Research Programme (FP7) to disability equality research: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The potential contribution of the 7th Framework Research Programme (FP7) to disability equality research: Preliminary results of the EuRADE review of the FP7 work programmes

• Prof. Lisa Waddington,

EDF Chair in European Disability Law, Jantien Dekkers, Research Assistant, Maastricht University (NL)

Faculty of Law

Structure of Presentation

• 1. Aims of the EuRADE Review of 7th Framework

Research Programme (FP7)

• 2. Structure of the 7th Framework Research

Programme (FP7) and Areas to be reviewed

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of the ICT

Work Programme

• 4. Case Studies of Calls from the ICT Work

Programme

• 5. Preliminary Results of the Review of the PEOPLE

Programme

Faculty of Law

• 1. Aims of EuRADE Review of FP7 (1)
• A. To identify whether any current or upcoming calls

allow for the possibility to fund the research proposals developed within EuRADE

• B. To identify the “match” between FP7 calls and the

research priorities of DPOs as identifed in the EuRADE consultation survey

• C. To identify the extent to which FP7 calls allow for

the funding of disability related research

Faculty of Law

• 1. Aims of EuRADE Review of FP7 (2)
• D. To identify the extent to which FP7 calls allow for

participatory research involving DPOs.

• E. To identify the room for campaigning to improve

the “disability” dimension of future calls.

Faculty of Law

• 2. Structure of FP7 and Areas to be Reviewed (1)
• The EU funds an enormous amount of research.
• Funding: 5.3 billion euros in 2006 and more than

10 billion euro by 2012.

• Funds research carried out by academics, industry

and SMEs.

Faculty of Law

• 2. Structure of FP7 and Areas to be Reviewed (2)

H e a lth

ID E A S

E u ro p e a n R ese a rch C o u n cil In itia l tra in in g F o o d , a g ricu ltu re a n d b io te ch n o lo g y L ife -lo n g tra in in g In d u stry -a ca d e m ia In fo rm a tion a n d co m m u n ica tio n te ch n o lo g ie s In te rn a tion a l d im e n sion

P E O P L E

S p e cific a ctio n s N a n oscie n ces, n a n o te ch n o lo g ie s, m a te ria ls a n d n e w p ro d u ction te ch n o lo g ie s R e se a rch in fra stru ctu res R e se a rch for th e b en e fit

• f S M E s

E n erg y R e g io n s o f K n o w le dg e R e se a rch p o ten tia l E n v iro n m en t (in clu d in g clim a te ch a n g e ) S cie n ce in so cie ty C o h e ren t d e v e lo p m e n t

• f re se a rch p o licie s

T ra n sp o rt (in clu d in g a e ro n au tics)

C A P A C IT IE S

In te rn a tion a l co -

• p e ra tio n

S o cio -e co n o m ic scie n ces a n d th e h u m an itie s

C O O P E R A T IO N

S e cu rity an d S p a ce N o n -n u cle a r a ctio n s b y th e Jo in t R e se a rch C e n tre

Faculty of Law

• 2. Structure of FP7 and Areas to be Reviewed (3)

Figure 3. Review sections within FP7

H e a lth

ID E A S

E u ro p e a n R e s e a rch C o u n cil In itia l tra in in g F o o d , a g ricu ltu re a n d b io te ch n o lo g y L ife -lo n g tra in in g In d u s try -a ca d e m ia In fo rm a tio n a n d co m m u n ica tio n te ch n o lo g ie s In te rn a tio n a l d im e n s io n

P E O P L E

S p e cific a ctio n s N a n o s cie n ce s , n a n o te ch n o lo g ie s , m a te ria ls a n d n e w p ro d u ctio n te ch n o lo g ie s R e s e a rch in fra s tru ctu re s R e s e a rch fo r th e b e n e fit

• f S M E s

E n e rg y R e g io n s o f K n o w le d g e R e s e a rch p o te n tia l E n v iro n m e n t (in clu d in g clim a te ch a n g e ) S cie n ce in s o cie ty C o h e re n t d e v e lo p m e n t

• f re s e a rch p o licie s

T ra n s p o rt (in clu d in g a e ro n au tics )

C A P A C IT IE S

In te rn a tio n a l co -

• p e ra tio n

S o cio -e co n o m ic s cie n ce s a n d th e h u m an itie s

C O O P E R A T IO N

S e cu rity an d S p a ce N o n -n u cle a r a ctio n s b y th e Jo in t R e s e a rch C e n tre

PEOPLE

Faculty of Law

• 2. Structure of FP7 and Areas to be Reviewed (4)
• For each theme or area, there is a specific work

programme.

• The work programme consists of a large number of

calls, each setting out the nature of the research to be funded and the expected goals to be achieved by the research.

• Researchers submit their proposals under a specific

call and these are reviewed.

• Proposals which are awarded the highest grade are

most likely to receive funding.

Faculty of Law

• 2. Structure of FP7 and Areas to be Reviewed (5)
• Calls which explicitly refer to disability and likely to:
• stimulate researchers to take account of disability

in their proposals

• lead to research projects which take account of

disability being funded

Faculty of Law

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of

the ICT Work Programme (1)

• Generally speaking, individual calls within a work

programme can:

• Address disability specifically.
• Address mainstream issues, but include a

specific reference to disability in the context of the research.

• Address mainstream issues, but include a

generic reference to e.g. “vulnerable groups”, “combating discrimination” etc., which could “open the door” to disability related research.

Faculty of Law

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of

the ICT Work Programme (2)

• Address mainstream issues, and include no

reference to disability even though this would be appropriate.

• Address issues completely unrelated to disability
• Allow for (or not allow for) the involvement of

civil society in the research (participatory research) or allow for end users to test results

• f research, i.e. allow for DPO involvement.

Faculty of Law

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of

the ICT Work Programme (3)

How does the ICT Work Programme address disability /involvement of DPOs?

• Many positive aspects in the ICT work programme.
• An interesting set of disability specific calls.
• Some involvement for users is provided for.

Faculty of Law

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of

the ICT Work Programme (4)

• One the research priorities identified in the EuRADE

consultative survey is also addressed in the work programme:

• research to promote the development of

information and communication systems, resources and products inclusive and accessible to disabled people

Faculty of Law

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of

the ICT Work Programme (5).

But, three shortcomings:

• A. Some mainstream calls make no specific

reference to disability, or the needs of disabled users, even though this would be appropriate.

• As a result, researchers will not be encouraged

to address the disability dimension in their research proposal.

• Mainstreaming of disability is required in FP7 work

programmes – to encourage researchers to address disability in their research proposals, and ensure funded research addresses disability.

Faculty of Law

• B. Calls designed to influence the development of

general ICT standards do not mention the need to ensure design for all (universal design)

• It is important that such standards incorporate

the needs of all potential users, i.e. that they are based on design for all principles.

• The ICT Work programme includes a number of

calls which will fund research designed to develop standards, but there is no mention of the need for those standards to embrace design for all principles or incorporate the needs of users with a disability.

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review of

the ICT Work Programme (6)

Faculty of Law

• 3. Preliminary Results of the Review
• f the ICT Work Programme (7)
• Generally, there is a need to recognize the

importance of standards which are based on design for all principles throughout all FP7 work programmes.

Faculty of Law

Preliminary Results of the Review of the ICT Work Programme (8)

• C. No possibility for participatory research – some

limited possibility for user involvement in dissemination of information or testing

• Participatory research involves civil society
• rganizations / DPOs participating as equal

partners in research projects – setting the agenda and contributing to the research where appropriate.

• There is no possibility for participatory research
• f this nature in the ICT work programme.

Faculty of Law

Preliminary Results of the Review of the ICT Work Programme (9)

• However, to address this issue, it is not

sufficient for the work programmes to require that user groups / civil society orgs., such as DPOs, are involved in carrying out the research.

• Research in fields such as ICT and transport is

highly technical – requires specialized knowledge.

• In order to allow for participatory research, it is

important that FP 7 work programmes provide funding to allow user groups and civil society

• rganizations, including DPOs, to develop

capacity to engage with researchers.

Faculty of Law

Preliminary Results of the Review of the ICT Work Programme (10)

• This would include both training on relevant

research methodologies and the content of research.

• Some of the calls in the ICT work programme do

allow for user involvement – e.g. in testing ICT products or disseminating information.

Faculty of Law

• 4. Case Studies of Calls from the

ICT Work Programme

Faculty of Law

Main Shortcomings

• A. Some mainstream calls make no specific reference

to disability, or the needs of disabled users, even though this would be appropriate.

• B. Calls designed to influence the development of

general ICT standards do not mention the need to ensure design for all (universal design)

• C. No possibility for participatory research – some

limited possibility for user involvement in dissemination of information or testing

Faculty of Law

• A. No Specific Reference to Disability in

Mainstream Calls

• Research in ICT can be of great relevance to people

with disabilities

• To encourage relevant research, it is important to

refer to disability in the calls

• Call 4.2 Technology-enhanced learning
• There is a need for mainstream products to be

disability accessibility and for disability specific products where necessary

• However, Call 4.2 makes no reference to disability

Faculty of Law

• B. Calls to develop Global ICT

Standards do not refer to the need to take account of Design for All

• Call 1.1 „The Network of the Future‟

Aim: development of “novel internet architectures and technologies”, including development of global standards The internet can currently be inaccessible to pwd

• Global standards can facilitate accessibility by

incorporating Design for All principles

• Call only includes vague reference to „multiplicity of

user requirements‟ - does not refer to Design for All

Faculty of Law

• C. Limited possibilities for user

involvement or participatory research

• Researchers can have insufficient knowledge of

disability

• DPOs can have insufficient knowledge of technology
• Cooperation can lead to better research
• No possibility for participatory research in Work

Programme – but some possilibity for a Coordination Action under the disability specific call (e.g. Users groups and researchers)

Faculty of Law

Shortcomings of the ICT Work Programme - disability perspective

• Call 4.1 „Digital Libraries‟

– No mention of need to incorporate requirements

• f users with a disabiity

– No involvement of users with a disability foreseen

Faculty of Law

Shortcomings of the ICT Work Programme - disability perspective

• Suggestions for improvement Call 4.1:

– Reference to disability accessibility / design for all – All potential users involved in development process

• Result: better product for the user, the industry and

the market.

Faculty of Law

• 5. Preliminary results of the People

Programme (1)

• The PEOPLE programme is designed to increase

mobility and life long learning for researchers.

• PEOPLE covers salary and mobility (travel between

host and home country).

Faculty of Law

• 5. Preliminary results of the People

Programme (2)

• Individuals with a disability can experience higher

costs when they move to a new Member State to carry out research:

• higher transport costs
• costs related to adapting workplace
• higher housing costs
• To increase the opportunities for researchers with a

disability, it would be appropriate for PEOPLE to provide researchers with disabilities with additional funding, if the nature of their disability / situation justifies this.