DREAM ITN
Final Deliverable
Robert Huffaker
Fundosa Technosite now "Ilunion Consultoría S.A
Supervisor: Luis Miguel Bascones Serrano
Cluster 2, ESR 10
DREAM work package
Building the Business Case for eAccessibility and assessing its
socioeconomic impact
April, 2015
1 1.
Topics and Research Questions. Given the current global economic crisis,
public and private sector businesses and organizations need to examine every possible
opportunity to ensure maximum profitability. Those that exclude persons with disabilities
from their target markets are not only in violation of Article 9 of the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) but are also leaving
out a crucial element of Europe’s population. According to the World Health
Organization’s World Health Survey and Global Burden of Disease, at least 15.6% of
people age 15 and over around the world experience a disability1. This study explores the
business case, or the economic justification, of eAcessibility, the inclusive practice of
making information and communication technology (ICT) goods and services usable by
everyone.
Say “I have been”….ESR10 2 has been working on building the business case of
eAccessibility. Reflecting off Article 9 of the UNCRPD, with the work package titled
“Building the Business Case for eAccessibility and assessing its socioeconomic impact”.
This study asks, “What do businesses have to gain by enforcing eAccessibility into their
marketing strategies?”, and “What are they losing by not applying these strategies?” This
study expands EU disability law and policy reform options via UN CRPD and explores
market potential for the European ICT sector. Using secondary quantitative and
qualitative data sources and through field research with international experts and ICT
companies, data collection consists of quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews to
gather information on the level of development of accessible technologies in Europe.
Economic models such a Business Case Tool are used to demonstrate different costs and
benefits derived from accessible ICT, providing best practices and recommendations for
future use.
ESR10 has been based at Technosite3, which is a company based in Madrid, Spain.
Technosite, part of the Foundation of the Spanish National Organization for the Blind, is
1 World HealthOrganization. http://www.unicef.org/protection/World_report_on_disability_eng.pdf 2 Robert Huffaker worked at Technosite in Madrid, Spain during his time as an Early Stage Researcher and is a PhD student at the Centre for Disability Law and Policy at the National University of Ireland, Galway. 3 Technosite has been renamed Ilunion in October 2014 however will remain as Technosite throughout this report. 2 in the sector of Information Technology and Communication (ICT) serving both the
Spanish and European market and has established itself as a benchmark of quality in the
field of accessible ICTs. It is a company with a clear social mission, whose
multidisciplinary team consists of a large number of workers with disabilities, and where
research and development represents a significant and growing percentage of overall
activity.
The objectives laid out for the ESR to complete, as shown in the Annex Description of
Work include:
1.
To identify the Business Case of eAccessibility (both at Organizational
and societal levels) i.e. the cost benefits and commercial advantages of producing
eAccessible goods and services.
2.
To monitor the evolution of the status the eAccessibility in Europe in the
wake of the UN CRPD.
According to the Description of Work, the tasks include:
1.
Investigate how the business case of eAccessibility is currently being
accepted and fostered (or not) by major corporate enterprises and governments
2.
Survey existing good practice models in terms of companies maximising
the commercial opportunities ofeAccessibility.
3.
To consider cost-benefit analysis of eAccessibility, savings or
expenditures of a sample of firms investing (or not) in eAccessible goods and
services.
4.
Review the literature on the extent to which comparative US laws have
opened up market opportunities for US ICT companies.
5.
Survey the socioeconomic benefits and costs of the implementation of
eAccessibility criteria in the development of ICT products and services.
The deliverables include:
3 1.
An internal research report for at least one of the secondment APs (end of
year two).
2.
Input to strategic policy thinking of one of the secondment APs by
formally making a presentation to their Board of Management and/or members
(end of year two).
ESR10’s work falls under Cluster 2, “Harnessing Market Forces: Disabled People as
Market Participants and Expanding Accessible ICT Markets” and under section 2.4
“Towards improving the Business Case & Socio-economic Impact of eAccessibility”.
This cluster hopes to show on an international level the ways that eAccessibility not only
is cost effective for businesses and there is a business case to it, this cluster also aims to
show the importance of accessibility enforcement to include people with disabilities in
the market and shed light as to how the fragmented market is indeed discriminating
against people with disabilities, violating law, and proving to be bad business strategy.
The research is tied directly with Article 9 of the UNCRPD. The UNCRPD provides a
comprehensive, overarching approach to the implementation of web accessibility to
ensure access to information for people with disabilities. eAccessibility can be interpreted
from Articles 12(5), 13(1), 21(a), 24(2)(a), 25(d) and 25(e) in broad senses, however it is
most relevantly influenced by Article 9. Under Article 9, the UNCRPD deals with the
right of access to education, employment, information, transportation, social and cultural
life, and entertainment. Due to its intersectional scope, ranging into education,
employment, etc., information and communication technologies (ICTs) are affected in
almost all of these aspects, proving to be a wide-reaching goal on behalf of the UN.
Article 9 can be argued that it emphasizes as much built environment accessibility as it
does eAccessibility, or the (define eAccessibility) In order to ensure non-discrimination
and accessibility, public bodies at different levels are implementing new policies in line
with the UNCRPD. Nowadays, in the era of Information Society, the availability of
goods and services is shifting from the physical environment towards virtual access
through technologies. In light of this trend in the market, technology was the focus for the
ESR’s studies.
4 Article 9(2)(a) mentions that States Parties should develop and implement minimum
standards and guidelines for accessibility of facilities and services open or provided to the
public.
Under Article 9, the UNCRPD deals with the right of access to education, employment,
information, transportation, social and cultural life, and entertainment. Due to its
intersectional scope, ranging into education, employment, etc., ICTs are affected in
almost all of these aspects, proving to be a wide-reaching goal on behalf of the UN.
Member States that currently do not have any obligations in place in relation to the
accessibility of both telecommunications goods/devices and services should introduce
similar tactics in order to fulfil their commitment under the UNCRPD to ensure, as says
in Art 9(1), “to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to …
information and communications.”
Furthermore, Article 9 (2)(b) also contains the general disposition on ICT accessibility
and articulates the obligation for State Parties to ensure that persons with disabilities have
access to information and ICT goods and services. Hence, Art 9 requires all content,
communication, hardware, software and interfaces to be accessible. It further calls upon
States Parties to encourage the private sector to deliver accessible products and services.
Article 9(2)(c) states that States Parties should provide training for stakeholders on
accessibility issues facing persons with disabilities. There must be more awareness and
training in curricula in web training fields. The best way to have these introduced is
through education schemes such as web IT and architecture courses in university and
technical schools.
Web accessibility is even singled out in Article 9(2)(g) in promoting “for people with
disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including
the Internet.” In Section 2h, the importance of implementing accessibility at the early
stages of design, development, production, and distribution is stressed, in order to ensure
5 that the technologies and systems are made accessible at a minimum cost. This is the case
with most technologies, but certainly relevant when creating accessible websites.
These methods also help strengthen the adherence to Article 9(2)(h). Art9(2)(h) enforces
the belief that it is important to make sure that products and services are accessible from
the beginning of the production processes to ensure that technologies are accessible at a
minimum cost.
In the 2014 European Commission “Report on the implementation of the UN Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) by the European Union” it was
highlighted that “public websites and online services in the EU that are important to take
a full part in public life should be brought into line with international web accessibility
standards”4. However, the European Disability Forum made a counter statement that the
working document did not take into consideration the potential of involving the Council,
the European Parliament, civil society, and disabled people’s organizations to get a
further scope of the reach of how the UNCRPD has been implemented in Europe5.
2.
My Research Journey.
The first year of the Marie Curie Fellowship at Technosite involved conducting research
and writing for projects related to the measurement of eAccessibility and Design for All,
such as “Monitoring eAccessibility in Europe (066)”, “Study on the Socio-economic
Impact of New Measures to Improve Accessibility of Goods and Services for People with
Disabilities (077)”, Apsis4All, Atis4All, ICARUS, CLOUD4all, amongst others.
This first year proved to be an introduction to accessibility legislation research in a
“learning by doing” approach. Years 2 and 3 were more concentrated on producing
deliverables for DREAM and developing the PhD thesis, tasks which are closely linked.
Performed training sessions are explained below.
4 European Commission (2014) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/swd_2014_182_en.pdf 5 European Disability Forum (2014) http://www.edf-­‐
feph.org/Page_Generale.asp?DocID=13855&thebloc=33688 6 The following is a shortened list of training attended throughout the duration as an Early
Stage Researcher and pertinent aspects of importance of each training session.
1. DREAM Field Trip to Brussels: Introduction to Policy Environment in the EU
Institutions (23-25 November 2011) European Commission – Brussels, Belgium
The purpose of this event was to introduce all 14 ESRs to the policy environment in
the European Institutions and to key policy makers on EU Disability law and policy.
The field trip was also intended as an event bringing together the researchers who are
spread among several academic institutions in Europe to build up a community of
scholarship with an active dynamic of mutual support and collaboration. The second
day focused on team building. ESR10 gave a presentation on the chosen PhD topic
within the DREAM network.
2. First Network-Wide Event: Introduction to Disability Research & Transversal
Themes (13-17 January 2012) University of Leeds – Leeds, United Kingdom.
The first part of this training event provided highlights on the nature and importance
of research and professional training (project management, presentation skills, public
speaking, networking, research grant writing, writing research for publication, and
how to present research findings to maximize impact). Training in several crosscutting themes at the outset of the life of the network on ‘models of disability,’
(Professor
Mark
Priestley),
gender
and
disability
including
intersectional
discrimination and violence (Prof. Degener and Dr. Michele Funk), and general
principles and obligations under the UN CRPD (Dr. Rosemary Kayess). At this event
ESR10 gave 2 presentations on a legislation review and how to make more accessible
blog posts on the DREAM website.
3. Second Network-Wide Event: Cost-Benefit Analysis on Disability & Approaches,
practices and impact of European Union policy reform, in areas such as
eAccessibility (13-15 June 2012) Technosite – Madrid, Spain
7 This event introduced introductory key skills on cost-benefit analysis as applied to
disability (supported by SU-BBI) so that all ESRs incorporate costings in their
recommendations where relevant. eAccessibility are, amongst others, used as an
example of EU policy reform. Seeing that this event was hosted by host organization
Technosite, ESR10 had the opportunity to meet Ana Peláez, the director of
international relations at ONCE, Prof. Cristiano Codagnone, Disability Economics
expert, and Josep Martí Salat, ATM accessibility expert from Spanish bank La Caixa.
4. NUIG CDLP Summer School: “The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities – How to Use it”. (18-23 June, 2012) NUIG – Galway, Ireland
This summer school session showed the insights into and skills necessary to translate
the generalities of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities into
tangible reform for persons with disabilities. This event was a semi-official DREAM
event with many ESRs attending.
ESR10 had the opportunity to meet many
international disability policy experts, share ideas with said experts and gain new
insights in a first person experience.
5. Social Cost Benefit Analysis Summer School Course (16-27 July 2012) Estonian
Business School – Tallinn, Estonia
ESR10 attended a two week course on social cost and benefit analysis at the
University of Tallinn in Estonia. The course gave an overview of the conceptual
foundations of social cost-benefit analysis, a familiarization with the underlying
principles of valuation of social costs and benefits in a closed economy as well as in
an open economy, and showed how to use analytical skills, which are based on
socially oriented and economic thinking. The concepts learned here gave a
profounder academic background to ESR10 for PhD writing.
6. 7th European e-Accessibility Forum: Developing e-Accessibility as a Professional
Skill6 (18 March 2013) Paris, France
6 BrailleNet (2013) http://www.braillenet.org/documents/Flyer-­‐EAF2013-­‐EN.pdf 8 The purpose of this event was to show how to develop a career in e-Accessibility,
which was very interesting, however due to the broad and international scope of the
conference the actual value attained from attending was minimal. The researcher had
the opportunity to network with other professionals in the eAccessibility field and
gain insights first hand.
7. Nordic Network of Disability Research Conference (29-31 May 2013) Turku,
Finland
At the Nordic Network of Disability Research Conference the researcher presented an
abstract titled “Legal framework on eAccessibility: A legislation review” and also
had the opportunity to network with disability academics such as Prof. Tom
Shakespeare and Sonali Shah.
8. NUIG CDLP Summer School: “The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities – How to Use it”. (18-23 June, 2013) National University of Ireland,
Galway – Galway, Ireland
Over five and a half days the researcher attended lectures related to the UNCRPD and
reforms to the UNCRPD. The theme was “Choice and Voice” intending to connect
legal capacity reform and right to community living reform.
9. DREAM Event in Oslo (24-26 September 2013) Oslo, Norway
At the Oslo event ESR10 presented a paper summing up the secondment work
performed at Kanchi in Dublin, entitled “Determining Costs and Benefits of Website
Accessibility in Ireland: Results from an Empirical Approach”. There was also an
opportunity for the ESR to invite members of the DREAM network to register to use
the ATIS4all resource portal, a project lead by Technosite.
10. Social Return on Investment Training (23-24 January 2014) Amsterdam, the
Netherlands
9 The ESR learned how to better quantify social related issues when it comes to
calculating return on investment in projects and realized the importance of social
aspects in economics.
Topics covered included mapping, evidencing and valuing outcomes; establishing
value; calculations; and reporting.
11. DREAM 5th Event in Nottwil on “Research and Evidence-based Policy”(12-14
February 2014)
The ESR attended a workshop specifically catered to the European Commission grant
writing process overviewing the ins and outs of Horizon 2020; how to prepare a
successful proposal (often takes 5 months); and the roles of the key project actors
such as the coordinator, the partners, and the EC officer.
12. UNCRPD EU Law Convention (2-3 April) University of Maastricht, the
Netherlands
The ESR gained insights to how policy throughout the EU is implemented and further
updates on the EU Accessibility Act, most relevant to the ESR’sresearch.
Furthermore ESR10 saw the parallels between existing EU legislation and the
UNCRPD and how the elements are all tied together using advanced provisions.
13. Web4All conference, side event of the International World Wide Web Conference
(7-9 April 2014) Seoul, Korea
Here the ESR presented the paper “The United States' legislative impact on
eAccessibility: What the European Union can learn” which was later published in the
Association for Computing Machinery Journal7. In Korea there was the opportunity to
network with high level representatives from the Paciello Group, Ability Net and the
W3C. There were great presentations especially on global themes of accessibility and
international accessibility legislation.
7 Huffaker (2014) http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2596718 10 Beyond the events and workshops attended during the allotted time as an Early Stage
Researcher, ESR10 also received both internal and external training provided by
DREAM funding. The following lists summarize the training experience.
Throughout 2012 I:
•
Participated in the research activities within Technosite’s International
Department
•
Searched and analyzed macroeconomic, microeconomic and statistical
documents concerning accessibility and ICT.
•
Researched the concept of disability, the UN CRPD and ICT. Conducted
quantification activity on the number of people with disabilities (and their
poverty rate and purchasing power) in the EU27 using Eurostat and National
Statistical offices.
•
Reviewed Spanish and EU legislation on the accessibility of ICT. Wrote
literature review on accessibility, disability and ICT.
•
Examination of responses to public consultation the EC created and
conducted interviews to further understand the barriers for industries in the
provision of accessible goods and services within the EU Internal Market.
•
In November 2012 the ESR gave a lecture to the Law Master degree
(LLM) students at NUIG, presenting their research ambitions within the
DREAM network.
Throughout 2013:
•
Revising paper “Legal framework on eAccessibility: A Legislation
Review” that was presented at the DREAM Maastricht event, and preparing
the paper for presenting at the NNDR conference in Turku, Finland.
•
Prepared for secondment at the organization Kanchi.
•
Participated in the research activities within the international department,
and now in the Social Studies department within Technosite.
•
Starting a legislation review of EU and US legislation regarding
eAccessibility.
11 •
ES10 was chosen as the Marie Curie Fellow of the Week (of 18 November
2013) and a biography piece was published on the social media sites of the
Marie Curie Network. In November and December of 2013 ESR10 conducted
a series of interviews with their experience at Technosite and in the Marie
Curie Training Network. These interviews were broadcasted in Spanish
throughout Spanish media, such as through online publications such as FSC
Inserta, Solidaridad Digital, Fundación ONCE, and Sorteos ONCE.
Throughout 2014:
•
Finalization of the empirical research deliverable performed at Kanchi,
and presented the findings to DREAM Network event in Oslo. The Kanchi
deliverable was submitted to J-ACCES journal for publishing and was
published at the end of May 20148. The following paper produced, The
United States’ Legislative Impact on eAccessibility: What the European
Union Can Learn, was submitted to the Web4All Conference on 18 January
2014. The paper was presented at the conference on 09 April and the paper is
now published in the Journal of Association of Computing Machinery.
•
Submitting an extended abstract to the ICCHP conference in Paris, and
also to a call for speakers relating to the Marie Curie Actions network to give
a TED-talk like speech in New York in March 2014.
•
Presenting an abstract titled “Disability and Purchasing Power: A Global
Perspective” to the Third Annual Conference of ALTER (European Society
for Disability Research) on 03 July 2014.
In order to show a business case, the methodology implemented throughout the journey
as an ESR has been a mix of both quantitative and qualitative analysis in order to give a
complete picture of the benefits of accessibility. In all areas of policy, the function of the
cost benefit analysis is to assist organisations in the future to identify the best way to
deliver their strategic objectives. This can be crucial in including people with disabilities
in the market and also organisations attaining a larger market reach (a win-win situation
8 Huffaker (2014) http://www.jacces.org/jacces/ojs/index.php/jacces/article/view/98/71 12 by all means). Cost–benefit analysis can help to achieve the strategic aims of a plan by
weighing up the economic, social and environmental impacts of different technological
implementation options and identifying the best approach for the long run.
One major setback ESR10 experienced was in the enrolment of a PhD programme.
However, after not being given proper access to enrolment at University Carlos III
Madrid, the supervisory committee decided that ESR10 should apply to the Economics
programme at Maastricht University and perform classes by distance. In March of 2012
the ESR recreated the abstract and sent it to Maastricht University and unfortunately
received no response. In October 2012, over a year later than originally planned, the ESR
was finally admitted into NUI Galway in the Disability Law and Policy PhD programme.
It was originally planned that the ESR perform the secondment at the DIGITALEUROPE
institution in Brussels, however the supervisory committee later decided that it was more
appropriate for the ESR to conduct the secondment in the university where they would be
accepted for PhD studies. Then Dr. Gerard Quinn from NUI Galway thought it would be
more appropriate to connect the ESR with a not-for-profit disability organisation in
Dublin called Kanchi that works with decision makers and leaders to promote the
disability business case via innovative business initiatives.
During the ESR’s secondment at Kanchi ESR10 learned first-hand how to overcome
barriers to information needed to obtain for the study. The ESR encountered many people
during interviews who said they knew about accessibility however were unable to answer
basic elements to the enquiries. The ESR also experienced people wanting to help, which
is heart-warming, but not being able to due to internal politics, and requesting
confidentiality clauses, etc.
The ESR also experienced people refusing to share
information especially in the realm of automatic teller machines.
The ESR’s perspective from the beginning was optimistic regarding being able to find
case studies and research as to the added costs of accessibility and how these costs can be
minimized and justified in the long term for a company’s bottom line. In the end, the
ESR’s perspective is that accessibility is great in the human rights model and great for
13 corporate social responsibility; however as a clear-cut cost saving argument, the ESR has
still not found conclusive enough evidence to argue in such as way. More inclusive
measurements and techniques for data gathering must be deployed in future
There are alternative solutions to the impediments explained above, and change can be
implemented on many levels. From a bottom up perspective, the lived experience of a
person with a disability is often not seen by people without disabilities. If education
centres that involve ICT training such as website creation, app creation, etc. in technical
institutes or in universities mention accessibility and introduce what it is and how
important it is to people with and without disabilities, then this would be fresh in the
minds of the new generation of the creators of ICT goods and services.
From a top down perspective, the main agents for change include harsh punishments laid
out in legislation that would include people with disabilities having access to websites
and other ICT goods and services. Also, governments continue to support the
harmonization of standardizations and keep accessibility included from the very
beginning of the application and development process, as is being upheld through the
European Union.
3.
My Formation as a Policy Entrepreneur.
Legislation providing awareness to the needs of people with disabilities can be traced
back in the United States to the 1920 Rehabilitation Program giving people with
disabilities, especially World War 1 veterans, access to funds to supplement living after
experiencing a debilitating illness or disability after serving in the war. In 1966 Jacobus
tenBroeck argued for the role of integration of people with disabilities in wider society in
a social and rights-based model which later gave the inspiration of further legislation in
the United States such as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. Peter Blanck openly suggests that there is not one single
element that explains the evolution of disability rights policy and rather it can be
interpreted as a combination of historical, economic, political, medical, and social factors
14 at the same time9. Although the origins of disability policy seems to stem from a medical
perspective, in today’s terms we have steered away from the medical, reactionary model
and shifted towards a more inclusive and social model of defining disability.
The first thing ESR10 learned was that the law is more of a process than it is justice. The
most relevant piece of legislation in the studies conducted is the upcoming European
Accessibility Act, pipelined since the end of 2012 and as of the writing of this report in
April 2015 has not been implemented. The first lesson on policy here is that legislation
takes years to come to fruition.
We imagine that we have the laws to protect society and create and equal platform for all
citizens. Also the process of change is not simply creating and enforcing legislation.
Legislation is not the be all and end all. It’s not the law’s place to determine the level of
freedoms experienced by citizens, communities taking action and civil society
organizations determine where the lines are drawn and influence the law in turn.
Researchers have the key opportunity to quantify and implement change through their
investigation. The role of research is very important when it comes to implementing
change because investigation is necessary in order to justify the direction of change and
how much change is to be implemented. Research in this case can take many roles and
one main aspect can be conducting interviews, listening to the people affected and
providing them a platform for their voices and experiences to be heard like never before.
Researchers in policy need skills such as:
•
Good analytical skills and the ability to understand complex reports,
legislation and policy documents
•
Being able to communicate to a wide audience on all things related to
policy
9 Blanck, Peter. 2008. “The Right to Live in the World”: Disability Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. Texas Journal of Civil Liberties and Civil Rights. Vol. 13 No. 2 Spring 2008 pp 367-­‐401. 15 •
Ability to travel across Europe and gain a further understanding about
people’s lives by experiencing it first-hand.
•
Understanding international and national politics and the interlinking
between the two
•
Experience in editing and writing policy papers
The training activities undertaken in the DREAM programme have been exemplified
earlier and have prepared the ESR to exit the DREAM programme as a well-trained
policy professional.
It was a great experience to be able to conduct field research interviewing companies to
see what costs and benefits they experienced making their websites accessible. The
funding from the DREAM programme made it possible to make the most of these
situations and able to cope with the pitfalls and reek the benefits of running a study. The
internship placement at Kanchi was an opportunity to also see first-hand how civil
society organizations function including their struggles and accomplishments.
4.
Tentative Outcome & Recommendations.
The three main recommendations for ensuring accessibility adherence at a European level
include implementing carefully researched legislation, involving the importance of public
procurement and developing more research into the state of eAccessibility throughout
Europe.
Once the standards that are being implemented throughout are updated, there also needs
to be an effective manner to monitor changes in areas such as accessibility standards and
technological advancements. Yearly reporting such as through the MeAC study is a good
way to see how States are adhering to accessibility policies and standards, and to see the
resulting gap of use of ICT goods and services by people with disabilities. Studies like
MeAC are key to see how the status quo of ICT accessibility policy and more investment
in such studies needs to be upheld.
16 Accountability of infringement of the law is held not held to a high standard as is in other
countries such as the United States for many reasons including structural and cultural.
Not only at a civil level but also at a State level do corporations need to be held
accountable for their non-compliance to maintaining accessibility for people with
disabilities’ ICT goods and services in Europe. Part of this recommendation is being
implemented already. Soon the European Commission is organizing a high level meeting
with CEOs of European companies to see how the future European Accessibility Act
would affect businesses and how businesses would like to comply with the proposed Act.
With all of the considerations taken cautiously, in turn there would be profits for people
with disabilities, businesses, and governments.
The European Accessibility Requirements for Public Procurement of Products and
Services in the ICT Domain (Mandate 376) reduces barriers experienced by people with
disabilities when using ICT goods and services by requiring the three European standards
organisations CEN, CENELEC and ETSI to harmonise and facilitate the public
procurement of accessible information and communication technologies (ICT) products
and services within Europe 10 . Although not legally binding and shown as a “soft
measure” this mandate is led by major ICT leaders willing to show their support in
reducing barriers in the market that people with disabilities fall into.
Although the European Accessibility Act is currently still in development, reports from
the European Commission state that the directive proposes to give public websites the
flexibility of implementing accessibility into their websites from 2-3 years from when the
directive is released11.
10 CEN, CENELEC, ETSI (2014) http://www.mandate376.eu/ 11 European Parliament (2014) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/summary.do?id=1339850&t=e&l=en 17