Accessibility to Power: Framing of the Disability Rights Movements in India and Nepal
Purpose: This paper explores the effect of inherent social inequalities on disability rights movements and their political activities in India and Nepal. The situation for persons with disabilities is similar in both countries. Many social and cultural phenomena coincide, and laws and policies are currently being formulated in line with the human rights agenda. In order to understand the current situation and the envisioned future for persons with disabilities, it is important to probe how, and under what circumstances, the disability issue is framed.
Method: Purposive sampling was used to access outspoken activists in Kolkata in India and Kathmandu in Nepal. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, coded according to recurring themes, and analysed with Nancy Fraser’s theory on misrepresentation of social movements along with literature on framing. Though only 7 interviews were conducted (a limitation of the paper), together with informal discussions and previous knowledge they provided a sufficient overview of the social movements in the two countries.
Results: This paper increases the knowledge on the two social movements, and provides interesting case studies on how persons with disabilities engage in political activities in the Global South. The rights-based approach has a strong influence within both movements, and appears to be the main strategy adopted by them.Conclusions and Implications: The Indian and Nepalese disability rights movements are affected by social inequalities. It seems as though the urban middle-class and their needs colour the movements and its framing. Further research is needed to probe what implications these inequalities have for the situation of persons with disabilities.
Benford R, Snow DA (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology; 26: 611-639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
Bhatta CD (2012). Unveiling Nepal's civil society. Journal of Civil Society; 8(2):185–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2012.732429
Blee KM, Taylor V (2002). Semi-structured interviewing in social movement research. In Methods of Social Movement Research. Edited by Staggenborg S, Klandermans B, Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press. PMCid:PMC1222791
Brinkmann S, Kvale S (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. (3.ed.), Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Christensen A, Jensen SQ (2012). Doing intersectional analysis: Methodological implications for qualitative research. NORA - Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research; 20(2): 109-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740.2012.673505
della Porta D, Diani M (2006). Social movements: An introduction (2. ed.), Malden, MA.: Blackwell.
Fraser N (1995). From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a 'Post-socialist' age. New Left Review; (no. 212): 68-94.
Fraser N (2008). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalising world, Cambridge: Polity.
Ghosh N (2016). Interrogating disability in India: Theory and practice, New Delhi: Springer India. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-3595-8
Ingstad B (2007). Seeing disability and human rights in the local context: Botswana revisited. in Ingstad B, Whyte SR (eds). Disability in local and global worlds, Berkeley: University of California Press. PMid:17279110
Kitzinger C (2004). Feminist approaches. In Gobo G, Gubrium JF, Seale C, & Silverman D (Eds.). Qualitative research practice. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608191.d12
Lamichhane K, Okubo T (2014). The nexus between disability, education, and employment: Evidence from Nepal. Oxford Development Studies; 42(3): 439–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600818.2014.927843
Mladenov T (2016). Post-socialist disability matrix. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research; 19(2): 1–14.
Opokua MP, Mprah WK, Saka BS (2016). Participation of persons with disabilities in political activities in Cameroon. Disability and the Global South; 3(2): 980-999.
Robins S (2012). Transitional justice as an elite discourse. Critical Asian Studies; 44(1): 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2012.644885
Soldatic K, Grech S (2014). Transnationalising disability studies: Rights, justice and impairment. Disability Studies Quarterly; 34(2) : 36-50.Tarrow SG (2011). Power in movement: social movements and contentious politics Rev. & updated 3rd., Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
United Nations (2016). United Nations Treaty Collections, Human Rights, 15. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Available from: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-15&chapter=4&clang=_en [Accessed on 7 Mar 2017
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2017 Henrik Schedin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
© Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development