Report of the fourth meeting of the
Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD)
(Nairobi, Kenya, 28 September 2011)
Introduction
The Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) held its fourth face-toface meeting on 28 September 2011, during the sixth Internet Governance Forum
(IGF) at the United Nations Headquarters (UNON) in Nairobi, Kenya. One of the most
important goals for the fourth face-to-face meeting of the DCAD was to finalize a
message to be brought to the attention of the main Session on Access and Diversity,
on 29 September 2011.
Before this DCAD meeting, DCAD organized the following events in IGF 2011:

Workshop no. 136 (Feeder workshop to the main session on Access and
Diversity) “Implementing good practices in accessibility for an inclusive society”,
28 September 2011;

Workshop no. 137 (Feeder workshop to the main session on Access and
Diversity) “Mainstreaming the disability perspective for an inclusive society”, 28
September 2011;
The meeting was open to any interested person or organization and attracted about
15 participants. The DCAD Co-Coordinator, Mr Peter Major chaired the meeting. The
DCAD Coordinator Ms Andrea Saks attended the meeting remotely. The ITU-T/TSB
was represented by Ms Xiaoya Yang, while the ITU-T/TSB DCAD Secretariat, Ms.
Alexandra Gaspari attended the meeting remotely.
4th face-to-face DCAD Meeting Agenda – 28 September 2011
DCAD appointed as chair of the meeting the DCAD Co-coordinator, Mr Peter Major.
The agenda for the DCAD meeting is available at
http://www.itu.int/themes/accessibility/dc/meetings/004.html
DCAD Meeting Discussion
The DCAD aims to facilitate interaction between relevant bodies and ensure that ICT
accessibility is included in the debates around the Internet Governance. This is being
done in order to build a future where the sectors of the global community have equal
access to the information society. Also this year, DCAD intended to have an impact on
1
the main session the following day and to serve this purpose it was decided to
designate DCAD representatives to speak. Mr Shadi Abou-Zahra was designated to be
the DCAD spokesperson to the main session and he joined the panel of the Access and
Diversity main session as speaker.
It was highlighted that many lessons from past IGF meetings have not been passed
on and that IGF participants repeatedly encounter barriers which could have been
easily avoided if knowledgeable persons with disabilities had been involved in the
process. DCAD have and continue to offer themselves as a resource body to help
ensure accessibility of the IGF venue and the coverage of substantive topics relating
to barriers in Internet policies, technology and interoperability impacting inclusion.
During the DCAD meeting, Mr Fernando Botelho was designated to report on
Workshop 136 “Implementing good practices in accessibility for an inclusive society”.
Mr Botelho highlighted the major challenges that the estimated one billion persons
with disabilities have to face. The major challenges relate to assistive technologies
and are as following: affordability, customization and localization. Ms Cynthia Waddell
was named to report on Workshop 137 “Mainstreaming the disability perspective for
an inclusive society”. Some legal aspects of the UN Convention for the Rights of the
Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) were highlighted, namely Article 9: Accessibility,
which explicitly mandates that Nations promote access to the Internet. This includes
availability, affordability and accessible design.
The secretariat thanked for the participation and invited the DCAD participants to
participate to the Joint ITU-EBU Workshop no. 138: “How can we reach the media
have-nots of the developed and developing worlds?” on 29 September 2011.
The Chair of the meeting, Mr Peter Major closed the meeting and asked DCAD
participants to fully support the designated DCAD representatives at the main Session
on Access and Diversity. During the meeting it was decided to submit two proposals to
the IGF Secretariat:
-
To name a person in the IGF Secretariat Staff as to be assigned the role of
"Accessibility contact;
-
To include in the contract for the next IGF - which is to be signed between the
Secretariat and the local organizer - a point that makes mandatory the
inclusion in the local Organizing Committee of representatives of organizations
of persons with disabilities from the venue city.
2
Meeting with IGF secretariat
Prior to the main session on Access and Diversity, the DCAD secretariat along with
some members of DCAD requested a meeting with IGF secretariat in order to raise the
awareness of the accessibility issues and logistics that were faced. Many of the
meeting rooms were not accessible and DCAD requested the relocation of meetings in
other facilities more accessible. As an example, workshop 136, 137 and 138 meeting
rooms had to be moved because of accessibility issues (the roof floor was not
accessible for wheel chairs, for instance).
DCAD contribution to the Main Session on Access and Diversity
(29 September 2011)
DCAD members contributed substantially to the discussion being held in the main
session of Access and Diversity, taking the floors several times with statements from
DCAD members. Mr Shadi Abou-Zahra was named as DCAD spokesperson and he was
invited to join the other speakers of the main session in the podium. DCAD also
contributed to the main session with statements that were agreed within the two
feeder workshops, namely Workshop 136 “Implementing good practices in accessibility
for an inclusive society” and Workshop 137 “Mainstreaming the disability perspective for
an inclusive society”.
Mr Abou-Zahra reminded the activities and the past years contributions to IGF that
DCAD input. In particular, Mr Abou-Zahra reminded that earlier on in 2008, after the
IGF in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) an accessibility checklist for events organizations was
submitted to the attention of IGF. This list is attached to the report. It has and will be
again brought to the attention to the organizers and to the host country in order to
improve the process.
During the Workshop 137 on “Mainstreaming the disability perspective for an inclusive
society”, Article 21 of the United Nations Conventions for the rights of the persons
with disability was also mentioned by the workshop coordinator. Freedom of
expression and Opinion and Access to Information – Provides for Nations, including
providers of information through the Internet- to make their services accessible to
persons with disabilities.
Workshop 137 touched on the diversity of the community of persons with disabilities
and the means of equalizing opportunities through information and communications
technology. Prof. Arun Mehta highlighted that the effect that universal access cannot
3
mean access for almost all. All stakeholders at IGF need to pay attention to persons
who in information terms may as well be living in the middle ages: many of those
persons with multiple disabilities and mental challenges. During the workshop, he
proposed to launch an initiative that produced free software that allowed the deafblind to send and receive information using a smart phone.
Workshop 136 on “Implementing good practices in accessibility for an inclusive society”
continued the discussion on accessibility issue and presented several projects that
members of the DCAD are part of and are promoting in several countries. Projects
running in Japan, Brazil, Burkina Faso, India and USA were highlighted and discussed
during the workshop. One representative from G3icit and the President of the DAISY
Consortium contributed to the workshop, presenting the work done around the planet
by these two international non-profit organizations.
Remote participation tools, as well as captioning were provided to the DCAD meeting
and additional participants could follow the meeting from their respective locations.
During the Forum's first workshop aimed at orienting new delegates, DCAD member
Gerry Ellis pointed out that facilities such as captioning which in the past might have
been only seen as supports for people with disabilities are also of benefit to many
other groups of people. Ginger Pak added to this point that such supports were first
developed for people with disabilities and are now almost taken for granted as
mainstream supports.
The full text of the contributions from Shadi Abou-Zahra, Cynthia Waddell, Fernando
Botelho and two additional contributions from Gerry Ellis and Satish Babu are to be
found in the Annexes of this report. A summary of the accessibility problems observed
by the DCAD during the IGF Nairobi conference, as well as a communication to the
IGF secretariat on the IGF Accessibility & Host Country Agreements were compiled by
Cynthia Waddell and added to this report. Both these two documents were submitted
to the IGF organizers during the conference.
Prior to the main session on Access and Diversity, the DCAD secretariat along with
some members of DCAD requested a meeting with IGF secretariat in order to raise the
awareness of the accessibility issues and logistics that were faced. Many of the
meeting rooms were not accessible and DCAD requested the relocation of meetings in
other facilities more accessible. As an example, workshop 136, 137 and 138 meeting
4
rooms had to be moved because of accessibility issues (the roof floor was not
accessible for wheel chairs, for instance).
Conclusions
The primary objective of the fourth DCAD meeting was to prepare a contribution to
present at the Main session on Access and Diversity. This effort was highly successful
and very much appreciated by the organizers and the participants and the panelists of
the Access and Diversity Main session. The suggestions that DCAD have presented are
submitted to the organizers and will be hopefully taken in full account for the next IGF
session next year and in the future.
The DCAD, lead by ITU, with its activities, will continue to facilitate inclusion of the
needs of persons with disabilities in the global information society.
5
ANNEX A
Contribution to the Access and Diversity Main SessionThursday, 29 September 2011
(contribution from Mr Shadi Abou-Zahra)
The IGF Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) welcomes the
opportunity to contribute to the dialogue of Access and Diversity as a diverse crossdisability coalition supporting accessibility of the Internet - including availability,
affordability and accessible design.
1.
Accessibility for persons with disabilities is an essential aspect of an inclusive
society as it affects millions of persons around the world – actually over 1 billion
according to the WHO report (June 2011) and other sources – many of whom
belong to the most vulnerable groups of our society
2.
Lack of accessibility further excludes persons with disabilities from society,
despite the Internet being an unprecedented opportunity for persons with
disabilities to participate equally in society
3.
Accessibility also addresses the needs of persons with age related impairments,
which will include many of us – sooner or later
4.
Accessibility benefits everyone. You could be in a loud environment and need
captioning. You could be new to computers and need training or less have
literacy issues. You simply want something to work properly
5.
Unfortunately the DCAD concludes that accessibility for persons with disabilities
is not sufficiently prioritized and addressed at IGF
6.
In fact, accessibility is often placed as a side-topic rather than recognized as a
fundamental and cross-cutting topic for the IGF
7.
This has happened despite tangible achievements of the DCAD – an example
being the promotion of real time captioning of IGF sessions which is now part of
normal IGF events captioning has proven to be beneficial for communication for
all and has facilitated participation during all IGF activities
8.
DCAD would like to thank the host country for its effort in addressing
accessibility of the conference venue, program, transportation, and
accommodation given the challenges at hand
9.
Unfortunately it seems the many lessons from past IGF meetings have not been
passed on to future hosts and that IGF participants have repeatedly encounter
barriers to accessibility.
10.
Many of these barriers could have been easily avoided if knowledgeable persons
with disabilities had been involved in the process. Removing barriers to
accessibility would have made the IGF experience more effective and satisfying
for everyone
11.
DCAD has and continues to offer itself as a resource body to help ensure
accessibility of the IGF venue and the coverage of substantive topics relating to
barriers in Internet policies, technology and interoperability impacting inclusion
and to also include remote participation in this formula
12.
To make sure that the next and all meetings of IGF are accessible, DCAD
strongly urges that there be a person responsible for the accessibility of the IGF
from and at each host country. It is important that this person consult any
disability organizations in the host country throughout the IGF planning and
preparation to facilitate this process. DCAD also strongly recommends that the
IGF Secretariat maintain an accessibility checklist that is refined and passed on
from one IGF to the next. (* see note below)
13.
DCAD has already submitted such a checklist to the IGF secretariat just after
the second IGF meeting Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
6
Again, we thank the organizers and the host country for their efforts and look
forward to seeing all of you next year with more prominent discussions of
inclusion for persons with disabilities in all aspects relating to the use and
governance of the Internet.
* Note of the DCAD Secretariat: for easy reference, the DCAD accessibility checklist
along with the complete report on accessibility after the Rio meeting is in Annex B of
this report.
.
7
ANNEX B
Contribution to the Access and Diversity Main Session
Thursday, 29 September 2011
(report quoted by Mr Shadi Abou-Zahra)
Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) - 2nd Report to IGF
Secretariat (15 September 2008) *
(Accessibility and Disability in IGF meetings
1. Introduction
The Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability would like to provide the following
report to the IGF Secretariat on how to improve accessibility at IGF meetings and on
accessibility barriers observed at the IGF conference in Rio. The intention is to help the IGF
Secretariat to improve accessibility for older persons and persons with disabilities to the next
(3rd) IGF meeting in Hyderabad, India.
2. Accessibility needs for persons with disabilities to consider when organizing IGF
meetings (it includes feedbacks from IGF in Rio).
Information on reasonably priced accessible lodging needs to be provided early on. An
adequate contingency of accessible rooms needs to be blocked for the attendees who need
them in order to avoid that they are given away to non-disabled guests. In addition the
accessible rooms must be conveniently located to the conference site, in nearby hotels.. [In
Rio the accessible rooms in the hotel were very expensive and fully booked.]
The confirmation for the Session allocation must be done as early as possible. It is more
difficult for people with disabilities to make travel arrangements on short notice. [In Rio the
confirmation for the Session allocation came so late that the airline prices were expensive. It
was not feasible therefore to get travel support for many participants, or for their
accompanying assistance or interpreters.]
IGF should consider placing on the registration form a question asking if the attendee requires
a reasonable accommodation to access to the event and have a process in place for responding
to this request. In this way, organizers can anticipate the need for CART transcription (real
time captioning), sign language interpreters, palentype, assistive listening devices, alternate
print formats, etc. Please see ANNEX 1 for an example of the form. (CART transcription (real
time captioning) is most useful because it provides a record of the meeting useful for persons
with hearing related disabilities and for people with visual disabilities can later hear when
transcribed into DAISY format.) [In Rio this was not the case]
Information on the accessibility of the venue is essential, for example, a map or description of
how to move around between the meeting rooms and other facilities, or about the availability
of accessible restrooms. [In Rio, a text description describing the conference venue, paths of
travel and key locations would have been helpful for people with visual disabilities who require
a mobility orientation of the venue.]
It is essential that people with disabilities can move around freely without needing to be
escorted through security checkpoints or needing to wait for an elevator key. This applies to
moving between meeting rooms, exhibition, and dining venues, as well as to the restrooms. If
facilities are all on different levels it makes it extremely difficult to get from one place to the
other using a wheelchair (or as a blind person). [In Rio there were some alternate routes
through the kitchen, storerooms, or other spectacular facilities; besides not being able to take
these routes without escorts, it was not possible for people with disabilities to stroll along with
fellow colleagues or have proper hallway discussions.]
Note: ITU Report available at: http://www.itu.int/oth/T3601000002/en
8
The workshop rooms must have side aisles free and unblocked so persons using wheelchairs
can easily pass. Stages, stands, and podiums need to be accessible for persons using
wheelchairs as well (e.g. using ramps). The inclination of ramps must not exceed 8-10% to
enable access and to avoid hazardous situations. [In Rio most of the workshop rooms were not
welcoming for persons using wheelchairs.]
All luncheon venues must be easily accessible to wheelchairs. [In Rio not all luncheon venues
were accessible. There were two luncheon venues where a ticket could be bought for lunch.
The least expenses lunch was located down two flights of stairs without an elevator.]
Conference material (e.g. printed programmes) in Braille or plain text or diskette for persons
with disabilities should be available. In addition Braille printers should be made available for
blind delegates. It should be noted that frequently documents need to be reformatted
appropriately prior to use of a Braille printer. If documents are available on diskette in
accessible format or posted on an accessible web site, then a person using a screen reader can
access the documents as well as someone using a refreshable Braille display on their laptop.
It is also suggested to put a screen-reader feature on the web site to help persons who do not
have a screen-reader or refreshable Braille display. [In Rio conference materials that printed
the details of who was presenting and their abstract, was not available. Often only Workshop
titles and room numbers were available. On the best of our knowledge conference material in
Braille or plain text or diskette for persons with disabilities were not available. Because of the
lack of conference information posted onsite at the conference venue, a US diplomat requested
IGF organizers during the conference to post on workshop doors the list of workshops and
times to be held in the respective room. IGF responded by posting the lists on each workshop
door - making it more friendly to find our way around. However, if the list had been posted on
the wall next to the door - on the latch door side - it would have been better because when the
doors were open, the list could not be seen since it was on the door.]
All videos projected at the conference must include open captions to allow attendees with
hearing disabilities to participate. [In Rio not all videos used at the conference included open
captions so that attendees with hearing disabilities would know what was being said.]
An assistance desk must be operative and people with disabilities registration must be
processed with priority. The IGF Secretariat and staff supporting the conference organization
(e.g. registration etc.) must be trained to handle difficult situations for persons with
disabilities. [In Rio, when the conference began, registration was moved to require people to
stand in line outside without any cover from the elements. It rained all day and people were
seriously soaked standing outside. This would have been an impossible situation for some
members of the disability community. The tent was inaccessible and wheelchair users were not
able to register. There was no assistance desk and the staff had no idea how to handle the
situation.]
The website of IGF must be accessible, including online forms (e.g. registration form). [In Rio
the website was not accessible and included content in PDF format that was not tagged or
formatted for accessibility. Another serious problem was the use of an inaccessible online form
"Taking Stock and the Way Forward” (link http://www.intgovforum.org/Q2007.php) for all
stakeholders to give feedback and suggestions about the outcome of the RIO IGF event. This
meant that persons with disabilities could not provide feedback, one more reason to submit to
IGF this report.]
The archives of the conference webcasts must be accessible when posted on the web,
including captioning when available. [In Rio IGF lost opportunity to post archives of plenary
webcasts in an accessible manner. They arranged for captioning during the conference and
could have easily synched the captioning files with the video webcast to archive an accessible
media. Next time they should request the captioning to be time stamped so to archive
accessible media files.]
The captioning exercise should be done for the Plenary and for each of the IGF workshops
(main or side). The IGF secretariat should improve the coordination when captioning is
foreseen and an English speaking technician should be made available for the whole workshop
9
duration. [In Rio IGF only captioned the plenary sessions and did not respond to requests for
captioning of each individual workshop. When requested, IGF did not provide the technical
assistance needed to enable captioning to occur on some of the workshops. It happened that
the technician who spoke English left shortly after the workshop began and the remaining
technicians were having problems being able to transmit the audio cast from our particular
room.]
The Sign Language interpretation should be provided, when attendees require it, on the
language of the person. The IGF should understand better the requirements to provide a good
service. (In Rio the requirements for sign-language interpretation were not well understood by
the organizers ("it was not clear that Colombian sign language is different than BrazilianPortuguese" in addition it was not clear that one sign language interpreter for a full day is not
sufficient. The minimum is two interpreters per each “sign language” per day.)
The listening devices should have the ability to plug in neckloops as well as headphones, in
order to allow persons with hearing difficulties to follow the discussions. [In Rio the listening
devices had the headphones hardwired to the receivers. This meant that persons with hearing
problems could not use the listening devices to hear the English or the translation because it
interfered with the use of their hearing aids. The hardwiring of the headphones to the receivers
prevented those persons from plugging in their neckloops into the receivers for use with their
hearing aids. In Rio some people with hearing disabilities had to plug-in their neckloop into
their laptop to access the audio web cast (when available) in order to be able to follow
discussions.]
The DCAD provides in ANNEX 2, for IGF information and use, some online resources for
planning accessible Meetings.
3. Note for the IGF
The DCAD wishes to draw the IGF attention on another form of disability. This would be
persons with environmental and chemical sensitivities. We would recommend that participants
be advised not to wear perfume or scented products which could trigger allergic reactions. It
would also be important that all materials given to participants not contain chemical items that
produced a smell for the same reason. This also applies to new paint and new carpets of the
conference venue.
ANNEX 1
This annex provides an example of what could be added to a conference registration
form:
[…]
If you require disability accommodation, please select the accommodation needed
below:
10

Need Sign Language Interpreter: [Yes __ No __] - [if Yes, which
language?____________]

Need Real Time Captioning: [Yes __ No __]

Need Braille printouts of conference information in advance: [Yes __ No __]

Need documents on CD: [Yes __ No __]

Need wheelchair access: [Yes __ No __] (Not needed on form if you have selected a
venue that is accessible and if the airport shuttles are accessible, however Information
on accessible transportation and services needs to be provided, e.g. accessible taxis,
shuttle services, or public transportation, including railway).

An assistant will be accompanying me: [Yes __ No __]

Other _____________________________ ]
ANNEX 2
For IGF information, the DCAD provides in this annex some online resources for
planning accessible Meetings:
11

ITU tutorial on accessibility, website at http://www.itu.int/ITUT/worksem/accessibility/tutorial/index.html. Online webcast of the tutorial “Making ITU
Accessible: Web Design, Web Conferencing and Real Time Web Captioning” at
http://www.itu.int/ibs/ITU-T/200804tutorial/index.html

Guide to Planning Inclusive Meetings and Conferences, Treasury Board of Canada
Secretariat at http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/tb_852/gpimc-gprci_e.asp.
(French and English)

Plan an Accessible Meeting, posted at Ontario Province, Canada, website at
http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/mcss/english/how/howto_meeting.htm (French and
English)

Access Checklist, Disabled Women's Network in Ontario, it provides an helpful guide,
website at: http://dawn.thot.net/access_checklist_full.html (French/English)

Planning Accessible Conferences and Meetings, State of Michigan, website at:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Planning_Accessible_Conferences_and_Meetings_
59735_7.doc

Meeting information and communications technology access and service needs for
people with disabilities, background paper, online at: http://www.itu.int/ITUD/study_groups/SGP_2006-2010/events/2007/Workshops/documents/05successpolicies.pdf
ANNEX C
Workshop Feeder no. 137 – Mainstreaming the Disability Perspective
for an Inclusive Society - Contribution to the Access and Diversity Main
Session- Thursday, 29 September 2011
(contribution from Ms Cynthia Waddell)
Mainstreaming the Disability Perspective is a fundamental principle of the UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities - since the purpose of the
Convention is to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all
human rights & fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities.
Kenya is one of the105 nations that have signed and ratified the Convention. Of
relevance today are two Convention Articles:
Article 9: Accessibility, explicitly mandates that Nations promote access to the
Internet. This includes availability, affordability and accessible design.
Article 21: Freedom of expression & Opinion & Access to Information – Provides for
Nations, including providers of information through the Internet- to make their
services accessible to persons with disabilities.
Why is Access to the Internet a Fundamental Human Right enshrined in the
Convention?
Our workshop touched on the diversity of the community of persons with disabilities
and the means of equalizing opportunities through information and communications
technology.
By equalizing opportunities for persons with disabilities, we promote respect and
dignity for the individual.
Finally, perhaps we could say that the Internet for persons with disabilities is our
eyes, our ears, our hands, our feet and some might even say our heart – that enables
us to make our own unique contributions to society from the disability perspective.
12
ANNEX D
Workshop Feeder no. 136 “Implementing good practices in
accessibility for an inclusive society” - Contribution to the Access and
Diversity Main Session- Thursday, 29 September 2011
(contribution from Mr Fernando Botelho)
My name is Fernando Botelho. I'm with F123 Consulting. I'm contributing to the main
session based on Workshop 136, which was organized by the Dynamic Coalition on
Accessibility and Disability (DCAD). It was quite clear in our workshop that the major
challenges we have for inclusion of persons with disabilities, which are estimated to be
about 1 billion persons around the world, stem from three needs: affordability,
customization, and localization. Let me just expand very briefly on each one of these.
Affordability, since persons with disabilities are statistically the poorest among the
poor and 80% of them live in developing countries.
Customization, because many disabilities, including persons that have multiple
disabilities, require us to be able to go in and adjust the software, so that it better
meets their needs. One example that was shared with us by Professor Arun Mehta
was the case of persons who are deaf-blind. Finally there is also localization. There
are many languages around the world, and many specific needs that are not
necessarily financially viable if we are following conventional business models for
software development and distribution. For example, there are no speech synthesizers
for many African languages.
Just as importantly, because there are few resources dedicated to persons with
disabilities around the world, relative to the amount of work that needs to be done, it
became clear that we have to somehow facilitate the process of international
cooperation in the development of these technologies, And that the most effective
model in meeting every one of these needs is the free and open source software
model.
Finally, I want to conclude by saying that this is not so much a matter of convenience
for persons with disabilities. This is something that effectively determines the
opportunities we have in education, and ultimately employment and participation in
society; in other words, the right technology strategy can enable our human rights.
Thank you very much.
13
ANNEX E
Workshop Feeder no. 136 “Implementing good practices in
accessibility for an inclusive society” - Contribution to the Access and
Diversity Main Session- Thursday, 29 September 2011
(contribution from Mr Satish Babu)
I am Satish Babu, of the International Center for FOSS, India.
This is a supplement to what Fernando Botelho had presented on the workshop 136. I
had presented a case study of the InSight project in India which is about accessibility.
This was for the province of Kerala, with a population of about 32 million, and the
main highlight of the presentation was the use of Free and Open Source Software, for
multiple reasons. For example, some of the points mentioned here before: cost,
customization, especially the language localization, the licensing and the fact you can
distribute as many copies as you wish. Most of all, for the communities, such as those
for the persons with disabilities, a sense of community can be built. This is actually a
support structure and support system that can enable much more effective use of a
technology, because FOSS is not just about technology, it is about a community and
an ecosystem. We started four years ago. Currently we are rolling out, and the
experience has been uniformly positive. We would like to request the international
community to examine this model closely and explore ways of replication.
14
ANNEX F
Contribution to the Access and Diversity Main Session
Thursday, 29 September 2011
(contribution from Mr Gerry Ellis)
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Gerry Ellis. I am from Dublin in
Ireland. I'm a software engineer in Dublin and a consultant in usability and
accessibility. I'd like to make two things - just to make two comments, really, rather
than a question. One, I'd like to support all the things that were said so far about the
benefits to Society of our inclusion, and we heard about curb cuts and we heard about
captioning and that sort of thing.
But of course our own inclusion, if we have access to the Internet and the information
on it, it's only a tool for access to information, education, whatever. Instead of forced
dependence, we become fully -- fully functioning, active members of society, and
we're paying our
taxes and you're adding to gross national product and becoming economically
functioning people within society. So that benefits
a society as well.
One other point I'd like to make is that we've been -- advocates like myself and the
DCAD who are here, and people who have been speaking this morning, have been
talking about this for 20, 25 years, and have been getting good results sometimes,
and poor results sometimes, but if you talk to the actual people who are the
designers, even if you convince them,
they say, "Well, I went through an education -- technology education system that
didn't know about accessibility."
So about three years ago, a number of us got doing with CEN, which is the official
European standards body and we developed what's called a workshop agreement that
involved people from eight different countries around Europe, coming together on four
occasions, putting
out information to public -- public consultation where we got over 200 responses from
all over Europe, and there is now a document which is an official workshop agreement
from the official European standards body, CEN, which is a curriculum for a course on
universal design.
What I'm asking people here today, and people who are remotely participating, is to
take that curriculum, bring it to your local technology trainers, your local universities,
and promote the inclusion of universal design in all technology courses, and that will
work its way through the system. You'll find that at www.cen.org.
Thank you.
15
ANNEX G
Summary of the accessibility problems at the United Nations Office at
Nairobi (UNON) observed by the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility
and Disability during the IGF conference
Nairobi 27 – 30 September 2011.
(contribution from Ms Cynthia Waddell)
During the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 27-30 September 2011, members of the
Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) observed a number of
accessibility problems at the United Nations Office at Nairobi. Although this document
is not a full assessment of the accessibility issues, it attempts to highlight some of the
major problems at the venue.
This document is submitted for your attention regarding some of the serious and
hazardous accessibility problems experienced by DCAD members during the event.
Perhaps the most serious problem was the venue assignment of IGF meetings and
workshops on the roof. The roof was not accessible to DCAD experts attending the
meeting. There was no elevator, the switchback ramps were too steep, the ramp
drainage grates had gaping holes, and the wooden boards for path of travel, ramps
and stairs created dangerous conditions. We have individuals with mobility disabilities
who use wheelchairs, walkers and leg braces, as well as experts with visual disabilities
who use the white cane. There was also a captioner with low vision who operated out
of a room on the roof who also had difficulty.
Because of the inaccessibility of the roof, the DCAD requested that our DCAD 4th
Annual IGF Session be re-located to an accessible venue and this action was greatly
appreciated. In addition, our request for the ITU-EBU workshop on accessible
broadcasting was also moved off the roof and to an accessible venue at the last
minute. Because of this short notice, the captioner had to set up again at the new
venue- causing captioning delays at no fault to the captioner. We also requested that
signs be posted at the location to indicate the new meeting location.
However, even if our own workshops were moved to an accessible location, it was still
the case that our members could not attend other workshops that were scheduled on
the roof and this was an unfair and discriminatory practice even if it was not
intentional.
Other issues included the location of the complimentary lunch venue in tents on a hilly
and grassy area. Two members – one using a wheelchair and another person using a
walker- could not traverse this grade and surface area. It would have been more
helpful to designate a location that was accessible so that everyone could eat together
rather than being denied access to lunch because of a disability.
Another problematic accessibility issue was the location of the Gala Dinner. Some
pictures below show the steps and the crowding at the venue that did not provide for
an accessible path of travel. Even the registration location for badges was
problematic since there was no room in the queue for users of wheelchairs and
walkers. The UN security staff should have taken these delegates out of line and
processed them separately once they saw the problem.
In addition, there was no provision for shuttle transportation for the delegates who
used wheelchairs, leg braces and walkers to and from the hotel and venue. This
problem occurred even though the DCAD had made repeated requests for accessibility
information about the IGF hotel and shuttle transport. The delegate using a
wheelchair had to hire the hotel car for transport to and from the venue. And another
delegate, who was local from Kenya and used a walker, drove up in her car and
requested a gate pass in order to drive her car from the gate to the venue. This
16
request was reasonable, given the terribly long distance she would need to traverse
over unstable paths with her walker to the meeting venue. For one month prior to
IGF, she had made multiple requests to UNON for a gate pass. Instead, upon arrival,
UNON sent her an ambulance for transport from the gate to the venue. She turned
down the ambulance saying that she was not an invalid.
Finally, it should be reported that there were at least two unfortunate incidents. On
the street, in front of the security building, one DCAD member fell because of the curb
ramp location was in front of one line but not another. His injury was treated by the
first aid staff. The second incident concerned the DCAD delegate with a leg brace.
Because of the inaccessibility of the venue, the stress on his leg brace caused it to
break. He was able to get it repaired but this should never have happened.
The following pictures illustrate some of the accessibility barriers encountered at the
UNON venue that are discussed in this document.
Photo 1- Ramp to Roof with Drain Grates
Ramps that are too steep and do not have a level resting place are not accessible.
Photo shows such a ramp leading to the roof that is not accessible. The ramp is also
fitted with drain grates that can cause users of wheelchairs and other aids to get stuck
between the grates.
17
Photo 2- Close-up of Drain Grates
Photo 3- Cement hump/ramp on path
After taking the ramp up to the roof, the path of travel is blocked by this hump.
18
Photo 4- Ramp to walkway on roof
Ramp shown in Photo 4 is too steep and pedestrians need to mind all gaps. This is
dangerous for people who are blind as well as people using walkers, braces and
wheelchairs. The wood was also plywood that would bend and actually caused a
person with low vision to lose their balance while trying to grab the handrail.
Photo 5-Protruding Objects: Window Frame & Door
Open windows with sharp metal edges are protruding objects into path of travel. A
person with a visual disability could be injured because their white cane cannot detect
these types of protruding objects. It also is dangerous for anyone not paying
attention to the open window. Also, doors open into the path of travel and leave no
room for a person using a wheelchair, walker or crutches.
19
Photo 6-Wooden Pathway on Roof
This raised platform on the roof is also difficult for persons with visual disabilities to
navigate. Although the potted plants provide some form of edge detection, the plants
are not located along the entire length of the platform pathway.
Photo 7- Pathway to another set of rooms
A person with visual disability will have difficulty navigating this ramp and is in danger
of stepping off and falling on the stairs. Similarly, a person using a walker or a
wheelchair will have difficulty using this ramp.
20
Photo 8-Pathway on Roof
Same issues as indicated before regarding edge detection, ramp and stair problems.
Photo 9- Close-up of Pathway on Roof
21
Photo 10- Stair transition with Gaps-
Photos 10 and 11 are examples of gaps where a person traveling up from the concrete
stairs on the right to the wooden path of travel could step or fall into these gaps or
holes.
Photo 11-Stairs down from roof and gap on right.
22
Fire Exit Sign
Sign
Photo 12-Fire Exit Path with Obstructions on ground
This picture shows the fire exit path of travel which is down stairs that have broken
boards and are uneven. Photos 12 through 19 show the fire exit dangerous
conditions. Once the pedestrian steps down the wooden stairs they must go around
the three obstructions on the roof.
Photo 13- Fire Exit Sign Close-up
23
Photo 14- Another View of Fire Exit Steps
Photo 15-Obstructions in Fire Exit Path on Roof
24
Photo 16-Unstable/Uneven Fire Exit Steps
Photo 17-Fire Exit Steps Leading Off Roof Indicated by Yellow Stripes
There is no signage to indicate where to exit off the roof. It appears that the yellow
stripes are the indicators.
25
Figure 18- Fire Exit off Roof?
Photo 19-Stairs Down From Roof
26
Photo 20- Path of Travel to Venue
Photo 21- Example of Tripping Hazards on Path to Venue
27
Photo 22-Location of Lunch Venue
Complimentary lunch venue for delegates was situated on a hilly, grassy location. Delegates using
walkers and wheelchairs were unable to use this venue and their was no alternative offered to
them for lunch.
Photo 23- Path to Gala Dinner with Steps
28
Photo 24-More Steps at Gala Dinner
Photo 25-Crowded Gala Dinner Venue
29
ANNEX H
IGF Accessibility & Host Country Agreements
A communication to IGF from the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility
and Disability, Nairobi 27 – 30 September 2011.
(communication addressed by Ms Cynthia Waddell)
This year members of the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD)
observed a number of challenges involving accessibility at IGF. Perhaps in the future,
it would be helpful to include language in the host country agreements that addresses
accessibility requirements for the IGF venue. Please consider allowing the IGF
Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) to review the draft host
country agreements and offer recommended text to address accessibility. If you
believe this would be helpful, I would be glad to lead this effort as a member of the
Dynamic Coalition. For example, the annex to the agreement could contain a
checklist of specific accessibility requirements so that the host country would
understand what was meant by accessibility.
In addition, I recommend that after an IGF host country agreement is in place, a preinspection be conducted regarding the accessibility issues. There are ways to address
accessibility that do not necessarily require extensive renovations and those steps can
be identified in a pre-inspection should there be ongoing concerns by the host
country. However, this pre-inspection needs to be conducted by an accessibility
expert knowledgeable about both the built environment as well as programmatic
access such as communications, registration, etc. I believe that taking this step
would make the work of the IGF Secretariat go much more smoothly if the
accessibility understandings are in place.
As put forward by Shadi Abou-Zahra of the DCAD in the Access and Diversity Main
Session (added: 29 September 2011), the DCAD has and continues to offer itself as a
resource body to help ensure accessibility of the IGF venue and the coverage of
substantive topics relating to barriers in Internet policies, technology and
interoperability impacting inclusion.
However, the DCAD strongly urges that there be a person responsible for the
accessibility of the IGF at each host country; that the person consult disability
organizations in the host country throughout the IGF planning and preparation; and
that the IGF Secretariat maintain an accessibility checklist that is refined and passed
on from one IGF to the next. The DCAD had submitted such a checklist to the IGF
Secretariat after the Rio IGF meeting. (Added: see Annex B in this report)
Thank you for considering this proposal for addressing accessibility in the next and
future IGFs.
30