.png)
When the costs are counted but the benefits are not: why evidence matters
- Sue Tape
- 2 days ago
- 4 min read
When governments make decisions about our communities, accessibility, approach to inclusion, reforming programs, laws, standards or regulations, the first question that usually arises is simple.
What will it cost?
But a more important question is often missing:
What are the benefits, and are we measuring them properly?
Cost–benefit analysis is meant to guide these decisions. It’s designed to assess the full impact of delivering on everyone’s human rights, policy choices, and on people, communities and the economy.
But when it comes to accessible and inclusive communities, the evidence is often incomplete.
We still lack consistent, high-quality disability data about how people move through communities, how they use transport, access public spaces, participate in education, work and social life. Without this, it becomes difficult to track outcomes over time and even harder to understand the true costs of inaccessibility and the full benefits of inclusion.
The result is a familiar pattern. Up-front costs are visible, benefits are not, and decisions are shaped accordingly.
Think about designing a home. It may be more expensive to build a step-free home, but it limits who can use the space in the meantime. You may not notice when you first move in, but perhaps you realise soon that Nanna doesn't drop round with her baked goods quite so often, because the front stairs are getting a bit harder on her knees.
What we don't count up front still has a cost, and we miss the benefits and opportunities.
When inclusion is treated as a constraint rather than a driver
Across many policy areas, inclusion and accessibility are still framed as a constraint, something that adds cost, complexity or delay.
Accessible and inclusive communities support:
participation in education, employment and community life
more efficient use of mainstream systems rather than specialised alternatives
independence, confidence and social connection
broader community benefit, including for older people, families and others.
Some of the most important benefits are also the least visible in policy processes, things like dignity, belonging, and the ability to move through the world without barriers.
These are rarely counted, even though they shape how communities function. Costs are only measured in dollars spent today, and benefits to the whole community are ignored.
If we only count the cost, we miss the benefit and the opportunity we never created.
Three resources to explore
As a researcher, policymaker or advocate, these resources offer a useful starting point for reflection and discussion:
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. (2023). Cost–benefit analysis: Guidance note. Office of Impact Analysis.
This resource explains how governments assess policy proposals and make decisions about regulation. It highlights the importance of considering impacts across the whole community, not just immediate financial costs and provides a structured framework for comparing options.
Ferdering, D., & Lewis, D. (2017). Towards a framework for identifying and measuring the benefits of accessibility (ITF Discussion Paper No. 2017/03). International Transport Forum, OECD.
This paper expands how we think about the benefits of accessibility, moving beyond narrow economic measures to include social, participation and “capability” impacts. It shows how current approaches often undervalue accessibility because important benefits are not captured or measured.
Inclusively Made. (2025). The inclusion imperative: The commercial case for authentic disability representation.
This very recent report provides practical, real-world evidence that inclusion delivers measurable outcomes, in this case, demonstrating how accessible and inclusive practices drive engagement, participation and economic value. It shows that inclusion is not only a social good, but also creates tangible returns.
What happens when a bus isn’t accessible?
Take school transport as one example. In Australia, school buses have long been subject to delayed and modified accessibility requirements under the transport standards (Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts. (2024). 2022 review of the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002: Final report. Australian Government.).
At one level, this is a cost and logistics decision. At another level, it shapes around 13 years of how a child moves through their community.
It influences whether a young person travels with their peers or separately. Whether they build independence early or rely on others. Whether everyday participation feels straightforward, or something that needs to be arranged.
But this isn’t just about school.
In many regional and rural communities, the same buses used for school runs are part of the broader community transport system. They’re the buses that take people into town, to community centres, to after-school activities, to training and local events.
When those buses aren’t accessible, it doesn’t just affect children with disability. It affects who can get to football training, who can stay after school for activities, who can connect with their community, and who misses out.
There is also a deeper question beneath this.
Childhood is when people learn how to move through the world, catching buses, travelling with friends, and building confidence, independence and community. When the systems children encounter every day are not designed with them in mind, those opportunities can be limited from the start.
And yet, we have very little evidence that brings together the full costs and benefits of these settings over time, not just for individuals and families, but for schools, communities and the systems that support them.
What kind of evidence is missing?
If we want to build accessible and inclusive communities, we need evidence that reflects how people actually live.
In particular, there is a need for research that can:
demonstrate the economic and social returns of accessibility and inclusive design
examine the impacts of policy gaps, exemptions and regulatory settings
understand how people move through communities over time
capture lived experience alongside system-level outcomes
support governments to make stronger, evidence-informed decisions.
This is not just about measuring access, it is about understanding participation, independence and inclusion in practice.
Continuing the conversation
These questions sit at the centre of the NDRP Evidence to Action event on Accessible and Inclusive Communities (23 March 2026). The discussion will focus on where current systems are falling short, where evidence is missing, and how research can better support practical change. It also connects directly to NDRP’s broader work in shaping future research in this space.
Accessible and inclusive communities are shaped by the decisions we make, and the evidence we use to make them. When the benefits of inclusion and accessibility are properly understood, the choices available to policymakers, and communities, begin to shift.
Join us at our next Evidence to Action event: register here.
