Government Action on the 
Implementation of the Standard 
Rules on the Equalization of 
Opportunities for Persons with 
Disabilities 


A Global Survey 
Phase II 
2008 


Office of the UN Special Rapporteur on Disability Doha, Qatar 
Tel.: + 974 4477144 
Fax: + 974 4477122 
e-mail: info@srdisability.org 



Global Survey on Government Action on the Implementation of the 
Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with 
Disabilities Executive Summary 


Contents Page 

Acknowledgments 5 

Forward 7 

Chapter I 11 
Introduction to Phase II 

Chapter II 21 

Section One 23 
Rule 1: Awareness Raising 24 
Rule 2: Medical Care 28 
Rule 3: Rehabilitation 29 
Rule 4: Support Services 32 

Section Tow 34 
Rule 5: Accessibility 35 
Rule 6: Education 39 
Rule 7: Employment 41 
Rule 8: Income maintenance and social security 43 
Rule 9: Family life and personal integrity 44 
Rule 10: Culture 46 
Rule 11: Recreation and sports 48 
Rule 12: Religion 50 
Rule 13: Information and research 53 
Rule 16: Economic policies 55 
Rule 17: Coordination of work 56 
Rule 18: Organization of persons with disabilities 57 
Rule 19: Personnel training 59 
Rule 20: National monitoring & evaluation 61 
Rule 21: Technical & economic cooperation 63 


Contents Page 

Chapter III 65 

Rule 1: Awareness Raising 71 
Rule 2: Medical Care 74 
Rule 3: Rehabilitation 76 
Rule 4: Support Services 80 
Rule 5: Accessibility 82 
Rule 6: Education 89 
Rule 7: Employment 94 
Rule 8: Income maintenance and social security 96 
Rule 9: Family life and personal integrity 99 
Rule 10: Culture 101 
Rule 11: Recreation and sports 103 
Rule 12: Religion 106 
Rule 13: Information and research 110 
Rule 16: Economic policies 110 
Rule 17: Coordination of work 111 
Rule 18: Organization of persons with disabilities 113 
Rule 19: Personnel training 115 
Rule 20: National monitoring & evaluation 117 
Rule 21: Technical & economic cooperation 120 

Chapter IV 123 
Comments and Remarks 

End Note 130 

Appendix I 133 
List of disabled persons organization that responded 

Appendix II 139 
List of the 324 measures 

Appendix III 145 
Global Survey 
Supplement to the Slandered Rules 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Acknowledgements 

The production of this document could not have been possible without 
the valuable contributions of a number of people. Therefore, thanks go 
to the following: 

First and foremost, the individuals and organizations around the world who took the 
time and effort to respond to the Survey questions to the best of their knowledge and 
ability. 

At the Office of the Special Rapporteur on Disability in Doha 

Ala' Al Sheikh 
Amira Johar 
Ayman Balsha 
Girish Piryani 
Fatma Abdallah 
Ma'moun Al Khob 
Nawal Al Haddad 
Rawda Saadi 


At the South-North Center for Dialogue and Development 
Abeer Kassab 
Haneen Al Najjar 
Mohammad Hashhash for collating and entering data gathered, and producing 
endless variations of charts and tables, 

For writing the report, 
Thuraya Khalil 

For editing & proofreading the final copy, 
Rima Fawaz Husseini 

For designing the Survey, reviewing, verifying and ensuring the accuracy of the 
information contained herein, for managing, directing and supervising the entire 
process and for keeping all those involved on their toes, 

Dr. Sabri Rbeihat 

Finally, appreciation and thanks to the Government of the State of Qatar for its 
continuous and generous financial support of the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on 
Disability 

5 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Forward 

by Sabri Rbeihat, PhD 
President, South-North Center for Dialogue and Development 

Since the inception of the United Nations there have been treaties and conventions governing 
all aspects of human rights, from the Universal Declaration, to the Covenant on Social, 
Political, Economic and Cultural Rights; from the Convention on the Rights of the Child to the 
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women-none of which 
have touched upon the rights of persons with disabilities except perhaps in passing. 

In 2000 the General Assembly adopted the Millennium Development Goals, focusing attention 
in the past seven years on development issues and prompting United Nations agencies 
and non--governmental organizations to concentrate on development. Yet again, persons 
with disabilities were absent from the eight Goals which deal with all aspects of development. 

In 1993 the world looked at disability through the Standard Rules on the Equalization of 
Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. This marked a new era in disability rights, and 
oriented the world to address disability issues. However, there remained a need to assess 
and measure the commitment that the international community made to disability when it 
adopted--unanimously--the Standard Rules. It was important to measure where the world 
stood on the implementation of the Standard Rules in order to understand where it was going 
and what else needed to be done and what direction it needed to take. This became even 
more of an imperative with the negotiations, drafting and adoption of the Convention on the 
Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 

A Global Survey to assess the extent of government implementation of actions leading to the 
achievement of full and equal rights for persons with disabilities, is a much needed step in the 
long journey leading to full equalization. This need is what justified and instigated the Special 
Rapporteur on Disability to commission the execution of such a Survey. 

The preliminary work on this Survey took into account the work, literature, and contributions 
of the pioneers in the field, among those the work of WHO and the former Special Rapporteur 
on Disability, Mr. Bengt Lindqvist, on a selected number of Standard Rules; the avant-garde 
conceptualization of many Scandinavian organizations and the thorough, detailed work 
contained in Agenda 22; and many other local and regional initiatives on monitoring and 
evaluation of disability actions. 

The unique contribution of this effort to the disability movement lies in the its aim, content 
and methodology. In addition to being a tool of measurement, the questionnaire functioned 
as an explanatory form presenting the world with a huge inventory--a check-list of actions, if 
you will--covering all aspects of human life and addressing itself to the primary stakeholders 
in any country--governments and disabled persons organizations. 

With regard to its methodology, the inclusion of both governments and disabled persons 
organizations as respondents to the same set of questions, has made of this Survey both a 
tool to gather information and validate that information at the same time. 

7 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


I am proud to have been asked by the Office of the Special Rapporteur on Disability to take 
the lead on this initiative. Despite the time, effort and resources that went into executing 
this, I consider it a valuable stepping stone for monitoring at the local, national, international 
and global levels. 

The report of the results of the Survey remind us unequivocally that we live in a global world, 
interdependent and co-reliant at every level. 

In the same way, this Report assesses the actions that need to be implemented in order to 
achieve the equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities as interdependent 
actions--one leads to the other, and the next totally dependent on the full implementation of 
the one before it. In this way, it demonstrates that the actions needed and the actions taken 
affect every aspect of human life--every aspect of the life of a person with disabilities. 

While we have compiled and analyzed the data at the global and regional levels, we have not 
overlooked the stakeholders at the national level. The issues and concerns of everyone in 
every corner of the world had a place in the conceptualization and construction of this 
instrument 

In that sense, this Report can be seen as another one of many efforts whose aim is to 
stimulate further action, instigate deeper investigation, educate and raise awareness of the 
issues involved in achieving societies where equal opportunities and non-discrimination are 
the predominant values. 

It is my sincere hope that this research will be a springboard to more review, more research 
and to deeper debate; that it will trigger questions and prompt governments to provide 
answers; that it will urge activists to push the envelope further and lobby harder. 

While Phase I of this analysis looked at whether the actions specified have been implemented 
or not and what percentage of the world's countries have done so; Phase II examined 
the data from three angles. First, to reveal the regional variations where they exist at 
the regional level; second, to examine the differences in evaluating the situation of persons 
with disabilities from the point of view of governments and disabled persons organizations; 
third to classify and present the major concerns expressed by respondents in their comments 
and remarks. 

Since respondents were asked to mark the presence or absence of actions in their own 
countries, the reporting of the data gathered was limited to describing the situation as 
revealed, avoiding making inferences beyond what the data reveals. 

The tables and graphs illustrate the variations leaving the analysis of reasons and causes up 
to the reader and opening the door to further investigation. 

Finally, it should be kept in mind that the responses received to the Survey are based on selfreporting--
predominantly by governments, and that this fact in itself will result in certain 
biases. 

8 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


While we recognize that as a shortcoming, we also acknowledge that there may be other 
weaknesses and limitations. Those are entirely the responsibility of the South-North Center 
for Dialogue and Development, and while we take full responsibility for them, they do not 
stop us from moving forward in seeking answers and developing more sophisticated instruments 
of measure. 

It is my belief that, with the adoption, ratification and inception of implementation of the 
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the assessment contained in these 
pages, will gain more relevance and greater value. After all, it is only when know where we 
stand that we can decide where we will go next. 

9 


CHAPTER ONE 


Introduction to Phase II 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Introduction 

In January 2007, the Office of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Disability and the 
South-North Center for Dialogue and Development published Phase I of the results of the 

Global Survey on Government Actions on the Implementation of the Standard Rules for the 
Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. 

Phase I presented the state of the world with regard to the implementation of the Standard 
Rules, based on the responses received from 114 countries out of a total of 191 countries to 
which the Survey was sent (the number of the United Nations Member States at the time of 
the distribution of the Survey). 

The Survey was disseminated to one government body and two disabled persons organizations 
in each of the countries. 

Phase I was well received and was launched at a press conference that took place in both 
Doha, Qatar in January 2006 and at the United Nations headquarters a month later. 

Through a detailed questionnaire, the Survey presented respondents for the first time with a 
list of the 324 actions necessary to fully implement the equalization of opportunities initiative. 
While this was important in raising awareness and moving the implementation of the 
Standard Rules one step further, the data collected in Phase I of the analysis was limited to the 
presence and absence of these actions, regardless of their scope, coverage and comprehensiveness. 


This provided us with a general picture and could be used to initiate further analysis and 
research regarding the extent of implementation and the coverage of the actions. 

Phase II takes a closer look at the data to examine variations in the responses on the basis of 
region and the type of respondent, i.e. to examine whether responses on the same issues 
vary depending on whether the responses came from disabled persons organizations or from 
governments. It will help determine how disabled persons organizations and governments 
see the same situation. It will also help us see how regions performed--knowing that the 
situation of persons with disabilities at the regional level is affected by various initiatives being 
implemented, i.e. disability decades, adoption of declarations, signature of treaties and 
conventions. 

Description and Administration of the Survey 

The design of the Survey took into consideration previous work conducted by the former 
Rapporteur on Disability, Mr. Bengt Linqvist, and literature from disability organizations 
worldwide, and relied heavily on the Scandinavian experience and the work done on Agenda 

22. That document, in particular, was used to identify and extract the 324 actions (List of 
Actions Appendix II) related to the 22 Rules of the Standard Rules, as follows: 
-67 actions to fully implement the Pre-conditions 
-151 actions to fully implement the Target Areas 
-106 actions to ensure the fulfilment of the Implementation of Measures 

13 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The Survey also asked specifically about the issues included in the Supplement to the 
Standard Rules, which, although it has not been adopted by the General Assembly, raises 
valid issues to which responses are necessary. These include: women and children with 
disabilities; persons with psychosocial disabilities; persons with developmental and 
intellectual disabilities; issues relating to housing, medical care, and health in the context 
of poverty and economic deprivation; issues relating to families and caregivers of persons 
with disabilities. 

Additionally, the Survey questioned whether services and actions to achieve equalization 
of opportunities cover low income and working class persons with disabilities, refugees 
and immigrants with disabilities, minorities and ethnic groups. 

In crafting the questionnaire there was strict adherence to the principles of clarity and 
simplicity, despite its length. (47 questions in 22 pages, see Appendix III). To break down 
the language barrier and facilitate response, the questionnaire was also translated into 
Arabic, French and Spanish. 

Although the target population of the Survey is governmental agencies and bodies 
relevant to disability issues, the Survey was also distributed to two disabled persons 
organizations in each country. The responses of the organizations have been used as a 
verification tool against which to check the responses of the governments. 

Five hundred and seventy-three (573) Survey copies were distributed to 191 countries; 

-one to each government body in the 191 countries 
-one to each of two disabled persons' organizations in each of the 191 countries 
-two-hundred and seven (207) returned filled out Surveys containing 
information about 114 countries at a 60% rate of return 

Despite the fact that this report is based on a regional analysis, it should be kept in mind 
that real implementation takes place within a socio-political context, i.e. where policies are 
set, legislations are passed, programmes are adopted and financial resources are allocated. 
This, of course, is done at the national level. Therefore, although we are presenting 
results from a regional perspective, this does not mean that the national level can be 
overlooked. The situation in each country individually could be the subject of future 
analysis. 

Regional Distribution 

In distributing the Survey we divided the world into five regions based on culture and 
geography, rather than the division adopted by United Nations agencies. For example, the 
Arab region encompassed all Arabic-speaking countries including those in North Africa, 
the analysis covers five regions divided as such (Fig. 1): 

14 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Distribution of responses by region in percentage 
Fig. 1 


Region Countries Responded Percentage 
Africa 43 23 53 
Asia 47 21 44 
Europe 46 30 65 
Latin America 33 21 63 
Arab Region 22 19 86 
Total 191 114 59 

Since the number of responding countries to the Survey varied considerably from region to 
region, and in order to indicate the level of representation per region, we have chosen to 
express the level of representation in percentages. This was done by dividing the number of 
responding countries from each region by the total number of countries in each region 

multiplied by 100. 
e.g. The Arab region 
Number of countries in the region: 
Number of countries responding: 
Percentage of countries that responded: 
22 countries; 
19 countries; 
19 ÷ 22 x 100 = 86% 

Percentage of countries per region that responded 
Fig. 2 


Percentage 

100 
90 

86 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 

53 
44 
65 63 59 
Africa Asia Europe Latin America Arab Region Total 


15 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Chapter Two covers the 114 countries, which represent the total sample analyzed, that 
responded to the Global Survey from the five regions: Africa, the Arab region, Asia, Europe, 
Latin America. 

The results in Chapter Two, therefore, reflect the combined responses of government bodies 
and disabled persons' organizations that responded to the Survey in the 114 countries. They 
represent the responses of 71 government bodies and 43 disabled persons organizations. 

In countries where governments failed to respond, the responses of disabled persons organizations 
were considered. (Fig. 2) 

The distribution of responses from sources by region 
Fig. 2 


Region Government Disabled persons 
organizations 
Africa 9 14 
Asia 10 11 
Europe 23 7 
Latin America 12 9 
Arab Region 17 2 
Total 71 43 

As shown above, the dual source of responses considered from governments and disabled 
persons organizations might explain the observed discrepancy between regions and the 
sometimes inflated responses within some regions. 

In some cases, such as the Arab region, the analyzed data at the global level was based on 
information of which 89.4% was obtained from government sources while the responses from 
disabled persons organizations did not exceed 10.6%. This may be responsible for the 
inflation of the reported achievements observed in the Arab region in terms of number of 
actions implemented. This may also be true of Europe where 76.6% of the responses came 
from governments while only 23.4% came from disabled persons organizations. 

The data shown in this chapter indicates that the reported implementation in both the Arab 
region and Europe was considerably higher than in the other three regions. Inversely, 68.9% 
of the responses received from Africa came from disabled persons organizations, with 
responses from Asia being almost equally distributed between governments and disabled 
persons organizations at 47.6% from governments and 42.4% from disabled persons 
organizations; and in Latin America 57.2% responses were obtained from government 
sources and 42.8% from disabled persons organizations. 

To express the level of implementation for each region in a standardized manner, the number 
of actions implemented by each country in the region was added up and the result was divided 
by the total number of actions expected to be implemented, then multiplied by the number of 
countries in that region that responded. 

16 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


i.e. the number of actions implemented in four countries: 
200 + 300 + 150 + 170 = 820 actions actually implemented; divided by the total 
number of actions (324) and multiplied by the number of countries (4) 820 ÷ 1246 
(actions expected to be implemented by 4 countries) 
= 63.2 % (percentage of the actions implemented in the four countries of that region) 


According to this calculation the 114 countries reported the implementation of an average of 
162 actions out of the 324 actions required. In other words, only 50% of the total actions 
required have been implemented globally. (As illustrated in Figure 3 below) 

Percentage of implementation on each rule globally 
(Fig. 3) 

100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Awareness RaisingMedical CareRehabilitationSupport ServicesAccessibilityEducationEmploymentIncome MaintenanceFamilyCultureRecreation & SportsReligionInformation & ResearchEmploymentCoordination of workDPOsPersonal TrainingNational MonitoringTechnical &
Economic corporation 
While the global average reached 50% implementation, the performance at the regional 
level did not follow the same pattern, with the exception of the Asia-Pacific region which 
performed similarly to the global percentage. 

17 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 

March 2008 

Fig. 4 below shows the percentage of actions implemented in each region. In Asia, 
the number of actions implemented in the 21 countries that responded was equal 
to the global average of 162 (50%). Both Europe and the Arab world exceeded the 
global average, reporting 215 actions (66%) and 197 actions (61%) respectively. 
At the other end of the spectrum both Africa and Latin America reported the 
implementation of 120 actions (37%) implemented and 108 actions (33%) 
respectively. 

Percentage of Actions Taken in each region 
Fig. 4 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 

66 

37 
50 
33 
61 
50 
Africa Asia Europe Latin America Arab Region Total 


Chapter Three will compare the responses received from government officials or bodies and 
disabled persons organizations in 28 countries representing the five regions. The countries 
vary in their social, cultural, political, geographical, economic and development characteristics. 


The significance of this analysis is that it will serve to measure the discrepancies between the 
responses of governments and disabled persons organizations on each of the expected 
actions, to the same questions posed on each of the Rules. 

18 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


These 28 are the countries from which governments and disabled persons organizations 
responded - thereby fulfilling the conditions for their inclusion in a comparative analysis. 
These include 11 European countries, five African countries, five Arab countries, four Asian 
countries, and three Latin American countries, as follows: 

Europe: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, 
Portugal, Russia, Slovakia, Sweden 
Africa: Botswana, D.R. Congo, Eritrea, Namibia, Tanzania 
Arab region: Algeria, Jordan, Morocco, Palestine, Yemen 
Asia: Mongolia, Nepal, Korea, Samoa 

Latin American: Belize, El Salvador, Guyana 

Chapter Four contains a synthesis of opinions, comments and remarks expressed by the 
respondents to the Survey in the space that was provided to them for that purpose. 

The comments cover issues respondents felt needed to be clarified, conditions particular to 
their countries, or their opinion about the Survey itself. Those have been classified by issues 
and, as much as possible, copied or translated verbatim, and only edited for space. 

19 


CHAPTER TWO 


Countries Performance 
on Implementing the Actions by Region 



Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Countries' Performance on Implementing the Actions by Region 
Based on Responses from 114 countries 


Following the logical sequence of the Standard Rules for the Equalization of Opportunities for 
Persons with Disabilities 324 actions were extrapolated. To consider the Standard Rules fully 
implemented, all 324 actions would have to be implemented. Therefore, the performance of 
each region was assessed accordingly. 

On the four Rules which make up the Pre-conditions for equalization of opportunities, 
namely, Awareness-Raising, Medical Care, Rehabilitation, Support Services and 
Assistive Devices, a total of 67 actions were identified. Implementing all 67 actions 
indicates that the pre-conditions to equalization have been met, and the groundwork has 
been laid for proceeding with the implementation of the actions in the eight Target Areas. 

Section One 
Implementation of the Pre-conditions in the Five Regions 


This section presents the findings on the implementation of the 67 actions specific to the four 
Rules that make up the Pre-conditions in the first section of the Standard Rules. 

The findings from each region were expressed in percentages and the results were stated in a 
comparative manner, among the regions, and are illustrated in Figure 2.1. 

The global picture in relation to the implementation of the Pre-conditions is not very encouraging. 
No region has exceeded 80% implementation of the actions, while considerable 
variation among the five regions was detected. Europe scored higher than all other regions, 
with the Arab region a close second, Asia scored in the middle range, between Europe and the 
Arab region, on the one hand, and Africa and Latin America, on the other. 

Both Africa and Latin America scored less than 50% on three out of the four rules. The 
responses of Europe and the Arab region clustered around the 70% mark. 

Looking at the data, region by region and in relation to each of the four Pre-conditions, the 
following observations can be made: 

On Awareness-Raising, with the exception of Latin America, the other four regions 
reported that they had implemented more than 50% of the expected actions. Europe 
implemented 74% of the actions, the Arab region 68%, Asia 58%, Africa 50%, while Latin 
America reported 45% implementation. 

The same pattern was evident with Medical Care, where Europe and the Arab region 
reported the implementation of more than 70% of the actions and Asia and Africa reported 
implementation of 57% and 48% respectively, and Latin America reported lower implementation 
at 43%. 

23 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


While on Rehabilitation Africa reported a slightly higher level of implementation than even 
Europe at 72%; Europe and the Arab region reported 70% and 68% respectively, Asia 
reported 62% and Latin America was at 32%. 

More divergence was observed in relation to Support Services, with Europe being the 
highest at 76% followed by the Arab region at 68% and Asia at 53% with Africa and Latin 
America very close at 45% and 43% respectively. (Figure 2.1) 

Figure 2.1 
The percentage of actions implemented by region on the Pre-conditions 

100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Detailed Analysis of Implementation of Actions on the Pre-Conditions 

Rule 1: Awareness-Raising 

According to the Standard Rules Awareness-Raising is the first condition necessary to 
achieving equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities. The concept of awareness 
includes the perception of persons with disabilities of themselves as well as society's 
perceptions of their abilities, needs, rights, potentials and contributions. To fully achieve 
awareness-raising, in any given community, a set of actions should be implemented; nine of 
which pertain to the structural level, while six to the quality of the implementation, its scope 
and coverage. 

24 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The first nine (9) actions expected to be taken by governments in relation to Rule 1, pertain 
to adopting policies; passing legislations; adopting programmes; drafting guidelines for the 
media on covering disability issues; training personnel in awareness-raising; disseminating 
materials; including issues relating to raising awareness in the school curriculum; educating 
the public about disability and persons with disabilities; cooperating with disabled persons 
organizations. 

These actions are interdependent and organically related so that the implementation of one 
can only be successful if the one before has been fully implemented. Together they constitute 
a comprehensive approach to raising awareness of all issues related to persons with disabilities. 
By the same token, the lack of implementation of one would negatively effect the 
implementation of the rest. Thus, adopting policies on awareness-raising is the first significant 
step taken by the highest authorities within a country to prioritize the issues of persons 
with disabilities, and indicates the existence of a political will to alter the conditions of 
persons with disabilities at the national level. 

The next logical step would be to translate the political will indicated by the adoption of 
policies into legally binding rights through legislations, which consequently would drive 
officials, organizations, caretakers, the media, and society at large to carry out their duties 
towards persons with disabilities. This will create the national atmosphere conducive to 
constructing programmes, which would organize the efforts and actions of society towards 
meeting the requirements of equalization for persons with disabilities. The allocation of 
resources, the training of personnel, involvement of the media…etc. all become part of the 
same scheme. 

The other six (6) actions focus on the quality of awareness-raising and the extent of its 
coverage. A successful awareness raising scheme would consider covering all types of 
disabilities; all rights, needs, potentials, contributions; as well as describing persons with 
disabilities in positive terms. 

The Standard Rules maintain that the implementation of all these actions within any given 
society would result in the ideal state of raised awareness on all aspects and dimensions of 
disability and for all persons with disabilities. 
In many countries, efforts to raise awareness do exist in one form or another. Yet, a comprehensive 
awareness raising programme inclusive of all of the above is what this Survey has 
tried to assess. 

Analysis of the responses from each of the five regions showed a level of fluctuation on the 
implementation of the 15 actions in all the five regions, as well as between the 15 actions 
within the same region. 

As evident from the Figure (2.2) one of the striking findings is 89% of the countries of the 
Arab region responding to the Survey stated that they had implemented policies. This is 
much higher than the reported implementation in Europe, Africa and Asia, in which 65% of 
the countries reported that they had implemented actions and far higher than Latin America 
which reported 48%. 

Regarding legislations, the Arab countries responding remained very high at 80% followed 
by Europe at 70% and Latin America 55%, Asia at 53%, and Africa at 35%. 

25 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


When programmes were considered, Europe reported higher than all other regions at 84% 
implementation, followed by the Arab region at 65%, Asia at 52%, and Africa and Latin 
America at 48%. 

On drafting guidelines for raising awareness through the media, all the five regions' 
responses dipped considerably to below 50%. The Arab region, however, was highest at 
46%, Europe at 39%, Asia at 35%, Africa at 17%, and Latin America at 15%. 

With regard to training personnel, the Arab region and Europe stood at 69% and 60% 
respectively, Africa and Asia at 53%, and Latin America 35%. 

On dissemination of materials, Europe scored highest at 75%, the Arab region at 74%, Asia 
at 67%, Africa at 40%, and Latin America at 35%. 

On awareness-raising in schools through the educational curriculum, the scores dipped in all 
the five regions. Europe again showed the highest level of implementation at 50%, African 
and the Arab region at 44%, Asia at 30% and Latin America at 13%. 

As to whether actions are implemented to educate the public at large, about the rights, 
needs, potentials and contributions of persons with disabilities, the Arab region stood at 68% 
implementation, while Europe was at 60%, with Asia at 58%, Africa at 52%, and Latin 
America at 35%. 

In relation to cooperating with disabled persons organizations, Europe scored high at 94%, 
followed by the Arab region at 85%, Asia at 72%, Africa at 65%, and Latin America at 58%. 

On the second set of actions to be implemented, and in reference to raising awareness on all 
types of disabilities, Europe remained highest at 88%; followed by the Arab region at 70% 
and Africa 60%, Asia at 58%, and Latin America at 55%. While in raising awareness on 
rights, Europe stood at 92%, the Arab region at 75%, Asia and Latin America at 63% and 
Africa at 53%. 

On raising awareness about the needs of persons with disabilities, Europe reported 90% 
implementation, the Arab region 75%; Latin America 62%; Africa and Asia 58%. 

Despite the importance of raising social awareness on the potentials of persons with disabilities, 
with the exception of Europe at 83%, the rest of the regions scored relatively low at 72% 
for Asia; 57% for Latin America; 52% for the Arab region and Africa. Closely related to the 
issue of potentials, is that of the contributions of persons with disabilities to their societies 
and communities. On this, the Arab regions scored highest among the regions at 80%; while 
Europe and Asia were next at 70%; Africa at 55%; and Latin America at 52%. 

With regard to describing persons with disabilities in positive terms, Europe was highest at 
85%; the Arab region and Asia at 68%; Latin America at 65%; and Africa at 52%. 

There is no evident explanation for this apparent variation and fluctuation - note that the 
Arab region scored low on the issue of potentials (at 52%) while it scored higher than Europe 
on the related issue of contributions (at 80%). However, it is important to keep in mind that 
there are perceived biases when it comes to self-reporting, especially when it comes to 

26 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


information supplied by governments. Additionally, actions necessary for raising awareness 
are linked to perceptions and may be subject to a different understanding by the respective 
governments or agents reporting on it. 

Additionally, in some regions people define their social structure and their responses to 
disability issues on the basis of culture and tradition -- where family and community shoulder 
the bulk of responsibility rather than government. This transfer of responsibility from the 
official structures to the community and family may be regarded as actions attributed to 
governments. 

Figure 2.2 
Awareness Raising 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsGuidelinesTraining PersonnelMaterial DisseminatingAwareness through CurriculumEducating The PublicCooperating with DPOsType of DisabilityRightsNeedsPotentialsContributionsDescriptions of Disability 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
27 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 2: Medical Care 

Medical care is a pre-requisite to enable persons with disabilities to overcome the medical 
consequences related to impairment and to maximize their ability and release their potential, 
to participate fully and contribute to society on an equal basis with others. Without the 
proper and relevant medical care, individuals with disabilities will not be able to arrive at the 
stage at which they can exercise their independence and make use of the opportunities 
available to them. 

For these reasons, Medical Care was listed as the second rule after awareness-raising and 
considered a precondition to full participation. For a country to create an environment 
capable of providing the proper medical services, and for persons with disabilities to receive 
the necessary care they need, a set of actions derived from the letter and spirit of Rule 2, 
would have to be implemented by government. 

Fifteen (15) actions were derived for the full implementation of the provision of medical care 
for persons with disabilities in order to achieve equalization. 

These actions range from adopting policies; passing legislations; adopting programmes 
allocating financial resources; training personnel; making medical care accessible to 
persons with disabilities; consulting with disabled persons organizations; informing persons 
with disabilities about the availability of medical services; raising awareness on the causes of 
disability; improving maternal/pre-natal & post-natal care; detecting impairment at an early 
age; treating impairment at an early stage; training personnel in detecting & treating 
impairment at an early stage; updating medical personnel's knowledge in methods and new 
technologies; to ensuring access to treatment and medicine for persons with disabilities. 

Europe reported the highest implementation rate on all 15 actions dealing with medical care 
for persons with disabilities at 70% and above, with the exception of adopting programmes. 
The Arab region came next with implementation rates ranging between 60% and 85%, and 
registering higher implementation than Europe on allocation of financial resources and on 
causes of disability and improved health; and much lower than Europe, but higher than any 
other region on training personnel and information on medical care to persons with disabilities. 


More than 40% of the countries responding in the five regions have implemented most of the 
15 actions pertaining to Medical Care. However, Africa and Latin America dipped below the 
40% mark on legislations and updating medical information and ensuring access -- on 
legislation; Africa came in at 13%, on updating medical information at 15%, and on ensuring 
access at 35%; Latin America came in at 25% on legislations; on informing persons with 
disabilities at 28%; on updating medical info at 28%; and on ensuring access at 28%. 

28 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.3 
Medical Care 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTraining PersonnelCare AccessConsulting with PWDInfo PWDCause Of DisabilityImprove HealthEarly DetectEarly TreatTraining PersonnelUpdate MedicalEnsure Access 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 3: Rehabilitation 

The definition of disability as constructed by the World Health Organization (WHO), is based 
on the interaction between the person with an impairment and their environment. Hence, 
any effort towards enabling persons with disabilities, should take into consideration the two 
factors of the equation--the persons and their environment. 

Rehabilitation implies an intervention geared towards maximizing the abilities of individuals 
with disabilities and removing the obstacles that prevent them from participating. Over the 
years, the concept of rehabilitation evolved to include social and cultural attitudes; discriminatory 
behaviour; and legal codes barring persons with disabilities from full participation and 
exercise of their rights. 

On the other hand, rehabilitation should also focus on changing the perception of persons 
with disabilities of themselves and their abilities; developing their abilities, skills and talents; 
providing them with skills necessary for their adaptation and taking full advantage of their 
potential. 

Successful and comprehensive rehabilitation programmes are ones that address the individual 
in a holistic manner, taking into consideration the physical, psychological, social and 
spiritual aspects. 

29 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Just as important is the rehabilitation geared towards the societies and communities in 
which persons with disabilities live, learn, work and conduct all aspects of their lives. This 
means that rehabilitation has to be inclusive of people and the environment in its broadest 
terms. 

To assess the extent of government actions in relation to rehabilitation, 22 actions were 
identified. The first seven (7) have to do with preparing society to respond to the issues of 
persons with disabilities, and include adopting policies; passing legislation; adopting 
programmes; allocating financial resources; training personnel and making rehabilitation 
services accessible to persons with disabilities; consulting and cooperating with disabled 
persons organizations. 

The remaining 15 actions deal with the inclusiveness of rehabilitation services to persons 
with all types of disabilities and from all ethnic and social groups, covering all service 
providers and disabled persons organizations as follows: all types of disabilities; children 
with disabilities; women with disabilities; low-income, working class and poor persons with 
disabilities; all geographical locations; all socio-economic classes and ethnic groups; 
inclusive of disabled persons organizations; families of persons with disabilities; communities 
in which persons with disabilities live; specific/diverse needs of persons with disabilities; 
medical personnel; schools, educational institutions and teaching staff; communities of 
persons with disabilities; and involving disabled persons organizations in planning, design, 
implementation & evaluation. 

On policies, Latin America scored lowest at 38%, with Asia scoring higher than Europe at 
60% and 77% respectively. The Arab region scored second highest after Asia, at 69% and 
Africa at 43%. 

On legislations, Africa scored 17%; while at the high end, the Arab region responded with 
having implemented 74%; Latin America, Asia and Europe responded at 38%, 52% and 
64%, respectively. 

In relation to programmes, the highest implementation rates were reported in the Arab 
region also at 74%, with Asia next at 68%; Europe and Africa at 56%; and Latin America at 
43%. 

It was surprising, therefore, to find that on financial allocations to rehabilitation the highest 
percentage was in Europe at 76% with Asia closely behind at 72% and the Arab regions at 
63%, despite reporting highest on the implementation of programmes. Africa responded at 
61% and Latin America at 43%. Personnel training in the Arab region reached the 79% 
mark, one percentage point higher than Europe which was at 78%, while Asia reported at 
72%, Africa at 61%, and Latin America at 43%. 

Countries responding from the region said that they make rehabilitation accessible to 
persons with disabilities at an implementation rate of 89%; with Europe at 80%; Asia at 
71%; Africa at 70% and Latin America at 33%. 

Europe and Asia scored highest on the issue of consulting disabled persons organizations at 
76%; the Arab region reported 63%; Africa 49% and Latin America 33%. 

30 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the availability of rehabilitation services for all types of disabilities, Europe and Asia were 
at 95%, with Arab region next at 89%, and Latin America and Africa at 52% and 49% respectively. 


As far as rehabilitation services for children with disabilities are concerned, the Arab region 
scored highest at 89%, with Europe next at 83%; while Asia, Latin America and Africa stood 
at 72%, 52% and 49%, respectively. Considering the dual, and sometimes multiple discrimination 
faced by women with disabilities, it was important to ask whether rehabilitation 
services are fully available to women. On this issue, Europe reported at 83%; the Arab region 
at 79%; Asia slightly lower at 77%; with 53% for Latin America and 43% for Africa. 

Figure 2.4 
Rehabilitation 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTraining PersonnelRehab AccessConsulting DPOsTypes Of DisabilityChildWomenLow IncomeGeographical locationsClasses/EthincsDPOsFamilyCommunityNeedsMedicalFamilies PWDSchools/EducationsCommunityOrg. PWDProgram Description 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
31 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 4: Support Services 

Support services is the fourth pillar of the Pre-conditions that are necessary for the creation 
of an environment conducive to equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities. 
Together with awareness raising, medical care and rehabilitation, support services lay the 
groundwork for other interventions and for upgrading and improving the abilities of persons 
with disabilities to take advantage of available opportunities and to participate in all aspects 
of life. 

The concept of support services extends beyond equipments and devices to include the 
people, knowledge, technology and all other means necessary to maximize the ability of 
individuals with disabilities, to interact independently and meaningfully with their social and 
physical spheres. 

Fourteen (14) actions were derived from the Rule on Support Services, and are required to 
enable persons with disabilities to live with dignity. Of these 14, six deal with structural 
changes at the political and legal levels, these include adopting policies; passing legislations; 
instituting programmes; allocating financial resources and supplying individuals with 
assistive devices; consulting with and involving organizations of persons with disabilities. 

The remaining eight (8) actions pertain to the quality and inclusiveness of the services and 
include the following: children with disabilities; women with disabilities; 
low-income, working class and poor persons with disabilities; persons with disabilities in all 
geographical locations, from all socio-economic classes, all ethnic groups, all religious 
groups, all types of disabilities. 

Considerable variation was seen in the responses between Europe, Asia and Africa, 
as indicated by the graph. 

Europe consistently reported highest on actions relating to support services, with Latin 
America and Africa alternating the lower scores. Responses from the Arab region dipped 
from 95% on supplies to individuals to 45% on covering all geographic areas and all ethnic 
groups. 

Legislations on support services were the highest in Europe at 80% and in comparison to 
Africa at 20%, which was also the lowest of all implementation rates on all actions. The 
ranking of all regions on all actions shows that the situation in Europe is far better than it is in 
all other regions - in 12 of the 14 actions, Europe ranked between 70% and 90% implementation, 
and in policies and programmes at around 53%. 

The Arab region reported considerably high percentages in supplying and consulting with 
disabled persons organizations, in services to children, women and low income persons with 
disabilities, as well as in financial allocations. 

Asia's graph has less fluctuations than the Arab region, maintaining a position in the middle 
with the exception of policies in which it reported higher than Europe and lower than the Arab 
region. 

32 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.5 
Support Services 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceSupply IndividualConsulting DPOsChildWomenLow IncomeAll Geo.
All ClassesEthnic GroupsReligious GroupsAll Types Of Disability 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
African countries alternated the lower ranks with Latin American countries, with responses 
at lower than 50%, and on the majority of actions between 30% and 48%, with the exception 
of legislations and all socio-economic classes where it fell below 30%. 

The percentage of implementation for Latin American countries fell below 30% on five of the 
14 actions: children, women, geographic, ethnic groups, all types of disabilities. 

33 


Section Two: Target Areas 
Implementation at the Regional Level: Overview 
The concept of target areas pertains to the areas and spheres that require intervention and 
modification in order to allow and facilitate the participation of persons with disabilities. The 
intervention in these areas is two-fold, on the one hand, the identification of obstacles and 
barriers and on the second the removal of these barriers. 
The Standard Rules document identified eight Target Areas ranging from Accessibility to 
Religion. Since the aim of equalization of opportunities is to enable persons with disabilities to 
fully participate in all spheres of life, the eight identified areas have become the target of 
government actions with the aim of achieving equalization for persons with disabilities. 
Without equal opportunities for persons with disabilities to participate and exercise their rights 
and responsibilities in the areas of education, employment, income generation, family life and 
personal dignity, recreation and sports, culture, and religion, with accessibility in all its 
dimensions applied to all these spheres of life, persons with disabilities will continue to be 
excluded and marginalized. 
Together with Pre-conditions, the Target Areas form an inventory of what is needed to free 
society of all forms of discrimination in which persons with disabilities are able to both enjoy 
and exercise their full rights on an equal basis with others. Their implementation is also aimed 
at enriching the social fabric and forming societies that are good for all. 
For the eight target areas of the Standard Rules, a total of 151 actions were identified. All 151 
actions are required to be implemented in order to reach an ideal situation in which persons 
with disabilities are able to participate fully and contribute to society. 
Implementation of the Target Areas in the Five Regions 
At the global level, the data with regard to implementation of the Target Areas painted a 
similar picture to the one observed in relation to the Pre-conditions. 
When disaggregated at the regional level, Europe remained the highest among the five 
regions on all eight (8) areas that make up the Target Areas, with the exception of Sports and 
Recreation and in which it ranked second after the Arab region. 
Europe reported 65% implementation on accessibility; 80% on education; 75% on employment; 
78% on income maintenance; 65% on family life; 64% on culture; 65% on recreation 
and sports, and 35% on religion. 
Ranking second on all actions with the exception of recreation and sports in which it ranked 
above Europe, the Arab region reported implementation ranging from 48% on income 
maintenance and religion, and 75% on recreation and sports. 
Asia occupied third place on all eight Target Areas, with the exception of education where they 
reported the same percentage as the Arab region at 70%. 
34 
Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
34 
Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On accessibility, Latin America reported 28% implementation, and 30% on income maintenance; 
while Africa reported 26% on accessibility and 27% on income maintenance; and both 
reported similar results on culture at 32% implementation. 

The difference in implementation between the regions ranged from 50% on income maintenance 
and 30% on family life. 

Figure (2.6) illustrates the percentage of implementation per region. 


Figure 2.6 
Percentage of Implementation on Target Areas 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Acc Ed Emp I.M Family Cul R.S Rel 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Detailed Analysis of Implementation of Actions on the Target Areas 

Rule 5: Accessibility 

Accessibility refers to the ability of persons with disabilities to take part in any given activity 
within any sphere of life as independently as possible, without encountering any obstacles and 
with their dignity preserved. Accessibility encompasses the notion of access to the physical 
world as well as access to the world of ideas, meanings and concepts. Therefore, actions taken 
by relevant authorities should take into consideration that the ultimate aim is enabling each 
and every individual, regardless of the type of disability to participate fully. 

This is why the full implementation of this Rule requires the fulfilment of 39 separate actions-far 
more than any other Rule among the Standard Rules. 

The first set of actions pertain to actions to be taken by governments at the political and 
administrative levels. These range from: adopting policies; passing legislations; introducing 
programmes; allocating financial resources; training architects and construction engineers; 

35 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


raising public awareness; implementing accessibility programmes; to consulting with and 
involving disabled persons organizations. 

With regard to making the physical environment accessible to persons with disabilities, the 
actions needed to be implemented should cover nine areas within the physical space. These 
should be inclusive of, but not limited to, the following: Schools, hospitals, clinics, community 
centers, public libraries, theaters; rehabilitations centers; public buildings and government 
agencies & offices; outdoor environment (sidewalks, pedestrian crossings etc.); land, 
sea and air transportation; housing. 

The next set of actions refers to the dissemination of information regarding accessibility to 
the following groups: persons with disabilities only; families of persons with disabilities; 
representatives of persons with disabilities and their organizations; and society as a whole. 

Equally important, is information provided in an accessible form, since information is the 
only available means of communication and interaction, and, therefore, the only means to 
participate as a social being. Equalization of opportunities would not be achieved without the 
access of persons with disabilities to information in the form which suits their type of disability. 


Governments and authorities are, therefore, required to adopt a set of actions at the political, 
legislative and administrative levels, to make information accessible to persons with 
disabilities. These actions include: adopting policies; passing legislations; introducing 
programmes; allocating financial resources; training interpreters for all disability needs; 
raising public awareness; implementing accessibility programmes; consulting with and 
involving organizations. 

Accessible information is a relative concept, depending on the nature of the disability and the 
needs of the persons who have that disability. For example, information accessible to a blind 
person would not be accessible to a deaf person. Therefore, for equalizations of opportunities 
in relation to accessibility of information to be relevant to all, it has to take into consideration 
the nature and needs of all groups and all types of persons with disabilities. Fully accessible 
information should target the following groups and types of information: blind or visually 
impaired persons; deaf-blind people; the deaf or hearing impaired; people with developmental 
disabilities; people with psycho-social disabilities; literature on Braille; literature on 
tape; news magazines on tape/in Braille; sign language interpretation; Easy Reader for 
persons with disabilities. 

Since accessibility is a cross cutting condition to the implementation of all other rules, and is 
an integral part in every sphere of life, and since the benefit that persons with disabilities can 
reap from all services provided by governments depends heavily on their accessibility, the 
four remaining actions dealing with monitoring and ensuring the existence of accessibility 
become imperative. The four actions constitute a national mechanism to ensure the compliance 
of all service providers and government agencies, with the conditions of accessibility in 
the form of: the appointment of an ombudsman; setting up governmental bodies for the 
purpose; assigning independent expert bodies; allocating special arbitration/conciliation 
bodies. 

As illustrated by Figure (2.7), below, there is a wide and consistent discrepancy in the 
regions, with Europe as the highest and Africa as the lowest, and Asia maintaining a middle 
yet consistent rank among the five regions. Since accessibility requires the allocation of 

36 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


considerable financial resources, the rankings are consistent with the socio-economic 
situations in the regions, which may explain why Europe reported 90% accessibility in public 
buildings. 

Figure 2.7 
Accessibility 1 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTraining PersonnelRaising AwarenessImplement AccessConsult PWDOsSchools/HospitalPublic BuildingsOutdoor EnvironmentLand, sea transportHousingPWDsFamilies PWDRep. Of PWDSociety 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
On all required actions a wide gap was evident between the regions. However, the gap 
widened when it came to implementation of actions pertaining to the physical sphere, such 
as transportation and housing. These observed findings are consistent with what we know 
about the fact that the political will to effect change is always higher than the actual delivery 
of the services. Hence, the absence or availability of financial resources, have a great effect 
on the actual implementation of this Rule. 

When considering involving persons with disabilities, the percentage of countries that have 
implemented these actions fell to below 60% in all regions, with Africa falling to 5% and 
Europe and the Arab region to below 58%. 

The same is true in the actions dealing with involving families of persons with disabilities and 
the existence of policies on accessible information and legislations; where two out of five 
regions reported less than 15% implementation on these actions: Africa and Asia. 

37 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.8 
Accessibility 2 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PWDsFamilies PWDRep. Of PWDSocietyPoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTrainingRaising AwareImplement ProgramsConsulting Org/PWD 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
One of the striking results as reported by countries of the Arab region, was on awareness 
raising, where they registered higher than Europe and by far higher than all other region at 
75%. While Europe on the average remained consistently higher on implementation than the 
five other regions on all other actions. 
On the accessibility of information, European countries reported 85% implementation; Asian 
countries 73%; Arab countries 68%; Latin American countries 48%; and African countries 
31%. 

These results were only slightly higher than reported implementation of accessible information 
for deaf-blind persons on which three of the five regions (Europe, Arab Region, Asia) 
clustered around 60% implementation; while Latin America and Africa stood at 35% and 
32%, respectively. 

For deaf and hard-of-hearing persons, Europe reported implementation of actions on 
accessible information at 70%; while the Arab region was at 65%; Asia at 58%; Africa at 
38%; and Latin America at 33%. 

With regard to developmental disabilities, accessible information was lower than 60% for all 
regions; and on accessible information for persons with psycho social disabilities implementation 
was even lower in all regions, all of them reporting at lower than 50% implementation. 

38 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The existence of material in Braille was reported to be higher than 70% in all regions reaching 
its highest in Europe at 95% and its lowest in Africa at 38%. (Figure 2.9) 

With regard to sign language, all five regions were over 50% with a very narrow gap between 
them. Africa reported 55%implementation and Europe reported 75%, with the other three 
regions falling in between. (Figure 2.9) 

On the existence of a monitoring system, all regions reported relatively higher percentages 
on having implemented actions to establish government bodies, and very low on all of the 
following: Ombudsmen, disability experts, arbitration and conciliation bodies. 

Figure 2.9 
Accessibility 3 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
BlindDeaf & BlindDeaf Or HearingDevelop Disab.
Psycho SocialBrailleOn TapeNews On TapesSign InterpreterEasy ReaderOmbudsmanGov. BodiesExpertsArbitratrat / Conciliatiat 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 6: Education 

Education has been identified as a basic human right in every international document and 
declaration. It is the primary means of socialization and a gateway to gaining access to other 
essential human rights, including employment. Education involves nurturing the talents, 
developing the abilities, honing and upgrading the skills of persons with disabilities in an 
integrated setting; preparing the individual to exercise their future life in a natural, free, 
competitive social setting. To achieve education as prescribed by the equalization of oppor


39 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


tunities, 24 actions need to be implemented as derived from Rule 5 of the Standard Rules. 

The first eight actions pertain to the structural, political, legislative and administrative levels. 
These include adopting policies; passing legislations; adopting programmes; allocating 
financial resources; modifying and adapting schools to the needs of children with disabilities; 
training teachers and school administrators; providing accessible schools, classrooms & 
educational materials; involving organizations of persons with disabilities in planning and 
implementation. 

However, inclusive education in integrated settings can only be achieved if the educational 
system implements a set of actions, some of which would secure inclusiveness and others 
would ensure integrated settings are accessible and welcoming. 

To ensure inclusiveness, certain groups should be receiving educational services on an equal 
basis as others. These include children with disabilities; women with disabilities; low-
income, working class and poor persons with disabilities; disabled persons from all ethnic 
groups, all religious groups and communities and with all types of disabilities. 

In order to ensure that the settings in which all these groups can receive educational services 
are integrated, the following actions should be implemented to make education relevant and 
accessible to persons with all types of disabilities, and to their families and communities: 
sign language interpretation; educational materials in Braille; lessons on tape; educational 
material & teaching methods appropriate to children with intellectual disabilities; and 
programmes for children whose needs cannot be met in integrated settings. Additionally, 
educational services need to involve the following groups: parents of children with disabilities; 
disabled persons organizations; NGOs that work with children; the communities in 
which children and persons with disabilities live. 

On 15 of the 24 actions all regions reported more than 50% implementation, with Europe 
being the highest with responses ranging from 75% to 98% on the first 20 actions. 
Only in the action pertaining to involving NGOs that work with children with disabilities and 
the community, responses from Europe fell to below 60%. 

For all the other regions implementation percentages were close on all the required actions, 
with the exception of Africa and Latin America on legislations and involvement of persons 
with disabilities, and on educational material, lessons and text books on tape for blind 
children. 

The Arab region reported higher than Europe, and all other regions, on educational materials 
in Braille and on tape. This might be due to the fact that the reporting parties reported their 
knowledge of the existence of such services regardless of their prevalence and extent of their 
availability to all those who need them. 

40 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.10 
Education 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceModifying SchoolsTrainingProviding AccessInvolving PWDChildrenWomenLow IncomesEthnic GroupsReligions GroupsDP all CommunitiesAll DisabilitiesSign LanguageEduc. MaterialsLessons On TapePrograms for Children needsParentsOrg PWDNGO’s ChildrenCommunity 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 7: Employment 

Employment is state and status. Persons with disabilities can play a role in their communities 
and acquire status related to this role through employment. To preserve their dignity and to 
achieve full integration, persons with disabilities must have a role in their communities. The 
type of employment that persons with disabilities should have access to should be commensurate 
with their skills, qualifications and aspirations. It should therefore, be meaningful 
work, and provide a decent living in decent conditions. 

Furthermore, providing employment opportunities for persons with disabilities is sound 
economic policy. Unemployed Persons with disabilities being unemployed means a loss of a 
large amount of productivity, useful energy and potential talent as well as economic contribution. 
Add to that, in the absence of support outside the home, the loss of the economic 
contribution of the caretakers or family members of persons with disabilities. 

In order to ensure that persons with disabilities are gainfully and decently employed-their 
dignity preserved and their contributions valued, a set of 14 actions need to be taken by 
governments, relevant authorities, businesses, and employers, as well as all other stakeholders 
need to implement. These actions include adopting policies; passing legislations; 

41 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


adopting programmes; allocating financial resources; training persons with disabilities; 
modifying and adapting the physical, social and administrative environment; raising awareness 
among management and administration on disability issues; providing accessible 
transportation and work stations; cooperating with disabled persons organizations on all 
actions relating the labour market. As well as actions to ensure equalization of opportunities 
in hiring; promotion; the right to work benefits; pay increase; training programmes aimed at 
skills upgrading and continued education. 

The first 9 measures have to do with societal structures which are essentially the responsibility 
of the state, while the remaining 4 have to do with creating opportunities-a shared 
responsibility between the public and private sectors. 

On the first nine actions a wide discrepancy is observed between the regions, namely in the 
areas of legislations on employment and on transportation. There was less discrepancy in the 
five actions pertaining to discrimination. 

The lowest percentage recorded was on accessible transportation in Latin America which was 
at 0%, and the highest was on legislations at 95% in Europe. 

Europe was reported higher than all regions on the first nine actions, and by a relatively high 
margin. With regard to hiring, promotion, work benefits, increases, the Arab region scored 
highest. The lowest percentage of implementation was reported in Latin America followed by 
Africa. 

Figure 2.11 
Employment 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTraining PWDModifying EnvironmentRising AwarenessAccessibility TransCooperate DPOHiringPromotionsWork BenefitsPayment IncreaseParticipation 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
42 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 8: Income maintenance and social security 

Whether a person with a disability has lost all or part of their income due to disability, the 
government or relevant authorities are required to implement actions to ensure that persons 
with disabilities are able to maintain a decent standard of living. 

Often caring for a family member with a disability-particularly in the absence of adequate, 
accessible and affordable services outside the home-will deprive one or sometimes two 
members of the family from employment or education. Considering that studies on poverty 
have revealed that persons with disabilities and their families in any given community often 
live in poverty levels below those of other members of their community, the need to maintain 
income and provide persons with disabilities with a social safety net becomes imperative. 
This is especially true if governments consider persons with the disabilities the sole responsibilities 
of their families. 

In order to ensure that persons with disabilities and their families are provided with an 
income that allows them to live decently and on equal par with other members of their 
community, governments would have to adopt and implement a set of actions aimed at 
achieving that equalizations. At the political, legislative and administrative levels these 
actions include adopting policies; passing legislations; adopting programmes; allocating 
financial resources; providing persons with disabilities with information regarding income 
maintenance and support; and consulting disabled persons organizations. 

In addition to the six actions mentioned above, governments are required to take nine 
actions that ensure that all persons with all types of disabilities are covered by the provisions 
of income maintenance, including those who have become temporarily disabled; or who 
have acquired a disability due to on-the-job accidents; people with physical disabilities; 
people with sensory disabilities; people with intellectual disabilities; women with disabilities; 
families of children with disabilities; care-givers of persons with disabilities; and finally, all 
persons with disabilities regardless of social, economic, religious, national, ethnic and 
backgrounds. 

Europe stands out on having the highest implementation rates on 15 of the 16, ranging 
between 70% and 90% implementation of actions relating to income maintenance and social 
security, with the exception of persons who have become disabled due to on-the-jobaccidents; 
while Africa and Latin America reported implementation between 10% and 30%. 

Implementation in Asia and the Arab region ranged between 40% and 50%. However, 
income support to care givers of persons with disabilities was lower than other actions in 
Africa, Latin America, Asia. 

However, Europe scored much higher (at 95%) on income maintenance for persons with 
physical, sensory and intellectual disabilities, than for persons with psycho social disabilities. 
In Africa and Latin America support for persons with psycho social disabilities was as low as 
20%, in Asia 42%, in the Arab region 46%. 

43 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.12 
Income Maintenance and Social Security 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceInfo PWDConsulting PWDOTemporarily Lost IncomeOn the job AccidentPhysical DisabilitySensory DisabilityIntellectualPsyco SocialWomenFamiliesCare GivenAll PWD 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 9: Family life and personal integrity 

Family life is crucial to the psychological and social well being of any person. This is more than 
true for persons with disabilities for whom a supportive and caring family environment is a 
necessity. The importance of being part of a family--of belonging to the basic social unit--is 
evident from the link made between family life and personal integrity in this rule. 

Moreover, belonging to and living within a family unit is a right recognized by all international 
treaties and conventions. Therefore, it is the responsibility of governments and the relevant 
authorities to ensure that actions are implemented to guarantee that persons with disabilities 
enjoy, exercise and maintain that right. 

Including family life in the Standard Rules constitutes a major step in addressing centuries of 
discrimination against persons and children with disabilities, from within their family, which 
can result in abandonment and neglect. Additionally, the Standard Rules have consecrated 
not only the right of persons with disabilities to live within their families but to establish 
families of their own. It has also provided guidelines for governments and societies to 
facilitate the exercise of this right. 

44 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


At the political, legal and administrative levels, 13 actions have been identified in relation to 
this rule. Eight pertain to adopting policies; passing legislations; adopting programmes; 
allocating financial resources; raising social awareness of the rights of persons with disabilities; 
raising awareness among persons with disabilities regarding their rights; establishing 
mechanisms for reporting discrimination and handling violations and abuse; and involving 
disabled persons organizations. 

The remaining six actions pertain to ensuring the right of persons with disabilities to fully 
participate in all aspects of family life including establishing families of their own; having 
sexual relationships; exercising the right to marriage; parenthood; privacy; and accessing 
consulting services on all of the above. 

Fourteen (14) actions in all are needed to fully implement this Rule; eight are structural, while 
six have to do with the various aspects of family life. 

On the structural actions, all regions reported considerably low ranging between 15% and 
70%. Even Europe reported lower implementation than the Arab region and Asia on all eight 
actions, with the exception of reporting discrimination. 

When moving to the aspects of family life, Europe reported higher on the average, maintaining 
a 90% implementation rate on the first five actions and 84% on consulting services. 

On the issue of the right to sexual relations, the Arab region reported lowest at 53% and 
higher when it came to marriage and parenthood. This is consistent with the value system of 
a traditional society which frowns on sexual relations outside the context of marriage. 

In Latin America the implementation rates fell further on the five actions to reach its lowest 
dip on consulting services at 32%. 

45 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.13 
Family life and personal integrity 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceSocial AwareAmong PWDReport DiscrimInvolve PWDFull ParticipationSexual RelationsMarriageParenthoodPrivacyConsulting Services 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 10: Culture 

Cultural life is an integral part of social life. It is, therefore, damaging when persons with 
disabilities are excluded from cultural life, whether as active participants, using their creative, 
artistic or intellectual potential, or as observers and spectators at cultural events and 
performances. 

It is important to keep in mind that the degree of participation in such events and activities is 
also directly related to the accessibility of such events to people with all types of disabilities. 
Such accessibility should cover not only the physical space where these events take place, 
but also information about them as well as information regarding their accessibility. 

The implementation of all 18 actions derived from this Rule would constitute the full and 
equal participation of persons with disabilities in the cultural life of their communities. 

46 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Eleven (11) of these actions pertain to the political, legal and structural aspects necessary to 
ensure full participation, and these include: adopting policies; passing legislations; adopting 
programmes; allocating financial resources; raising social awareness of the rights of 
persons with disabilities; raising awareness among persons with disabilities regarding their 
rights; providing venues for persons with disabilities to participate in cultural activities; 
providing venues for persons with disabilities to contribute to cultural life; providing accessible 
information about cultural activities; making cultural performances accessible to all 
types of disabilities; involving disabled persons organizations. 

The remaining actions have to do with the coverage of those actions and their inclusiveness 
of all persons with all types of disabilities, as well as their inclusiveness of persons with 
disabilities from different ethnic, religious and socio-economic backgrounds. These include 
children with disabilities; women with disabilities; low-income, working class and poor 
persons with disabilities; persons with disabilities from all ethnic groups; persons with 
disabilities from all religious groups; persons with disabilities from all communities, and all 
types of disabilities. 

On the first 11 actions all regions reported a percentage of implementation lower than 70% 
with the exception of one action where the Arab region reported 78% implementation with 
regard to raising awareness among persons with disabilities on cultural activities. Africa 
remained the lowest on all 11 actions, while Latin America was the second lowest. 

The highest implementation remained for Europe, with the Arab region in second place and 
Asia maintaining the middle ground on all actions. The involvement of persons with disabilities 
was higher in Europe than any other region at 85%. 

47 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


When examining implementation on the seven actions pertaining to the coverage or inclusion, 
the gap between the regions narrowed considerably; with Europe taking the lead 
followed by Asia, the Arab region, and finally, Africa and Latin America reporting lowest. 

Figure 2.14 
Culture 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceSocial Awarenessmong PWDProviding VenuesProviding ContributeAccessible InfoMaking Cultural accessibleInvolving Org. PWDChildrenWomen 
Low incomeAll ethnicAll ReligionsAll CommunitiesAll Disabilities 
Awareness a 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 11: Recreation and sports 

Sports and recreational activities, like culture, are crucial to the exploration and release of 
abilities and potentials. They also provide the opportunity for people to test the limits of their 
endurance and to compete at different levels. They are also opportunities to socialize, be part 
of a team, and to provide ways for people to take pride in themselves and their abilities. They 
also provide a chance for persons with disabilities to be part of a community and to conduct 
psychologically and physically healthy lives. Sports and recreational activities, like cultural 
activities, involve persons as either active participants or spectators and observers. In all 
cases, venues and information about these activities have to be accessible to persons with 
disabilities. Therefore, 15 actions in all were identified. Their implementation would constitute 
full and equal participation for persons with disabilities. 

The first 10 actions require governments to make structural and societal adjustments at the 
political and legal levels, to ensure that the political will is translated into action. These 

48 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


actions include adopting policies; passing legislation; adopting programmes; allocating 
financial resources; raising social awareness on the rights of persons with disabilities; raising 
awareness among persons with disabilities regarding their rights; providing accessible 
venues for persons with disabilities to participate in sports and recreational activities; 
providing accessible information about sporting events and recreational activities; making 
sports and recreational activities accessible to all types of disabilities; and finally, involving 
organizations of persons with disabilities. 

The remaining five (5) actions pertain to the inclusiveness of the accessibility actions in 
facilitating the participation of persons with disabilities at all levels of competency and in all 
venues; including whether sports and recreational venues are accessible to persons with 
disabilities, and whether persons with disabilities are enabled to participate at the community 
or national level, as amateur or professional athletes. 

On legislation, all regions scored low with Asia and Africa lowest at 15% implementation. On 
persons with disabilities as professional athletes, implementation rates were also low for all 
regions with the lowest being in Asia and Africa at 17% and 18%, respectively. Other actions 
ranged between 30% on accessible venues and 90% on persons with disabilities participating 
in sports at the international level. 

It is interesting to note that on 11 of the actions, the Arab region reported higher than all 
other regions (Figure 2.15), a result that prompts further investigation. 

100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinancial ResourcesRaising SocialAwareness among PWDVenues to participateAccessible InfoMaking Sports accessibleInvolving PWD OrgsCommunity LevelNational LevelInter LevelAmateur atheletesPro. Atheletes 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
49 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.15 
Recreation and sports 


Rule 12: Religion 

Religion is a set of beliefs, convictions, ideas, rituals, behaviours, as well as a way of life 
shared by the members of a community or society. When religion is not accessible to persons 
with disabilities, it automatically spells their exclusion from the life of their community. 
Although governments do not regulate or legislate on religion or religious belief, the right to 
religion for all is recognized and guaranteed in United Nations human rights instruments. 
Therefore, it is the responsibility of governments to implement the 11 actions identified for 
the full implementation of Rule 12, in order to ensure full and equal participation of persons 
with disabilities to religion. 

As in the case of every other rule, there are six actions that require the political, legal and 
administrative actions that need to be taken to ensure the full participation for persons with 
disabilities, and four actions to ensure that religious events and venues are inclusive and 
accessible to persons with disabilities. 

These actions encompass the following: adopting policies; passing legislation; adopting 
programmes; allocating financial resources; raising social awareness of the rights of 
persons with disabilities; raising awareness among persons with disabilities regarding their 
right to participate; providing accessible venues for persons with disabilities to participate in 
religious events and services; providing accessible information about religious events and 
services; making religious events and services accessible to all types of disabilities; involving 
disabled persons organizations in ensuring equal participation; and finally ensuring that 
religious events and services are accessible to all persons with disabilities. 

With regard to policies, legislations, programmes and financial allocations in this area, all 
regions reported no higher than 50%. In Africa, rates dipped as low 5% on legislation and 
financial allocations, and in Latin America as low as 7% on programmes. Europe reported 
better implementation on the first 3 actions ranging from 44% to 50% and as low as 13% on 
awareness-raising for persons with disabilities; while Latin America recorded 0% for 
accessible venues and less than 20% on the remaining accessibility actions. 

Europe, Asia and Africa reported in the middle ground with a marked difference between 
those three regions and both Latin America (15%) and the Arab region (55%). 

50 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.16 
Religion 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceSocial awarenessAwareness PWDAccessible venuesAccess Info.
Making Action AccessibleInvolving DPOs 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Implementation Measures: Regional Responses 

Actions Taken on Implementation Measures by Region 

The Standard Rules specified 10 Implementation Measures. Only seven were included in the 
Survey, and therefore included in this assessment, since 'policies', 'legislations', and 
'programmes' are incorporated in the questions on each of the Rules. Therefore, for the seven 
Rules in the Implementation Measures section of the Standard Rules 106, individual actions 
were identified to ensure their full implementation. 

Once again the highest implementation was in Europe. However, Africa appeared to be 
markedly higher on information and statistics, with a 20% difference between it and Europe 
and a 50% difference between it and Latin America; while Latin America reported the lowest 
on all actions, with the exception of coordination of work where it reported higher implementation 
than both Asia and Africa. 

On national monitoring, Europe ranked highest at 58% of actions implemented, with the Arab 
region at 52%; Asia at 45%; Africa at 32%; and Latin America at 28%. 

51 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Africa's reporting on economic policies and on statistics revealed a gap of over 50% in 
implementing actions on both these issues. This raises serious doubts about Africa's 
response on statistics. It would seem inconceivable that there should be 78% implementation 
of actions in information and statistics while implementation of actions on economic 
policies is at 25%. This, therefore, requires further investigation to explain or correct these 
numbers. 

On personnel training the Arab region recorded much higher than Europe at 68% of the 
actions implemented while Europe reported 52%. This too requires further investigation. 

Generally, when considering all actions, Europe reported the highest percentage of actions 
implemented, followed by the Arab region, followed by Asia, Africa and Latin America. On 
average, the percentage of implementation in Europe is twice that of Latin America. 

Examining the global picture with regard to implementation of all rules indicates that the 
performance of all the responding countries in all the five regions ranges from 40% to 50% 
implementation. The average rate of implementation for 12 out the 19 Rules included in the 
Survey was between 40% and 50% - i.e. regarding awareness-raising, medical care, 
rehabilitation, support services, employment, income maintenance, family life, culture, 
sports, economic policies, coordination of work, and the involvement of disabled persons 
organizations. 

Technical cooperation, national monitoring and personnel training as well as accessibility, 
and information and statistics were below 40% implementation. 

Education in integrated settings was the highest at 56%, while the actions pertaining to 
religion was the lowest at 25%. 

Figure 2.17 
Percentage of implementation on the Implementation Measures 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Info E.p Co DPOs P.T N.M Teach 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
52 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Detailed Analysis of Actions Taken on the Implementation Measures 

Rule 13: Information and research 

Any response to disability issues should be based on accurate and reliable knowledge -with 
regard to size, scope, prevalence, incidence, causes, distribution, types and availability of 
services. Such information should be both qualitative and quantitative. The presence or 
absence of such information is a good indicator of the level of interest at the national and 
governmental levels in the issues, needs and rights of persons with disabilities. 

Setting policies and planning programmes depend heavily on the availability of accurate, 
relevant, specific and up-to-date information. For that reason, governments, relevant 
authorities and communities are expected to compile data and statistics with regard to all 
aspects of disability on a regular and periodic basis. However, while such compilation is 
crucial, it is essential that it be widely disseminated, published, and that all stakeholders are 
encouraged to make use of it. Without such a system in place, the national response to the 
issues of disability will fall short of addressing the real needs and the pressing issues. 

There are 25 separate actions that need to be taken by governments and relevant authorities 
and they fall under two categories. The first, are political and administrative in nature 
and include adopting policies; passing legislation; adopting programmes; allocating 
financial resources; raising social awareness; collecting statistics; involving the disabled 
persons organizations; disseminating statistical information to all pertinent users; updating 
statistical information regularly and periodically. 

The second, pertains to the quality, scope and coverage of the information collected and 
includes whether there is a system for collecting, processing, analyzing and publishing data 
about the incidence, prevalence and types of disability; disaggregated statistics by gender, 
age, socio-economic background, geographical location; the needs of persons with disabilities; 
services and programmes for persons with disabilities; the availability, coverage and 
scope of those services; the living conditions for persons with disabilities; the educational 
situation for pupils with disabilities; the conditions in the workplace for persons with disabilities; 
employment opportunities for persons with disabilities; expenditures entailed by 
disability; the impact of social policies on persons with disabilities; the type of research 
available, and parties undertaking it; disabled persons organizations, their programmes, 
services, coverage and location; local, national, regional and international disability issues, 
events, studies…etc. 

On policies, the highest reporting was from the Arab region at 58%; Europe at 47%, with a 
narrow gap between Europe and Asia at 43%; while Africa and Latin America reported at 
30% and 29%, respectively. 

With regard to legislations Africa reported lowest at 5%, considering that all regions 
reported low on legislations with the second lowest being Asia at 7%, followed by Latin 
America at 29% and Europe at 37% with the Arab region at 52%. 

With regard to programmes Europe reported highest at 58% and Africa lowest at 28%. The 
narrowest gap was observed between the Arab region and Asia at 47% and 43% respectively. 


53 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the allocation of finances Latin America and Africa recorded the lowest with a narrow gap 
at 25% and 27% respectively. Europe reported 47% on resource allocation and 52% on 
social awareness of the importance of statistics and information and 78% on the use of 
statistical information. 

With regard to updating statistical information the lowest reported percentage was Africa at 
20% and the highest in the Arab region at 69%. In response to the question regarding 
whether there is a system in place to collect data and information, Europe reported the 
highest at 70% and Africa lowest at 40%, with the other three regions ranging between 63% 
in Africa and the Arab region, and 38% in Latin America. 

The variation on the reported implementation by region maintained the same pattern as on 
all other rules, with Europe in first place and the Arab region closely behind, Asia in the 
middle, and Africa and Latin America last. 

Over-reporting has been consistently detected in the responses received from the Arab region 
throughout the Survey. On the issue of Information and Statistics, the percentages reported on 
prevalence, types and living conditions were at 70%, 90% and 70%, respectively. Such numbers are 
not supported by the available data on disability and the information generally known about the 
region. By the same token, reporting from Europe in response to the Survey was consistently lower 
than what is generally known about the situation in Europe. However, both the over- and under-
reporting specific to the Arab region and Europe have been consistent throughout the Survey and for 
all the Rules. 

Figure 2.18 
Information and research 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesProgramsSocial awarenessUpdating statistics infoPrevalence incidenceDisagree gate dataServices & ProgramsLiving conditionConditions of workplaceExpenditures entailedType of researchLocal National issues 
Involving DPOs 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
54 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 16: Economic policies 

Economic policies are the engine of implementation for all actions taken by governments and 
other relevant authorities in ensuring equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities. 
Without the allocation of financial resources many intended actions will never see the 
light. In order for governments to fulfill their commitments and move from intention to action 
they are required to tie all actions to sound economic policies. 

The following actions have been identified in relation to economic policies: adopting financial 
policies specific to persons with disabilities; passing legislation; providing financial support to 
projects and initiatives aimed at equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities; 
allocating special disability fund to support grassroots and programmes; involving organizations 
of persons with disabilities in financial planning. These actions are structural in nature, 
pertaining to the political, legal and administrative levels and the purview of governments and 
relevant political/fiscal authorities.

 Four out of the five regions reported higher percentages with regard to financial support of 
projects and initiatives while three out of the five reported lower percentages of implementation 
on actions relating to the legislations necessary to implement such fiscal policies. 

With regard to the existence of disability funds, the response of the five regions ranged 
between 50% and 70%, with the gap in responses from Asia, Europe and the Arab region 
being narrower than on the other four actions. On the involvement of persons with disabilities, 
both Latin America and Africa reported considerably low at 19%. On all actions pertaining to 
this rule, Europe recorded higher implementation on the average. Figure (2.19) below clearly 
illustrates the percentages and differences. 

Figure 2.19 
Economic policies 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 PoliciesLegislationSupport toprojectsDisability FundInvolving PWD 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
55 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 17: Co-ordination of work 

Since equalization of opportunities is relevant to all aspects and sectors of human life, it is 
crucial that actions should be coordinated at all levels and with all the bodies specialized in 
the areas where change is required. That is to say that work coordination needs to be both 
vertical, from the national to the provincial, to municipal and to the community levels; and 
horizontal, to include all aspects of life specified by the Target Areas of the Standard Rules. 

Such coordination requires the formation of a specialized body of a multi-sectoral nature. 
This body would take a central role in planning, organizing, implementing and evaluating 
actions taken at the national level. 

The actions expected from governments to implement the above prescribed actions are the 
following: forming permanent coordinating committees; giving them a clear legal mandate; 
allocating resources to support their work; involving organizations of persons with disabilities 
in their composition and activities; providing them with legal and political status; 
ensuring balanced representation of types of disabilities and gender; ensuring adequate 
financial resources. 

Responses to these actions revealed the highest discrepancy among the regions. Europe 
reported the highest implementation with Africa at the lowest end. With regard to the 
establishment of coordination committees, Europe responded at 90% while Africa 
responded at 35%. 

Europe reported consistently higher than the other four regions on all actions. However, with 
regard to giving committees a legal mandate, allocating resources to projects and initiatives 
, and to the committees themselves, Europe reported at 62%, 62% and 58% respectively. 
On the same issues, the Arab region also reported lower at 52%, 48% and 48% respectively. 
Responses from the Arab region took their lowest dip on actions relating to balanced gender 
representation at 28%. On the same measure there was a wide discrepancy between the 
five regions (60%) on permanent committees and the lowest was on involving person with 
disabilities at 30%. 

Latin America, inconsistently with the observed pattern thus far, reported higher implementation 
on establishing permanent committees and involving persons with disabilities, and 
their representation on the committees. However, Africa, Asia and Latin America reported 
very closely on most issues and almost similar results on some. (Figure 2.20) 

56 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.20 
Co-ordination of work 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Permanent CommitteeLegal mandateAllocating resourcesInvolving PWDBalanced representativesRepresent PWDLegal & PoliticalTypes of DisabilitiesBalanced gender Rep.
Adequate resources 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 18: Organizations of Persons with disabilities 

This rule is what fully demonstrates the participatory nature of the Standard Rules and the 
philosophy of equalization that permeates them-which is the overall aim of their full implementation. 
It is important that persons with disabilities be involved in every aspect of the 
implementation of the rules, as persons who understand the issues at an intimate and 
personal level, able to identify barriers and obstacles and point out ways by which they can be 
removed. They can also be closely involved in drafting policies and specifying the actions 
needed to be taken by governments to make the environment accessible in the broadest 
sense. It is for this reason that the survey asked about the involvement of disabled persons 
organizations in relation to every measure in the questionnaire. 

The strength and capacities of disabled persons organizations varies from one country and 
even one region to another. In some they can be the driving force behind change, while in 
others they have no power. More than half the countries responding said they do not have 
such organizations. Observation has shown that even where exist, they may not have a 
prominent role or the ability and means to effect change and influence policy. 

The actions which are necessary for governments to take in order to ensure that disabled 
persons organizations are strong, capable, able, influential are at both the structural legal 
and political levels and the level of scope, mandate and implementation. 

57 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


At the first level the actions are the following: adopting policies; passing legislation; setting 
up programmes to strengthen and support organizations; setting administrative guidelines; 
allocating financial resources; empowering organizations with advisory capacity; cooperating 
with organizations on all matters concerning persons with disabilities; granting organizations 
legal and representational status. At the second level the actions are the following: 
advising on general policy and specific actions; identifying needs and priorities; participating 
in the planning of actions; participating in the implementation of actions; participating in the 
monitoring and evaluation; contributing actively towards increasing public awareness. 

The gap between all regions is narrow and the actual implementation is higher than the 
structural response. This is perhaps due to the fact that disabled persons organizations 
themselves are responsible for these issues rather than governments. 

The highest reported implementation was on identifying the needs and priorities: it stood at 
95% in Europe; 85% Asia; 80% Arab region; 70% Africa; and 53% in Latin America. 
The lowest recorded was on legislations in Asia and Africa at 22% and 20%, respectively. The 
narrowest gap between all regions was on granting status, with Europe at 67%; Arab region 
and Africa at 58%; Latin America at 53% and Asia 43%. 

Similarly, with regard to public awareness of the role of disabled persons organizations all 
five regions reported very close percentages of implementation and relatively high ranging 
between 90% in Europe; 77% in Europe; 82% in Africa; and 68% in Latin America and the 
Arab region. (Figure 2.21 below) 

58 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.21 
Organizations of persons with disabilities 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsAdminFinancial resourceAdvisory capacityCooperating with Org.
Granting statisticsAdvisory PoliciesIdentify needs & PriorityParticipate in planningParticipate in implementParticipate in MonitoringPublic awareness 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 19: Personnel training 

Considering the comprehensive nature of equalization of opportunities, personnel training is 
an integral part of achieving such equalization. It is the personnel who are trained to work 
with persons with disabilities, whether in education or rehabilitation or any other aspect, who 
carry a large part of the responsibility and who need to have an in-depth and well rounded 
knowledge of the what is needed to achieve equalization. 

Trained personnel, themselves are also change agents, their role exceeds the technical 
know-how to a more comprehensive role of managing change. In the many required target 
areas, effecting change rests upon the existence of well trained, qualified personnel who are 
able to understand the needs of persons with disabilities and fulfill them, and who are able to 
recognize that the ultimate goal in fulfilling those needs is the full participation of persons 
with disabilities in all aspects of life. 

Actions expected from governments and leading to this objective are ten in all and range 
from adopting policies to involving persons with disabilities-seven at the structural political 
levels and three pertaining to the quality of training. However, the responses revealed that 
more than half the countries have implemented no actions related to this area at the level of 
adopting policies; passing legislation; adopting training programmes; setting professional 
standards for personnel; allocating financial resources to training programmes; building the 
capacities of personnel; and involving disabled persons organizations. 

59 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The majority also did not fare any better in the area of quality of training as revealed by their 
responses to the following: Do personnel working with persons with disabilities receive 
training; are organizations of persons with disabilities involved in planning training 
programmes; are persons with disabilities involved as resource persons in training of 
personnel 

On policies and legislations, implementation was very low in all regions (Figure 2.22 below). 
On programmes they responded slightly higher, ranging between 85% for the Arab region 
and 38% for Latin America. Responses for the Arab region remained surprisingly higher all 
through, and for Africa low on the first four actions. 

Figure 2.22 
Personnel training 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsPro. StandardsFinance resourcesSocial AwarenessBuilding capacityInvolving Org. PWDTrainingDPO involved in TrainingPWD as resouece 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 20: National monitoring and evaluation 

In any given country, the existence of monitoring bodies and mechanisms is the ultimate 
expression of the country's commitment to the concept of equalization. Establishing such 
bodies and mechanisms reflects the level of awareness of the actions needed to be taken, the 
ends to which they are put, and the willingness to assess their success in arriving at their 
goals. 

60 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


This is the basic principle inherent in the Standard Rules for the Equalization of Opportunities 
for Persons with Disabilities. This Survey is in itself a manifestation to the implementation of 
this rule. Monitoring is one way of re-energizing the vision and detecting areas where 
implementation is lacking, determining needs, ensuring efficient responses and assuring 
that programmes stay their course, as well as ensuring cost effectiveness and the quality of 
the services delivery scheme. 

Monitoring bodies and mechanisms inform stakeholders of the coherence of the policies, and 
the ability of the actions to achieve the national goals. This can be spelled out through full and 
accurate knowledge of precisely who service recipients are, how many they are, where they 
are, what their needs are, and which would inform the assessment and guide the revision of 
programmes, services and financial allocations. 

In this sense, monitoring, both at the level of self-assessment by governments and monitoring 
through independent bodies, becomes not a punitive and finger-pointing exercise, but a 
means of understanding how to reach the desired goal of equalization of opportunities most 
effectively. Basic to all of the above is knowing who are the people for whom the service 
should be delivered. The responses reveal that 50% of the respondents have not established 
a clear and workable definition of disability, which would constitute the basic component for 
developing policies on services and expenditures. 

One of the main challenges for the disability movement worldwide is the absence of a 
universal definition. Although the World Health Organization (WHO) has developed an 
International Classification of Functioning (ICF), few countries seem to have formally 
adopted it. Therefore, respondents were asked: whether they have established a formal 
definition of disability; created a specialized monitoring body; collected census data; or 
conducted sample surveys. 

They were also asked about the following: establishing a national register; using records 
from service providers; using information gathered by disabled persons organizations, and 
whether such information encompasses the size, scope and prevalence of disability; types of 
disability; age distribution; gender and geographic distribution. 
In all, 23 actions regarding formal structures for monitoring the implementation of the 
actions necessary for the achievement of equalization of opportunities for persons with 
disabilities were identified. One to seven were pre-requisites for setting up a monitoring 
system. 

All regions rated the issue of having a formal definition of disability below 50%, with the 
exception of the Arab region. The Arab region ranked higher than all other regions in collecting 
data, conducting sample surveys, establishing a definition, and their specialized monitoring 
bodies - which is doubtful, knowing that there is little information and data on disability in 
the Arab region. 

With regard to specialized monitoring bodies, all regions responded below the 60% mark. On 
having a national registrar all regions responded at below 32%, and with Africa at less than 
10%. 
With regard to using records, Europe reached 70% implementation while the rest of the 
regions were under 52%. The same applies to using information about persons with disabilities. 


61 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On coverage, size and scope, the Arab region reported 64% implementation; Europe 54%; 
Asia 48%; Latin America 30%; Africa 25%. On including the types of disabilities in monitoring, 
Europe and the Arab region reported at 74%, while Asia and Africa were at 53%, and 
Latin America at 38%. 

On distribution by age, Europe reported 74%; the Arab region 64%; Asia 38%; Latin 
America 34% and Africa 30%. 

On geographic, age and gender distribution; organizations and programmes; service 
provision, personnel percentage of implementation was between 58% on the high end and 
30% at the lower end for Europe, the Arab region and Asia. 

While Latin America and Africa reported at 30% on age, gender, geography, and went below 
30% on organizations, programmes, services and personnel. 

Considering its importance as a ground for policy making and the importance of knowing 
size, scope, geography, as well as gender and age distribution, the action on establishing a 
national registrar is crucial. 
The other challenging observation is the fluctuation in the implementation of some essential 
and related actions by some regions (Figure 2.23 below). For example, the inconsistency of 
the responses received from the Arab region with the reality as reflected from other sources, 
both at the national and international level, about the situation of persons with disabilities in 
that region. 

Moving to the issue of national monitoring, there are seven actions ranging from policy 
making, adaptation, improvement, revision of programs, to research. 

Europe reported high on all seven, while Africa maintained a level of consistency with low 
response on all with a considerably consistent pattern between 39% and 27% on all seven. 
The Arab region fluctuated from being the highest on adaptation and improvement, to the 
lowest on public relations - which ought to be are generally interdependent functions. This is 
another area which necessitates additional investigation. 

Similarly Asia and Latin America maintained the same pattern, with Asia third and Latin 
America fifth in ranking on all actions. 

It is interesting to note that at the level of research Europe, the Arab region and Asia were 
close with a very narrow margin of difference, at a percentage ranging from 53% to 44%, 
while Latin America was under 10%. 

1 ICF is a classification of health and health related domains that describe body functions and structures, activities and participation. 
The domains are classified from body, individual and societal perspectives. Since an individual's functioning and disability occurs in a 
context, ICF also includes a list of environmental factors. 

62 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 2.23 
National monitoring and evaluation 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Formal DefinitionSpecialized monitoringCollection census/dataConducting Sample SurveyNational RegUsing RecordsUsing Info PWDSize ScopeTypesAge DistributeGender DistributeGeography DistributeOrg. Of PWDPrograms of PersonsServices provision Org.
Services provision personsPolicy MakingAdaption & improveRevision of ProgramsPublic AdminAwareness Raising ProgramAnnual & Periodic ReportsResearch 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
Rule 21: Technical and economic co-operation 

All United Nations initiatives, treaties and conventions are aimed at establishing a universal, 
shared culture in which the rights of all persons are promoted and the most vulnerable are 
protected from violations. The signing of such agreements indicates a belief on the part of 
Member States in the importance of creating such a culture.

 Implementing the requirements for compliance with these agreements is an indication of 
international responsibility that goes beyond verbal commitment to action on the ground. 
International cooperation, both at the technical and economic level, is exemplified by giving 
and receiving assistance, sharing and exchanging expertise and disseminating best practices. 


The means to create a world in which all people enjoy the right to live in dignity are available. 
Through the implementation of the actions identified by the Standard Rules for the 
Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, the opportunity to create a world 
free of barriers and obstacles, which is good for all, is a real possibility. 

Country responses show, however, that not many have taken advantage of the opportunity 
presented. The actions necessary for such an undertaking are the following: signing relevant 
international treaties and conventions; being party to bi-lateral or multi-lateral aid agreements; 
providing or receiving financial aid; providing or receiving technical assistance; 
exchanging information, experience, expertise, best practices; disseminating or receiving 

63 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


technological know-how, equipment; participating in international development cooperation 
projects; taking part in regional initiatives. 

In addition to this should be the following actions: including persons with disabilities in policy 
planning and programmes; tailoring programmes specific to their needs; supporting their 
families; ensuring their access to services; ensuring disabled persons organizations represent 
their interests; ensuring access to education; access to gainful employment; access to 
adequate housing; protecting vulnerable segments such as women and children; and finally 
allocating financial resources to all these actions. 

The first 8 actions have to do with pre-conditions for cooperation, starting with signing 
treaties for regional initiatives (international and regional). The rest are structural actions at 
the national level. It is interesting that all regions scored high on the international actions 
relating to international cooperation, yet when looking at the actions required at the national 
level, which make use of these international cooperation initiatives, most regions reported 
low percentages of implementation - giving credence to the popular belief that governments 
act globally but fail to implement locally. 

Interestingly, all regions, with the exception of Europe, clustered below the 30% mark and 
were as low as 5% for Latin America and 10% for Asia and Africa. 

Allocating resources was a point of intersection for three regions, at 20% to 24% for the Arab 
region and Asia, respectively, with Europe not much higher at 37%. 

Figure 2.24 
Technical and economic co-operation 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
SigningtreatiesBeing part toagreementProviding AidsProviding/
receiving technicalExchange InfoDisseminate/
receiving technicalParticipate in projectsRegional InitiativesPoliciesProgramsSupporting familiesAccess to servicesDPOsEducationEmploymentAdequate HousingProtecting SegmentsAllocating Resources 
Africa 
Asia 
Europe 
Latin 
Arab 
64 


CHAPTER THREE 


Comparison of Responses in 28 Countries: 
Governments versus Disabled Persons Organizations 



Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Comparison of Responses of Governments and Disabled Persons 

Organizations on 324 Actions in 28 Countries 

Introduction 

This chapter examines the responses received from government officials, or bodies, and 
disabled persons organizations. The analysis is based on responses obtained from 28 
countries representing the five regions, in which both a government body and a disabled 
persons organization responded to the Survey, and which vary in their social, cultural, 
political, geographical, economic and developmental characteristics. 

These 28 countries are not a chosen sample. They are the countries from which government 
and disabled persons organizations responses were obtained - thereby, fulfilling the conditions 
for their inclusion in a comparative analysis on which this chapter is drawing. These 
include 11 European countries, five African countries, five Arab countries, four Asian countries, 
and three Latin American countries, as follows: 

Europe: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, 
Portugal, Russia, Slovakia, Sweden 
Africa: Botswana, D.R. Congo, Eritrea, Namibia, Tanzania 
Arab region: Algeria, Jordan, Morocco, Palestine, Yemen 
Asia: Mongolia, Nepal, Korea, Samoa 
Latin American: Belize, El Salvador, Guyana 

The intention from this comparative analysis is to achieve the following objectives: 
a) To validate the data obtained from government and disabled persons 
organizations sources presented in the previous chapter; 
b) To assess the situation of persons with disabilities from their perspective and 
governments entrusted with the task of implementing actions towards 
equalization; 
c) To identify the areas where governments may have inflated or deflated their 
achievements in relation to equalization of opportunities. 
d) To assess the level of awareness on the issues of equalization on the part of 
both governments and disabled persons organizations and their effect on the 
rating of their countries' achievements. 

An examination of the government responses and disabled persons organizations responses 
will help assess the degree of reliability of government responses, particularly since there is 
no direct way of verifying the biases of governments' self-reporting. In some cases it will help 
shed light and/or cast doubts on these responses. Therefore, by the same token, we may find 
that the analysis of the results in fact validates, confirms and even explains the government 
responses. 

In other cases the responses of disabled persons organizations may be more inflated than 
those of governments showing a rather more positive picture of implementation than would 
have otherwise appeared. Such as the case in six of the countries. 

67 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Table 3.1 

Country 
No. of Actions 
Reported by 
Government 
No. of Actions 
Reported by 
DPO 
%age of 
Discrepancy 
between 
Government & DPO 
Finland 234 294 20.4 
Korea 179 254 29.5 
Malta 140 291 51.8 
Morocco 180 187 3.7 
Portugal 80 159 49.6 
Sweden 206 211 2.3 

While there are no indicators at the moment to measure the veracity or reliability of 
either set of responses, the discrepancies may be attributed to a number of factors. Chief 
among these factors are: 

-the strength or weakness of the disabled persons organizations and the 
disability 
movement in that country; 
-the depth of their knowledge about the actions that need to be taken to achieve 
equalization; 
-their knowledge of the conditions of persons with disabilities in their countries; 
-the nature of these disabled persons organizations, their relationship with their 
governments, i.e. their dependency or interdependency on governments, 
whether 
they have an arms-length relationship with governments; and whether they 
have a need to appease their government for financial or political reasons. 
An important factor also lies in the nature of these disabled persons organizations-i.e. 
whether they are run by or for persons with disabilities, whether they play a token role in 
advocating for persons with disabilities, and whether their survival depends on currying 
favour with their governments. 

(Appendix I. List of disabled persons organizations responding to the Survey.) 

This chapter will present the responses of both governments and the disabled persons 
organizations that responded, with a brief description and some explanation where 
necessary. However, due to the nature of the data many issues may be open to further 
investigation or even introspection by persons with disabilities and their representative 
organizations in those countries. 

1Finland, Korea, Morocco, Malta, Portugal, Sweden 

68 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Table 3.2 
Comparison of Responses to Actions Implemented Region-wide 


Region Government DPO Discrepancy in % 
Africa 158 actions 75 actions 25.9% 
Arab region 224 actions 145 actions 24.3% 
Asia 216 actions 107 actions 33.6% 
Europe 210 actions 190 actions 6.1% 
Latin America 175 actions 63 actions 34.4% 

Analysis 

The overall picture indicates a wide discrepancy between how governments and disabled 
persons organizations rate the extent of the implementation of actions necessary to achieve 
equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities in their countries. When governments' 
and disabled persons organizations' responses were compared it was found that 
governments had reported having implemented more actions than the disabled persons 
organizations acknowledged. 

An examination of the data available indicates that no government has taken all the necessary 
actions for implementing equalization and full participation for persons with disabilities. 
It also reveals a marked discrepancy in government implementation of the actions in 
different countries within the same region. 

In most of the 28 countries listed above, governments responded that they had implemented 
an average of 201 out of the expected 324 actions. This is much higher than what 
disabled persons organizations indicated as being the reality as they perceive it on the 
ground. In other words, in those same countries, disabled persons organizations indicated 
that only an average of 129 actions have been implemented by their governments, as 
opposed to the 201 reported by the governments. 

Overall, on all expected actions, governments reported having implemented more actions 
than the disabled persons organizations acknowledged, with the exception of three (3) 
actions in which disabled persons organizations reported higher than governments and one 

(1) action in which both governments and disabled persons organizations reported equally. 
2Portugal: 
Government responses indicate implementation of 80 actions out of the 324; while disabled persons organizations 
responses indicate that 159 actions have been implemented. 


69 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


1. On financial support provided to persons with disabilities where disability has 
been caused by- on-the-job accidents: 
12 disabled persons organizations responded that such support is available where as eight 
governments responded that it is not. The reason for this discrepancy may be attributed to 
the fact that such provisions fall under the purview of ministries of labour and are regulated 
by labour laws and therefore not within the responsibilities of the government body that 
responds to the Survey. 
The other point of divergence was on: 
2. The scope of coverage of statistical information on disability; i.e. whether 
statistical information includes the incidence and prevalence of disability. The disabled 
persons organizations' responses were slightly higher with 17 disabled persons organizations 
responding that statistical information does cover these aspects versus 16 governments 
saying that it does not - however, both responses are low. 
The one action on which both the governments' and disabled persons organizations' 
responses were equal was: 

3. The coordination of action in awareness raising between disabled persons 
organizations and governments, which 22 governments and 22 disabled persons organizations 
reported it true. 
70 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Responses of Governments and Disabled Persons Organizations 
on each of the rules in 28 countries 

Rule 1. Awareness Raising 

States should take action to raise awareness in society about persons with disabilities, 
their rights, their needs, their potential and their contribution. 

According to the Standard Rules, raising awareness at all levels of society is a pre-requisite to 
the implementation of all other actions necessary to achieving equalization of opportunities. 
In the absence of awareness of the needs and rights of persons with disabilities there can be 
no real change in their situation. 

Therefore, Rule 1 requires that States take actions to raise awareness in society about 
persons with disabilities, their rights, their needs, their potential and their contributions. In 
order to raise awareness 15 actions in all need to be taken. The first nine (9) have to do with 
societal response to raising awareness and the remaining seven (7) have to do with aspects 
and coverage of awareness raising. 

In the area of awareness raising more than 70% of governments reported that they have 
adopted policies and programmes, trained personnel, disseminated materials,, educated the 
public, and coordinated with persons with disabilities. While the percentage of disabled 
persons organizations that reported on the same actions that had been taken in their countries, 
did not exceed 60%. 

Disabled persons organizations responded higher than governments on the action relating to 
the passing of legislations. 

On legislation 53% of disabled persons organizations responding reported that their countries 
have passed legislations about the rights, needs, potentials and contributions of 
persons with disabilities; compared to 50% of the governments who responded responding 
reported having done so on these same issues. 

This result may need further investigation as governments' responses have been consistently 
higher than those of disabled persons organizations on almost all rules and all related 
actions. 

3 Adopting policies 

Passing legislations 

Adopting programmes 

Drafting guidelines for the media 

Training personnel 

Disseminating materials 

Raising awareness through the curriculum 

Educating the public 

Consulting with disabled persons organizations

4 

All types of disabilities (including psychosocial) 
Rights of persons with disabilities 
Needs of persons with disabilities 
Potentials of persons with disabilities 
Contributions of persons with disabilities 
Descriptions of persons with disabilities in positive terms 


71 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the issue of cooperation with disabled persons organizations, both governments and 
disabled persons organizations responded equally that such cooperation exists - in 79% of 
the 28 countries being considered in this section. 

Figure 3.1 Rule 1 
What action was taken by your government to raise awareness about the rights, 
needs, potential and contributions of persons with disabilities? 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsGuidelinesTrainingPersonnelMaterialDisseminatingAwarenessthroughcurriculumEducatingThe PublicCooperatingwith DPOs 
The actions where the difference was clear between the responses of governments and those 
of disabled persons organizations and in which the difference was highest, were in issuing 
guidelines to media & raising awareness among the public. On the first, 39% of governments 
responding reported the existence of such guidelines, in contrast with only 18% of disabled 
persons organizations responding who stated that such guidelines exist. 

Similarly, on the actions dealing with awareness raising through the school curricula, 57% of 
the responding governments stated that such actions have been taken while only 32% of 
disabled persons organizations responding said that such actions exist. 

With regard to the education of the public about the issues of persons with disabilities, similar 
results were obtained with 68% of governments reporting the existence of such actions, and 
43% of disabled persons organizations saying such actions were taken. 

This difference in reporting on the existence or lack of actions taken was also manifested 
when governments and disabled persons organizations responded to the question of the 
coverage of these actions. 

72 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.2 
Rule 1 
Does information used in awareness raising about persons with disabilities 
cover: 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Type of DisabilityRightsNeedsPotentialsContributionPositivedescription ofDisability 
More than 70% of governments responding on the coverage of awareness raising actions, 
maintained that the information they used in awareness raising about persons with disabilities 
covers all types of disabilities, all rights, all needs, and includes the potentials, contributions 
of persons with disabilities, and descriptions of disability and persons with disabilities in 
positive terms. 

While less than 50% of disabled persons organizations that responded agree that all of the 
above information is included in awareness raising and information targeting the public. 

The lowest percentage of responses by disabled persons organizations appeared on the 
issues of the contribution of persons with disabilities and the description of persons with 
disabilities in positive terms. On both these actions, only 40% of the disabled persons 
organizations reported that the information used in awareness raising included these issues. 

73 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 2. Medical care 

States should ensure the provision of effective medical care to persons with 
disabilities. 

In order to consider this Rule fully implemented there are 14 actions that governments are 
required to take. The first eight (8) actions refer to the structure of the societal response to 
disability while the remaining seven 7 refer to the provision of services within the country. 

Figure 3.3 
Rule 2 
What actions has your government taken to ensure the provision of effective 
medical care for persons with disabilities? 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTrainingPersonnelAccess to careConsulting PWDInforming PWD 
5 Adopting policies 

Passing legislation 

Adopting programmes 

Allocating financial resources 

Training personnel 

Making medical care accessible to persons with disabilities 

Consulting with organizations of persons with disabilities 

Informing persons with disabilities about the availability of medical services 

6 

Causes of disability 
Improved health care 
Early detection 
Early intervention & treatment 
Training medical personnel on early detection & intervention 
Updating medical knowledge 
Ensuring access to treatment 


74 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On three of the structural actions (policies, allocating finances and access to medical care) 
more than 80% of governments reported that they have implemented the required actions. 
The percentage of disabled persons organizations, on the other hand, in responding to the 
same question on these actions did not exceed 50%. 

With regard to the adoption of programmes; training of personnel, consulting with, and 
informing persons with disabilities more than 70% of governments stated that these actions 
are taken while the percentage of disabled persons organizations who stated that such 
actions were taken was less than 52% on three of the four actions, with the exception of 
information to persons with disabilities which scored 63%. 

On passing legislations both responses from the disabled persons organizations and governments 
showed the lowest percentage of implementation for this action at 57% for governments 
and 46% for disabled person's organizations respectively. 

Figure 3.4 
Rule 2 
Has your government taken any action on the following: 


Cause OfDisabilityImprove HealthEarly TreatTrainingPersonnelUpdate MedicalEnsure Access 
Early Detect 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
On the remaining seven (7) actions, relating to the quantity and quality of medical care, the 
percentage of governments that reported taking action was much higher than that of 
disabled persons organizations on all seven (7). 

However, governments scored more than 84% on four of the actions, (causes of disability; 
improving the health; early detection; early treatment). On the same actions disabled 
persons organizations' responses ranged between 50% and 62% with improving health as 
the highest at 62%, while causes of disability and early detection were at 57% and early 
treatment scoring slightly lower at 50%. 

75 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


With regard to training personnel and ensuring access to medical care, 75% of governments 
stated that such actions exist, while 50% of disabled persons organizations acknowledged 
the existence of actions to train personnel and 39% reported the existence of actions to 
ensure access. 

Among the seven actions, updating medical information was reported to be the lowest by 
both governments and disabled persons organizations at 57% and 28% respectively. 

Rule 3. Rehabilitation 

States should ensure the provision of rehabilitation services to persons with 
disabilities in order for them to reach and sustain their optimum level of independence 
and functioning. 

There are 22 actions in all relating to the implementation of rehabilitation for persons with 
disabilities, in order to achieve full participation in society. 

7

Seven (7) of the actions relate to the societal response to rehabilitation matters , ten related 

8

to inclusiveness and coverage of the services , while the other 5 actions pertained to the 

9

involvement of various stakeholders in matters of rehabilitation for persons with disabilities. 

7 

Adopting policies 
Passing legislation 
Adopting programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Training personnel 
Making rehabilitation services accessible to persons with disabilities 
Consulting and cooperating with organizations of persons with disabilities 


8 

All types of disabilities (including psycho-social & developmental disabilities) 
Children with disabilities 
Women with disabilities 
Low-income, working class and poor persons with disabilities 
All geographical locations (rural, urban, agricultural, tribal, etc.) 
All socio-economic classes and ethnic groups 
The organizations of persons with disabilities 
The families of people with disabilities 
The communities in which people with disabilities live 
The specific/diverse needs of persons with disabilities 


9 

Does the planning, design, implementation and evaluation of rehabilitation programmes involve:

 Medical personnel

 Families of persons with disabilities

 Schools, educational institutions and teaching staff

 Communities of persons with disabilities 

76 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Among the first seven actions, passing legislations to ensure the right to rehabilitation 
scored the lowest by both governments and disabled persons organizations. The percentage 
of disabled persons organizations reporting the existence of legislations was slightly higher 
than governments at 53% and 50% respectively. 

Eighty-five percent (85%) of government and 60% of disabled persons organizations 
reported the accessibility of rehabilitation services to persons with disabilities. 

Actions on training personnel were reported to exist by 85% of government while 60% of 
disabled persons organizations said that they had been implemented. Fifty percent (50%) to 
60% of all disabled persons organizations reported the existence of policies, financial 
allocations, training personnel, access to rehabilitation, and consulting disabled persons 
organizations. While more than 60% of governments that responded reported the existence 
of policies, programmes and consultation with disabled persons organizations. 

Figure 3.5 
Rule 3 
What actions has your government taken to provide rehabilitation services for 
PWD? 


PoliciesLegislationFinanceTrainingPersonnelRehab accessConsulting DPOs 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Organizations of persons with disabilities 

77 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


When asked about the inclusiveness of rehabilitation services more governments than 
disabled persons organizations reported that they are inclusive of all types of disability (78% 
government; 57% disabled persons organizations). 

With regard to the targets and coverage of rehabilitation services, governments' and 
disabled persons organizations' responses were as follows: rehabilitation for children 89% 
versus 75%; for women 85% versus 68%; for low income populations 85% versus 68%. On 
whether rehabilitation services cover all geographic locations, the responses were 75% 
versus 47%; all social classes & ethnic groups 85% versus 83%. 

On the inclusion of families of persons with disabilities in rehabilitation the responses were 
75% versus 39%; and on community inclusion 57% versus 21%. 

Whether rehabilitation covered all needs of persons with disabilities the responses were 
60% of governments versus 43% of disabled persons organizations saying that they did. 

Figure 3.6 
Rule 3 
In your country, are rehabilitation services inclusive of the following: 


Type Of DisabilityChildLow IncomeGeographicalLocationsClasses/EthincsNeeds 
Women 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Community 
Family 
DPO 
78 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the question of the involvement of other sectors of society in rehabilitation of persons 
with disabilities, responses ranged between 93% and 60% for governments, and for 
disabled persons organizations from 57% to 21%. The details are as follows: 

On the involvement of the medical establishment 93% of government respondents said they 
do, as opposed to 57% of disabled persons organizations. With regard to involvement of the 
families of persons with disabilities 82% of governments versus 36% of disabled persons 
organizations said they are involved. While schools and educational institutions' involvement 
elicited a 79% response from governments and 46% from disabled persons organizations. 


Regarding involvement by the community, and involvement by organizations of persons 
with disabilities, governments responded with at 61% versus 21%, and 68% versus 57%, 
respectively. 

Figure 3.7 
Rule 3 
In your country, does the planning, design, implementation and evaluation of 
rehabilitation programmes involve the following: 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
MedicalFamilies of PWDSchools/InstitutionCommunityDPOsPrograms disc. 
79 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 4. Support services 

States should ensure the development and supply of support services, including 
assistive devices for persons with disabilities, to assist them to increase their level 
of independence in their daily living and to exercise their rights. 

The Survey questions encompassed all 14 actions required for full implementation of the rule 
from developing and supplying assistive devices to persons with disabilities (6 actions)10 to 
the inclusiveness of the services (8 actions)11 . 

The number of governments that reported having policies, legislations and programmes for 
supplying assistive devices was considerably low considering the importance of such services 
for persons with disabilities, at around 60%. While 40% of the disabled persons organizations 
responded that policies and legislations exist, and only 28% responded that programmes do 
exist. 

10 

Adopting policies 
Passing Legislations 
Instituting programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Supplying assistive devices 
Consulting disabled persons organizations 


11 

Children with disabilities 
Women with disabilities 
Low-income, working class persons with disabilities Persons with disabilities in all geographic locations 
All socio-economic classes 
All ethnic groups 
All religious groups 
All types of disabilities 

80 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.8 
Rule 4 
What actions has your government taken to develop and supply assistive 
devices for PWD? 


PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceSupply IndividualConsulting DPOs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
With regard to supplying assistive devices, more governments reported the existence of 
actions at 89%, while on financial allocations 75%. This may mean that actions take place 
regardless of the institutional framework. 

The reported answers indicate that actions are not necessarily dependent on legislations. 
According to these responses, more actions are implemented than legislated for. 

On consulting with disabled persons organizations 71% of governments responded that they 
do, while only 46% of disabled persons organizations said they play a consultative role on 
this issue. With regard to supplying devices to individuals and financial allocations 57% and 
54% of disabled persons organizations said that these actions are implemented. 

With regard to the inclusiveness of services, on all eight actions, governments recorded 
much higher responses than disabled persons organizations. The highest, at over 80% of 
governments' responses was on the supply of devices to low income persons with disabilities 
and children with disabilities; and over 70% of governments reported the existence of 
services to women and all types of disabilities. Geographic region, classes, ethnic groups, 
religious groups received an overall 60% positive response by governments. 

81 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


With the exception of all types of disabilities, on which 54% of disabled persons organizations 
responded to the existence of this action, less than 50% of disabled persons organizations 
responded to the existence of services to all other target groups. 

Rule 5. Accessibility 

States should recognize the overall importance of accessibility in the process of 
the equalization of opportunities in all spheres of society. For persons with disabilities 
of any kind, States should (a) introduce programmes of action to make the 
physical environment accessible; and (b) undertake measures to provide access 
to information and communication. 

Thirty-nine actions in all were derived from Rule 5 on Accessibility. Nine (9) represent 
political, structural and social responses to the issues of accessibility, while five pertain to 
codes and standards of accessibility for the physical environment and four pertain to 
information on accessibility, and 9 actions have to do with the provision of accessible 
information. An additional five actions are concerned with the accessibility of information to 
all types of disabilities; and five with the specificity of information. The remaining four 
actions have to do with means of monitoring the or access to accessibility of the physical 
environment and information. 

On political, structural and social responses to the physical accessibility of the environment 
for persons with disabilities, the number of governments that reported having taken these 
actions ranges from 43% to 71%, while disabled persons organizations' responses ranged 
from 21% to 50%. 

The disabled persons organizations' responses were lower than those of governments, with 
the widest gap being in raising awareness about accessibility; implementing accessibility 
programmes; and consulting with disabled persons organizations. On these three actions 
over 68% of governments responded that actions exist, while less than 50% of the disabled 
persons organizations said that they do. 

82 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.9 
Rule 5 
In your country, does the government provide the support which PWD need 
with regard to assistive technology, personal assistance, interpreter services, 
etc. to do the following: 


PoliciesLegislationFinanceTrain engineersImplementaccess programConsulting DPOs 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Raising awareness 
The percentage of governments that stated they have policies was 68% versus 46% for 
disabled persons organizations; on legislations 60% versus 50%; on programmes 50% 
versus 28%; on financial allocations 50% versus 36%; on training engineers 43% versus 
21%; on raising awareness 71% versus 39%; and on consulting disabled persons organizations 
71% versus 39%. 

On the accessibility of the physical environment, the discrepancy between governments and 
disabled persons organizations' responses on the five actions relating to the physical 
environment was relatively narrow. Fifty percent (50%) of governments and disabled 
persons organizations reported accessibility of the outdoor environment; 39% of governments 
versus a slightly higher percentage of disabled persons organizations (43%) reported 
accessibility of transportation by land, sea, etc. 

83 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.10 
Rule 5 
What actions has your government taken to make the physical environment 
accessible to all PWD? 


Schools/HospitalsPublic buildingsOutdoor environmentLand, Sea transportHousing 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Accessibility with regard to schools, hospitals, public buildings was at 61% for governments 
versus 50% response from disabled persons organizations, while on housing, responses 
were 46% versus 43%. 

On information regarding accessibility, governments also reported higher, ranging between 
43% to 75%; while disabled persons organizations responding ranged between 25% and 
36%, as follows: Forty-three percent (43%) versus 29% on information on accessibility to 
persons with disabilities; Forty-six percent (46%) versus 25% on information on accessibility 
to the families of persons with disabilities; Fifty-three percent (53%) versus 36% on 
information on accessibility to representatives of persons with disabilities; and Seventy-five 
percent (75%) versus 36% on information about accessibility available to society at large. 

84 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.11 
Rule 5 


Does government provide information regarding accessibility to the following: 

PWDsFamilies of PWDReps of PWDSociety 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
With regard to the accessibility of information there are eight (8) actions in all. On all eight a 
higher percentage of governments reported the existence of these actions, with the highest 
reporting at 61% on both policies and consulting with organizations of persons with disabilities. 


On legislation, finance and programmes 54% of governments reported the existence of such 
actions. 

On raising awareness 57% of governments reported the existence of actions, while on both 
training of personnel and implementation of programmes they reported 50% and 46% 
respectively. 

On the other hand, on playing a consulting role, disabled persons organizations reported the 
closest to governments at 50%. The lowest reporting by disabled persons organizations 
were on financial allocation and awareness raising at 21%, followed by policies, legislations, 
training of personnel, and implementation of programmes all reporting at or around the 30% 
mark. 

85 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.12 
Rule 5 
What actions has your government taken to ensure accessibility of information 
to PWD? 


PoliciesLegislationFinanceTrainingImplement programConsulting DPOs 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Raising awareness 
In relation to accessibility of information to all types of disabilities, governments recorded a 
higher percentage than disabled persons organizations, with the highest being 71% for 
accessibility for blind persons, followed by 68% for deaf and hard of hearing persons, 53% 
for deafblind persons, and with the lowest reporting at 39% for psychosocial disabilities. 

The narrowest gap between governments and disabled persons organizations was on 
accessible information for deaf and hard of hearing persons, with a 68% response from 
governments and 64% from disabled persons organizations. 

Disabled persons organizations' responses on all other actions ranged between 29% for 
persons with psycho-social disabilities to 46% for blind persons. 

Concerning the accessibility of information and services to persons with disabilities, governments 
and disabled persons organizations were asked to indicate whether the following 
information was available in the following forms: Literature Braille - 78% of governments 
versus 57% of disabled persons organizations responded that it is available; Literature on 
tape - 75% versus 54%; and newspapers and magazines on tape and/or in Braille was 
reported at 36% versus 25%. 

86 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On sign language, the percentage of governments responding to the availability of information 
and services in sign language was much higher than that of disabled persons organizations 
at 71% versus 68%, while both scored similarly (and very low) for the availability of 
Easy Readers for persons with intellectual disabilities at 28% for governments and disabled 
persons organizations. 

Figure 3.13 
Rule 5 
In your country, is information accessible to the following groups of people 
with disabilities: 


BlindDeaf & BlindDeaf or HearingDevelop DisabilitiesPsycho Social 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
When asked about monitoring the accessibility of the environment and information for 
persons with disabilities, four actions for monitoring were included: 

-The existence of an ombudsman 
-Monitoring via government bodies 
-Monitoring through experts from disabled persons organizations 
-Monitoring through arbitration and conciliation bodies 

Generally, more governments reported the existence of monitoring than did disabled 
persons organizations, as follows: 64% versus 27% reported the existence of government 
bodies, 32% versus 21% of disabled persons organizations said that experts on disability 
are used in monitoring; 29% versus 18% said that there is an ombudsman; and only 18% of 
government responded that there are arbitration and conciliation bodies while only 7% of 
disabled persons organizations reported their existence. 

87 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.14 
Rule 5 
In your country, are any of the following services available to PWD? 


BrailleTapeNews on tapeSign interpreterEasy reader 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Figure 3.15 
Rule 5 
What actions does your government take to monitor the accessibility of the 
environment and of information for PWD? 


OmbudsmanGov. bodiesExpertsArbitration/
Conciliation 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
88 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 6. Education 

States should recognize the principle of equal primary, secondary and tertiary 
educational opportunities for children, youth and adults with disabilities, in 
integrated settings. They should ensure that the education of persons with disabilities 
is an integral part of the educational system. 

Rule 6 identified 24 actions necessary for achieving quality education for persons with 
disabilities in integrated settings with the aim of equalizing educational opportunities for 
persons with disabilities. Eight (8) actions12 that ensure education in integrated settings for 
persons with disabilities were identified; while seven13 (7) 

asked about the availability of education to various groups; five (5) related to the adequacy 
of education to persons with disabilities; and the remaining four (4) inquired about the 
involvement of various stakeholders in the process of educating persons with disabilities. 

Generally, the percentage of governments responding to the existence of actions on education 
for persons with disabilities was much higher than that of disabled persons organizations. 


12 Adopting policies 

Passing legislation 

Adopting programmes 

Allocating financial resources 

Modifying and adapting schools to the needs of children with disabilities 

Training teachers & school administrators 

Providing accessible schools, classrooms & educational materials 

Involving organizations of persons with disabilities in planning & implementing 

13 Children with disabilities 

Women with disabilities 

Low-income & working class persons with disabilities 

All ethnic groups 

All religious groups 

All communities & geographic areas 

All types of disabilities 

89 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.16 
Rule 6 
What actions has your government taken to ensure the education of PWD in 
integrated settings? 


PoliciesLegislationFinanceModifying SchoolProviding accessInvolving PWD 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Training 
More than 70% of governments reported having implemented all eight (8) actions; and more 
than 40% of disabled persons organizations reported that all eight (8) actions were taken. 

The percentage of governments reporting that percentages on all actions implemented 
ranged between 90% on programmes and 75% on legislations and modifying schools; while 
the disabled persons organizations' responses ranged between 71% on training of teachers 
and 46% on the allocation of finances. 

The highest discrepancy was on the allocation of finances where 82% of governments stated 
that they had allocated resources for education in integrated settings, while 46% of disabled 
persons organizations reported those actions having been implemented. 

The narrowest gap was on modifying schools to accommodate persons with disabilities, 
where 75% of governments said they had done so and 64% of disabled persons organizations 
said that such actions had been implemented. 

Concerning the availability of education to various groups, again governments had a higher 
percentage of positive responses than disabled persons organizations; with the highest being 
on the education of children at 96% and lowest was on education for all disabilities at 68%. 

90 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The difference between disabled persons organizations and governments was at 25% on 
most actions. But the least discrepancy between governments and disabled persons 
organizations was recorded on children with disabilities where at 96% of governments 
responded and 89% of disabled persons organizations. The largest gap was observed with 
regard to disabled persons in all communities, where governments were at 78% and 
disabled persons organizations were at 46% 

Figure 3.17 
Rule 6 
In your country, is education available to the following members of society: 


ChildrenWomenEthnic GroupsReligious GroupsAll Disabilities 
Low Incomes 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PWD in allCommunities 
On availability of education for women with disabilities responses were relatively close, with 
75% of government and 68% of disabled persons organizations saying that education is 
available. With regard to low-income persons with disabilities responses stood at 78% 
versus 54%; on ethnic groups they stood at 75% versus 50%; and on all religious groups 
they reported at 75% versus 50%. 

In relation to educational methods and tools for persons with disabilities , governments 
reported a higher availability but the gap was very narrow. On all five actions more than 68% 
of governments reported the use of all methods to make education accessible and more than 
52% of disabled persons organizations reported the availability of same. 

91 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.18 
Rule 6 
In your country, does the education for PWD include the use of? 


Sign LanguageEduc. in brailleLessons on tapeEduc. MaterialsPrograms forchildren needs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
The highest percentages for both governments and disabled persons organizations were on 
the availability of educational materials in Braille at 89% for governments and 82% for 
disabled persons organizations. 

With regards to the use of sign language interpretation in education, 78% of government 
versus 75% of disabled persons organizations reported the availability. 

As for lessons on tape, responses were 68% for governments versus 53% for disabled 
persons organizations; and 75% versus 60% for availability of educational 

materials and methods suitable for intellectual disabilities; and finally on children whose 
needs cannot be met in integrated settings, 71% of governments reported actions taken to 
meet their needs as opposed to 60% of disabled persons organizations. 

Sign language interpreters 
Educational materials in Braille 
Lessons on tape 
Educational materials & teaching methods appropriate for intellectual disabilities 
Programmes for children whose needs cannot be met in integrated settings 


92 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the question of the involvement of all stakeholders in the education of children with 
disabilities, governments reported higher involvement of organizations of persons with 
disabilities (86%) and higher involvement of the community in general (61%) than did the 
disabled persons organizations that responded to the Survey. 

With regard to the involvement of NGOs that specialize in children's issues both governments 
and disabled persons organizations reported similarly at 71%; while there was only a slight 
difference between the responses of governments and disabled persons organizations on 
involvement of parents at 82% and 78% respectively. 

Figure 3.19 
Rule 6 
Other than educational authorities, are the following groups involved in the 
educational process for children and adults with disabilities? 


ParentsDPOsChildren’s NGOsCommunity 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Parents 
Disabled persons organizations NGOs dealing with 
children 
The community 

93 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 7. Employment 

States should recognize the principle that persons with disabilities must be 
empowered to exercise their human rights, particularly in the field of employment. 
In both rural and urban areas they must have equal opportunities for 
productive and gainful employment in the labour market. 

In order to achieve equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities in employment 
in accordance with Rule 7, thirteen (13) actions need to be implemented. Nine (9) 
of them have to be implemented at the structural level, and the remaining five (5) have to 
do with equality and equal opportunities in employment. 

On the implementation of the first nine actions governments reported higher than 
disabled persons organizations, at times exceeding the 70% mark. On policies governments' 
responses were 71%, and similarly on legislations at 82%, while responses on 
programmes stood at 75%, and on training of persons with disabilities they responded at 
86%. With regard to raising awareness among managers and administrators regarding 
the issues of persons with disabilities, governments were at 75%. 

On the remaining actions government responses ranged between 53% and 64%. The 
responses of disabled persons organizations displayed the same pattern with lower 
responses on each of the actions, ranging between 61% on legislation and 29% on 
accessible transportation to the workplace. Responses for the other actions ranged 
between 39% to 57%. 

Adopting policies 
Passing legislations 
Adopting programmes 
Allocating financial resources Training persons with disabilities 
Modifying & adapting the physical, social & administrative environment 
Raising awareness among managers & administrators 
Accessible transportation & work stations 
Cooperating with disabled persons organizations 

94 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.20 
Rule 7 
What actions has your government taken to encourage the integration of PWD 
into open employment? 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceTraining PWDModifyingenvironmentRaisingawarenessAccessibletransp.
Cooperatingwith DPOs 
When considering equal opportunities to employment for persons with disabilities, again 
governments responded at a higher percentage than disabled persons organizations on the 
implementation of all five actions as follows: on the hiring of persons with disabilities, 
governments responded at 64% versus 21% for disabled persons organizations; on promoting 
persons with disabilities, responses were at 61% versus 29 %. Regarding whether 
persons with disabilities had the right to the same benefits, pay increases and participation in 
employee training programmes as non-disabled employees, governments responded 
affirmatively at 75%, 68% and 60% respectively; while the responses of disabled persons 
organizations on the same issues were at 43%, 29% and 46% respectively. 

95 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.21 
Rule 7 
In your country, do PWD have the same prospects as others with regard to the 
following: 


HiringPromotionsWork benefitsPaymentincreaseParticipation intraining 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Rule 8. Income maintenance and social security 

States are responsible for the provision of social security and income maintenance 
for persons with disabilities. 

In order for persons with disabilities to enjoy equal opportunities and full participation and 
maintain a standard of living that affords them dignity and respect, the governments are 
supposed to implement 16 actions in all to fulfill Rule 8 of the Standard Rules. 

The first six (6) actions have to do with making structural changes in order to provide the 
services necessary while the remaining 10 have to do with the inclusiveness of these 
services to other groups, including families and care givers of persons with disabilities. 

Adopting policies 
Passing legislations 
Adopting programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Providing persons with disabilities with information 
Consulting with disabled persons organizations 


96 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Although the scores for both governments and disabled persons organizations were considerably 
low on these actions, still government responses were higher than those of disabled 
persons organizations. 

On policies, legislations, programmes, the allocation of financial resources and the implementation 
of programmes, governments responded at 50%, 60%, 50% and 64% respectively. 
While on these same actions, disabled persons organizations responded at 25%, 
39%, 14% and 39% respectively. 

On providing persons with disabilities with information on income maintenance and support 
and on consulting with the disabled persons organizations responses were at 64% versus 
36%, and 50% versus 36% respectively. 

Figure 3.22 
Rule 8 
What actions has you're your government taken to ensure the income 
maintenance and support for the People with Disabilities? 


PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceInfo to PWDConsultingDPOs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
On the remaining 10 actions pertaining to the inclusiveness of this service to all types of 
disabilities, all ethnic, religious and economic backgrounds, as well as parents, families and 

Temporary loss of income due to disability 
Disability caused by on-the-job-accidents 
Physical disabilities 
Sensory disabilities 
Intellectual disabilities 
Psychosocial disabilities 
Women 
Families of children 
Caregivers of persons with disabilities Persons with disabilities from all social, economic, religious & national backgrounds 

97 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


caregivers, governments' responses were higher than those of disabled persons organizations 
on the existence and inclusiveness of these services. 


However, with regard to income maintenance and financial support for persons whose 
disability is caused by on-the-job accidents, the responses of disabled persons organizations 
exceeded those of governments at 43% versus 28%. 


Regarding all of the other actions on support and income maintenance, responses for 
governments versus disabled persons organizations were recorded as follows:


 Temporary loss of income at 68% versus 50% 
Physical disability 75% versus 46% 
Sensory disabilities 64% versus 39% 
Intellectual disabilities 71% versus 39% 
Psychosocial disabilities 61% versus 32% 
Women with disabilities 71% versus 43% 
Families of persons with disabilities 68% versus 29% 
Caregivers of persons with disabilities 50% versus 21% 
All persons with disabilities regardless of background and social status 64% versus 39% 


Figure 3.23 
Rule 8 
In your country, does the financial support provided for the PWD include the 
following: 


TemporarilyLost IncomeOn the jobAccidentIntellectualPsyco SocialWomenAll PWD 
PhysicalDisability 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Care Given 
Families 
SensoryDisability 
98 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 9. Family life and personal integrity 

States should promote the full participation of persons with disabilities in family 
life. They should promote their right to personal integrity and ensure that laws do 
not discriminate against persons with disabilities with respect to sexual relationships, 
marriage and parenthood. 

Fourteen (14) actions in all were identified within this rule, the implementation of which 
would guarantee the right of persons with disabilities to a family life and personal integrity 
equally with other persons in society. 

On the first eight (8) actions dealing with structural societal conditions conducive to the 
exercise of family life, both governments and disabled persons organizations reported a low 
percentage of implementation. 

On four (4) of the eight actions, less than 50% of governments responding reported implementation 
relating to policies, legislations, financial allocations, and mechanisms to report 
discrimination. 

With regard to the implementation of programmes government responses stood at the 50% 
mark. 

On the three (3) actions relating to raising awareness both of society at large and persons 
with disabilities themselves, and the establishment of mechanisms to report discrimination, 
government responses were also still low at the 60% or less mark. 

The responses of disabled persons organization on these same eight actions were even 
lower, though consistent with the pattern of responses throughout the Survey. 

Ten percent (10%) of disabled persons organizations responding reported the existence of 
actions pertaining to the allocation of financial resources; 14% for legislation; 18% for both 
programmes and mechanisms for reporting discrimination; 21% for policies. Twenty-five 
percent (25%) reported on the existence of actions aimed at raising awareness among 
persons with disabilities; and 32% on both social awareness and consulting with the organizations 
of persons with disabilities. 

Adopting policies 
Passing legislations 
Adopting Programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Raising social awareness of these rights 
Raising awareness among persons with disabilities of their rights 
Establishing mechanisms for reporting discrimination 
Consulting disabled persons organizations 

99 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.24 
Rule 9 
What actions has your government taken to ensure the full participation of 
PWD in family life, including protecting and promoting their rights and personal 
integrity? 


PoliciesLegislationFinanceSocial awarenessReport DiscrimInvolve PWD 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Awarenessamong PWD 
On actions pertaining to the enjoyment by persons with disabilities of the rights to family 
and personal integrity, the responses revealed a wide, although consistent, gap between the 
reporting of governments and those of disabled persons organizations regarding the 
existence of these actions: 

On the right to full participation in family life (89%); the right to sexual relations (89%); the 
right to marriage (89%); the right to parenthood (89%); and the right to consulting services 
on these matters (89%); i.e. 89% of the governments responding said that actions do exist 
to guarantee those rights. Additionally, 85% of governments said that persons with disabilities 
have the right to privacy. 

Generally, the responses of disabled persons organizations to the existence of these actions 
ranged between 52% for the right to full participation and 32% for the right to receive 
consultation on these issues. 

Looking at the 14 actions pertaining to family life and personal integrity reveals an area in 
need of further examination in order to assess the conditions of persons with disabilities and 
to bridge the gap between the official/government perception of the situation and that of the 
disabled persons organizations with regard to these vital rights. 

100 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.25 
Rule 9 
In your country, do PWD enjoy the right to:


Full participationSexual relationsMarriageParenthoodPrivacyConsultingServices 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Rule 10. Culture 

States will ensure that persons with disabilities are integrated into and can participate 
in cultural activities on an equal basis. 

In order for persons with disabilities to be able to participate in culture and cultural activities 
18 actions need to be taken by governments. Eleven of those actions would ensure full and 
equal participation for persons with disabilities, while the remaining seven (7) have to the 
with the inclusive nature of this participation. 

The position of governments and disabled persons organizations on these actions reveals 
wide variation. In some cases, the government perspective shows as much as a three-fold 
difference from that of disabled persons organization. One illustration of this point is on 

Adopting policies 
Passing legislations 
Adopting programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Raising social Awareness 
Raising awareness among persons with disabilities 
Providing accessible venues for participation 
Providing accessible venues for contribution 
Providing accessible information on cultural activities 
Making performances accessible 
Involving disabled persons organizations 


101 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


policies where 64% of governments said that policies exist while only 21% of disabled 
persons organizations said that they do; similarly on programmes 57% of governments said 
that there are programmes while only 18% of disabled persons organizations acknowledged 
their existence. On all other actions, a consistent discrepancy was observed. 

Figure 3.26 
Rule 10 
What actions has your government taken to ensure that PWD are integrated 
into and can participate in cultural activities on equal basis? 


PoliciesLegislationFinanceContributionsInvolving DPOs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Providingvenues 
ProgramsSocial awarenessAccessible info 
Awarenessamong PWDMaking cultureaccessible 
On the issue of the inclusiveness of the right to equal participation in cultural activities, 
governments reported higher implementation than disabled persons organizations. The 
highest reporting by governments was on the actions relating to the participation of children 
with disabilities in cultural activities and events; and the lowest was on actions to ensure the 
participation of persons with disabilities from all ethnic and religious backgrounds and in all 
communities. The responses on ethnic & religious backgrounds did not exceed 35% and for 
the latter were at 25%. Similarly for the rest of the target groups, government responses did 
not exceed the 60% mark, while the percentage of implementation reported by disabled 
persons organizations did not exceed 50%, as follows: on children 46%; women 39%; low-
income persons with disabilities 39%; all ethic groups 32%; all religions 32%; all communities 
25%; all persons with disabilities 39%. 

Children with disabilities 
Women with disabilities 
Low-income, working class, poor persons with disabilities All ethnic groups 
All religious groups 
All communities 
All types of disabilities 


102 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.27 
Rule 10 


In your country, do the following PWD participate equally in cultural activities: 

ChildrenWomenDP All ethnicsDP All religiousAll Disabilities 
Low income 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
DP AllCommunities 
Rule 11. Recreation and sports 

States will take measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have equal 
opportunities for recreation and sports. 

In all, 15 actions need to be taken in order to fully implement rule 11 and provide for full and 
equal participation in recreation and sports for persons with disabilities. Ten (10) of those 
actions are needed in order to provide the optimum conditions for the participation of 
persons with disabilities; while the remaining five (5) have to do with ensuring equal participation 
at all levels. 

Adopting policies 
Passing legislations 
Adopting programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Raising social awareness 
Raising awareness among persons with disabilities 
Accessible venues for participation 
Accessible information 
Accessible for all types of disabilities 
Involving disabled persons organizations 

103 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


With regard to all ten actions government reporting was higher and the discrepancy 
between governments and disabled persons organizations was consistent. The highest 
responses for governments was on the actions to involve disabled persons organizations at 
78% while on legislations relating to the participation of persons with disabilities in sports 
and recreational activities, governments reported lowest at 39%. 

By the same token the highest response among disabled persons organizations on involving 
the organizations of persons with disabilities stood at 50% and the lowest was on legislation 
at 18%. 

The largest discrepancy was observed in the area of programmes, with 68% for governments 
versus 25% for disabled persons organizations; and in awareness raising among 
persons with disabilities at 64% versus 21%. 

Other actions ranged from 50% on allocation of financial resources to 25% on policies from 
the point of view of disabled persons organization. 

Figure 3.28 
Rule 11 
What actions has your government taken to ensure that the PWD have the 
opportunity to equally participate in sports and recreational activities? 


PoliciesLegislationRaising socialawarenessAwarenessamong PWDVenues toparticipateInvolving DPOs 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Making sportsaccessible 
Accessible info 
Financialresources 
104 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the issue of participation in sports and recreational activities at all levels governments 
and disabled persons organizations registered relatively closer views. On participation in 
amateur athletics; and competing at the international level, 57% and 68% of governments 
and 53% and 64% of disabled persons organizations reported that actions have been taken 
to ensure those rights, respectively. 

With regard to participation at the community level, governments and disabled persons 
organizations reported 64% versus 50%; and on participation at the national level 71% 
versus 57% responded that actions had been implemented to guarantee those rights. 

Both governments and disabled persons organizations reported lower implementation on 
the issue of persons with disabilities competing as professional athletes, with 36% and 21% 
respectively. 

Figure 3.29 
Rule 11 
In your country, do PWD equally participate in sports and recreational activities 
at the following levels: 


Community LevelNational LevelInter. LevelAmateurAthletesPro. Athletes 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
105 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Rule 12. Religion 

States will encourage measures for equal participation by persons with disabilities 
in the religious life of their communities. 

With regard to enabling persons with disabilities to participate equally in the religious life of 
their communities, governments are required to apply 10 actions in all starting with formulating 
policies to the involvement of disabled persons organizations. 

Both governments and disabled persons organizations reported very low percentages with 
regard to the implementation of actions necessary to ensure the participation of persons 
with disabilities in religious activities. 

At the high end 46% of governments and 25% of disabled persons organizations reported 
the existence of policies and legislations, respectively, to ensure the participation of persons 
with disabilities. The discrepancy between the responses of governments and disabled 
persons organizations remained consistent at an average of 20%. 

Adopting policies Passing Legislations 
Adopting programmes 
Allocating financial resources 
Raising social awareness 
Raising awareness among persons with disabilities 
Accessible venues for participation 
Accessible information on events & services Accessibility to all types of disabilities 

106 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.30 
Rule 12 
What actions has your government taken to encourage equal participation by 
PWD in the religious life of their communities? 


PoliciesLegislationSocial awarenessAwarenessamong PWDInvolving DPOs 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Making activitiesaccessible 
Accessible info 
FinancialAccessible venues 
The lowest percentage of responses from governments was 28% for raising awareness 
among persons with disabilities; and the lowest from disabled persons organizations was 
14% on the allocation of financial resources. 

Rule 13. Information and research 

States assume the ultimate responsibility for the collection and dissemination of 
information on the living conditions of persons with disabilities and promote 
comprehensive research on all aspects, including obstacles that affect the lives of 
persons with disabilities.

 The importance of this rule lies in the fact that information and statistical data are essential 
to the formulation of policies and legislations based on correct and accurate information 
about disability, the numbers of persons with disabilities, the types, distribution and causes. 


Twenty-four (24) actions in all are required in order to effectively implement this rule. 
Nine (9) actions pertain to the procedures necessary to collect and disseminate information, 
while 16 actions relate to the areas that should be covered by the information and statistical 
data. 


107 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On the first five (5) actions, covering policies, legislations, programmes, financial allocations, 
and social awareness, neither governments' nor the disabled persons organizations' 
responses exceeded 50%, with legislations receiving the lowest number of responses from 
both at 28% versus 21% respectively. 

Both governments and disabled persons organizations responses were equal for the action 
relating to allocation of financial resources; and the largest discrepancy was observed on 
policies at 50% versus 25% 
. 
With regard to the actions relating to statistics and the involvement of disabled persons 
organizations much higher reporting by governments was observed than for the other 
actions, at 78% and 64% respectively. While disabled persons organizations responses to 
the same actions were at 64% and 54% respectively. 

On the last two actions in this set dealing with dissemination of information and updating 
statistical information, 57% of governments reported the existence of both those actions, 
while 46% of disabled persons organizations reported on the existence of the former and 
36% the existence of the latter. 

Prevalence & incidence 
Types of disabilities 
Disaggregate data 
Needs Services & programmes 
Availability, coverage & scope of services 
Living conditions 
Educational situation 
Workplace conditions 
Employment opportunities 
Expenditure incurred by disability 
Impact of social policies on persons with disabilities Type of research available & parties conducting it 
Organizations: programmes, services, coverage, location 
Disability issues: local, national, regional, international, events, studies 

108 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.31 
Rule 13 
What actions has your government taken to collect and disseminate 
information and promote research on all issues affecting the lives of PWD? 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
PoliciesLegislationProgramsFinanceSocialawarenessStatisticsInvolving DPOsDisseminatingstatisticsUpdatingstatistics 
With regard to the second set of actions relating to coverage of the information, both 
governments and disabled persons organizations reported the existence of information on 
all 15 of the areas indicated in the Survey, however, with considerable variance. 

On the area of prevalence and incidence of disability, disabled persons organizations 
recorded a higher percentage than governments at 61% and 57% respectively. While for the 
type of research available 18% of both governments and disabled persons organizations 
reported that such information is available. 

In most other areas the discrepancy between the responses of governments and disabled 
persons organizations ranged between 15% and 30%. 

109 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.32 
Rule 13 
In your country, does the statistical information cover the following: 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Prevalence incidenceDisaggregate dataServices & ProgramsAvailable coverageEmp;oy. Oppor.
Expenditures entailedTypes of research 
TypesNeeds of PWDLiving conditionCondition of workplaceImpact of social policies 
Educational situationDPOsLocal national issues 
Rule 16. Economic policies 

States have the financial responsibility for national programmes and measures to 
create equal opportunities for persons with disabilities. 

Five (5) actions were identified in relation to this rule dealing with adopting policies, adopting 
legislations, supporting projects for persons with disabilities, establishing a disability fund, 
and finally involving disabled persons organizations. 

On the average governments reported higher than disabled persons organizations on all five 
actions with roughly the same level of discrepancy between them. 

On policies and legislations 43% of governments versus 25% of disabled persons organizations 
reported that they exist; on support for projects responses were 68% versus 37%; on 
establishing a disability fund 43% versus 36%, and on involving disabled persons organizations 
they responded at 61% versus 29%. 

110 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.33 
Rule 16 
What economic policies has your government undertaken to create equal 
opportunities for PWD? 


PoliciesLegislationSupport to projectsDisability FundInvolving PWD 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Economic policies are planning issues that require the involvement of experts on disability 
issues, and therefore the involvement of disabled persons organizations and persons with 
disabilities. It is obvious from the responses that many governments believe that they 
involve disabled persons organizations in economic policies much more than persons with 
disabilities themselves believe it. This may have to do with the definition of involvement or 
the extent to which they are involved. 

Rule 17. Coordination of work 

States are responsible for the establishment and strengthening of national coordinating 
committees, or similar bodies, to serve as a national focal point on disability 
matters. 

Ten (10) actions were identified in two sets of five actions each. The first having to do with 
strengthening and supporting coordination of work, and the second set with the nature and 
representation of the coordinating bodies. 

The first set encompasses the following actions, and on which responses were as follows: 

111 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The establishment of permanent coordination committees 79% governments as opposed to 
43% disabled persons organizations; the provision of a legal mandate (54% as opposed to 
29%); the allocation of financial resources (50% versus 39%); involving disabled persons 
organizations in the coordination of work (75% versus 54%), and finally, ensuring a balanced 
representation of disabilities and gender (57% versus 32%) 

The expectation would be that there would be more conformity in the responses between 
governments and disabled persons organizations on these issues, since they involve actions 
that can be physically manifested through the existence of committees and formal structures. 
However, the results indicate that there are differing perceptions of these five issues. 

Figure 3.34 
Rule 17 
What actions has your government taken to establish and strengthen national 
coordinating bodies on disability? 


PermanentCommitteeLegal mandateAllocatingresourcesInvolving PWDBalancedrepresentative 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
With regard to the nature and makeup of the national committees or bodies, the responses of 
both governments and disabled persons organizations were reported as follows: 

On whether the committees, councils or bodies are representative of persons with 
disabilities, 85% of governments said they are while only 50% of disabled persons organizations 
agreed. 

112 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On whether these bodies have a legal or political status the responses were at 68% versus 
32%; on the representation of all types of disabilities, the responses were 60% versus 25%; 
while with regard to gender representation the gap between governments and disabled 
persons organizations was much wider at 54% versus 18%; and equally wide was the gap in 
responses with regard to the allocation of adequate financial resources at 46% and 14%. 

Figure 3.35 
Rule 17 
In your country, are there national committees (or similar bodies) on disability 
with the following: 


Represent PWDLegal & PoliticalType of DisabilitiesBalanced gender Rep.
Adequate resources 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Rule 18. Organizations of persons with disabilities 

States should recognize the right of the organizations of persons with disabilities 
to represent persons with disabilities at national, regional and local levels. States 
should also recognize the advisory role of organizations of persons with disabilities 
in decision-making on disability matters. 

Of the 14 actions identified in Rule 18 on the organizations of persons with disabilities, eight 

(8) are structural and six (6) pertain to the role of disabled persons organizations. 
On structural actions governments reported higher on all 8 actions than the disabled persons 
organizations and the discrepancy between them ranged between 40% on the advisory 
capacity of the disabled persons organizations to 10% on the representational status of the 
disabled persons organizations. 

113 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.36 
Rule 18 
What actions has your government taken to ensure and encourage the 
formation and participation of organizations to represent PWD at national, 
regional and local levels? 


PoliciesLegislationAdminFinancial resourcesCooperate w/
DPOsGranting statistics 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Advisory capacity 
On other actions governments and disabled persons organizations responded as follows: 

With regard to advising on policies 57% versus 32%; on identifying needs and priorities, 
53% as opposed to 32%; on participation of disabled persons organizations in planning 79% 
of governments said they did while only 36% of disabled persons organizations agreed; the 
same was reported on the participation of disabled persons organizations in the implementation 
of programmes, with again 79% of governments saying that they did and only 39% of 
disabled persons organizations agreeing. Disabled persons organizations responding on 
their participation in monitoring was at 39% whereas 68% governments said that they did. 
Identifying needs and priorities, and public awareness garnered the narrowest gap between 
the responses of governments and disabled persons organizations at 78% versus 71% and 
78% versus 64% respectively. 

114 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.37 
Rule 18 
In your country, what role do organizations of PWD play with regard to the 
following: 


Advisory PoliciesIdentify needs& priorityParticipate inplaningPublicawareness 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Participate inimplementingParticipate inMonitoring 
Rule 19. Personnel training 

States are responsible for ensuring the adequate training of personnel, at all 
levels, involved in the planning and provision of programmes and services concerning 
persons with disabilities. 

The first seven (7) of the 10 actions on the training of personnel to work with persons with 
disabilities have to do with creating the conditions for adequate training of personnel at all 
levels. 

Both governments and disabled persons organizations reported low on existence of actions 
for the implementation of this rule. However, governments responded relatively higher than 
disabled persons organizations; and the discrepancy between their responses was relatively 
wide in some cases. 

On legislations, for example, only 29% of governments responded affirmatively; otherwise 
the responses of governments ranged between 50% and 64%. 

Only 14% of disabled persons organizations agreed on the existence of policies, and 18% on 
the existence of legislations; 36% on programmes; 29% on professional standards; 39% on 
the allocation of financial resources; 14% on capacity building; 32% on the involvement of 
disabled persons organizations. 

115 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.38 
Rule 19 
What actions has your government taken to ensure adequate training of 
personnel at all level involved in the planning and provision of programmes and 
services to PWD? 


PoliciesLegislationPro. standardsFinancial resourcesInvolving DPOs 
Programs 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Building capacity 
On the remaining 3 actions questioning the quality of training of personnel, 89% of governments 
stated that it exists as opposed to 68% of disabled persons organizations; 43% of 
governments acknowledged the involvement of disabled persons organizations in training as 
opposed to 39%; 71% of governments said that persons with disabilities are used as 
resources compared with 53% of disabled persons organizations who agreed. 

116 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.39 
Rule 19 
In your country are any of the following actions implemented? 


TrainingInvolving DPOsin trainingUse PWD asresource 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Rule 20. National monitoring and evaluation of disability programmes in the 
implementation of the Rules 

States are responsible for the continuous monitoring and evaluation of the implementation 
of national programmes and services concerning the equalization of 
opportunities for persons with disabilities. 

Twenty-three (23) actions were derived from the Rule to rate the existence of national 
monitoring and evaluation for the programmes and services necessary to provide equalization 
of opportunities for persons with disabilities. 


On the following four of the first seven (7) actions governments reported higher implementation 
of the required actions than disabled persons organizations : 
Existence of a formal definition of disability, 68% versus 43% 
Existence of specialized monitoring bodies, 40% versus 32% 
Collecting census data 61% as opposed to 40%; Conducting sample survey 64% versus 
36% 


117 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


With regard to the existence of a national registrar for persons with disabilities, organizations 
reported higher than governments at 36% and 25% respectively. 

The percentages were back to the predictable level for both governments and disabled 
persons organizations with the actions concerning using public records from services 
providers, (Such as ministries, hospitals, educational institutions, etc.) at 57% versus 39%. 
On using information collected by persons with disabilities responses were at 50% versus 
46%. It is interesting to note, however that on all seven actions the responses of both 
governments and disabled persons organizations did not exceed 68%. 

Figure 3.40 
Rule 20 
What actions has your government taken to ensure monitoring and evaluation 
of the implementation of national programmes and services concerning the 
equalization of opportunities for PWD? 


FormalDefinitionSpecializedmonitoringNational regUsing records 
Collectingcensus/data 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Using info from PWD 
Conductingsample survey 
The second set of actions is related to the coverage of monitoring and evaluation 
programmes. The data collected through this Survey shows that the coverage of issues 
related to monitoring and evaluation is considerably low on the areas, issues and dimensions 
of disability in all the responding countries. 

Yet even within this range of coverage, governments still reported higher coverage than 
disabled persons organizations. The discrepancy between governments and disabled 
persons organizations is consistent with the exception of services provided for organizations 

118 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


of persons with disabilities in which governments reported more than 4 folds the percentage 
of disabled persons organizations' responses at 44% versus 10%. 

With regard to the remaining actions and areas of coverage, the responses were as follows: 

For size and scope of disability 57% versus 46%; on types of disabilities 64% versus 46%; 
on age distribution 68% versus 43%; with regard to gender and geographic distribution they 
reported at 60% versus 39%, and 64% versus 46%, respectively. 

With regard to the organizations of persons with disabilities 40% of governments versus 
32% of disabled persons organizations responded that they are covered, including their 
numbers, size, type, scope and activities. On the programmes for persons with disabilities 
35% of governments versus 28% of disabled persons organizations said that coverage 
includes their nature, numbers, capacity, scope, activities, and effectiveness. 

With regard to coverage of monitoring and evaluation of the services-providing organizations 
and services-providing personnel, 43% and 28% of governments responded that they 
are covered, while 10% and 14% of disabled persons organizations reported that they are 
covered. 

Figure 3.41 
Rule 20 
Does monitoring and evaluation cover the following: 


100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Size scopeTypesAge distributionGenderdistributionOrg. of PWDPrograms of PWDServicesprovision Orgs.
Servicesprovisionpersonnel 
Geographydistribution 
119 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


On whether the information gathered from the monitoring and evaluation is put to use in 
policy making; in the adaptation and improvement of services; the revision and restructuring 
of programmes; dissemination to the public; awareness raising programmes; in annual 
and periodic development reports; or in research on disability, the disabled persons organizations 
responding affirmatively to all seven actions came to half the percentage of governments. 


Figure 3.42 
Rule 20 
Is information from monitoring and evaluation used in: 


Policy MakingAdaption &
improvementAwarenessraising programAnnual &
periodic reports 
Revision ofprograms 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Research 
Public admin 
Rule 21. Technical and economic cooperation 

States, both industrialized and developing, have the responsibility to cooperate in 
and take measures for the improvement of the living conditions of persons with 
disabilities in developing countries. 

Cooperation at the international or regional levels whether technical or economic in nature, 
aims at creating a shared universal culture in which people's basic needs are met and their 
rights are protected. Giving and receiving aid, assistance, sharing and exchanging information 
and expertise are some of the actions central to this. 

Twenty-eight (28) actions in all were identified in relation to this rule. 

On all of them over 50% of governments responded to having taken action. The highest was 
82% on cooperation on regional initiatives such as Disability Decades, Declarations, allocation 
of awareness raising days; and the lowest rate of responses at 57% was on being party 
to bi-lateral and multi-lateral agreements. 

120 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Figure 3.43 
Rule 21 
What measures has your government taken to ensure the improvement of the 
living conditions of persons with disability? 


Signing treatiesBeing part toagreementProviding/
receivingtechnicalExchange InfoParticipate inprojectsRegionalInitiatives 
Providing Aids 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Disseminate/
receivingtechnical 
For all other actions responses ranged between 64% and 71% for governments. 
By the same token, the highest responses for disabled persons organizations was on providing 
and receiving technical assistance at 60%; on providing and receiving financial aid at 
57%. Most disabled persons organizations responses ranged between 39% and 57%. 


The widest discrepancy between government and disabled persons organizations responses 
was on taking part in regional initiatives at 84% versus 42%. 


The percentage of governments responding to having implemented on the next set of 
actions was as follows: signing international treatise and conventions 78%; being party to 
bilateral and multi-lateral agreements 57%; providing and receiving financial aid 68%; 
providing and receiving technical assistance 71%; exchanging information and expertise 
71%; disseminating and receiving technical know-how and equipment 64%. 


If we consider that the attention paid by governments to the issues, needs and rights of 
immigrant and refugee population with disabilities represents the human face of international 
cooperation and is a manifestation of international responsibility, then the reported 
performance of governments on these actions does not make for a very positive picture. 


Only 53% of governments responded having taken any action on three of those issues: 
policies, making services accessible to immigrant and refugees with disabilities; and making 
education accessible to immigrants and refugees with disabilities. While for the rest of the 
actions government responses did not exceed 40% and were as low as 28%. 


121 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


The disabled persons organizations' responses vary considerably from the governments', 
and reaching as much as five fold on many actions. These responses were as follows: 10% 
for policies; 14% for all programmes; supporting families; adequate housing; allocating 
resources; and representation by disabled persons organizations; and 21% for access to 
services; 18% for education; 7% for employment; 18% for protecting segments of population. 


Figure 3.46 
Rule 21 
In your country, what measures has your government taken to improve the life 
conditions of immigrants and refugees with disabilities? 


PoliciesProgramsDPOsEducationAllocatingresources 
Supportingfamilies 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 
0 
Protectingvulnerablesegments 
Adequatehousing 
Access toservicesEmployment 
None of the disabled persons organizations' responses exceeded the 25% mark, with the 
lowest being on employment at 7%. 

Tailoring services to their needs 
Supporting families of members with disabilities Ensuring access to services 
Ensuring disabled persons organizations represent them 
Ensuring employment 
Ensuring housing 
Protecting vulnerable segments (children, women, elderly with disabilities) 
Allocating financial resources 


122 


CHAPTER FOUR 


Comments and Remarks 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Comments by respondents (Governments & Disabled persons 
organizations) 

Respondents were encouraged to share their comments whether on the issues and rights of 
persons with disabilities in their countries, the performance of governments with regard to 
implementation or on the Survey itself. A space was provided for that purpose on the last 
page of the Survey and they were encouraged to add their comments on a separate sheet of 
paper as well. 

Below is a summary of the comments received, classified according to the issues raised and 
specifying the responding country. 

Issues raised Comments Country/ Region 
Policies/ 
National Policies 
No policies on disability/ policies 
not implemented 
Policies being developed / 
Awareness of the need to 
develop policies 
Improving policies 
D.R Congo, Burundi, Samoa, Bangladesh 
Algeria, Swaziland, Guatemala, Ethiopia 
Sierra Leone, Ghana, 
Gambia, Eretria, Trinidad & Tobago Belize 
New Zealand, Sudan, Ireland, Netherlands 
Legislations Not a 
Available 
vailable Nigeria Samoa Azerbaijan 
Tunisia, Lebanon, Algeria, 
Dominica, Sudan, Ireland, Portugal, 
Switzerland, Poland, Netherlands, Czech 
Republic, Malawi 
Ratification of UN 
human rights 
treaties 
Not implemented, or not fully 
implemented 
South Africa, El Salvador, Ethiopia 
Integration Still a challenge 
Integration drafted into legislation 
/ not implemented 
Integration implemented 
South Africa 
D.R. Congo 
Cambodia, Poland, Gambia, Namibia, 
Romania 
Funding/Resources Funding available 
Inadequate funding 
South Africa, UAE, Sweden, Ireland 
Gambia, Cameroon, Eritrea, Belize 
No government funding 
No funding 
Gambia, Tanzania, Malawi 
Burundi, Samoa, Guatemala, Morocco, 
Lebanon, Netherlands, Dominica, Comoros, 
Sudan, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Zimbabwe, 
Eritrea, Belize 

125 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Accessibility Accessible 
Not full accessibility 
Poland, Netherlands, UAE 
Gambia, Malawi, Papua New Guinea, 
Australia, Lebanon, Portugal, Cambodia, 
Bangladesh, Namibia, Ethiopia, Belize 
Awareness of 
Standard Rules 
No awareness by governments 
Awareness but no implementation 
Implemented 
Working on implementation 
Burundi, Papua New Guinea 
Tanzania, New Zealand, Ghana, Nepal, El 
Salvador, Bangladesh, Dominica, Croatia, 
Malawi, Zimbabwe 
Russian Federation, Ireland, Czech Republic, 
Rwanda, Eritrea 
Belize 
Employment No employment 
Employment available 
Tanzania, Australia, Guatemala, Lebanon, 
Portugal, Denmark, Ethiopia, Malawi 
Romania, Namibia 
Technical Support Available 
Not available 
Inadequate 
Belize, Netherlands 
Samoa 
Gambia, Eritrea 
Facilities Inadequate Nigeria 
Representation/ 
participation of 
Persons w/ 
disabilities 
No political representation 
Politically represented 
Striving to provide political 
participation 
Nigeria, Australia, Ireland, Ethiopia, Gambia 
Bangladesh, Spain, Malawi 
Zimbabwe 
Discrimination Discrimination in education, 
housing, health services, 
employment, domestic violence, 
programmes and services 
Deaf people forbidden to drive & 
Blind people forbidden to sign 
official documents 
People w/ disabilities not 
considered human beings 
No discrimination 
Zambia, Malawi, Papua New Guinea Australia, 
Cambodia 
Ethiopia 
Ethiopia 
Malawi, Haiti, Finland, Ireland, Poland 
Violations of Rights Type of violations not specified Zambia, Australia 

126 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Education Poor quality of education 
Available to only 8% 
Available to only 20% 
Available in integrated settings 
Discrimination in higher education 
Not available to persons with 
disabilities 
Australia 
Lebanon 
Algeria 
Samoa, Ireland, Portugal, Papua New 
Guinea 
Thailand 
Guatemala, Malawi, Namibia 
Services Available 
No food, clothing, shelter, medical 
services, rehabilitation 
No services available in most 
Target Area of the Standard Rules 
Ireland 
Zambia 
Namibia, Malawi, Eritrea 
Sports & Recreation Persons with disabilities involved 
Persons with disabilities not 
involved 
Involving persons with disabilities 
is controversial 
Denmark 
Namibia 
Ethiopia 
Disabled persons 
organizations 
Limited Namibia 
Personnel Training Trained personnel 
No trained personnel 
Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Thailand, 
Morocco, Iraq, Australia 
Gambia, Namibia 
Assistive devices Not available 
Efforts are being made by 
Government 
No assistive devices for education 
& not for all disabilities 
Australia 
Zimbabwe 
Namibia 
Programs Programmes available through 
NGOs & associations 
Special education programmes but 
in their infancy 
Education on reducing violence 
Technical, managerial, financial 
educational programmes 
Programmes available but not 
specified 
No programmes available 
Namibia, Brazil, Croatia, Kenya 
Eritrea, Papua New Guinea, Guatemala, UAE, 
Cambodia 
Australia 
Guyana, Slovak Republic 
Namibia, Ethiopia, Trinidad & Tobago, Belize 

127 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Awareness Raising Programs available Nepal, Lebanon, UAE, Finland, Namibia 
Medical Assistance Not available Lebanon, Poland, Netherlands 
Transportation Not available 
Not easily accessible 
Available 
Papua New Guinea, Algeria, Lebanon, 
Australia, Gambia 
Netherland 
Coordination of 
Work 
Work is coordinated 
No coordinated work 
Limited coordination based 
on type of work 
Need to be consulted on 
disability/rehabilitation issues 
Papua New Guinea, Macedonia, Sierra Leon, 
Cambodia, Spain 
Gambia, Tanzania, Namibia, 
Cameroon 
Mauritius 
Welfare Act Available but not 
implemented 
Being developed 
Still to be drafted 
Nepal 
Cambodia 
Swaziland 
Sexual exploitation 
& Abus 
Persons with disabilities 
sexually exploited 
Australia 
Segregation & 
isolation 
Persons with disabilities 
segregated from their 
community & feel isolated 
Australia, Portugal, Ethiopia 
Monitoring Available 
Not available 
Korea, Ireland 
Sudan 
Statistical data Not available Guatemala 
Asking for support Information, moral support, 
expertise, most other areas of 
disability rights 
Botswana, Gambia, Eritrea 
Psycho-social 
disabilities 
Have not been considered seriously 
by Government 
Zambia 
Social Protection Working on providing adequate 
social protection 
Zimbabwe 
Disability council Need inter-sectoral councils 
Need to update 
profiles/definitions 
Swaziland 
Mauritius 

128 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Media No promotion in the media of 
rights of persons with disabilities 
but individual, non-governmental 
efforts to do so 
Guyana 
On the Survey Good. Helps provide insight into 
the lives and needs of persons 
with disabilities 
Would have been better to have a 
survey that is disability-specific 
"None" should have been an 
option because governments have 
taken NO actions 
Comprehensive 
Strange terms 
Questions are repeated 
It is only possible to give yes or 
no answers? 
No attention to early detection 
Very long 
Questions do not allow 
respondents to give a clear picture 
of current situation 
All issues in Survey are at the 
heart of disability issues 
All questions assume only 
governments as actors and no 
other partners 
Questions could be understood in 
different ways 
Some questions not easy to 
understand 
Survey more suited to 
industrialized countries not those 
that have no resources 
Much of the work on disability is 
due to church organizations and 
NGOs that receive their funds 
from similar organizations 
internationally 
Government has addressed seven 
out of the 22 rules (e.g. 
awareness raising, education, 
sports, disabled persons 
organizations) & partially 
addressed rehabilitation. No work 
has been done on Rule 9 (family 
life) 
Zimbabwe 
Botswana 
Burundi, Rwanda, Tunisia, Libya 
Algeria, Tunisia, Sudan 
Tunisia, Yemen, Malta 
Poland, Sudan, Yemen 
Sudan 
Sudan 
Belgium 
Netherland 
Netherland 
Netherland, Eritrea 
Eritrea 
Rwanda 
Ethiopia 
Ethiopia 

129 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


End Note 

By the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Disability 
Hissa Al Thani 

Five years ago, when I took on the duties of Special Rapporteur for the Standard Rules 
for the Equalization of Opportunities for persons with Disabilities to the United Nations 
Commission for Social Development, it was not easy to define the scope and parameters 
of the work involved. 

It was necessary therefore to define for myself the areas and functions that I would need 
to be concerned with and to determine where the focus and concentration should lie. 
Monitoring was certainly the main duty as defined by the Standard Rules document itself. 

Monitoring functions were, therefore, incorporated into country visits and every 
encounter that took place with government officials and disabled persons, experts and 
activists in the field of disability, as well as meetings with United Nations agencies 
operating in the countries visited. 

Monitoring also encompassed a thorough review of the work that had been done by the 
former Special Rapporteur and the literature generated by organizations and agencies. 

And, although, the information gathered at that level was useful, it remained a) 
qualitative in nature; and b) overlooked the global picture. 

Knowing that my activities are directly related to the Commission for Social 
Development and that my relationship at the United Nations level is directly linked to the 
58 countries that make up the membership of the Commission, the qualitative 
monitoring was not sufficient. What was needed was to draw a picture of the situation of 
the world in relations to disability and persons with disabilities. 

It was at that point that it became necessary to construct an instrument of measure to 
help us understand where the world stands vis a vis the rights, needs, issues, and 
concerns of persons with disabilities, as well as the responses to the same. 

Obviously, a work such as this, which is general in nature and scope, means that 
specifics and details would have to be compromised. However, it is also a work of this 
nature, that is best at painting a global picture with all its variations and diversities, and 
all different colours and shades. 

This, I hope, is what we have succeeded in doing through this Survey aimed at assessing 
Government Actions on the Implementation of the Standard Rules on the Equalizations of 
Opportunities for Person with Disabilities. 

The published results of the assessment is the fruit of cooperation between the Office of 
the Special Rapporteur and the South North Center for Dialogue and Development. 
The team worked on reviewing existing literature; constructing the instrument 
(questionnaire) based on the Standard Rules-using the Scandinavian Agenda 22 as a 
point of departure; compiling the list of target populations and planning the distribution 
of the Survey through a variety of methods; and finally collecting, collating, compiling 
and analyzing the returned data. 

130 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


I am extremely proud that this work was taking place parallel to all the other activities I 
was undertaking at the time. Another point of pride for me has to do with the rate of 
return we received to the questionnaire. Of 191 countries to which the questionnaire was 
sent, we have been able to gather data from 114 countries, and were, therefore, able to 
amass this wealth of information. 

Moreover, I am also pleased to have been able to use this information over the past 
three years, even while the team worked on collating and analyzing, in many if my visits, 
discussions with government officials, speeches, and talks. 

I would have to say that I have learned from this work as much as I contributed to it. I 
am happy to see that we now have a detailed inventory of measures and actions which 
are necessary for every government to undertake in its quest towards fulfilling its 
obligations to protect and preserve the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities and 
achieve a society where equalization of opportunities is more than just lip service to an 
ideal. 

131 


APPENDIX I 


Lists of Disabled Persons Organizations 
that responded 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 

Africa 

Country DPO 
Botswana Botswana Association of the Blind and Partially Sighted. 
Burundi Union des Personnes Handicapees du Burundi. 
Burundi Burundi National Association of Deaf. 
Cameroon UNAPHA - Cafod 
Cape Verde 
D.R Congo VHDH. 
Eritrea Eritrean National Deaf Association. 
Ethiopia Ethiopian Federation of Persons with Disabilities. 
Gambia Gambia Association of Physically Disabled. 
Ghana 
Guinea 
Guinea Federation Guineenne pour la Promotion des Association de/pour 
Personnes Handicapees. 
Kenya United Disabled Persons of Kenya. 
Malawi Malawi National Association of the Deaf. 
Mauritius Federation of Disabled Persons Organizations. 
Namibia National Federation of People with Disabilities. 
Mauritius National Council for the Rehabilitation of Disabled. 
Nigeria Renewed Hope Foundation of the Disabled People. 
Rwanda Rwanda Union of the Blind. 
Sierra Leone Sierra Leone Association of the Deaf. 
Uganda Uganda National Association of the Deaf. 
Tanzania Disabled Organizations for Affairs and Social Economic Development. 
Zambia Mental Health Users Network of Zambia. 
Zimbabwe Zimbabwe Association of the Visual Impaired. 
Zimbabwe Organization of the Deaf. 

Asia 

Country DPO 
Australia Australian Federation of Disability Organizations. 
Azerbaijan Lotos - Disability Learning and Awareness Center. 
Azerbaijan Disabled Women's Society. 
Bangladesh Bangladesh Protibandhhi Kallyan Somity (BPKS). 
Cambodia Caritas - RBC. 
Cambodia Disability Action Council. 
China China Disabled Persons Federation. 
Fiji Fiji National Council of Disabled Persons. 
Fiji Fiji Disabled People's Association. 
India Action for Autism. 
Mongolia Save the Children UK, Mongolia programme. 
Myanmar Educational Center for Blind Affairs. 

135 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 


Nepal National Federation of the Disabled. 
Papua New Guinea National Assembly of Disabled Persons. 
Papua New Guinea National Assembly of Disabled Persons. 
Philippines Autism Society Philippines ASP. 
Philippines Kampi Disabled People International. 
Republic Of Korea Korean Society for the Cerebral Palsied. 
Samoa National Disability Council. 
Thailand National Association of the Deaf in Thailand. 
Hong Kong - China Hong Kong Association of the Deaf. 

Europe 

Country DPO 
Albania Albania Disability Forum (ADF). 
Austria Austrian National Council of Disabled Persons. 
Bulgaria Union of Disabled People in Bulgaria. 
Belgium Felmish Fund for the Social integration of Disabled Persons. 
Bosnia & 
Herzegovina 
Association for Mutual Assistance in Mental Distress. 
Finland Finnish Disability Forum. 
Georgia Georgian Disabled Women's International Association (GDWIA). 
Georgia Coalition for Independent Life. 
Ireland Irish Deaf Society. 
Italy National association of Umpired and Civils Disabled people. 
Malta Malta Society of The Blind 
Movement in Favor of Rights for Persons with A Disability. 
Netherlands National Disability Council of The Netherlands. 
Norway The Norwegian Federation of Organizations of Disabled People. 
Poland Polish Federation of Organizations of Persons with Physical Disability. 
Portugal Portugal Psychiatry. 
Poland Polish Disability Forum. 
Russian Federation. All Russian Federation of the Deaf. 
Serbia & Montenegro Association of Youth with Disabilities of Montenegro. 
Slovakia Organization of Wheelchair Users in Kosice - Independent Life. 
Sweden The Swedish Disability Federation. 
Macedonia Union of The Blind of The Republic Of Macedonia. 
Macedonia Republic Center for Support Of Persons with Intellectual Disability. 

136 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 

Latin America 

Country DPO 
Argentina Comision Nacional Asesora para la Interacion de Personas 
Discapacitadas coordinado por el Consejo Nacional de Coordiacion 
de Politicas Sociales. 
Argentina Federacion Argentina de Entidades pro Atencion a las Personas con 
Discapacidad Intelectual y/u otras Necesidades Especials. 
Belize Belize Assembly of & for Persons with Disabilities. 
Bolivia Asociacion Boliviana de Padres y Amigos de Personas con 
Discapacidad Mental. 
Chile Disabled Peoples International Chile. 
Chile Consejera Nacional Fondis. 
Colombia Center for International Rehabilitation and Asociacion de Discapacitados 
de Riasaralda. 
Colombia Federacion Nacional de Sordos de Colombia. 
Costa Rica FEREPRODIS 
Costa Rica Foro por los Derechos Humanos de las Personas con Discapacidad. 
Dominican Republic Circulo De Mujeres Con Discapcidad Cimudis. 
Dominican Republic Insituto de Ayuda al Sordo Santa Rosa 
El Salvador Asociacion de Grupo Independiente Pro Rehabilitacion Integral. 
Guatemala 
Guyana National Commission on Disability Funacion Hondurena para la 
Honduras Rehabilitacion e Inclusion del Limitado. 
Honduras Coordinadora de Instituciones y Asociaciones de Rehabilitacion de Honduras. 
Mexico Asocacion Pro Personas con Paralsis Cerebral 
Mexico Centro de Estudios para Invidentes. 
Paraguay Asociacion de Personas con Discapacidad. 
Peru Sociedad Y Discapidad. 
Peru Asociacion Peruana De Abogados con Discapacidad Visual. 
St. Vincent & 
The Grenadines 
National Society of Persons With Disabilities. 
Uruguay Cothain 

137 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 

Arab Region 

Country DPO 
Algeria Federation of Associations of People with Physical Disabilities 
Iraq Al-Bashaaer Institute for speech training 
Iraq Al-Mansor Institute for Special Education and Mental Development 
Jordan Nazic Al-Hariri Center for Special Education 
Lebanon National Rehabilitation and Development Center 
Lebanon Parents & Institutional Associations National Union for 
Intellectually Disabled 
Morocco Association of Al-Hadae for Blind Persons 
Qatar Qatar Society for Rehabilitation of Special Needs 
Palestine GUDP. 
Qatar Bara' Children Care. 
Sudan Peace and Tolerance Organization 
Sudan Federation of Journalists with Disabilities 
Tunisia National Union of the Blind of Tunisia 
Tunisia Tunisian Union for the Aid of Intellectually Disabled 
UAE Rashid Pediatric Therapy center. 
UAE The Future Center for Special Needs 
Yemen Al-Aman Organization for Blind Women Care 
Qatar Bara' Children Care 

138 


APPENDIX II 


List of The 324 measures 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 

March 2008 

In Awareness Raising In Support Services 

1. Policies 54. Policies 
2. Legislation 55. Legislation 
3. Programs 56. Programs 
4. Guidelines 57. Finance 
5. Training personnel 58. Supply Individual 
6. Material disseminating 59. Consulting DPOs 
7. Awareness into school curriculum 60. Child 
8. Educating the public 61. Women 
9. Cooperating with DPOs 62. Low income 
10. Type of disability 63. All geographical locations 
11. Rights 64. All classes 
12. Needs 65. Ethnic groups 
13. Potentials 66. Religious groups 
14. Contribution 67. All types of disability 
15. Positive description of disability 
In Accessibility 
In Medical Care 68. Policies 

16. Policies 69. Legislation 
17. Legislation 70. Programs 
18. Programs 71. Finance 
19. Finance 72. Train engineers 
20. Training personnel 73. Raising awareness 
21. Care access 74. Implement access program 
22. Counseling with PWD 75. Consult DPOS 
23. Info PWD 76. Schools/Hospital 
24. Cause of disability 77. Public buildings 
25. Improve health 78. Outdoor environment 
26. Early detection 79. Land, sea transport 
27. Early treatment 80. Housing 
28. Training personnel 81. PWDs 
29. Update medical knowledge 82. Families PWD 
30. Ensure access 83. Representative Of PWD 
31. Policies 84. Society 
32. Legislation 85. Policies 
33. Programs 86. Legislation 
34. Finance 87. Programs 
35. Training personnel 88. Finance 
36. Rehab access 89. Training 
37. Consulting DPOs 90. Raising aware 
38. Types of disability 91. Implement programs 
39. Child 92. Consulting DPOs 
40. Women 93. Blind 
41. Low income 94. Deaf Blind 
42. Geographical locations 95. Deaf Or Hearing 
43. Classes/Ethnics 96. Development disability 
44. DPOs 97. Psycho social 
45. Family 98. Braille 
46. Community 99. On tape 
47. Needs 100. News on tapes 
48. Medical 101. Sign interpreter 
49. Families PWD 102. Easy reader 
50. Schools/Education 103. Ombudsman 
51. Community 104. Government Bodies 
52. Organizations of PWD 105. Experts 
53. Program description 106. Arbitration 
141 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 

March 2008 

In Education 

159. Care givers 
160. All PWD 
161. Policies 
162. Legislation 
163. Programs 
164. Finance 
165. Social aware 
166. Among PWD 
167. Report discrimination 
168. Involve PWD 
169. Full participation 
170. Sexual relations 
171. Marriage 
172. Parenthood 
173. Privacy 
174. Counseling services 
In Culture 

175. Polices 
176. Legislation 
177. Programs 
178. Finance 
179. Social awareness 
180. Awareness among PWD 
181. Providing venues 
182. Providing contribute 
183. Accessible Information 
184. Making cultural accessible 
185. Involving DPOs 
186. Children 
187. Women 
188. Low income 
189. All ethnics 
190. All religions 
191. All communities 
192. All disabilities 
In Recreation and Sports 

193. Policies 
194. Legislation 
195. Programs 
196. Financial resources 
197. Raising social awareness 
198. Awareness among PWD 
199. Venues to participate 
200. Accessible Information 
201. Making Sports accessible 
202. Involving DPOs 
203. Community level 
204. National level 
205. International Level 
206. Amateur athletes 
207. Professional Athletes 
208. Recreational venues 
107. 
108. 
109. 
110. 
111. 
112. 
113. 
114. 
115. 
116. 
117. 
118. 
119. 
120. 
121. 
122. 
123. 
124. 
125. 
126. 
127. 
128. 
129. 
130. 
Policies 
legislation 
Programs 
Finance 
Modifying schools 
Training 
Providing access 
Involving PWD 
Children 
Women 
Low Incomes 
Ethnic Groups 
Religious Groups 
PWD all communities 
All disabilities 
Sign language 
Education in Braille 
Lessons on tape 
Education materials 
Programs for children needs 
Parents 
DPOs 
NGO's Children 
Community 

In Employment 

131. Policies 
132. Legislation 
133. Programs 
134. Finance 
135. Training PWD 
136. Modifying environment 
137. Rising awareness 
138. Accessibility transportation 
139. Cooperate DPO 
140. Hiring 
141. Promotions 
142. Work benefits 
143. Payment increase 
144. Participation 

145. 
146. 
147. 
148. 
149. 
150. 
151. 
152. 
153. 
154. 
155. 
156. 
157. 
158. 
In Income Maintenance 

Policies 
Legislation 
Programs 
Finance 
Info PWD 
Consulting DPOs 
Temporarily lost income 
On the job accident 
Physical disability 
Sensory disability 
Intellectual 
Psycho social 
Women 
Families 

142 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 

March 2008 

In Religion 

209. Policies 
210. Legislation 
211. Programs 
212. Finance 
213. Social awareness 
214. Awareness PWD 
215. Accessible venues 
216. Access Information 
217. Making Active Accessible 
218. Involving DPOs 
219. Accessible to all 
In Information and Research 

220. Policies 
221. Legislation 
222. Programs 
223. Finance 
224. Social Awareness 
225. Statistics 
226. Involving DPOs 
227. Disseminate statistics information 
228. Updating statistics information 
229. System to collect Data 
230. Prevalence incidence 
231. Types 
232. Disaggregate data 
233. Needs of PWD 
234. Services & Programs 
235. Available Coverage 
236. Living condition 
237. Educational situation 
238. Conditions of workplace 
239. Employment Opportunities 
240. Expenditures entailed 
241. Impact of social policies 
242. Type of research 
243. DPOs 
244. Local regional international national 
issues 
In Economic Policies 

245. Policies 
246. Legislation 
247. Support to projects 
248. Disability Fund 
249. Involving PWD 
In Coordination of Work 

250. Permanent Committee 
251. Legal mandate 
252. Allocating resources 
253. Involving PWD 
254. Balanced representatives 
255. Represent PWD 
256. Legal & Political 
257. Types of Disability 
258. Balanced gender Representation 
259. Adequate resources 
In Organizations of PWD 

260. Policies 
261. Legislation 
262. Programs 
263. Admin 
264. Financial resources 
265. Advisory capacity 
266. Cooperating with DPOs 
267. Granting statistics 
268. Advisory Policies 
269. Identify needs & Priority 
270. Participate in planning 
271. Participate in implementation 
272. Participate in Monitoring 
In Personnel Training 

273. Public awareness 
274. Policies 
275. Legislation 
276. Programs 
277. Professional Standards 
278. Financial resources 
279. Building capacity 
280. Involving DPOs 
281. Training 
282. DPO involved in Training 
283. PWD as resource 
In Monitoring and Evaluation 

284. Formal Definition 
285. Specialized monitoring 
286. Collecting census/data 
287. Conducting Sample survey 
288. National Regional 
289. Using Records 
290. Using Information from PWD 
291. Size Scope 
292. Types 
293. Age Distribute 
294. Gender Distribution 
295. Geographical Distribution 
296. DPOs 
297. Programs of PWD 
298. Services provision DPOs 
299. Services provision PWD 
300. Policy Making 
301. Adaption & improvement 
302. Revision of Programs 
303. Public Admin 
304. Awareness Raising Program 
305. Annual & Periodic Reports 
306. Research 
143 


Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 

March 2008 

In Technical and Economic coorporation 

307. Signing treaties 
308. Being part to agreement 
309. Providing Aids 
310. Providing / receiving technical 
311. Exchange Info 
312. Disseminating/ receiving technical 
313. Participate in projects 
314. Regional Initiatives 
315. Policies 
316. Programs 
317. Supporting families 
318. Access to services 
319. DPOs 
320. Education 
321. Employment 
322. Adequate Housing 
323. Protecting Segments 
324. Allocating Resources 

144 


APPENDIX III 


Government Actions on Equalization of Opportunities 
for 
People with Disabilities 


A Global Survey 



Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
147

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
148

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
149

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
150

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
151

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
152

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
153

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
154

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
155

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
156

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
157

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
158

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
159

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
160

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
161

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
162

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
163

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
164

Global Survey on Government Implementation of the Standard Rules--Results Analysis 
March 2008 
165