Advertisement

Counting Disabled People: Historical Perspectives and the Challenges of Disability Statistics

  • Arne H. EideEmail author
  • Mitchell Loeb
Chapter
Part of the International Perspectives on Social Policy, Administration, and Practice book series (IPSPAP)

Abstract

Over more than three decades, the need for refining and improving disability definition and measurement, and using those tools to analyse the life experiences of individuals with disability, has been advanced through international initiatives and policy documents. With respect to the former, the work of the World Health Organization in the development of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) (WHO 2001) and the formation, in 2002, of the United Nations Washington Group on Disability Statistics have been paramount. In terms of policy, the focus of the international community has been directed to issues of disability in recent decades, highlighted with the World Program of Action Concerning Disabled Persons (UN 1982; 1993), The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities (UN 1994) and more recently in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Article 31) (UN 2006) and the Report by the High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (Chap. 4, page 23) (UN 2013a). Estimation of disability prevalence in a population, statistics on access to basic services and descriptions of the status of living conditions are regarded as important for policy development, for planning purposes, for resource allocation, for monitoring, impact assessments and comparisons across groups, for awareness building and as a foundation for advocacy work and improved dialogue between stakeholders, including disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) and relevant national authorities (Madans et al. 2004). Reliable and valid disability statistics are seen as instrumental for monitoring the implementation of the UN Conventions, and to ensure the human rights of people with disability. This understanding has also been adopted by the international disability movement, as exemplified by the recent resolution of the International Disability Alliance supporting an inclusive post-2015 development agenda for persons with disability in Africa (point 6) (IDA 2014). This chapter draws some historical lines to illustrate the development of the discourse on disability and uses this as a background for a critical examination of current possibilities and challenges in disability statistics.

Keywords

Counting disability Disability statistics Disability definitions Models of disability Data collection Disability measurement systems Measurement impacts and outcomes 

References

  1. Allotey, P., Reidpath, D., Kouame, A., & Cummins, R. (2003). The DALY, context and the determinants of the severity of disease: An exploratory comparison of paraplegia in Australia and Cameroon. Social Science and Medicine, 57, 949–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altman, B. M. (2001). Disability definitions, models, classification schemes and applications. In G. L. Albrecht, K. D. Seelman, & M. Bury (Eds.), Handbook of disability studies (pp. 97–122). New York: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anand, S., & Hanson, K. (1997). Disability-adjusted life years: A critical review. Journal of Health Economics, 16, 685–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bickenbach, J. E. (2011). Monitoring the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Data and the international classification of functioning, disability and health. BMC Public Health, 11(Suppl 4), S8. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/S4/S8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borg, J., Larsson, S., Östergren, P.-O., & Eide, A. H. (2010). The friction model—A dynamic model of functioning, disability and contextual factors and its conceptual and practical applicability. Disability and Rehabilitation, 32(21), 1790–1797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cerniauskaite, M., Quintas, R., Boldt, C., Raggi, A., Cieza, A., Bickenbach, J. E., et al. (2011). Systematic literature review on ICF from 2001 to 2009: Its use, implementation and operationalisation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(4), 281–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chang, F.-H., Coster, W. J. C., & Helfrich, C. A. (2013). Community participation measures for people with disabilities: A systematic review of content from an International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health perspective. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 94(4), 771–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eide, A. H., Amin, M., MacLachlan, M., Mannan, H., & Schneider, M. (2012). Human rights, social inclusion and health equity in international donors’ policies. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development, 23(4), 24–40. doi: 10.5463/DCID.v23i4.144.Google Scholar
  9. Eide, A. H., & Ingstad, B. (2011). Disability and poverty: A global challenge. Bristol: The Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eide, A.H., & Jele, B. (2011). Living conditions among people with disabilities in Swaziland: A national, representative study. SINTEF A 20047. Oslo: SINTEF Technology & Society.Google Scholar
  11. Eide, A. H., Jelsma, J., Loeb, M. E., Maart, S., & Ka’ Toni, M. (2007). Exploring ICF components in a survey among Xhosa speakers in Eastern & Western Cape, South Africa. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30(11), 819–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eide, A. H., & Loeb, M. E. (2006a). Reflections on disability data and statistics in developing countries. In B. Albert (Ed.), In or out of the mainstream? Lessons from research on disability and development cooperation (pp. 89–104). Leeds: University of Leeds\Disability Press.Google Scholar
  13. Eide, A. H., & Loeb, M. E. (2006a). Living conditions among people with disabilities in Zambia: A national representative survey. SINTEF Report No. A262. Oslo: SINTEF Health Research.Google Scholar
  14. Eide, A. H., & Loeb, M. E. (2011). Living conditions among people with disabilities in southern Africa: A comparative analyses. In A. H. Eide & B. Ingstad (Eds.), Disability and poverty. London: The Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eide, A. H., Loeb, M. E., Nhiwatiwa, S., Munthali, A., Ngulube, T. J., & van Rooy, G. (2011). Living conditions among people with disabilities in southern Africa: A comparative analysis. In A. H. Eide & B. Ingstad (Eds.), Disability and poverty (pp. 55–71). London: The Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fougeyrollas, P., Cloutier, R., Bergeron, H., St Michell, G., Cote, J., Cote, M., et al. (1999). The Quebec classification: Disability creation process. Quebec: International Network on the Disability Creation Process.Google Scholar
  17. Gray, D. B., Hollingsworth, H. H., Stark, S., & Morgan, K. A. (2006). Participation survey/mobility: Psychometric properties of a measure of participation for people with mobility impairments and limitations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87, 189–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gray, D. B., Hollingsworth, H. H., Stark, S., & Morgan, K. A. (2008). A subjective measure of environmental facilitators and barriers to participation for people with mobility limitations. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30(6), 434–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hammel, J., Magasi, S., Heinemann, A., Whiteneck, G., Bogner, J., & Rodriguez, E. (2007). What does participation mean? Disability and Rehabilitation, 30(19), 1445–1460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harvey, A., Robin, J., Morris, M. E., Graham, H. K., & Baker, R. (2008). A systematic review of measures of activity limitation for children with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 50(3), 190–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. IDA. (2014). Inclusive post 2015 development agenda for persons with disability in Africa. Nairobi: International Disability Alliance. Nairobi Declaration.Google Scholar
  22. Ingstad, B., & Whyte, S. R. (1995). Disability and culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  23. Jagger, C., Gillies, C., Cambois, E., Oyen, H. V., Nusselder, W., & Robine, J.-M. (2010). The Global Activity Limitation Index measured function and disability similarly across European countries. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(8), 892–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jette, A. M. (1994). Physical disablement concepts for physical therapy research and practice. Physical Therapy, 74, 380–386.Google Scholar
  25. Jette, A. M. (2006). Towards a common language for function, disability and health. Physical Therapy, 86(5), 726–734.Google Scholar
  26. Jette, A. M., Haley, S. M., & Kooyoomjian, J. T. (2003). Are the ICF activity and participation dimensions distinct? Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 35, 145–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loeb, M. E. (2013). Disability statistics: An integral but missing (and misunderstood) component of development work. Nord J Hum Rights, 31(3), 306–324.Google Scholar
  28. Loeb, M. E., Eide, A. H., & Mont, D. (2008). Approaching disability prevalence: The case of Zambia. ALTER European Journal of Disability Research, 2, 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Long, J. S., & Pavalko, E. (2004). Comparing alternative measures of functional limitation. Medical Care, 42, 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maart, S., Eide, A. H., Jelsma, J., Loeb, M. E., & Ka Toni, M. (2007). Environmental barriers experienced by urban and rural disabled people in South Africa. Disability and Society, 22(4), 357–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Madans, J. H., Altman, B. M., Rasch, E. K., Mbogoni, M., Synneborn, M., & Banda, J. (2004). Washington Group Position Paper: Proposed purpose of an internationally comparative general disability measure. Retrieved September 25, 2014, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/washington_group/WG_purpose_paper.pdf.Google Scholar
  32. Madden, R. H., Dune, T., Lukersmith, S., Hartley, S., Kuipers, P., Gargett, A., et al. (2013). The relevance of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in monitoring and evaluating community-based rehabilitation (CBR). Disability and Rehabilitation. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2013.821182.Google Scholar
  33. Mitra, S. (2013). A data revolution for disability-inclusive development. Lancet Global Health, 1(4), e178–e179. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70016-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mont, D. (2007a). Measuring health and disability. Lancet, 369, 1658–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mont, D. (2007b). Measuring disability prevalence. Social Protection Discussion Paper No. 0706. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  36. Mont, D., & Loeb, M. (2008). Beyond DALYs: Developing indicators to assess the impact of public health interventions on the lives of people with disabilities. SP Discussion Paper No. 0815. Washington DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  37. Nagi, S. (1965). Some conceptual issues in disability and rehabilitation. In M. B. Sussman (Ed.), Sociology and rehabilitation (pp. 100–113). Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
  38. Nagi, S. (1991). Disability concepts revisited: Implications for prevention. In A. Pope & A. Tarolv (Eds.), Disability in America: Toward a national agenda for prevention (pp. 309–327). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  39. NIH. (1992). National advisory board on medical rehabilitation Research. Draft 5: Report and plan for medical rehabilitation research. Bethesda: National Institute of Health.Google Scholar
  40. Oliver, M., & Barnes, C. (2012). The new politics of disablement. Hants: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  41. UN. (1982). The United Nations world programme of action concerning disabled persons. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  42. UN. (1993). World programme of action concerning disabled persons. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  43. UN. (1994). The standard rules on the equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities. New York: United Nations. Retrieved August 2, 2014, from http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/gadocs/standardrules.pdf.Google Scholar
  44. UN. (2003). Expert Group Meeting to review the United Nations Demographic Yearbook System, 10–14 November 2003. ESA/STAT/AC.91/6.. New York: United Nations Secretariat. Statistical Division.Google Scholar
  45. UN. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from www.un.org/disabilities/convention/facts.shtml.Google Scholar
  46. UN DISTAT. (2013). Human functioning and disability. United Nations Statistics Division. Retrieved September 25, 2014, from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sconcerns/disability/disab2.asp.
  47. UN. (2013a). A new global partnership: Eradicate poverty and transform economies through sustainable development. Report by the High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  48. UN. (2013b). UN Millennium Development Goals. Retrieved September 26, 2014, from http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.
  49. United Nations Statistics Division. (2008). Principles and recommendations for population and housing censuses (2nd revision). New York: United Nations. Retrieved August 2, 2014, from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sources/census/docs/P&R_Rev2.pdf.
  50. Üstün, T. B., Chatterji, S., Kostanjsek, N., Rehm, J., Kennedy, C., Epping-Jordan, E., et al. (2010). Developing the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 88, 815–823. doi: 10.2471/BLT.09.067231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Verbrugge, I., & Jette, A. (1994). The disablement process. Social Science and Medicine, 38, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Whiteneck, G. G., Harrison-Felix, C. L., Mellick, D. C., Brooks, C. A., Charlifue, S. B., & Gerhart, K. A. (2004). Quantifying environmental factors: A measure of physical, attitudinal, service, productivity, and policy barriers. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85, 1324–1335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. WHO. (1980). International classification of impairments, disability and handicap. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  54. WHO. (1981). Disability prevention and rehabilitation: Report of the WHO expert committee on disability prevention and rehabilitation. Technical Report Series 668. Geneva: World Health Organization. Retrieved from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_668.pdf.Google Scholar
  55. WHO. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  56. WHO. (2010). Community-based rehabilitation. CBR guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  57. WHO. (2011). World disability report. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  58. WHO. (2013). How to use the ICF. A practical manual for using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  59. Witsø, A. E., Eide, A. H., & Vik, K. (2011). Professional carers’ perspective on participation for older adults living in place. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(7), 557–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HealthSINTEF Technology and SocietyOsloNorway
  2. 2.National Center for Health Statistics/Washington Group on Disability StatisticsWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations