Für neue Autoren:
kostenlos, einfach und schnell
Für bereits registrierte Autoren
Akademische Arbeit, 2019
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF APPENDICES
1.1 Background of the Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Objectives of the Study
1.4 Research Questions
1.5 Significance of the Study
1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Conceptualizing Disability
2.2. The Link between Disability and Poverty
2.3. Disability and Inclusive Development
2.4. Factors Determining Self-employment of Person with Disability
2.5. Disability Related Studies in Ethiopia
III. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
3.1. Study Area
3.2. SamplingTechnique and Sample Size Determination
3.3. Data Types, Sources and Methods of Collection
3.4. Data Analysis
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Descriptive Analysis
4.1.1 Composition of Persons with Disabilities
4.1.2. Individual Characteristics of Persons with Disabilities, by IGA
4.1.3. Socio-Economic Characteristics of Persons with Disabilities, by IGA
4.2. Econometric Analysis Participation in IGAs of Persons with Disabilities
4.3. Gender Disparity among the Persons with Disabilities
V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
Table 4.1Types of Impairments
Table 4.2Gender Composition of Persons with Disabilities
Table 4.3Health condition of persons with disabilities
Table 4.4Participation status of persons with disabilities in IGAs
Table 4.5Gender distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.6Age distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.7 The distribution of grade completed by persons with disabilities
Table 4.8Educational distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.9Skill Training Status of Persons with Disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.10 Marital status distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.11Household size distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.12Assets ownership distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.13Communication assets ownership distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.14Saving accounts ownership distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.15Credit use distribution of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.16Membership in social associations of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.17Social capital status of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.18 Isolation status of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4.19 Forms of impairments of PWDs in bad health (unable to work) condition
Table 4. 20 Health status of persons with disabilities, by IGAs
Table 4. 21 Regression Result of Logistic Model for Participation in IGA
Table 4. 22 Type and proportion of disability among female and male PWDs
Table 4. 23 Skill training status of persons with disabilities, by sex
Table 4. 24 Credit utilization status of persons with disabilities, by sex
Table 4. 25 Group t-test of disabled household head’s income (ETB) by sex
Table 4. 26 Group t-test of disabled household family income (ETB) by sex
Table 4. 27 Group test of aggregate income (heads income plus family income) by sex
Appendix 1. Research questionnaire (Oromiffa version)
Appendix 2. Discreptive results of the study using STATA
Appendix 3. Regression results of the study using STATA
Appendix 4. Gender Disparity among the Persons with Disabilities using STATA
Social policy agenda could be seen as integral part of the nation’s economy, contributing to economic growth, equity and sustainability and should not be treated as competing with economic resources. The persons with disabilities are the neglected citizens in the socio-economic transformations of many African countries including Ethiopia. As a result, these groups are forced to live in economically poor and precarious conditions. In light of this, this research paper refers to the determinants of self-employment of the persons with disabilities and existing gender differences within the group. A simple random sampling of the persons with disabilities was made from all the six sub cities, under Nekemte town, proportional to their size in each sub city. A total of 121 persons with disabilities were drawn and analyzed using both descriptive and econometric analysis. The study revealed that 25.62 percent of persons with disabilities are engaged in income generating activities equally with other healthy (active) citizens of the people in the area. The use of credit, the social capital and better health condition are variables identified in significantly influencing their participation in income generating activities. The proportion of participation of female persons with disabilities is higher as compared to male counterpart. There is discrepancy in annual income of female heads compared to male headed. At the same time the study indicates that a significant number, 30.58 percent, still require a continuous support (health, food, sheltering, clothing, and so on) from any source to cope up with the highly competitive living condition. The study recommends support on enhancing their educational level through training, health condition and provision of credit to increase their engagement in income generating activities for the healthy (able to work) persons; and provision of a continuous assistance for the remaining households that are in bad health condition.
Key words: Persons with Disabilities, Income Generating Activities, Determinants
Development policies and strategies of nations are expected to address every corner of the society including the disadvantaged and the marginalized portion of the community (such aspersons with disabilities). Despite the consensus to pursue all inclusive developmental works, thepersons with disabilities are mostly forgotten due to a number of reasons some of which are related to neglect in development agendas by the concerned bodies, cultural barriers and economic development status of nations.
Given their substantial number, the neglect of this group of people will result in their lower contribution to the economy, vulnerability to income shocks and psychological (social) crisis for the society at large. Considering their values, potentials and perspectives in the development agenda of a nation definitely adds to the development and welfare of this society.
Such efforts of scientific approaches on development are limited in less developing countries including Ethiopia. In light of this, this research (report) assessed the factors that affect the self-employment of the persons with disabilities; and analyzed gender disparities on participation of the households in income generating activities and household income. This chapter presents the background, statement of the problem, objectives, significance, scope and limitations of the study. The details are provided in the subsequent pages.
According to Central Statistical Agency (CSA) 2007 data, in Oromia region, the number of persons with disabilities is 282,544 (of which female constitute 45.77 percent). In terms of place of residence, 36,671 persons with disabilities live in urban area. For the same period, in east Wollega zone, there are 12,883 (persons with disabilities). Among this total number of disabled individual1832 of them are living in urban area. In urban area of the zone female constitute 46.20 percent. These figures are expected to be higher as of today.
Persons with disabilities are diverse and heterogeneous due to the fact thatthe disability experience resulting from the interaction of health conditions, personal factors, and environmental factors. In this study, disability of persons in the study area include blindness/difficulty to see, deafness/difficulty to hear, unable to speak/difficulty of speaking, non-functional upper limb(s), non-functional lower limb(s), body movement difficulty, learning (mental) difficulty and mixed or more than one type of disabilities. In east Wollega zone, majority of them have non-functional lower limb(s) (unable to stand and walk) which is near to 23 percent of persons with disabilities in the zone (CSA, 2007).
In developing countries including Ethiopia, persons with disabilities face problems of denial of equal access to education, health care, employment and political participation because of their disability; they are subjected to violations of dignity or disrespect because of their disability; and they face the problem denial of autonomy when they are confined in institutions against their will (Quinn &Degener, 2002).
As a result of these marginalization and economics discrimination, persons with disabilities are more likely to live in poverty, more likely to be unemployed, more likely to face discrimination in the workplace, more likely to receive low health services and to contribute little to the over-all economic growth in general.
The World Development Report (WDR) 2006 also confirms these facts. In its evaluation of a number of national studies that persons with disabilities are often more severely affected by poverty, unemployment and a lack of schooling than people without disabilities. A substantial proportion of adolescents remain excluded from education because of lack of a strategy for integrating persons with disabilities and youth into state school systems. This in turn affects families of persons with disabilities ‘families because of their dependents require intensive care.
In Ethiopia, a vast majority of people with disabilities live in rural areas where access to basic services is limited. In Ethiopia, 95 per cent of all persons with disabilities are estimated to live in poverty (ILO, 2013). They lack of public understanding on status of disabilities, shortage of basic needs, such as vocational training placement, health facilities, and inaccessibility to assistive devices and so on. In Ethiopia, some associate disability with spiritual evil and do not let persons with disabilities to go out in public (JICA, 2002).
Many persons with disabilities depend on family support and begging for their livelihoods. A study in Oromia region, for instance, found that 55 per cent of the surveyed persons with disabilities depend on family, neighbors and friends for their living, while the rest generate inadequate income through self-employment, begging and providing house maid services (CARDOS, 2007).
A similar phenomenon is observed in east Wollega zone where an overwhelming number of people with disability are in disadvantaged position and observed moving from various districts and zones to make a living in urban centers as a coping strategy to sustain their life. Even though well documented data is not available at zonal and district levels in this regard, an overwhelming presence of these groups in urban centers like Nekemte is practically observed that is why Nekemte town was selected to represent urban parts of the study area.
Thus developing the productive capacity of persons with disabilities and giving them access to work therefore plays a significant role. The socio-economic integration of persons with disabilities is not just a question of their right to participation; it is also a pre-requisite for broad-based and sustainable pro-poor growth. The research paper contributes to this effort by identify the factors that affect the self-employment of persons with disabilities in income generating activities in the study area.
Persons with disabilities (especially disabled women) are amongst the poorest in developed countries like Ethiopia. Poverty of this group often goes beyond income, and includes physical weaknesses, isolation, powerlessness and low self-esteem. Such people often fail to claim their entitlements because of lack of information, less attention given to the group and absence of appropriate structures. The challenge could be double among women due to gender related factors. They have unequal opportunity to participate in decision making on issues related to their development and welfare. Prolonged health problems are common and health services are not easily accessible to the majority besides being expensive. Competitive economic environment, growth of towns and the movement of people from rural to urban in search of jobs have changed existing culture and formal relationship in the family and society in general. As a result of weakened traditional life, people do not show respect to persons with disabilities and often defame them.
The economic benefits of adopting a disability inclusive approach to development by recognizing their potential, valuing and respecting their contributions and perspectives are widely acknowledged as being significant (Aus AID, 2008; Metts, 2000; WHO & World Bank, 2011). As opposed to isolated policies and actions, a comprehensive approach to development enhances an integrated strategy benefiting all individuals and the society as a whole (Berman-Bieler, 2008).
It is harder for these people to benefit from development and escape from poverty due to discrimination in gainful employment and lack of access to resources to promote self-employment and livelihood activities. They are experiencing limited employment opportunities and decreased productivity in their adulthood. Their households are experiencing hardships including food insecurity, poor housing, and inadequate access to health care. The efforts to promote development and poverty reduction and social protection programmes have not adequately included this section of the society.
Many of these people need assistance and support to achieve a good quality of life and to be able to participate in social life on an equal basis with others. They need to be empowered to live in community and participate in work and other activities, rather than be marginalized or left fully dependent on family support or social protection. They need formal assistance that enable them to participate in paid or income generating activity. Developing the productive capacity of persons with disabilities and giving them access to work therefore plays a significant role. According to a World Bank report in 2000, the neglect of this group in gainful employment leads to estimated annual loss in global GNP between 1.37 and 1.95 billion U.S. dollars.
Many of previous studies have yielded rich data on the prevalence and diversity of persons with disabilities (Yohannis and Johanna, 2006; Nora Groce, Barbara Murray, Anna Kealy, 2014), inclusive education to persons with disabilities (Yared, 2008; Ingrid Lewis, 2009; Rachel Hussey, 2016; Abebe, 2017), and the right of persons with disabilities to work and paid employment (ILO, 2004; Marishet Mohammed, 2012). But comparatively less has been produced on the value of persons with disabilities such as their engagement in income-generating activities. The precise nature of persons with disabilities’ engagement in income-generating activities is not well known. Specifically, there is limited understanding of factors that influence their participation in these activities.
The governments at central and local level did not adequately address the problem of people with disabilities through: undertaking needs assessment; providing care and protection to them; ensuring the provision of basic needs to them; involving them in income generating activities and sensitizing the community on issues related to them and their participation in the national development effort.
This paper contributes in bridging these gaps; and investigated the determinants of engagement in income-generating activities; and assessed existing gender disparity among this group of persons with disabilities in the study area.
The over-all objective of the study is to identify the factors that affect the involvement of persons with disabilities in income generating activities in the study area.
The specific objectives are to:
- Describe the socio-economic characteristics of the persons with disabilities in the study area
- Identify factors affecting self-employmentof the persons with disabilitiesin the study area.
- Analyze gender disparity within the group of persons with disabilities.
The study aimed to answer the following research questions.
- What are the socio-economic characteristics of the persons with disabilities in the study area?
- What are the factors that affect self-employment in IGAs of persons with disabilities in the study area?
- Is there a gender disparity within the group of the persons with disabilities?
The finding serves as an input to utilize the undermined contribution of persons with disabilities for the country, in an endeavor on avoiding of unprecedented social crisis. The result of the study serves as an input for planners, decision makers and policy makers. Moreover, the findings and information on the socio-economic profile of the group will serve other scholars/ researchers/ engaged on the subject for further enquiry.
The study is limited to east Wollega zone of Oromia regional state of Ethiopia. Nekemte town is the major cosmopolitan city (urban center) selected to represent the zone. The study is limited to analysis of factors affecting self-employment (i.e. income generating) of the persons with disabilities and does not include any form of unpaid productive works.
The study more or less might be liable to the following limitations. Eliciting information from the respondents like these (disabled groups: unable to hear and speak) requires knowledge of sign languages on the side of the enumerators. Due to lack of such knowledge, provision of translators (third party) for the enumerators was among the tasks of the survey work. Translation of such information might not be perfect when done by third party.
Some sample households are reluctant to correctly tell the exact amount of their daily, weekly, monthly and annual income due to various reasons. The situation required more effort and approaches (mechanism) to obtain correct information.
Moreover, the study encountered problems of base-line secondary information (in-accuracy) and actual distribution of the different categories of persons with disabilities in the town due to mobility. The situation necessitated for a slight modification in the planned sample size distribution within the disabled groups in the six sub cities of the urban center under study.
There are contrasting ways of thinking about the nature of disability in society. Some highlights the dominance of the medical model of disability whereby medical and rehabilitative professionals and practitioners tend to conceive of disability as an individual physiological and/or medical condition requiring the afflicted individual to be given appropriate medical and/or rehabilitative support. It locates disability as a problem of individual functioning. This model is widely criticized on different grounds that reduce the understanding of disability to the conditions of the individual ‘patient’ and ignore wider social and environmental influences in engendering a state of disability (Imrie R., 1997; WHO & World Bank (2011); Lutz and Bowers, 2003; Mitra, 2006&Rimmerman, 2013).
The charity model of disability also focuses on the individual characteristics, and tends to view people with disabilities as passive victims ‒ objects of pity who need care, and whose impairment is their main identifier (Al Ju’beh, 2017). Both the medical and charity models of disability have led to development interventions based largely on impairment needs assessed by expert personnel, involving specialist services that are often severely limited in geographical, age, and impairment reach, as well as generally being expensive to run (Coe, 2012).
Alternatively, there are definitions and models that have evolved from the social justice perspectives and civil rights, and that locate the problem of disability within a disabling society. The social model of disability high lights that social, attitudinal, and environmental barriers in society are an important component in disabling people (Imrie R., 1997&Mitra, 2006). In this mode people are viewed as being disabled by society rather than by their bodies (Oliver, 1990). The model places emphasis on society adapting to include people with disabilities by changing attitudes, practice and policies to remove barriers to participation, but also acknowledges the role of medical professionals (Al Ju’beh, 2017).
The social model has been criticized for ignoring the personal impact of disability and for its emphasis on individual empowerment, which may be contrary to more collective social customs and practices in many developing countries (Al Ju’beh, 2017 &Rimmerman, 2013).
The sociopolitical model (human right mode) views disability as a policy and civil rights issue (Hubbard, 2004). This model stresses that disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others. This model sees people with disabilities as the central actors in their own lives as decision makers, citizens and rights holders (Al Ju’beh, 2017).This model of disability seeks to transform unjust systems and practices and progress on improving social participation can be made by addressing the barriers which hinder persons with disabilities in their day to day lives.
The economic modelof disability, on other hand, bases on the concept of employability, emphasizes a health-related inability (or limited ability) to work rather than physical functioning of the individual (Hubbard, 2004).
Interactional model of disability recognize that disability should be seen as neither purely medical nor purely social, as people with disabilities can experience problems arising from the interaction of their health condition with the environment (WHO & World Bank, 2011). The most commonly used interactional model is the model underlying the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) (WHO & World Bank, 2011). This views disability as arising from the negative interaction between health conditions and the context which includes environmental factors and personal factors (WHO & World Bank, 2011).
ICF defines ‘disabilities’ as an umbrella term referring to impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. Impairment is a problem in body function or structure. It refers to a wide range of bodily functions difficulty that might be grouped as: physical (dysfunction of the musculoskeletal, neurological, cardiac, circulatory and respiratory body systems); mental illness or disorder (schizophrenia, neuroses and psychotic conditions, anxiety and emotional disorders, phobias, depression); cognitive (brain injuries, dementia); sensory (sight loss or blindness, hearing); and intellectual or developmental (below average general intellectual function). Such impairments vary in terms of various characteristics – type, severity, stability, duration and time of onset. Whereas an activity limitation, in the definition of ICF; is a difficulty encountered by an individual in executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in involvement in life situations (WHO & World Bank, 2011)..
Thus to know how to define and approach disability-related issues, it is important to understand how people living with disability perceive its influences on their lives.This study adopted the definition of disability by in reference to impairments, activity limitations and participation restriction due to both physical and mental conditions of individuals.
There is bi-directional link between disability and poverty. Disability may increase the risk of poverty, and poverty may increase the risk of disability (Sen A., 2009).People with disabilities andtheir families are more likely to experience economic and social disadvantage than those without disability.
Presence of impairment has often been considered as one of the factors which may lead a person into poverty (Hoogeveen, 2005). Person with disability have lower education and work opportunities than the rest of the population and are therefore more likely to remain below the poverty line. Disability can additionally result in barriers to skills development, reduced earning or job loss, which in turn may cause economic deprivation. These aspects reduce their human capital and increase their risk of being chronically poor (Yeo & Moore, 2003).
Disability accentuates poverty because the systemic institutional, environmental and attitudinal barriers that people with disabilities encounter in their daily lives (Groce et al., 2011). These include discrimination, social marginalization and isolation; insufficient access to education, adequate housing, nutritious food, clean water, basic sanitation, healthcare and credit; lack of ability to participate fully in legal and political processes; and lack of preparation for and meaningful inclusion in the workforce(Woodburn, 2013&Groce et al., 2011).
Eide and Ingstad (2011) identified established and culturally rooted discriminatory practices that affect individuals with disabilities and their families. People with disabilities, in most cases, are considered a group that deserves help and are excluded as active members of a society. Most pressing issue faced by millions of persons with disabilities worldwide is not their disability but rather poverty. Much of this poverty is the direct and indirect result of exclusion and marginalization of persons with disabilities due to stigma and prejudice about disability (UN 2011). Prejudice toward persons with disability limits their social relationships or social networks which are the important resource, particularly in poor countries where formal systems of support are limited (Narayan, 2000). All of this increases the risks of poverty and reduces the opportunities for a person to live the life they want.
In most cases, schools, universities and other education institutions are not adapted to include people with diverse educational needs; this is one main reason why parents of children with a disability are less likely to take them to school (Action on Disability and Development, 1998 & WHO& WB, 2011). According to the WHO& WB (2011), at least 40 million children with disabilities do not receive an education thus barring them from obtaining knowledge essential to gainful employment and forcing them to grow up to be financially dependent upon others. The societal value of education and the inability of schools to accommodate special needs children substantially will contribute to the discrimination of these individuals. This in turn has a negative effect on future employment and well-being of persons with disability and their families.
Barnes and Mercer demonstrated that the exclusion of persons with disabilities from the paid labor market is a primary reason why the majority of this population experiences far greater levels of poverty and are more reliant on the financial support of others (Barnes & Mercer, 2003). In addition to the economic gains associated with employment, that participation in the formal economic sector reduces discrimination of persons with disabilities. The study conducted in Botswana confirmed that individuals who were able to find formal employment will usually obtain a position in society equal to that of non-disabled citizens (Ingstad, 1995). In most case, however, persons with disability are often excluded from paid labor market. Thus, this might be a reason for majority of this population experiences far greater level of poverty.
Further, disability can lead to poverty in the sense that those with impairments require extra cost of living due to their specific needs (Yeo & Moore, 2003). People with different impairments have special needs that should be covered and in most cases these needs reduce the levels of available income of individuals and their families, creating a poverty trap. The study conducted by Narayan (2000) confirmed this fact, due to extra costs of disability, households containing persons with disability are less likely to accumulate savings and other assets, leaving them vulnerable to economic shocks, such as poor harvests and illness, and high risk coping strategies, such as borrowing from formal money lenders, which compounds the risk and magnitude of poverty.
In addition, transportation services are usually not accessible for individuals with reduced mobility, buildings are not designed to include people with physical impairments, information is not available in braille and only a small number of people can communicate using sign language (WHO, 2011). All these barriers result in people with disabilities having less access to basic services and should be considered when the relationship between disability and poverty is analyzed.
Disability, in conclusion, increases the risk of becoming poor or impoverished. Exclusion from basic services such as education and health has a negative impact on the levels of individual human capital. Extra costs associated with disability are also a main source of risk, not only for individuals but also for their families. If a member of a poor household becomes disabled, the risk of impoverishment and chronic poverty increases and a family can fall into a poverty trap. All these elements play a fundamental role in how the existence of impairments increases the risk of poverty of a person and his/her family.
On the other hand, disability is also a consequence because income poverty can limit the access to health care and services and add to the chances that one lives and works in an environment that may negatively impact health (Yeo, 2005). Poverty is often more likely to contribute, while interacting with the individual’s characteristics like impairment and the environment factors to the increase of disability prevalence (Mitra, 2006). Poverty is associated with malnutrition, inadequate access to public health services, poor living conditions, and environmental exposures which can lead to health conditions which result in disability (Mitra et al., 2013). That is why it often argued that persons with disabilities are among the most disadvantaged people in the world and are over-represented among the poorest of the poor.
The few options available to the poor often necessitate that these individuals put themselves in harm way, consequently resulting in an increase in the acquisition of preventable impairments (Yeo & Moore, 2003). In a study by Oxfam, the organization found that well over half of the instances of childhood blindness and hearing impairment in Africa and Asia were considered preventable or treatable (Lee, 1999). This shows living in poverty decreases an individual’s access to preventative health services, which results in an increase in the acquisition of potentially preventable disabilities.
Farmer (2003) has also identified “social suffering” and “structural violence” as approach to explain the link between disability and poverty. In Zimbabwe, for instance, political and structural forces violating basic human rights are a direct cause of persistent poverty, with dire consequences particularly for children with disability (Muderedzi and Ingstad, 2011). This indicates that without putting the needs of individuals with disabilities in the forefront, there is a high risk for maintaining the disability–poverty relationship even if this was not intentional and even in cases where the intention was to alleviate poverty.
Individuals living in poverty, in general, face different risks that increase their probabilities of becoming ill, having an accident and impairment. Added to this, exclusion from access to preventive, curative and rehabilitation health care services are determinant factors in how impairments become disabilities.
Thus, poverty alleviation policies in developing countries and genuine progress towards achievement of the Millennium Development Goals require that disabled people are explicitly taken into account in multidimensional poverty reduction efforts.
Disability is a critical development issue because of its direct link to poverty. Disability may increase the risk of poverty and poverty in turn may increase the risk of disability. Researches continue to show that people with disabilities and their families are more likely to experience economic and social disadvantage than those without disabilities.
In spite of the close relationship between disability and poverty, disability has historically been invisible in the international development agenda. For example, the Millennium Development Goals, which served as “blueprint” for development from 2000 to 2015, did not include disability either among their goals or in their operationalizing targets and indicators. As a result disability was largely invisible in their implementation, rarely included in national policies or programmes related to the Millennium Development Goals or in monitoring and evaluation efforts.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets to guide international development efforts between 2016 and 2030, represent a significant step forward in terms of the inclusion of disability in internationally-agreed development goals. An emphasis of the Agenda and the SDGs is to “leave no-one behind.” The SDGs require governments, NGOs and development partners to ensure people with disabilities and their representative organizations are included in all aspects of development and humanitarian work (Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development).
The roots of such global commitment to equalizing social and economic opportunities for disabled people are both humanitarian and economic (Metts, 2000). From a humanitarian perspective, it is intended to secure for people with disabilities what are generally agreed to be their basic human rights. From an economic perspective, it is expected to increase the human capital of disabled people, and thus enable them to reduce their dependence on income transfers and other forms of public support. This economic expectation embodies an appreciation of the fact that disability is a development issue.
The economic benefits of adopting a disability inclusive approach to development by recognizing their potential, valuing and respecting their contributions and perspectives are widely acknowledged as being significant (Aus AID, 2008; Metts, 2000; WHO & World Bank, 2011). Persons with disabilities can indeed take charge of their lives, be masters of their own destinies, and lead a productive and meaningful life. Inclusion is not a one-sided process in which service providers and rehabilitation experts try to integrate persons with disabilities into the community and regular employment. Inclusion is achieved by the self-initiative of a group of persons with disabilities. They can create an extraordinary enterprise according to their own special needs. Non-disabled people interact with them on an equal level, as partners in a business, sharing mutual interests of quality production (Reiter, Friedman and Goldman, 1995). As opposed to isolated policies and actions, an inclusive approach to development enhances an integrated strategy benefiting individuals and society as a whole (Berman-Bieler, 2008)
Disability-inclusive development promotes effective development by recognizing that, like all members of a population, people with disabilities are both beneficiaries and agents of development. An inclusive approach seeks to identify and address barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating in and benefiting from development. The explicit inclusion of people with disabilities as active participants in development processes leads to broader benefits for families and communities, reduces the impacts of poverty, and positively contributes to a country’s economic growth (Kelly&Wapling, 2012).
The inclusion of persons with disability also facilitated by formulation of disability-mainstreamed and disability specific policy, legal and implementation instruments, the commencement and emergence of systemic change moving towards inclusive education and training and the availability of political goodwill on the part of the governments of the study countries as opportunities for the enhancement of the participation of students with disabilities in regular vocational education programmes (Abebe, 2017). Thus the issue of disability has to be sufficiently addressed in relation to issues of strategy, prioritization and implementation.
Self-employment of individuals could be defined as the process of earning a living through the use of own capital or borrowed fund using ones’ own knowledge, intelligence and efficiency by taking minimum risk. Self-employed people have their own work rather than being provided by another employer, earning income from a trade or business that they operate.
There are two divergent views of the self-employed (Ellen, 2003). The first perception, the one typically encountered in the literature, is one of the visionary or maverick. He is an entrepreneur—an independent worker who accepts risk in returns greater reward. His independent nature may add to his own valuation of self-employment. His taste for risk may be different from others’. Alternatively, the self-employed may be a discouraged wage worker who finds his offered wages too low or his employment too sporadic in the wage sector. In other words, he chooses self-employment not because the value of self-employment is so high but because his value of wage work is so low. Understanding which of these viewpoints is true is important in analyzing self-employment of person with disability.
Disability affects a wide range of socio-economic outcomes, including labour market participation, but also other factors that shape participation, including education, information and transport. Disabled people experience lower labour market participation rates than the non-disabled. Disabled people tend to be concentrated in lower-skilled, lower-paid occupations (Meager and Higgins, 2011). But such low participation rates are costly for the individuals concerned in terms of economic and psychological well-being, for governments in terms of lost output and tax revenues, and increased welfare payments, and for society in terms of the impact of social exclusion and discrimination on civic participation and public life.
One possible solution to problems of low participation rates lies in the potential for disabled people to become self-employed or to start and run their own businesses. Some argue that self-employment can be used as a potential rehabilitation vocational tool to achieve faster and better integration into the labour market of individuals who become disabled (Arnold and Seekins 2002).
Data from Europe and the US suggests that self-employment rates are higher among disabled people than those non-disabled people (13 per cent compared with 11 per cent: DRC, 2002; Meager and Higgins, 2011). This suggests that self-employment is an important source of paid work for disabled people.
But the extents of participation self-employment rates vary by type and severity of impairment, gender, education and residential location. Self-employment rates were higher among people who were severely limited in their daily activities than among those reporting some or no limitation in daily activities (Pagán 2009; Jones&Latreille 2011). Boylan and Burchardt (2002) found that, in the UK, men and women with musculoskeletal problems, and women with mental health problems, are particularly likely to be self-employed, while men with sensory impairments are relatively unlikely to be self-employed.
The finding of Reyes et al (2011) also reported that for the mobility- impaired, their primary employment/income sources were earnings from businesses while for the blind, wages and salaries. The deaf on the other hand, relied heavily on money received from family and friends and therefore they can be considered to be the least independent among the groups of persons with disability included in the survey.
They are attracted to such employment because of ‘pull’ and ‘push’ factors. As a pull factor they attracted to self-employment because such employments offered more flexibility (i.e., being able to arrange work hours to fit round periods of greater and less impairment). Self-employment might arguably provide the flexibility in work tasks, pacing, hours and location sought by disabled people and a better adjustment between disability status and working life (Pagán2009; Meager and Higgins 2011). Pull factors are related to flexibility in working hours, location of work, accommodation of special needs in the workplace, and overall work satisfaction that arises when people are self-employed; these items closely relate to why disabled people may also have preferences towards part time or casual work (Gouskova, 2012).
Other researchers emphasize push factors such as a lack of alternative employment opportunities and employer discrimination (Foster 2010; Ravaud et al, 1992) that may make self-employment seem a more attractive or feasible option. Employers may hold negative stereotypes of disabled people that limit their opportunities for employment (Davidson, 2011). The disabled face greater stigma in being embraced as a viable employee. This may include being viewed as a costly addition to a company’s workforce. Additional factors include lower wages paid and lack of recognition of their abilities. UK data suggests that women are more likely to report pull factors (Boylan and Burchardt 2002).
The push factor, employer discrimination, may be highest for those impairments or limitations that are subject to greater prejudice by employers such as those with mental and physical problems (Pagán 2009). For these people, self-employment might offer the only opportunity for active labour market participation and the associated incomes and living standards.
Whether pushed or pulled towards self-employment, the individual with a disability has personalities that support the desire that many people have for self-sufficiency. Self-sufficiency through self-employment may relate to gaining independence, improving work–life balance increasing happiness and satisfaction with their career, capitalizing on an identified opportunity, and to increasing income and quality of life (Halabisky, 2014)
Advocates of self-employment options for people with disabilities suggest that benefits for individuals include increased range of choices, income generation, community engagement, inclusion and integration, enhanced self-esteem, improved quality of life and growing social networks (Helen, 2012).
Sullivan and Cooper (1998) talked to entrepreneurs with disabilities. They reported that individuals enjoyed having more flexibility, control and choice in the types of work they did. They also reported increased self-confidence, more meaningful work, community involvement, perceived status and income potential.
A case study conducted by Reiter, Friedman and Goldman (1995) confirmed that self-employment opportunity of person with disability helps them to master new technical skills, learn new work-related behaviours, expand their interpersonal competencies and felt personal growth. It helps them to develop high motivation to make their operation successful.
Blanck et al. (2000) noted that for individuals with mental health conditions, self-employment can be a desirable and effective employment option. Their interviews with entrepreneurs with depression reported that the ability to regulate work hours and work-loads made self-employment attractive and viable. Grandin and Duffy (2004) explore the benefits of self-employment for young people with autism and Asperger syndrome. They note that self-employment allows greater accommodation of disability emphasizes an individual’s strengths and interests and is a route to social and economic empowerment.
Some people with disability see self-employment as a platform for innovation and an opportunity to change attitudes to disability (Angelocci et al. 2008). A successful entrepreneur with a disability can help counter the stereotype of people with disability being dependent and impoverished (Yamamoto, Unruth, and Bullis, 2012), serve as models for others and raise awareness about the skills and competencies of people with disability (Blanck et al. 2000).
Self-employment benefits can also be more intrinsic or intangible, such as having a decision-making role, sense of dignity, personal control, personal competence, work autonomy, self-worth, self-reliance, enjoyment of work, and a way to meet personal expectations, (Yamamoto, Unruth, and Bullis 2012). In many European countries, self-employed men with disabilities report higher levels of job satisfaction compared to their employed counterparts (Pagán, 2009).
Working for yourself also creates an identity and purpose, builds self-respect and confidence and is a route to social inclusion. It also means people can be seen by others as ‘able’ rather than ‘disabled’. For some people with disabilities, self-employment is a last resort, as they have not been able to secure supported employment (Helen, 2012).
Disabled people are likely to face specific barriers to entering and sustaining self-employment are very deep-rooted social-structural constraints imposing severe limits on life chances for certain groups of disabled people. Lack of access to start-up capital is the most common barrier.Disabled people often experience difficulties of financing new start-ups due to limited personal financial resources (savings, home ownership), which, in turn, are partly due to poor education, lower employment rates and the concentration of disabled employees in low-paid occupations; poor credit rating after long-term benefit receipt; disinterest/discrimination on the part of banks; lack of accessible information on sources of grants and loans (Boylan and Burchardt, 2002; Foster, 2010).
Viriri and Makurumidze (2014) emphasized that access to capital and lack of customers as the two major barriers to self-employment by people with disabilities. Disabled entrepreneurship are also socially excluded, stigmatized and marginalized and consequently their network ties and cohesion in business circles are weak and frail. Self-employment can be deterred by customer discrimination, reducing the demand for goods and services produced, as well as the rewards to self-employment (Boylan and Burchardt, 2002; Jones and Latreille, 2011).
The main finding of de Klerk (2008) indicated that in reality many people with disabilities do not have access to microfinance programmes. This can be explained by disabilities of person with disabilities by staff of micro financial institutions (MFIs), who do not believe in their income earning and repayment capacity, and self-exclusion by person with disabilities. Many of persons with disability have no prior business experience, while many MFIs only provide loans to clients with an existing business. To fight against these projects need to be set-up linking MFIs with programmes for persons with disability, to facilitate their inclusion. Vocational and/or business training also required to raise their self-confidence prior to setting-up of a self-employment activity.
Stevens (2003) reported the perceived barriers to self-employment for people with disabilities as access to finance, the application processes and difficulties filling in forms, illness and stress which affects a person’s availability and ability to work, information about enterprise supports not tailored to or reaching people with disabilities, lack of business skills and access to business networks and fear of losing benefits.
Galway Traveller Movement Enterprise Toolkit (2012) highlights several barriers to enterprise for discriminated groups includes fear of failure and lack of confidence (especially for women), lack of education and skills, financial barriers (e.g. access to seed capital and longer-term financing), loss of benefits or the fear of a loss of benefits, business information, enterprise supports and access to business networks and lack of role models (particularly for women).
Robinson (2000) identified evidence of obstacles to employment included a lack of understanding about the capability of disabled people, lack of knowledge about financial and technical assistance and undifferentiated approaches to access and accommodation. This study demonstrates the need for better interagency communication and a more effective information distribution strategy, particularly in relation to the availability of systems of support and the capability of persons with disability.
The education of person with disability has a considerable effect on his probability of self-employment and income earning. The rate returns from education is great. The study conducted by Mori and Yamagata (2009) that highly educated person with disability earn substantial amounts of income while those with no education earn far less than the educated ones. They also found that females earn only one-third of the income of males with the same education, age, marital status, and disability.
The study by Choto, Tengeh and Iwu(2014) indicated that lack of education and training was a major inhibitor of entrepreneurial growth in the economy. Disabled people often lack specialist business management, legal and financial expertise due to limited relevant education and employment experience might feel at a disadvantage. Disabled entrepreneurs need training in terms of business plan preparation, strategic planning, decision making, negotiation, pricing, market penetration, organization and management, management of the workforce, and handling of cash-flow among other issues. But such training are often lacking for persons with disabilities.
Alexander and Morgan (2005) explain that people without disabilities usually have negative impressions about people with disabilities, viewing them as inferior. These impressions can foster discrimination when entrepreneurs living with disabilities run their businesses as people without disabilities will be viewing them as inferior.
Surveys indicate that there is often a fear of losing the security of regular benefit income when other income is generated (Boylan and Burchardt, 2002; Doyel, 2002). Awareness of eligibility for benefits is incomplete among the population of people with disabilities and contributes to perceptions of self-employment as ‘risky’.
Some entrepreneurs with disabilities need to hire assistants to help them undertake tasks that many people without disabilities may be able to do on their own (e.g. moving merchandise, inputting data into computer software), which increases their labour costs and puts them at a competitive disadvantage (Roni, 2009).
The summary of literatures by Sharon (2015) identified barriers of enterprises like lack of access to finance, lack of capital, lack of support barriers, lack of confidence, fear of failure, lack of prior experience, business bureaucracy, lack of information, gender, discrimination, lack of access to transport, lack of physical access to building, benefit trap and loss of medical card.
Only very few studies are available focusing specifically on self-employment of persons with disabilities. It is possible to categorize the reviews into three types. The first category of studies focuses on prevalence and diversity of persons with disabilities. The second sets of studies are focusing on the inclusive education. This includes inclusiveness at higher education, inclusiveness to disabled children, and inclusiveness in formal vocational education. Other studies focus on the rights of persons with disabilities to work and employment and particularly focusing on paid employment, not self-employment.
Yohannis and Johanna (2006) conducted the study to assess the prevalence and impact of disability in one urban and three rural areas in north-western Ethiopia. Their finding indicates that the proportion of people affected by disability is significant and deserves the attention of the relevant health authorities. Access to education by this community group is very limited. The lower locomot or disability is the most common type of disability observed among the studied disabled subjects followed by visual impairment. The majority of the disabled have problems in self-care especially toileting, bathing and dressing. The most common problem mentioned by the disabled people in the study was difficulty with movement for lack of appliances.
Perhaps the single most striking finding from the study conducted by Nora Groce, Barbara Murray, Anna Kealy (2014) is the prevalence, diversity of the experiences and needs of disabled beggars who, from the outside, look so similar. This diversity offers a number of points for interventions which could both keep many from becoming beggars in the first place and also offer others viable options to leave the streets and earn a living, allowing them a more secure life with dignity and self-determination.
Bachelorarbeit, 39 Seiten
Akademische Arbeit, 71 Seiten
Doktorarbeit / Dissertation, 263 Seiten
Seminararbeit, 13 Seiten
Akademische Arbeit, 172 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 90 Seiten
Rezension / Literaturbericht, 14 Seiten
Studienarbeit, 23 Seiten
Forschungsarbeit, 17 Seiten
Forschungsarbeit, 33 Seiten
Essay, 16 Seiten
Wissenschaftlicher Aufsatz, 3 Seiten
Studienarbeit, 32 Seiten
Seminararbeit, 14 Seiten
Bachelorarbeit, 39 Seiten
Akademische Arbeit, 71 Seiten
Doktorarbeit / Dissertation, 263 Seiten
Seminararbeit, 13 Seiten
Akademische Arbeit, 172 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 90 Seiten
Forschungsarbeit, 17 Seiten
Forschungsarbeit, 33 Seiten
Essay, 16 Seiten
Wissenschaftlicher Aufsatz, 3 Seiten
Der GRIN Verlag hat sich seit 1998 auf die Veröffentlichung akademischer eBooks und Bücher spezialisiert. Der GRIN Verlag steht damit als erstes Unternehmen für User Generated Quality Content. Die Verlagsseiten GRIN.com, Hausarbeiten.de und Diplomarbeiten24 bieten für Hochschullehrer, Absolventen und Studenten die ideale Plattform, wissenschaftliche Texte wie Hausarbeiten, Referate, Bachelorarbeiten, Masterarbeiten, Diplomarbeiten, Dissertationen und wissenschaftliche Aufsätze einem breiten Publikum zu präsentieren.
Kostenfreie Veröffentlichung: Hausarbeit, Bachelorarbeit, Diplomarbeit, Dissertation, Masterarbeit, Interpretation oder Referat jetzt veröffentlichen!