Accessible does not always mean usable – why we need to rethink accessibility

A restaurant says on its website that it is accessible. The museum next door describes its entrance as wheelchair accessible. A public authority points out that there is one (!) elevator. Useful information? Maybe. But in most cases, it still does not answer what a person with a disability actually needs to know.

Because the real questions are: Can I actually get where I need to go? Can I get through the entrance? Can I really – really – move around inside the building? Can I even use the restroom? Will I find the right service desk? Will I understand the information I am given there? Question after question. One small word – “accessible” – suddenly turns into a long list of missing, limited or incomplete information. And that is exactly where the problem begins.

An elevator alone does not make a journey accessible

Take a wheelchair user who needs to attend an appointment at a public authority. The website says: elevator available. Great. But the journey does not begin in the elevator. It begins at the tram stop or subway station. Perhaps the elevator there is currently out of service, or the vehicle cannot be boarded with a wheelchair. The nearest stop may be accessible, but the curb on the way to the building may not be lowered. And then the accessible entrance turns out to be at the back of the building. Perhaps the door there is so heavy that it can barely be opened without assistance.

Minor details? No… especially not for the person standing in front of the barrier. The basic principle is simple: Any one of these details can determine whether the journey works – or whether it fails.

Accessibility is not a feature – it is a chain

Those of us who are not directly affected have become used to thinking of accessibility as a feature of a place. But for many people, accessibility works very differently. It is a chain of connected steps. The chain begins at their own front door. The next links are sidewalks, crossings, stops, public transport, elevators, entrances and doors. And even reaching the destination does not necessarily mean the journey is over. Because then the next question arises: Can I actually find my way around once I am there?

One weak or broken link is enough – and the entire accessible chain falls apart. It sounds simple. But it is the harsh reality.

And then there are the people

There is another issue: There is no such thing as “the” accessibility. A deaf person needs different information from a blind person. Someone with severe visual impairment may have different requirements again. A person using a manual wheelchair will assess a route differently from someone using a heavy powered wheelchair. And age, physical strength or the presence of a companion can make a difference as well.

One example: There is a ramp. Great. But if it is so steep that someone using a manual wheelchair can barely manage it without assistance, the statement “ramp available” may be factually correct – but practically, it is only of limited use. Put differently: Data alone is not enough. It has to fit the individual situation of the person using it.

The right question

Perhaps we should stop asking this question altogether: “Is this place accessible?” It is too broad. It needs to be replaced. A better question is: Is this route, this entrance and this place usable for me in my specific situation? That is a fundamental difference. Accessibility is no longer treated as an abstract characteristic. It becomes practical information people can use to plan their everyday lives. That should really be a matter of course. But it is not.

The information exists – it is just scattered everywhere

The absurd part is that most of the information people need already exists. Municipalities hold data. Transport operators know a great deal about stops and elevators. Operators know their own buildings and publish relevant information on their websites. Hotels, restaurants, museums and medical practices also provide information online. On top of that, there are mapping services, open-data platforms and the experiences of people who have already visited a place. The problem is that all of this information is scattered across different sources. More importantly, it is described differently, updated at different intervals and provided at very different levels of detail.

Anyone trying to plan with confidence today often has to search several websites, make phone calls, read reviews and then piece all those fragments together into something resembling a reliable picture. The frustrating principle is: research, hope, worry – and then perhaps arrive.

There is a solution

But seriously: Should this still be the norm in 2026? That question is exactly what gave rise to the InkluCity project in Germany – www.inklucity.de. Another mission and another vision – but one that is close to becoming reality: Soon, this infrastructure, available as an app on a mobile device, will answer three very important questions:

How do I get there?

How do I get in?

How do I manage once I am there?

InkluCity, the first digital infrastructure for accessibility, no longer looks at information in isolation. Routes, public transport, buildings and services are considered as one connected system. Data is collected, verified, updated and – crucially – delivered in a way that matches the needs of each individual user. Regardless of disability, impairment or age – and always based on that person’s specific needs.

Not everyone needs everything. But everyone needs the right information.

InkluCity means this: Accessibility starts with reliable information. Of course, a digital infrastructure cannot remove a flight of stairs. It cannot repair a broken elevator or widen a doorway that is too narrow. But it can prevent people from discovering those barriers only when they are already standing in front of them. And perhaps that is exactly where we need to start rethinking accessibility. Not by asking whether somewhere is labelled “accessible”. But by asking the much more important question:

Can I plan my journey independently – and can I rely on it to work for me?