Thank you for the very useful insights and examples that have so far been provided in response to my earlier email regarding disability inclusion in evaluations relating to agriculture and rural development.
We have had some very interesting inputs, such as the capturing of individual responses from persons with disabilities through the household survey conducted for the Inter-Agency Humanitarian Evaluation of the Drought Response in Ethiopia 2015 – 2018, as shared by Amleset Haile. Other contributions, such as that from Bassirou Diagne, raised the point that the inclusion of persons with disabilities could be captured under analyses relating to ‘vulnerable groups’. However, underscoring the complexity of the topic, Mohammad Lardi shared the example of a UNFPA multi-country study on young persons with disabilities, which gave a thorough analysis of the intersecting vulnerabilities and marginalities faced by persons with disabilities (e.g. HIV status, gender, distance from urban areas, poverty, age, etc.) and made the important point that every disability is different and that it is somewhat artificial to “lump everyone under the same heading”
As Pamela White has noted, people might tend to have different and subjective understandings of what ‘disability’ entails, and therefore they might not so readily self-identify as having a disability, for a host of reasons. Similarly, Lal Manavado pointed out that persons with disabilities who live in rural areas are perhaps even more likely to be excluded or misrepresented, and extra care and consideration is therefore needed to ensure that evaluations truly capture the views of persons with disabilities living in rural areas.
From that point of view, I am curious as to how the IAHE in Ethiopia, or indeed other evaluations have identified persons with disabilities in their sampling, and what is the accepted best practise for doing so.
Thank again to those of you who have provided links to external guidance (e.g. the Washington Group on Disability Statistics). If there is similar guidance that could be of use, please feel free to share with the Eval Forward network.
And do please continue to share any other interesting examples of how persons with disabilities have been included through your evaluations.
RE: Addressing disability inclusion through evaluations in agriculture and rural development
Dear Eval Forward members,
Thank you for the very useful insights and examples that have so far been provided in response to my earlier email regarding disability inclusion in evaluations relating to agriculture and rural development.
We have had some very interesting inputs, such as the capturing of individual responses from persons with disabilities through the household survey conducted for the Inter-Agency Humanitarian Evaluation of the Drought Response in Ethiopia 2015 – 2018, as shared by Amleset Haile. Other contributions, such as that from Bassirou Diagne, raised the point that the inclusion of persons with disabilities could be captured under analyses relating to ‘vulnerable groups’. However, underscoring the complexity of the topic, Mohammad Lardi shared the example of a UNFPA multi-country study on young persons with disabilities, which gave a thorough analysis of the intersecting vulnerabilities and marginalities faced by persons with disabilities (e.g. HIV status, gender, distance from urban areas, poverty, age, etc.) and made the important point that every disability is different and that it is somewhat artificial to “lump everyone under the same heading”
As Pamela White has noted, people might tend to have different and subjective understandings of what ‘disability’ entails, and therefore they might not so readily self-identify as having a disability, for a host of reasons. Similarly, Lal Manavado pointed out that persons with disabilities who live in rural areas are perhaps even more likely to be excluded or misrepresented, and extra care and consideration is therefore needed to ensure that evaluations truly capture the views of persons with disabilities living in rural areas.
From that point of view, I am curious as to how the IAHE in Ethiopia, or indeed other evaluations have identified persons with disabilities in their sampling, and what is the accepted best practise for doing so.
Thank again to those of you who have provided links to external guidance (e.g. the Washington Group on Disability Statistics). If there is similar guidance that could be of use, please feel free to share with the Eval Forward network.
And do please continue to share any other interesting examples of how persons with disabilities have been included through your evaluations.
Looking forward to continuing this discussion.
Kind regards,
Eoghan