© Independent Living Institute
Independent Living Institute,
Storforsplan 36, 10 tr
123 47 Farsta
Sweden
Tel. 08-506 22 179
info@independentliving.org
Promoting the self-determination of people with disabilities
Government Implementation of
the Standard Rules
As Seen By Member Organizations of
World Blind Union - WBU
© Dimitris Michailakis 1997
Accessibility
Table 9 (Question No. 9)
Regulations to ensure accessibility in the built environment
Total 28, No answer 5
WBU organizations reporting that: Frequency Valid Percent Accessibility standards exist 18 64,3 Accessibility standards do not exist 10 35,7
As Table 9 indicates, almost 36% of WBU organizations are reporting that no accessibility standards exist. The same pattern prevails as with the NGOs in general, with no clear differences in the percentages, even when compared with the percentages, reported by the governments.
Table 10 (Question No. 10)
Accessibility of the built environment
Total 28, No answer 5
WBU organizations reporting accessibility in: Frequency Valid Percent Public places 16 88,9 Outdoor environment 14 77,8 Transportation 9 50,0 Housing 11 61,1 Accessibility standards does not exist 10 35,7
As Table 10 indicates, the majority of WBU organizations are reporting the existence, to a great extent, of accessibility standards for public places exists, whereas the accessibility standards for transportation exist to a lesser extent. The pattern is the same as with the NGOs in general, with no discernible difference in the percentages reported. Nor are ther any clear differences with the percentages reported by the governments, except regarding accessibility in public places, where WBU organizations report a lower percentage.
Table 11 (Question No. 11)
Supervision of the accessibility in the built environment
Total 26, No answer 7
Accessibility in the built environment is observed by: Frequency Valid Percent National authority 11 42,3 Local Governments 13 50,0 The constructor 6 23,1 The organizers/providers of the activities 2 7,7 No responsible body exists 6 23,1
As Table 11 shows, 23% of WBU organizations are reporting that there is no responsible body for observing the accessibility in the built environment. Accessibility in the built environment, when existing, is most often observed by a national authority and by local governments. The same pattern prevails in replies, compared with the NGOs in general. When compared with the percentages reported by the governments, WBU organizations indicate a lower percentage regarding supervision by a national authority and by local governments.
Table 12 (Question No. 12)
Measures to facilitate accessibility of the built environment
Total 25, No answer 8
Government measures promoted: Frequency Valid Percent Levelling off pavements 14 56,0 Marking parking areas 14 56,0 Installing automatic doors, lifts and accessible toilets 10 40,0 Ensure accessibility in public places 12 48,0 Improving accessibility in housing 7 28,0 Financial incentives/support for accessibility measures 4 16,0 Special lighting/contrast colours for visually impaired 1 4,0 Provision of specially adapted motor vehicles 11 44,0
According to WBU organizations, the following measures to facilitate accessibility in the built environment are the most frequently promoted: levelling off pavements; marking parking areas and ensuring accessibility in public places. The measure least of all promoted is special lighting/contrast colours for visually impaired. There are great differences in the percentage reported, when compared with the NGOs in general. WBU organizations report a lower percentage regarding the following measures: installing automatic doors, lifts and accessible toilets; ensuring accessibility in public places; providing financial incentives/support for accessibility measures and using special lighting/contrast colours for visually impaired. The percentages reported by the WBU organizations are much lower than those by NGOs in general. It is particularly interesting to note that the percentage regarding special lighting, reported by WBU organizations, is so low. When compared to the percentages reported by governments, WBU organizations report lower percent regarding the following measures: installing automatic doors, lifts and accessible toilets, improving accessibility in housing, providing financial incentives/support for accessibility measures and providing special lighting/contrast colours for visually impaired.
Table 13 (Question No. 13)
Special transport system
Total 30, No answer 3
Special transport is available for: Frequency Valid Percent Medical treatment 15 83,3 Education 15 83,3 Work 16 88,9 Recreational purpose 15 83,3 No special transport system exists 11 36,7 Special transport exists 19 63,3
There are 37% of WBU organizations reporting that no special transport system exists. When a special legislation exists, in most countries it is available for education and medical treatment. There are no clear differences in the percentages, when compared with the NGOs in general. When compared with the percentages reported by governments, WBU organizations report a lower percentage regarding education and recreational purpose.
Table 14 (Question No. 14)
Adaptation of the built environment
Total 32, No answer 1
Obstacles reported by WBU when building accessible environments: Frequency Valid Percent Attitudinal factors 16 50,0 Economic/budgetary factors 27 84,4 Technical factors 5 15,6 Geographical and climatic factors 7 21,9 Lack of legislation and regulations 16 50,0 Lack of planning and design capacity 7 21,9 Lack of knowledge, research and information 12 37,5 Lack of user participation 9 28,1 Lack of co-operation from other organizations 12 37,5 Lack of enforcement mechanism 15 46,9
As Table 14 shows, the three main obstacles reported by WBU organizations, when building accessible environments, are economic/budgetary factors, lack of legislation and regulations and attitudinal factors. There are clear differences, compared with the NGOs in general. WBU organizations are reporting a lower percentage regarding attitudinal factors, lack of planning and design capacity and lack of enforcement mechanism. Another difference is that the percentage reported by WBU organizations regarding geographical and climatic factors is higher than that reported by NGOs in general. When compared with the percentages reported by governments, WBU organizations report a lower percentage regarding technical factors but a higher percentage regarding obstacles, such as lack of legislation and regulations, lack of user participation and lack of co-operation from other organizations.
Table 15 (Question No. 15)
Disability awareness component
Total 30, No answer 3
Disability awareness in the training: Frequency Valid Percent There is a disability awareness component 12 40,0 There is not a disability awareness component 18 60,0
The majority of WBU organizations are reporting that a disability awareness component is not incorporated in the training of planners, architects and construction engineers. The same pattern prevails, compared with the NGOs in general. No clear differences in the percentage are reported. There are also only minor differences, when compared with the percentages reported by the governments.
Table 16 (Question No. 16)
Status of sign language
Total 23, No answer 10
The status of sign language as reported by WBU organizations: Frequency Valid Percent Recognized as the official language 9 39,1 As the first language in education 5 21,7 As the main means of communication 6 26,1 No officially recognized status 3 13,0
As Table 16 indicates, 13% of WBU organizations are reporting that sign language has no officially recognized status while also 39% of the WBU organizations are reporting that sign language is recognized as the official language of deaf people. There is a clear difference compared with the NGOs in general regarding the recognition of sign language as the main means of communication, where the percentage reported by WBU organizations is higher. There is also a difference between NGOs in general and WBU organizations, regarding the percentage of countries, where sign language has no officially recognized status: WBU organizations report a much lower percentage. When compared with the governments, WBU organizations report a lower percentage in cases where sign language has no officially recognized status.
Table 17 (Question No. 17)
Accessibility measures in media
Total 31, No answer 2
Accessibility measures in media Frequency Valid Percent Reporting accessibility measures 13 41,9 Reporting no accessibility measures 18 58,1
As Table 17 shows, the majority of the WBU organizations report that there are no accessibility measures to encourage media to make their information services accessible for persons with disabilities. There are noo differences in the percentages reported, compared with NGOs in general. There are, however, differences when compared with the percentages, reported by governments. WBU organizations report a higher percentage of countries with no accessibility measures.
Table 18 (Question No. 18)
Accessibility measures in public information services
Total 28, No answer 5
Public information services Frequency Valid Percent Accessibility measures in information 6 21,4 No accessibility measures in information 22 78,6
The majority of the WBU organizations are also reporting that there are no government measures to make other forms of public information services accessible for persons with disabilities. There are no discernible differences compared with the percentage reported by the NGOs in general. When compared with the percentages reported by governments, WBU organizations report a lower percentage regarding accessibility measures in public information services.
Table 19 (Question No. 19)
Access to information and communication
Total 31, No answer 2
Services to facilitate information/communication Frequency Valid Percent Literature in Braille/tape 26 83,9 News magazines on tape/Braille 18 58,1 Sign language interpretation for any purpose 5 16,1 Sign language interpretation for major events 10 32,3 Easy readers for persons with mental disabilities 4 12,9 None 5 16,1
As Table 19 indicates, there are 16% of WBU organizations reporting that no services at all are provided in order to facilitate information and communication between persons with disabilities and others. The services most frequently provided are literature in Braille/tape, news magazines on tape/Braille and sign language interpretation for major events, while services such as easy readers for persons with disabilities are less often provided. The main difference here, compared with NGOs in general is that WBU organizations are reporting a higher percentage regarding provision of literature in Braille/tape and news magazines on tape/Braille. When compared with the percentages reported by governments, WBU organizations report a lower percentage regarding sign language interpretation for any purpose and easy readers for persons with mental disabilities, and a higher percentage, where none of the above mentioned services is provided.
Contents of the WBU Report
