Closing the Gap Between Rhetoric and Reality

1. Closing the Gap Between Rhetoric and Reality Lalita Sen Texas Southern University Sen_LX@tsu.edu

2. Legislation for the Rights of the Disabled Nations without legislation • Must develop and adopt laws Nations with legislation • Must reconcile their legislation with UNCRPD if they have ratified it. • Develop a plan for implementation. • Initiate/ expand public projects such as accessible public transportation services, access to public buildings etc. • Monitor and enforce laws.

3. Key Barriers to Implementing Accessibility Initiatives General Obstacles • Limited understanding of what is total accessibility: access to/ from residence/ buildings; accessible washrooms/ bathrooms; safe & accessible pedestrian walkways ; ingress/ egress to all transport modes (both public and private). • Travelers with disabilities synonymous with wheelchair users. • Little conclusive research on the socio-economic benefits of accessibility. • Initial cost of achieving accessibility is viewed as unaffordable especially for developing countries despite ratifying the UNCRPD.

4. Barriers……continued Financial Obstacles • Competition among national priorities especially true for developing countries. • Accessibility has had lower priority for many cash strapped national/ regional / local government agencies. • For some governments only new vehicles are accessible, as retrofitting costs are prohibitive or impossible.

5. Barriers………. continued Obstacles for program implementation (using policies adopted • Lack of organizational infrastructure to implement mandate for accessibility (innovation, research, implementation strategy). • Limited/no collaboration and coordination between levels of government , and agencies. • Lack of monitoring of progress at local levels especially after passage of legislation(s).

6. Action to Implement Adopted Laws • Create a national oversight board to represent interest regions/ target population, and to interpret / amend laws. • Create a national forum/ platform for exchange of research , innovation, and evaluation of progress. • Allocate budget for research and to implement laws.

7. Action………continued • Develop a detailed implementation strategy at national, regional and local levels with penalty for non compliance. • Establish a hearing board for addressing non compliance by public and private transportation carriers and agencies. • Establish local volunteer advisory boards of professionals and users to monitor progress.

8. Lessons from Areas with Tangible Change North America • Coordination and cooperation from national to local levels utilizing funds provided for implementation of accessible services by all modes, and design accessible infra structure (ramps, curb cuts etc). • Involvement of oversight bodies (access board, CTA), state agencies, and local volunteer advisory bodies. • Vigilant disability groups/ individual volunteers to undertake access audit . • Users willing to use the judicial system to challenge non compliance.

9. Lessons ………continued Europe • EU Funds allocated to address accessible transport issues to ensure compatible levels of service in member nations. • Educating new EU members to challenges and need for accessible system to be compatible with Western Europe. • Adjusting laws for compatibility within EU nations. • Adjusting services to meet local service demand.

10. Lessons ………continued Other Parts of the World • Special events are used as catalysts to improve accessible public transportation for major national public event: Olympics, Sport Events etc. • Income from tourism has resulted in accessible toilets, ramps for boarding/ disembarking from airlines, accessible public buildings, historic sites, hotels etc. • Visible public projects such as accessible metro rail system, BRT systems in major cities.

11. Stake Holders’ Role • This should be formalized perhaps at the regional level. • They should be educated about “accessibility” and who are the disabled users ( hearing impaired, vision impaired etc). • Role should include monitoring and evaluation against established goals for each local area/ region. • Channel of communication between the responsible authority and the stakeholders should be established and publicized. • Methods of redress should also be known including penalty against the authority responsible for implementation.

12. Value of Laws & Statutes Adopted From Higher Income to Middle/ Lower Income Countries • Laws should be adopted to fit governance framework, need, modes, and current state of accessibility. • Need to adopt an implementation strategy, with successes visible to the public. • More than laws, need for monitoring and evaluation is critical to success at local levels.

13. Negative or Lack of Impact of Legislation • No implementation of a visible project after the passage of legislation. • If implementation of project(s) is delayed. • If a visible project is not successful or has flaws (e.g. BRT without dedicated right of way or with unsafe access).

14. Other Negative Results Lack of enforcement of adopted rules • Seats designated for women • Seats designated for seniors Regressive results • Special rail coaches for the disabled

15. Accessible Projects-Closing the Gap • Integrated Metro Rail/ BRT Project in New Delhi (plan to implement BRT in other major Indian cities). • Metro Rail in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. • Pedestrian overpass in Bangkok, Kolkata • Accessible world heritage sites such as Red Fort, Delhi, & Taj Mahal (in progress). • Ramps in Jaipur Palace

16. Summary • Gaps exists even in North America especially in accessible pedestrian way. • Progress in the middle and lower income countries vary due to perceived cost and benefits of accessibility, influencing each nation’s willingness to invest in increasing levels of accessibility. • Current state is very uneven even within nations. • It may take at least a decade for even the mega cities in developing nations to achieve a reasonable level of accessibility to allow the disabled to move freely.