An institutionally Ableist State? Exploring civil society perspectives on the implementation of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities in India

References

• AALI – Association for Advocacy and Legal Initiatives; Akshara Centre – Empowering Women and Girls, Mumbai; All India Dalit Mahila Adhikar Manch (AIDMAM); Aman: Global Voices for Peace in the Home; Andhra Domestic Workers' Union6. Anjali, Kolkata; ANANDI (Area Network and Development Initiatives), Gujarat; ASAA (Anna Suraksha Adhikar Abhiyan/Right to Food Campaign), Gujarat; Association for Women with Disabilities, Kolkata; Bhumika Women's Collective; Breakthrough; CAWL Rights; CBGA (Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability), New Delhi; Centre for Advocacy on Stigma and Marginalisation, India; CommonHealth – The Coalition for Maternal-Neonatal Health and Safe Abortion; CREA; Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee (DMSC), Kolkata; EQUATIONS, Karnataka; FAOW – Forum Against Oppression of Women, Mumbai .... (2016). Joint stakeholder’s report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Action Aid Association. (2016). NGO report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Andreassen, B. A., & Sano, H.-O. (2007). What's the goal? What’s the purpose? Observations on human rights impact assessment. The International Journal of Human Rights, 11(3), 275–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642980701443483
   Google Scholar
• Bangalore. (2017). NGO submission to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM). (2016). Joint stakeholder’s report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Bhambhani, M. (2018). Emergence of disability rights movement in India: From charity to self-advocacy. In A. Ghai (Ed.), Disability in South Asia: Knowledge and experience (Chap. 2, pp. 21–35). Sage Publications Pvt. Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Capoccia, G., & Kelemen, R. D. (2007). The study of critical Junctures: Theory, narrative, and counterfactuals in historical institutionalism. World Politics, 59(3), 341–369. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100020852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chadda, R. (2020). Influence of the new mental health legislation in India. British Journal of Psychiatry, 17(1), 20–22. https://doi.org/10.1192/bji.2019.18
   Google Scholar
• Chaney, P. (2011). Equality and public policy. University of Wales Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chaney, P. (2015). Institutional ableism, critical actors and the substantive representation of disabled people: Evidence from the UK parliament 1940-2012. Journal of Legislative Studies, 21(2), 168–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2014.975512
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaney, P. (2020). India at the crossroads? Civil society, human rights and religious freedom: Critical analysis of CSOs’ third cycle universal periodic review discourse 2012-2017. International Journal of Human Rights, 24(5), 531–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2019.1656610
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaney, P., & Sahoo, S. (2021). Conclusion. In S. Sahoo & P. Chaney (Eds.), Civil society and citizenship in India and Bangladesh (pp. 89–95). Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Chennapragada, S., & Jain, S. (2020). Demystifying India’s Paralympic movement: Overview of legislation, sport governance and ground realities. The International Sports Law Journal, 20(3-4), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-020-00168-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chopra, T. (2013). Expanding the horizons of disability law in India: A study from a human rights perspective. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 41(4), 807–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlme.12091
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1997). Procedure and substance in deliberative democracy. In J. Bohman & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (Chap. 4, pp. 56–64). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
   Google Scholar
• D’Angelo, P., & Kuypers, J. (2010). Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dawn, R. (2014). “Our lives, our identity”: Women with disabilities in India. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36(21), 1768–1773. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.870237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deepak, S., Kumar, J., Ramasamy, P., & Griffo, G. (2014). An emancipatory research on CBR and the barriers faced by persons with disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36(18), 1502–1507. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.800914
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dirikx, A., & Gelders, D. (2010). To frame is to explain: A deductive frame-analysis of Dutch and French climate change coverage during the annual UN conferences of the parties. Public Understanding of Science, 19(6), 732–742. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509352044
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy, R. M., & Kelly, B. D. (2019). The right to mental healthcare: India moves forward. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 214(2), 59–60. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2018.250
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2004). Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 615–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00061-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erikson, E. (1950). Dimensions of a new identity. W.W. Norton and Co.
   Google Scholar
• Esteves, A. M., Franks, D., & Vanclay, F. (2012). Social impact assessment: The state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2012.660356
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fierros, E. G. (2006). One size does not fit all: A response to institutionalizing inequity. Disability Studies Quarterly, 26(2), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v26i2.683
   Google Scholar
• Gabel, S., & Danforth, S. (2008). Disability and the politics of education. Peter Lang Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ghai, A. (2015). Rethinking disability in India. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ghai, A. (Ed.). (2018a). Disability in South Asia: Knowledge and experience. Sage Publications Pvt. Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Ghai, A. (2018b). Disability, exclusions, and resistance: An Indian context. In Z. Hasan, A. Z. Huq, M. C. Nussbaum, & V. Verma (Eds.), The empire of disgust: Prejudice, discrimination, and policy in India and the US (Chap. 12, pp. 243–262). Oxford Scholarship Online.
   Google Scholar
• Girimaji, S. C., & Srinath, S. (2010). Perspectives of intellectual disability in India: Epidemiology, policy, services for children and adults. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 23(5), 441–446. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e32833ad95c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. Havard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Government of India. (2017). National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 16/21: India (A/HRC/WG.6/27/IND/1). UN.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1994). Three normative models of democracy. Constellations, 1(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8675.1994.tb00001.x
   Google Scholar
• Haq, R., Klarsfeld, A., Kornau, A., & Ngunjiri, F. W. (2020). Diversity in India: Addressing caste, disability and gender. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 39(6), 585–596. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-04-2020-0095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HAQ: Centre for Child Rights, New Delhi, India. (2016). Report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Hehir, T. (2005). New directions in special education: Eliminating Ableism in policy and practice. Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hooks, B. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Housing & Land Rights Network India. (2016). NGO report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Human Rights Watch. (2016). NGO report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Humble, D., & Mani, H. (2018). Working for change in India’s civil society. Work, Employment and Society, 32(6), 1130–1139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017715176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janardhana, N., Muralidhar, D., Naidu, D. M., & Raghevendra, G. (2015). Discrimination against differently abled children among rural communities in India: Need for action. Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine, 6(1), 7–11. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.149070
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnstone, C. J., Kayama, M., & Limaye, S. (2019). Inclusion or assimilation? Program development in disability-focused organizations in India. Disability & Society, 34(9-10), 1595–1612. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2019.1601068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joint Working Group on Human Rights in India. (2016). NGO report to the third cycle UPR. UN.
   Google Scholar
• Keane, J. (Ed.). (1988). Civil society and the state: New European perspectives. University of Westminster Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klijn, E.-H., & Skelcher, C. (2007). Democracy and governance networks: Compatible or not? Four conjectures and their implications for theory and practice. Public Administration, 85(3), 587–608. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00662.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kukla, A. (2000). Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, P., & Agrawal, N. (2019). Learning disabled and their education in India. Human Arenas, 2(2), 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-018-0035-5
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, V., & Dwivedi, K. (2017). Sociology of disability in India: A victim of disciplinary apathy. Social Change, 47(3), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049085717712816
   Google Scholar
• Kumari Campbell, F. (2009). Contours of ableism: The production of disability and abledness. Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kundu, S. C., Bansal, J., Mor, A., & Pruthi, M. (2018). Workforce diversity status in Indian public sector: A study of employees’ reactions. Journal of Organisation and Human Behaviour, 7(2 3), 34–46.
   Google Scholar
• Lowri, T. (1961). Four systems of policy, politics and choice. Inter- University Case Program.
   Google Scholar
• Maikho Apollo Pou, L., & Goli, S. (2013). Burden of multiple disabilities among the older population in India: An assessment of socioeconomic differentials. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 33(1/2), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443331311295181
   Google Scholar
• Mathias, K., Pant, H., Marella, M., Singh, L., Murthy, G., & Grills, N. (2018). Multiple barriers to participation for people with psychosocial disability in Dehradun district, North India: A cross-sectional study. British Medical Journal Open, e019443. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019443
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202
   Google Scholar
• Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2011). India: Recommendation of the second cycle universal periodic review (A/HRC/21/10). UN.
   Google Scholar
• Pinilla-Roncancio, M., Mactaggart, I., Kuper, H., Dionicio, C., Naber, J., Murthy, G.V.S., & Polack, S. (2020). Multidimensional poverty and disability: A case control study in India, Cameroon, and Guatemala. SSM - Population Health, 11, 100591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100591
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiser, R. (2006). ‘Disability equality: Confronting the oppression of the past’ chapter 7. In M. Cole (Ed.), Education, equality and human rights (pp. 134–156). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Saikia, N., Bora, J. K., Jasilionis, D., & Shkolnikov, V. M. (2016). Disability divides in India: Evidence from the 2011 census. PLoS One, 11(8), e0159809. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159809
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (2001). The social model of disability: An outdated ideology? Research in Social Science and Disability, 2, 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3547(01)80018-X
   Google Scholar
• Stoetzler, M., & Yuval-Davis, N. (2002). Standpoint theory, situated knowledge and the situated imagination. Feminist Theory, 3(3), 315–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/146470002762492024
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2012). Human rights council: Report of the working group on the universal periodic review – India (A/HRC/21/10). United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2019). Committee on the rights of persons with disabilities: Concluding observations on the initial report of India (CRPD/C/IND/CO/1). United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Volkens, A. (2001). Quantifying the election programmes: Coding procedures and controls. In I. Budge (Ed.), Mapping policy preferences: Parties, electors and governments (Chap. 5, pp. 87–99). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wolbring, G. (2008). The politics of ableism. Development, 51(1), 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2008.17
   Google Scholar
• Yanow, D. (1999). Conducting interpretive policy analysis. SAGE.
   Google Scholar