Resources search

Who is disabled? On whether the functional definition of disability targets the same individuals as the subjective definition

Judith Baart
Willem Elbers
Alice Schippers
May 2023

Expand view

With the increased attention to disability as a vulnerability criterion in the Sustainable Development Goals, international organizations and NGOs within the international development sector have started to pay explicit attention to persons with disabilities, including the collection of data on persons with disabilities. The Washington Group Short Set of Questions, which focuses on functional limitations, has been gaining popularity as an assessment tool for disability. This set of questions reflects a categorization of disability that does not necessarily correspond with subjective disability assessments, such as the yes/no question (“do you have a disability?”) which many development actors have used in their assessment tools when they collect disability data This study compares the subjective and the functional limitations assessment tools for disability to answer the question: do they identify the same individuals as persons with disabilities? Based on a survey carried out amongst persons with disabilities in Cambodia, we included both the Washington Group Short Set and a subjective question asking respondents to self-identify their disability type. We find that, although all respondents self-identified as disabled, not all respondents would be considered disabled according to the Washington Group Short Set of questions. In addition, there is little overlap between specific disability types according to a subjective classification method and the domains of functioning measured through the Washington Group methodology. Our findings affirm that categorization as abled or disabled depends on the tool used. This is important, as the assessment approach chosen by those collecting disability data can shape the design choices of policies and programs, and determine who benefits.

Global Disability Summit: One Year On – accountability report 2019

EQUAL INTERNATIONAL
September 2019

Expand view

This first accountability report, one year on from the Global Disability Summit 2018, presents independent analysis of the 171 sets of commitments made by governments and organisations at the Summit. It also sets out the results of a self-reporting survey completed by Summit participants, updating on progress made against their commitments so far.

 

The wider impact of the summit is discussed.

 

The results of the first GDS18 self-reporting survey demonstrate that significant progress has been made on implementation of the 968 Summit commitments. Work is reported to be underway on 74% of the commitments and 10% are reported as already completed, contributing towards an improved and increased visibility of disability inclusion within development and humanitarian action.

 

Appendix 2 gives country level case studies: Case study developed by Users and Survivors of Psychiatry Kenya; Case Study developed by the National Federation of the Disabled Nepal (NFDN); and Case Study developed by I Am a Human, Jordan

 

A comparison of disability rights in employment: Exploring the potential of the UNCRPD in Uganda and the United States

OJOK, Patrick
GOULD, Robert
2019

Expand view

The disability employment policy systems in the US and Uganda are compared, and areas identified to improve implementation by examining the broader socio-cultural contexts that have shaped disability policy and practices of the two countries over time. Using the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) as the overarching analytical framework, the analysis is framed within the discussion of the right to employment, as both countries are recognized for policy advances in this domain, but continue to experience low labor market participation for persons with disabilities. It identifies three critical areas that impact the realisation of disability rights in each context: ideological frameworks; hiring and retention initiatives; and state level supports. Ultimately, it considers the limitations of the rights based framework for actualising employment rights in the context of limited state and individual resources. 

 

Disability and the Global South, 2019, Vol.6, No. 2

 

Improving educational outcomes for people with disabilities in low and middle-income countries: why does it matter and what works?

KUPER, Hannah
SARAN, Ashrita
WHITE, Howard
July 2018

Expand view

The studies included in this Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) are taken from the Disability Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) prepared by the Campbell Collaboration for the UK Department for International Development (DFID) under the auspices of the Centre for Excellence for Development Impact and Learning (CEDIL). Eligible studies included systematic reviews and impact evaluations published in English from 2000 onwards that assessed the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in LMICs. Qualitative studies, process evaluations, and non-impact evaluations (e.g. crosssectional surveys) were not eligible for inclusion. Quality grading was applied to the literature, so that assessment could be made of where there was strong evidence and where evidence was limited or missing. The studies were grouped by education sub-outcomes related to different stages in education across the life course; that is: early intervention, primary education, secondary education, non-formal education, and lifelong learning. 

 

There were 24 eligible individual studies, including studies conducted in the Middle East (10), Asia (7), and Africa (5), one from Latin America, as well as one multicountry study

Discourses of service user involvement in meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care: a discourse analysis of staff accounts

YNNESDAL HAUGEN, Lill Susann
ENVY, Andreas
BORG, Marit
EKELAND, Tor-Johan
ANDERSSEN, Norman
2016

Expand view

In previous research, meeting places have been favourably addressed by service users, but they have also been contested as exclusionary. In this participatory explorative study, we sought to perform a contextual analysis of meeting places in Norway based on a discourse analysis of three focus group discussions with 15 staff members. We asked the following question: how do meeting-place employees discuss their concrete and abstract encounters with service users and their experiences? We focused on service user involvement, which was largely analysed as neoliberal consultation and responsibilisation. Service users were positioned as resisting responsibility trickling down and defending staffed meeting places. Social democratic discourse was identified in the gaps of neoliberal discourse, which is noteworthy given that Norway is a social democracy. This relates to global concerns about displacements of democracy. We suggest that meeting places appear to hold the potential for staff and service users to collaborate more democratically.

The ScoPeO tool : measuring the impact of our interventions : quality of life, safety and social and family protection

HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL
2015

Expand view

This advocacy briefing paper presents information about Handicap International’s ScoPeO tool which is a data collection tool to help measure outcomes of development initiatives on the quality of life (QOL) of beneficiaries who have accessed our projects and those of our partners. This brief highlights the need to measure quality of life and provides an overview of how ScoPeO works along with a case study from Rwanda. It outlines how humanitarian and development actors can measure impact and suggests ways to measure progress

Advocacy briefing paper

Disability under occupation : at the congruence between conflict, religion, & society in Palestine

RASHID, Omar
January 2015

Expand view

A dissertation on the Palestinian experience of disability under Israeli territorial occupation. The following key research questions were considered under this dissertation. "First, to locate the perceptions of disability among the disabled in the occupied territories of Palestine, in light of their religious affiliation. Second, to investigate the realities of the disabled within Palestine; and third, to enquire as to whether there had been any differences in the perceptions of disabilities and the realities of those who were injured in conflict, and those who were born with impairment" These questions were answered through a hybrid-methods system of research, with a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods being used

 

Dissertation submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for a Masters degree at the University of Birmingham

The user has given permission for the original dissertation document to be uploaded to be reproduced and made publicly available on the Source website

E-bulletin