COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS   European Disability Strategy 2010-2020:  A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe   {COM(2010) 636 final} {SEC(2010) 1324 final}
Date: 2010-11-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European social policy, action programme, disabled person, discrimination based on disability, equal treatment, fundamental rights, marginalisation, social participation

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 15.11.2010 
SEC(2010) 1323 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying the 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS  

European Disability Strategy 2010-2020:  
A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe 

{COM(2010) 636 final} 
{SEC(2010) 1324 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

1.4. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

2.5. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

3.3. 

3.4. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.3. 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction.................................................................................................................. 4 

Overview of the situation ............................................................................................. 4 

Definition of disability ................................................................................................. 4 

Prevalence of disability ................................................................................................ 4 

National differences ..................................................................................................... 5 

Social and economic impact of disability .................................................................... 6 

The 2004-2010 Disability Action Plan’s achievements............................................... 8 

Historical and institutional context of disability policies at EU and Member State 
level .............................................................................................................................. 8 

Scope of the 2003-2010 Disability Action Plan......................................................... 10 

Summary of DAP achievements ................................................................................ 11 

Impact of EU initiatives ............................................................................................. 13 

Key recommendations from mid-term evaluation of the DAP .................................. 19 

Development of the new European Disability Strategy 2010-2020........................... 21 

International and EU developments ........................................................................... 21 

Views of the European institutions ............................................................................ 33 

Stakeholder consultation ............................................................................................ 35 

Surveys and expert input............................................................................................ 35 

European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: Objectives................................................ 37 

General objectives...................................................................................................... 37 

Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 37 

European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 ................................................................... 38 

Justification for reinforced action .............................................................................. 38 

Expected impact ......................................................................................................... 39 

Monitoring and evaluation of the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 ............. 40 

Annex 1 – Summary of the main outcomes of the public consultation ..................... 42 

Annex 2 – Table with key instruments for implementation of the UNCRPD ........... 55 

Annex 3 – Results of the EU Disability Action Plan 2008-2009............................... 59 

Annex 4 – List of recent reference documents........................................................... 74 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
List of main abbreviations 

EC: European Communities 

EU: European Union 

MS: Member States 

CoE: Council of Europe 

UN: United Nations 

ILO: International Labour Organisation 

OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development  

TEC: Treaty Establishing the European Community 

TEU: Treaty on European Union 

TFEU: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

UNCRPD:  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  or  "UN 
Convention" 

DAP: Disability Action Plan 

DHLG: Disability High Level Group 

NGO: Non Governmental Organisation 

OMC: Open Method of Coordination 

SPSI: Social Protection and Social Inclusion 

ANED: Academic Network of European Disability Experts 

NSR: National Strategic Report 

EU-SILC: EU Statistics on Income, Social Inclusion and Living Conditions 

EQLS: European Quality of Life Survey  

LFS: Labour Force Survey 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
INTRODUCTION 

This background document relating to the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 describes 
the present situation as regards disability in the EU, refers to evidence  and  supporting  data, 
underpins  the  new  strategy  and  summarises  the  contributions  received  in  the  public  and  the 
stakeholders’ consultation rounds. 

1. 

OVERVIEW OF THE SITUATION  

1.1. 

Definition of disability 

There is no EU-wide definition of disability. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of 
Persons with Disabilities1 (UNCRPD or UN Convention) uses an open definition which says 
that (Article 1) ‘Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, 
intellectual  or  sensory  impairments  which  in  interaction  with  various  barriers  may  hinder 
their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.’ 

The Convention recognises that disability is an ‘evolving concept’ and one that ‘results from 
the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers 
that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others’.  

In practice, the definition of disability depends on its intended use: non-discrimination laws 
may be based on different criteria from those used to determine eligibility for state benefits. 
Moreover, definitions within the same policy area vary between Member States: the ‘Study on 
the  situation  of  women  with  disabilities  in  light  of  the  UNCRPD’  provides  a  comparative 
analysis  of  differences  in  the  emphasis  that  European  countries  place  on  the  medical  and 
social aspects of disability when adopting non-discrimination laws2.  

1.2. 

Prevalence of disability 

The  proportion  of  people  with  disabilities  or  long-term  health  problems  across  the  Member 
States is estimated at 15.7 % of the working-age population.3 This is the evidence of the 2002 
ad hoc disability module of the Labour Force Survey (LFS AHM).4  

However, the LFS AHM only surveyed working-age (16-64) persons. The annual survey on 
Statistics on Income, Social Inclusion and Living Conditions (SILC) includes all persons aged 
15  and  above.  In  years  2006  through  2008,  on  average  almost  8 %  of  respondents  across 
Europe stated that they were severely restricted in ‘activities people usually do’ and 16.5 % 
of  respondents  stated  that  they  were  restricted  to  some  extent,  adding  up  to  approximately 

1 
2 

3 

4 

UN Website, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. [Online]. 
Ecotec, ‘Study on the situation of women with disabilities in light of the UN Convention for the Rights 
of  Persons  with  Disabilities’,  A  Final  Report  for  the  DG  Employment,  Social  Affairs  and  Equal 
Opportunities of the European Commission (VC/2007/317), December 2009 [Online]. 
The 2002 ad hoc disability module of the Labour Force Survey shows that 6.3 % of working-age people 
see themselves as severely restricted, 4.1 % somewhat restricted and further 5.2 % report some form of 
disability or a long-term disease. 
APPLICA & CESEP & ALPHAMETRICS, ‘Men and Women with Disabilities in the EU: Statistical 
Analysis  of  the  LFS  ad  hoc  module  and  the  EU-  SILC’  Final  Report  of  study  undertaken  for  the 
European Commission,, April 2007, Europa website [Online], p. 10 & 28. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
24.5 %  of  the  population.  The  data  from  SILC  for  persons  of  working  ages  15-64  who  say 
they are severely restricted or restricted to some extent show a total percentage of 17.6 % of 
the population, which is in line with the percentage of the LFS AHM. 

Among  the  respondents  to  another  European-level  survey,  the  European  Quality  of  Life 
Survey (EQLS), 7 % considered themselves to be severely disabled and 15 % disabled to some 
extent. 

While  there  is  some  variation  between  the  figures  of  these  surveys,  the  incidence  of  severe 
restriction (respectively 6 %, 8 %, and 7 %) is in a narrow range.  

Another quantitative approach uses the Healthy Life Years methodology, which looks at life 
expectancy without disability. Based on data from Eurostat, the results5 are that in the EU25 
men were expected to live 80.7 % of their life without disability, while women could expect to 
live 75.4 % of their lives free of disability.  

Further analysis shows that there is a clear correlation between age and disability. EU-SILC 
data from 2006 to 2008 show that on average over 30 % of respondents aged over 75 say they 
are restricted to some extent, and over 20 % describe themselves as severely restricted. In the 
85-and-over age group, ‘severe limitation’ is more common than ‘some limitation’. The EU-
SILC  data  suggest  that  across  all  age  groups,  the  prevalence  of  limitation  was  somewhat 
higher amongst women than men in 20076, with almost 9 % of women describing themselves 
as severely restricted and around 18 % as restricted to some extent compared to 7 % and over 
14 % respectively amongst men. It seems that men are more likely to be strongly limited than 
women,  as  exemplified  by  looking  at  the  55-64  age  group  in  the  EU-SILC,  where  10 %  of 
men are classified as strongly limited against just over 8 % of women7. 

In summary, these results indicate that at least one in six of working-age Europeans living in 
households  is  affected  by  some  form  of  disability  or  long-standing  health  problem.  If  those 
living in institutions and people of retirement age are taken into account, the overall incidence 
is even higher. 

1.3. 

National differences 

An analysis of the EQLS data shows great differences in the incidence of disability between 
countries, from around 20 % in the EU15 up to 32 % in the new Member States 8.  

Similarly,  the  LFS  dataset  showed  that  proportions  varied  markedly  across  EU  Member 
States, ranging from 32 % in Finland and 27 % in the UK to just under 7 % in Italy9.  

5 
6 

7 

8 

9 

Europa - Public Health, 5/05/2010, ‘Data on the Healthy Life Years in the European Union’. 
APPLICA & CESEP & ALPHAMETRICS, ‘Men and Women with Disabilities in the EU: Statistical 
Analysis  of  the  LFS  ad  hoc  module  and  the  EU-  SILC’,  Final  Report  of  study  undertaken  for  the 
European Commission, Europa website, April 2007, p. 45. 
APPLICA & CESEP & ALPHAMETRICS, ‘Men and Women with Disabilities in the EU: Statistical 
Analysis  of  the  LFS  ad  hoc  module  and  the  EU-  SILC’,  Final  Report  of  study  undertaken  for  the 
European Commission, Europa website, April 2007, p. 45. 
Fahey et al., ‘Quality of Life – First European Quality of Life Survey 2003’, 2004. Europa website – 
Eurofound, p. 56. 
APPLICA & CESEP & ALPHAMETRICS, ‘Men and Women with Disabilities in the EU: Statistical 
Analysis  of  the  LFS  ad  hoc  module  and  the  EU-  SILC’,  Final  Report  of  study  undertaken  for  the 
European Commission, Europa website, April 2007, p. 20. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The EU-SILC showed variations, with for example 25 % of the population being hampered to 
some extent in Estonia and a corresponding figure of 6.5 % in Iceland. These differences in 
self-reported limitations may be due to environmental, social or economic factors, but could 
also reflect different societal and cultural attitudes to what constitutes limitation. 

While  there  may  be  some  difference  between  countries10,  there  seems  to  be  a  general 
consensus  that  demographic  trends  (i.e.  ageing  of  population)  lead  to  an  increase  in  the 
number  of  years  which  a  person  will  live  with  a  disability  and  hence  to  an  increase  in  the 
number of persons with disabilities. 

1.4. 

Social and economic impact of disability  

Available  evidence  suggests  that  persons  with  disabilities  suffer  explicit  or  concealed 
discrimination or are at risk of discrimination. This leads to a number of social and economic 
disadvantages: 

•  Incidence  of  poverty  for  persons  with  disabilities  is  70 %  higher  than  average.11  The 
enlargements of 2004 and 2007 increased the number of persons with disabilities by some 
9 million. Standards of living are substantially below the EU average in most of the ‘EU-
12’,  which  implies  an  increase  of  EU  citizens  with  disabilities  living  in  precarious 
circumstances. 

•  The work-related limitations imposed on persons with disabilities carry a significant risk 
of isolation and exclusion, the ‘benefit trap’ appearing to be one of the biggest obstacles to 
their labour market participation. 

•  Employment  rates  for  persons  with  very  severe  and  severe  degrees  of  disability  are 

respectively 19.5 % and 44.1 %  

•  Fewer opportunities for persons  with  disabilities to participate  fully in education carry a 
significant disadvantage for personal development. Measures to facilitate full inclusion of 
persons  with  disabilities  at  all  levels  of  education  would  considerably  improve  their 
standing in the labour market and their social integration. 

A study by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions 
highlights ten risk factors for social exclusion12: long-term dependence on low or inadequate 
income;  long-term  unemployment;  low  quality  employment  or  absence  of  employment 
record;  low  level  of  education  and  illiteracy;  growing  up  in  a  vulnerable  family;  disability; 
health;  living  in  an  area  of  multiple  disadvantage;  precarious  housing  conditions  and 
homelessness; immigration, ethnicity, racism and discrimination. 

People with disabilities suffer from most of these social exclusion risk factors13. A particular 
strand of research has examined how the risk of people acquiring a disability relates to some 

10 

11 

12 
13 

Lafortune  et  al.,  ‘Trends  in  Severe  Disability  Among  Elderly  People:  Assessing  the  Evidence  in  12 
OECD  Countries  and  the  Future  Implications’,  30.03.2007,  OECD  Health  working  papers,  OECD 
website, p. 6. 
According to the 2004 EU-SILC data, over 17 % of those aged 16-64 who were strongly limited in what 
they could do had income below the risk of poverty line compared to just over 10 % of those not limited 
at all. 
Grammenos, S., ‘Illness, Disability and Social Inclusion’, 2003, Europa website – Eurofound, p. 31. 
Grammenos, S., ‘Illness, Disability and Social Inclusion’, 2003, Europa website – Eurofound, p. 31. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
of  these  factors.  For  instance,  European-level  analysis  of  socio-economic  characteristics  of 
people  with  illness  and  disability  has  shown  that  poorly  educated  people,  poor,  unskilled 
workers and the unemployed constitute high-risk groups for acquiring a disability14.  

14 

Grammenos, S., ‘Illness, Disability and Social Inclusion’, 2003, Europa website – Eurofound, p. 125. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

2.1. 

THE 2004-2010 DISABILITY ACTION PLAN’S ACHIEVEMENTS 

Historical  and  institutional  context  of  disability  policies  at  EU  and  Member 
State level 

Since 1983, the Commission has supported the development of a European disability policy 
through a succession of action programmes15, initially aimed at promoting networking among 
rehabilitation and education professionals. The third disability action programme (HELIOS II) 
marked  an  important  shift  in  the  Commission’s  approach,  its  aim  being  ‘to  promote  equal 
opportunities  for  and  the  integration  of  disabled  people’.  The  equal  opportunities  approach 
was clearly set out in a 1996 Communication16.  

With the insertion of Article 13 into the EC Treaty by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997 (now 
Article  19  TFEU),  appropriate  steps  could  be  taken  to  combat  discrimination  based  on  sex, 
racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. This led in 2000 
to the adoption of the Framework Equal Treatment Directive (Council Directive 2000/78/EC), 
which requires Member States to take measures to prohibit various forms of discrimination on 
grounds  of  disability  (as  well  as  religion,  belief,  age  and  sexual  orientation)  in  employment 
and  occupation.  Furthermore,  the  rights  of  persons  with  disabilities  have  been  addressed  in 
recent years by EU legislation in several sectors, such as transport, public procurement, ICT, 
and structural funds17.  

The current EU Disability Action Plan (DAP) was formulated for the period 2003-201018 in 
two-year  phases  with  the  following  policy  priorities:  in  2008-2009  it  focused  on 
accessibility,19  in  2006-2007  on  active  inclusion20  and  in  2004-2005  on  employment21. 
Although disability issues require action at all levels of governance, the DAP focused on the 
measures  taken  by  the  Commission  at  EU  level,  aiming  to  coordinate  the  activities  of  the 
various  Commission  services.  The  action  plan  is  based  on  three  pillars:  mainstreaming, 
accessibility and legislation against discrimination. 

15 

16 

17 
18 

19 

20 

21 

Community  Social  Action  Programme  on  the  Social  Integration  of  Handicapped  People,  1983-88, 
(1981);  HELIOS  I  (Second)  Community  Social  Action  Programme  for  Disabled  People  (1988)  OJ 
L104/38;  HELIOS  II  (Third)  Community  Action  Programme  to  Assist  Disabled  People  (1993)  OJ 
L56/30. 
Communication of the Commission on Equality of Opportunity for People with Disabilities - COM(96) 
406, 30.07.1996. 
See the Disability Action Plan 2008-2009, achievements at EU level. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the  European 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  ‘Equal  Opportunities  for people 
with disabilities: A European Action Plan’ - COM(2003) 650, 30.10.2003 [online]. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the  European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Situation of disabled people in the 
European Union: The European Action Plan 2008-2009’ - COM(2007) 738, 26.11.2007 [Online]. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the  European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Situation of disabled people in the 
enlarged  European  Union:  The  European  Action  Plan  2006-2007’  -  COM(2005)  604,  28.11.2005, 
[Online]. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the  European 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  ‘Equal  Opportunities  for people 
with disabilities: A European Action Plan’ - COM(2003) 650, 30.10.2003 [Online]. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.1.1.  Member State activities 

Member States have implemented a number of measures to address the problems associated 
with  disability.  These  include  examples  of  mainstreaming  as  well  as  targeted  strategies  or 
policies, such as restructuring of benefit systems.  

Although  some  Member  States  have  been  actively  integrating  disability  into  relevant 
policies22, research done by the Academic Network of European Disability Experts (ANED) 
on  National  Strategy  Reports  for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (SPSI  NSRs)  has 
shown that disability is mainstreamed in markedly different ways and that significant work is 
still required to achieve effective and strategic mainstreaming of disability issues in national 
policy development23.  

In  some  relevant  areas,  such  as  flexicurity,  research  has  found  little  explicit  reference  to 
disability  (where  this  is  present  it  is  mainly  for  the  carers  rather  than  people  with 
disabilities)24.  Moreover,  people  with  disabilities  are  in  some  countries  absent  from 
discussions on social inequality, exclusion and poverty25.  

ANED  experts  have  also  highlighted  how  education  has  either  been  underplayed  or 
disregarded  in  NSRs  on  the  subject  of  transposing  European  common  objectives  on  social 
protection  and  social  inclusion26.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the  same  reports  27,  increasing 
employment participation for disadvantaged groups is a priority common to all countries. 

As  far  as  targeted  policies  and  strategies  at  Member  State  level  are  concerned,  the  ANED 
analysis  reveals  a  wide  diversity  of  employment  activation  and  facilitation  policies, 
encompassing  accessibility  modifications  in  the  workplace,  personal  assistance  at  work, 
supported  employment,  sheltered  employment,  social  firms,  occupational  training  and 
rehabilitation,  and  self-employment  schemes28.  Moreover,  most  Member  States  have  taken 
initiatives to improve the accessibility of public buildings and to adopt rules friendly to people 
with disabilities regarding new constructions.  

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

See DAP 2008-2009, Annex 5: Member State developments contributing to the implementation of the 
EU Disability Action Plan. 
Priestley, M., ‘Synthesis report on disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports 
for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (NSRs)’,  Oct.  2008,  Academic  Network  of  European 
Disability Experts [Online], p. 9. 
Priestley, M., ‘Synthesis report on disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports 
for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (NSRs)’,  Oct.  2008,  Academic  Network  of  European 
Disability Experts [Online], p. 15. 
Priestley, M., ‘Synthesis report on disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports 
for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (NSRs)’,  Oct.  2008,  Academic  Network  of  European 
Disability Experts [Online], p. 16. 
Priestley, M., ‘Synthesis report on disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports 
for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (NSRs)’,  Oct.  2008,  Academic  Network  of  European 
Disability Experts [Online], p. 20. 
Priestley, M., ‘Synthesis report on disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports 
for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (NSRs)’,  Oct.  2008,  Academic  Network  of  European 
Disability Experts [Online], p. 13. 
Priestley, M., ‘Synthesis report on disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports 
for  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (NSRs)’,  Oct.  2008,  Academic  Network  of  European 
Disability Experts [Online], p. 13. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.1.1.1.  Disability High Level Group Reports on implementation of the UN Convention  

Since  the  start  of  the  Disability  Action  Plan  2003-2010,  a  Disability  High  Level  Group 
(DHLG)  composed  of  experts  in  disability  policies  from  Member  States’  governments  and 
civil society organisations has supported the European Commission in its implementation. In 
2007  the  German  Presidency  requested  the  DHLG  to  identify  common  challenges  and 
solutions  and  to  report  back  to  the  ministerial  disability  conferences  of  subsequent  EU 
presidencies on progress made in respect of the UN Convention. Since 2008, the DHLG has 
prepared an annual progress report indicating the state of play in relation to implementation of 
the  UN  Convention  and  identifying  potential  areas  for  cooperation  at  European  level  in 
implementing the Convention. 

The  first  report  (2008)29  focused  on  issues  related  to  the  state  of  play  of  signatures  and 
ratifications,  to  governance  mechanisms  developed  at  national  level,  to  translation  of  the 
Convention,  to  screening  of  relevant  disability  legislation,  to  training,  awareness-raising 
activities and information on the Convention. It also identified a number of areas for which 
collaboration at EU level could be useful, for example through exchanges of information and 
good practice.  

The second report (2009)30 showed some of the achievements and challenges in areas where 
Member States have seen added value in cooperation: accessibility, legal capacity, access to 
justice, living independently, voting rights and monitoring mechanisms and empowerment.  

The third report (2010)31 focuses on governance aspects as covered by Article 33 of the UN 
Convention  (formal  governance  mechanism,  participation  of  civil  society  and  collection  of 
statistics on disability). Furthermore, it provides information on national strategies and actions 
developed in order to effectively put into practice the UN Convention and it draws attention to 
areas for EU-level cooperation. 

2.2. 

Scope of the 2003-2010 Disability Action Plan 

The  2003-2010  EU  strategy  on  disability  (Disability  Action  Plan,  DAP)  was  developed  in 
two-year phases. The specific objectives of these phases are shown in the table below.  

Table 2: Overview of the DAP priorities 

2004-2005 

2006-2007 

2008-2009 

•  access 

to, 

remaining 
employment; 

and 
in, 

•  lifelong  learning  in 
of 

support 

•  encouraging activity; 

•  fostering  accessibility  of  the 

•  promoting 
quality 
care services;  

access 
to 
support  and 

•  boosting accessibility of goods, 
services and infrastructures; 

labour market; 

29 

30 

31 

European  Commission,  ‘First  Disability  High  level  Group  Report  On  Implementation  of  the  UN 
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’, 2008, Europa, [Online]. 
European  Commission,  ‘Second  Disability  High  level  Group  Report  On  Implementation  of  the  UN 
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’, June 2009, Europa, [Online]. 
European Commission, ‘Draft Third Disability High level Group Report On Implementation of the UN 
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’, March 2010, Europa, [Online]. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
employability, 
adaptability,  personal 
development 
and 
active  citizenship  of 
with 
people 
disabilities; and 

•  using  the  potential  of 
new  technologies  in 
empowering 
people 
with disabilities 

•  fostering  accessibility  of 
goods and services; and 

•  increasing 

the  EU’s 

•  consolidating the Commission’s 
analytical  capacity  to  support 
accessibility; 

analytical capacity 

•  increasing  the  EU’s  analytical 

capacity; 

•  facilitating  implementation  of 

the UN Convention; and 

•  complementing 
Community 
framework 
against discrimination 

of 

the 
legislative 
protection 

2.3. 

Summary of DAP achievements  

The  DAP  in  its  successive  phases  contained  actions  in  a  wide  range  of  areas  leading  to 
improvements and some key results.  

The  Mid-term  Evaluation  of  the  DAP  notes  good  progress  towards  ‘the  full  and  effective 
implementation’ of the Employment Equality Directive 2000/78/EC32. The Directive prohibits 
discrimination  in  employment  on  a  number  of  grounds,  including  disability.  In  Article  5  it 
establishes a duty for employers to provide reasonable accommodation for individuals with 
a disability. The Directive also allows for positive action in Article 7(1), which states that the 
‘principle  of  equal  treatment  shall  not  prevent  any  Member  States  from  maintaining  or 
adopting specific measures to prevent or compensate for disadvantages’33. The Directive does 
not explicitly define disability, but court cases have brought some clarity to  this  issue34. To 
complement  the  Employment  Equality  Directive,  a  proposal  for  a  Directive  on  non-
discrimination beyond the workplace has been adopted by the Commission.35 

Action in the area of accessibility has led to the adoption of important legislation.  

Table 3: Overview of European accessibility legislation 

Area 

Document 

Transport 

Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
5 July 2006 concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced 
mobility when travelling by air  

Regulation (EC) No 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
23 October 2007 on rail passengers’ rights and obligations  

32 

33 
34 

35 

See  Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services  (2009),  ‘Mid-term  Evaluation of  the European Action 
Plan 2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’, p. 7. 
Ibid, p36. 
See  Waddington,  Lisa  and  Lawson,  Anna  (2009),  ‘Disability  and  non-discrimination  law  in  the 
European  Union  –  an  analysis  of  disability  discrimination  law  within  and  beyond  the  employment 
field’, p. 15. 
 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52008PC0426:EN:HTML 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning rights of 
passengers  (including  PRM)  when  travelling  by  sea  and  inland  waterways 
(adopted on 11 October 2010, pending publication). 

Commission  Decision  2008/164/EC  of  21  December  2007  concerning  the 
technical  specification  of  interoperability  relating  to  persons  with  reduced 
mobility in the trans-European conventional and high-speed rail system  

Directive  2001/85/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20 
November 2001 relating to special provisions for vehicles used for the carriage 
of  passengers  comprising  more  than  eight  seats  in  addition  to  the  driver’s  seat, 
amending Directives 70/156/EEC and 97/27/EC  

Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 
1999  on  radio  equipment  and  telecommunications  terminal  equipment  and  the 
mutual recognition of their conformity 

Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 
2002  on  a  common  regulatory  framework  for  electronic  communications 
networks and services (Framework Directive) 

ICT 

Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 
2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications 
networks and services (Universal Service Directive) 

Directive  2007/65/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  11 
December 2007 amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of 
certain  provisions  laid  down  by  law,  regulation  or  administrative  action  in 
Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities 

An  important  development  was  the  inclusion  of  Article  16  in  the  General  Regulation  (No 
1083/2006)  on  the  Structural  Funds,  which  specifies  that,  in  implementing  the  Funds,  steps 
need to be taken to prevent any discrimination on the basis of disability and that accessibility 
is to be one of the criteria to be taken into account during the implementation36.  

A good contribution to progress on accessibility is made by the EC Standardisation Mandates 
376  (on  e-accessibility  and  public  procurement  in  the  area  of  ICT  goods  and  services  and 
public procurement) and 420 (on accessibility to the public built environment)37.  

The  mid-term  evaluation  notes  other  achievements,  including  disability  issues  now  being 
more  prominent  in  the  Social  Protection  and  Social  Inclusion  (SPSI)  OMC38,  as  well  as  a 

36  

37  

38  

See  European  Commission  (2009),  ‘Second  High  Level  Group  Report  on  Implementation  of  the  UN 
Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities’, p. 215. 
See  Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services (2009),  ‘Mid-term  Evaluation of  the European Action 
Plan 2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’, p. 8. 
See  Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services (2009),  ‘Mid-term  Evaluation of  the European Action 
Plan 2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’ p. 9. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
revision of the General Block Exemption Regulation to promote employment of people with 
disabilities39. 

Nevertheless,  the  mid-term  evaluation  also  identified  some  weaknesses,  such  as  lack  of 
indicators  and  insufficient  involvement  of  the  Member  States.  Also,  the  evaluation  made 
recommendations  for  future  work,  for  example  to  make  the  activities  consistent  with  full 
implementation of the UNCRPD.  

These achievements  in the  area of disability show  that  progress  has  been  made,  but  only  in 
some of the areas of the UNCRPD. A wider-ranging strategy is needed to comply fully with 
the substantive provisions of the UNCRPD.  

2.4. 

Impact of EU initiatives 

2.4.1. 

Impact on the situation of persons with disabilities  

There  is  limited  information  regarding  the  direct  impact  of  EU  policies  on  people  with 
disabilities. The mid-term evaluation of the DAP investigates the achievements to date, but it 
says little about the impact on that target group. 

The  Employment  Equality  Directive  is  widely  considered  to  be  an  important  piece  of 
European legislation for people with disabilities. However, the evaluators found that there is 
little evidence of progress in terms of employment rates of people with disabilities since the 
adoption of the DAP40.  

The  DAP  mid-term  evaluation  report  notes  that  collaborative  support  through  FP6  research 
projects contributed to the development of a number of innovative technologies which can in 
turn support independent living for people with disabilities, especially people with cognitive 
disabilities.  The  actual  impact  of  these  technologies  on  people  with  disabilities  could  not 
however  be  assessed41.  In  general,  the  evaluators  found  that  the  DAP  has  generated  a  large 
number  of  outputs,  including  projects,  activities,  documents  and  events,  but  the  results  of 
these were difficult to quantify42 and few conclusions could be drawn about the actual impact 
on the situation of people with disabilities.  

The DG EMPL 2009 activity report provides additional information about the current impact 
of EU actions on people with disabilities. In terms of collaborative support, the report states 
that around 4 % of the beneficiaries of ESF funding in 2008 were people with disabilities43. 

The evaluation of the European Year  of People with Disabilities provided some insights on 
the  impact  of  awareness-raising  activities.  It  indicated  that  the  activities  have  helped  to 
mobilise  and  enable  the  participation  of  people  with  disabilities  and  their  organisations, 
although no other clear benefits for people with disabilities were identified44. 

39  
40  
41  

42  
43  

44  

Ibid. 
Ibid, p. 144. 
See  Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services (2009),  ‘Mid-term  Evaluation of  the European Action 
Plan 2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’ , p. 50. 
Ibid, p. 149. 
See European Commission (2009), ‘Employment, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities Directorate 
General 2009 Annual Activity Report’ , p.. 9. 
See Ramboll Management (2004). ‘Evaluation of the European Year of People with Disabilities’, p. 31. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
With  regard  to  EU  activities  in  the  area  of  accessibility,  the  MeAC  (Measuring  Progress  of 
eAccessibility  in  Europe)  report  from  2007  provides  a  very  good  overview  of  the  recent 
developments. The authors of the report note that there is little evidence of initiatives such as 
the  eAccessibility  Communication,  inclusion  of  eAccessibility  as  one  of  the  themes  in  the 
i2010 policy framework, and the 2006 Riga ministerial declaration having a major impact on 
accessibility. Furthermore it highlighted an eAccessibility ‘deficit’ and pointed out that people 
with  disabilities  still  faced  many  barriers  to  using  ICT  products  and  services45.  This  is 
underscored  by  the  Riga  Dashboard  report  from  2007,  which  notes  that  progress  towards 
achieving  the  Riga  targets  is  much  too  slow46.  This,  in  turn,  implies  that  the  situation  of 
people with disabilities has not seen much improvement. As an example, the report notes that 
in 2007 only 5 % of public websites in Europe were fully accessible, nowhere near the 100 % 
target set for 201047. 

An ANED report ‘The implementation of EU social inclusion and social protection strategies 
in European countries with reference to equality for disabled people’ focuses on the impact on 
people  with  disabilities  of  European  agenda-setting  activities  under  the  Open  Method  of 
Coordination (OMC) in the areas of social inclusion, pensions, and health and long-term care. 
The  authors  of  the  report  note  the  introduction  of  new  legislation  aiming  at  fighting 
discrimination and improving social inclusion. They remark on positive developments, such 
as  evidence  of  policy  measures  supporting  independent  living,  de-institutionalisation,  and 
empowering people with disabilities.  

However, the report notes that the situation differs between countries48 and that the level of 
poverty among people with disabilities remains high. The authors conclude that ‘the current 
policy measures have not been able to offer to people with disabilities a safety net that would 
bring them out of the poverty trap and enable them to lead dignified lives’49. 

Overall,  the  evidence  of  the  impact  of  current  and  previous  EU  action  on  the  situation  of 
people  with  disabilities  remains  limited.  It  is  however  important  to  keep  in  mind  that  the 
impact  of  some  measures  can  take  a  long  time  to  materialise.  Nevertheless,  some  of  the 
instruments  have  potential  to  bring  about  more  immediate  changes:  examples  being  the 
positive effect of ESF funding on employment and the OMC’s impact on adopting measures 
promoting independent living and deinstitutionalisation.  

2.4.2.  Economic impact 

The impact of European disability policy on industry is felt in two main areas. As regards the 
impact  of  existing  or  proposed  anti-discrimination  legislation  which  covers  people  with 
disabilities, most information comes from employer and industry organisations and it tends to 
focus  on  the  ‘costs’  of  anti-discrimination  measures.  However,  there  is  relatively  little  hard 
data  available  on  the  benefits  of  such  measures.  People  with  disabilities  who  have  the 
opportunity to be (more) gainfully employed might for example make a bigger contribution to 

45  

46  
47  
48  
49  

See  Empirica  and  Work  Research  Centre  (2007),  ‘Assessment  of  the  Status  of  eAccessibility  in 
Europe’, p. II. 
See European Commission (2007), ‘Measuring Progress in e-Inclusion – Riga Dashboard 2007’, p. 3. 
Ibid, p. 5. 
Ibid, p. 32. 
See  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability  Experts  (ANED)  (2009),  ‘The  implementation  of  EU 
social  inclusion  and  social  protection  strategies  in  European  countries  with  reference  to  equality  for 
people with disabilities’ , p. 33. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
society. Further benefit can be obtained by measures that lead to the creation of new or bigger 
markets for products and services. 

A Business Europe response to a European stakeholder consultation regarding discrimination 
cites a 2007 study by the University of Dortmund and the Initiative for New Social Market 
Economy  (INSM),  which  looks  at  the  potential  cost  to  German  businesses  of  implementing 
the German non-discrimination laws. The study reveals that the total annual cost to German 
companies of putting in place preventive measures required by the transposition of EU anti-
discrimination legislation (such as new strategies or training) can amount to €1.73 billion 50, or 
0075 %  of  the  2008  GDP.  The  methodology  of  this  study  was  criticised  by  the  German 
government’s  non-discrimination  office  (Antidiskriminierungsstelle),  whose  estimate  (based 
on the data of the INSM study) was €26 million, around 1.5  % of the INSM estimate51. 

Similarly, in a position paper responding to the proposal for a Directive on Implementing the 
Principle of Equal Treatment Between Persons Irrespective of Religion or Belief, Disability, 
Age  or  Sexual  Orientation  (COM(2008)426  final),  Business  Europe  argues  that  reasonable 
accommodation  would  result  in  significant  costs  for  businesses.  Similarly,  it  points  to  the 
potential  cost  of  reversal  of  the  burden  of  proof  with  regard  to  accessible  goods  and 
services52.  UEAPME,  the  European  Association  of  Craft,  Small  and  Medium-sized 
Enterprises, voiced similar concerns regarding the burden of proof (Article 8), stating that it 
implies  that  all  activities  of  the  enterprise  would  need  to  be  documented,  which,  in  turn, 
implies high potential costs that can have a detrimental effect on the economic performance of 
small enterprises53.  

Although  business  stakeholders  argue  that  the  costs  of  tackling  discrimination  are  high  for 
businesses, other sources tell a different story. A US study showed that  ‘more  than 80 % of 
reasonable  accommodation  adjustments  cost  less  than  US  $500  but  half  of  all  those 
accommodations cost practically nothing’54 In another study by the Department of Work and 
Pensions  in  the  UK,  74 %  of  businesses  reported  that  making  adjustments  to  provide 
reasonable  accommodation  had  been  easy.55  Similarly,  a  Swiss  study  noted  that  the  cost  of 
making public and other buildings accessible does not exceed 1 % of building costs56.  

A  UK  study  commissioned  by  Government  Office  for  Disability  Issues  on  the  costs  and 
benefits of independent living pointed out that people with disabilities are likely to contribute 
more to public finances and to draw less benefits if they can live in the community rather than 
in institutions. The study concluded that on a macro-economic level, independent living is a 

50  

51  

52  

53  
54  

55  

56  

See Business Europe (2007), Response to social partner consultation ‘Discrimination, does it matter?’, 
p. 1. 
See  for  example  Hawley,  C.  (2008),  ‘Feared  cost  of  Anti-Discrimination  Law  May  Not  Exist’, 
8/05/2008, Der Spiegel [Online]. 
See Business Europe (2008), ‘Business Europe Position Paper – Commission Proposal for a Directive 
on ‘Implementing the Principle of Equal Treatment Between Persons Irrespective of Religion or Belief, 
Disability, Age, or Sexual Orientation’, p. 5. 
Ibid, p. 4. 
Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), US Department of Labour, ‘Investing in People: Job 
Accommodation Situations and Solutions’, [Online] http://www.dol.gov/odep/pubs/misc/invest.htm. 
Simm,  Claire  et  al  (2007),  ‘Organisations’  responses  to  the  Disability  Discrimination  Act’,  Research 
Report No 410 for Department for Work and Pensions, [Online] 
http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2007-2008/rrep410.pdf, p. 2 and passim. 
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich: http://www.hindernisfrei-bauen.ch/kosten_d.php 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
cost-effective  option.57  The  study  also  pointed  out  that  sending  young  disabled  people  to 
secluded residential schools costs considerably more than facilitating their further education 
within their community.58 

A 2008 study by EPEC has produced various estimates of the macro-economic impact of the 
lack of integration in  society of persons with disabilities. It estimates that the lower labour-
force  participation  or  lower  qualification  level  of  individuals  with  disabilities  results  in  the 
loss of €40.3 billion in GDP  for the EU-25 yearly.59 Discrimination in health services results 
in  more  days  lost  to  sickness  or  in  the  persons  concerned  leaving  the  workforce  entirely, 
causing  an  annual  GDP  loss  of  €812  million  in  the  EU-25  countries.60  These  figures  imply 
that  the  total  elimination  of  discrimination  in  occupation  and  training  as  well  as  healthcare 
would create over €41 billion in value for so ciety each year. The EPEC study also estimates 
that increasing the educational standard of people with disabilities Europe-wide to the level of 
Germany (the best performer) could generate €28 billion annually in higher wages. 

While  these  estimates  are  of  a  macro-economic  nature,  many  businesses  see  diversity  of 
workforce  also  as  a  benefit  at  micro  level.  A  European  Commission  project  used  the  2008 
European  Business  Test  Panel  (EBTP)  to  assess  the  benefits  of  diversity.  Around  56 %  of 
EBTP  companies  with  an  equality  and  diversity  (E  &  D)  agenda  suggested  that  it  has  a 
positive impact on their business and some 63 % of them identified a link between diversity 
and innovation.61  

Non-discrimination  also  creates  new  or  better  market  opportunities.  A  study  by  the  Royal 
National Institute of the Blind (UK) established that a £35 000 investment by the supermarket 
chain  Tesco  in  making  their  website  accessible  brought  in  additional  revenue  of  over  £13 
million  a  year62.  In  a  different  sector  and  country,  a  study  commissioned  by  the  German 
Federal  Ministry  of  Economics  and  Technology  estimates  that  more  accessible  facilities 
would  result  in  an  increase  of  travel  by  persons  with  disabilities,  yielding  between  €620 
million and €1  930 million in additional turnover for the German tourism industry. This would 
mean  additional  income  of  between  €365  million  and  €1  150  million,  as  well  as  16 000  to 
50 000  new  full-time  jobs.  45.6 %  of  persons  surveyed  for  the  study  would  be  prepared  to 
spend, on average, an extra €12.50 pe r day for adequate facilities.63 

By combining data from several sources an estimate can be made of the annual size of the EU 
market  for  assistive  devices.  Assistive  technology  products  are  products  designed  to  assist 
people  who,  because  of  specific  impairments  or  those  general  impairments  that  often 

57  

58  

59  

60  

61  

62  

63  

Hurstfield,  Jennifer  et.  al.  (2007):  ‘The  costs  and  benefits  of  Independent  Living’,  report  for  HM 
Government Office for Disability Issues, p. 100. 
See Hurstfield, Jennifer et. al. (2007): ‘The costs and benefits of Independent Living’, report for HM 
Government Office for Disability Issues, p. 97. 
EPEC  (2008),  ‘Study  on  discrimination  on  grounds  of  religion  and  belief,  age,  disability  and  sexual 
orientation outside of employment’, p. 85. 
EPEC  (2008),  ‘Study  on  discrimination  on  grounds  of  religion  and  belief,  age,  disability  and  sexual 
orientation outside of employment’, p. 86. 
European Commission (2008), ‘Continuing the Diversity Journey: Business Practices, Perspectives and 
Benefits’, p. 32. 
Web  Accessibility  Initiative  (WAI),  ‘Case  Study  of  Accessibility  Benefits:  Tesco’,  retrieved  from 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/tesco-case-study. 
See  Federal  Ministry  of  Economics  and  Technology  (2004),  ‘Economic  Impulses  of  Accessible 
Tourism for All – summary of Results’, retrieved from 
http://www.bmwi.de/English/Redaktion/Pdf/economic-impulses-of-accessible-tourism-for-all-
526,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi,sprache=en,rwb=true.pdf, p. 36. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
accompany old age, would otherwise be unable to participate meaningfully in society and the 
economy.  According to the ISO definition 9999 (2007), "an assistive product is any product 
(including devices, equipment, instruments, technology and software) especially produced or 
generally  available,  for  preventing,  compensating,  monitoring,  relieving  or  neutralizing 
impairments,  activity  limitations  and  participation  restrictions".  Assistive  technology 
encompasses  a  broad  range  of  devices,  from  “low-tech”  products  such  as  eyeglasses  and 
large-print books, to technologically sophisticated products such as voice synthesizers, Braille 
readers, and wireless monitoring devices. 

On  the  basis  of  US  figures  coming  from  Medicare,  the  annual  value  of  the  EU  market  for 
wheelchairs is estimated to be around €2 billion. Considering th at wheelchairs represent about 
38 %  of  the  home  medical  equipment  market64,  the  total  annual  value  of  this  market  for 
assistive devices would then be in the order of €5 billion. If one considers also other assistive 
segments like the vision and reading aids segment, the market for assistive devices in the EU 
would  be  worth  over  €30  billion 65.  Moreover,  on  the  basis  of  data  for  the  US  market,  this 
figure is expected to increase considerably in the coming years66. By opening up this market, 
sizeable efficiency gains should be attainable. 

2.4.3. 

Impact on technological development and innovation  

There is limited information on the impact that various EU initiatives in the field of disability 
have on technological development and innovation. EU instruments could be expected to have 
an impact on the funding of disability-related research through the framework programme on 
technological  development  and  innovation.  The  authors  of  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  the 
DAP  do  in  fact  state  that  the  collaborative  support  in  the  form  of  research  projects  funded 
under  the  Framework  Programmes  had  such  an  impact,  in  particular  through  demonstration 
effects  in  terms  of  development  of  innovative  solutions  to  support  independent  living  for 
persons with cognitive disabilities67.  

A more indirect effect of European actions in the area of disability is the potential impact of a 
more unified and harmonised set of standards. Standards which are simplified or harmonised 
across  Europe,  even  if  strict,  can  be  beneficial  to  businesses  by  reducing  the  cost  of 
developing a product for multiple markets within Europe. They can also encourage innovation 
since they effectively expand the potential market that a product in development can reach at 
a given cost, making the product potentially more profitable.  

2.4.4. 

Impact on public authorities  

Public authorities are a key target of a wide range of EU policies. The mid-term evaluation of 
the  DAP  provides  a  comprehensive  overview  of  the  impact  on  public  authorities,  noting, 
among  other  things,  that  the  DAP  served  as  a  useful  reference  point  for  public  authorities 
across Europe.  

64  

65  
66  

67  

‘Wheeled mobility market’ , online at: 
http://www.wheelchairnet.org/wcn_wcu/Research/StakeholderDocs/PDFs/wpf_wheelchairsummary_do
c.pdf. 
Deloitte & Touche, Access to Assistive Technology  in the European  Union 2003.  
The U.S. market for assistive technology is expected to be worth $38.2 billion in 2008, up from $36.4 
billion in 2007. This should increase to $49.3 billion in 2013, a compound annual growth rate of 5.3%, 
http://www.bccresearch.com/report/HLC047B.html.  
Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’ , p. 50. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In terms of practical benefits, the existence of a high-level European framework is reckoned 
to  have  contributed  for  example  to  the  development  of  national  disability  action  plans  (in 
France,  Ireland,  Portugal,  Sweden  and  the  UK).  The  evaluators  also  stress  that  the  DAP 
encouraged  disability  mainstreaming  at  national  and  regional  levels.  There  is  however  also 
evidence suggesting that in some cases the DAP was overly complex and did not relate to the 
context and priorities at Member State level68.  

With regard to the impact of different types of instruments, the Progress Annual Performance 
Monitoring Reports for 2008 and 2009 show that evaluation and monitoring, data collection, 
and  awareness-raising  activities  (including  policy  advice,  research  and  analysis,  statistical 
indicators,  tools  and  methods)  all  contributed  to  national  policymaking69.  Similarly,  with 
regard to awareness-raising in the form of the European Year of People with Disabilities, it 
was  found  that  the  Year  prompted  national  decision-makers  to  launch  new  initiatives, 
resulting in a number of legal and policy initiatives across Europe70.  

Agenda-setting activities, such as OMC, also impact on public authorities. The ANED report 
‘The  implementation  of  EU  social  inclusion  and  social  protection  strategies  in  European 
countries  with  reference  to  equality  for  disabled  people’  shows  that  a  number  of  measures 
were  put  in  place  as  a  result  of  EU  actions.  This  involved  in  particular  efforts  to  boost 
inclusive  education,  modernising  social  policies  by  increasingly  focusing  investment  in 
education,  as  well  as  actions  to  promote  de-institutionalisation  and  provision  of  direct 
payment  schemes.  The  report  also  stresses  the  lack  of  statistical  information,  which  is 
necessary in order to better assess the impact71.  

Although  the  European  initiatives  are  also  likely  to  entail  costs  for  public  authorities,  they 
result  from  obligations  stemming  from  the  UNCRPD,  and  carrying  them  out  at  EU  level 
could  also  bring  some  savings  by  avoiding  duplication  of  national  efforts.  For  example 
activities such as data collection and reporting could constitute a financial and administrative 
burden  for  Member  States,  although  this  tends  to  be  unavoidable  as  the  Monitoring 
Guidelines published by the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities contain 
strong demands concerning the collection of statistics. 

Overall,  there  are  some  indications  that  the  measures  taken  to  date  are  having  a  positive 
impact,  although  this  evidence  is  very  limited.  It  is  possible  that  a  greater  impact  will 
materialise  over  time,  but  there  appears  to  be  significant  scope  for  improving  the  current 
situation. 

68  

69  

70  
71  

See  Centre  for  Strategy  &  Evaluation  Services (2009),  ‘Mid-term  Evaluation of  the European Action 
Plan 2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’ , p. 11. 
European Commission, ‘Progress Annual Performance Monitoring Report from 2008’, Progress Annual 
Performance  Monitoring  Report  from  2008,  p.  37  ff.  and  European  Commission,  ‘Progress  Annual 
Performance  Monitoring  Report  from  2008’  Progress  Annual  Performance  Monitoring  Report  from 
2009, p. 43 ff. 
Ramboll Management (2004).‘Evaluation of the European Year of People with Disabilities’, p. 36. 
Academic Network of European Disability Experts (ANED) (2009), ‘The implementation of EU social 
inclusion  and  social  protection  strategies  in  European  countries  with  reference  to  equality  for  people 
with disabilities’, p. 34. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.5. 

Key recommendations from mid-term evaluation of the DAP 

Two  main  conclusions  that  can  be  drawn  from  the  ‘Mid-term  Evaluation  of  the  European 
Disability Action Plan 2003-2010’72 are: 

•  In a subset of areas where problems were identified and actions were included in the DAP, 

additional improvements are needed; 

•  There  is  a  need  for  a  wide  range  of  instruments,  including  in  particular  evaluation  and 

monitoring and data collection. 

The  study  generally  concludes  that  ‘(...)  the  Disability  Action  Plan  made  a  positive 
contribution  to  promoting  equal  opportunities  for  people  with  disabilities  in  its  first  two 
implementation  phases’73  by  serving  as  a  useful  reference  point  for  relevant  actors. 
Nevertheless, the study notes the following:  

•  the  assessment  of  the  situation  of  people  with  disabilities  in  the  labour  market  does  not 
reveal much progress in terms of increased employment rates and reduced inactivity rates; 

•  limited progress has been made in the area of lifelong learning;  

•  few disability mainstreaming activities had a national dimension.  

Even  in  areas  where  the  authors  of  the  evaluation  note  that  considerable  progress  has  been 
made, challenges remain. On the subject of accessibility to the built environment, they point 
out that ‘tackling accessibility barriers will only be achievable over the long term, which will 
require  ongoing  commitment  at  EU  and  MS  level’74.  Similarly,  with  regard  to  Directive 
2000/78/EC  on  anti-discrimination,  the  authors  of  the  study  note  that  ‘there  remains  some 
way  to  go  before  the  transposition  process  can  be  said  to  have  been  completed 
satisfactorily’75.  

With  regard  to  the  use  of  specific  instruments,  monitoring  and  evaluation  activities  are 
considered  incomplete.  There  is  thus  scope  ‘for  improving  the  monitoring  system’  and  for 
putting  in  place  ‘performance  measurement  indicators,  context  indicators  and  baselines’  (p. 
143).  In  fact,  the  evaluation  report  puts  forward  thirteen  recommendations  in  the  area  of 
monitoring and evaluation, which include the following:  

•  the  Commission  should  monitor  the  full  and  effective  implementation  of  recent  EU 
legislation  likely  to  have  an  impact  on  promoting  equal  opportunities  for  people  with 
disabilities;  

•  a study should be undertaken to assess the extent to which EU legislation with the potential 

to impact on people with disabilities is being fully and effectively implemented; and  

72  

73  

74  

75  

Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’. 
Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’, p. 155. 
Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’, p. 60. 
Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’, p. 126. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  some  quantitative  monitoring  should  be  carried  out  by  the  Unit  for  the  Integration  of 
People  with  Disabilities  so  that  statistical  data  on  EU  DAP  activities  are  available  to 
inform the work of the DHLG and the mid-term evaluation of Disability 2020 envisaged 
for 201576.  

Some of the recommendations focus more specifically on data collection, with the evaluation 
report  suggesting  that  ‘there  should  continue  to  be  a  focus  in  the  successor  Action  Plan  on 
improving  the  comparability  of  disability  data’  and  that  ‘there  is  a  need  to  improve  the 
availability of disability statistics on a disaggregated basis’77. 

76  

77  

Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’ , p. 164. 
Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 
2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities’. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEW EUROPEAN DISABILITY STRATEGY 2010-2020 

3.1. 

International and EU developments 

3.1.1.  Council of Europe Action Plan 

The Council of Europe (CoE) has an action plan for the period 2006-2015, with a focus on 
promoting the rights and full participation of people with disabilities in society and aiming to 
improve the quality of life of all people with disabilities in Europe. All EU Member States are 
members of the CoE and are implementing this action plan. 

The plan is broken down into action lines. These often refer to specific areas also covered in 
the UNCRPD, along with cross-cutting aspects relevant to people with disabilities. The CoE 
Action  Plan  was  developed  before  the  adoption  of  the  UNCRPD78  and  it  does  not  cover  its 
full scope. The plan has been taken into account in the preparation of the new strategy. 

3.1.2.  United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 

Since March 2007, all EU Member States are signatories to the United Nations Convention on 
the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  (UNCRPD)  and  a  majority  of  them  have  signed  its 
Optional Protocol too. The ratification process is under way. The European Community (now 
EU) has also signed the UNCRPD and the Council adopted the Decision for its conclusion in 
November 200979. Furthermore the Commission has made a proposal for a Council decision 
to accede to the Convention’s Optional Protocol. 

In  March  2008,  when  the  Council  asked  the  Commission  to  begin  working  on  a  European 
disability  strategy  to  succeed  the  DAP,80  it  invited  the  Commission  to  consider  setting 
consistent  and  comparable  national  targets  to  reflect  how  national  actions  comply  with  the 
commitment made by the EU and the Member States to fully implement the UNCRPD.  

The  UN  Convention  has  therefore  been  taken  as  a  point  of  departure  in  structuring  the 
problems that the new strategy should address, for two important reasons. Firstly, both the EU 
and the Member States have undertaken obligations by signing the Convention. Secondly, the 
Convention  provides  a  well-developed  reference  framework,  which  encompasses  practically 
all  relevant  disability  issues.  The  UN  Convention  is  a  ‘mixed  agreement’:  it  covers  some 
issues that fall fully within the competence of the Member States, others that fall fully within 
the  Union's  exclusive  competence  and  still  others that fall within the competence shared  by 
the Member States and the Union. In implementing the Convention, the EU and its Member 
States are bound by a duty of loyal cooperation with each other (Article 4(3) TEU). 

The section below gives an overview of the problem analysis and maps the key gaps between 
the  current  situation  and  a  scenario  where  the  UNCRPD  would  be  fully  implemented, 
providing  examples  from  available  data  and  research,  with  a  focus  on  Europe-wide  data 

78  
79  

80  

The UNCRPD was adopted in December 2006. 
Council Decision of 26 November 2009 concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the 
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, (2010/48/EC). 
Resolution  of  the  Council  of  the  European  Union  and  the  representatives  of  the  Governments  of  the 
Member  States,  meeting  within  the  Council  of  17  March  2008  on  the  situation  of  persons  with 
disabilities in the European Union, (2008/C 75/01). 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
                                                 
sources.  The  section  is  organised  to  reflect  the  Articles  of  the  UNCRPD,  grouped  into  four 
main  categories:  horizontal  issues,  civil  and  political  rights,  economic,  social  and  cultural 
rights, and governance issues. 

3.1.2.1.  Horizontal issues 

•  Equality and non-discrimination (Article 5)  

Research has shown that people with disabilities experience various kinds of discrimination in 
all areas of life81: less favourable treatment because of hostility, fear, impatience, ignorance or 
even  misplaced  kindness;  inaccessibility  of  physical  environments,  structures  and  features; 
inaccessibility  of  information;  inflexibility  as  to  modes  of  communication;  and  lack  of  staff 
assistance.  

The 2009 special Eurobarometer focusing on discrimination in  the European Union showed 
that 53 % of respondents across the EU believed that discrimination on grounds of disability 
was  widespread,  while  41 %  of  respondents  believed  it  was  rare82.  Around  80 %  of 
respondents  to  the  public  consultation  for  the  Disability  Strategy  2010-2020  agreed  or 
strongly agreed that people with disabilities face discrimination in their everyday activities. 

The  forms  of  anti-discrimination  legislation  vary  across  the  Member  States:  some  (e.g. 
Hungary and Germany) have created separate laws on disability and employment or new anti-
discrimination acts specifically addressing persons with disabilities, while others have taken 
the approach of incorporating anti-discrimination clauses into all legislation83. 

A 2009 analysis of disability and non-discrimination law in the European Union84 concluded 
that  good  progress  has  been  made  in  implementing  Directive  2000/78/EC  on  equality  in 
employment,  while  also  noting  that  the  most  challenging  disability-related  problems  in 
transposing  the  Directive  into  national  law  were:  establishing  who  is  protected  from 
discrimination  on  grounds  of  disability  and  clarifying 
the  concept  of  reasonable 
accommodation.  

•  Particularly vulnerable groups (Articles 6 and 7)  

It  is,  for  example,  evident  that  women  with  disabilities  are  under-represented  in  democratic 
processes  and  decision-making  more  generally85.  In  addition,  women  with  mental  or 

81  

82  

83  

84  

85  

European Commission (2008), ‘Impact assessment - Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing 
the  principle  of  equal  treatment  between  persons  irrespective  of  religion  or  belief,  disability,  age  or 
sexual orientation’, 2/07/2008, Commission Staff Working Document SEC(2008) 2180 & COM(2008) 
2180, [Online], And: Waddington, L & Lawson, A. (2009), ‘Disability and non-discrimination law in 
the European Union – An analysis of disability discrimination law within and beyond the employment 
field’, July 2009, European Network of Legal Experts in the Non-Discrimination Field, [Online]. 
European Commission (2009), ‘Discrimination in the EU in 2009’ Special Eurobarometer Report 317, 
Nov 2009, [Online] p. 78. 
See ‘Study on the situation of women with disabilities in light of the UN Convention for the Rights of 
Persons with Disabilities’ (2009). 
Waddington, L & Lawson, A. (2009), ‘Disability and non-discrimination law in the European Union – 
An  analysis  of  disability  discrimination  law  within  and  beyond  the  employment  field’,  July  2009, 
European  Network  of  Legal  Experts 
the  Non-Discrimination  Field,  http://www.non-
discrimination.net/content/media/Disability%20non-discrimination%20law.pdf [Accessed: 28/07/2010]. 
See ‘Study on the situation of women with disabilities in light of the UN Convention for the Rights of 
Persons with Disabilities’, p. 133. 

in 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
                                                 
psychological disability are at greater risk of being abused than are men with disabilities or 
women  without  disabilities.  Social  protection  systems  and  healthcare  services  do  not 
recognise gender as a dimension relevant to persons with disabilities. Women with disabilities 
are  particularly  under-represented  in  recreational  activities,  culture  and  sport  –  in  terms  of 
participation,  leadership,  management  and  media  coverage86.  Similarly,  children  with 
disabilities face significant barriers to e.g. participation in recreational activities, culture and 
sport, and remain poorly served by provision of education87.  

•  Awareness-raising (Article 8)  

Awareness-raising is crucial in fighting discrimination, as the latter is often based on hostility, 
fear, impatience, ignorance or even misplaced kindness, all of which are rooted in insufficient 
familiarity with the issue. Disability is the type of discrimination most widely recognised, yet 
awareness  of  the  existence  of  anti-discrimination  law  in  the  EU  is  quite  low  –  in  the  2006 
discrimination  Eurobarometer  (in  2009,  the  question  was  not  asked),  around  half  of  the 
European  public  knew  e.g.  that  discrimination  on  the  basis  of  disability  in  hiring  new 
employees  is  prohibited  by  law.  Awareness  is  lower  in  new  Member  States  than  in  the 
EU1588.  

•  Accessibility (Article 9)  

The  UNCRPD  refers  to  accessibility  in  detail,  and  highlights  the  responsibility  of  States 
Parties  to  take  ‘appropriate  measures  to  ensure  to  persons  with  disabilities  access,  on  equal 
basis  with  others,  to  the  physical  environment,  to  transportation,  to  information  and 
communications, including information and communications technologies and systems and to 
other facilities and services’.  

Additionally, 91 % of respondents in the 2006 Eurobarometer survey agreed that more money 
should be spent on eliminating physical barriers faced by people with disabilities89. 

Premises that are open to the public, such as shops, restaurants, cinemas, post offices, schools 
and  courts  of  law,  are  often  inaccessible  to  people  with  disabilities90.  Physical  access  to 
buildings  has  been  highlighted  as  a  particular  challenge  for  higher  education  institutions  in 
countries like Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Portugal and Spain91.  

Access  to  transportation  is  a  vital  factor  for  the  inclusion  of  persons  with  disabilities. 
Mobility is a particularly important issue for those that are considerably restricted92. In some 
countries transport support scheme are financed by the State, but in others families themselves 

86  

87  

88  

89  

90  
91  

92  

‘Study  on  the  situation  of  women  with  disabilities  in  light  of  the  UN  Convention  for  the  Rights  of 
Persons with Disabilities’, p. 34-135. 
‘Study  on  the  situation  of  women  with  disabilities  in  light  of  the  UN  Convention  for  the  Rights  of 
Persons with Disabilities’, p. 135. 
European Commission (2007), ‘Discrimination in the European Union’ Special Eurobarometer 263, Jan 
2007, [Online], p. 31. 
European Commission (2007), ‘Discrimination in the European Union’ Special Eurobarometer 263, Jan 
2007, [Online], p. 13. 
Grammenos, S., 'Illness, Disability and Social Inclusion', 2005, Eurofound, p. 36. 
European  Agency  for  Development  in  Special  Needs  Education  (2006),  ‘Special  Needs  Education  in 
Europe – Provision in post-primary education’ Volume 2, [Online]], p. 56. 
See ‘Men and women with disabilities in the EU: statistical analysis of the LFS ad hoc module and the 
EU-SILC’, p. 110. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
                                                 
have  to  pay  for  transportation,  which  in  itself  may  pose  another  obstacle  to  enjoying  e.g. 
leisure activities and health care93. 

Lack of accessibility to sources of information is recognised as a  particular  challenge, for 
example in Hungary, Norway, Romania, Sweden and Switzerland94. In the Czech Republic, 
Estonia,  Hungary,  the  Netherlands  and  Portugal  a  particular  need  for  specialist  educational 
support (e.g. technical aids, counselling, guidance) has been highlighted.  

Accessibility  barriers  in  using  services  like  insurance,  rented  accommodation,  banking  and 
financial services, as well as shops and other goods and services pose significant problems for 
people  with  disabilities  (e.g.  by  refusal  to  provide  service,  providing  lower  standard  of 
service, providing services on worse terms95). With regard to assistive technologies, there is 
evidence  of  insufficient  supply  of  public  goods,  weak  competition  and  lack  of  information 
about new developments96. 

Although almost all websites are navigable to some extent, on average in the EU27 only 5 % 
of  public  websites  comply  fully  with  the  web  accessibility  standards  and  guidelines.  The 
percentage of subtitled audio-visual programming varies widely (2.5 % to 95 %) and there is 
considerable  fragmentation  across  product  ranges  when  it  comes  to  built-in  accessibility  in 
PCs and software97. 

•  Situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies (Article 11)  

As an example, research on the response to the 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia showed that 
people with disabilities were particularly badly affected. Many of them lost all mobility aids 
and were under-represented in lobbying for reconstruction funding98.  

3.1.2.2.  Civil and political rights 

•  Rights with regard to legal and justice system (Articles 12, 13 and 14)  

There  is  not  much  quantitative  Europe-wide  information  about  rights  such  as  equal 
recognition before the law (Article 12) and access to justice (Article 13), but there are clear 
indications that this is a key problem area.  

There is evidence that judicial buildings are still barely accessible and that justice personnel 
are  not  properly  trained  to  provide  an  appropriate  service  and  to  cover  the  needs  of  people 
with disabilities (this is particularly true for women with disabilities)99. Round-table panellists 
at  the  Conference  of  State  Parties  to  the  UNCRPD  in  September  2009  underlined  the 

93  

94  

95  

96  
97  

98  

99  

‘Men and women with disabilities in the EU: statistical analysis of the LFS ad hoc module and the EU-
SILC, p. 36. 
European  Agency  for  Development  in  Special  Needs  Education  (2006),  ‘Special  Needs  Education  in 
Europe – Provision in post-primary education’ Volume 2, [Online], p. 56. 
Fahey et al., ‘Quality of Life – First European Quality of Life Survey 2003’, 2004. Europa website – 
Eurofound, p. 76. 
See for example http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007DC0332:EN:NOT, p. 7. 
European Commission (2007), Impact Assessment for the ‘European i2010 initiative on e-Inclusion’ - 
SEC(2007) 1469, p. 7. 
International Disability and Development Consortium (2005), ‘Disability in Conflict and Emergency 
Situations: Focus on Tsunami-affected Areas’ [Online], p. 7-9. 
See ‘Study on the situation of women with disabilities in light of the UN Convention for the Rights of 
Persons with Disabilities’, p. 113. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
                                                 
importance of equal legal rights and access to justice, with one panellist noting that ‘To date 
(…)  no  country  in  the  world  had  completely  recognised  the  right  to  legal  capacity  of  all 
people  with  disabilities  or  fully  eliminated  forced  mental  health  treatment  (…).  Some 
countries had granted limited decision-making rights to the disabled, but they remained under 
the  guardianship  of  others,  often  against  their  will’100.  These  problem  areas  have  also  been 
identified  as  priorities  by  the  High  Level  Group  on  Disability.  The  area  of  legal  rights  and 
access to justice is therefore of key importance in the new strategy.  

•  Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and 

exploitation, violence and abuse (Articles 15 and 16)  

Research  shows  examples  of  inappropriate  treatment  and  patient  abuse  in  residential 
institutions  for  mentally  disabled  people,  where  the  remoteness  of  the  institutions  and  the 
professional isolation of their staff create closed communities and a culture of disrespecting 
human  dignity  and  human  rights101.  Also,  the  rate  of  abuse  and  violence  committed  against 
women with disabilities, particularly women with severe or mental disabilities, is believed to 
be much higher than against women without disabilities or even men with disabilities102. 

•  Right to life, Protecting the integrity of the person, respect for privacy and respect 

for home and family (Articles 10, 17, 22 and 23)  

Research has in this context questioned the ‘non-interference’ characteristics of these Articles, 
with particular attention to the influence various impairments may have on making informed 
the  particular 
decisions  (e.g.  restrictions,  dependency,  pain,  fatigue),  highlighting 
vulnerability to abuse of people with mental disabilities103. This approach emphasises the role 
of  a  care  provider,  particularly  in  situations  where  intellectual  disabilities  are  involved, 
suggesting that the principle of ‘right to self-determination’ may not always be appropriate104. 

•  Liberty of movement and nationality (Article 18) 

Evidence suggests that the majority of disabled people do not take advantage of their right to 
free movement and that they know little about the European initiatives in place to support free 
movement105.  Around  60 %  of  respondents  to  the  public  consultation  for  the  Disability 
Strategy 2010-2020 agreed or strongly agreed that the strategy should address the fact that EU 
citizens with disabilities find it more difficult to move to another Member State than other EU 
citizens. 

100  

101  

102  

103  

104  

105  

UN  General  Assebmbly  (2009),  ‘Round  Table  Panellists  Underline  Decision-making  Rights  of 
Disabled People’ [Online]. 
Human Rights Monitoring Institute et al (2005) ‘Human Rights Monitoring in Residential Institutions 
for Mentally Disabled and Psychiatric Hospitals’ [Online]. 
See  ‘Study  on  women  with  disabilities’;  and  Council  of  Europe  (2006),  Recommendation  of  the 
Committee  of  Ministers  to  the  Member  States  on  the  Council  of  Europe  Action  Plan  to  promote  the 
rights  and  full  participation  of  people  with  disabilities  in  society:  Improving  the  Quality  of  Life  of 
People with Disabilities in Europe 2006-2015. 
European  Journal  of  Health  Law  14  (2007)  273-298:  SELECTED  LEGISLATION  AND 
JURISPRUDENCE - UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 
European  Journal  of  Health  Law  14  (2007)  149-163:  The  Rights  of  People  with  an  Intellectual 
Disability in the Netherlands: From Restriction to Development. 
See LivingAll Free movements and equal opportunities for all (LivingAll), ‘Work package 4: Detection 
of Main Barriers’. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Participation in political and public life (Article 29)  

Research106  findings  about  political  participation:  there  are  particular  challenges  associated 
with the ability of people with disabilities to represent themselves107; inaccessibility of polling 
stations gives people with disabilities less opportunity to vote108; and measures to ensure that 
civil  rights  are  granted  and  can  be  exercised  have  not  been  effective  enough109.  Limited 
accessibility of political venues, of transport facilities, or of information (e.g. unavailability of 
material  in  Braille,  large  print  or  audio  format)  is  likely  to  prevent  people  with  disabilities 
participating politically in society. 

3.1.2.3.  Economic, social and cultural rights 

•  Living independently and being included in the community (Article 19) 

A  study  carried  out  in  the  EU  Member  States  and  Turkey,  ‘De-institutionalisation  and 
community  living:  outcomes  and  costs’,  found  that  nearly  1.2  million  children  and  adults 
lived in long-stay residential institutions. Over a quarter of places in institutions are filled by 
people  with  intellectual  disabilities,  while  people  with  mental  health  problems  are  the  next 
largest  group.  It  is  widely  acknowledged  that  traditional  institutional  living  arrangements 
generally  inhibit  individuals’  ability  to  work,  which  clearly  has  an  impact  on  tax  revenues, 
national insurance and pension contributions110. 

In  strategically  reshaping  this  area,  the  quality  of  services  provided  or  paid  for  by  public 
authorities  as  well  as  their  availability  should  be  in  focus.  Adequate  attention  to  long-term 
care  and  assistance  is  needed  to  facilitate  living  at  home.  Lack  of  or  limited  assistance  or 
services may partly be related to structural barriers such as availability of support for assistive 
technologies, access to rehabilitation measures or adaption of the physical environment111.  

•  Personal mobility (Article 20) 

The market for mobility aids and assistive technologies is considerably fragmented, impacting 
on  both  the  efficiency  and  affordability  of  various  solutions.  Moreover,  there  are  relatively 
few formal standards that are specific to assistive devices, although there are large numbers of 
standards that have particular relevance for accessibility of mainstream devices112. However, 
standards may be costly and both designers and producers need to ensure that these standards 
are relevant to their products.  

106  

107  

108  

109  

110  

111  

112  

See  ‘Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs’. 
‘Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs’, p. 6. 
‘Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs’, p. 50. 
‘Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs’, p. 51. 
See Hurstfield, Jennifer et. al. (2007): ‘The costs and benefits of Independent Living’, report for HM 
Government, Office for Disability Issues, p. 89. 
‘Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs’. 
See  Gill,  John  (2009):  ‘Assistive  Technology  and  Accessibility  Portals’,  prepared  for  DG  INFSO 
European Commission, [Online], p. 6-7. 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information (Article 21) 

A survey carried out by the European Blind Union showed that only six European countries 
offer audio description on television and that the provision is very sparse, representing at most 
about 1 % of programmes (this share is higher in the UK)113. Another example can be found in 
a report issued by the European Deaf Union on the status of sign language across Europe: a 
number  of  Member  States  have  not  officially  recognised  national  sign  language  either 
constitutionally or through other legal measures114.  

•  Education (Article 24)  

LFS data show that in 2002 63 % of the considerably restricted individuals between the ages 
of  16  and  19  participated  in  education  or  training,  compared  to  75 %  of  those  who  were 
restricted to some extent, and 83 % of those not restricted115. This shows higher prevalence of 
early school leaving and limited access to education for people with disabilities. At the same 
time,  although  lifelong  learning  is  a  well-known  concept,  there  is  limited  availability  of 
services for e.g. people with high support needs116. 

Article 24 of the UNCRPD highlights the importance of an inclusive education system at all 
levels,  including  lifelong  learning,  vocational  training  and  adult  education,  with  particular 
emphasis  on  the  provision  of  reasonable  accommodation  and  support  to  ensure  effective 
participation  in  the  general  education  system.  However,  research  has  shown  that  the 
obligations  of  the  UNCRPD  at  this  point  are  not  fulfilled,  and  that  they  are  unlikely  to  be 
complied with in the near future117. Possibilities for accessing mainstream education tend to 
be unavailable for children with severe disabilities118, and segregation is still widespread all 
over  Europe119  (e.g.  in  Germany  only  15.7  per  cent  of  all  children  and  adolescents  with 
disabilities attend school together with non-disabled pupils)120.  

•  Health (Article 25) 

There  are  strong  indications  that  the  health  status  of  people  with  disabilities  is  significantly 
worse  than  that  of  the  average  population,  also  with  regard  to  non-disability-related  health 
risks121.  Evidence  suggests  that  limited  accessibility  to  health  services  and  unavailability  of 
treatment  can  lead  to  increased  health  inequalities122.  Barriers  to  accessing  health  services 

113  

114  
115  

116  

117  

118  

119  

120  
121  

122  

European Blind Union (2006) ‘The future of access to television for blind and partially sighted people 
in Europe’ [Online]. 
See the EUD website , http://www.eud.eu/EUD_Sign_Language-i-239.html 
See  ‘Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs’, p.12. 
See‘Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs’, p. 46. 
See‘Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs’, p. 5. 
‘Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs’, p. 73. 
‘Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs’, p. 74. 
See Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (Germany): 2009 Disability Report. 
See e.g. Department of Health and Human Services, Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (US): 
‘Disability and Health State Charterbook – 2006: Profiles of Health for Adults with Disabilities. 
See  ‘Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs’, p. 19. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
                                                 
may  be  physical  constraints,  logistical  constraints  or  discriminatory  practice.  For  example, 
people with disabilities may not be able to reach a doctor’s office, or have access to routine 
treatments123,  or  people  with  severe  disabilities  living  in  traditional  residential  institutions 
who  need  hospital  treatment  may  struggle  to  access  the  treatment  because  of  logistical 
difficulties in organising support needed from the institution.  

•  Habilitation and rehabilitation (Article 26) 

Although the majority of Member States have adopted the ILO Convention 159 on vocational 
rehabilitation  and  employment  of  people  with  disabilities,  where  disability  is  defined  by 
‘prospects of securing, retaining and advancing in suitable employment due to impairment’, 
many  countries  consider  rehabilitation  to  be  a  medical  problem,  reducing  it  to  strictly 
functional rather than social and professional rehabilitation124. As an extension of this topic, 
research  has  shown  that  Member  State  and  EU  policies  need  to  be  better  geared  towards 
employers’  and  employees’  needs  to  foster  the  idea  of  reasonable  accommodation,  for 
example in providing flexible funding and tailored support services125, and a need for greater 
company  efforts 
facilitating 
reintegration126. 

re-integrate  workers  and  social 

responsibility 

to 

in 

•  Work and employment (Article 27) 

Research has shown that the demands of the UNCRPD concerning work and employment are 
presently  not  met  in  most  countries,  particularly  for  people  with  complex  needs127.  On 
average  across  the  OECD  countries,  employment  rates  of  people  with  disabilities  are  just 
above 40 %128.  

The  ‘benefit  trap’  also  poses  significant  problems  for  labour  market  inclusion.  In  many 
countries, the conditions attached to receipt of social benefits do not allow for employment, 
and the tax system creates de facto disincentives to participating in the labour market129.  

Access to and retention in work and employment is not only a problem touching people with 
disabilities directly, but also a challenge in the context of the Lisbon Strategy (as well as its 
successor Europe 2020) and of the general macroeconomic performance of the EU. Existing 
research suggests that labour market reintegration of persons with disabilities who are capable 
of and willing to work could raise employment rates by up to 3.0 percentage points (approx. 
2-3.5 million people at EU level). This would contribute significantly to the Europe 2020 goal 
of  raising  employment  rates  to  75 %  by  2020.  Moreover,  low  labour  market  participation  is 
closely  related  to  low  participation  in  the  education  system.  The  EU-SILC  analysis  showed 

123  

124  

125  

126  

127  

128  
129  

See  "Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs", p. 41. 
See European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (2003), 
‘Illness, disability and social inclusion, p. 101. 
See  KMU  Forschung  Austria  (2008),  ‘Providing  reasonable  accommodation  for  persons  with 
disabilities in the workplace in the EU – good practices and financing schemes’ [Online], p. 3. 
See European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (2003), 
‘Quality of Life in Europe’[Online], p. 129. 
"Specific Risks of Discrimination Against Persons in Situation of Major Dependence or with Complex 
Needs", . p61. 
See OECD Issues Paper for the High-Level Forum on Sickness, Disability and Work, [Online], p. 11. 
See European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (2003), 
Illness, disability and social inclusion, p. 127. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
                                                 
for  example  that  of  the  group  with  only  basic  schooling,  just  20 %  of  those  who  were 
considerably  restricted  were  in  employment  compared  with  some  62 %  who  were  not 
restricted.  

•  Adequate standard of living and social protection (Article 28) 

Several  studies  have  shown  that  poverty  and  income  inequalities  result  from  the  manifold 
problems  faced  by  people  with  disabilities,  particularly  those  related  to  labour  market 
participation  and  participation  in  general  education130.  As  a  result  of  income,  poverty  and 
health inequalities, people with disabilities are also more likely to suffer from social exclusion 
and isolation131. 

•  Participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport (Article 30)  

Access to mainstream leisure activities is still limited for people with disabilities, mainly due 
to architectural barriers132. Many theatres, cinemas and youth clubs are still not barrier-free – 
even  where  by  law  they  should  be.  At  the  same  time  there  are  also  organisational  and 
conceptual barriers, where staff are not well  prepared to welcome and accommodate people 
with e.g. high support needs. Research133 has highlighted limited access to cultural and leisure 
activities for all age groups.  

3.1.2.4.  Governance, institutional cooperation and partnership 

•  Statistics and data collection (Article 31)  

State  Parties  of  the  UNCRPD  commit  themselves  to  collect  statistical  and  research  data  to 
identify barriers and develop policy responses. At present, it is apparent that comparable and 
consistent  data  are  lacking,  both  at  Member  State  level  and  at  European  level.  There  is  a 
shortage  of  empirical  evidence,  and  not  enough  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the  needs  of 
people  with  disabilities  and  their  actual  situation134.  At  Member  State  level,  definitions  and 
classification systems do not only vary from one country to another, but also within the same 
country  according  to  policy  objectives,  legislation  and  administrative  standards135.  At 
European level, the differing definitions of disability have a great impact on the comparability 
of data.  

Most EU-wide data gathering exercises do not disaggregate the data by disability status, with 
the exception of datasets such as the European Quality of Life Survey, the ad hoc module of 
the Labour Force Survey in 2002 and the EU-SILC. The lack of statistics and data means that 

130  

131  

132  

133  

134  

135  

See for example Applica, CESEP, and Alphametrics (2007), ‘Men and women with disabilities in the 
EU: statistical analysis of the LFS ad hoc module and the EU-SILC’. 
See  "Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs", p. 14. 
See  "Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs", p. 36. 
See  ‘Specific  Risks  of  Discrimination  Against  Persons  in  Situation  of  Major  Dependence  or  with 
Complex Needs’, p. 36. 
ANED,  ‘The  implementation  of  EU  social  inclusion  and  social  protection  strategies  in  European 
countries with reference to equality for disabled people [Online], p. 2. 
See  Applica,  CESEP,  and  European  Centre  (2007),  ‘Compilation  of  disability  statistical  data  coming 
from the administrative registers of the Member States’, p. 4. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
                                                 
there  is  a  weak  empirical  basis  both  for  the  development  of  national  and  European  policies 
and for an evaluation of the effectiveness of such policies. 

•  National implementation and monitoring (Article 33)  

National focal points on disability issues are already in place in most governments and a few 
have formally designated focal points for the UNCRPD. It is likely that functions of the focal 
points  in  the  sense  of  the  UNCRPD  would  ‘implicitly’  be  carried  out  by  these  existing 
disability  focal  points  within  government.  Exceptions  are  e.g.  Slovenia,  where  formally 
designated entities have been established as focal points for the Convention, and Spain, where 
the mandate of existing entities has been officially revised to explicitly include the focal point 
function136. 

Further,  in  several  countries,  disability  coordination  mechanisms  that  focus  on  policy 
development,  promotion  of  dialogue,  awareness-raising  etc.  and  are  often  housed  within 
ministries  of  social  welfare  predate  the  UNCRPD.  However,  the  effectiveness  of  these 
mechanisms is often low due to the narrowness of their legal mandate, lack of resources and 
limited involvement of persons with disabilities.  

Across  the  European  Union,  interviews  with  the  main  stakeholders  have  shown  that  more 
effective  coordination  within  the  EU  institutions,  and  in  particular  within  the  different 
Commission departments dealing with disability-related issues, would be necessary.137 

Furthermore,  the  UNCRPD  requires  involvement  and  full  participation  of  persons  with 
disabilities and their organisations in the monitoring process.  

•  Reports by States Parties, Cooperation between States Parties and the Committee, 

and Conference of States Parties (Articles 35, 37 and 40)  

Each state party to the UNCRPD must submit a comprehensive report on measures taken and 
progress made within two years after the entry into force of the Convention for the state party 
concerned, and at least every four years thereafter.  

At EU level, disability is included in the Open Method of Coordination for Social Protection 
and  Social  Inclusion,  but  it  is  not  yet  routinely  and  effectively  reported  on  in  this  forum. 
Furthermore, although the High-Level Group on Disability (set up to coordinate policies and 
priorities between the EU and national governments, and to share good practice) is generally 
considered  a  valuable  forum,  its  impact  and  responsibility  for  implementation  of  the 
UNCRPD remains limited. The role of DHLG and the SPSI OMC will be crucial for the new 
strategy, particularly for support by the European Union to Member States in implementing 
the UNCRPD. 

The EU Fundamental Rights Agency will also be called upon to contribute to this task, within 
the framework of its mandate, by data collection, research and analysis.  

136  

137  

See Thematic study by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the 
structure and role of national mechanisms for the implementation and monitoring of the Convention on 
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 
Mid-term Evaluation of the European Action Plan 2003-2010 on Equal Opportunities for People with 
Disabilities, p. 167. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.1.2.5.  Study  on  challenges  and  good  practices  in  implementation  of  the  UNCRPD  in 

Europe 

The aim of this study was to gather information on the process of implementing the UNCRPD 
in Europe. The contractor, EFC, identified the following issues: 

–  The paradigm shift towards treating people with disabilities as full ‘subjects’ bearing equal 
rights and deserving equal respect, and not as ‘objects’ to be managed or pitied has been 
uneven across the Member States. The obligation to perform a ‘screening exercise’ of the 
conformity of legislation to the UNCRPD is largely unfulfilled. 

–  Only  a  few  Member  States  have  extended  the  application  of  the  principle  of  non-
discrimination beyond the area of employment. The material scope of the duty to provide 
reasonable  accommodation  remains  limited  and  there  is  a  lack  of  laws  addressing  inter-
sectional and multiple discrimination. 

–  Monitoring of the implementation of the principle of accessibility, where it is included in 
legislation, appears to be ineffective. Additional problems are numerous exceptions and the 
lack of disability-specific training for professionals (e.g. architects and engineers). 

–  A  large  number  of  Member  States  continue  to  operate  restrictive  guardianship  laws  and 
policies. Where legislative reforms provide for personal assistants to support people with 
disabilities in decision-making, the distinction between such assistants and guardians is not 
clear enough. In many cases there are insufficient safeguards. 

–  Several  national  policies  are  focused  on  improving  institutional  care  instead  of  moving 
residents  of  such  institutions  into  the  community.  Where  national  policies  do  promote 
independent  living,  individualised  funding  schemes  (personal  budgets)  are  frequently 
absent. 

–  Key concepts, such as ‘discrimination’ and ‘reasonable accommodation’, are inconsistently 
interpreted  by  Member  States.  Neither  Directive  2000/78/EC  nor  many  of  the  Member 
States  explicitly  define  an  unjustified  denial  of  reasonable  accommodation  as  a  form  of 
discrimination.  Low  participation  rates  in  the  labour  market  for  persons  with  disabilities 
suggest that existing legislation may not be effective in practice. 

–  In  most  Member  States,  while  education  for  persons  with  special  educational  needs  can 
take  place  in  ordinary  establishments,  the  option  of  sending  children  with  disabilities  to 
special educational facilities is permissible and in most cases favoured. 

–  Provisions  to  allow  participation  in  voting  procedures  are  not  enough  to  ensure  full  and 
effective participation of all persons with disabilities. While polling stations may be largely 
accessible,  ballots  and  general  information  about  the  elections  are  not  provided  in 
alternative formats (e.g. Braille or easy-to-read formats). 

–  The data and statistics are insufficient for informed policymaking. 

–  Additionally,  the  information  on  governance  and  reporting  systems  required  by  the 

UNCPRD is inadequate. 

The same study made the following recommendations: 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
–  The UNCRPD ratification process should be used to raise  awareness  of disability issues. 
At  the  same  time,  the  use  of  reservations,  interpretative  declarations  or  ‘explanatory 
memorandums’ should be avoided. 

–  The  EU  and  Member  States  should  conduct  a  comprehensive  ‘screening  exercise’  of 
legislation  and,  if  necessary,  should  modify  or  abolish  existing  instruments  in  order  to 
ensure full compliance with the UNCRPD. In the course of this screening, all stakeholders 
should be involved and conformity with the social model of disability should be ensured. 

–  Appropriate  training  of  public  servants,  including  judiciary  staff,  should  be  organised  to 
ensure the application of EU and national law in a manner that is most consistent with the 
UNCRPD. 

–  The  provision  of  reasonable  accommodation  should  be  extended  to  all  areas  of  social, 
political, civil and economic life covered by the prohibition of discrimination. Legislation 
should  make  clear  that  unjustified  denial  of  reasonable  accommodation  is  a  form  of 
discrimination. 

–  Legislation should cater for the adoption of positive measures required to promote de facto 

equality of persons with disabilities, in conformity with Article 5(4) UNCRPD. 

–  The EU and Member States should cooperate to ensure that the principle of accessibility 
applies to all policy sectors (employment, education, transport, ICT, justice, etc.) and that 
adequate  accessibility  requirements  and  standards  are  established.  This  should  include  a 
clear  time  frame  for  achieving  conformity,  indicating  the  sanctions  in  cases  of  non-
compliance, and should be applied in both urban and rural areas. 

–  Legislation  should  be  revised  to  abolish  restrictive  guardianship  laws  and  policies. 
Measures  should  be  taken  to  ensure  access  to  supported  decision-making,  whereas 
effective  safeguards  to  ensure  that  assistants  do  not  abuse  their  position  should  be 
established. 

–  Member States should shift their focus from improving institutional care to relocating the 
residents  of  such  institutions  in  the  community.  Community-based  services  should  be 
adequately funded and sufficiently resourced, and individualised funding schemes should 
be accessible to all persons with disabilities. 

–  Legislation and policy should respect the rights of persons with disabilities to be educated 

in an inclusive education system.  

–  The EU and its Member States should ensure that disability-specific data and statistics are 
appropriate to support policy development and monitoring related to the implementation of 
the UNCRPD. 

3.1.3.  Europe 2020 

The  European  Union’s  new  strategy  for  jobs  and  smart,  sustainable  and  inclusive  growth 
(Europe  2020)  addresses  structural  and  long-term  challenges  of  the  European  economies, 
identified  as  globalisation,  pressure  on  resources  and  ageing.  To  reach  the  five  headline 
targets — in the fields of employment, research and development, environment, education and 
poverty reduction — this approach involves mobilising all EU instruments and policies and 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
coordinated  action  of  the  Member  States,  and  seven  ‘flagship  initiatives’  have  been 
formulated to ensure delivery. 

People  with  disabilities  are  addressed  in  the  flagship  initiatives,  most  prominently  in  the 
‘European platform against Poverty’ aiming to boost social inclusion and fighting poverty 
inter alia through the design and implementation of programmes to promote social innovation 
for disabled persons and definition and implementation of measures addressing their specific 
circumstances. Other thematic priorities, such as assessment of adequacy and sustainability of 
social  protection  and  pension  systems,  health  care  systems,  income  support  and  access  to 
health  care  are  of  utmost  importance  for  people  with  disabilities  and  their  families.  The 
‘Agenda for new skills and jobs’ aiming to raise employment and activity rates, e.g. through 
reviewing tax and benefit systems, touches on the issue of the extremely low employment and 
activity rates of persons with disabilities and the ‘benefit trap’ partly responsible for this. By 
focusing on transitions from education to employment and on training the increasing inflow 
into disability benefits of young people should be counteracted. In this respect also ‘Youth on 
the  move’  offers  multiple  links  with  the  disability  strategy  by  addressing  openness  and 
relevance of education systems, promoting entrepreneurship, fostering mobility etc. But also 
the ‘Innovation Union’ and ‘Digital Agenda for Europe’ address overlapping issues.  

In addition the Commission will mainstream a disability perspective in all flagship initiatives. 
The  targets  for  employment,  education  and  poverty  reduction  can  only  be  achieved  if  the 
situation of persons with disabilities in Europe is substantially improved. 

3.2. 

Views of the European institutions  

Council  Resolution  (2008/C  75/01)  on  the  situation  of  persons  with  disabilities  in  the 
European Union138 invited the Member States and the Commission to begin work on an EU 
disability  strategy  to  succeed  the  current  European  Disability  Action  Plan  2003-2010.  The 
new  strategy  should  inter  alia  assess  how  national  actions  reflect  the  commitments  entered 
into  by  the  European  Community  and  the  Member  States.  The  Resolution  suggests  setting 
national targets. 
Council  Resolution  (10173/10)139  of  8  June  2010  calls  for  greater  inclusion  of  people  with 
disabilities and their families in society by mainstreaming disability issues, and by launching 
initiatives in the areas of education, employment and social affairs, international affairs and 
development.  The  Resolution  invites  the  Commission  to  prepare  a  new  European  Disability 
Strategy building on the values enshrined in the European Treaties, the Europe 2020 Strategy 
and the UNCRPD. 
A  first  informal  ministerial  meeting  on  disability  issues  was  organised  by  the  German 
Presidency on 11 June 2007. It mandated the Disability High-Level Group to report annually 
on the progress by the EU and the Member States in implementing the Convention. 
A second informal ministerial meeting was organised by the Slovenian Presidency on 22 May 
2008. Based on the information provided by the Member States and the discussion held by the 
High  Level  Group,  it  concluded  that  among  the  actions  of  common  interest  and  added 
European  value  are:  development  of  consistent  and  comparable  data,  targets  and  indicators; 
common  approaches  for  the  reporting  required  under  the  UNCRPD;  exchange  of  good 
practices  (e.g.  on  accessibility,  legal  capacity,  access  to  justice,  independent  living,  voting 

138   

139   

See European Union, ‘Resolution of the Council of the European Union and the representatives of the 
Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 17 March 2008 on the situation of 
persons with disabilities in the European Union’. 
Council Resolution (10173/10) of 8 June 2010. 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
                                                 
rights);  cooperation  in  the  production  of  accessibility  guidelines  and  standards  for  products 
and services.140 
A  third  informal  ministerial  meeting  was  organised  by  the  Spanish  Presidency  on  19  May 
2010.  The  Trio  presidency  committed  itself,  among  other  things:  to  promote  and  encourage 
the  prompt  ratification  and  full  implementation of the UNCRPD;  to  enhance  the role of  the 
Disability  High  Level  Group;  to  advance  the  mainstreaming  of  disability  issues  with  an 
emphasis  on  areas  such  as  access  to  housing,  education,  vocational  guidance  and  training, 
transport,  information  and  communication  technologies  and  participation  in  society;  to 
promote the allocation of adequate funds in the new EU budget to ensure disability policies 
implementation 
The  European  Parliament,  in  its  resolution  of  24  April  2009  on  the  conclusion  of  the 
UNCRPD141,  called  on  ‘the  Community  and  the  Member  States  to  incorporate  all  the 
provisions  of  the  Convention  into  law,  to  take  the  measures  and  provide  financial  means 
necessary for their application within specific deadlines and to set quantitative objectives for 
this’. Also, in its resolution of 4 September 2007 on the Single Market Review142, it stressed 
the importance of ensuring that all members of the public benefit from the Single Market and 
pointed  out  that  ‘Declaration  No  22  annexed  to  the  final  act  of  the  Treaty  of  Amsterdam 
provides  that  the  institutions  of  the  Community  shall  take  account  of  the  needs  of  persons 
with a disability in drawing up measures under Article 95 of the Treaty’. Furthermore it called 
‘for  the  continuing  development  of  design  standards,  with  the  aim  of  further  improving 
accessibility  for  disabled  people,  the  elderly  and  children;  stresses  the  importance  that  this 
process has had in areas such as urban buses, lifts, electrical appliances and information and 
communications  technologies  (ICT)  in  extending  the  benefits  of  the  Single  Market  to 
vulnerable citizens and in creating greater certainty and preventing the creation of barriers to 
industry in the Union’. 
The  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  has  drawn  up  an  exploratory  opinion  on 
‘People with disabilities: employment and accessibility by stages for people with disabilities 
in the EU post-2010 Lisbon Strategy’.143 The opinion included calls for: a specific section on 
disability  to  be  included  in  the  Europe  2020  strategy,  the  Employment  Guidelines  and  the 
Social Agenda; policies that foster innovation, are based on statistical data and give visibility 
to  people  with  disabilities  in  all  relevant  European  and  national  statistics;  eAccessibility 
legislation to be presented; an intensive action plan on development of accessibility standards 
and  ‘design  for  all’.  The  EESC  also  backs  the  development  of  a  ‘European  disability  card’ 
that  would  facilitate  mutual  recognition  of  rights  and  cross-border  travel  for  people  with 
disabilities. 

140  

141  

142  

143  

Presidency Conclusions following the second informal ministerial meeting on Disability issues [Online] 
and European Commission (2009), ‘Discrimination in the EU in 2009’ Special Eurobarometer Report 
317 [Online]. 
European  Parliament  resolution  of 24  April  2009 on  the  conclusion,  by  the  European Community,  of 
the  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  and  the  Optional  Protocol 
thereto [Online]. 
European  Parliament  resolution  of  4  September  2007  on  the  Single  Market  Review:  tackling  barriers 
and inefficiencies through better implementation and enforcement [Online]. 
Opinion  of  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  on  People  with  Disabilities:  Employment 
and Accessibility by Stages for People with Disabilities in the EU. [Online]. 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.3. 

Stakeholder consultation  

3.3.1.  Consultation of Member States (DHLG) 

Member  State  experts  have  been  consulted  from  the  beginning  of  the  strategy  formulation 
process. The Disability High Level Group (DHLG) meeting of 1 and 2 April 2009 included a 
first exchange of opinions on priorities and objectives. This was followed up by discussions in 
the meetings of 22 June and 14-15 October 2009. In the meeting of the DHLG held on 23-24 
March  2010,  the  MS  were  invited  to  discuss  the  strategy  draft  and  attempt  to  reach 
compromise commitments on MS actions to comply with the UNCRPD. In the meeting of the 
DHLG held on 9 June 2010, a number of potential actions were discussed.  

3.3.2.  Consultation of civil society stakeholders 

All NGOs co-financed through the PROGRESS programme were invited to put forward their 
views, as were all participants at the yearly conference of the European Day of Persons with 
Disabilities.  During  the  customary  annual  meetings  with  the  NGOs  receiving  PROGRESS 
grants, the issues of the new strategy were the main item on the agenda. As a result, many of 
the main stakeholders submitted their proposals for the strategy in writing. 

A consultative workshop with the main stakeholders took place on 5 March 2010. Participants 
represented civil society, sectoral business and the social partners. 

In  addition,  EDF  —  the  Europe-wide  umbrella  organisation  of  disability  NGOs,  which 
receives  financial  support  from  the  European  Commission  —  was  consulted  in  bilateral 
meetings. 

3.3.3.  General public consultation 

From  4  November  2009  to  4  January  2010,  a  public  online  consultation  was  held  on  the 
Commission’s  central  consultation  website,  Your  Voice 
in  Europe.  The  extensive 
questionnaire received 336 replies, including 101 on behalf of a wide variety of organisations. 
Nine  targeted  responses  were  received  separately.  The  members  of  the  DHLG  were 
encouraged  to  respond  and  to  raise  awareness  about  the  consultation  at  national  level.  The 
public consultation yielded evidence on the existence and spread of discrimination, as well as 
priorities in thematic areas and expectations of the main actors in the field of disability. 

3.4. 

Surveys and expert input  

3.4.1. 

Special Eurobarometers on Discrimination 

Both the 2006 and 2009 special Eurobarometers focusing on discrimination in the European 
Union  showed  that  53 %  of  respondents  across  the  EU  believed  that  disability-related 
discrimination was widespread144.  

Discrimination on the basis of disability was in 2006 perceived to be most widespread in Italy 
(68 %) and France (66 %) and least so in Denmark (32 %). In 2009, discrimination was most 

144  

See European Commission (2007), ‘Discrimination in the European Union’ Special Eurobarometer 263, 
p.  48,  and  European  Commission  (2009),  ‘Discrimination  in  the  EU  in  2009’  Special  Eurobarometer 
Report 317, p. 78. 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
                                                 
acutely  perceived  in  France  (74 %),  followed  by  Latvia  and  Hungary  (both  64 %).  The  EU 
countries  where  this  perception  was  least  common  in  2009  were  Malta  (33 %)  and  Ireland 
(35 %).  In  2006,  Malta  and  Denmark  had  the  lowest  perception  of  disability-related 
discrimination, with respectively 34 % and 32 %. 

In 2008, 45 % of respondents felt that discrimination on grounds of disability was widespread, 
with extremes of 21 % in Malta and 61 % in France145. 

According to the results of the 2006 and 2009 Eurobarometers on discrimination, disability is 
the  type  of  discrimination  most  widely  recognised,  yet  awareness  of  the  existence  of  anti-
discrimination  law  in  the  EU  is  quite  low  —  around  a  third  of  the  European  public  are 
confident  in  their  knowledge  of  their  rights  if  they  consider  themselves  victims  of 
discrimination  or  harassment146.  At  the  same  time,  91 %  of  respondents  in  the  2006 
Eurobarometer  survey  agreed  that  more  money  should  be  spent  on  eliminating  physical 
barriers for people with disabilities147 (in 2009, this question was not asked). 

3.4.2. 

In  2009,  the  special  Eurobarometer  found  that  close  to  a  third  of  Europeans  felt 
totally comfortable with the idea of having a disabled person in the highest elected 
political office in their country. It is interesting to note that managers are much more 
comfortable  than  other  occupational  groups.  148ANED  recommendations  on  the 
future disability strategy 

The  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability  Experts  (ANED)  operates  under  a  service 
contract  with  the  European  Commission  and  consists  of  experts,  mainly  from  academic 
institutions  covering  the  EU  Member  States  and  the  EFTA  countries.  The  aim  of  this  pan-
European academic network is to support policy development by providing data, analysis and 
independent insight into disability issues in the EU. Experts are responsible for reporting on 
the  situation  in  their  country.  A  steering  board  compiles  and  analyses  national  reports  and 
provides a European overview. 

At the ANED annual meeting in November 2009,149 the Working Group on the priorities for 
future  law  and  policy  development  provided  input  to  the  preparation  of  the  new  European 
Disability strategy. The main elements of these recommendations were:  

•  Using  UNCRPD  as  a  reference  point  in  formulating  the  disability  strategy  for  years 

2010 to 2020. 

•  Ensuring  that  EU  funding  is  not  used  to  discriminate  against  disabled  people  or 

perpetuate disadvantage 

•  Enhancing the mainstreaming of disability across relevant EU policies providing a list of 

key thematic areas 

145  

146  

147  

148  

149  

See  European  Commission  (2008),  Discrimination  in  the  European  Union:  Perceptions,  Experiences 
and Attitudes. Summary of the Special Eurobarometer 296 [Online] p. 9. 
European Commission (2009), ‘Discrimination in the EU in 2009’ Special Eurobarometer Report 317, 
p. 34. 
See European Commission (2007), ‘Discrimination in the European Union’ Special Eurobarometer 263, 
p. 13. 
See European Commission (2007), ‘Discrimination in the European Union’ Special Eurobarometer 263, 
July 2007, p. 84. 
ANED website 
http://www.disability-europe.net/en/home/Home%20seminar%202009EN.jsp?jsEnabled=1 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
•  Using a wide range of EU instruments, such as legislation, funding, awareness-raising, 

research. 

Specific  comments  referred  to  using  the  Open  Method  of  Coordination  to  promote 
implementation  of  the  UNCRPD  at  national  level,  involving  disability  organisations  in  the 
planning,  delivery  and  monitoring  of  policies,  gathering  of  statistical  data  and  use  of  the 
structural and regional funds. 

4. 

EUROPEAN DISABILITY STRATEGY 2010-2020: OBJECTIVES 

4.1. 

General objectives 

Based on the issues and inputs above, the overall objectives of the next European Disability 
Strategy will be to empower persons with disabilities and to improve their situation notably 
by means of contributing to compliance with the UNCRPD.  

By  signing  the  UNCRPD,  the  EU  and  the  Member  States  have  committed  themselves  to 
complying  with  its  obligations.  Those  obligations  can  be  divided  into  two  general  groups: 
formal, related to governance issues, and substantive, related to thematic areas (highlighted in 
section 2). Therefore, the overall design of the new strategy will be defined by the following 
general objectives: 

•  Ensure effective governance to implement the UNCRPD; 

•  Comply with the substantive obligations of the UNCRPD. 

4.2. 

Specific objectives 

The two general objectives can be expanded into the following specific objectives: 

•  Governance issues: 

(1) 

Setting up a proper follow-up framework to comply with procedural obligations of the 
UNCRPD  undertaken  by  Member  States  and  EU  institutions,  such  as:  establishing 
independent  mechanisms  to  promote,  protect  and  monitor  implementation  of  the 
UNCRPD; designating focal points for implementation of the UNCRPD; establishing 
coordination mechanisms to facilitate related action in different sectors and at different 
levels; complying with reporting obligations. 

(2) 

Significantly  improving  monitoring  and  evaluation  by:  creating  conditions  for 
improving  the  quality  and  comparability  of  data;  developing  relevant  indicators  and 
possibly common targets; collecting reliable data and statistics. 

•  Thematic areas: 

Identifying  concrete  and  appropriate  actions  (legislation,  policy,  funding,  awareness-
raising,  research,  etc.)  at  EU  and  national  level  to  comply  with  all  substantive 
obligations of the UNCRPD undertaken by Member States and EU institutions in areas 
such  as:  accessibility,  participation,  equality,  employment,  education  and  training, 
living  standards  and  social  protection,  health,  and  external  action.  These  thematic 
areas  correspond  largely  to  issues  covered  in  the  articles  of  the  UNCRPD  and  have 

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
been selected according to their relevance to existing European policies and where EU 
instruments  allow  for  action  with  EU  added  value.  Most  of  the  thematic  areas 
correspond to one or more articles in the UNCRPD with the corresponding scope for 
action. 

•  Support activities: 

(3) 

Identifying  cross-cutting  support  activities,  such  as:  exchange  of  information; 
exchange  of  good  practices;  experts’  dialogue;  awareness-raising;  research;  dialogue 
with civil society. 

5. 

EUROPEAN DISABILITY STRATEGY 2010-2020 

5.1. 

Justification for reinforced action 

The EU has a strong mandate from its Member States to improve the situation of persons with 
disabilities. First, Article 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the 
Charter)150  states  that  ‘Human  dignity  is  inviolable.  It  must  be  respected  and  protected.’ 
Secondly, Article 26 of the Charter states that ‘the European Union recognises and respects 
the  right  of  persons  with  disabilities  to  benefit  from  measures  designed  to  ensure  their 
independence,  social  and  occupational  integration  and  participation  in  the  life  of  the 
community’, and Article 21 prohibits any discrimination on the basis of disability.  Thirdly, 
the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires the Union to combat 
discrimination based on disability when defining and implementing its policies and activities 
(Article 10) and gives it the power to adopt legislation to address such discrimination (Article 
19).  

The current EU Disability Action Plan runs till the end of 2010. When the UNCRPD enters 
into force for the EU151, the Union will have to comply with its obligations to the extent of its 
competences152.  Although  the  date  when  the  UNCRPD  will  enter  into  force  throughout  the 
EU  is  not  yet  known153,  there  is  a  need  to  set  up  the  necessary  coordination  and 
implementation mechanisms that will allow the EU to comply with the obligations stemming 
from the Convention.  

150  

151  

152  

153  

According  to  Article  51,  the  Charter    provisions  are  addressed  to  the  institutions,  bodies,  offices  and 
agencies of the Union with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity and to the Member States only 
when they are implementing Union law. The Charter does not extend the field of application of Union 
law  beyond  the  powers  of  the  Union  or  establish  any  new  power  or  task  for  the  Union,  or  modify 
powers and tasks as defined in the Treaties. 
The UNCRPD will enter into force for the EU 30 days after the person designated by the President of 
the  Council  deposits,  on  behalf  of  the  EU,  the  instrument  of  formal  confirmation  with  the  Secretary-
General of the United Nations. The deposition of the instrument of formal confirmation on behalf of the 
EU is conditioned by the adoption of a Code of Conduct concerning the details of the function of focal 
point  and  appropriate  arrangements  for  representation  of  the  EU’s  position  at  meetings  of  the  bodies 
created  by  the  UN  Convention  (Article  3  and  4  of  Council  Decision  2010/48/EC  concerning  the 
conclusion, by the European Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons 
with Disabilities). 
Declaration  concerning  the  competence  of the  European Community  with  regard  to  matters  governed 
by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 
By July 2010, 15 EU Member States had ratified the UNCRPD. 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  the  Decision  concerning  the  EU’s  conclusion  of  the  UNCRPD,  the  Union  declared  the 
extent of its competences with respect to matters governed by the Convention. A number of 
pieces of secondary legislation were identified and listed to illustrate the extent of the area of 
EU  competence,  in  particular  regarding  the  fields  of  accessibility,  independent  living  and 
social  inclusion,  work  and  employment,  personal  mobility,  access  to  information,  statistics 
and  data  collection,  and  international  cooperation.  All  these  fields  have  been  covered  –  to 
different extents – by the Disability Action Plan 2003-2010.  

To  enable  the  EU  to  comply  with  the  obligations  arising  from  becoming  party  to  the 
UNCRPD, the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 will need to continue addressing the 
issues  covered  in  the  declaration  of  competence.  In  addition,  the  EU's  adherence  to  the 
UNCRPD implies a need for Disability 2020 to provide also for certain governance measures, 
including: 

•  coordination in relation to UNCRPD reporting activities; 

•  exchange of information with regard to the Committee on Rights of Persons with 

Disabilities;  

•  exchange  of  information  and  cooperation  between  Member  States  and  the 

Commission with regard to the Conference of States Parties. 

Furthermore,  the  UNCRPD  implies  a  number  of  obligations  for  the  EU  institutions  that  the 
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 will need to address, namely: 

•  dealing with employment of people with disabilities in the EU institutions; 

•  ensuring  that  in  the  recruitment  process  people  with  disabilities  have  more 

opportunity to compete with non-disabled candidates; 

•  improving accessibility of buildings, websites, ICT tools and documents. 

However, to achieve compliance with the substantive obligations of the UNCRPD (the second 
general objective of the strategy) it is clearly necessary to have ambitious reinforcement of 
the current DAP. All of the political and stakeholder input has pointed to the conclusion that 
additional and stronger measures are needed in the areas where the EU is already active and 
also in the areas where there has been little EU activity.  

A set of actions to ambitiously reinforce the present activities is presented in a Commission 
Staff  Working  Document  accompanying  the  Communication  on  the  European  Disability 
Strategy 2010-2020. It covers eight main thematic areas as well as four horizontal areas. 

5.2. 

Expected impact 

Ambitious reinforcement of the current EU disability policy, including through the proposed 
strategy for the period 2010-2020, is expected to have a substantial positive impact in terms of 
fulfilling the obligations undertaken by signing and concluding the UNCRPD and to improve 
the  social  and  economic  situation  of  persons  with  disabilities,  especially  in  the  areas  not 
served well enough by the current DAP. In view of the progress already made under the latter, 
the proposed strategy appears to have potential to succeed, as it aims to remain flexible and 
respect  the  traditions  of  the  Member  States.  Given  that  the  policy  objectives  of  a  new  EU 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
disability strategy require a significant amount of coordinated action by the Member States as 
well  as  coordination  with  the  European  Union,  the  actions  proposed  in  the  annex  are 
proportionate to the challenge without going beyond what is necessary, while respecting the 
principle  of  subsidiarity.  Furthermore,  other  vulnerable  groups  in  society,  such  as  older 
persons, will benefit from the measures proposed under the strategy, and it will be sufficiently 
flexible to accommodate input from diverse stakeholders, such as industry and consumers. 

5.3.  Monitoring and evaluation of the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 

5.3.1.  Observing the requirements of the UNCRPD  

The UNCRPD requires each party to submit to the Committee on the Rights of Persons with 
Disabilities a comprehensive report on measures taken to give effect to its obligations under 
the Convention and on progress made in that regard. This report has to be submitted within 
two years after the entry into force of the Convention for the party and thereafter at least every 
four  years  and  further  whenever  the  Committee  so  requests.  During  its  second  session  the 
Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities prepared guidelines to be used as a tool 
to  facilitate  reporting  on  implementation  of  the  UNCRPD154.  When  the  Convention  enters 
into force for the EU, all of its institutions and bodies will have to evaluate their compliance 
with the UNCRPD, referring to the said guidelines. The self assessment and subsequent EU 
report must have regard to Articles of the Convention under Union competence, in particular 
as defined in the declaration attached as Annex II to Council Decision 2010/48/EC concerning 
the  conclusion  of  the  UNCRPD  by  the  EU.  Pursuant  to  Article  3  of  the  Decision,  the 
European Commission was designated to be a focal point. Certain aspects of monitoring and 
reporting will be detailed in a Code of Conduct, which is currently under discussion. 

The general principles for monitoring and evaluating the strategy will be linked to those for 
monitoring the UNCRPD. These principles are presented in a study entitled ‘Monitoring the 
Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Europe: 
Principles  for  the  Identification  and  Use  of  Indicators’155.  The  study  provides  a  number  of 
recommendations  with  regard  to  monitoring  the  UNCRPD,  which  are  also  of  use  for  this 
strategy.  It  notes,  for  example,  that  ‘appropriate  indicators  of  outcome  should  allow  for 
comparisons over time, between disabled and non-disabled people (between different groups 
of  disabled  people),  and  between  countries’,  and  that  there  is  a  need  for  a  combination  of 
simple statistical indicators and qualitative ones. The study also stresses the need to focus on 
‘long-term’  impairments,  as  well  as  intersectionality  (e.g.  of  impairment  with  age,  gender, 
ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation)156. 

5.3.2.  The strategy and the policy cycle  

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements will be designed to facilitate better decision-making 
by  feeding  into  the  policy  cycle.  In  implementing  the  strategy,  the  Commission  will 
periodically need to (re)examine operational objectives and related actions. 

154  

155  

156  

Guidelines on treaty-specific document to be submitted by states parties under article 35, paragraph 1, 
of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Note by UN Secretary General) [Online]. 
See  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability  Experts  (ANED)  (2009),  ‘Monitoring 
the 
Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Europe: Principles 
for the Identification and Use of Indicators’. 
(ANED) (2009), ‘Monitoring the Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with 
Disabilities in Europe: Principles for the Identification and Use of Indicators, p. 36. 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Progress  and  any  necessary  revision  should  be  discussed  with  stakeholders  –  e.g.  in  the 
Disability  High  Level  Group.  In  line  with  the  UNCRPD,  persons  with  disabilities  and  their 
representative organisations will be involved.  

5.3.3.  Reporting on progress  

The reporting process of the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 will follow the reporting 
requirements of the UNCRPD, where each state party must submit a comprehensive report on 
measures  taken  and  progress  made,  first  within  two  years  after  the  entry  into  force  of  the 
Convention, and at least every four years thereafter. 

The  Commission  will  base  its  reports  on  both  its  own  monitoring  arrangements  (improving 
efforts  for  collection  of  statistics  and  collection  of  qualitative  data  and  analysis  through  a 
network  of  European  disability  experts)  and  reports  of  the  Member  States  party  to  the 
UNCRPD. Any relevant evaluation exercises in respect of specific actions will feed into the 
monitoring and evaluation framework of the strategy.  

The  Commission  will  also  establish  a  web-based  tool  giving  an  overview  of  the  practical 
measures  and  legislation  being  used  by  MS  and  the  EU  to  implement  the  Convention.  A 
detailed description of the tool and the plans for implementation is included in Annex 2. 

Finally the Commission aims to develop in the coming years, depending on the availability of 
data,  a  framework  of  output  and  outcome  indicators  for  the  disability  strategy  policy 
evaluation.  A  serious  effort  will  be  made  to  assess  the  causality  between  outputs  and 
outcomes  as  far  as  possible  so  as  to  make  recommendations  on  the  effectiveness  of  the 
activities. In particular, three potential indicators linking to key targets of Europe 2020 in the 
areas  of  employment,  poverty  reduction  and  education  have  been  identified  as  priorities  for 
development. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 1 – SUMMARY OF THE MAIN OUTCOMES OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION 

1. Background to the public consultation 

On  4  November  2009  the  Commission  launched  a  two-month  online  public  consultation 
called  "Public  consultation  on  the  preparation  of  a  new  EU  Disability  Strategy  2010-2020". 
The  aim  of  the  consultation  was  to  provide  the  possibility  to  different  stakeholders 
(organisations,  public  authorities,  individuals  including  persons  with  disabilities  and  their 
organisations, enterprises) from all Member States to give their opinion on the problems that 
persons with disabilities face in Europe and the ways to solve them. The consultation was also 
designed  to  give  feedback  on  priorities  and  challenges  for  the  future  of  the  European 
disability policy and the forthcoming strategy 2010-2020.  

The new disability strategy is needed to address new challenges  and  opportunities since the 
launching of the European Disability Action plan in 2003:  

•  obligations  taken  by  the  EU  and  the  Member  States  by  signing  and  ratifying  the  UN 

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,  

•  increase in differences in the situation of persons with disabilities across the EU connected 

to the accession of twelve Member States in 2004 and 2007,  

•  the current demographic trends and the situation of the economy.  

The consultation focuses on issues at European level. However, many areas of vital interest to 
persons  with  disabilities,  such  as  content  and  structure  of  education,  the  norms  for  built 
environment  and  public  spaces,  leisure  issues  as  well  as  social  assistance  are  mainly  in  the 
competence  of  the  Member  States.  Often  they  are  dealt  with  by  the  local  authorities. 
Therefore  the  public  consultation  also  addressed  the  question  of  appropriate  actors  for  each 
thematic area as well as questions of governance. I  

2. Questionnaire 

The questions were divided into 6 groups: 

1) Profile of the respondents; 

2) What should the new EU disability strategy cover;  

3)  Ten  thematic  areas  (Accessibility;  Employment;  Education;  Healthcare;  Free  movement; 
Independent living; Participation in democratic and public life; Participation in cultural life; 
recreation; leisure and sport; Adequate standards of living and social protection; Freedom and 
dignity); 

4) Governance issues; 

5) The role of the European Union 

6) Any other remarks 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
Depending on a concrete question, the respondents were asked to evaluate on a 5-point scale 
(with a neutral position in the middle) the usefulness of a selection of activities; the relevance 
of different actors in addressing the issues or the importance of the different problems. 

3. Statistics and profile of the respondents 

In the period 4 November 2009 until 4 January 2010 a total of 336 responses were received to 
the  online  consultation.  Given  the  effort  needed  to  reply  to  a  questionnaire  with  a  large 
number of questions, the participation is a positive indicator of a public interest in the area. 

70% of the responses came from individual persons not representing any type of organisation 
or public body, 30% of the responses were on behalf of different organisations.  

The individual respondents were in the following age groups: 8% up to 24 years; 55% 25-49 
years; 32% 50-64 years  and  3% 65  or  older.  57% of the respondents were female and 43% 
male. 

The most common countries of origin were: Germany and UK (23%), followed by Belgium 
(7%), France, Ireland and Italy (5% each). 

49%  of  the  individual  query  participants  were  persons  with  disabilities,  further  16%  of  the 
respondents  were  family  members  or  non-paid  careers  for  persons  with  disabilities  and  8% 
take care of persons with disabilities as a paid job. 

9 responses from organisations were received separately, in a format chosen by the sender. 

4. What should the new EU disability strategy cover 

This section of the questionnaire yielded strong evidence of perception of discrimination.  

79%  of  respondents  agreed  or  strongly  agreed  that  persons  with  disabilities  face 
discrimination  in  their  everyday  activities  because  of  their  disabilities.  44%  of  individual 
respondents indicated that they had experienced problems because of their disabilities, further 
45% had indirect experience, through friends or family. 

Responding to questions on the main areas of daily living, the respondents saw every one of 
them  as  important  or  very  important  for  persons  with  disabilities.  For  almost  95%  of 
respondents, lack of access to the built environment was an important or very important issue. 
Just one percentage point behind was the lack of equal opportunities in the job market. 91% 
saw  the  lack  equal  opportunities  in  education  and  difficulties  in  independent  living  as 
important or very important issues. 

79% of responses confirm that equal access to healthcare is important or very important for 
persons with disabilities. 

The item with the "lowest" importance rating in this section - barriers to free movement – still 
achieves  68%.  These  high  percentages  suggest  a  need  for  action  in  a  wide  range  of  areas 
covering most aspects of life. 

5. Thematic areas  

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
In section 11 the main results per thematic area are given in tabular form. In this section the 
main findings are described per area.  

Accessibility 

Most  favoured  tools  in  the  area  of  accessibility  were  legislation  and  measuring.  Guidelines 
and  research  were  the  less  favoured  tools  in  this  area.  Greater  involvement  of  persons  with 
disabilities received ratings "very effective or effective" from 78% of respondents. As regards 
the actors, the respondents saw a clear need for more effort from all established actors. 98% 
of respondents said that national governments should do "more" or "much more" in the area, 
for local government and private sector this share was respectively 91% and 88%. For the EU 
this  share  was  86%,  ahead  of  NGOs  (72%)  and  "other"  (27%).  85%  of  respondents  agreed 
that harmonising rules and standards for accessible goods and services was important or very 
important. 

Employment  

In the area of employment, all measures proposed in the consultation received  over 74% of 
"useful"  or  "very  useful"  ratings,  with  promotion  of  self-employment  and  training  to  job-
seekers  being  the  lowest-rated  (74%  and  77%  respectively)  and  provision  of  assistive 
technologies  and  increasing  accessibility  of  workplaces  the  highest-rated  (88%  and  87% 
respectively).  Fighting  discrimination  and  raising  awareness  were  very  highly  rated,  along 
with  making  standard  technologies  and  digital  content  accessible  (all  86%).  83%  of  the 
respondents  considered  more  and  better  labour  market  support  services  "useful"  or  "very 
useful",  enforcement  of  the  obligation  to  make  reasonable  accommodation  at  the  workplace 
received 82%. 77% of respondents considered dealing with the "benefit trap" useful or very 
useful. 

Education 

In  the  area  of  education,  accessibility  of  learning  materials  emerged  clearly  as  the  most 
critical issue with  90% of respondents indicating that  action in this  area would be  useful or 
very useful. This was closely followed by increasing the accessibility of buildings (89%). At 
the other end of scale, scholarships and grants for persons with disabilities enjoyed support of 
73%  of  respondents.  Awareness-raising  to  increase  social  acceptance  of  persons  with 
disabilities and specific training for teachers on accommodating the persons with disabilities 
in classroom were seen as useful or very useful by respectively 87% and 86% of respondents. 
Support for increasing resources to bring students with disabilities into the general and higher 
education systems was at the 84% level. Finally, mechanism enabling the move from special 
to  general  education  and  adapting  adult  education  and  training  programmes  were  supported 
by respectively 83% and 82% of respondents. 

Healthcare 

In the area of healthcare, prohibiting discrimination in provision of health insurance emerged 
as  the  most  supported  measure  (86%  respondents  said  that  it  would  improve  access  to 
healthcare "clearly" or "very much"). Specific training for health professionals followed with 
83%.  Developing  more  health  services  for  special  needs  of  persons  with  disabilities  was 
supported  by  more  than  three  quarters  of  respondents.  Preventive  action  to  reduce  the 
incidence  of  disabilities  enjoyed  lowest  popularity,  but  64%  is  still  a  significant  level  of 
support.  

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
Free movement 

Free movement is the one area, where the respondents expect more from the European Union 
than  from  Member  States  or  local  authorities.  Highest  rating  (85%  of  "clearly"  or  "very 
much" in terms of improvement expected) is given to mutual recognition of disability status 
across the Member States. Harmonisation of criteria used by the Member States to assess the 
degree of disability is supported by 80% of respondents. Similar disability related benefits and 
the portability of such benefits were given respectively 77% and 78% of high and very high 
helpfulness ratings.  

Independent living  

In the area of independent living, avoiding placement in residential institutions was at the top 
of the respondents' agenda. Out of the measures to avoid this, 90% approval rating was given 
to  measures  directed  at  increasing  provision  of  community-based  services  and  increasing 
access  to  assistive  technologies  that  can  support  the  disabled  to  live  independently. 
Supporting  families  and  other  informal  carers  enjoyed  80%  level  of  support.  On  the  other 
hand, planning for closing down the existing residential  institutions  received  relatively  little 
support  –  only  49%  of  respondents  felt  that  it  would  "clearly"  or  "very  much"  improve  the 
ability  of  persons  with  disabilities  to  live  independently.  Awareness-raising  received  85% 
approval,  minimum  quality  standards  for  care  services  was  supported  by  80%.  Provision  of 
personal  budgets  and  retraining  the  staff  from  institutions  appeared  helpful  to  respectively 
75%  and  74%  of  the  respondents.  In  addition to  supporting  personal  budgets  and  retraining 
the staff from institutions, some respondents made separate written comments highlighting the 
central role played in empowerment of persons with disabilities by the provision of personal 
assistants as well as the need to secure adequate working conditions for the assistants. 

Participation in political life  

Accessibility was high in the wish-list for the participation in political life: 89% of responses 
supported making elections and voting (including the related materials) fully accessible. In a 
separate  question,  88%  support  was  given  to  providing  policy-related  material  in  accessible 
formats. Media action to improve the image of persons with disabilities received 84% ratings 
"useful" and ""very useful" and financing the disability NGOs 81%. 

Recreation and leisure  

Accessibility  was  again  highly  rated  in  the  area  of  recreation  and  leisure:  ensuring 
accessibility  of  both  cultural  venues  (including  monuments  and  sites)  and  sports  facilities 
received 92% support. Accessible formats for cultural material and programmes were seen as 
useful  or  very  useful  by  87%  of  the  respondents.  Training  sports  staff  and  ensuring  the 
funding  to  address  disability  issues  in  sports  received  the approval  of  respectively  88%  and 
84%. Support for the creative activities for persons with disabilities was seen as useful or very 
useful also by a high proportion of respondents - 80%. 

Standards of living  

The  responses  in  the  thematic  area  addressing  standards  of  living  stand  out  by  their  high 
.convergence  levels.  90%  approval  ratings  of  compensating  for  extra  costs  and  burdens 
caused  by  disability  and  expanding  job  opportunities  are  not  very  far  from  the  82%  rating 
given to measuring the situation of persons with disabilities while gathering data on the most 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
vulnerable groups. Also, the rating of 86% given to providing adequate disability pensions is 
very close to 85% for expanding public housing opportunities. 

In the area of freedom and dignity, practical tools and actions received relatively more support 
than  legislative  measures.  Nevertheless,  support  levels  of  81%  and  86%  for  legislative 
measures  concerning  respectively  decision-making  and  preventing  violence  as  well  as  legal 
monitoring  are  by  no  means  low.  Legislation  to  ensure  the  legal  capacity  of  persons  with 
disabilities received the same support as most practical measures – 88%. 

Practical  measures  in  decision-making  and  awareness-raising  were  supported  or  strongly 
supported by 88% of respondents, the most supported measure was developing practical tools 
to prevent violence against persons with disabilities with 89% support. 

6. Governance issues 

The public consultation confirmed that assigning clear political responsibility for disability at 
all governance levels is considered important (or very important) by 92% of responses given. 
Along  the  same  lines,  83%  of  respondents  favoured  identification  of  a  lead  office  for 
disability issues. 

Developing  communication  and  cooperation  mechanisms  between  different  actors  (EU, 
national and local governments, civil society) remains a challenge, but a challenge that must 
be tackled - 87% of respondents agreed it was important or very important. 

Assessing  the  impact  of  new  policies  (in  all  sectors)  on  persons  with  disabilities  was 
important  or  very  important  for  87%  of  respondents.  As  to  how  to  do  this  best  -  78%  of 
respondents  considered  establishing  indicators  and  targets  to  measure  improvements  in  the 
situation of persons with disabilities important or very important. 

7. The role of the European Union 

In  each  thematic  section  respondents  indicated,  which  actors  should  be  involved  to  what 
extent. The choices were European Union, National Government, Regional/local Government, 
Disability NGOs, Industry and Other. The lowest share of respondents who wanted EU to do 
more or much more, was evident in the area of recreation and leisure - 74%. At the same time, 
doing  more  or  much  more  was  favoured  by  86%  of  the  respondents  in  the  area  of 
accessibility. High on the list of areas, where the EU should engage more actively, were also: 
freedom  and  dignity  (86%),  free  movement  (84%),  independent  living  and  participation  in 
democratic and public life (both 83%). Even the items lower on the list also enjoyed a high 
level  of  support  for  more  EU  engagement:  80%  for  employment  and  education,  78%  for 
standards of living and 75% in healthcare. 

 more or 
much more 
86% 
86% 
84% 
83% 
83% 
80% 
80% 

EU should be involved 
in the area of 

Accessibility 
Freedom and dignity 
Free movement 
Independent living 
Participation in democratic and public life 
Employment 
Education 

less or  
much less 
2% 
2% 
1% 
2% 
2% 
3% 
2% 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
78% 
75% 
74% 

Standards of living and social protection 
Healthcare 
Culture, recreation, leisure, sport 

3% 
2% 
3% 

The table shows that there was very little call for the EU to do less in any of the areas and that 
the differences in percentages to do more are small between the areas. . 

In  the  special  section  devoted  to  the  role  of  the  EU,  the  respondents  were  asked  to  rate  the 
suitability of a variety of instruments the EU could use. All proposed instruments received at 
least 76% of "suitable" or "very suitable" ratings, with targets and indicators being the least 
favoured  and  ensuring  disability-friendly  public  purchasing  the  most  supported  with  92%. 
Legislation  to  harmonise  disability-related  objectives  across  Member  States  enjoyed  79% 
support, whereas financial support for local projects and research received "suitable" or "very 
suitable"  from  respectively  84%  and  82%  of  respondents.  Financing  NGOs  enjoyed  the 
support of 81% of responding organisations and 77% of all respondents. 86% of respondents 
regarded  helping  the  MS  to  exchange  information  and  best  practice  as  "suitable"  or  "very 
suitable" role for the EU, information campaigns reached 80% level of support. 

On  a  more  general  level,  75%  of  respondents  considered  mainstreaming  alone  to  be 
insufficient to address the problems faced by the persons with disabilities. 66% of respondents 
supported  addressing  disability  issues  with  a  combination  of  mainstreaming  and  specific 
policies. 

Legislation  to  harmonise  disability-related  objectives  across  Member  States  enjoyed  79% 
support; helping the MS to exchange information and best practice seen as "suitable" or "very 
suitable"  by  86%  of  respondents.  Featured  in  two  different  sections,  targets  and  indicators 
were found "suitable" or "very suitable" by 76% or 78% of respondents. 

8. The role of the Member States 

The lowest share of respondents who wanted MS to do more or much more, was in the area of 
free movement –, but even there the percentage was still 81%. Accessibility issues received 
the highest percentage with 93% of responses seeing a need for the MS to do more or much 
more.  Standards  of  living/social  protection  and  employment  as  well  as  independent  living 
(91%),  also  freedom  of  dignity  (90%)  were  among  the  areas,  with  the  highest  shares  of 
respondents  wanting  to  see  additional  effort  by  the  Member  States,  followed  by  89%  in 
education and participation in democratic and public life, 88% in culture and recreation and 
87% in healthcare. 

MS should do more or much more 
Accessibility 
Standards of living and social protection 
Employment 
Independent living 
Freedom and dignity 
Education 
Participation in democratic and public life 
Culture, recreation, leisure, sport 
Healthcare 
Free movement 

93% 
91% 
91% 
91% 
90% 
89% 
89% 
88% 
87% 
81% 

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
 
 
Overall, the respondents laid most responsibility for thematic areas with the Member States, 
followed  by  the  local  or  regional  governments  and  the  European  Union  but  differences  are 
small.  In  this  sense,  the  table  depicting  the  distribution  of  the  answers  in  the  area  of 
accessibility  is  rather  representative.  Main  exception  was  the  area  of  free  movement,  where 
the EU is expected to take most responsibility. 

Accessibility: who should do more or much more

92,80%

91,40%

86,00%

88,40%

71,70%

26,50%

European Union

National government

Regional/local
government

NGOs, including disability
NGOs

Private sector

Other

Free movement: who should do more or much more

84,2%

81,2%

63,1%

60,8%

55,9%

European Union

National government

Regional/local
government

NGOs, including disability
NGOs

Private sector

Other

7,2%

9. Any other remarks 

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
In addition to replying to the questionnaire, several organisations sent detailed proposals, with 
recommendations  for  the  new  Disability  Strategy.  Many  respondents  also  used  the  free  text 
field in the questionnaire to add further remarks. Among the suggestions made, some of the 
most prominent were:  

•  Providing  a  comprehensive  legal  framework  which  is  clear  and  binding  for  all  involved 
parties.  In  particular,  a  horizontal  Directive  aimed  at  achieving  equal  treatment  and  non 
discrimination  for  persons  with  disabilities  in  design,  manufacturing  and  provision  of 
goods and services, was mentioned. 

•  The implementation of the UN Convention should be stated as priority in the new strategy.  

•  Development  of  specific  action  plans  to  address  particular  situations:  health  inequalities, 
de-institutionalization,  employment  of  people  with  disabilities;  people  with  high 
dependency needs. 

•  Introduction  of  the  quota  system  for  employing  persons  with  disabilities  in  the  public 

service in the whole EU as an encouragement for private sector. 

•  Establishing indicators and targets. 

•  Mainstreaming of disability in EU programmes for financial support such as the European 

Structural Funds or in programmes for development cooperation.  

•  Using public procurement as leverage to achieve the inclusion of accessibility features in 

the design and manufacturing in the EU. 

Among  the  submissions,  there  was  support  for  the  following  actions  of  the  Commission: 
mainstreaming,  particularly  in  the  assessment  and  evaluation  of  policy-making  as  well  as 
research; awareness-raising; more detailed and segmented collection of data. 

A specific proposal for a Disability Pact was made by the European Disability Forum. Their 
document  contains  comprehensive  and  detailed  recommendations  for  the  EU  to  remodel  its 
handling of disability issues, including the governance aspects. Several free-form submissions 
referred to this Pact proposal or reflected its individual recommendations. 

11. Tables relating to thematic areas 

"effective" 
or "very 
effective" 
71% 
69% 
66% 
59% 

"effective" 
or "very 
effective" 
60% 
59% 

Developing legislation to ensure accessibility of 

the built environment 
transport 
Internet and communication technologies 
other goods and services 

Measuring accessibility of 

the built environment 
transport 

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
 
58% 
55% 

Internet and communication technologies 
other goods and services 

"effective" 
or "very 
effective" 
58% 
57% 
55% 
49% 

"effective" 
or "very 
effective" 
56% 
52% 
51% 
51% 

"effective" 
or "very 
effective" 
78% 

75% 
75% 
69% 
68% 
65% 

 "useful" 
or "very 
useful" 

88% 

87% 

86% 

86% 

86% 

83% 

82% 

77% 

Developing guidelines and standards to promote 
accessibility of 

Internet and communication technologies 
transport 
the built environment 
other goods and services 

Funding for research on accessibility of 

Internet and communication technologies 
transport 
the built environment 
other goods and services 

Accessibility – other measures 

Greater involvement of persons with disabilities in developing 
accessibility standards 
Increasing availability of assistive technologies 
Regular checks of accessibility of goods and services 
Increasing use of "universal design" or "design for all" 
Supporting the development of the assistive devices industry 
Providing know-how to support application of the "reasonable 
accommodation" principle 

Employment – usefulness to persons with disabilities in 
seeking employment 

Providing assistive technologies 

Increasing accessibility of workplaces 

Fighting discrimination related to recruitment, employment and 
career advancement 
Raising awareness of the potential of persons with disabilities 
among employers 
Better accessibility of standard technologies and digital content 

More and better labour market support services 

Enforcing the obligation to make reasonable accommodation for 
disabled persons at the workplace 
Reducing financial risks for persons with disabilities entering or 
leaving the labour market 

EN 

50 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
77% 

74% 

"clearly" 
or "very 
much" 

90% 

89% 

88% 

86% 

84% 

83% 

82% 

73% 

Providing training to job-seekers with disabilities 

Promoting opportunities for self-employment 

Education - expected improvement equal opportunities for 
Persons with disabilities 

Increasing the availability of accessible learning material, including 
electronic material and assistive technologies 
Increasing the accessibility of educational buildings 

Awareness-raising activities in the general education system to 
increase social acceptance and understanding of the needs of 
persons with disabilities 

Providing specific training for teachers to accommodate students 
with disabilities in their classrooms 
Increasing human and financial resources to bring students with 
disabilities into the general and higher education system 
Facilitating mechanisms for students with disabilities to move from 
special to general education 
Adapting adult education and training programmes to the needs of 
persons with disabilities 
Providing scholarships and grants for persons with disabilities 

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
 
 
"clearly" 
or "very 
much" 

86% 

83% 

76% 

64% 

"clearly" 
or "very 
much" 

85% 

80% 

78% 

77% 

 "clearly" 
or "very 
much" 

90% 

90% 

85% 

80% 

80% 

75% 

74% 

49% 

Healthcare - expected improvement in equal opportunities for 
persons with disabilities 

Prohibiting discrimination against persons with disabilities in the 
provision of health insurance 
Providing training for health professionals on health needs of 
persons with disabilities 
Developing more health services for special needs of persons with 
disabilities 
Preventive action to reduce the incidence of disabilities 

Free movement – degree of helpfulness in ensuring persons 
with disabilities enjoy the right to free movement 

Mutual recognition of disability status across the Member States 

Harmonisation of criteria used by the Member States to assess the 
degree of disability 
Portability of disability-related benefits and services when moving 
to another Member State 
Work towards similar disability related benefits across the Member 
States 

Independent living – expected contribution to increasing the 
ability of the disabled to live independently 

Avoiding the placement of persons with disabilities in residential 
institutions by increasing provision of community-based services 
Avoiding the placement of persons with disabilities in residential 
institutions by increasing access to assistive technologies that can 
support the disabled to live independently 

Awareness-raising activities to make the right of people with 
disabilities to live in the community more socially acceptable 
Avoiding the placement of persons with disabilities in residential 
institutions by supporting families and other informal carers 

Setting minimum quality standards for care services 

Providing persons with disabilities with personal budgets 

Retraining and requalification of staff working in institutions to 
provide them with skills for community-based care 
Developing action plans to close down residential institutions 

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 "useful" 
or "very 
useful" 

89% 

88% 

84% 

81% 

 "useful" 
or "very 
useful" 

92% 

92% 

88% 

87% 

84% 

80% 

 "useful" 
or "very 
useful" 

90% 

90% 

86% 

85% 

82% 

Usefulness in enabling persons with disabilities to participate 
in democratic and public life 

Ensuring that elections and voting, including related material, are 
fully accessible 
Providing policy-related information in accessible formats 

Media action to improve the image of persons with disabilities 

Providing support to disability NGOs 

Recreation and leisure - usefulness in enabling persons with 
disabilities participation 

Ensuring that cultural venues and monuments and sites of cultural 
value are accessible 
Ensuring that sports-related facilities are accessible 

Ensuring that sports staff concerned are trained in disability issues 

Providing cultural material and programmes in accessible formats 

Providing funding to address disability issues in sports 

Supporting the development of creative activities for persons with 
disabilities 

Usefulness in ensuring persons with disabilities enjoy an 
adequate standard of living and social protection 

Compensating for extra costs and burdens caused by disability in 
everyday life 
Expanding job opportunities 

Providing adequate disability pensions 

Expanding public housing opportunities for persons with disabilities 

Measuring the situation of persons with disabilities when gathering 
data on the groups most vulnerable to poverty 

EN 

53 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
"useful" 
or "very 
useful" 

89% 

88% 

88% 

88% 

86% 

86% 

81% 

Usefulness in guaranteeing freedom and dignity for persons 
with disabilities 

Preventing violence, ill-treatment and abuse of persons with 
disabilities by developing practical tools e,g, supporting services, 
training for families and formal carers 

Developing legislation to ensure persons with disabilities have full 
legal capacity 
Raising awareness of the situation of persons with disabilities 

Supporting people with disabilities in decision-making e,g, in 
financial transactions and medical treatment options by developing 
practical tools 

Preventing violence, ill-treatment and abuse of persons with 
disabilities by developing legislation e,g, criminal law 
Monitoring relevant legal practice in the Member States 

Supporting people with disabilities in decision-making e,g, in 
financial transactions and medical treatment options by developing 
legislation 

EN 

54 

   EN 

 
 
 
ANNEX 2 – TABLE WITH KEY INSTRUMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNCRPD  

Objective 

The  information  available  shows  that  persons  with  disabilities  are  at  a  disadvantage  when 
compared with other citizens in terms of access and participation.  

There is a need  to develop a framework describing the policy and  legal situation across the 
EU in the light of the commitments undertaken for the implementation of the UN Convention. 
Therefore an on-line table on the European Commission webpage will provide information on 
policies,  practical  measures  and  legal  acts  that  are  needed  to  achieve  the  effective 
implementation of the UN Convention. The table will be accompanied by an accessible on-
line  tool  that  will  permit  stakeholders'  organisations  to  comment  on  the  stage  of 
implementation as identified users. 

The preliminary list of elements below is not exhaustive but aims to cover the key instruments 
that are necessary to bring about the needed changes in society to provide the required equal 
access to the key rights and freedoms mentioned in the Convention. 

The table will contain an entry or "cell" for: 

–  each MS and the EU 

–  each policy or legal instrument 

Each cell will contain a web link to the reference document or to a web page containing the 
relevant information that describes the instrument and its operation. 

A first list of instruments and related links will be collected by ANED (European Academic 
Network of Disability experts). Members of the Disability High Level Group will be invited 
to revise those links, where available. The table can be updated regularly and at least once a 
year a snapshot can be made, for instance to accompany the implementation progress report 
from the Disability High Level Group for the informal ministerial meeting.  

In  this  way,  with  relatively  little  effort  and  based  on  already  existing  information  it  will  be 
possible to collect much of the information needed to complete the table. In parallel, work on 
the collection of the key statistics and quantitative indicators will continue. 

Preliminary list of instruments 

I. 

UN Convention status 

•  Ratification  or  conclusion  of  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with 
Disabilities:  Setting  up  governance  (focus  point,  coordination  mechanism, 
independent mechanism, involve civil society in monitoring) 

Art. 33 of the UNCRPD and Parts A.3.c & D. Art.33& A.5.3.b of the Guidelines on the treaty-
specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Ratification or Accession to the Optional Protocol 

EN 

55 

   EN 

 
A.12 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

II. 

General Legal Framework 

•  Antidiscrimination legislation157  

Art 4.1 and 6 of the UNCRPD and Parts A.2.1, A.4.2., A.5.4., A.5.5., B.4., B.5., B.7., C. - Art.5 
of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Legislation recognising legal capacity of persons with disabilities 

Art 13.1 of the UNCRPD and C. Art.13.1. & Art.13.3. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific 
document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Legislation  to  ensure  accessibility  to  voting  and  elections  by  Persons  with 

Disabilities  

Art 29.a.i and art. 29.a.ii of the UNCRPD158 and A.5.c. and art.29 of the Guidelines on the 
treaty-specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Official recognition of sign language  

Art 21.5 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

III.  Accessibility and Assistive Technology 

•  Accessibility legislation and standards159 

a. 

b. 

c. 

Transport - Art. 9.1 of the UNCRPD. 

Physical environment - Art 9.1.a, 9.2.d, 9.2.e of the UNCRPD 

ICT including the web - Art 9.2.d, Art 9.2.e of the UNCRPD 

More details on accessibility instruments can be found in A.3.2.g, A.5.3.c, C.-Art 9, C.Art.21 
of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Programmes for ensuring availability of Assistive Technologies - 

Art 4.g of the UNCRPD and C. - Art.9.1. and Art.26.4. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific 
document to be submitted to the Committee 

IV. 

Instruments for independent living 

157 

158 
159 

Specific  measures  or  legislation  should  also  ensure  that  women  and  children  with  disabilities  are 
protected from discrimination (Art. 6 of UNCRPD). 
Art. 29.a.i. addresses accessible voting procedures and art.29.a.ii the protection of privacy of the vote 
Accessibility  is  a  cross-cutting  principle  touching  upon  several  areas  of  the  UNCRPD.  As  such, 
accessibility should be promoted in relation to Articles 4.1.a, 4.1.b, 4.1.f, 4.1.g, 4.1.h, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 
14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30. 

EN 

56 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Programmes  and  plans  for  the  transition  from  institutions  to  community  based 

services: no obligation to live in a particular living arrangement  

Art 19a of the  UNCRPD and  art.19 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be 
submitted to the Committee 

•  Programmes for quality of social services for persons with disabilities 

Art.25.e  and  art.  28  of  the  UNCRPD160  and  C.  -  Art.16.2.  and  art.25.2,  25.3.,  25.6,  28.2., 
28.3. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Availability of disability pensions  

Art 28 of the UNCRPD and C. –Art.28.2 & Art.28.4. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific 
document to be submitted to the Committee 

V. 

Collection of data 

•  Programmes on research and development on disability matters  

Art 4.1.g and C. art. 9.1. and E. Art.31.1. & art.31.3. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific 
document to be submitted to the Committee 

•  Programmes on the collection of statistics  

Art 31 of UNCRPD and A.3.h and E. art 31 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document 
to be submitted to the Committee 

VI. 

Education and employment 

•  Policy and laws for inclusive education  

Art 24 of the UNCRPD161 and C. Art.24 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to 
be submitted to the Committee 

•  Employment support programmes  

Art 27 of the UNCRPD162 and C. Art.27 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to 
be submitted to the Committee 

VII.  Training professionals 

160 

161 

162 

Ensure  access  of  persons  with  disabilities  to  adequate  health  and  life  insurance  (Art  25  e  of  the 
UNCRPD) and social protection (Art. 28). 
Legislation  should  be  provided  to  ensure  that  children  with  disabilities  are  not  excluded  from 
compulsory primary education or secondary education on the basis of disability and that they receive 
the  required  support.  Measures  to  facilitate  learning  of  sign  language  and/or  Braille  should  also  be 
undertaken. 
Legislation  should  be  provided  to  ensure  that  children  with  disabilities  are  not  excluded  from 
compulsory primary education or secondary education on the basis of disability and that they receive 
the  required  support.  Measures  to  facilitate  learning  of  sign  language  and/or  Braille  should  also  be 
undertaken. 

EN 

57 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Availability of training programmes on disability and accessibility matters for: 

a. 

Lawyers –  

Art 13 of the UNCRPD163 and C. Art 13.2. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document 
to be submitted to the Committee 

b.  Doctors  

Art 25.d of the UNCRPD164 and C. art. 25.5. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document 
to be submitted to the Committee 

c. 

Engineers165 

C. Art 20.4 of the Guidelines of reporting of the UNCRPD 

d. 

Teachers  

Art 24.4 of the UNCRPD166 and C. Art-24.8. of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document 
to be submitted to the Committee 

VIII.  Awareness raising and external development 

•  Inclusive development aid programmes with clear reference to disability matters 

A.8. and C. Art. 11 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to be submitted to the 
Committee 

•  Awareness raising programmes 

Art. 8 of the UNCRPD167 and C. – art. 8 of the Guidelines on the treaty-specific document to 
be submitted to the Committee 

163 

164 

165 
166 

167 

Measures  should  be  undertaken  to  insure  that  increasingly  more  persons  working  in  the  field  of 
administration  of  justice,  police  and  prison  staff  are  qualified  in  sign  language  and/or  Braille  and  are 
trained on disability and accessibility (Art. 13.2 of the UNCRPD). 
Measures  should  be  undertaken  to  insure  that  increasingly  more  health  professionals  are  qualified  in 
sign language and/or Braille and are trained on disability and accessibility (Art. 25.d of the UNCRPD). 
Encourage production of mobility aids, devices and assistive technologies. 
Measures should be undertaken to insure that increasingly more teachers are qualified in sign language 
and/or Braille and are trained on disability and accessibility (Art. 25.d of the UNCRPD). 
Art.  8  referring  to  Launching  campaigns  for  general  society  within  education  system  and  the  actions 
undertaken by the media (TV, internet, radio coverage). 

EN 

58 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ANNEX 3 – RESULTS OF THE EU DISABILITY ACTION PLAN 2008-2009 

PRIORITY ACTION 

INSTRUMENTS 

ACHIEVEMENTS 

1. Fostering accessibility of the labour market 

Exploring  flexicurity  measures  for 
people with disabilities 

Expert exchanges and thematic peer review 
of  practices  on 
flexicurity  addressing 
disabled  people,  to  be  carried  out  through 
the  Disability  High  Level  Group  and  the 
Employment Committee. 

Two  peer  review  took  place  during 
this period: 

on 

review 

-Peer 
"Vocational 
rehabilitation  and  income  security 
for  people  with  work  incapacities 
within  the  framework  of  integrated 
Flexicurity  approaches"  on  15-16 
September  2008  (Mutual  Learning 
programme). 

-Peer  review  on  "Modernising  and 
to 
activating  measures 
work  incapacity"  on  4-5  February 
2010  (Peer  review  programme  in 
social 
social 
inclusion). 

protection 

relating 

and 

The Commission launched a Study 
on  Supported  Employment 
that 
addresses Flexicurity issues. 

Encouraging 
employment 
corresponding 
achieve their full potential. 

supported 
helping 
programmes 

and 

High-level  expert  exchanges  within  the  new 
EU Network of Heads of Public Employment 
Services  on  accessibility  of  employment 
services  and  matching  of  labour  market 
needs with those of disabled persons. 

employment 

Commission  services  discussion  paper  on 
supported 
the 
guidelines  of  the  European  Employment 
Strategy. This paper will be discussed in the 
Disability High Level Group and submitted to 
the EU Employment Committee. 

reflecting 

of 

issue 

The 
supported 
employment  was  discussed  within 
the  Disability  High  level  group  with 
a  presentation  by  the  "Union  of 
supported Employment". 

The  Commission  prepared  a 
discussion  paper  on  supported 
employment  that  was  presented 
and  discussed  with  the  Member 
States  in  the  Disability  High  level 
group 

The  Commission  supported  an 
expert 
the 
Network  of  Public  Employment 
Services assistants on 15.10.2008 

exchange  within 

A  European  comparative  study  on 
Supported 
and 
Flexicurity  is  in  progress,  to  be 
finished early 2011. 

employment 

Facilitating  access  to  information 
on reasonable accommodation for 
the 
people  with  disabilities 
workplace 

in 

Analysis  of  data,  facts  and  success  stories 
of companies on the basis of a study under 
the PROGRESS Programme for 2007 with a 
view  to  identifying  models  of  good  practice 
and  carrying  out  of  a  cost  benefit  analysis 
(VT/2007/007). Results are expected by the 
end of 2008. 

the 
study 
The  execution  of 
reasonable 
Providing 
for  persons 
accommodation 
with disabilities in the EU – best 
practices 
financing 
and 
schemes  under  call  for  tender 
successfully 
VT/2007/007  was 
finished.  

EN 

59 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Providing 
the 
guidance 
incorporation  of  social  criteria  into 
public procurement 

on 

A guide on the incorporation of social criteria 
into  public  procurement  will  be  elaborated 
on the basis of a study. 

the 

Improving 
integration  of 
disabled  persons  in  the  field  of 
education and youth. 

“Lifelong  Learning”  and  “Youth  in  action” 
programmes,  with  a  specific  priority 
in 
2008/2009 calls for proposals. 

have 

practices, 

The  results  of  the  study,  including 
the final report, the compendium of 
good 
been 
presented  in  the  HLG  meeting  on 
1-2  April  2009  and  in  US  –  EU 
seminar 
5/6 
November 2009 and is available in 
the web. 

on  Employment 

on 

the 

guide 

social 
A 
considerations 
public 
procurement  is  at  an  advanced 
stage  of  preparation  and  will  soon 
be published.  

in 

lead 

recently 

terms  of  Lifelong  Learning 
In 
policies, 
the  Communication  on 
Efficiency  and  Equity  (*)  urges 
Member  States  to  act  upon  factors 
that 
educational 
to 
disadvantages (including disability). 
adopted 
The 
on 
School 
Communication 
the 
education 
(**)  underscores 
need  of  giving  all  pupils 
the 
competences  they  need  for  life, 
them  with  high 
while  providing 
involves 
quality  education.  This 
improving 
within 
mainstream  schooling  for  students 
with special needs. 

support 

Achievements in 2010: 

- funding of the 3-year Inclusion 
project, 
run  by  13  Lifelong 
Learning  Programme  National 
Agencies, to facilitate access to 
education  and 
training  of 
people with fewer opportunities, 
including those with disabilities 

the 

-  Grundtvig  specific  activities:  a 
specific workshop on disabilities 
during 
Dissemination 
conference  in  January  2010  + 
an  NA 
seminar  on  how 
Grundtvig  NAs  can  ease  the 
participation  of  disadvantaged 
groups  to  the  programme  in 
June 2010 

-  The  recently  created  unit, 
inside  Education  Directorate  A, 
“Equal  Opportunities  &  Equity”, 
which started operation on June 
1st, 
a 
2010, 
significant  progress 
the 
implementation  of  community 
the 
policy 

represents 
in 

regards 

as 

EN 

60 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
participation  of  people  with 
in  education  and 
disabilities 
training.  .  Statistical  data  and 
information 
become 
available  for  the  whole  year 
2010 in the second semester. 

will 

As  regards  the  Youth  in  Action 
programme  and policies, emphasis 
is  constantly  brought  to  the  better 
inclusion  of  disadvantaged  groups, 
including disabled youth.  

* Efficiency and Equity in European 
education  and 
training  systems; 
COM (2006) 481 final, 8.9.2006 

**  Improving  competences  for  the 
21st  century:  An  agenda 
for 
European  cooperation  on  school: 
COM (2008) 425 final, 2.7.2008 

Youth 
figures  2010 
decentralised level): 

in  Action  programme 

- 
(granted  projects 

-  projects  with  primary 
theme 
"disability: 271 (8% of total granted 
projects) 

-  projects  with  secondary  theme 
"disability": 298 (9% of total granted 
projects) 

- projects aiming at the inclusion of 
young  disabled  and/or  directly 
involving disabled young people:  

a)  n.  of  projects  543  (16%  of  total 
granted projects) 

b) n. of participants: 14 690 

c)  n.  of  young  people  with  fewer 
opportunities  involved  (disabled  + 
other): 7 620 

Operational Programmes 2007-
is 
2013: 
improve 
being 
accessibility 
disabled 
persons.  

Increased  attention 
to 
for 

paid 

Some  MS  have  included  anti-
discrimination  clauses  in  their 
Operational  Programmes  (e.g. 
Poland), 
have 
accessibility  as  a  horizontal 
priority  (e.g.  Bulgaria,  Slovenia 
and  Austria),  while  other  MS 
for 
targeted  measures 
have 

other  MS 

Using  the  potential  provided  by 
integrated 
Policy's 
Cohesion 
and 
approach 
multi-level 
the 
to 
governance 
business  case  of  disability  and 
accessibility for disabled persons 

support 

Employment, 

Implementation  by  Member  States,  regions 
and 
the 
the  wider  partnership  under 
Convergence,  Regional  Competitiveness 
Territorial 
and 
Cooperation 
programmes 
operational 
negotiated and decided in 2007 on the basis 
of  Council  Regulation 
(EC)  1083/2006, 
Regulation  (EC)  1080/2006  and  Regulation 
(EC) 1081/2006 

and 

EN 

61 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
2. Boosting accessibility of mainstream goods, services and infrastructures 

Transport systems and services 

Air  transport:  enforcing  the  rights 
of  disabled  persons  and  persons 
with reduced mobility. 

Regulation  No  1107/2006  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 
concerning  the  rights  of  disabled  persons 
and  persons  with  reduced  mobility  when 
travelling by air (OJL204/1 26.07.2006)  

Rail transport:  enforcing the rights 
of  disabled  persons  and  persons 
with reduced mobility. 

Regulation  on  rail  passengers’  rights  and 
obligations  (text  agreed  by  EP  and  Council, 
publication pending, entry into force 2 years 
after publication). 

persons  with  disabilities  (e.g. 
Lithuania, Bulgaria). 

Member  States  also  aim  at  a 
better representation of persons 
the 
with 
monitoring committee meetings. 

disabilities 

at 

meetings 

Periodical 
and/or 
exchange  of  views  with  National 
the 
Enforcement  Bodies 
enforcement  of  Regulation  No 
1107/2006 have taken place. 

on 

The  Commission 
is  monitoring 
complaint  handling  and  acting  on 
complaints 
for 
information.  

request 

or 

a 

of 

By  end  2010,  the  Commission  will 
two 
package 
adopt 
communications 
passenger 
on 
rights: 1) a communication on Reg. 
261/2004  on 
long  delays  and 
cancellations;  2)  an  application 
report  on  Reg.  1107/2006  on 
PRM  (passengers  with  reduced 
mobility) 

into 

Regulation  (EC)  No  1371/2007  of 
the European Parliament and of the 
Council  of  23  October  2007  on  rail 
passengers’  rights  and  obligations, 
published  in  the  Official  Journal  of 
the  European  Union  L315  of 
3.12.2007  eentered 
force: 
3.12.2009.  As  of  the  entry  into 
force  all  railway  undertakings  have 
to ensure equal treatment and non-
discrimination  against  disabled 
persons  and  persons  with  reduced 
mobility  (PRM).  The  application  of 
the  PRM  Chapter  (assistance  to 
access 
to 
be 
domestic 
postponed  by  individual  MS  up  to 
15 years. 

trains  and  stations) 
services  may 

During  2009  application  was 
prepared,  in  particular  in  view  of 
Member  States'  possibilities 
to 
derogate 
(regional,  urban  and 
suburban  services)  and/or  exempt 
for  up  to  15  years  all  national  rail 
transport  from  the  application  of 
one  or  more  chapters  of 
the 
regulation. 

MS/railway  undertakings  are  being 
advised  on  how  to  best  apply  the 

EN 

62 

   EN 

 
 
PRM Chapter. 

Regular  National  Enforcement 
Bodies  meetings  are  taking  place 
which  include  discussions  on  the 
implementation  of  the  Regulation 
with  regards  persons  with  reduced 
mobility 
including  persons  with 
disabilities. 

The  Passenger  Rights  Campaign 
for  Rail  and  Aviation  Passengers 
has  been  launched  on  29  June 
2010.  This  campaign  has  a  strong 
focus  on  the  protection  of  persons 
with  reduced  mobility  and  disabled 
passengers. 

Commission  proposal  on  the  rights 
of  passengers  when  travelling  by 
inland  waterway  … 
sea  and 
COM(2008)816 
adopted 
4.12.2008 

was 

Council  position  in  first  reading  on 
11 March 2010. 

Maritime 
transport:  Establishing 
the rights of disabled persons and 
persons with reduced mobility. 

Regulation  based  on  articles  71  and  80  of 
the Treaty 

of 

Opinion 
European 
Parliament in Second Reading on 5 
July 2010. 

the 

Adopted  on  11  October  2010; 
publication is pending.  

and 

transport: 
coach 
Bus 
establishing  the  rights  of  disabled 
persons and persons with reduced 
mobility. 

Regulation based on article 71 of the Treaty  Commission  proposal  on  the  rights 
of  passengers  in  bus  and  coach 
transport  COM(2008)817  was 
adopted 4.12.2008 

Council  position  in  first  reading  on 
11 March 2010. 

of 

Opinion 
European 
Parliament in Second Reading on 5 
July 2010. 

the 

preferential 

Examining 
tariff 
schemes  in  public  transport  in 
Member States. 

A  study  will  start  in  2008  and  results  are 
expected in the second half of 2008. 

Conciliation  procedure  is  expected 
during  second  half  of  2010-early 
2011. 

A  study  has  been  launched  in 
2008. The study has confirmed the 
need  to  act  with  legal  proposals  in 
commercial 
hinder 
order 
discrimination of passengers based 
on 
transport 
conditions  which  has  not  yet  been 
subject to EU legislation. 

ticket  prices  and 

to 

Commission proposals on maritime 
and  bus  passenger  rights  contain 
articles 
commercial 
discrimination. 

against 

Regulation  (EC)  No  1008/2008  of 

EN 

63 

   EN 

 
 
Users 

Protecting vulnerable users  

To develop European Rights of Energy user: 
it would inter alia address issues relevant for 
people with disabilities 

the European Parliament and of the 
Council  of  24 September  2008  on 
common  rules  for  the  operation  of 
air services in the Community  

During  2009/2010  the  Commission 
follow-up 
will  examine  possible 
regarding  rail  transport  where  no 
respective provision exists. 

There  is  no  Commission  proposal 
for  a  common  free  travel  pass  for 
Old  Age  Pensioners  or 
for  a 
European  Senior  Pass.  The 
Commission 
is  not  aware  of 
specific plans to create such a pass 
by  Member  States  or  by  other 
competent 
Any 
preferential  tariffs  plan  that  could 
in 
be  put 
in  place  authorities 
to 
Member  States  would  have 
comply  with  the  principle  of  non-
discrimination  on  grounds  of 
nationality. 

authorities. 

in 

customers 

vulnerable 

As  a  result  of  new  consumer 
protection  measures  introduced  in 
Third  Energy  Package 
the 
and 
(Directives 
2009/72/EC 
2009/73/EC),  an  obligation 
for 
Member  States  was  introduced  to 
define 
consumers. 
Member  States  should  take  the 
to  protect 
necessary  measures 
vulnerable 
the 
context  of  the  internal  market. 
differ 
Such  measures  may 
particular 
to 
according 
circumstances 
the  Member 
States 
in  question  and  may 
include  specific  measures,  or 
more  general  measures  taken  in 
system. 
the 
Member  States  need  to  develop 
vulnerable 
definitions 
of 
consumers 
to 
that  may 
persons with disabilities. However, 
not all disabled persons should be 
treated  as  vulnerable  in  energy 
market context (for example, those 
on high incomes). 

security 

social 

refer 

the 

in 

user 

Research, 
analysis, 
development  and  demonstration  of  pilot 
projects 

needs 

Researching 
the  empowerment 
and  security  of  people  with 
disabilities in access to information 
(urban accessibility for people with 
visual 
in 
emergencies; 
for 
people with hearing impairment or 
migrants). 

live  subtitling 

impairment 

or 

The  results  of  the  VOICE  Project 
on subtitling for people with hearing 
impairment  and  new  applications 
for 
identity  controls  have  been 
presented  to  and  discussed  with 
people  with 
associations 
of 
an 
disabilities, 
in 
in 
international 
Vancouver in 2008. 

particularly 

congress 

EN 

64 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
The  SESAMONET  RFID  and  GPS 
based guidance system for visually 
been 
impaired 
people 
demonstrated  and 
technical 
aspects have been patented by the 
European Commission. 

has 

the 

Researching 
the  empowerment 
and  security  of  all  passengers, 
including  those  with  disabilities,  in 
access to automatic border control 
systems. 

ICT 

user 

Research, 
analysis, 
development  and  demonstration  of  pilot 
projects 

needs 

During 2008-2009, the Commission 
that 
IPSC  performed  a  project 
analysed  the  usability  of  security 
technologies in an airport departure 
process.  Follow  on  research 
is 
focusing  on  the  usability  of  the 
automatic  border  control  systems. 
The 
results  have  been 
presented  and  discussed  with  a 
few  Associations  of  people  with 
disabilities,  particularly  EURO-CIU 
European  Association  of  Cochlear 
Implant Users on April 2010. 

first 

Increasing  support  for  projects  on 
ICT  for  ageing  and/or  disability 
under 
Research 
Framework  Programme  2007-
2013.  

7th 

the 

Disability-related research projects launched 
through regular calls for proposals. 

4 

of 

research 

Call 
under 
Framework  programme  7  in  the 
Information  Society  programme 
includes 
on 
accessibility,  and  another  related 
objective on ICT for ageing. 

objective 

an 

Work  Programme  2011-12  of 
research 
framework  programme/ 
priority  'cooperation,  ICT  '  includes 
an objective on ageing and another 
on inclusion/ accessibility . 

"Ambient  Assisted  Living" 
New 
European research programme (on 
ICT  for  ageing)  is  on  going  and  is 
to  disability.  The 
also  relevant 
its  3rd  call 
for 
programme  has 
proposals in 2010  

Calls 2 and 3 of the CIP-ICT Policy 
Support 
include 
Programme 
actions  on  e-accessibility  and  ICT 
for  ageing.  Call  4  of  the  CIP-ICT 
Policy Support Programme in 2010 
includes actions on e-accessibility  

The 
reformed  directives  were 
adopted  end  2009  and  should  be 
transposed by MS by 25 may 2011. 

changes 

e-accessibility 

introduced  will 
The 
improve 
and 
promote  an  inclusive  information 
society  by  ensuring  that  disabled 
users  can  benefit  from  the  same 
telecommunications services as the 

Reform of the EU Regulatory 
package governing electronic 
communications (in particular 
articles 7 and 23a of the Universal 
Service Directive-USD); 

the  European 
Directive  2009/136/EC  of 
Parliament  and  of 
the  Council  of  25 
November  2009  amending  2002/22/EC  on 
universal service and user's rights relating to 
electronic  communications  networks  and 
services,  Directive  2002/58/EC  concerning 
the  processing  of  personal  data  and  the 
protection  of  privacy 
the  electronic 
communications sector and Regulation (EC) 
No  2006/2004  on  cooperation  between 
the 
national  authorities 

responsible 

for 

in 

EN 

65 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
enforcement of consumer protection laws  

majority of users.  

in 

to 

changes 

the  MS 

strengthen 
The 
considerably 
the  provisions  on 
disabled  users  by  placing  explicit 
take 
obligation  on 
favour  of 
specific  measures 
disabled  and  by  bringing  terminal 
equipment for users with disabilities 
within  the  scope  of  the  USD  which 
should  provide  better  end-to-end 
covering  a 
solutions 
legislative  gap  that  existed  so  far 
between  the  R&TTE  Directive  and 
the e-communications framework) 

(thereby 

Improving 
availability 
the 
accessibility standardisation  

of 

Follow  up  and  support  work  on  standards 
harmonising  requirement  for  accessibility  in 
ICT. 

proposals 

New 
Standardisation Action Plan 

under 

the 

eEurope 

Standards development  

376 

standardisation 
Executing 
on  European 
mandate 
for 
accessibility 
public 
of  
products  and  services  in  the  ICT 
domain  

requirements 

procurement 

Policy  making:  Communication  on 
eInclusion  strategy  preparing  for 
i2010 initiative in 2008  

An  eInclusion  initiative  for  2008  involving 
industry, users and Member States. 

eInclusion 

The  plan  changed  to  be  called 
2009 
ICT  Standardisation  Work 
programme and contains a chapter 
on 
for 
accessibility  related  work.  Various 
standardisation  activities  relevant 
for  person  with  disabilities  are 
being  financially  supported  by  the 
Commission. 

that 

call 

Phase  1  of  the  mandate  has  been 
successfully completed and reports 
are  published  in  the  web  of  the 
European 
standardisation 
organisations  (ESOs).  The  ESOs 
have sent a proposal for Phase 2 of 
the  Mandate  where  the  standards 
will  be  developed  and  is  currently 
under 
the 
Commission. 

evaluation 

by 

to 

The  Commission  developed  a 
horizontal 
e-
approach 
Accessibility  following  consultation 
of all stakeholders (users, business 
and  authorities).  This  approach 
to  support  eAccessibility 
aims 
mainstreaming 
the 
2005 eAccessibility Communication 
stakeholder 
and 
cooperation 
increase 
awareness 

reinforce 
and 

following  up 

to 

to 

"Towards  an 
A  communication 
accessible  information  society"  /* 
was 
COM/2008/0804 
staff 
published 
working 
in 
December 2008  

together  with 

adopted 

papers 

final 

Council 
conclusions 
accessibility  adopted 
2009 

on 

e-
in  March 

Digital  agenda  for  Europe  adopted 

EN 

66 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
legislative 
towards  a 
Working 
initiative for an accessible, barrier-
free information society. 

PUBLIC BUILT ENVIRONEMENT 

Fostering  accessibility  to  the  built 
environment 

BUSINESS CASE 

Using  the  potential  provided  by 
integrated 
Policy’s 
Cohesion 
multi-level 
and 
approach 
governance 
the 
to 
business  case  for  disability  and 
accessibility for disabled persons 

support 

Horizontal  approach  to  legislation  on  e-
Accessibility  following  consultation  of  all 
stakeholders 
and 
authorities). 

business 

(users, 

in May 2010; includes actions on e-
accessibility  and  refers  to  the  UN 
Convention  

for 

interfere  with 

The  Commission  has  explored 
in 2008 through studies and an 
online 
issues 
consultation 
around  possible  legislation  on 
e-accessibility. It was found that 
certain conditions where not yet 
met 
European 
new 
legislation,  notably  the  need  to 
relevant 
not 
legislation already proposed but 
not  yet  approved  (on  electronic 
communications),  the  fact  that 
key reference standards are not 
yet  ready,  and  that  there  is  not 
sufficient  political  consensus. 
The  Commission  adopted  a 
communication 
e-
accessibility  in  December  2008 
providing suggestions for future 
progress  on  e-accessibility, 
without excluding the possibility 
of legislation in future.  

on 

EU  standardisation  mandate  investigating 
possible 
accessibility 
the  built  environment 
requirements 
suitable for public procurement in agreement 
with the Public Procurement Directives. 

standards 
for 

for 

Employment, 

Implementation  by  Member  States,  regions 
and 
the 
the  wider  partnership  under 
Convergence,  Regional  Competitiveness 
and 
Territorial 
programmes 
operational 
Cooperation 
negotiated and decided in 2007 on the basis 
of  Council  Regulation 
(EC)  1083/2006, 
Regulation  (EC)  1080/2006  and  Regulation 
(EC) 1081/2006 

and 

Ongoing 
impact  assessment  on 
future options for EU policy on web 
accessibility 

The Commission issued a Mandate 
to  the  ESOs  in  January  2008.  The 
Mandate  was  accepted  and  the 
secretariat will be done by AENOR. 
A  contract  has  been  signed  by  the 
the  European 
Commission  with 
Standardisation  organisations 
to 
provide financial support to execute 
the Mandate that started in 2010. 

Operational Programmes 2007-
2013: Increased attention is 
being paid to improve 
accessibility for disabled 
persons.  
Some MS have included anti-
discrimination clauses in their 
OPs (e.g. Poland), other MS 
have accessibility as a 
horizontal priority (e.g. Bulgaria, 
Slovenia and Austria), while 
other MS have targeted 
measures for persons with 
disabilities (e.g. Lithuania, 
Bulgaria). 

EN 

67 

   EN 

 
 
 
MS also aim at a better 
representation of persons with 
disabilities at the monitoring 
committee meetings. 

3. Consolidating the EU’s analytical capacity 

Measuring  health  and  disability  in 
Europe  

First  round  of  European  Health  Interview 
Survey (EHIS). It contains 4 survey modules 
with  questions 
to  background 
referring 
variables,  health  care,  health  determinants 
and  health  status.  The 
latter  module 
includes questions on functional limitations. 

•  A number of MS have started 
the European Health Interview 
Survey EHIS implementation; 
EHIS data files expected during 
2009/2010 

of 

collection 

Continuation 
and 
data 
calculation  of  the  structural  indicators  for 
disability-free 
/ 
the 
healthy 
Statistics  on  Income  and  Living  Condition 
(SILC) survey. 

life  expectations  (HLY)  via 

life  expectations  (DFLE) 

Implementation  of  survey  module  on 
European  Disability  and  Social  Integration 
(EDSIM),  including  variables  not  only  on 
functional 
on 
also 
participation and environmental factors. 

limitations 

but 

Discussion  with  Member  States  to  prepare 
implementation 
the  draft  of  a  specific 
regulation 
and 
health 
determinants, including disability issues. 

status 

on 

•  First EHIS results 

(dissemination) expected end 
2010/2011 

•  Further harmonisation of the 

SILC questions on health that 
includes disability relevance 
(2008 reference year) 

2010:  validation  of  the  data  files 
received 
some  Member 
States 

from 

•  June 2008: the project 
launched by ESTAT on 
designing the European 
Disability and Social Integration 
EDSIM was completed  

•  December 2008: ESTAT signed 
the grant agreement with 10 
countries for translating and 
testing the EDSIM. The outputs 
we received by the end of 2009  

•  January 2010: start of the 

ESTAT project on the analysis 
of the EDSIM translations and 
tests and on the revision of the 
EDSIM module 

•  January 2010: set up of a Task 
Force on disability statistics 
working towards streamlining 
the EU social surveys covering 
disability issues including 
EDSIM. 

•  Regulation (EC) No 1338/2008 
of the European Parliament and 
of the Council on Community 
statistics on public health and 
health and safety at work was 
adopted 16 of December 2008 
and published in the Official 
Journal of the EU 31.12.2008  

Measuring the social integration in 
society of people with disabilities 

Preparing the legal basis for EHIS 
the 
adoption 
following 
European  Parliament  and  Council 
of  the  Regulation  on  Community 
Statistics  on  Public  Health  and 
Safety at Work. 

by 

EN 

68 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Developing indicators and data on 
eAccessibility 

Benchmarking  and  various  studies  on  ICT 
for ageing and/or disability to be pursued or 
launched:  Measuring  eAccessibility 
in 
Europe, SeniorWatch2, assistive technology 
industry, eAccessibility legislation, etc. 

Reviewing  the  literature  regarding 
the  social  situation  of  informal 
caregivers  and  care  receivers  in 
the  EU.  Among  other  things,  the 
review will address the situation of 
people  with disabilities and that of 
their carers. 

launched 

to  collect 
A  study  will  be 
information  and  good  practices 
the 
in 
Member States and analyse the implications 
at  EU  level.  The  study  results  are  expected 
to feed into the European policies related to 
disability and demographic issues 

Launching 
Academic Network on Disability  

European 

the 

Operational  and  financial  support  through 
the  call  for  tender  launched  under  the 
2007 
Programme 
PROGRESS 
(VT/2007/005) 
of 
a 
EUR 500 000 per year from 2007 until 2010. 

for 
budget 

with 

The  next  step 
is  preparing  an 
implementing  regulation  for  EHIS. 
Details  of  data  collection  and  its 
schedule  to  be  discussed  with  the 
HIS experts in 2010  

launched 

3  studies 
monitoring 
economics 
assistive technologies 

of 

in  2010: 
e-accessibility; 
e-accessibility; 

Call  for  proposals  will  be  launched 
for  a  study  on  future  challenges  of 
e-accessibility 

A  study  called  Care  Provision 
its  Socio-
within  Families  and 
Economic 
on  Care 
Impact 
Providers  was  launched  in  2007 
under reference VT/2007/114 

The study has been carried out and 
published on official EU websites 

related 

launched 

in 
The  Network  was 
January  2008  following  a  call  for 
proposals. During the first year they 
reports  on  disability 
produced 
matters 
to  employment 
OMC,  social  inclusion  and  social 
protection  OMC, 
of 
statistics,  the  legal  framework  and 
the  UN  Convention.  The  Network 
has  continued  their  work  till  2010 
producing  additional  reports  that 
are available in the web 

sources 

Evaluating the EU Disability Action 
Plan at mid-term  

External  evaluation  of  the  results  of  the 
Disability  Action  Plan  and  corresponding 
pilot projects.  

knowledge 

Improving 
and 
analytical  competences  on  rare 
diseases 

A  Commission  Communication  is  currently 
foreseen  taking  action  in  the  field  of  rare 
diseases. 

A  Recommendation  and  Communication 
were  adopted  by 
the 
Commission 

the  Council  and 

http://www.disability-
europe.net/?jsEnabled=1 

The evaluation study was launched 
through  a  call  for  tender  under  the 
PROGRESS  Programme  with  a 
budget  of  EUR 200 000  and  was 
closed  in  March  2009.  Outcome 
was  presented  in  HLG  meeting 
April 2009.  

of 

the 
Recommendations 
Evaluation  have  contributed 
to 
draw  up  EU  Disability  Strategy 
2010-2020 and is published on the 
Commission web site. 

The Commission Communication 
on rare diseases: Europe's 
Challenges 
http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_th
reats/non_com/rare_10_en.htm
was adopted on 11 November 
2008 and several conferences 
under the French Presidency took 
place. 

The Recommendation on rare 

EN 

69 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
diseases was adopted in June 
2009: 
http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexU
riServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:151:0
007:0010:EN:PDF 
In May 2010 the Commission 
support the European 
Conference on rare diseases 
http://ec.europa.eu/health/rare_
diseases/events/index_en.htm 

4. Actions towards full enjoyment of fundamental rights 

Supporting  the  implementation  of 
the  UN  Convention  through  the 
establishment  of  a  sustainable 
framework  for  future  presidencies 
the  European 
to 
human 
to 
approach 
disability. 

strengthen 
rights 

information  and 
Sustained  exchange  of 
good practises within the EU Disability High 
Level  Group.  As  a  result,  the  EU  Disability 
High  Level  Group  will  issue  regular  reports 
on  progress  made  in  the  implementation  of 
the  UN  Convention 
the  annual  EU 
ministerial  disability  conferences  of  EU 
presidencies. 

to 

Contributing to the implementation 
of the provisions of the Convention 
relating  to  gender  and  disability 
(notably Article 6) 

the 

under 

Analysis on the basis of a Commission study 
PROGRESS 
launched 
programme  2007  (VT/2007/006).  The  study 
assesses the overall situation of women with 
disabilities 
the  specific 
the  EU  and 
obstacles  confronting  them  in  the  light  of 
fundamental 
rights  and 
their  human 
freedoms  under 
the  UN  Convention.  A 
report available online: 

in 

The  annual  HLG  Report  on  the 
implementation 
UN 
Convention was prepared. It can be 
found at: 

the 

of 

http://ec.europa.eu/employment_so
cial/index/7003_en.html 

The  Commission  organised 
the 
annual Presidential conference and 
Ministerial  meeting  on  disabilities 
under  the  Slovenian,  and  Spanish 
Presidency.  Conclusions  were 
drafted  and  can  be  found  in  the 
two  Council 
web.  Furthermore 
Resolutions were adopted. 

(hosting 

The  Commission  monitored 
the 
progress  of  the  study  and  gave 
logistical  support 
the 
Expert  Committee  meeting)  and 
technical  advice  (data  sources). 
Final  report  has  been  approved 
. 
and 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServl
et?docId=4363&langId=en. 

is  available  online  at 

http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId
=4363&langId=en. 

Study  encompasses  extensive  and 
useful  country  profiles  and  other 
reference 
: 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServl
et?docId=4364&langId=en 

http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServl
et?docId=4365&langId=en  

to 

The results of the study have been 
into  enlargement 
used 
discussions,  new disability strategy 
and new gender strategy.  

feed 

Improving  the  mainstreaming  of 
disability  issues  in  development 
aid.  

Exploration of the possibilities of introducing 
disability as a cross-cutting issue in aid. 

Revised  EC  Guidance  Note  on  Disability 

General public and specialists have 
been  able  to  access  the  study  for 
their data needs. 

in  EC 
A  Study  on  Disability 
Development  Cooperation 
has 
been  launched  by  DG  AIDCO,  in 
close 
coordination  with  DEV, 
RELEX  and  EMPL.  This  study  will 

EN 

70 

   EN 

 
 
Examining 
if  adjustments  are 
needed in the relevant Community 
development  cooperation  policies 
or  if  specific  action  needs  to  be 
taken  under  Article  32  of  the  UN 
Convention 
to 
relating 
international cooperation. 

and  Development  for  EU  Delegations  and 
Services: 
htpp://ec.europa.eu/development/body/publi
cations/docs/Disability_en.pdf 

results  of 

Dissemination  of 
the 
the 
Commission  pilot  project  on  breaking  the 
cycle  of  disability  and  poverty  in  developing 
countries, led by the NGO Licht fur die Welt, 
which will conclude in December 2007: 

Disability  mainstreaming 
countries: 
inclusive.org/index.php?wid=1024&spk=en 

in  developing 
http://www.make-development-

Supporting  awareness-raising  for 
the 
effective 
Convention at the various levels of 
governance concerned. 

implementation  of 

Trans-national  project  with  financial  support 
the 
Commission 
from 
PROGRESS programme.  

under 

the 

provide  a  set  of  recommendations 
on  measures  to  take  in  order  to 
comply with Art. 32 of the UNCPRD 
(on International Cooperation). 
The  study  will  also  provide  a 
proposal  for  the  revision  of  the  EC 
Guidance  Note  on  Disability  and 
Development  for  EU  Delegations 
and Services.  
The study will be finalised by end of 
2010.  

The Commission has disseminated 
in various events the results of the 
Pilot Project on "Breaking the cycle 
of disability and poverty in 
developing countries" , including to 
the Network of Disability Contact 
Persons in EU Delegations 
(established in 2009).  

top 
It  was  decided  by  DEV 
management not to go forward with 
the staff working paper 

One  of  the  specific  items  in  the 
HLG  Report  on  implementation  of 
the  UN  Convention  focussed  on 
trainings organised in the MS. 

Furthermore the Commission has 
published in 2010 a call for tender 
Training of legal and policy 
practitioners on the UN Convention 
on the Rights of Persons with 
Disabilities.  

for 

with 

requests 

launched  call 

–  Study 

tender 
The 
on 
VT/2008/001 
challenges  and  good  practices 
in the implementation of the UN 
Convention  on  the  Rights  of 
Disabilities 
Persons 
specifically 
the 
contractor  to  describe  various 
trainings  organised  in  Member 
States,  explain 
targeted 
groups of such training and the 
field  covered.  All  the  relevant 
training  materials, 
translated 
into  German,  English  and 
French  should  be  also  made 
available online. 

the 

issued. 

A  Commission  Communication  on  diversity 
policy within the Commission services could 
be 
Its  disability  aspects  would 
elaborate  on  action  to  be  taken  by  the 
Commission as an employer to improve the 
recruitment  and  working  conditions  of 
people  with  disabilities  in  the  Institutions 
including 
the 
accessibility  of buildings, as  well  as support 
for staff with disabled family members, 

questions 

related 

to 

A  framework  contract  to  carry 
out 
to 
the  works  necessary 
make  Commission  buildings 
the  disabled 
accessible 
people is now in place. 

for 

Commission  Services  organised  a 
discussion meeting with all families 
who  have  disabled  dependents. 
Over  110  people  attended.  Topics 

Addressing  the  needs  of  disabled 
persons 
European 
Institutions. 

the 

in 

EN 

71 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
Follow  up  the  implementation  of  the  UN 
Convention  on  the  rights  of  persons  with 
disabilities.  

the 

procedures 

simplification 

discussed  included  the  European 
of 
schools, 
bureaucratic 
and 
succession rights. A self-help group 
similar 
the  Cancer 
that  of 
Support  Group  was  created.  An 
explanatory booklet on the steps to 
be followed in the event of death of 
the  parents  of  a  disabled  child  will 
be published. 

to 

"In this context the Commission as 
employer  continues  to  reflect  on 
the  obligations  emerging  from  the 
UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of 
Persons  with  Disabilities.  The 
to 
above 
actions 
implement the Convention" 

contribute 

the 

Within 
framework  contract, 
adjustment  to  existing  building  are 
being carried out in order to comply 
with accessibility standards.  

Like in 2009, HR C1 will organise a 
discussion meeting with all families 
who  have  disabled  dependents. 
The  meeting  will  take  place  in  the 
second half of the year.  

The  «  Guichet  unique»  providing 
information 
parents  with 
disabled  children  is  permanently  at 
the disposal of these colleagues.  

for 

for 

Furthermore, two officials deal  with 
requests 
reimbursement  of 
costs  linked  to  a  disability  on  the 
basis 
guidelines 
the 
"supplementary aid for disabled". 

of 

the  Community 
Complementing 
legislative framework of protection 
against discrimination. 

Proposal  for  a  Directive  based  on  art  13  of 
the  Treaty  implementing  the  principle  of 
equal  treatment  outside  employment  inter 
alia on grounds of disability 

The  CPAS  (the  inter-institutional 
Joint  Committee  for  Social  Affairs) 
has  now  been  charged  by  the 
College  of  Head  of  Administration 
to  proceed  to  a  screening  of  the 
legal  and  procedural 
Institutions 
framework, 
in  view  of  ensuring 
complete  compliance  with  the  UN 
Convention.  

The  Commission  adopted  on  the 
2nd  of  July  2008  a  proposal  for  a 
Council  Directive  on  implementing 
the  principle  of  equal  treatment 
between  persons 
irrespective  of 
religion  or  belief,  disability,  age  or 
sexual  orientation.  The  scope 
covers  social  protection,  including 
social  security  and  healthcare; 
social 
education; 
access to and supply of goods and 
other  services  which  are  available 

advantages; 

EN 

72 

   EN 

 
 
 
to the public; including housing.  

Article 4 requests the provision by 
anticipation of the measures 
necessary to enable persons with 
disability to have effective non 
discriminatory access. It also puts 
the obligation to provide 
reasonable accommodation in 
particular cases. 

The draft Directive is being 
negotiated in the Council working 
group, which has held several 
meetings on it since July 2008.  

In  April  2009,  the  EP  adopted  a 
resolution which basically endorses 
the  Commission's  proposal,  while 
suggesting some amendments 

adopted 

the 
On  29  August  2008, 
Commission 
and 
transmitted  to  the  Council  and 
the  European  Parliament  two 
proposals  (COM  (2008)  530 
final): 

Preparing for the conclusion of the 
UN  Convention  on  the  rights  of 
disabled persons. 

Commission Proposal for a Council Decision 
in  early  2008 
the  European 
to  allow 
Community to conclude the UN Convention. 

for 
concerning 

a  Council 
-Proposal 
the 
Decision 
(formal 
conclusion 
confirmation),  by  the  European 
the  United 
Community,  of 
Nations  Convention  on 
the 
Rights 
Persons  with 
of 
Disabilities; 
for  a  Council 
-  Proposal 
Decision 
the 
conclusion  (accession),  by  the 
European  Community,  of  the 
Optional  Protocol  to  the  United 
the 
Nations  Convention  on 
Right 
with 
of 
Disabilities. 

concerning 

Persons 

the 
The  Council  adopted 
Decisions 
the 
to  conclude 
Convention  in  November  2009. 
Deposition  of  the  instrument  of 
formal confirmation in the UN is 
pending  approval  of  a  Code  of 
Conduct 
describing 
arrangements 
coordination 
between 
the  Member  States 
and the Commission. 

EN 

73 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 4 – LIST OF RECENT REFERENCE DOCUMENTS  

Documents of European institutions and international organisations 

–  Consolidated  Version  of  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  OJ  C  325 
http://eur-

24.12.2002, 
lex.europa.eu/en/treaties/dat/12002E/htm/C_2002325EN.003301.html 

–  Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the functioning 
115 

of 
C 
9.05.2008,http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st06/st06655.en08.pdf 

European 

Union, 

the 

OJ 

–  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  European  Union,  OJ  C  364/01  18.12.2000, 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf 

–  Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on 
the  European  Regional  Development  Fund,  the  European  Social  Fund  and  the  Cohesion 
Fund  and  repealing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1260/1999,  OJ  L  210/25  31.7.2006, 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/regulation/pdf/2007/general/c
e_1083(2006)_en.pdf 

–  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  1566/2001  of  12  July  2001  implementing  Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No  577/98  on  the  organisation  of  labour  force  sample  survey  in  the 
Community  concerning  the  specification  of  the  2002  ad  hoc  module  on  employment  of 
people 
http://eur-
OJ 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2001/l_208/l_20820010801en00160019.pdf 

disabilities, 

1.8.2001, 

208/16, 

with 

L 

–  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for 
equal  treatment  in  employment  and  occupation,  OJ  L  303  ,  02.12.2000,  http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0078:EN:HTML 

–  Proposal for a Council Decision concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, 
of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, COM(2008) 
530 
http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SPLIT_COM:2008:0530(01):FIN:EN:PDF 

29.8.2008, 

Brussels, 

final, 

–  Resolution  of  the  Council  of  the  European  Union  and  the  representatives  of  the 
Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 17 March 2008 on the 
situation  of  persons  with  disabilities  in  the  European  Union,  OJ  C  75/1  ,  http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:075:0001:0004:EN:PDF 

–  Presidency  Conclusions  following  the  second  informal  ministerial  meeting  on  Disability 
from: 

issues. 
Retrieved 
http://www.mddsz.gov.si/fileadmin/mddsz.gov.si/pageuploads/dokumenti__pdf/ns_invalid
i_sklepi_220508_en.pdf  

–  Council  Resolution 

(10173/10) 

from 

8 

June 

2010,  Retrieved 

from 

http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/10/st10/st10173.en10.pdf  

EN 

74 

   EN 

 
 
–  European  Parliament  resolution  of  24  April  2009  on  the  conclusion,  by  the  European 
Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 
and 
from 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2009-
0334+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN  

Retrieved 

Optional 

Protocol 

thereto. 

the 

–  European  Parliament  resolution  of  4  September  2007  on  the  Single  Market  Review: 
tackling  barriers  and  inefficiencies  through  better  implementation  and  enforcement. 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-
Retrieved 
//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2007-0367+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN  

from 

–  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 'Situation of 
disabled  people  in  the  enlarged  European  Union:  The  European  Action  Plan  2006-2007', 
COM(2005) 
<http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SPLIT_COM:2005:0604(01):FIN:EN:PDF> 
[Accessed: 28/07/2010] 

final, 

604 

–  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 'Situation of 
disabled  people  in  the  European  Union:  The  European  Action  Plan  2008-2009', 
COM(2007) 
http://eur--
ex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0738:FIN:EN:PDF 

26.11.2007, 

Brussels 

final, 

738 

–  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the 
European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  ‘Equal 
opportunities for people with disabilities: A European Action Plan’, COM(2003) 650 final, 
http://eur-
30.10.2003, 
Brussels, 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0650:FIN:EN:PDF 

–  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Situation 
of  people  with  disabilities  in  the  enlarged  European  Union:  the  European  Action  Plan 
2006-2007’, 
http://eur-
final, 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SPLIT_COM:2005:0604(01):FIN:EN:PDF 

COM(2005) 

28.11.2005, 

Brussels, 

604 

–  Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, 
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Ageing 
well  in  the  Information  Society  -  An  i2010  Initiative  -  Action  Plan  on  Information  and 
Communication  Technologies  and  Ageing’,  COM(2007)  332  final,  Brussels,  14.6.2007, 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0332:FIN:EN:PDF 

–  Commission  Staff  Working  Document,  ‘Evaluation  of  the  Open  Method  of  Coordination 
for Social Protection and Social Inclusion - A synthesis of replies by Member States and 
other  actors  to  an  evaluation  questionnaire  on  the  Open  Method  of  Coordination  in  the 
fields  of  social  inclusion  and  adequate  and  sustainable  pensions’,  SEC(2006)  345, 
Brussels, 
8.3.2006, 
http://www.lex.unict.it/eurolabor/en/documentation/com/2006/sec(2006)-345en.pdf 

–  Commission  staff  Working  Document  -  Accompanying  document  to  the  Communication 
from  the  European  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European 

EN 

75 

   EN 

 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  ‘European  i2010 
initiative  on  e-Inclusion  "To  be  part  of  the  information  society”  -  Executive  summary  of 
the 
8.11.2007, 
SEC(2007) 
http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/ia_carried_out/docs/ia_2007/sec_2007_1470_en.pdf 

Assessment’, 

Brussels, 

Impact 

1470, 

–  Commission  staff  Working  Document  -  Accompanying  document  to  the  Communication 
from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the  European  Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 'Situation of disabled people in 
the  European  Union:  The  European  Action  Plan  2008-2009',  SEC(2007)  1548,  Brussels, 
26.11.2007,  http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/2/2007/EN/2-2007-  1548-EN-1-
0.Pdf 

–  European  Commission  (2008),  'Impact  assessment  -  Proposal  for  a  Council  Directive  on 
implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or 
belief,  disability,  age  or  sexual  orientation',  2/07/2008,  Commission  Staff  Working 
<http://eur-
Document 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SEC:2008:2180:FIN:EN:PDF>  

COM(2008) 

SEC(2008) 

2180, 

2180 

& 

–  Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the Proposal for a Regulation of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  rights  of  passengers  in  bus  and  coach 
transport  and  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  2006/2004  on  cooperation  between  national 
authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws – Summary of the 
Impact 
http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SEC:2008:2954:FIN 

Assessment’, 

–  European  Commission  (2007),  ‘Situation  of  people  with  disabilities  in  the  European 
from  http://eur-

Union: 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0738:FIN:EN:PDF 

the  European  Action  Plan  2008-2009’, 

retrieved 

–  European  Commission  (2007),  ‘Situation  of  people  with  disabilities  in  the  European 
from 

Union: 
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/2/2007/EN/2-2007-1548-EN-1-0.Pdf 

the  European  Action  Plan 

2008-2009  Annexes’, 

retrieved 

–  European Commission (2008), ‘Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the 
Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between 
persons  irrespective  of  religion  or  belief,  disability,  age  or  sexual  orientation  -  Impact 
Assessment’, 
http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SEC:2008:2180:FIN:EN:PDF 

retrieved 

from 

–  European Commission (2008), ‘Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the 
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the rights of 
passengers  in  bus  and  coach  transport  and  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  2006/2004  on 
cooperation  between  national  authorities  responsible  for  the  enforcement  of  consumer 
protection  laws  –  Summary  of  the  Impact  Assessment’,  retrieved  from  http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SEC:2008:2954:FIN:EN:PDF 

–  European Commission (2001), ‘Attitudes of Europeans to disability: Eurobarometer 54.2’, 

, Europa, http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_149_en.pdf 

–  European  Commission  (2007), 

'Discrimination 

in 

Eurobarometer 

263, 

the  European  Union'  Special 
from 
Retrieved 

EN 

76 

   EN 

 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/eyeq/uploaded_files/documents/eurobarometer_rep
ort_en.pdf 

–  European  Commission  (2008),  Discrimination  in  the  European  Union:  Perceptions, 
Experiences  and  Attitudes.  Summary  of  the  Special  Eurobarometer  296.  Retrieved  from: 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3979&langId=en, 

–  European Commission (2009), 'Discrimination in the EU in 2009' Special Eurobarometer 
from 

retrieved 
Report 
<http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_317_en.pdf 

317, 

–  European Commission (2001), ‘The employment situation of people with disabilities in the 
Europa, 

European 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/news/2001/dec/2666complete_en.pdf 

Union’, 

2001, 

–  European  Commission  (2003)  Mid-Term  Assessment,  Key  Action  6:  The  Ageing 
Disabilities. 
and 

Population 
ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/life/docs/ka6_mt_assessment_fullreport_final_en.pdf 

2008 

Annual 

General 

Activity 

–  European  Commission  (2008),  ‘Employment,  Social  Affairs,  and  Equal  Opportunities 
from 
Directorate 
http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/synthesis/aar/doc/empl_aar.pdf  European  Commission  (2008), 
‘Progress  Annual  Performance  Monitoring  Report 
from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3658&langId=en  European  Commission 
(2008),  ‘Proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  concerning  the  conclusion,  by  the  European 
Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’, 
retrieved 
http://eur-
from 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SPLIT_COM:2008:0530(01):FIN:EN:PDF 

retrieved 

retrieved 

Report’, 

2008’, 

–  European  Commission  (2008),  ‘The  fight  against  discrimination  and  the  promotion  of 
from 

equality: 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2041&langId=en  

retrieved 

progress 

measure 

done’, 

How 

to 

–  European Commission (2009), ‘Council decides on the European Community becoming a 
party  to  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  (UNCRPD)’, 
retrieved 
from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=429&newsId=648&furtherNews=yes  

–  European  Commission  (2009),  ‘Ensuring  accessibility  and  non-discrimination  of  people 
with  disabilities:  Toolkit  for  using  EU  Structural  and  Cohesion  Funds’,  retrieved  from 
http:// ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2740&langId=en  

–  European  Commission 

retrieved 
http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/commission_guidelines/docs/iag_2009_en.pdf 
European Commission (2009),  

‘Impact  Assessment  Guidelines’, 

(2009), 

from 

–  ‘Information Note to Accompany the Second High Level Group Report on Implementation 
of  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  People  with  Disabilities’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2873&langId=en  

EN 

77 

   EN 

 
–  European Commission (2009), ‘Report of the Ad Hoc Expert Group on the Transition from 
from 
Institutional 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=614&furtherNews=yes  

Community-based 

retrieved 

Care’, 

to 

–  European  Commission  (2009),  ‘Second  High  Level  Group  Report  on  Implementation  of 
the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  People  with  Disabilities’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2790&langId=en  

–  European Commission (2009) ‘Support to national activities identifying good practices in 
combating  discrimination  and  promoting  equality  -  Project  Descriptions’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4383&langId=en  

–  European 

Commission, 

ESF 

project 

search 

engine, 

http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/emplweb/esf_projects/search.cfm 

–  European  Commission  (2007),  Communication  from  the  European  Commission  to  the 
European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the 
Committee  of  the  Regions:  European  i2010  initiative  on  e-Inclusion  "To  be  part  of  the 
information  society"  -  Executive  summary  of  the  Impact  Assessment’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/ia_carried_out/docs/ia_2007/sec_2007_1470_en.pdf 

–  European  Commission  (2007),  ‘Ageing  well  in  the  Information  Society  –  an  i2010 
Initiative  –  Action  Plan  on  Information  and  Communication  Technologies  and  Ageing’, 
http://eur-
from 
retrieved 
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007DC0332:EN:NOT 

–  European Commission, ‘Measuring Progress in e-Inclusion – Riga Dashboard 2007’, 2007, 

Europa, 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/i2010_initiative/rigadash
board.pdf 

–  European  Commission, 

‘Continuing 

Perspectives 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=749&langId=en 

and 

the  Diversity  Journey:  Business  Practices, 
2008, 
Benefits’, 

Europa, 

–  European Commission, ‘Employment, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities Directorate 
Europa, 
Activity 

General 
http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/synthesis/aar/doc/empl_aar.pdf 

Report’, 

Annual 

2008, 

2008 

–  European  Commission,  ‘Progress  Annual  Performance  Monitoring  Report  2008’,  2008, 

Europa, http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3658&langId=en 

–  European  Commission,  ‘The  fight  against  discrimination  and  the  promotion  of  equality: 
Europa 
progress 

How 
done’, 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2041&langId=en 

measure 

2008, 

to 

–  European Commission, ‘Community Action Programme in the Sphere of Employment and 
Social Solidarity – PROGRESS – Funding Priorities for 2010 Annual Plan of Work’ 2008 

–  European Commission, ‘Council decides on the European Community becoming a party to 
the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)’, 2009, Europa 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=429&newsId=648&furtherNews=yes 

EN 

78 

   EN 

 
–  European  Commission,  ‘Ensuring  accessibility  and  non-discrimination  of  people  with 
disabilities:  Toolkit  for  using  EU  Structural  and  Cohesion  Funds’,  2009,  Europa, 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2740&langId=en 

–  European  Commission,  ‘Impact  Assessment  Guidelines’,  SEC(2009)  92,  2009,  Europa, 

http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/commission_guidelines/docs/iag_2009_en.pdf 

–  European  Commission,  ‘Information  Note  to  Accompany  the  Second  High  Level  Group 
Report  on  Implementation  of  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  People  with 
Disabilities’, 2009, Europa, http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2873&langId=en 

–  European  Commission,  ‘Progress  Annual  Performance  Monitoring  Report  2009’,  2009, 

Europa, http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3658&langId=en 

–  European  Commission,  ‘Report  of  the  Ad  Hoc  Expert  Group  on  the  Transition  from 
, 

Institutional 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=614&furtherNews=yes 

Community-based 

Europa 

Care’, 

2009, 

to 

–  European  Commission,  'First  Disability  High  Level  Group  Report  On  Implementation  of 
the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities',  2008,  Europa, 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2293&langId=en 

–  European  Commission,  'Second  Disability  High  Level  Group  Report  On  Implementation 
of  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities',  June  2009,  Europa,  -
<http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2790&langId=en> 

–  European  Commission, 

'Draft  Third  Disability  High  Level  Group  Report  On 
Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities', March 
2010, Europa, http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=5070&langId=en 

–  European  Commission  ‘Support  to  national  activities  identifying  good  practices  in 
combating  discrimination  and  promoting  equality  -  Project  Descriptions’,  2009,  Europa  , 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4383&langId=en 

–  European  Commission,  ‘Updated  Work  Programme  2009  and  Work  Programme  2010  – 
Cooperation  –  Theme  3  –  ICT  –  Information  and  Communications  Technologies’,  2009, 
Europa, ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/ict/docs/ict-wp-2009-10_en.pdf 

–  European 

ESF 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/emplweb/esf_projects/search.cfm 

Commission, 

project 

search 

engine, 

Europa, 

–  European Commission, ‘Roadmap: European Disability Strategy 2010-2020’ 

–  Europa- Public Health, 5/05/2010, 'Data on the Healthy Life Years in the European Union', 

< http://ec.europa.eu/health/indicators/healthy_life_years/data/index_en.htm> 

–  Opinion  of  the  European  Economic  And  Social  Committee  on  People  With  Disabilities: 
Employment and Accessibility by Stages for People With Disabilities in the EU. Retrieved 
from 
http://eescopinions.eesc.europa.eu/viewdoc.aspx?doc=//esppub1/esp_public/ces/soc/soc36
3/en/ces449-2010_ac_en.doc  

EN 

79 

   EN 

 
–  UN  Website,  Convention 

on 

the  Rights 

of  Persons  with  Disabilities. 

http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=259 

–  Guidelines on treaty-specific document to be submitted by states parties under article 35, 
paragraph  1,  of  the  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  (Note  by  UN 
Secretary 
from: 
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/CRPD/CRPD-C-2-3.pdf  

Retrieved 

General) 

–  UN General Assembly (2009), 'Round Table Panellists Underline Decision-making Rights 
from 
People'. 

of 
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/hr5000.doc.htm 

Retrieved 

Disabled 

–  OECD (2007), ‘OECD Health Working Papers No. 26. Trends in severe disability among 
elderly people: Assessing the evidence in 12 OECD countries and the future implications’, 
retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/13/8/38343783.pdf  

–  OECD  (2009),  ‘OECD  High-Level  Forum:  Sickness,  disability  and  work:  Keeping  on 
track  in  the  economic  downturn,  Stockholm  14-15  May,  2009.  Background  Paper’, 
retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/15/42699911.pdf  

–  OECD  (2009),  ‘OECD  High-Level  Forum:  Sickness,  disability  and  work:  Keeping  on 
track  in  the  economic  downturn,  Stockholm  14-15  May,  2009.  Issues  for  Discussion’, 
retrieved 
from 
http://www.oecd.org/document/22/0,3343,en_21571361_42464611_42654102_1_1_1_1,0
0.html 

Other Sources  

legislation  which  makes  a 

–  Academic Network of European Disability Experts (ANED) (2009), ‘Annotated review of 
from 

European 
http://www.disability-
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%202008%20task%203%20Annotated%20review%20of%2
0European%20legislation%20which%20makes%20a%20reference%20to%20disability.pdf 

to  disability’, 

reference 

retrieved 

–  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability  Experts  (ANED)  (2009),  ‘European 
comparative  data  on  the  situation  of  people  with  disabilities:  an  annotated  review’, 
retrieved 
http://www.disability-
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%20report%20European%20Comparative%20Data%20on%
20the%20Situation%20of%20Disabled%20People.pdf 

from 

–  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability  Experts  (ANED)  (2009),  ‘Monitoring  the 
Implementation  of  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  in 
Europe:  Principles  for  the  Identification  and  Use  of  Indicators’,  retrieved  from 
http://www.disability-
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%202008%20Task%205%20Monitoring%20UN%20Conve
ntion%20report%20final%20version.pdf 

–  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability Experts (ANED) (2009), ‘Synthesis report on 
disability mainstreaming in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports for Social Protection 
and 
http://www.disability-
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%202008%20NSR%20disability%20synthesis%20report%2
0SPSI%20-%20311008.pdf 

Inclusion 

(NSRs)’, 

retrieved 

Social 

from 

EN 

80 

   EN 

 
–  Academic Network of European Disability Experts (ANED) (2009), ‘The implementation 
of EU social inclusion and social protection strategies in European countries with reference 
disabilities’, 
to 
http://www.disability-
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%20Task%207%20report%20Social%20Inclusion%20final%2020-05-09.pdf 

people  with 

retrieved 

equality 

from 

for 

–  Academic  Network  of  European  Disability  Experts  (ANED)  (2009),  ‘The  labour  market 
situation  of  people  with  disabilities  in  European  countries  and  the  implementation  of 
employment policies: a summary of evidence from country reports and research studies’, 
http://www.disability-
retrieved 
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%20Task%206%20final%20report%20-
%20final%20version%2017-04-09.pdf 

from 

–  Applica,  CESEP,  and  European  Centre  (2007),  ‘Compilation  of  disability  statistical  data 
coming  from  the  administrative  registers  of  the  Member  States’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3007&langId=en 

–  Applica, CESEP, and Alphametrics (2007), ‘Men and women with disabilities in the EU: 
statistical  analysis  of  the  LFS  ad  hoc  module  and  the  EU-SILC’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3008&langId=en  

–  Blanck,  Peter  et.  al.  .  (2003),  ‘Calibrating  the  Impact  of  the  ADA’s  Employment 

Provisions’, Stanford Law & Policy Review, 2003, 267-290  

–  Bundesministerium  für  Arbeit  und  Soziales  (2009),  ‘Behindertenbericht  2009‘,  retrieved 

from http://www.bmas.de/portal/9828/a125__behindertenbericht__2009.html 

–  Business  Europe  (2007),  Response  to  social  partner  consultation  ‘Discrimination,  does  it 
from 

matter?’, 
http://www.businesseurope.eu/DocShareNoFrame/docs/14/BMOJHCECFEJJHGEKJJAE
DNNMPDB39DWKGY9LTE4Q/UNICE/docs/DLS/2007-01441-E.pdf 

retrieved 

–  Business  Europe  (2008),  ‘Business  Europe  Position  Paper  –  Commission  Proposal  for  a 
Directive  on  “Implementing  the  Principle  of  Equal  Treatment  Between  Persons 
Irrespective of Religion or Belief, Disability, Age, or Sexual Orientation’, retrieved from 
http://www.businesseurope.eu/DocShareNoFrame/docs/13/BMOJHCECFEJJHGEKJJAE
DNNMPDBW9DP6C19LTE4Q/UNICE/docs/DLS/2008-02385-E.pdf 

–  Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (2009), ‘Mid-term Evaluation of the European 
Action  Plan  2003-2010  on  Equal  Opportunities  for  People  with  Disabilities’,  retrieved 
from http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3784&langId=en  

–  Davidson, C., M., and Santorelli, M,. J., (2009), ‘The Impact of Broadband on People with 
the  US  Chamber  of  Commerce’,  retrieved  from 

to 
Disabilities  -  A  Report 
https://www.uschamber.com/assets/env/0912broadband_dis.pdf 

–  Dawson, M. (2009), ‘EU law ‘transformed’? Evaluating accountability and subsidiarity in 
the  ‘streamlined’  OMC  for  Social  Inclusion  and  Social  Protection’,  retrieved  from 
http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/viewFile/2009_008a/115  

–  Department  of  Health  and  Human  Services,  Centres  for  Disease  Control  and  Prevention 
(US): ‘Disability and Health State Charterbook – 2006: Profiles of Health for Adults with 
Disabilities’ retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/dh/chartbook/default.htm  

EN 

81 

   EN 

 
–  DREES  (2002),  ‘Les  personnes  handicapées  vieillissantes  une  approche  à  partir  de 
http://www.sante.gouv.fr/drees/etude-resultat/er-

retrieved 

from 

l’enquête  HID’, 
pdf/er204.pdf 

–  DREES 

des 
fromhttp://www.sante.gouv.fr/drees/etude-resultat/er-pdf/er142.pdf 

les  Aidants 

Les  Aides 

(2001), 

et 

Personnes 

âgées’, 

–  Ecotec, 'Study on the situation of women with disabilities in light of the UN Convention 
for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities', A Final Report for the DG Employment, Social 
Affairs and Equal Opportunities of the European Commission (VC/2007/317), December 
2009 , http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4363&langId=en 

–  Empirica and Work Research Centre (2007), ‘Assessment of the Status of eAccessibility in 
Europe’, 
from 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/meac_study/meac_report
_06_11_final.pdf 

retrieved 

–  EPEC  (2008),  ‘Study  on  discrimination  on  grounds  of  religion  and  belief,  age,  disability 
from 

and 
http://www.cosac.eu/en/info/earlywarning/anti-dscrimination.pdf/external_study.pdf 

employment’, 

orientation 

retrieved 

outside 

sexual 

of 

–  Equal  Opportunities  Review  (1997)  ‘Implementing  the  DDA:  an  EOR  survey  of 

employers’, Equal Opportunities Review, No.71, pp.20-9  

–  European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2008), ‘Young Voices -
Meeting  Diversity  in  Education  European’,  summary  of  presentation  and  results  of  the 
European  Hearing  of  Young  People  with  Special  Education  Needs’,  retrieved  from 
http://www.european-agency.org/publications/ereports/young-voices-meeting-diversity-in-
education/EPH-EN.pdf 

–  European  Agency  for  Development  in  Special  Needs  Education  (2007),  ‘Assessment  in 
from 

Inclusive  Settings  –  Key 
http://www.european-agency.org/publications/ereports/assessment-in-inclusive-settings-
key-issues-for-policy-and-practice/Assessment-EN.pdf 

for  Policy  and  Practice’, 

retrieved 

Issues 

–  European  Agency  for  Development  in  Special  Needs  Education  (2006):  ‘Special  Needs 
Education  in  Europe  (Volume  2)  –  Provision  in  Post-Primary  Education’,  retrieved  from 
http://www.european-agency.org/publications/ereports/special-needs-education-in-europe-
volume-2/Thematic-EN.pdf 

–  European  Blind  Union  (2006),  ‘The  future  of  access  to  television  for  blind  and  partially 
sighted  people  in  Europe’,  retrieved  from  http://www.euroblind.org/fichiersGB/access-
TV.html#exec  

–  European Foundation Centre and European Disability Forum (2009): ‘Symposium on the 
legal capacity of persons with disabilities in light of the UN Convention on the Rights of 
from 
Persons 
www.efc.be/.../Symposium%20on%20the%20legal%20capacity%20Conclusions.doc  

Disabilities 

(CRPD)’, 

retrieved 

with 

–  European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) 
from 

(2003), 
inclusion’, 
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2003/35/en/1/ef0335en.pdf 

disability 

retrieved 

‘Illness, 

social 

and 

EN 

82 

   EN 

 
–   European  Foundation  for 

(Eurofound) 
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2004/105/en/1/ef04105en.pdf 

Europe’, 

‘Quality 

(2003), 

of 

in 

the  Improvement  of  Living  and  Working  Conditions 
from 

retrieved 

Life 

–   European Journal of Health Law 14 (2007) 273-298: SELECTED LEGISLATION AND 
JURISPRUDENCE - UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities European 
Journal  of  Health  Law  14  (2007)  149-163:  The  Rights  of  People  with  an  Intellectual 
Disability  in  the  Netherlands:  From  Restriction  to  Development  European  Network  of 
Legal Experts in the  Non-discrimination field (2009),  ‘Disability and  Non-discrimination 
in 
from: 
European 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4176&langId=en:  

retrieved 

Union’, 

the 

–  European  Platform  for  Rehabilitation:  ‘The  importance  of  social  services  of  general 
interest  (SSGI)  in  modern  social  policies:  The  European  Commission  biennial  report  on 
SSGI 
from 
http://www.epr.eu/images/EPR/documents/archivedocs/2008/biennial_reportonssgi.pdf 

retrieved 

Analysis 

Paper’, 

– 

–  European  Social  Survey  (2008),  Source  questionnaire  amendement  03  (Round  4, 
2008/2009)’, 
from 
http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_downloa
d&gid=473&itemid=80  

retrieved 

–  European  Agency  for  Development  in  Special  Needs  Education  (2006),  'Special  Needs 
Education  in  Europe  –  Provision  in  post-primary  education'  Volume  2,  [Online] 
<http://www.european-agency.org/publications/ereports/special-needs-education-in-
europe-volume-2/Thematic-EN.pdf 

–  European  Union  of  the  Deaf,  ‘Status  of  Sign  Language  in  Europe’,  retrieved  from 

http://www.eud.eu/EUD_Sign_Language-i-239.html  

–  Eurostat (2001), ‘The European Union labour force survey: Methods and definitions 2001’, 
from 
retrieved 
http://circa.europa.eu/irc/dsis/employment/info/data/eu_lfs/LFS_MAIN/Coding%20lists,%
20explanatory%20notes%20and%20classifications/EU%20LFS%20Methods%20and%20
Definitions%202001.pdf 

–  Eurostat (2003), ‘Closing Ceremony of the European Year of People with Disabilities: One 
in  six  of 
from 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/3-05122003-AP/EN/3-05122003-AP-
EN.HTML  

the  EU  working-age  population 

report  disability’, 

retrieved 

–  Eurostat  (2007),  ‘Data  on  Healthy  Life  Years  in  the  European  Union’,  retrieved  from 
http://ec.europa.eu/health/indicators/healthy_life_years/data/index_en.htm Eurostat (2008), 
‘EU-SILC Description of target variables: Cross-sectional and longitudinal’, retrieved from 
http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/dsis/eusilc/library?l=/guidelines_questionnaire/operation_
guidelines/silc065_consolidated/_EN_1.0_&a=d  

–  Eurostat  (2009)  ‘’  The  EU-27  population  continues 

to  grow’,  retrieved  from 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-QA-09-031/EN/KS-QA-09-031-
EN.PDF 

EN 

83 

   EN 

 
–  Eurostat 

‘Lists 

(2010), 

of  Grants  Awarded 

from 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/grants/overview Eurostat, ‘One in six of 
the EU working-age population report disability’, Press release for the Closing Ceremony 
of 
from 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/3-05122003-AP/EN/3-05122003-AP-
EN.HTML 

People  with  Disabilities, 

the  European  Year 

retrieved 

retrieved 

2009’ 

of 

in 

–  Fahey  et  al.,  'Quality  of  Life  –  First  European  Quality  of  Life  Survey  2003',  2004. 

Eurofound, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2004/105/en/1/ef04105en.pdf 

–   Federal  Ministry  of  Economics  and  Technology  (2004),  ‘Economic  Impulses  of 
Accessible  Tourism 
from 
http://www.bmwi.de/English/Redaktion/Pdf/economic-impulses-of-accessible-tourism-for-
all-526,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi,sprache=en,rwb=true.pdf 

of  Results’, 

for  All 

summary 

retrieved 

– 

–  Ferri,  D.  (2009).  ‘The  European  Community  competences  to  implement  the  UN  CRPD’ 
Gill,  John  (2009):  ‘Assistive  Technology  and  Accessibility  Portals’,  prepared  for  DG 
INFSO 
from 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/worshop_atm/at_markets
_report.pdf 

Commission, 

European 

retrieved 

–   European  Blind  Union  (2006)  'The  future  of  access  to  television  for  blind  and  partially 
sighted  people  in  Europe'  Retrieved  from  http://www.euroblind.org/fichiersGB/access-
TV.html#exec  

–  HM  Treasury,  Cabinet  Office,  National  Audit  Office,  Audit  Commission  and  Office  for 
National  Statistics  (2001),  ‘Choosing  the  Right  Fabric:  A  Framework  for  Performance 
Information’  in  The  Stationary  Office  and  HM  Treasury,  Cabinet  Office  and  National 
Audit Office (2003), Setting Key Targets for Executive Agencies  

–  Grammenos,  S.,  'Illness,  Disability  and  Social  Inclusion',  2003,  Europa  website  – 

Eurofound, < http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2003/35/en/1/ef0335en.pdf 

–  Hawley,  C.  (2008),  'Feared  cost  of  Anti-Discrimination  Law  May  Not  Exist',8/05/2008, 
Der Spiegel [Online], http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,572290,00.html 

–  Human Rights Monitoring Institute et al (2005) 'Human Rights Monitoring in Residential 
from 

for  Mentally  Disabled  and  Psychiatric  Hospitals'  Retrieved 

Institutions 
http://www.old.gip-vilnius.lt/leidiniai/human_rights_monitoring_report.pdf 

–  Hurstfield,  Jennifer  et.  al.  (2007):  ‘The  costs  and  benefits  of  Independent  Living’,  report 
from 

for  HM  Government,  Office 
http://www.enil.eu/elib/app/webroot/files/independent_living_report.pdf 

for  Disability 

retrieved 

Issues, 

–   Human Rights Council (2009): draft ‘Thematic study by the Office of the United Nations 
High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights  on  the  structure  and  role  of  national  mechanisms 
for  the  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with 
Disabilities’  Instituto  Nacional  de  Estadística  Survey  on  Disability,  Personal  Autonomy 
and 
from 
http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?L=1&type=pcaxis&path=/t15/p418&file=inebase 

Dependency 

Situations 

retrieved 

2008’ 

EN 

84 

   EN 

 
ageing 

–  International Longevity Centre-UK and the Merck Company Foundation (2006), ‘The state 
from 

of 
http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/The%20State%20of%20Ageing%20and%
20Health%20in%20Europe%20-%20Executive%20Summary_tcm6-15882.pdf 

in  Europe:  Executive  Summary’, 

retrieved 

health 

and 

–  Jenkins, S and Rigg, J. (2003), ‘Disability and disadvantage: selection onset and duration 
effects’ in Burchardt, T. (2003), ‘Being and becoming: Social exclusion and the onset of 
disability’, retrieved from: http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/CR/CASEreport21.pdf 

–  Garces, Jorge et. al. (2007): ‘Free movements and equal opportunities for all (LivingAll)’, 
funded under FP6 International Disability and Development Consortium (2005), 'Disability 
in Conflict and Emergency Situations: Focus on Tsunami Affected Areas’ for International 
from 
Disability 
http://www.iddcconsortium.net/joomla/images/IDDC/emergency/kar_tsunami_%20paper_
05.pdf 

Development 

Consortium, 

retrieved 

and 

–   KMU Forschung Austria (2008), ‘Providing reasonable accommodation for persons with 
disabilities in the workplace in the EU – good practices and financing schemes’, retrieved 
from http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=1957&langId=en  

–  KMU  Forschung  Austria  (2008),  ‘Providing  reasonable  accommodation  for  persons  with 
disabilities in the workplace in the EU – 24 company case studies across Europe’, retrieved 
from http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=1961&langId=en 

–  Lafortune  et  al.,  'Trends  in  Severe  Disability  Among  Elderly  People:  Assessing  the 
Evidence in 12 OECD Countries and the Future Implications', 30/03/2007, OECD Health 
working papers, OECD website, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/13/8/38343783.pdf 

–   LivingAll Free movements and equal opportunities for all (LivingAll), ‘Work package 4: 
from 

Detection 
http://www.livingall.eu/admin/Ficheros/D4.1%20Report%20presenting%20the%20actual
%20situation%20of%20disabled%20people%20in%20Europe..pdf 

Barriers’, 

retrieved 

Main 

of 

–  Lyons, Richard (2009), ‘Physical and mental disabilities in newborns doubled in 25 years’, 
from 

York 
article 
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/18/us/physical-and-mental-disabilities-in-newborns-
doubled-in-25-years.html?&pagewanted=1  

retrieved 

Times, 

New 

in 

–  Le  Ministère  du  Travail,  des  Relations  Sociales,  de  la  Famille,  de  la  Solidarité  et  de  la 
Ville  (2007),  ‘Synthèse  sur  l’emploi  des  personnes  handicapées‘,  retrieved  from 
http://www.travail-
solidarite.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/tdb_th_II_A_Synthese_sur_l_emploi_des_personnes_handicap
ees-2.pdf 

–  Mansell,  J.  et.  al.  (2007),  ‘Deinstitutionalisation  and  community  living  –  outcomes  and 
from 

costs: 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2788&langId=en 

European 

retrieved 

Study’, 

report 

of 

a 

–  Mowlam, A. et. al. (2007), ‘UK Study of Abuse and Neglect of Older People: Qualitative 
from 

Findings’, 
http://assets.comicrelief.com/cr09/docs/older_people_abuse_report.pdf 

retrieved 

EN 

85 

   EN 

 
–  My  Opinion  My  Vote  (2009),  ‘Voting  Experiences  among  Young  People  with  Learning 
from 

Disabilities’, 
‘http://www.myopinionmyvote.eu/webdown/researchpoll/votingexperiences2009fin.pdf 

retrieved 

–  National Council on Disability (2007), ‘The Impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act: 
Assessing  the  Progress  Toward  Achieving  the  Goals  of  the  ADA’,  retrieved  from 
http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2007/pdf/ada_impact_07-26-07.pdf 

–  Needels et. al. (2006) ‘Economic and social costs and benefits to employers of retaining, 
recruiting  and  employing  disabled  people  and/or  people  with  health  conditions  or  an 
injury:  a  review  of  the;  evidence  (Department  for  Work  and  Pensions  research  report  no 
400’, retrieved from http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2005-2006/rrep400.pdf 

–  Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), US Department of Labour, 'Investing in 
[Online] 

Accommodation 

Solutions', 

Situations 

and 

People: 
http://www.dol.gov/odep/pubs/misc/invest.htm  

Job 

–  Office 

Issues: 
http://www.officefordisability.gov.uk/research/indicators.php 

‘Disability  Equality 

for  Disability 

Indicators’, 

retrieved 

from 

–  Office  for  the  United  Nations  High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights:  ‘International 
from 

retrieved 

Political 

Rights’, 

Covenant 
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm 

Civil 

and 

on 

–  Office  for  the  United  Nations  High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights:  ‘International 
from 

and  Cultural  Rights’, 

retrieved 

Covenant 
on  Economic, 
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm 

Social 

–  Priestley,  M.,  'Synthesis  report  on  disability  mainstreaming  in  the  2008-2010  National 
Strategy Reports for Social Protection and Social Inclusion (NSRs)', Oct. 2008, Academic 
Network  of  European  Disability  Experts 
[Online],  <  http://www.disability-
europe.net/content/pdf/ANED%202008%20NSR%20disability%20synthesis%20report%2
0SPSI%20-%20311008.pdf 

–  Ramboll  Management  (2004).‘Evaluation  of  the  European  Year  of  People  with 
from 

Disabilities’. 
http://wwwupload.pls.ramboll.dk/eng/Publications/EvaluationAndResearch/EYPD_FinalR
eport_Synthesis.pdf 

retrieved 

–  Ramboll Management (2008) ‘On-going Evaluation of the 2007 European Year of Equal 
from 

Opportunities 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=2144&langId=en  

retrieved 

All’, 

for 

–  ROBOTIKER-TECNALIA, AATE, IBV, and NG4ALL (2009), ‘Analysing and federating 
from 

the 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/document.cfm?action=display&doc_
id=606  

technology 

industry’, 

European 

retrieved 

assistive 

ICT 

–  Salvador-Carulla, L. (2009), ‘Bridging knowledge in long-term care and support. Crossing 
from 

boundaries 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2707536/  

disability’, 

retrieved 

between 

ageing 

and 

EN 

86 

   EN 

 
–  Schädler, Johannes et. al. : ‘The specific risks of discrimination against persons in situation 
from 

of  major 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=3009&langId=en  

dependence 

retrieved 

complex 

needs’, 

with 

or 

–  Schweizerische  Fachstelle  für  behindertengerechtes  Bauen,  ‘Kosten’,  retrieved  from 

http://www.hindernisfrei-bauen.ch/kosten_d.php 

–  Simm, Claire et al (2007), 'Organisations' responses to the Disability Discrimination Act', 
[Online] 

Research  Report  No.  410 
http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2007-2008/rrep410.pdf 

for  Work  and  Pensions, 

for  Department 

–  SINTEF (2000), ‘De sier du skal ha det tilnærma likt et annet liv, men det det er jo slettes 
ikke  det’,  retrieved  from  http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/ad/dok/nouer/2001/nou-2001-
22/15/2.html?id=144323  

–  Social  Exclusion  Unit  (2003),  ‘Making  the  Connections:  Final  Report  on  Transport  and 
from 

Social 
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/cabinetoffice/social_exclusion_task_force/assets/p
ublications_1997_to_2006/making_transport_2003 

Exclusion’, 

retrieved 

–  Stapleton  et.  al.  (2009),  ‘Review  of  international  evidence  on  the  cost  of  disability, 

Department for Work and Pensions’  

–  Stein, M. A. (2000), ‘Empirical Implications of Title I’, 85 Iowa Law review, 2000. 1672-

1690, p1674  

–  Ray  et.  al.  (2003),  ‘Measuring  the  Macroeconomic  Effects  of  Reducing  Benefit 

Dependency’, National Institute Economic Review n186: 85-97  

–  UEAPME (2008), ‘UEAPME position paper on the European Commission proposal for a 
Council  Directive  on  implementing  the  principle  of  equal  treatment  between  persons 
irrespective  of  religion  or  belief,  disability,  age  or  sexual  orientation  COM  (2008)  426’. 
retrieved from http://www.ueapme.com/IMG/pdf/081128_pp_non_discrimination.pdf 

–  UNICE (2005), ‘UNICE Position on the European Commission Framework Strategy “Non 
from 
opportunities 
–discrimination 
http://www.businesseurope.eu/DocShareNoFrame/docs/1/BMOJHCECFEJJHGEKJJAED
NNMPDB19DW3WN9LI71KM/UNICE/docs/DLS/2005-01716-EN.pdf 

retrieved 

equal 

all’. 

and 

for 

–  United  Nations,  ‘Convention  on  the  rights  of  persons  with  disabilities’,  retrieved  from 

http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf 

–  United  Nations  Enable,  ‘Persons  with  disabilities  and  multiple  discrimination  -  Rights  of 

special groups’, retrieved from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/comp500.htm  

–  United Nations Enable, ‘What is disability and who are persons with disabilities’, retrieved 

from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/faqs.htm  

–  United Nations General Assembly HR/5000 (2009): ‘Equal Legal Rights, Access to Justice 
Crucial  to  Implementation  of  Disabilities  Convention,  Say  Speakers  as  Conference  of 
from 
States  Parties  Continues’,  press 
ttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/hr5000.doc.htm  

release  on  3rd  meeting, 

retrieved 

EN 

87 

   EN 

 
–  University College Dublin Centre for Disability Studies, ‘Pomona - Health Indicators for 

People with Intellectual Disabilities’, retrieved from http://www.ucd.ie/include/  

–  University  of  Bristol  (2005):  ‘Tackling  attitudes  of  healthcare  professionals  towards 

disabled people’, Press release retrieved from http://www.bris.ac.uk/news/2005/810  

–  University  of  York  Social  Policy  Research  Unit  (2001),  ‘Young  Disabled  People  and 

Sport’, retrieved from http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/pubs/rworks/nov2001.pdf 

–  Waddington,  L  &  Lawson,  A.  (2009),  'Disability  and  non-discrimination  law  in  the 
European  Union  –  An  analysis  of  disability  discrimination  law  within  and  beyond  the 
employment  field',  July  2009,  European  Network  of  Legal  Experts  in  the  Non-
<http://www.non-
Field, 
Discrimination 
discrimination.net/content/media/Disability%20non-discrimination%20law.pdf>  

–  Web  Accessibility  Initiative  (WAI),  'Case  Study  of  Accessibility  Benefits:  Tesco', 

retrieved from http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/tesco-case-study 

–  We  Want  You  –  Disability  Votes  Count:  ‘Facts  and  Figures’,  retrieved  from 

http://www.disabilityvotescount.eu/en/press-facts-figures.php 

–  Wheelchair 

at 
http://www.newdisability.com/wheelchairstatistics.htm 

Statistics 

Newdisability.com: 

EN 

88 

   EN