Accessibility of Dutch Public Space: Regulations and Local Actions by Pedestrians with Disabilities

Abstract

This article examines the accessibility of public space for individuals with disabilities in the Netherlands, as well as the relevant legal frameworks intended to promote accessibility. It discusses the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) and efforts to implement its provisions at the local level. The article first provides an overview of Dutch legislation and regulations concerning accessibility in public spaces. It then presents an analysis of the experiences of individuals with disabilities in navigating streets and pavements in two Dutch cities, Utrecht and Almere. The central question is to what extent equal participation in public space has been realised. The findings indicate that national legislation remains inadequate in addressing the accessibility of streets and pavements. Despite the constitutional amendment in January 2023, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of disability, substantive equality is largely dependent on the individual policies and bylaws of the 342 municipalities. The involvement of individuals with disabilities in shaping the inclusive use of public space is therefore crucial at the local level. This article highlights local initiatives that have successfully drawn the attention of municipal policymakers and civil servants to the importance of accessible streets.

1. Introduction

There is a pressing need to improve the inclusivity of public spaces in the Netherlands. Recent reports illustrate the necessity of enhancing the accessibility of streets and pedestrian areas. In 2021, the Dutch Social and Cultural Planning Office (SCP) published ‘Far from Accessible: Experiences of Dutch Persons with a Physical Disability as a Mirror of Society’ (Vermeij and Hamelink 2021), which explores how individuals with disabilities experience public space accessibility. Similarly, a report by CROW, a private consultancy firm specialising in public space, titled ‘Obstacles in Pedestrian Areas’ (Molster et al. 2021), arrived at comparable conclusions.

In its 2024 Concluding Observations on the Initial Country Report of the Netherlands, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities expressed concern regarding the Netherlands’ lack of ambition in implementing accessibility requirements for the built environment. It recommended the establishment of a comprehensive enforcement and monitoring mechanism to ensure the accessibility of public spaces (CRPD Committee 2024).

According to the SCP study, many individuals with disabilities experience insecurity in various public spaces. Even minor obstacles can have significant consequences for their mobility, leading many to spend considerable time planning their outings. Equal participation in public space remains far from being achieved. The CROW report highlights how both fixed objects (e.g., lampposts and traffic signs) and movable objects (e.g., bicycles and outdoor café seating) obstruct pedestrian pathways, thereby hindering individuals who are reliant on unobstructed passage, such as those using mobility aids, wheelchair users, or individuals with visual impairments. CROW provides municipalities with precise recommendations to improve accessibility, including guidelines for outdoor space design and enforcement measures to remove obstacles.

This article presents the findings of the Dutch component of the international Inclusive Public Space project (Inclusive Public Space Project n.d.), initiated by the University of Leeds in 2019. This research project, which was concluded in 2025, investigates the negative impacts of exclusionary, inaccessible public space design, management, and maintenance. It examines how unequal access to urban streets affects persons with disabilities, older adults, children, parents, and caregivers. The IPS project was conducted in the United Kingdom, India, Kenya, the Netherlands, and the United States. In the Netherlands, research was carried out under the responsibility of Disability Studies in Nederland (DSiN), a research and educational foundation with a chair at the University of Humanistic Studies in Utrecht. The IPS project aimed at raising awareness of spatial exclusion and to encourage action by both citizens and governments. The resources and other materials, including awareness-raising publications and videos, are published in an open access format on the project website: https://inclusivepublicspace.leeds.ac.uk/ (accessed on 1 July 2025).

In the Netherlands, two cities were selected for investigation: Utrecht and Almere. Utrecht, with its historic city centre and newly developed suburban areas, presents a contrast to Almere, a city constructed from the 1970s onwards on reclaimed land from the largest inland lake, IJsselmeer.

Section 2, Section 3 and Section 4 of this article focus on the legal aspects of public space design and maintenance. Key questions include the following: What legal requirements exist regarding accessibility in public space design? What guarantees do national and municipal regulations provide? What implications does the new Environment and Planning Act have for accessibility?

Section 5 examines local efforts to implement regulations that promote safer streets, parks, and pavements for individuals with disabilities and other vulnerable pedestrians.

2. Methodology

As part of the Inclusive Public Space project in the Netherlands, this study investigated the experiences of persons with disabilities, older adults, and caregivers with young children in public spaces. A mixed-methods approach was employed, incorporating legal desk research and qualitative empirical research (Disability Studies in Nederland 2014).

The legal analysis involved an examination of Dutch laws and regulations concerning public space design, maintenance, and enforcement, with a focus on their effectiveness in preventing spatial exclusion. The study reviewed multiple legal frameworks, including civil tort law, administrative law, and equal treatment legislation.

For the empirical component, semi-structured interviews and group discussions were conducted with a range of stakeholders. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the interviews were conducted online between 2020 and 2021. The processing and analysis of the empirical data were carried out by the lead IPS project team of the University of Leeds and will be published in a forthcoming book. Participants in group discussions in the Netherlands included 6 legal professionals, 7 representatives of public authorities that are responsible for public space design and management, 6 urban designers and accessibility specialists, 7 disability rights campaigners advocating for accessibility at the local and national levels, 7 policymakers, and 4 lawyers.

With these professionals, discussions were held regarding municipal measures—both existing and potential—that could improve accessibility and foster inclusive public spaces.

Additionally, persons with disabilities, older adults, children, parents, and caregivers were interviewed in Utrecht and Almere. These cities were chosen for their contrasting urban layouts: Utrecht, with its medieval city centre and newer suburban developments, and Almere, a planned city in the Amsterdam metropolitan region constructed on reclaimed land. Forty-two participants, nineteen from Utrecht, and twenty-three from Almere, were asked in interviews to describe their experiences in public spaces. Five extra meetings were conducted in small groups of two to three of these participants who told their stories to one another. Most of these participants had a disability (36), some were older than 65 years (9), and eight were parents of small children. Two of these parents had a disability. Of the participants, 10 persons had visual impairments, 3 persons had hearing impairments, 21 had walking impairments, and 4 had mental impairments.

Participants were recruited through the research team’s network and via national and local disability organisations. A snowball sampling method was used to identify further participants with relevant insights. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated into English in accordance with the University of Leeds’s research standards. The analysis of the information gained in the interviews was carried out by the IPS team at the University of Leeds and will be presented in a forthcoming article (Lawson and Eskyte 2025) in the wider context of the research in the five participating countries.

The project in the Netherlands resulted in the participation in a Participation Action Research (PAR) group. After the closure of the IPS project, many of the participants are still collaborating with municipalities to make public space accessible.

3. Legal Framework

This section examines international legal obligations, national legislation, and local regulations concerning public space accessibility.

3.1. Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Some CRPD provisions are relevant to street design and pedestrian environments (Houtzager 2021). The CRPD guarantees rights such as the right to life and non-discrimination, which are crucial for the regulation of pedestrian–vehicle interactions. Two CRPD provisions are particularly significant: the right to accessibility (Article 9) and the right to live independently and being included in the community (Article 19). The concept in Article 9 refers to Universal Design as the overarching principle relating to the development of usable products, services, and environments. According to the Committee, Article 9 requires that persons with disabilities should have equal access to all goods, products, and services that are open to or provided for the public in a manner that ensures their effective and equal access and respects their dignity (CRPD Committee 2014). It addresses both governmental vision and processes and the societal level and private sector (Hedvall et al. 2025). In the implementation bill presented to the Parliament in 2014, the government referred to Universal Design as one of the basic principles for accessibility (Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports 2014–2015).

Article 19 sets out the right to independent living and being included in the community. Independent living is directly related to personal autonomy and self-determination, which include amongst others access to transport, a place of residence, daily routine, habits, decent employment, personal relationships, clothing, nutrition, hygiene and health care, religious activities, cultural activities, and sexual and reproductive rights. None of these rights can be fully enjoyed when public space is inaccessible. Independence means that the person with a disability is not deprived of the opportunity of choice and control regarding their personal lifestyle and daily activities (CRPD Committee 2017).

In its concluding observations on the initial Dutch report, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with disabilities was critical about the application of these rights in the Netherlands (CRPD Committee 2024).

The Netherlands signed the CRPD on 30 March 2007 but did not ratify it until 14 June 2016, making it, with Finland and Ireland, one of the last EU countries to do so. The Dutch government had long argued that existing national legislation provided sufficient protection for individuals with disabilities. Concerns over the financial implications of implementing accessibility requirements for both public and private entities also contributed to the delay (Oomen 2018).

Upon ratification, the Dutch government amended five laws, including those related to social security, voting rights, and equal treatment. A multi-year implementation programme was also established under the auspices of the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, entitled ‘Onbeperkt Meedoen! (‘Unlimited Participation!’) (Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports 2017). The programme, which ran from 2018 to 2021, aimed to enhance the participation of individuals with disabilities by reducing barriers in various aspects of society, including public space accessibility.

The programme involved collaboration between ministries, disability advocacy organisations, the Association of Dutch Municipalities, and employer federations. One key outcome was the integration of accessibility considerations into the National Strategy on Spatial Planning and the Environment (Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations 2020).

3.2. National Legislation and Policy

3.2.1. Applicability of Human Rights Treaties in the Dutch Legal Order

The Netherlands have a monist legal system, in the sense that international law forms part of the national legal order from the moment that the relevant rule or provision becomes binding in the Kingdom. Before the ratification of an international treaty, the government will review existing laws and, where necessary, amend these so as to make the legislation conform with the treaty norms. In general, directly effective self-executing provisions of treaties prevail over national legal provisions. This basic notion is codified in Articles 93 and 94 of the Constitution.

This implies that provisions of international treaties are substantially of a constitutional nature, as they function as superior constitutional provisions in the Netherlands. Courts have to give priority to these provisions over conflicting norms; therefore the constitutional importance of these treaties is substantial (Besselink 2014). The issue of directly effective self-executing provisions of treaties has been the subject of case law. In the ‘Tobacco-ban’ judgment (2014), the Supreme Court stated that “If neither the text nor the history of its formation makes it clear that the treaty provision is not intended to have direct effect, the content of that provision is decisive. The question is whether it is unconditional and sufficiently precise to be applied as an objective right in the national legal order”. This judgment has since served as a point of reference for lower courts.

With regard to the applicability of the UNCRPD in the Netherlands, the convention does not seem to play a major role in the case law. The convention is only sparsely invoked, and where this happens, the courts have often concluded that the provision is not directly effective (Administrative Jurisdiction Division Council of State 30 March 2022, ECLI:NL:RVS:2022:937). Where a reference to the treaty is successfully made, it involves a treaty-compliant interpretation of existing legislation (District Court Gelderland 29 April 2021, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2021:2449, Ogier 2022).

3.2.2. Government Reporting and Monitoring

The initial Dutch government report on CRPD implementation was submitted to the UN CRPD Committee on 14 June 2018, two years after ratification (Government of the Netherlands 2018). With regard to public space accessibility, the government asserted that this was primarily a municipal responsibility, citing various local projects aimed at improving the accessibility of shopping and leisure areas (Minister of Health, Welfare and Sports 2021). The report also referenced the proposed Environment and Planning Act, which was still under parliamentary consideration at the time. This Act, which came into effect in January 2024, mandates that municipal environmental plans account for efforts to enhance accessibility.

In addition to the official government report, the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights (NIHR) submitted an independent assessment in 2018 (Netherlands Institute for Human Rights 2018). A coalition of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) also submitted a shadow report in 2019, highlighting key concerns, including the introduction of the shared space concept (Schoonheim and Smits 2019). This will be discussed in Section 5.2.

4. Legislation and Regulations Concerning Accessibility in Public Spaces

In the European part of the Netherlands, four tiers of governance exist: national, provincial, and municipal administrations, alongside the Water Boards, which manage water-related infrastructure. Each level of government has distinct legal responsibilities regarding the design, management, and maintenance of public spaces (Houtzager 2021). Since Water Boards are responsible for a limited type of street design and maintenance, they are not addressed in this discussion.

4.1. The Role of Central Government

The Dutch system of governance is highly decentralised, with many responsibilities being delegated to municipal authorities under the principle of local democratic participation. The national government sets overarching policies, while provinces and municipalities are responsible for translating these policies into regional and local contexts (Provinces Act, Section 118; Municipalities Act, Section 149).

In the domains of spatial planning, road infrastructure, and transport policy, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management plays a leading role. It formulates national mobility policies, which provinces and municipalities subsequently implement at the regional and local levels. Coordination between these levels of government is a defining feature of the Dutch administrative system, ensuring a balance between national objectives and local autonomy.

National Mobility Policy

Historically, policies related to pedestrian infrastructure have been framed primarily in terms of road safety, categorising pedestrians as vulnerable road users. Measures have focused on protecting pedestrians from vehicular traffic rather than enhancing their ability to navigate public space independently (Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management 2018).

A notable shift occurred in 2019, when the Ministry established the ‘Ruimte voor Lopen’ (Space for Walking) platform. This national initiative, comprising approximately 30 cities, research institutes (e.g., CROW), and interest organisations (e.g., Wandelnet and Ieder(in)), aims to promote walking as a mode of transport. The platform’s strategic agenda, presented in October 2020 under the City Deal Space for Walking, recognises pedestrian accessibility as a key area for development.

4.2. The Role of Municipalities

4.2.1. Local Administration and Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the Netherlands’ 342 municipalities expanded significantly in 2015 following the decentralisation of several government functions, particularly in the social domain. Municipalities became responsible for employment policies, youth care, and services for older adults and persons with disabilities (Claessens et al. 2018).

Since the ratification of the CRPD in 2016, municipalities have been required to develop periodic implementation plans for the local implementation of the convention, including a Local Inclusion Agenda (LIA) addressing accessibility.1 However, as of 2023, only 130 (out of 342) municipalities had adopted a comprehensive LIA (Harnacke and Fitzpatrick 2023).

4.2.2. Street Design, Management, and Maintenance

In practice, municipalities play a critical role in ensuring the accessibility of streets and pavements. Many individuals with disabilities encounter accessibility barriers within their immediate surroundings, making local interventions particularly significant. A broken pavement, for example, may pose an insurmountable obstacle for a blind pedestrian attempting to reach a nearby supermarket.

Municipal decisions regarding street design and construction are governed by Environmental and Planning Plans, as mandated by Article 2.16 of the Omgevingswet (Environment and Planning Act). Article 5.162 of the Besluit Kwaliteit Leefomgeving, (Environmental Quality Decree) requires municipalities to consider the importance of accessibility when drafting these plans. This obligation extends to policies regulating the use of public streets, such as permitting shop displays, fencing, and bicycle parking.

Under the Environment and Planning Act, the national government has the authority to issue directives instructing municipalities to prioritise accessibility in their environmental plans. Articles 2.33 and 2.34 of the Act outline the legal basis for such directives.

4.3. The Environment and Planning Act (2024)

The Environment and Planning Act, initially adopted in 2016, faced multiple delays before its eventual implementation in January 2024. The Act represents a significant overhaul of Dutch spatial planning law, consolidating various regulations related to land use, infrastructure, environmental protection, and urban development.

Accessibility Provisions in the Environment and Planning Act

The original draft of the Act did not include provisions on accessibility for persons with disabilities. Following a lobbying campaign, an amendment was introduced to incorporate accessibility as an explicit objective. This amendment, which was passed with broad parliamentary support, extended Article 2.1(3) of the Act to include the promotion of accessibility in public outdoor spaces.

As a result, all levels of government—national, provincial, and municipal—must now consider accessibility in their planning processes. Additionally, Article 2.28 grants the central government the authority to issue binding instructions to local authorities to promote accessibility in environmental plans. However, these provisions apply only to new developments; existing urban areas are not required to be retrofitted for accessibility compliance.

4.4. The Environmental Quality Decree (Bkl)

The Environmental Quality Decree is one of the key regulatory instruments under the Environment and Planning Act. It establishes instruction rules for local authorities concerning environmental plans. Article 5.162 of the Bkl requires municipal plans to take into account the importance of accessibility when new developments impact public outdoor spaces.

The explanatory memorandum accompanying the Decree specifies that accessibility considerations must be balanced against other interests, such as heritage preservation or environmental concerns. However, this discretionary approach introduces a level of non-commitment that may undermine the intended impact of the legislation.

Early drafts of Article 5.162 contained stricter wording, mandating that accessibility must be taken into account. That was in accordance with a Parliamentary motion (Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports 2016–2017). The final version, which merely acknowledges the importance of accessibility, provides municipalities with broad discretion. This wording appears to conflict with Article 9 of the CRPD, which obliges states to take appropriate measures to ensure accessibility. Under human rights treaty implementation principles, accessibility should be progressively realised, meaning that temporary barriers may be permitted, but full accessibility must remain the ultimate objective.

4.5. The National Environmental Vision (NOVI)

The Nationale Omgevingsvisie, (NOVI) (‘National Strategy on Spatial Planning and the Environment’) is one of the most influential policy documents under the Environment and Planning Act. It outlines long-term national objectives for the physical living environment.

Among its 21 national priorities, NOVI explicitly recognises the need to ensure accessibility of the built environment in priority no. 8. This includes obligations arising from the CRPD, particularly in relation to the accessibility of public buildings, transport infrastructure, and public spaces, as well as suitable housing for persons with disabilities.

The recognition of accessibility as a national priority represents a significant step forward. However, similar to the Environmental Quality Decree, the NOVI framework remains largely non-binding. Municipalities retain substantial discretionary power, meaning that accessibility considerations may ultimately be deprioritised in favour of competing interests. In its reaction to the concluding observations of the Committee, the government repeated its point that the municipalities are responsible for improving accessibility (Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports 2024, p. 4/5).

4.6. Municipal Regulations

In 2022, the Association of Dutch Municipalities (VNG) conducted a survey to assess the extent to which the UN CRPD had been implemented at the local level and whether municipalities had adopted a Local Inclusion Agenda (Briels 2022). The findings revealed significant disparities between municipalities in terms of implementation. As stated above, only 34% of municipalities had adopted a LIA, while nearly 50% remained in an exploratory phase or had yet to develop specific plans.

Given that national legislation does not explicitly regulate public space accessibility, the realisation of equal rights for individuals with disabilities largely depends on municipal policies and bylaws. The lack of uniformity in local approaches results in a fragmented legal landscape, where accessibility outcomes vary considerably between municipalities.

4.7. Interim Conclusion

Laws and regulations concerning the design and maintenance of accessible streets and pavements are weak in the Netherlands. Legal protection against the effects of the inaccessibility is also limited. The requirements of Articles 9 and 19 of the UNCRPD do not seem to be fully met. The new Environment and Planning Act establishes accessibility as a national policy objective, which could create opportunities for meaningful improvement in the design of public space. Both the central government and local authorities are legally required to incorporate accessibility considerations into public space developments. Despite the national government’s power to intervene if municipal efforts prove inadequate, it has stressed that the responsibility lies at the local level.

However, as the Act only came into force in 2024, its practical impact on public space accessibility remains uncertain. The extent to which it will drive meaningful change depends on municipal implementation and enforcement. Meaningful monitoring by the central government is not anticipated.

4.7.1. Persistent Barriers to Equal Participation

As outlined in previous sections, individuals with disabilities continue to experience significant barriers in public spaces. The SCP study found that many respondents reported feeling unsafe in public areas due to inadequate accessibility. Even minor obstacles, such as uneven pavements or street furniture, can severely restrict mobility. The need for advanced planning when navigating public spaces further limits the spontaneity and independence of individuals with disabilities.

The CROW study corroborates these findings, identifying both fixed (e.g., lampposts, traffic signs) and movable (e.g., bicycles, outdoor café seating) obstacles as major impediments to pedestrian mobility. The study provides municipalities with a range of recommendations for improving accessibility, including best practices for urban design and enforcement measures to remove obstructions.

4.7.2. Accessibility Legislation: A Work in Progress

Despite ratifying the CRPD in 2016, the Netherlands remains among the European countries with the least developed legal framework for public space accessibility. At present, national accessibility legislation is largely aspirational, with few enforceable mandates. Consequently, equal participation in public spaces is far from being realised (Vermeij and Hamelink 2021).

The Environment and Planning Act represents a step forward, but its effectiveness remains to be seen. In the next section, the daily experiences of pedestrians with disabilities in public space will be explored. They indicate that a significant amount of work has to be carried out to make streets accessible to all. Implementation relies heavily on municipal regulations, and enforcement mechanisms remain weak. Without stronger national oversight, meaningful progress is unlikely to be achieved in the short term.

5. Experiences of Pedestrians with Disabilities

5.1. Interview Findings

As described in Section 2, interviews were conducted with stakeholders and vulnerable pedestrians, i.e., people with disabilities, older persons, and parents with small children, to assess their experiences navigating streets, pavements, and pedestrian zones. Participants were asked to identify obstacles that they encountered and discuss how they adapted to these challenges. They were also asked about their perceptions of shared space designs. In the following sections, some interviewees are cited. Their names are pseudonymised.

Both movable and immovable obstacles were commonly cited as sources of difficulty and frustration. Movable obstacles included parked bicycles, advertising boards, and café terraces encroaching on pavements. Immovable obstacles included street furniture, bollards, lampposts, and traffic signs. These issues were reported in both cities examined in this study. The citations in the following section illustrate the often negative experiences of users of public space.

5.1.1. Utrecht

Utrecht’s historic city centre was widely perceived as inaccessible for individuals with disabilities. Narrow pavements, crowded pedestrian areas, and encroaching street furniture were commonly cited concerns. Some interviewees also expressed unease regarding shared space areas, where pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists interact without clear demarcations.

Interviewer:

What comes to mind when you think of Utrecht’s streets?

Els (visually impaired):

An inaccessible city centre. Because it is an old city, the pavements are narrow. In pedestrian areas, there are all sorts of obstacles—terraces that expand, even when that is not allowed in summer.

Interviewer:

How do you experience accessibility in Utrecht?

Andrea (wheelchair user):

Leidsche Rijn is a pleasant area for people using mobility aids. The pavements are wide and relatively accessible. But when I go to the city centre, everything changes. The area around Utrecht Central Station is chaotic—cyclists run red lights, and pavements are inaccessible. Sometimes, the gap between a lamppost and a shop is so narrow that I cannot pass through.

5.1.2. Almere

As a planned New Town, Almere generally provides better accessibility than older cities. However, interviewees identified several challenges, including overgrown greenery, uneven park pathways, and the absence of sufficient resting benches and public toilets. Some participants reported difficulties navigating the city centre due to a lack of clear distinctions between pedestrian and vehicular zones. The municipality has made small improvements, with the help of online discovery software, but structural solutions have not been taken up yet.

Dani (guide dog user):

In the centre of Almere, there are no real pavements in many areas. The street is at the same level as pedestrian zones, so my guide dog cannot differentiate between where people walk and where traffic flows.

Interviewer:

Have you ever experienced dangerous situations when walking in Almere?

Dani:

Not really, but only because I used to work in Amsterdam, where the traffic is much more intense. You learn to anticipate. But I wouldn’t say it feels safe.

5.2. Experiences with Shared Space

Several participants shared their experiences with shared space areas, a planning concept that is designed to encourage careful and considerate interactions between road users. In 2024, almost all of the 342 Dutch municipalities had implemented some form of shared space, particularly in city centres. The approach typically involves the removal of traffic controls, kerbs, and distinct footpaths, allowing for more fluid pedestrian–vehicle interactions (Havik et al. 2012; Havik et al. 2015). Natural features, aesthetic objects, and speed limits are often used to promote positive driver–pedestrian interaction (Gerlach et al. 2009; De Haan and Nota 2012).

Some studies suggest that shared space reduces vehicular speeds and decreases the incidence of serious accidents (CROW 2023; Kaparias and Li 2021). However, evidence also indicates that pedestrians—particularly those with disabilities—face heightened risks of collisions with cyclists and e-bikes. In response, some municipalities have introduced additional regulations, such as banning cyclists from shared space areas at certain times. Other cities, such as The Hague, have abandoned shared space altogether due to safety concerns (Maas 2020).

Our interview findings highlight significant challenges for individuals with disabilities in shared space environments. Many respondents reported feeling unsafe or disoriented due to the absence of clear pedestrian pathways. As a result, they often avoided these areas. These challenges were corroborated by advocacy groups (Schoonheim and Smits 2019).

Els (Utrecht):

Cyclists weave around you from every direction, especially in shared space areas like Domplein and Zadelstraat. The pavements have been removed, replaced with decorative paving that does not help at all.

Ale (Almere):

We have the Esplanade here—you probably know it. It doesn’t bother me that much, but it’s… what do they call it? Designed for shared use, so there is no distinction between the footpath and cycle lane. That can be tricky. Pedestrians and cyclists move in all directions. If it gets busy, I have to use my cane, or I risk being knocked over.

5.3. Impact on Daily Life

Participants in the study identified several consequences of inaccessible streets. Some noted that existing regulations regarding unobstructed pedestrian passage were frequently ignored and that law enforcement authorities failed to take action. Others reported experiencing physical injuries due to hazardous urban environments or expressed a fear of potential accidents.

Many respondents described the additional time and effort required to move from one place to another compared to individuals without disabilities. This resulted in increased stress and frustration. Some participants indicated that they actively planned their outings to avoid peak hours or high-traffic areas, while others resorted to wearing high-visibility clothing to enhance their safety.

Ultimately, these accessibility barriers contributed to feelings of isolation, reduced mobility choices, and increased dependency on others. Many individuals reported a loss of dignity and a decline in self-esteem due to the constant challenges they faced in navigating public space.

5.4. Challenges in Local Implementation

The perspectives of individuals with disabilities regarding the fair use of public space are often underrepresented at the municipal level. While some municipalities actively engage with disability organisations to consult them on accessibility issues (Luitzen de Vos 2023), many do not have regular mechanisms for such consultations.

Although municipalities are legally required to develop a Local Inclusion Agenda (LIA), as of 2023, only a minority of municipalities had adopted a LIA. Some municipalities had taken preliminary steps towards developing one, while a significant number of municipalities had no concrete plans (Harnacke 2024).

In municipalities where a LIA has been implemented—such as Almere and Utrecht—there is a growing recognition of the value of consulting individuals with disabilities. From interviews with local policymakers in the project, it appears that local initiatives by citizens have successfully drawn the attention of municipal lawmakers and civil servants to the need for inclusive urban design. This has led to the development of working principles that promote equal access to public space for all individuals, regardless of their physical abilities.

6. Overall Conclusions

6.1. Accessibility and Equality

As discussed in the previous sections, existing Dutch equality and anti-discrimination legislation does not directly apply to public space accessibility. Consequently, issues related to inaccessible streets and pedestrian areas cannot be legally challenged under equal treatment law in Dutch courts or before the National Institute for Human Rights (NIHR).

As a result, inaccessibility is not typically framed as a discrimination issue in legal and public discourse. Unlike exclusion in employment or education, which is widely recognised as an urgent policy concern, accessibility-related exclusion in public space receives comparatively less attention. However, some anti-discrimination agencies have begun addressing these issues and processing complaints related to inaccessible environments. In its reports, the NIHR has increasingly highlighted public space accessibility as a human rights issue that requires action at both the national and municipal levels.

The outcomes of this study, especially the empirical findings, highlight the gap between the lived experiences of persons with disabilities and the lack of rules and enforcement in pedestrian areas.

6.2. Enforcement of Accessibility Standards

Historically, accessibility has been largely absent from Dutch spatial planning policies. It was only with the introduction of the Environment and Planning Act in 2024 that accessibility was formally recognised as a consideration in urban development. The Act and the National Environmental Vision (NOVI) establish a framework for promoting accessibility in public spaces, providing national, provincial, and municipal authorities with legal tools to improve inclusion.

Despite these advancements, enforcement remains weak. The effectiveness of the new legal framework will depend on how municipalities choose to implement and uphold accessibility standards.

From the perspectives shared in this study, it is clear that individuals with disabilities continue to encounter significant barriers in pedestrian areas. Participants identified various obstacles, including movable objects (improperly parked bicycles, waste bins, advertising boards, and outdoor café seating), fixed objects (street furniture, bollards, traffic signs, and lampposts) and cyclist behaviour (illegal bicycle parking and the risks posed by cyclists in pedestrian zones).

Interviewees repeatedly emphasised that local authorities fail to enforce existing rules regarding pedestrian space. This lack of enforcement exacerbates accessibility issues, making daily mobility more challenging for individuals with disabilities.

In some municipalities, the implementation of the CRPD has led to increased attention to accessibility when designing public spaces. Although many towns and cities have yet to introduce Local Inclusion Agendas, a growing number of municipalities are taking steps to integrate accessibility into urban planning. For example, the Municipality of Almere has incorporated pedestrian accessibility into its mobility plans and the Municipality of Utrecht has embedded accessibility requirements into its structural vision and urban development plans.

These municipalities serve as examples of good practice and may provide valuable models for other local governments. The coming years will reveal whether the new Environment and Planning Act will lead to tangible improvements in public space accessibility across the Netherlands.