Sarah Parker Harris

Parity of participation in liberal welfare states: human rights, neoliberalism, disability and employment

Governments continue to face challenges in implementing effective strategies to increase social and economic participation of people with disabilities. In a recent OECD high-level policy forum on Sickness, Disability and Work, the main policy message was the need for a culture of inclusion; with a dual focus on short-term active policy interventions and long-term structural reform. This paper examines policies in liberal welfare states that encourage people receiving disability benefits to participate in the labor market. Examples from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia of active labor market programs aimed at moving people with disabilities from workfare are analyzed in the context of international disability rights and neoliberal discourse. The paper explores the extent to which new approaches to activation policies are facilitating parity of participation and factors that impact the effectiveness of these policies.

Social entrepreneurship as an employment pathway for people with disabilities: exploring political–economic and socio-cultural factors

The current economic climate demands more innovative approaches to increasing labor market participation for people with disabilities. Social entrepreneurship (SE) offers one alternative employment pathway. However, little is known about the broader factors influencing SE for people with disabilities. Using empirical data from focus groups comprised of social entrepreneurs with disabilities and interviews with key stakeholders working in the fields of policy, disability, and business, this research frames its analysis in the intersection of disability studies and entrepreneurship to explore which factors influence the potential for SE to provide equal participation opportunities for people with disabilities in the labor market. Findings suggest that further consideration of political–economic and socio-cultural factors is needed if we are to better understand the potential of SE for people with disabilities.

Accessing social entrepreneurship: Perspectives of people with disabilities and key stakeholders

Social entrepreneurship has been gaining increasing attention as a possible employment strategy for people with dis- abilities. However, little is known about the experiences of social entrepreneurs with disabilities in relation to their resources needs, opportunities for participation, and barriers they encounter. Further, little is understood about how social entrepreneurship differs from self-employment or forms of commercial entrepreneurship. The findings included herein are representative of the first empirical research integrating the fields of disability studies and entrepreneurship studies to explore social entrepreneurship among people with disabilities through interviews with key stakeholders working in the field (n = 19) and focus groups with social entrepreneurs with disabilities themselves (n = 27). Three themes emerged from this qualitative research that hold particular impor- tance to policymakers and professionals working in the field of vocational rehabilitation: 1) education, training and information; 2) finance, funding and asset development; 3) networking and supports. The findings demonstrate that social entrepreneurship can be an effective model of employment but is currently underutilized. With additional investment, it can offer a meaningful way for people with disabilities to participate in the labor market and complement existing strategies in competitive and customized employment to promote choice and self-determination.

Entrepreneurial entry by people with disabilities

This article investigates the effect of disability on progress in the start-up process. One person out of 10 has a disability, yet entrepreneurship literature remains silent on the contributions of this population. This is surprising given that people with disabilities are more likely to be self-employed than the general population. Results from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics show that start-up efforts by nascent entrepreneurs with disabilities are less likely to result in the emergence of a viable organization, indicating that nascent entrepreneurs with disabilities face particular challenges.

Entrepreneurship by Any Other Name: Self-Sufficiency Versus Innovation

Entrepreneurship has been promoted as an innovative strategy to address the employment of people with disabilities. Research has predominantly focused on the self-sufficiency aspect without fully integrating entrepreneurship literature in the areas of theory, systems change, and demonstration projects. Subsequently there are gaps in services, policies, and research in this field that, in turn, have limited our understanding of the support needs and barriers or facilitators of entrepreneurs with disabilities. A thorough analysis of the literature in these areas led to the development of two core concepts that need to be addressed in integrating entrepreneurship into disability employment research and policy: clarity in operational definitions and better disability statistics and outcome measures. This article interrogates existing research and policy efforts in this regard to argue for a necessary shift in the field from focusing on entrepreneurship as self-sufficiency to understanding entrepreneurship as innovation.

Enhancing rigor and practice of scoping reviews in social policy research: considerations from a worked example on the Americans with disabilities act.

BACKGROUND There is increasing theoretical consideration about the use of systematic and scoping reviews of evidence in informing disability and rehabilitation research and practice. Indicative of this trend, this journal published a piece by Rumrill, Fitzgerald and Merchant in 2010 explaining the utility and process for conducting reviews of intervention-based research. There is still need to consider how to apply such rigor when conducting more exploratory reviews of heterogeneous research. OBJECTIVES This article explores the challenges, benefits, and procedures for conducting rigorous exploratory scoping reviews of diverse evidence. METHODS The article expands upon Rumrill, Fitzgerald and Merchants framework and considers its application to more heterogeneous evidence on the impact of social policy. RESULTS A worked example of a scoping review of the Americans with Disabilities Act is provided with a procedural framework for conducting scoping reviews on the effects of a social policy. The need for more nuanced techniques for enhancing rigor became apparent during the review process. CONCLUSIONS There are multiple methodological steps that can enhance the utility of exploratory scoping reviews. The potential of systematic consideration during the exploratory review process is shown as a viable method to enhance the rigor in reviewing diverse bodies of evidence.

Equality through Difference: Policy Values, Human Rights, and Social Justice in the Employment Participation of People with Disabilities

Since the postwar period, conceptions of disability have shifted from a status involving isolation and segregation to one that recognizes equal rights and participation. An integral factor in participation, the right to work, is recognized as a fundamental human right by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD 2006). However, people with disabilities continue to be impeded by a disabling society embedded in structural and attitudinal barriers. People with disabilities are denied equal citizenship, which has been exacerbated in recent years as governments continue to face challenges in increasing the social and economic participation of people with disabilities. Particularly in liberal welfare states, contemporary disability employment policy embraces a neoliberal discourse and focuses on the development of workfare programs that encourage labor force participation as the principle means of achieving equality. This has resulted in a limited policy focus that fails to account for all the economic and cultural steps needed to ensure parity of participation of people with disabilities. This chapter uses examples from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia of active labor market programs aimed at moving people with disabilities from welfare to work.

Does workfare policy in the United States promote the rights of people with disabilities

BACKGROUND: Policymakers in the United States continue to face challenges in implementing effective strategies to encourage people with disabilities receiving disability benefits to participate in the labor market. Ticket to Work is one such strategy that has undergone considerable scrutiny. However, the experience of people with disabilities within welfare reform is an area that has been under-researched. OBJECTIVE: To explore how this contentious issue affects the provision of Vocational Rehabilitation services. Following the implementation of Ticket to Work, does workfare policy allow people with disabilities to pursue full and equal participation in the labor market, and do they have equality of opportunity to achieve employment? METHODS: This research takes a qualitative approach to social policy, using empirical data from focus groups with people with disabilities and interviews with policymakers, employment service providers and employers. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from an analysis of data framed within the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in relation to disability rights and workfare policy: the rights of people with disabilities; the expectations of people with disabilities; and the practices associated with policy reform. The findings suggest that a collaboration of government actors, community organizations and the business community is necessary in order to achieve human rights.

Systematic review and Knowledge Translation: A framework for synthesizing heterogeneous research evidence

BACKGROUND Participatory methodologies in disability and rehabilitation research are used to capture the perspectives of people with disabilities and to recognize the agency of stakeholder groups. Existing resources for conducting systematic reviews seldom provide details about how to integrate stakeholder input into the methodological process. OBJECTIVES This article considers how knowledge translation strategies can support and advance systematic reviews that include diverse types of research. METHODS Lessons learned from conducting a systematic review of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) employment research are explained and contextualized within research on barriers and facilitators to successful knowledge translation. RESULTS Steps from the research protocol are described to provide a procedural framework for integrating stakeholder feedback into the review process. Descriptive mapping, an analytical technique most commonly used in scoping reviews, was deemed necessary to provide a clearer understanding and overview of the diverse body of research evidence. CONCLUSIONS Stakeholder feedback can address barriers to knowledge translation by engaging end-users of research products throughout the review process. Given the growing scholarly recognition of qualitative and mixed-methods techniques as suitable approaches for systematic review, there is further need for consideration on how these approaches can benefit from more participatory research processes.

Can Policy to Address Some Disability Rights Mitigate Weak Approaches to Others

Governments prioritize some rights over others because of policy constraints. We ask whether differential disability policy priorities can readdress other unrealized rights when applied to services for people with disabilities in boarding houses in Australia. The housing is inappropriate to their support needs and breaches their immediate right to unsegregated housing. Findings about the government-funded support showed that their well-being improved, but the housing increased their support needs and reduced their eligibility for suitable housing, implying that support policies that prioritize progressive realization rights are not successful where immediate realization rights to housing remain unaddressed. These findings about the negative social outcomes from ignoring human rights hierarchies have implications for policy priorities.