Resources search

Disability and poverty are inextricably linked, with lifelong consequences for persons with disabilities and their families. Investing in a disability-inclusive social protection system, therefore, is critical for addressing the diverse risks, inequalities, disability-related costs and barriers that limit the participation of persons with disabilities in their communities.

This analysis provides an in-depth assessment of the progress that the national government of Kenya has made to establish disability-inclusive social protection programmes. It reviews the policy/legal framework and the institutional arrangements for social protection in Kenya. It also reviews public investments in disability-specific and mainstream social protection programmes based on a budget tracking exercise covering five financial years (FY) between 2017/18 and 2021/22.

This article explores COVID-19 related experiences of disabled people in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria, Nepal and Uganda. Narrative interviews generated storied responses, focussing on respondents' priorities, which enabled us to hear what was most significant for them and their families. 143 interviews were conducted online or by phone by 7 local researchers (3 disabled), with appropriate inclusive support. Nearly everyone was interviewed twice to capture the progression of impacts over time. The data was analysed thematically through a virtual participatory approach. An overarching 'subjective' theme of feelings experienced by the participants was labelled 'destabilisation, disorientation and uncertainty'. We also identified 'concrete' or material impacts. People experienced various dilemmas such as choosing between securing food and keeping safe, and tensions between receiving support and feeling increased vulnerability or dependence, with interplay between the emotions of fear, loss and hope. We found both the concept of liminality and grief models productive in understanding the progression of participants' experiences. Disabled people reported the same feelings, difficulties and impacts as others, reported in other literature, but often their pre-existing disadvantages have been exacerbated by the pandemic, including poverty, gender and impairment related stresses and discrimination, inaccessible services or relief, and exclusion from government initiatives.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated inequalities and barriers to social inclusion for people with disabilities. These experiences of social exclusion have been feltto an even greater extent by women with disabilities and under-represented groups of people with disabilities, leading to a range of effects on the operations and priorities of OPDs. To address a critical gap in the evidence base, the Disability Inclusion Helpdesk carried out a rapid assessment of the role of OPDs during the pandemic, and how the pandemic has affected OPDs’ operations and priorities.

This Labour Market Assessment for Kenya is a refresh of the initial assessments done in 2019 for the Inclusion Works programme. The assessment adopts a Markets for Poor (M4P) approach to mapping demand for and supply of labour, supporting functions and regulatory frameworks; recognising that labour markets conditions will have evolved since 2019, especially in light of COVID-19. The perspectives of jobseekers, employers, and organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) are also included in this analysis. The report provides insights into market changes and recommendations to enable Inclusion Works programming to adapt and be more effective in their interventions.

This Labour Market Assessment for Uganda is a refresh of the initial assessments done in 2019 for the Inclusion Works programme. The assessment adopts a Markets for Poor (M4P) approach to mapping demand for and supply of labour, supporting functions and regulatory frameworks; recognising that labour markets conditions will have evolved since 2019, especially in light of COVID-19. The perspectives of jobseekers, employers, and organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) are also included in this analysis. The report provides insights into market changes and recommendations to enable Inclusion Works programming to adapt and be more effective in their interventions.

This guide is designed to support UNHCR staff, partners and other stakeholders at field level to:

• Recognize the protection concerns and capacities of refugees with disabilities and other persons with disabilities protected and assisted by UNHCR;
• Apply the principles reflected in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and UNHCR Guidance on Working with Persons with Disabilities to a range of programs and sectors;
• Design immediate and long-term strategies to mitigate protection risks and promote the inclusion of persons with disabilities in UNHCR programming.

The four modules include:

• Introductory module - Organizing an accessible and inclusive workshop (Module 1);
• Promoting a rights-based approach to disability (Module 2);
• Raising awareness about the impact of forced displacement on persons with disabilities (Module 3);
• Learning key strategies to foster inclusion of persons with disabilities in forced displacement (Module 4). 

In recent times there has been sustained momentum to address inequalities within university faculties and improve the diversity of students. Also, in response to historical and current social injustices, universities have sought to decolonize curricula. These progressive movements have had particular significance for departments focused on development studies and related subjects because the need to be inclusive is not only the right thing to do from a moral position, but also because to be exclusive is fundamentally challenging to the conceptualization and philosophy of the discipline. Development is a contested term but addressing inequality and working towards social justice are common themes found across most definitions. This commentary provides a critical insight into the importance of inclusive universities as gatekeepers to equitable knowledge production and the development of future professionals. To play their part in addressing the challenges posed by a globalized world, universities need to be proactive in ensuring that they become fully and meaningfully inclusive. While all university departments would benefit from becoming more inclusive, departments focused on development must be the pioneers leading the way, as inclusivity is relevant to the delivery of development studies, as well as emerging as an important discourse within the discipline that continues to evolve. This commentary will explore how and why in an increasingly interconnected global society, the need for universities to leave no one behind, and challenge hegemonic and unequal structures has never been greater.

The authors of this paper have protested, fought, written extensively and represent the broader theoretical foundations of Indigenous and disability research by focusing on their standpoint perspectives informed by their ancestral spirits and knowledge. Based on our knowledge, cultures, and advocacy skills, this paper collectively explores and compares the intersections of Indigeneity and disability as an embodied identity in four countries: USA, Canada, Sweden, and Australia. This is accomplished by beginning with a brief synopsis of colonization to provide context and then examine the consequences of Western assimilation practices, including academic support of the Western status quo. The paper will then turn to the impact of both colonization and academic constructs on Indigenous epistemologies and ideas of self in disability dialogues. Finally, the paper will focus on Indigenous concepts of difference to not only advance Western disability discussions, but also as a way for Western dialogue to overcome its predilection to hierarchical binaries.

This is part of a series of briefings that track the disability inclusivity of county budgets. In this briefing, we present the inclusivity of Trans Nzoia County budgets towards persons with disabilities between financial years (FY) 2016–17 and 2020–21. It should be noted that this briefing has utilised data from only three FYs, as opposed to five as planned, due to the unavailability of budget data. The three FYs with available budget data are FY2017–18, FY2018–19 and FY2020–21. For the two FYs without budget data, we have used projections from the previous years.