Abstract
Introduction:
Worldwide, one in six individuals live with a disability. Many people continue to experience disabling situations, particularly when travelling. Travel can be an important part of the lives of many people, including people with disabilities. Barriers to accessing air travel can lead to a reluctance to travel for these potential passengers. As early as the flight planning stage, options to facilitate accessibility are limited. At airports, passengers must travel long distances in areas where navigation is complex, and accessibility limited. Furthermore, few aircraft are accessible. The travel experience can have adverse effects on the health of people with disabilities. Practices are sometimes not inclusive, not always available, and may not address the full spectrum of possible needs. The objective of this study is to provide a state of art on accessibility features available to people with disabilities in the busiest international airports.
Methods:
A scoping review of practices in airport accessibility was done. A search strategy was deployed in 4 databases (Avery index to architectural periodicals, Medline, CINAHL, and Web of science). The official websites of the 35 busiest airports were exhaustively consulted. All information regarding accessibility measures and inclusive services were extracted.
Results:
31 scientific articles, out of 3,640 screened, and all extracted data from airports’ website were considered for synthesis. While efforts are made in major airports, there is a great inconsistency in accessibility features. Both facilitators and challenges are encountered by people with disabilities at every stage of air travel. These stages include journey planning; getting to and from the airport, obtain human assistance, navigate in the premises, check in, security screening, using facilities, boarding and disembarking, customs and immigration procedures, and luggage management.
Discussion:
Services need to be extensively planned, placing a significant burden on passengers. The disability-centric perspective disregard passengers’ unique needs and capabilities, leading to a sense of dehumanization. The complexity of airport organizations, shared responsibilities, limited communication, training challenges can deter accessibility initiatives and create discomfort during travel. This study is the first step of a broader project supported by Canadian Accessibility Standards, focusing on enhancing inclusive accessibility in Canadian airports.
1 Introduction
In 2021, approximately one in six person had one or more disabilities leading to disabling situations (). In Canada, this phenomenon is particularly salient, with more than one in four people living with a disability (). To address this situation, the Government of Canada proposed several programs and laws focused on equal rights and opportunities for people with disabilities (PwD) (). Despite this desire for equity, many people still experience disabling situations when carrying out their daily lives, particularly when it comes to travel. Air travel can hold a significant meaning for the social, productive and leisure of everyone, including people living with a disability or disabilities (, ).
The many barriers encountered during air travel bring a sense of discrimination and reluctance to travel for PwD (, , ). From the planning stage onwards, there is no guarantee that the flight provider will be able to accommodate the individual's unique needs. Most airlines offer accessibility information, but the level of detail of the information is insufficient to make an informed decision about travel (). Often, travellers are forced to contact service providers by phone and give highly personal health information (, ). Moreover, few aircraft are accessible. Aircraft configurations and restricted spaces force staff to resort to means perceived as dehumanizing. For example, people in wheelchairs often have to change seats, be manipulated over armrests, board long before other passengers or disembark last. In addition to discomfort and pain, these measures can exacerbate a sense of segregation for these passengers (, ). In some cases, boarding staff's perception of a person's degree of autonomy can result in denied boarding, if unaccompanied (). Other barriers are related to airport facilities. In particular, passengers often have to travel long distances in complex environments. These features can limit PwD’ ability to orient themselves and navigate the facilities (, ). At many stages, passengers must wait for long periods, in uncomfortable areas, and/or adapted services are scarce (screening, passport, security, etc.). Often, few entertainment options, restaurants or waiting areas are accessible for PwD (). Airport staff may also lack the knowledge to effectively support specific needs around and within the aircraft (, ).
Some airports are trying to mitigate these barriers. In Canada, for example, some airports offer individualized mobility assistance to passengers upon request (–). In Toronto, a GPS navigation system with verbal guidance is being tested to improve independence for people with visual impairments (). Also, a mobile application is available for people with neurodiversity, to guide them step-by-step through the various common procedures at the airport (). Other services are offered elsewhere. For example, at Hartsfield-Jackson airport in Atlanta, USA, or Haneda International in Tokyo, Japan, quiet areas are available for passengers with developmental, intellectual disabilities or mental health issues (, ).
However, while efforts are being made to improve the experience of passengers with disabilities, they can raise other issues. Travel planning is much more important for PwD than for other passengers. Many airport services need to be booked 72–48 h in advance, and there is no guarantee that they will still be available, even after a ticket has been purchased. Passengers must constantly check and anticipate the suitability of the services offered for their specific needs (, , ). Challenges experienced by passengers with disabilities can lead to adverse effects on physical, psychological and emotional health (, ). Indeed, services are often designed according to a specific type of disability (e.g, motor disability, visual impairment), hardly representative of the complexity and diversity of factors that influence the needs that PwD may have (). This issue is exacerbated by the predominant vision of adaptation rather than inclusiveness in airport accessibility. Indeed, services are primarily aimed at overcoming environmental barriers. These adaptations are not always comfortable or respectful of individual particularities. The systematic use of assistance staff, “segregated” circulation channels and means different from other passengers can create a feeling of marginalization, even humiliation, for passengers with disabilities (, ).
Both PwD and airport service stakeholders insist on the importance of developing and updating the measures deployed to improve the experience of passengers living with disability situations. However, it is not very clear what exists today in terms of accessibility practices at international airports around the world. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore and map existing accessibility and inclusive practices for PwD at international airports, in order to identify gaps and shortcomings.
2 Methods
To address the main objective, a scoping review was carried out through various stages using several methodological guides (–).
2.1 Research strategy
The research was developed in order to identify all the scientific literature and grey literature relevant to the research topic.
2.1.1 Scientific literature
A professional librarian, affiliated with Laval University, helped identify the scientific literature relevant to the research question. Her expertise in review methods and specialization in the healthcare field ensured the accuracy, comprehensiveness and relevance of the search. An initial list of keywords and descriptors was identified via eight articles from the preliminary review. The terms were refined and validated by several members of the research team (DG, PhD student; EM and FR, professors). The terminology used for the research is presented in Appendix A. The search strategy was deployed in four databases (Avery's index of architectural periodicals, MEDLINE, CINAHL and Web Of Science). The databases were chosen to reflect the diversity of fields relevant to accessibility and participation: health (CINAHL, Medline), planning and architecture (Avery index of architectural periodicals) and multidisciplinary (Web Of Science). Endnote software () was used to collate all references from the databases. The databases were consulted on November 2, 2022.
2.1.2 Selection of scientific articles
Given the exploratory nature of the scoping review, the criteria did not consider study designs. The selection process was facilitated by Covidence software (). Covidence is a web-based collaboration software platform that streamlines the production of systematic and other literature reviews. Two members of the research team (DG; JR, research professional) made the initial selection based on titles and abstract. Of the articles selected, they (DG; JR) consulted the full texts to validate the presence of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, presented in Table 1.
Table 1
| Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria |
|---|---|
| Focuses on people with disabilities or living with handicaps. Relates to accessibility and inclusion. Pertains to measures or studies at airports Aims at effects on participation, accessibility, use, inclusion, desire to travel or suitability of the physical environment. | Is a market analysis Is a statistical analysis of air traffic Pertains only to freight, cargo, military or aerospace personnel Focuses exclusively on the issues and effects of profitability, traffic, equipment, environment or flight management. Other type of publication: advertising, protocol, magazines, books, opinion pieces. Written in a language other than French or English. |
Scoping review inclusion and exclusion criteria.
2.1.3 Grey literature
At the same time, the websites of the 35 busiest international airports, as well as all Canadian international airports, were consulted. To obtain a list of these airports (Table 2), pre-pandemic air traffic and traffic statistics were used (, ). The data available for the pandemic period varies greatly from previous years, given the unequal restrictions on activities between different airports (). Previous data from the COVID-19 pandemic are therefore more representative of the usual activities of international airports. Each website was consulted in two stages. Firstly, a free manual search was carried out to extract information from sections dealing with services, policies and information on accessibility or inclusion. Then, several keywords, such as “accessibility”, “special” or “barrier-free” (see Appendix B) were entered into each website's search engine to obtain data not captured by the first stage. External links to guides or third-party organizations were also considered.
Table 2
| Rank (2019) | Country, city | Airport |
|---|---|---|
| International | ||
| 1 | United States, Atlanta | Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport |
| 2 | China, Beijing | Beijing Capital International Airport |
| 3 | United States, Los Angeles | Los Angeles International Airport |
| 4 | United Arab Emirates, Dubai | Dubai International Airport |
| 5 | Japan, Tokyo | Tokyo International (Haneda) Airport |
| 6 | United States, Chicago | O'Hare International Airport |
| 7 | United Kingdom, London | Heathrow Airport |
| 8 | China, Shanghai | Pudong International Airport |
| 9 | France, Paris | Aéroport de Paris-Charles de Gaulle / Orly |
| 10 | United States, Dallas | Dallas/Ft Worth International Airport |
| 11 | China, Guangzhou | Guangzhou Bai Yun International Airport |
| 12 | Netherlands, Amsterdam | Amsterdam Airport Schiphol |
| 13 | Hong Kong SAR | Hong Kong International Airport |
| 14 | Korea, Republic of, Incheon | Incheon International Airport |
| 15 | Germany, Frankfurt | Flughafen Frankfurt/Main |
| 16 | United States, Danver | Denver International Airport |
| 17 | India, New Delhi | Indira Gandhi International Airport |
| 18 | Singapore | Singapore Changi Airport |
| 19 | Thailand, Bangkok | Suvarnabhumi International Airport |
| 20 | United States, New York | John F. Kennedy International Airport |
| 21 | Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur | KL International Airport |
| 22 | Spain, Madrid | Aeropuerto de Adolfo Suarez Madrid-Barajas |
| 23 | United States, San Francisco | San Francisco International Airport |
| 24 | China, Chengdu | Chengdu Shuangliu International Airport |
| 25 | Indonesia, Jakarta | Soekarno-Hatta International Airport |
| 26 | China, Shenzhen | Shenzhen Baoan International Airport |
| 27 | Spain, Barcelona | Aeropuerto de Barcelona-El Prat |
| 28 | Turkey, Istanbul | Istanbul International Airport |
| 29 | United States, Seattle | Seattle-Tacoma International Airport |
| 30 | United States, Las Vegas | Harry Reid International Airport |
| 33 | Mexico, Mexico City | Aeropuerto Internacional de la Ciudad de Mexico “Lic Benito Juarez" |
| 34 | United States, Charlotte | Charlotte Douglas International Airport |
| 35 | Russian Federation, Moscow | Sheremetyevo International Airport |
| Canada | ||
| 1 | Canada, Toronto | Toronto/Lester B Pearson International, Ontario |
| 2 | Canada, Vancouver | Vancouver International, British Columbia |
| 3 | Canada, Montréal | Montréal/Pierre Elliott Trudeau International, Quebec |
| 4 | Canada, Calgary | Calgary International, Alberta |
| 5 | Canada, Edmonton | Edmonton International, Alberta |
| 6 | Canada, Ottawa | Ottawa/Macdonald-Cartier International, Ontario |
| 7 | Canada, Winnipeg | Winnipeg/James Armstrong Richardson International, Manitoba |
| 8 | Canada, Halifax | Halifax/Robert L Stanfield International, Nova Scotia |
| 9 | Canada, Victoria | Victoria International, British Columbia |
| 10 | Canada, Québec | Québec/Jean Lesage International, Québec |
World's and Canada's busiest international airports (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 2019; statistics Canada, 2021).
2.2 Data extraction
Extraction was performed according to the methodological specifics of scoping reviews (). Descriptive data about study design, location, population and context were extracted. The analysis of this data has particular relevance to the object of study, given the diversity of socio-economic, political and cultural influences at different international airports. It helped provide information on the nature and distribution of the studies included (). Additionally, Bronfenbrenner () ecological model's categories, relevant to the object of study (microsystem, mesosystem and macrosystem), were included in the exaction grid (see Appendix C), to ensure that the different levels of contextual factors impacting airports’ accessibility were taken into account. Finally, the grid included a section dedicated to the researcher's reflections and notes that may influence the analysis. Two members of the research team (DG, JR) carried out 10% of the extraction, until consensus was reached, to ensure the comprehensiveness and relevance of the extracted data ().
2.3 Data analysis
Data were subject to thematic content analysis (, , –). This type of analysis is recommended for exploratory studies where data is limited (, ). The analysis was carried out using a mixed deductive and inductive approach. Bronfenbrenner () model's categories were used to group identified themes and facilitate their analysis (). Grouping the codes by level of influence has made it easier to identify the main themes, ensuring that they are complementary and mutually exclusive. Identified themes are presented in Table 3. In a subsequent step, the data was linked to the relevant travel stages, to better visualize the traveler's experience over time. Three members of the research team (DG, EM, FR) were involved in data analysis, using Nvivo software (). Several reduction steps were performed to reduce the number of codes identified and refine the data synthesis.
Table 3
| Categories | Themes | Codes |
|---|---|---|
| Microsystem | Airport physical environment | Interior installations |
| Exterior installations | ||
| Vehicles (inside) | ||
| Key step areas | ||
| Airport social environment | Personal assistant | |
| Human assistance (airport) | ||
| Other passengers | ||
| Children and families | ||
| Airport services infrastructures | Personal care facilities | |
| Stores | ||
| Specialized rooms and spaces | ||
| Restaurants | ||
| Emergency resources | ||
| Personal equipment | Luggage | |
| Medical devices and supplies | ||
| Baby and children equipment | ||
| Assistive technology, communication and information | ||
| Personal factors | Health | |
| Disability | ||
| Knowledge | ||
| Mesosystem | Organizational culture | Accessibility committee |
| Values and beliefs | ||
| Perceived utility | ||
| Staff management | Communication | |
| Skills and expertise | ||
| Training | ||
| Internal operations | Airport regulations | |
| Objectives and quality standards | ||
| Advice given to passengers | ||
| Services management | Human assistance management | |
| Key travel steps services | ||
| Customer service | ||
| Transportation programs | ||
| Other services and programs | ||
| Macrosystem | External partners | External partners |
| Practice guidelines | Practice guidelines | |
| Laws and regulations | Laws and regulations | |
| Social disability perspective | Social disability perspective | |
| Needs | Meaning | Leisure and pleasure |
| Access to health services | ||
| Maintaining social relations | ||
| Autonomy | Pursuing interests and values | |
| Advocate | ||
| Equity | ||
| Independence | ||
| Competency | Communicate | |
| Efficiency and time | ||
| Flexibility | ||
| Planning and anticipation | ||
| Safety | Health (physical, mental and emotional) | |
| Emergency | ||
| Dignity |
Categories, themes and codes used in the thematic content analysis.
3 Results
3.1 Scientific articles included
The article selection process is shown in a PRISMA diagram (Figure 1) (). The database search strategy identified 3,319 unique results. After the selection process, 30 scientific articles were retained for analysis. Systematic reviews were not retained, in order to prioritize first-source literature. The quality of scientific articles was not assessed, and they were not discriminated on the basis of design. The majority of studies were based on qualitative research designs (n = 20), while others used quantitative (n = 7) or mixed methods (n = 4). Table 4 present included studies characteristics and distribution.
Figure 1
Table 4
| Study characteristics | Number of studies | |
|---|---|---|
| Origin of the study | Europe | 15 |
| North America | 11 | |
| Asia | 5 | |
| Year of publication | 2009 | 2 |
| 2010 | 4 | |
| 2011 | 1 | |
| 2012 | 2 | |
| 2014 | 2 | |
| 2015 | 1 | |
| 2016 | 1 | |
| 2017 | 1 | |
| 2018 | 2 | |
| 2019 | 3 | |
| 2020 | 5 | |
| 2121 | 4 | |
| 2022 | 3 | |
| Aim of the study | Highlight accessibility issues | 16 |
| Evaluate accessibility and propose solutions | 11 | |
| Address accessibility issues | 4 | |
| Studied population | PwD | 22 |
| Older adults | 4 | |
| Employees | 4 | |
| Accompanying person | 1 |
Included studies characteristics.
3.2 Included grey literature
Table 2 shows all the airports from which the information available on the websites was extracted. Airline web pages were also included when referenced by the selected airport websites.
The desire to support travel opportunities for PwD is not a new topic in airport industry environments. The literature reviewed shows that both in the field and in research, measures and recommendations are being deployed to support the experience of passengers living with disabilities. Results are presented to highlight relevant facilitators and barriers at each step of the journey. Also, additional aspects affecting travel experiences are presented.
3.3 Travel steps and activities
PwD travel primarily for leisure, for pleasure (
3.3.1 Accessing the information needed to plan the journey
For PwD, planning is required to make the journey possible, especially to anticipate longer steps and potential unforeseen circumstances that could make the trip impossible (
Airport and airlines websites are the primary information channels for passengers. The vast majority of airport websites offer a description of their accessible services. Where relevant, airports refer to airlines websites or contact information for travel steps where they are responsible for accessibility.
Several airports, such as Dubai and Hong Kong airports, apply recognized web accessibility guidelines for their website (
However, website accessibility is heterogeneous. Guidelines and regulations are not always followed, and in some cases, PwD may have to ask another person to use the website or contact customer service directly. In that case, it is not uncommon for people to have to pay more for their trip (
Some Airports, such as Toronto's Pearson Airport provide additional accessible information material, to help with planning, through the “MagnusCard” mobile application. Notably, this information enables people with autism to plan the trip with greater ease and reduce the stress of the unfamiliar (
3.3.2 Getting to and from the airport
Accessibility to and from airports largely depends on the accessibility of the means of private or public transport used. At airports such as Calgary, Dallas and Singapore, some public buses are equipped to accommodate wheelchair users (
However, few airports provide clear information on the proportion of services accessible, or their degree of availability. Cole et al. (
3.3.3 Obtaining human assistance
Human assistance services are offered at all the international airports included in the analysis. Human assistant services are mainly designed to compensate for the lack of accessibility of the physical environment. They aim to support the mobility, communication and access to information for passengers with disabilities, through the different travel stages, as in Madrid Airport (
PwD have to plan in advance for dedicated human assistance services, to minimize waiting times at the airport. In most airports, the airport, airlines and other contractors share the responsibility of providing assistance (
To facilitate punctual assistance to people with invisible disabilities, 140 airports around the world are also partners in the “Hidden Disabilities Sunflower” program, such as Denver Airport. This program offers people with invisible disabilities the opportunity to wear a sunflower symbol, making it “visible” to those around them that they may need extra help. Some airports additionally train employees on certain invisible conditions or disabilities (
For airport, human assistant fleets requires intensive management. Competence and training are directly linked to service quality (66, 67). Wang and Cole (68) highlight the importance of basic health knowledge training for employees. Employees should be prepared to compose with the common situations PwD may encounter during travel. Additionally, the desire to help, patience, the ability to offer clear information, to relate and to support comfort are key determinants of service quality. At Schiphol in Amsterdam, Netherlands, assistants are given specialized training in safety, risk management and intervention (64). In Dubai, employees are trained according to Air Carrier Act's standards and a certification program is in place to ensure an adequate level of competence among employees that may interact with PwD (69).
Human assistance services present several considerable challenges for airports organizations. First, assistants have to contend with low wages, irregular schedules, and physically demanding conditions (
Also, McCarthy (67) and Cole et al. (
In addition, coordination and communication between assistants is hindered by factors such as distance, complex environments, numerous requests for assistance and dependence on walkie-talkies, leading to gaps in real-time information, errors and a decline in service quality (
Finally, the employee fleets of airports and airlines are under different management. Management processes should include efficient channels of communication between different parties, to improve the fluidity, efficiency and quality of services, particularly during service transitions (68).
3.3.4 Getting around the airport
Most airports have physical installations designed to facilitate the mobility of PwD. The different type of mobility amenities in the physical environment is presented in Table 5.
Table 5
| Physical environment features | Current practices in airports | Scientific literature recommendations |
|---|---|---|
| Signage | Large fonts Contrasting colours (e.g, Heathrow) Simple langage Anti-reflective coating (e.g, Paris) | Abundant use of clear and simple signs ( Contrasting colours Large fonts Static and dynamic signs Intelligent signs with multiple sensory modes Visual signals at boarding gates (71). Use of static, dynamic and intelligent signs ( |
| High luminosity day and night (e.g, Toronto) | Lighting should be provided for all times of the day and night (71) | |
| Outdoor | ||
| Meeting points | Placed near the entrance (e.g, Madrid) | |
| Parking | Accessible, reserved, and close to entrance parking spaces (e.g, Atlanta) | Van-accessible spaces ( |
| Curb | Accessible drop-off areas (e.g, Québec) | |
| Indoor | ||
| Entrance door | Large entrance, Sliding doors (e.g, Winnipeg) Carpeted vestibule to reduce residue, White cane bars (e.g, Calgary) | No steps ( |
| Flooring | Hard materials Non-slippery materials Textured paths and lanes (e.g, Beijing airport) | Hard materials (71) Non-slip material Light-coloured Textured path Braille blocks Use of LED paths, colour coding, tactile information and luminescent materials ( |
| Ramps | Whenever possible to limit required efforts for PwD and assistants (70) Limited steepness ( | |
| Handrails | In main circulation areas, to support mobility and orientation (e.g, Beijing) | |
| Seating | Reserved seating, placed throughout terminals for respite and waiting areas (e.g, Beijing Airport) Raised for people who have trouble getting up (e.g, Paris CDG) | Regular intervals to reduce walking distance (71) |
| Meeting points and landmarks | Located near recognizable features, highly signposted, often used for kiosks and assistance counters (e.g, Madrid) | Should be placed to minimize walking distances (71) |
| Elevators | Braille buttons Voice assistance (e.g, Canton) Mirrors Tactile signs for directional information Strategically placed near staircases and escalators (e.g, Calgary) | Should be placed to minimize walking distances (71) |
| Escalators and stairs | Placed in high traffic areas (e.g, Denver) | Should be large: Limited space of escalators can cause issues for large mobility aids and during emergencies ( Tactile signs at both ends should be present to indicate the direction of movement for people with visual impairments ( Should be placed to minimize walking distances (71) |
| Vehicles | Wheelchairs rent or free self-service (e.g, Singapore) Electric vehicles Buggies Carts (e.g, Dubai) | |
| Restroom | Dedicated cubicles in toilets (one or two per general public room) (e.g, Québec) Gender-neutral toilets for personal attendants Increased space for wheelchair circulation Handrails Lowered sink Objects table Coat Hook Lowered hand dryers Lowered water fountain (e.g, Beijing Airport) | Large spaces for wheelchair circulation. Grab bars. Clean spaces for medical procedures ( |
International airport's physical environment aspects used to improve mobility.
In all the airports surveyed, regulatory exemptions are in place to allow the free circulation of people with assistance dogs. However, it is the passenger's responsibility to inform the airlines and provide the necessary documentation (animal passport and identification documents) to justify the need for a service dog. Many airports, such as Calgary and Dallas's airports, offers pet-friendly outdoor areas, before and after security. However, in numerous cases, those relief areas are too scarce (
Despite those features, several challenges are faced by PwD when they navigate airport environment. Firstly, wheelchair users have to check in their wheelchair for transportation (72). For this reason, many airports offer self-service wheelchairs for both indoor and outdoor use, they may not be comfortable and affect individual autonomy (66). In addition, wheelchairs may be damaged during transit. Beside the inconvenience of not having a wheelchair due to damage, insurance procedures in those cases are complicated (
Furthermore, passengers have to change vehicles between the different stages of the journey. Besides, access to vehicles varies greatly between airports. However, the vast majority have at least electric vehicles in the terminal waiting areas after security screening.
3.3.5 Information and wayfinding at the airport
Several practices and technologies are in place in airports to allow PwD to access to timely information. Hearing loops, such as those used in Tokyo Haneda Airport (73), enable people with hearing disabilities to obtain crucial information about flights and airport situation. Hearing Loops are assistive listening systems, designed for people wearing hearing aids (T-coil, cochlear implants and streamers), that improve the clarity of information and communication. Also, a number of teletypewriter telephones (typed messages telephone) and video relay services are in place in many airports to facilitate communication between passengers and stakeholders.
Also, airports usually rely on the use of flight information panels, coupled with auditory information on changing situations (cancellation, etc.). Information panels should present data multimodally, without separating situational and contextual information (74). Park et al. (
Interestingly, for some PwD, other passengers can act as a supportive information resource. While these interactions are positive most of the time, discriminatory or marginalizing attitudes or remarks may be made (
In addition, Toronto Pearson Airport recommends that people with visual impairments use the Aira application, which enables them to communicate with an assistant via videoconferencing, in real time (75). Another application, based on the use of IBeacon in airports, offers real-time information at every step, to enable route decisions to be made, based on time and distance. The information presented is multimodal (haptic feedback, audio, text) and flexible (e.g, customizable level of detail) (74). However, for indoor navigation systems, vast airport spaces can make it difficult to install beacons covering all possible paths. Indoor systems are also less accurate than outdoor systems, which can be a problem when lanes are narrow or when hazardous installations are nearby (
3.3.6 Check in
Several airports, such as Singapore Changi or London Heathrow offers dedicated accessible counters in check-in areas (
Check-in, however, can be challenging for PwD. At every key travel stages, airports are particularly dense in terms of people and traffic. The density of people can hinder access to counters and reserved spaces for PwD (
3.3.7 Security screening
The high passenger traffic, the impossibility of using regular scanners, the additional equipment to be checked and the sometimes confined spaces are additional stressors for PwD during security screening (
Usually, airports’ internal regulations anticipate the additional equipment that PwD will have to carry during screening. For instance, The Canadian Air Transport Security Authority offers extensive information of regulations, exemptions and facilitators for the transportation of medical and other essential items for PwD (80). In Singapore, technical aids are checked separately and an alternative line to metal detectors, with a manual check, is provided for wheelchair users (
PwD still face several challenges when going through security screening process. Indeed, they often have to carry out additional documents, as in Kuala Lumpur airport in Malaysia, where passengers are required to keep their medical and identity documents with them at all times (81). Also, the process is also generally more anxiety-provoking and time-consuming, due to the need for a manual search of aids and personal belongings (78). The strain of having to part with one's technical aids and medical devices can be a stress vector for passengers, who fear that their belongings may be lost or damaged in the process (
3.3.8 Use facilities and wait at gates
Few airports provide detailed information on assistance to PwD when they are waiting in the gate area. Yet, the ability to use restaurants, bars and other facilities in this area is a key factor in airport accessibility (71). One of the problems at this stage is the transfer and change of responsibility of organizations in human assistance. This pose obvious issues, when people have to use facilities for essential needs, such as having to use the toilet (
3.3.9 Boarding and disembarking
In every airport surveyed, airlines are responsible for providing assistance with boarding and disembarking. Individuals must inform companies prior to the journey or during check-in, for any specific required accommodations. In the majority of cases, people board and disembark the aircraft at a dedicated time, before or after other passengers, to ensure they have more time and assistance to reach their seat or get out of the plane, as explained at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (82).
Spaces in airplanes almost never accommodate wheelchairs (Holloway et al., 2015). Small type of aisle chairs are used to enable wheelchair users to reach their seat, exit or restrooms (70, 83). However, several people with obesity report negative experience with the inadequacy of airports and airplanes’ chairs (
Boarding and disembarking may have to take into account the different possible ways planes dock airports. Most boarding relies on the use of jet bridges, which are movable closed bridges connecting terminals and airports. However, they are not used in every situation, for example, when boarding and disembarking take place directly onto the airfield ground (tarmac). Information on procedures in that case is not available on airport websites. Some airports, such as Toronto Pearson or Kuala Lumpur International, recommend that passengers directly contact airlines for assistance and information with specific boarding and disembarking procedures (
3.3.10 Customs and immigration
Few airport websites offer information on accessibility and inclusion at customs and immigration. At Dubai International, a priority lane with a dedicated counter and a person trained to assist PwD facilitates the declaration process. The scarcity of information on airport websites is not surprising, since those services are managed by immigration and customs agencies. For instance, the Canadian Border Services Agency offers information on priority and alternative lines: they can provide assistance in completing the declaration and documents, accommodate sign language and handle personal items for more extensive clearance (85)
To support independence, it is recommended that PwD be offered the opportunity to use accessible automatic information and service terminals (e.g, customs service terminal) (
3.3.11 Managing luggage and personal belongings
Managing luggage during the journey can be a difficult task for people with disability, whom mobility is reduced (
Luggage assistance is included with human assistance services at most airports. For instance, at Calgary Airport, help is offered as soon as the person arrives at the airport to check in, and when collecting from conveyors after their flight (
However, those services need to be planned prior to travel, and might require waiting time at arrival, depending on the destination. Also, this step can be challenging for PwD, when they are alone or when services are unavailable. Finding and lifting bags from conveyors may not always be possible. In some cases, PwD may try to avoid having a checked baggage, to avoid this step altogether (
3.3.12 Sustaining travel experience
PwD often express the need to be able to move around airports independently, without depending on constant assistance (
Regulations, as well, play a decisive role in improving travel accessibility and experience (
Every airport puts forward a customer service department, to sustain travel experience. For example, Toronto airport has set up a 24-hour helpline, live chat and contacts phone number. At Tokyo Haneda airport, dedicated customer service agents are deployed at accessible counters (73). Nevertheless, the contact process can sometimes be difficult. The lack of accessibility of some websites can deter PwD from getting in touch with customer service to raise issues (
4 Discussion
This scoping review highlights many practices and challenges for accessibility and inclusion in airports. At first glance, the challenges and negative experiences of passengers with disabilities may appear paradoxical, considering the large number of measures in place to support their travel experience. However, current practices may underestimate the complexity of air travel (90). Conceptions of accessibility and inclusion can be influenced by visions that may be mistakenly believed to be universal (e.g, Western view of disability). Indeed, air travel has many meanings and purposes and can be pursued in many different ways. This reality is particularly important in airports, which welcome people from all over the world, with very different cultural backgrounds. Some salient challenges experienced by PwD can be deduced from this exploration. On the one hand, they carry a heavy burden when travelling, and experience tensions with airports’ views of their identity. On the other hand, the scale and complexity of airports are a major challenge for stakeholders in supporting PwD.
4.1 The burden of travel for PwD
The results show that, while many services exist, passengers who need assistance have to plan their journey to a much greater extent. Indeed, services are not always immediately available to PwD, without reservation. If they are, they often require additional time for deployment. Implicitly, this approach to services, places a great deal of responsibility on PwD in their ability to travel. This vision of accessibility is rooted in current practices. Indeed, travel guides designed for PwD place considerable emphasis on passengers’ and families’ responsibility for travel. Several additional steps are required, and it's up to PwD to prevent setbacks at each step. Many organizations are explicit on this topic: they specify that the individual is responsible, and sometimes decline responsibility for the failure of the trip, if arrangements have not been made by the passenger beforehand. This position is at odds with the recommendations or obligations issued by several governments. Indeed, the legal framework suggests an inclusive approach, where PwD have the same opportunities as any other passenger. In a context where this additional burden can be detrimental to the possibility of making the journey, it is legitimate to think that PwD may effectively not have the same opportunities as other passengers.
Planning is often at the forefront, in a context where the notion of time is critical to air travel. The success of the journey depends in particular on the person's capacity to get through the various stages in a timely manner. The deployment and use of alternative services or channels can lead to additional delays in the journey. Airports are well aware of this, as many insist on the importance of arriving at the airport well in advance. Long waits for an assistant is one example that raises concerns about the management of travel time. The chain of steps involved in air travel is long and complex. The accumulation of additional delays at each stage is a major concern for passengers with disabilities.
These issues are exacerbated by the ambiguity surrounding information on accessibility. The use of generic rather than descriptive adjectives and terms, such as “accessible” without further detail, is common practice on websites. Since people's needs are as unique as they are diverse, each individual is in the best position to assess their own needs. This can hinder PwD's preparation, as they cannot always conclude whether the services in place are sufficient to meet their specific needs. Similarly, few really prepare PwD for the challenges they will face at airports. Most airport organizations present the services they offer, to demonstrate that the journey will be accessible, without acknowledging limitations. Heathrow Airport in London, UK stands out in this respect. The organization conveys information about accessibility, acknowledging the challenges that will accompany the journey (e.g, additional delays, regulatory limitations, etc.) (
For the same reason, in addition to increased preparation, passengers with disabilities need to have a higher level of knowledge of air travel (
4.2 The tension of the PwD vision
One of the main reasons why PwD don't travel is the dehumanizing nature of travel, as described by Darcy (
Firstly, the complexity and uniqueness of PwD are often overlooked. By reducing people to their disability or perceived needs, services are neither personalized nor respectful of passengers’ agency. Rarely can people decide or express what they want in terms of the level of assistance, the route he wishes to take or the places he wishes to visit. Moreover, although passengers’ vision of autonomy varies widely, it is often conceived in just one way, at airports. For example, employees’ level of knowledge about disability can lead to the development of a perception that PwD need to be assisted in everything they do (67). On the other hand, services and infrastructures have a well-defined objective: to complete travel stages. To do so, it is assumed that people need to meet their primary needs, and to mobilize. If these needs are important to the journey, it's possible that other needs are just as important. It is rarely possible for passengers with disabilities to take full advantage of the wide range of activities that airports have to offer. In particular, human assistance services are often well-defined to a specific route, which only allows the completion of travel stages. Also, the approaches are often the same, regardless of the passenger. The unique meaning of travel for the individual is therefore rarely called upon.
Secondly, services are focused on inability, rather than strengths. In many cases, the passenger must inform the organization in advance about the things he or she cannot do (
Also, the vision and practices of accessibility in the airport context can be stigmatizing for PwD. On the one hand, the terms used to designate PwD often have an unfavourable connotation in relation to the person's abilities. The use of terms such as “weak, challenged, sick” is indicative of the objectives pursued by services and infrastructures. Consequently, employees interact with these people from that perspective, creating, unwillingly, a dehumanizing and stigmatizing experience (
Cole et al. (
Increasingly, airport organizations are expressing a desire to change and redefine this vision. Toronto Airport, for example, explicitly makes this distinction in its position statement on accessibility: “We recognize that passengers and employees don't need to adapt to have their needs met; we do” (92). Passengers living with disabilities insist on the importance of bringing this critical reflection to the development and planning of accessibility practices (
4.3 Organizational challenges at airports
The magnitude and complexity of airports are a major challenge for the organization of services and infrastructure. Many stakeholders are required to ensure the international reach of airports. Numerous airlines, airport operators and third-party companies have to work together to make travel possible. Each of these organizations has to deal with different realities, objectives and sometimes regulatory frameworks. This reality of shared responsibility can hinder service synergy. The many different organizations working on accessibility have mandates defined for specific actions or areas (93). As mentioned before, for example, airport organizations are responsible for getting people to the gates, while airlines are responsible for boarding and disembarking. Elsewhere, as in Calgary, some airlines take charge of PwD as soon as they check in. The need to deal with heterogeneous operating modes can hamper continuity of service (93). Also, there is little evidence of sustained communication between these stakeholders: usually, it's the passenger who has to do the bridging (
More and more airport organizations are talking about inclusion. In many countries, legislation is pushing organizations to think critically about equal opportunities for PwD. Airports often wish not only to meet their legal obligations, but also to develop the quality of their services and travel experience. Major challenges remain in respecting passenger rights (
4.4 Strengths and limitations of the study
This study has several strengths. Firstly, the methodological choices, informed by the scope review method, contribute to the study's relevance and credibility. The process of identifying and selecting articles was carried out by two people, double-blind. Disagreements were discussed ensuring accuracy and comprehensiveness. Secondly, systematic consultation of the websites of airport organizations greatly contributed to data richness and comprehensiveness. Airport organizations are the main resources for obtaining information on accessibility services and infrastructures. Their inclusion was essential to obtain an accurate picture of the state of accessibility and inclusion in international airports. Moreover, the varied origins of the airports also enabled us to highlight critical differences between the various international airports. At the same time, we took a broad look at the contextual aspects that play a role in accessibility. By considering all stages of the journey, it was possible to highlight important gaps, transversal to accessibility and inclusion practices (e.g, issues of disability vision and organizational challenges).
Several limitations should also be noted. In particular, we did not systematically include Google search results when identifying documents. In the search for accessibility practices, the vast majority of results from the Google search engine refer to international airport websites. Since the Google search is conducted from Canada, the search favoured results related to North American airports. However, for the purposes of this study, we wanted to consider airports in terms of their activities, rather than their location. With this in mind, we chose to proceed systematically by directly identifying the sites of the world's busiest international airports. Also, as mentioned previously, accessibility information on websites is sometimes ambiguous and vague. Generic terms such as “accessible” are used to include a range of features and accommodations that are not described on the sites. For this reason, it was not possible to establish clear data on the frequency of arrangements and services as part of this scoping review. Such results could have raised issues of data accuracy, for airports that do not specify or whose information is too general to conclude on the presence or absence of an accessibility feature.
Furthermore, only scientific literature in English and French was considered. It is likely that accessibility or inclusion practices are presented in documents in other languages. Secondly, few data focus on the experience of passengers with disabilities. Although the aim of this study was to highlight accessibility practices, understanding the experience of passengers with disabilities is equally important in improving services. Similarly, understanding the needs and experience of individuals is crucial to taking a stance on the occupational participation of passengers with disabilities. To this end, Prajapati et al. (94) are currently conducting a scoping review on the experience of PwD when flying.
5 Conclusion
Air travel is very important for the well-being of everyone, and, of course, of PwD, but also for their fundamental right to equal opportunities. Air travel is increasingly becoming a common means of transport, sometimes essential to many important roles in people's lives. Even today, a considerable number of PwD do not travel, due to the difficulties anticipated in the process (91). For this reason, various organizations are working on several fronts, to support access to travel for these individuals. This study has painted a picture of accessibility and inclusion in airports around the world. A wide variety of practices, at many contextual levels, were identified. The results are an important step towards understanding the main challenges affecting the occupational participation of PwD when travelling through international airports. Several possible directions for future research were raised. In particular, gaps relating to the burden of travel for PwDs, their vision by the various stakeholders and organizational management were highlighted. Narrowing these gaps is crucial, given that it's not enough for airports to be “accessible”, but that they must offer PwD a satisfying and humane travel experience.
For this reason, this study is the first step in a larger project, funded by Canadian Accessibility Standards, aimed at improving inclusive accessibility in Canadian airports. We will be accompanying PwD of various profiles through the various stages of their journey, to gather their perceptions of the travel experience. The results will be used in conjunction with this study to formulate recommendations and solutions for inclusive accessibility.
Statements
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Author contributions
DG: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Validation, Visualization. EM: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing. FR: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. JR: Data curation, Validation, Writing – review & editing. AH: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This project was funded by Norms of Accessibility Canada/the Government of Canada - project ASC-23/24-050-C. Some members of the research team are currently funded by the Fonds de recherche du Québec: FR as a Senior research fellow of the Quebec Health Research Funds/Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé (grant # 296761), and DG as a Doctoral Research Scholarship of the Fonds de recherche du Québec - Société et Culture (Society and Culture) (2024-2025 - B2Z - 348335). Université Laval and the Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche en réadaptation et intégration sociale also contributed to the development of this project.
Acknowledgments
This study was made possible thanks to Accessibility Standards Canada. The authors would like to thank them for their generous funding, and our partners and committee members for their help in designing the study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1.
World Health Organization. Global report on health equity for persons with disabilities. (2022).
2.
Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability, 2017 to 2022. (2023).
3.
Government of Canada. Rights of people with disabilities 2018Available online at:https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/rights-people-disabilities.html(accessed September 8, 2022).
4.
BauerI. When travel is a challenge: travel medicine and the ‘dis-abled’traveller. Travel Med Infect Dis. (2018) 22:66–72. 10.1016/j.tmaid.2018.02.001
5.
DarcyS. (Dis) embodied air travel experiences: disability, discrimination and the affect of a discontinuous air travel chain. J Hosp Tour Mana. (2012) 19:91–101. 10.1017/jht.2012.9
6.
ChangY-CChenC-F. Meeting the needs of disabled air passengers: factors that facilitate help from airlines and airports. Tour Manag. (2012) 33(3):529–36. 10.1016/j.tourman.2011.06.002
7.
OrakaniSNSmithKWeaverA. Reframing the experiences of travellers with mobility impairments: enhancing the leisure constraints model. J Hosp Tour Mana. (2021) 47:84–92. 10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.03.003
8.
SmithMAmorimÉUmbelinoJ. Accessible tourism and disability service information provided on leading airline websites: a content analysis. Int J Res Tour. (2013) 2(4):7–23. http://repec.turismulresponsabil.ro/RePEc/amfarchive/2013-4/2013-2-4-07-23.pdf
9.
Calgary Airport Authority. Accessibility 2022Available online at:https://www.yyc.com/en-us/navigatingyyc/accessibility.aspx(accessed September 27, 2022).
10.
Greater Toronto Airports Authority. Arranging for wheelchair and mobility assistance (2022) Available online at:https://www.torontopearson.com/en/accessibility/mobility-wheelchair-services(accessed September 26, 2022).
11.
Ottawa Airport Authority. Accessibility. (2022). Available online at:https://yow.ca/en/accessibility (accessed September 27, 2022).
12.
Greater Toronto Airports Authority. BlindSquare (2022). Available online at:https://www.torontopearson.com/en/accessibility/blindsquare(accessed September 26, 2022).
13.
Greater Toronto Airports Authority. MagnusCards (2022). Available online at:https://www.torontopearson.com/en/accessibility/autism-app-magnuscards(accessed September 26, 2022).
14.
Department of Aviation, City of Atlanta. Accessibility (2022). Available online at:https://www.atl.com/ADA/#PassengerInformation(accessed August 17, 2022).
15.
Tokyo International Air Terminal Corporation. Universally designed “Calm down, cool down” spaces (2020), Available online at:https://tokyo-haneda.com/en/service/facilities/calmdown-cooldown.html(accessed August 19, 2022).
16.
FougeyrollasP. La Funambule, le fil et la Toile: Transformations Réciproques du Sens du Handicap. Québec, Canada: Presses Université Laval (2010).
17.
ArkseyHO'MalleyL. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. (2005) 8(1):19–32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616
18.
ColquhounHLLevacDO'BrienKKStrausSTriccoACPerrierLet alScoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol. (2014) 67(12):1291–4. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013
19.
Joanna Briggs Institute. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2015 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute (2015).
20.
TriccoACLillieEZarinWO’BrienKColquhounHKastnerMet alA scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. (2016) 16(1):15. 10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4
21.
KastnerMTriccoACSoobiahCLillieEPerrierLHorsleyTet alWhat is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review. BMC Med Res Methodol. (2012) 12(1):114. 10.1186/1471-2288-12-114
22.
The EndNote Team. EndNote. EndNote 20 ed. Clarivate: Philadelphia, PA (2013).
23.
Veritas Health Innovation. Covidence. Melbourne, Australia: Covidence (2023).
24.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. 2019 Airport Traffic Report. (2020).
25.
Statistics Canada. Air passenger traffic at Canadian airports, annual. (2021).
26.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. 2021 Airport Traffic Report. (2021).
27.
BronfenbrennerU. Ecological models of human development. Int Ency Educ. (1994) 3(2):37–43. https://www.ncj.nl/wp-content/uploads/media-import/docs/6a45c1a4-82ad-4f69-957e-1c76966678e2.pdf
28.
BraunVClarkeV. Thematic analysis. (2012).
29.
CastleberryANolenA. Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: is it as easy as it sounds?Curr Pharm Teach Learn. (2018) 10(6):807–15. 10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019
30.
PopeCZieblandSMaysN. Chapter 7 Analysing Qualitative Data. Qualitative Research in Health Care. 3rd edOxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd (2006).
31.
HsiehH-FShannonSE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. (2005) 15(9):1277–88. 10.1177/1049732305276687
32.
QSR International Pty Ltd. Nvivo. (2020).
33.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPMBoutronIHoffmannTCMulrowCDet alThe PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. (2021) 372:n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71
34.
BatraA. Senior pleasure tourists: examination of their demography, travel experience, and travel behavior upon visiting the Bangkok metropolis. Int J Hosp Tour Adm. (2009) 10(3):197–212. 10.1080/15256480903088105
35.
DaviesAChristieN. The experiences of parents with children with disabilities travelling on planes: an exploratory study. J Transp Health. (2018) 11:122–9. 10.1016/j.jth.2018.10.002
36.
Calgary Airport Authority. Accessibility (2023). Available online at:https://www.yyc.com/navigatingyyc/accessibility.aspx(accessed March 2, 2023).
37.
FlahertyGTGeogheganRBrownIGFinucaneFM. Severe obesity as a barrier to international travel: a qualitative analysis. J Travel Med. (2019) 26(3):1–8. 10.1093/jtm/taz018
38.
ParkKJeonHParkS. Disability e-inclusion for accessible tourism websites. Curr Issues Tour. (2022) 25(22):3571–8. 10.1080/13683500.2022.2106195
39.
ManleyMKimYSChristensenKChenA. Modeling emergency evacuation of individuals with disabilities in a densely populated airport. Transp Res Rec. (2011) 2206(1):32–8. 10.3141/2206-05
40.
PirelliGChawdhryP. A joint model for usability and security of the passenger process in airports.2009 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics; San Antonio, TX, USA (2009). p. 2091–8
41.
Airport Authority Hong Kong. Accessibility Statement (2023) Available online at:https://www.hongkongairport.com/en/accessibility-statement.page(accessed March 2, 2023).
42.
Dubai Airports. Accessibility Statement for Dubai Airports (2023) (updated September 26, 2023). Available online at:https://www.dubaiairports.ae/accessibility-statement
43.
Publications Office of the European Union. Accessibility of public sector websites and mobile apps, (2016).
44.
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities, (2010).
45.
Accessible Canada Act, (2019).
46.
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C®). WCAG 2 Overview (2023) Available online at:https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/(accessed August 21, 2023).
47.
LHR Airports Limited. Accessibility Statement (2023) Available online at:https://www.heathrow.com/accessibility-statement(accessed July 28, 2023).
48.
LazarJJaegerPTAdamsAAngelozziAManoharJMarciniakJet alUp in the air: are airlines following the new DOT rules on equal pricing for people with disabilities when websites are inaccessible?Gov Inf Q. (2010) 27(4):329–36. 10.1016/j.giq.2010.04.005
49.
ColeSWhiteneckGKilictepeSWangWHobackNGZhaoH. Multi-stakeholder perspectives of environmental barriers to participation in travel-related activities after spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil. (2022) 44(5):672–83. 10.1080/09638288.2020.1774669
50.
Cerdan ChiscanoM. Autism Spectrum disorder (ASD) and the family inclusive airport design experience. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2021) 18(13):7206. 10.3390/ijerph18137206
51.
Changi Airport Corporate. Special assistance. (2023). https://www.changiairport.com/en/airport-guide/special-assistance.html (accessed July 28, 2023).
52.
Dallas Fort Worth International Airport. Accessibility (2023) Available online at:https://www.dfwairport.com/explore/plan/assist/accessibility/(accessed July 31, 2023).
53.
LHR Airports Limited. Assistance and accessibility (2023) Available online at:https://www.heathrow.com/at-the-airport/accessibility-and-mobility-help(accessed July 28, 2023).
54.
City & County of Denver Department of Aviation. Accessibility. (2023).
55.
Incheon International Airport Corporation. Tailored services (2023) Available online at:https://www.airport.kr/ap_cnt/en/svc/cusserv/cusserv.do(accessed July 28, 2023).
56.
Los Angeles International Airport. Inter-Terminal Connections (2023) Available online at:https://www.flylax.com/inter-terminal-connections(accessed July 31, 2023).
57.
FianTHaugerG, Iop, Lama Energy Grp LG, Oil PCT, Tech Univ Wien CTSPAAVA. The human, the built environment and the technology: identifying key configurations for a user-friendly wayfinding system at transport hubs.5th World Multidisciplinary Civil Engineering-Architecture-Urban Planning Symposium (WMCAUS) (2020). p. 960
58.
Aena. Barrier Free assistance service at Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas Airport (2023) Available online at:https://www.aena.es/en/adolfo-suarez-madrid-barajas/airport-services/barrier-free-assistance-service.html#:∼:text=Additionally%2C%20through%20our%20website%2C%20the,valid%20for%20Aena%20network%20airports(accessed August 1, 2023).
59.
City & County of Denver Department of Aviation. DEN Travel Assist (2023) Available online at:https://www.flydenver.com/dentravelassist(accessed July 31, 2023).
60.
Delhi Airport. Special Assistance (2023) updated September 27, 2023. Available online at:https://www.newdelhiairport.in/airport-guides/special-assistance-prm
61.
GuerreiroJAhmetovicDSatoDKitaniKAsakawaCAssoc CompMet alAirport accessibility and navigation assistance for people with visual impairments.CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (2019).
62.
GrahnRJacquillatA. Optimal escort dispatch for airport travelers with reduced mobility. Transportation Research Part C-Emerging Technologies. (2020) 111:421–38. 10.1016/j.trc.2019.12.010
63.
Chicago Department of Aviation. Terminal accessibility (2023) Available online at:https://www.flychicago.com/ohare/ServicesAmenities/accessibility/Pages/Terminal-Accessibility.aspx(accessed August 22, 2023).
64.
Schiphol. Extra assistance at Schiphol (2023) Available online at:https://www.schiphol.nl/en/page/extra-assistance/(accessed August 1, 2023).
65.
Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad. The Butterfly Effect (2023) Available online at:https://airports.malaysiaairports.com.my/airport-amenities/services/butterfly-effect(accessed July 28, 2023).
66.
DaviesAChristieN. An exploratory study of the experiences of wheelchair users as aircraft passengers—implications for policy and practice. IATSS Res. (2017) 41(2):89–93. 10.1016/j.iatssr.2017.05.003
67.
McCarthyMJ. Improving the United States airline industry’s capacity to provide safe and dignified services to travelers with disabilities: focus group findings. Disabil Rehabil. (2011) 33(25/26):2612–9. 10.3109/09638281003729540
68.
WangWColeS. Perceived onboard service needs of passengers with mobility limitations: an investigation among flight attendants. Asia Pac J Tour Res. (2014) 19(11):1239–59. 10.1080/10941665.2013.852116
69.
Dubai Airports. Special Assistance (2023) updated September 26, 2023. Available online at:https://www.dubaiairports.ae/before-you-fly/procedures/special-assistance
70.
HollowayCThoreauRPetitETylerN. Time and force required for attendants boarding wheelchair users onto aircraft. Int J Ind Ergon. (2015) 48:167–73. 10.1016/j.ergon.2015.04.003
71.
AfacanYCaglayanI. Simulation-based service walkthrough (SBSW) to assess airport environment performance. ArchNet - IJAR. (2021) 15:905–24.
72.
U.S. Department of Transportation. Wheelchairs and Other Assistive Devices, (2017) Available online at:https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/wheelchairs-and-other-assistive-devices(accessed July 31, 2023).
73.
Tokyo International Air Terminal Corporation. Customers Who Require Special Assistance (2022) Available online at:https://tokyo-haneda.com/en/service/facilities/calmdown-cooldown.html(accessed September 26, 2022).
74.
LiuYEHarringtonCMelgenSSanfordJ, Georgia Inst technol AGAUSA. GatePal - universal design for airport navigation to allow departing travellers to stay informed. 10th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction Held as Part of 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International) (2016). p. 586–94.
75.
Greater Toronto Airports Authority. Aira (2023) Available online at:https://www.torontopearson.com/en/accessibility/aira(accessed July 31, 2023).
76.
Airport Authority Hong Kong. Airport facilities and services (2023) Available online at:https://www.hongkongairport.com/en/passenger-guide/airport-facilities-services/(accessed September 27, 2023).
77.
ArhewohRKellyBAKellyMPBuchowskiJMGuptaMCLuhmannSJ. Positive security screening episodes of patients with spinal implants are influenced by detector type and not implant material. Spine J. (2022) 22(5):738–46. 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.12.010
78.
PetersonCMBirkelandRWBarselSStatzTLGauglerJEFinlayJM. ‘Sick with stress’: perspectives on airport travel from persons living with dementia and their travel companions. Disabil Soc. (2022) 21:234–54.
79.
City of Atlanta. Accessibility (2023) Available online at:https://www.atl.com/civil-rights/#reciteme(accessed July 31, 2023).
80.
Canadian Air Transport Security Authority. Medication and Medical Items. (2023).
81.
Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad. Faqs on security screening for liquids, gels or aerosol (2023) Available online at:https://airports.malaysiaairports.com.my/passenger-guide/lags-restricted-items(accessed August 29, 2023).
82.
Paris Aéroport. Paris Aéroport fait de l’accessibilité une priorité (2023) Available online at:https://www.parisaeroport.fr/passagers/preparation-vol/assistance-handicap-pmr(accessed August 1, 2023).
83.
WheelchairTravel.org. Boarding the Airplane as a Wheelchair User If You Cannot Walk (2023) Available online at:https://wheelchairtravel.org/air-travel/aisle-chair-boarding-airplane-disability/#:∼:text=Passengers%20who%20are%20non%2Dambulatory,a%20seat%20on%20the%20airplane(accessed September 18, 2023).
84.
Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad. Special assistance (2023) Available online at:https://airports.malaysiaairports.com.my/klia2-airport-amenities/services/special-assistance(accessed August 29, 2023).
85.
Canada Border Services Agency. Travelling with a disability (2023). Available online at:https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/travel-voyage/disability-handicap-eng.html(accessed September 4, 2023).
86.
OostveenAMLehtonenP. The requirement of accessibility: european automated border control systems for persons with disabilities. Technol Soc. (2018) 52:60–9. 10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.07.009
87.
BuddLIsonS. Supporting the needs of special assistance (including PRM) passengers: an international survey of disabled air passenger rights legislation. J Air Transp Manag. (2020) 87:9. 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101851
88.
Greater Toronto Airports Authority. Accessibility plan (2023) Available online at:https://www.torontopearson.com/en/accessibility/accessibility-plan#:∼:text=This%20Accessibility%20Plan%20explores%20the,Information%20and%20communication%20technologies%20(ICT)(accessed September 8, 2023).
89.
Calgary Airport Authority. YYC Accessibility Plan 2023-2026 (2023) Available online at:https://www.yyc.com/en-us/navigatingyyc/accessibility/yycaccessibilityplan2023-2026.aspx#:∼:text=The%20Calgary%20Airport%20Authority%20is,and%20enjoy%20the%20airport%20experience(accessed September 8, 2023).
90.
EganMRestallG. Promoting Occupational Participation: Collaborative Relationship-Focused Occupational Therapy. 1st ed. Ottawa, Canada: CAOT/ACE (2022). p. 347.
91.
ZałuskaUKwiatkowska-CiotuchaDGrześkowiakA. Travelling from perspective of persons with disability: results of an international survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(17):10575. 10.3390/ijerph191710575
92.
Greater Toronto Airports Authority. Our accessibility statement (2022) Available online at:https://www.torontopearson.com/en/accessibility-statement(accessed September 8, 2023).
93.
van TwistRvan den AkkerMHoogeveenH. Synchronizing transportation of people with reduced mobility through airport terminals. Comput Oper Res. (2021) 125:14. 10.1016/j.cor.2020.105103
94.
PrajapatiHYaoDPLabbéDMillerWC. Air Transportation. (2023). 10.17605/OSF.IO/B4VDS
Appendix A: Scientific literature research terminology
All free terms were searched within titles and abstracts
Medline (via ebsco)
(disab* OR “special need*” OR incapacit* OR “physical disorder*” OR “reduced mobility” OR “physical* challenge*” OR (MH “Disabled Persons+”) OR visual* impair* OR vision OR blind* OR “deaf*” OR hearing* OR (MH “Sensation Disorders+”) OR intellectual OR “mental* deficienc*” OR “Developmental” OR “mental* ill*” OR “mental* disorder**” OR “mental* health disorder*” OR “psychiatric disorder*” OR “psychiatr* ill*” OR neurodivergen* OR neuro-divergen* OR autism OR autistic OR cognitive OR dementia OR (MH “Mental Disorders+”) OR elder* OR older OR senior OR aged OR (MH “Aged+”) OR (MH “Aging+”) OR Obes* OR (MH “Obesity+”)) AND (OR modif* OR “access* program*” OR “access* measure*” OR “universal access*” OR design* OR “assistive technolog*” OR “architectur* access*” OR adapt* OR Signage OR (MH “Architecture+”) OR (MH “Self-Help Devices+”) OR Inclusiv* OR discriminat* OR Respect* OR Equity OR Justice OR tolerance OR prejudice OR (MH “Social Inclusion”) OR (MH “Social Discrimination”) OR (MH “Respect”) OR (MH “Prejudice”) OR (MH “Social Justice”) OR (MH “Social Isolation”) OR Guideline* OR “Framework” OR “Frame of reference” OR “Best practice*” OR recommendation* OR polic* OR Rule* OR Regulation* OR (MH “Models, Theoretical”) OR (MH “Guidelines as Topic+”) OR (MH “Policy”) OR (MH “Health Planning+”) OR ([Neutral* OR equity OR (MH “Gender Equity”)] AND [bathroom* OR restroom* OR Utilit* OR Facilit* OR (MH “Toilet Facilities”)])) AND (Accessib* OR Orientation OR Mobil* OR (MH “Architectural Accessibility”) OR (MH “Spatial Navigation”) OR inclusiv* OR participation OR (MH “Social Participation”) OR (MH “Community Participation”) OR use OR usability OR utilization OR capab* OR capacity OR ability OR adequacy OR appropriateness OR experience) AND (airport* OR “air transport*” OR “airline*” OR aircraft OR (MH “Airports”) OR (MH “Aviation+”) OR (MH “Air Travel”)
CINAHL (via ebsco)
(disab* OR “special need*” OR incapacit* OR “physical disorder*” OR “reduced mobility” OR “physical* challenge*” OR (MH “Persons with Disabilities+”) OR visual* impair* OR vision OR blind* OR “deaf*” OR hearing* OR (MH “Sensation Disorders+”) OR intellectual OR “mental* deficienc*” OR “Developmental” OR “mental* ill*” OR “mental* disorder**” OR “mental* health disorder*” OR “psychiatric disorder*” OR “psychiatr* ill*” OR neurodivergen* OR neuro-divergen* OR autism OR autistic OR cognitive OR dementia OR (MH “Behavioral and Mental Disorders+”) OR elder* OR older OR senior OR aged OR (MH “Aged+”) OR (MH “Aging+”) OR Obes* OR (MH “Obesity+”)) AND ((modif* OR “access* program*” OR “access* measure*” OR “universal access*” OR design* OR “assistive technolog*” OR “architectur* access*” OR adapt* OR Signage OR (MH “Facility Design and Construction”) OR (MH “Assistive Technology Devices”) OR (MH “Signage”) OR Inclusiv* OR discriminat* OR Respect* OR Equity OR Justice OR tolerance OR prejudice OR (MH “Social Inclusion”) OR (MH “Attitude to Disability”) OR (MH “Respect”) OR (MH “Prejudice”) OR (MH “Social Justice”) OR (MH “Occupational Justice”) OR Guideline* OR Framework” OR “Frame or reference” OR “Best practice*” OR recommendation* OR polic* OR Rule* OR Regulation* OR (MH “Practice Guidelines”) OR (MH “Conceptual Framework”) OR (MH “Rules and Regulations”) OR (MH “Government Regulations”) OR (MH “Public Policy”) OR ([Neutral* OR equity OR (MH “Gender Equality”)] AND [bathroom* OR restroom* OR Utilit* OR Facilit* OR (MH “Toilet Facilities”)]) AND [Accessibility OR Orientation OR Mobil* OR inclusiv* OR participation OR (MH “Social Participation”) OR use OR usability OR utilization OR capab* OR capacity OR ability OR adequacy OR appropriateness OR experience] AND (airport* OR “air transport*” OR “airline*” OR aircraft OR (MH “Aviation”) OR (MH “Aircraft”) OR (MH “Travel+”))
Avery index to architectural periodicals
(disab* OR “special need*” OR incapacit* OR “physical disorder*” OR “reduced mobility” OR “physical* challenge*” OR (DE “People with disabilities”) OR (DE “Public health”) OR (DE"Architecture and the physically handicapped”) OR visual* impair* OR vision OR blind* OR “deaf*” OR hearing* OR (DE “Hearing impaired”) OR (DE “Visually impaired”) OR intellectual OR “mental* deficienc*” OR “Developmental” OR “mental* ill*” OR “mental* disorder**” OR “mental* health disorder*” OR “psychiatric disorder*” OR “psychiatr* ill*” OR neurodivergen* OR neuro-divergen* OR autism OR autistic OR cognitive OR dementia OR (DE “Autism”) OR elder* OR older OR senior OR aged OR (DE “Aged”) OR Obes* OR (DE “Obesity”)) AND (modif* OR “access* program*” OR “access* measure*” OR “universal access*” OR design* OR “assistive technolog*” OR “architectur* access*” OR adapt* OR Signage OR (DE “Universal design”) OR (DE “Barrier-free design”) OR Inclusiv* OR discriminat* OR Respect* OR Equity OR Justice OR tolerance OR prejudice OR (DE “Social justice”) OR Guideline* OR Framework” OR “Frame of reference” OR “Best practice*” OR recommendation* OR polic* OR Rule* OR Regulation* OR (DE “Government policy”) OR ((Neutral* OR equity) AND [bathroom* OR restroom* OR Utilit* OR Facilit* OR (DE “Rest rooms”)]) AND (Accessib* OR Orientation OR Mobil* OR (DE “Access) OR (DE “Access to airports”) OR inclusiv* OR participation OR (DE “Citizen participation”) OR (DE “User-centered system design”) OR use OR usability OR utilization OR capab* OR capacity OR ability OR adequacy OR appropriateness OR experience) AND (airport* OR “air transport*” OR “airline*” OR aircraft OR (DE “Choice of transportation”) OR (DE “Airports—Buildings”))
Web of science
(disab* OR “special need*” OR incapacit* OR “physical disorder*” OR “reduced mobility” OR “physical* challenge*” OR visual* impair* OR vision OR blind* OR “deaf*” OR hearing* OR intellectual OR “mental* deficienc*” OR “Developmental” OR “mental* ill*” OR “mental* disorder**” OR “mental* health disorder*” OR “psychiatric disorder*” OR “psychiatr* ill*” OR neurodivergen* OR neuro-divergen* OR autism OR autistic OR cognitive OR dementia OR elder* OR older OR senior OR aged OR Obes*) AND (modif* OR “access* program*” OR “access* measure*” OR “universal access*” OR design* OR “assistive technolog*” OR “architectur* access*” OR adapt* OR Signage OR Inclusiv* OR discriminat* OR Respect* OR Equity OR Justice OR tolerance OR prejudice OR Guideline* OR Framework” OR “Frame or reference” OR “Best practice*” OR recommendation* OR polic* OR Rule* OR Regulation*) OR ((Neutral* OR Equity) AND (bathroom* OR restroom* OR Utilit* OR Facilit*))) AND (Accessibility OR Orientation OR Mobil* OR inclusiv* OR participation OR use OR usability OR utilization OR capab* OR capacity OR ability OR adequacy OR appropriateness OR experience) AND (airport* OR “air transport*” OR “airline*” OR aircraft)
Appendix B: Airports’ websites free search terms
| Disability/ies | Special | Impairment/impaired | Needs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Older/old/aged | obesity | Access | Accessibility |
| Assistance | Assistive | Accommodation/accommodate | Equity |
| Inclusive/vity | Discrimination | Help | Customer service |
| Service.S | Mobility | Wayfinding | Complaint |
Appendix C: data extraction grid sample (excel)
The following table contains some non-exhaustive examples of data extracted for a scientific article, for illustrative purposes.
| Reviewer name | DG |
| Title | Airports and ageing passengers: A study of the UK |
| Authors | Anne Graham, Lucy Budd, Stephen Ison, Andrew Timmis |
| Year | 2019 |
| Study location | UK |
| Study objective | (…) the aim of this paper is to undertake an exploratory analysis of ageing passengers at UK airports. |
| Study design | Case study |
| Population | Older adults |
| Needs addressed (explicitly in the text) | much of the extant literature on transport and ageing focuses on driving cessation, public transport use and the role of active travel in supporting healthy older age (…) while the impacts of ageing on air travel are hitherto comparatively unexplored. |
| Purpose of the practice(s) described | N/A |
| Micro (factors and practices) | (…) Age-related hearing and sight loss, as well as mobility and cognitive impairments, can create challenges associated with navigating new environments and negotiating the procedural logic of air travel, while advances in airport automation may generate anxiety and confusion among an older generation who have not grown up with the technologies and who are consequently not familiar with their purpose and operation. (…) allegations of pre-booked assistance failing to meet user needs, inappropriate equipment, inadequate staffing levels and poor customer service standards often reported (Buckley, 2017). […] |
| Meso (factors and practices) | In the United States, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) (2019) has introduced special security screening protocols for passengers aged 75 and over which negates the need for older travellers to divest of shoes and clothing during the security search. (…) priority boarding and disembarkation from the aircraft In response, some airports are seeking to become ,”Dementia Friends“ by providing staff with additional training and providing lanyards to allow customers self-identity if they think they would benefit from additional support. […] |
| Macro (factors and practices) | Within the European Union, all passengers with a disability (whether physical, cognitive or communicative) or reduced mobility (irrespective of age) are legally entitled to support or “Special Assistance” whilst travelling by land, water and air. EC Regulation 1107/2006 states that all EU airports handling over 150,000 passengers a year must provide, free of charge, help and assistance to wheelchair users, older and elderly travellers, and those with communication, social interaction and “hidden” disabilities including autism and dementia. […] |
| Link to participation (if any) | the latest CAA tracker consumer survey found that 43% of the passengers who requested assistance on their last trip did so for the first time (CAA, 2019b). This survey found that 76%. Those receiving assistance were very satisfied or fairly satisfied with services at the UK airport on departure, and 69% on their arrival back, but satisfaction with the overall flying experience for those with disabilities had decreased from 82% in 2016 to 77% in 2019 (compared to 90% to 81% for the total market) […] |
| Disability perspective (term used, person or disability centric) | There is a popular misconception that the ageing traveller market consists of frail old people in wheelchairs or with walking sticks. This is incorrect, especially as these travellers make up a number of diverse and heterogeneous consumer groups (Nielsen 2014; Alén et al, 2016). |
| Research team member reflections and comments | The authors directly support the next steps of our project: “An important area for future work would include in-depth qualitative studies of senior passengers’ experiences of using airports. This would provide both much needed and valuable insight into their needs and a greater understanding of the behaviour of this passenger segment.” |
Summary
Keywords
accessibility, airport, inclusive, people with disabilities, participation
Citation
Gotti D, Morales E, Routhier F, Riendeau J and Hadj Hassen A (2024) Dehumanizing air travel: a scoping review on accessibility and inclusion of people with disabilities in international airports. Front. Rehabil. Sci. 5:1305191. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2024.1305191
Received
01 October 2023
Accepted
09 August 2024
Published
27 August 2024
Volume
5 - 2024
Edited by
Tiziana Campisi, Kore University of Enna, Italy
Reviewed by
Marianella Chamorro-Koc, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Elena Remillard, Georgia Institute of Technology, United States
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2024 Gotti, Morales, Routhier, Riendeau and Hadj Hassen.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: David Gotti david.gotti.1@ulaval.ca
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.