This paper approaches the topic of transport and disability from a variety of sociological paradigms and includes functionalist, interpretive, radical humanist, radical structuralist and postmodernist approaches. The paper shows how each approach generates its own distinct explanations regarding problem definition and policy solutions. Examples are given of the resulting interpretations of the issues faced in the planning of transport facilities for disabled people, and of the implications for policy directions and evaluation methodologies. Comment is made regarding the inherent problems of comparison between different policies, schemes and facilities, even when they are apparently addressing similar issues. In particular, attention is drawn to the need, when making any such comparisons, not only to allow for explicit differences between schemes but also to examine the comparative methodology itself from a variety of perspectives so as to acknowledge its inevitable implicit biases and asymmetries.
Abstract