Disasters and conflict

Disaster risk reduction

People with disabilities are often excluded from disaster management and risk reduction processes (UNISDR, 2014; Smith et al., 2012, p. 5). A survey of people with disabilities by the UN Office of Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) found that 85.57 per cent of respondents from 137 countries had not participated in community disaster management and risk reduction processes currently in place in their communities.  However, only 20.6 per cent of respondents believe they can evacuate immediately without difficulty in the event of a sudden disaster event (UNISDR, 2014, p. 2). Most rely on the support of family (UNISDR, 2014). In addition, the Zero Project found that many countries surveyed did not have early warning systems accessible to all people with disabilities (Fembek et al., 2013, p. 51; Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 99; Smith et al., 2012, p. 6).

However, the new Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (para 11 & target 11b) now includes five references to persons with disabilities and an additional two references to universal design (Stough & Kang, 2015).

Risk and mortality

Wide neglect of the needs of people with disabilities in official planning processes has increased death rates of people with disabilities and reduced their inclusion in disaster response (UNISDR, 2014, pp. 4, 12; Smith et al., 2012, p. 4). People in wheelchairs or with other mobility impairments have died as a result of inaccessible evacuation procedures in events such as tsunamis and floods (Osamu, 2014, p. 144). People with sensory disabilities have been unable to escape on time as warnings were not provided in accessible formats (Osamu, 2014, p. 144).

Conflict and emergencies

Disasters and conflicts exacerbate existing disabilities and create new ones (Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 226). It is generally agreed they have a disproportionate impact on people with disabilities, although there is little available evidence of the pathways leading to this increased vulnerability (Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 228; Smith et al., 2012, p. 2). People with disabilities are particularly at risk of marginalisation and discrimination as a result of exclusionary policies and practices by communities and humanitarian agencies (Kett & Twigg, 2007, pp. 87, 91).

Natural disasters

According to emergency management statistics, people with disabilities die in far higher percentages of the population than other people in natural disasters (Mitchell and Karr, 2014, p. 1). In the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami, for instance, people with disabilities were twice as likely to die as other people in the population (Osamu, 2014, p. 143).

Conflict

People with disabilities have also been reported to be directly targeted during conflict (Rohwerder, 2013, pp. 773-774). In Iraq, there were reports of people with Down’s syndrome being used as suicide bombers (Rohwerder, 2013, p. 774). In conflict, people with disabilities are also at increased risk of death and injury as a result of mobility challenges and communication problems, which may make it harder to flee violence (Rohwerder, 2013, p. 774). The disruption and destruction of services social safety nets caused by conflict can reduce the quality of life of people with disabilities (Rohwerder, 2013, pp. 774-775; Kett, 2010, p. 345). It can be assumed that people with disabilities will experience poverty in conflict contexts, as conflict exacerbates prior conditions of poverty, discrimination and social exclusion, although more research is needed on the casual links between disability and poverty in countries affected by conflict (Kett, 2010, pp. 342, 355, 364).

Flight and refugees

Refugees with disabilities are ‘among the most isolated, socially excluded and marginalized of all displaced populations’ (WRC, 2008, p. 1). People with disabilities may be abandoned by their families as they flee conflict or disaster (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 97). When they are taken along, people with disabilities have sometimes been denied access to shelters, or have felt they should leave because of discrimination they faced in the shelter (UNISDR, 2014, p. 4; Kett & Twigg, 2007, pp. 92-93, 101).

People with disabilities can become more dependent and isolated as a result of the loss of their assistive and mobility devices, services, and support structures (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 100; Kett, 2010, p. 346; WRC, 2008, p. 2). Attitudinal, physical and social barriers means they are excluded from or unable to access mainstream assistance programmes (WRC, 2008, p. 2). Services provided in camps such as toilets and schools may not be built to be accessible (Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 1; WRC, 2008, p. 3; Smith et al., 2012, p. 6). Food distribution procedures are often inaccessible, especially for those with physical or visual impairments, or put people with disabilities at risk (Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 1; WRC, 2008, p. 3; Smith et al., 2012, p. 7). There is a lack of specialised healthcare and accessible healthcare facilities (WRC, 2008, p. 3). Access to vocational and skills training, income generation and employment opportunities for refugees with disabilities varies considerably (WRC, 2008, p. 3).

There are few opportunities for formal participation of refugees with disabilities in camp management and programme planning, implementation and management (WRC, 2008, p. 4). People with disabilities, especially women and girls, are also at increased risk of physical and sexual violence, discrimination and harassment (WRC, 2015; Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 1; Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 91; WRC, 2008, p. 4; Barriga & Kwon, 2010).

Vulnerability and capability

Research has shown that people with disabilities face acute vulnerability to economic crises and political upheavals, but are less likely than non-disabled community members to benefit from interventions or humanitarian assistance put in place in response to these shocks (Groce et al., 2011, p. 1499). However, it is also important to note that people with disabilities are disproportionately vulnerable ‘primarily as a consequence of social disadvantage, poverty and structural exclusion’ rather than because of any inherent vulnerability (Hemingway & Priestley, 2006, p. 64). Many people with disabilities have skills, experience and other capabilities that can assist them in disasters, and which can be used more widely in disaster risk reduction or emergency response (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 103). People with disabilities have been actively involved in disaster risk reduction or emergency response across the world (Kett & Twigg, 2007, pp. 102-105).

Humanitarian response

Often data on people in need in humanitarian responses are not disaggregated and people with disabilities are not accounted for, which marginalises them further (UNISDR, 2014, p. 14; Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 1; Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 95; WRC, 2008, p. 2; Smith et al., 2012, p. 4). Humanitarian agencies often refer people with disabilities to specialist agencies, rather than making their own services accessible, which perpetuates discrimination and exclusion (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 94). People with disabilities have many of the same needs as everyone else in an emergency (food, shelter, WASH), but it is how they are provided that matters (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 94). Perceived expense can also contribute to the exclusion of people with disabilities, despite evidence suggesting accessible facilities involve only minimal extra costs (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 94).

Diverse needs

People with disabilities have diverse needs, which may be overlooked in humanitarian response (Mitchell & Karr, 2014, p. 227). For instance, a focus on people who have become physically impaired as a result of emergencies may lead to neglect of those already living with disablities (Rohwerder, 2013, p. 779). Children with disabilities also face particular challenges in emergencies (UNICEF, 2013, pp. 49-53; Mitchell & Karr, 2014, pp. 228-229).

Post-conflict reconstruction

The long-term effects of conflict and emergencies on people with disabilities is under-researched, but they are often left out of the reconstruction process (Kett, 2010, p. 343; Samararatne & Soldatic, 2015, p. 763). Women with disabilities have been found to be at risk of being left behind during repatriation efforts (Barriga & Kwon, 2010, p. 6), and disabled women living in rural post-conflict ‘face the greatest of difficulties in the peace-building process, and are more vulnerable to forms of physical and sexual violence, exploitation and extreme forms of abject poverty’ (Samararatne & Soldatic, 2015, p. 759).

People with disabilities may face difficulties in taking advantage of the distribution of food and rebuilding materials in the recovery phase (Kett, 2010, p. 346). Immediate post-conflict support for people with disabilities may not be designed in a sustainable way; for example, the camps for amputees in Sierra Leone were located too far from urban centres, which reduced opportunities for integration, schooling, shopping and employment (Kett, 2010, p. 358). A World Bank assessment in Sierra Leone also found that people with physical and psychological disabilities were amongst the poorest segments of the population in the post-conflict period (Kett, 2010, p. 356). Until recently, children with disabilities were rarely considered in post-conflict education strategies or reconstruction and development programmes (Trani et al., 2011, p. 1190).

Opportunities for people with disabilities

Some emergencies have resulted in unexpected opportunities, such as the formation of disabled people’s organisations which lobby to get disability issues on the government agenda, as in post-conflict Sierra Leone and Liberia (Kett & Twigg, 2007, p. 94; Kett, 2010, p. 348, 360-361). Disabled veterans may have political power as ‘war heroes’, which can be used to raise awareness and make disability a priority within the post-conflict reconstruction process (Irvine, 2014, p. 163). However, some governments do not automatically extend rights and benefits given to war victims and disabled ex-combatants to all people with disabilities: it took almost 30 years for Nicaragua to do so (Meyers, 2014, p. 197).

• Barriga, S. R., & Kwon, S-R. (2010). ‘As if we weren’t human’ Discrimination and violence against women with disabilities in Northern Uganda. New York: Human Rights Watch. See document online
• Kett, M., & Twigg, J. (2007). Disability and disasters: Towards an inclusive approach. In World disasters report – Focus on discrimination. Geneva: IFRC. See document online
• Osamu, N. (2014). Japan’s 2011 earthquake and tsunami: The paradox of community living and disaster. In D. Mitchell & V. Karr (Eds.), Crises, conflict and disability: Ensuring equality. New York: Routledge.
• Smith, F., Jolley, E,. & Schmidt, E. (2012). Disability and disasters: The importance of an inclusive approach to vulnerability and social capital. The World We Want. See document online
• Stough, L.M., & Kang, D. (2015). The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and persons with disabilities. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 6(2), 140-149. See document online
• UNISDR. (2014). Living with disability and disasters: UNISDR 2013 survey on living with disabilities and disasters – Key findings. UNISDR. See document online

• Irvine, R. (2014). Getting disability on the post-conflict agenda: the role of a disability movement. In D. Mitchell & V. Karr (Eds.), Crises, conflict and disability: Ensuring equality. New York: Routledge.
• Kett, M. (2010). Disability and poverty in post-conflict countries. In T. Barron & J.M. Ncube (Eds.), Poverty and disability. London: Leonard Cheshire Disability.
• Kett, M., & Twigg, J. (2007). Disability and disasters: Towards an inclusive approach. In World disasters report – Focus on discrimination. Geneva: IFRC. See document online
• Meyers, S. (2014). The past dividing the present: Nicaragua’s legacy of war shaping disability rights today. In D. Mitchell & V. Karr (Eds.), Crises, conflict and disability: Ensuring equality. New York: Routledge.
• Mitchell, D., & Karr, V. (Eds.). (2014). Crises, conflict and disability: Ensuring equality. New York: Routledge.
• Trani, J-F., Kett, M., Bakhshi, P., & Bailey, N. (2011). Disability, vulnerability and citizenship: To what extent is education a protective mechanism for children with disabilities in countries affected by conflict? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(10), 1187-1203. See document online

• Fembek, M., Butcher, T. H., Heindorf, I., & Wallner-Mikl, C. (2013). Zero Project report 2013: Employment. Klosterneuburg: Essl Foundation. See document online
• Groce, N., Kett, M., Lang, R., & Trani, J-F. (2011). Disability and Poverty: the need for a more nuanced understanding of implications for development policy and practice. Third World Quarterly, 32(8), 1493-1513. See document online
• Hemingway, L. & Priestly, M. (2006). Natural hazards, human vulnerability and disabling societies: A disaster for disabled people? In The Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 2(3), 57–67. See document online
• Kett, M. (2010). Disability and poverty in post-conflict countries. In T. Barron & J.M. Ncube (Eds.), Poverty and disability. London: Leonard Cheshire Disability.
• Kett, M., & Twigg, J. (2007). Disability and disasters: Towards an inclusive approach. In World disasters report – Focus on discrimination. Geneva: IFRC. See document online
• Mitchell, D., & Karr, V. (Eds.). (2014). Crises, conflict and disability: Ensuring equality. New York: Routledge.
• Osamu, N. (2014). Japan’s 2011 earthquake and tsunami: The paradox of community living and disaster. In D. Mitchell & V. Karr (Eds.), Crises, conflict and disability: Ensuring equality. New York: Routledge.
• Rohwerder, B. (2013). Intellectual disabilities, violent conflict and humanitarian assistance: Advocacy of the forgotten. Disability & Society, 28(6), 770-783. See document online
• Samararatne, D. W. V. A., & Soldatic, K. (2015). Inclusions and exclusions in law: Experiences of women with disability in rural and war-affected areas in Sri Lanka. Disability & Society, 30(5), 759-772. See document online
• Smith, F., Jolley, E,. & Schmidt, E. (2012). Disability and disasters: The importance of an inclusive approach to vulnerability and social capital. The World We Want. See document online
• UNICEF. (2013). The state of the world’s children 2013: Children with disabilities. New York: UNICEF. See document online
• UNISDR. (2014). Living with disability and disasters: UNISDR 2013 survey on living with disabilities and disasters – Key findings. UNISDR. See document online
• Women’s Refugee Commission (WRC). (2008). Disabilities among refugees and conflict affected populations. New York: WRC. See document online
• WRC. (2015). ‘I see that it is possible’: Building capacity for disability inclusion in gender-based violence programming in humanitarian settings. New York: WRC. See document online