Nearly three-quarters avoid shops because of inaccessibility
A new study shows that physical and social barriers keep many people with physical disabilities away from shops.
Nearly three-quarters of people with a physical disability say they sometimes skip a visit to a shop because it is not sufficiently accessible. This is according to research by De Zonnebloem among more than 1,300 people.
In the study, 91 per cent of participants say they experience problems while shopping. Nearly half report experiencing such problems regularly or often. The most commonly mentioned obstacles are narrow or obstructed aisles, heavy doors, high shelves and the absence of an adapted toilet.
The way customers are assisted also plays a role. 42 per cent of respondents do not feel taken seriously or sufficiently helped by shop staff. When they need the toilet, some participants say they go home earlier or avoid visiting a shop altogether.
The figures emerge at the start of the Week van de Toegankelijkheid, which runs from 5 to 11 October inclusive. De Zonnebloem says accessibility is not only about a step at the entrance, but also about space, information, service and the ability to use facilities independently.
The issue is also commercially relevant for retailers. The organisation says inaccessible shops are missing out on potential customers. At the same time, the study comes from an advocacy organisation and concerns the experiences of survey participants; it does not directly measure how much turnover shops lose as a result.
The Netherlands has transposed the European Accessibility Act into national rules. These rules apply, among other things, to online shops and certain services and have been in force since 28 June 2025. They do not automatically mean that every physical shop meets all the needs of customers with a disability.
De Zonnebloem is calling for practical improvements, such as a threshold ramp, sufficient space between shelves, a mobile card machine and clear information in advance. A separate study commissioned by the ACM previously showed that 61 per cent of the large online shops examined were not fully digitally accessible.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- In a De Zonnebloem survey of more than 1,300 people with a physical disability, nearly three-quarters say they sometimes skip a visit to a shop.
- Participants mention both physical obstacles and insufficient support from staff.
- Dutch rules have required certain businesses to improve digital accessibility since 28 June 2025.
Left
Arguments Accessibility is a right and should not depend on the goodwill or financial capacity of individual business owners. The government and local authorities should provide stricter standards, oversight and financial support.
Values Equality, social participation and protection for people who systematically have less access to facilities.
Consequences More obligations may create costs for business owners, but reduce exclusion and make shops and public spaces usable by a larger group.
Centre
Arguments A combination of clear minimum standards, practical guidance and gradual improvement is the obvious approach. Not every shop can make the same structural changes immediately, but information and the way people are treated should improve quickly.
Values Feasibility, proportionality and cooperation between government, business owners and people with relevant lived experience.
Consequences A step-by-step approach can build support, but it does require measurable targets and oversight to prevent it from becoming merely voluntary.
Right
Arguments Business owners should retain the freedom to choose their own solutions and should not face an accumulation of rules. Under this approach, customers, landlords and local authorities all have a responsibility.
Values Entrepreneurship, affordability and freedom of choice.
Consequences Fewer rules can limit costs and administrative burdens, but without a clear minimum standard there is a risk that inaccessibility will persist.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The main percentages and obstacles mentioned can be found in the study and independent reporting. The legal context was checked with the Dutch government and the ACM.
- confirmed Nearly 73 per cent sometimes skip a visit to a shop because of inaccessibility. — Mentioned in reporting on De Zonnebloem’s study. source
- confirmed 91 per cent of participants experience problems while shopping. — Reported by RetailTrends and Hart van Nederland. source
- confirmed 42 per cent do not feel taken seriously or sufficiently helped by shop staff. — The percentage appears in the public summary of the study. source
- confirmed The European Accessibility Act has applied in the Netherlands since 28 June 2025, including to online shops. — The Dutch government describes the transposition and date of application. source
- confirmed 61 per cent of the large online shops examined were not digitally accessible. — ACM study of around one hundred large online shops. source
Editor's note
The survey figures come from research by De Zonnebloem and have been described by several public media outlets. No independent research was found into the exact loss of turnover for retailers.Sources
- Onderzoek: driekwart mensen met fysieke beperking mijdt ontoegankelijke winkels — RetailTrends
- Veel mensen met beperking mijden winkels — Hart van Nederland
- Producten en diensten toegankelijk voor mensen met beperking — Rijksoverheid
- ACM: klant met beperking kan bij merendeel grote webwinkels niet terecht — ACM
More on this in Dutch media
- de Volkskrant — „toegankelijkheid winkels”
- RTL Nieuws — „toegankelijkheid winkels”
- NOS — „toegankelijkheid winkels”