Abstract: Disability study as an academic discipline has existed for over four decades in the West. It has tremendous influence on public policies. The burden of providing accessible environment for people with disability has been shifted from individual adjustments to the state and society services. This paper compares the two major models in disability studies—the Social Model and the Universal Model, and their corresponding public policies on three areas of barrier free, universal design and capability approach. People with disability should enjoy the same rights to social participation as their basic human rights. Society and government play a major role in assuring such rights are protected. Providing a disability friendly environment is the key to the success. The Social Model is better recognized than the Universal Model in the West. When it comes to the environmental barriers, the Social Model looks at ways of removing barriers in social environment that restrict life choices for disabled people. The Social Model has undoubtedly made great contribution to the disability rights movement in the past decades. It is not until WHO put forward the model as its core paradigm to define disability and health in ICF in the late 1990s, the world knew very little about Irving Zola’s universal approach. Zola believes that disability is a universal experience of humanity. The model brings our body experience into the discussion of disability experience and places disability as part of everyone’s life experience. Only when we acknowledge the universality of disability, we can demystify the term and stop discrimination. Zola’s ideas and his vision were ahead of his time. When we look at the two models’ accessible designs, the contrast is clear. It makes Zola’s contribution even more appreciated today than ever.

Key words: universalism , capacity approach , social participation , social model , social policy