Policy development: An analysis of disability inclusion in a selection of African Union policies
Policy development: An analysis of disability inclusion in a selection of African Union policies
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/dpr.12323
复制
发表时间：
2019-03-01
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Groce, Nora
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lang, Raymond;Schneider, Marguerite;Groce, Nora
国际发展话语中的当代辩论涉及发展中国家政策制定过程中边缘化群体的非象征性包容和参与。这与非洲的残疾人直接相关，这也是本文的重点。《联合国残疾人权利公约》规定了融入社会的原则。此外，非洲联盟（非盟）在向其成员国提供有关残疾问题的建议方面发挥着关键作用，这一建议应反映在包容残疾的政策中。本文分析了非盟制定的九份政策或战略文件，涵盖教育、卫生、就业和社会保护等政策领域，这些领域对将残疾人纳入国际发展至关重要。根据七个独立的要素（权利、可及性、包容性、执行计划、预算拨款、执行机制或分类管理信息系统）进行分析，使用1至4级的评级表，其中4级是最高级别的包容性。尽可能从文件中审查了政策制定过程（例如，协商级别）、背景（例如，可持续发展目标）和涉及的行为者。没有一项政策达到可能总分的50%，这表明真正的包容水平很低。right得分最高，但仍处于较低水平。这表明承认残疾人的包容性权利，但这通常没有纳入包容性执行计划、预算拨款、执行机制或分类管理信息系统以供监测。在非盟政策中对残疾人的有限的社会经济包容是一个失去的机会，应该加以审查和纠正。研究结果对贫穷和边缘化群体真正参与国际决策领域具有更广泛的影响。
Contemporary debates in international development discourse are concerned with the non-tokenistic inclusion and participation of marginalized groups in the policy-making process in developing countries. This is directly relevant to disabled people in Africa, which is the focus of this article. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities delineates the principles of inclusion in society. Furthermore, the African Union (AU) plays a key role in advising its Member States about disability issues, and this advice should be reflected in disability-inclusive policies. This article analyses nine policy or strategy documents produced by the AU, covering the policy domains of education, health, employment and social protection that are crucial to the inclusion of disabled people in international development. These were analysed according to seven discrete elements (rights, accessibility, inclusivity, implementation plans, budgetary allocations, enforcement mechanisms or disaggregated management information systems) using a rating scale of one to four, with four being the highest level of inclusion. The process (for example, level of consultation), the context (for example, the Sustainable Development Goals) and actors involved in the policy development were reviewed as far as was possible from the documents. None of the policies reached even 50% of the total possible score, indicating poor levels of genuine inclusion. Rights scored a highest rating, but still at a low level. This suggests that there is recognition of the rights of disabled people to inclusion, but this is not generally integrated within inclusive implementation plans, budgetary allocations, enforcement mechanisms or disaggregated management information systems for monitoring. The limited socio-economic inclusion of disability within AU policies is a lost opportunity that should be reviewed and rectified. The findings have broader ramifications for the non-tokenistic and genuine involvement of poor and marginalized groups in the international policy-making arena.