People with intellectual disability and the digitization of services
Introduction
The advance of digital technologies has been accompanied by a celebratory discourse promising cities that are ‘smarter’ and consequently more sustainable, democratic and accessible (see Sadowski and Pasquale, 2015, Kitchin et al., 2016). However, recent scholarship also questions these hopeful assumptions, suggesting that smart city developments redistribute and entrench, rather than equalize, uneven access to opportunities for practising urban citizenship (Gilbert, 2010, Eubanks, 2017, Joss et al., 2017, Hatuka and Zur, 2019, Iveson and Maalsen, 2019). Studies of digital inequality emphasise the uneven classed, racialized and gendered outcomes created by the digital turn, as technologies can replicate and amplify oppressive and discriminatory structures (Macdonald and Clayton, 2013, Sadowski and Pasquale, 2015, Eubanks, 2017, Strengers et al., 2019, Elwood, 2020). Our paper contributes to this body of work by analyzing the uneven effects of urban services digitization with a specific focus on people with intellectual disability, as an extremely marginalized group of people who face a distinctive set of barriers when accessing and using digitizing services.
The exclusion of people with intellectual disability from urban citizenship has a long history. Since the 17th century, in different parts of the world, a large number of people with primarily intellectual or psychosocial disabilities have been excluded from citizenship participation through incarceration in institutions. Since the 1970s, a process of deinstitutionalisation began in some developed countries, involving the rehousing of people with disability in smaller and more dispersed housing in urban neighborhoods, with the aim of increasining their opportunities for participation in society (Wiesel and Bigby, 2015). Beyond housing, attempts have been made towards enhancing participation of people with intellectual disability in mainstream services, rather than specialist disability services, for example through individualized support (Power and Bartlett, 2018). Yet, despite deinstitutionalization, some people continue to experience a continuing lack of inclusion in aspects of society.
In Australia, the terms on which people with disabilities can seek to participate in community life have recently changes with the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). The NDIS constitutes an expansive overhaul of support funding for people with disability which saw the shift from primarily block funded disability support services, to primarily individualized funding allocated to eligible people with disability. The NDIS was largely welcomed for its promises to double government spending on disability support and place more control with people with disabilities (on funding see Every Australian Counts, 2016). Adults whose primary disability was recorded as intellectual disability form almost 30 percent of NDIS participants and are thus the largest group of users (NDIS, 2019). However, not all people with intellectual disability are participants in the Scheme, for instance because their disability is considered mild, or because they have limited formal and informal advocacy support when trying to access the Scheme. Enhancing mainstream participation by people with disability is one of the key objectives of this reform (Wiesel et al., 2019) and the Scheme’s architects have expressed their faith in the power of technological advancement to enhance participation for people with disability (NDIS, n.d.).
Literature on people with intellectual disability has highlighted social interactions and practices that lead to their exclusion, and at times self-exclusion, from mainstream settings (Hall, 2004, Hall, 2010; Wiesel and Bigby, 2016). For instance, people with intellectual disability are often frowned upon in mainstream settings for being too slow, too noisy or presenting other behaviors considered inappropriate (Wiesel and Bigby, 2016). These literatures suggest that barriers to participation by people with intellectual disability are multifaceted, and involve the interaction between a cognitive impairment, and social and environmental factors, including social attitudes towards intellectual disability, and the practices of disability support services. In this paper, we bring this view to bear on the effects of services digitization on the inclusion and exclusion of people with intellectual disability.
Technological innovation is often discussed for its promised potential to overcome disabling barriers. For example, the NDIS has repeatedly emphasized its desire “to optimise the opportunities that technological advancement and digital disruption are offering society, putting people with a disability at the forefront of these opportunities” (NDIS, n.d.). However, various scholars (van Dijk, 2006, Ferri et al., 2015, Goggin, 2018; Gleeson, 1999) have argued that technologies can also have exclusionary effects for people with disabilities. We situate this paper in geographical scholarship that observes the deeply uneven social and spatial orders around which smart city politics are assembled (e.g. Iveson and Maalsen, 2019, Elwood, 2020).
The paper draws on interviews with people with intellectual disability, and managers of mainstream services in Melbourne’s North-Eastern suburbs, as well as input from a team of research advisers with intellectual disability. Our empirical analysis suggests that certain aspects of digitization can make cities easier to navigate for some people with intellectual disability who have access to technologies and the skills to use them. However, digitization can also compound forms of exclusion of people with intellectual disability. The paper shows that successful engagement with digital service systems require a multifacted alignment of circumstances such as disability supports, digital technology training and the availability of personal devices, and that these requirements create exclusions and uneven opportunities for people with intellectual disabilities. We argue that the geographical study of processes of digitization must consider how exclusion emerges in interactions with digital technologies and attempt to identify the socio-spatial circumstances that are required for technologies to play an enabling role in the lives of people with intellectual disability.
The paper is structured as follows: first, we review existing literatures on digital inequality in cities; second, we review the subset of this literature that deals specifically with the impact of digital technologies on people with intellectual disability; third, we present an overview of our study methods, and relevant context for our case study area; fourth, we discuss our key findings, organized around three sets of digitizing urban services: digital payment systems in urban retail settings, electronic ticketing systems for public transport, and digital access programs in public libraries; we conclude by highlighting the implications of our paper for wider debates on digital inequality.
Section snippets
the politics and inequalities of digital technologies
Early conceptualizations of digital technology used terms such as ‘online’, ‘virtual’ and ‘cyber’, to describe the digital as a sphere that is separate from, and somehow less ‘real’, than the physical world. For example, the ‘physical’ computer was imagined as a gateway to the ‘virtual’ internet, and seminal work on digital exclusion therefore focused on ownership or other forms of access to digital devices (Gilbert, 2010). But as Sadowski and Pasquale (2015: n.p.) observe ‘it no longer makes
Method and context
This paper is informed by a case study on the accessibility of mainstream services for people with intellectual disability in Melbourne, the capital city of the State of Victoria in Australia. Material presented here was generated between October 2018 and May 2020, and some data collection thus occured while Covid-19 distancing measures were in place. The data collected comprised of two components. The first component consisted of semi-structured interviews undertaken with 10 people with
Digital technology in the lives of people with intellectual disability
People with intellectual disability who participated in the research discussed accessibility issues related to the digitization of three kinds of services: digital payment systems in retail settings, electronic ticketing on public transport, and digital resources and programs in public libraries. These settings emerged in our interviews as significant areas where people with intellectual disability interact with digital technologies in everyday urban settings in ways that create opportunities
Discussion
Urban scholars highlight the ways digital technologies can compound racial, classed and gendered discrimination and exclusion (e.g. Sadowski, 2015; Eubanks, 2017, Safransky, 2019). The empirical exploration presented here adds to this body of work by focusing on the differentiated impact of urban digitization on people with intellectual disability. Building on conceptualizations of digital technology in cities as integrated, rather than separate, to other social and physical spheres of the city
Conclusion
In conclusion, digital systems are intricately woven into urban infrastructures (Sadowski and Pasquale 2015) and this has deep running and hitherto largely overlooked consequences for people with limited digital literacy and resources, including many people with intellectual disability. People with limited access to internet connectivity and devices are at risk of missing out on numerous resources and opportunities. Access barriers to digital platforms and the opportunities these hold can
Acknowledgement
We gratefully acknowledge contributions in time and expertise by interviewees and the team of advisers: Greg, Heather, Luke and Susan. This paper was made possible by Discovery Project funding from the Australian Research Council Grant number DP180102191.
References (51)
- et al.
Unrealized potential: exploring the digital disability divide
Poetics
(2016) - et al.
Making space for the “intellectual” in geographies of disability
Health and Place
(2001) - et al.
The praxis and politics of building urban dashboards
Geoforum
(2016) - et al.
Geographies of digital skill
Geoforum
(2019) - et al.
Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second- and third-level digital divide
Telematics Inform.
(2017) The Interface Envelope: Gaming, Technology, Power
(2015)- et al.
Using qualitative methods in research with people who have intellectual disabilities
J. Appl. Res. Intellect. Disabil.
(2014) Habit displaced: the disruption of skilful performance
Geographical Research
(2013)eQuality: The Struggle for Web Accessibility by Persons with Cognitive Disabilities
(2014)- et al.
Predictors of reported internet use in older adults with high and low health literacy: The role of socio-demographics and visual and cognitive function
Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics
(2011)
Restricted access: media, disability, and the politics of participation
Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor
Fostering accessible technology and sculpting an inclusive market through regulation
International Review of Law, Computers and Technology
Theorizing digital and urban inequalities: Critical geographies of ‘race’, gender and technological capital
Information, communication & society
Disability and digital inequalities
Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures, Technological Mobilities and the Urban Condition
Social geographies of learning disability: narratives of exclusion and inclusion
Area
Spaces of social inclusion and belonging for people with intellectual disabilities
J. Intellect. Disabil. Res.
Shopping for support: personalisation and the new spaces and relations of commodified care for people with learning disabilities
Social & Cultural Geography
Who is the ‘smart’ resident in the digital age? The varied profiles of users and non-users in the contemporary city
Urban Studies
Consumers with an intellectual disability and carers: perceptions of interactions with banks
Journal of Intellectual Disabilities
Social control in the networked city: Datafied dividuals, disciplined individuals and powers of assembly
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
Cited by (14)
Fostering an inclusive public transport system in the digital era: An interdisciplinary approach
2023, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesPublic transport as travel alternative for users of Special Transport Services in the Netherlands
2023, Journal of Transport and HealthAn accessible and inclusive public transportation management response to COVID-19 through a co-creation process with people with disability. The case of Metro Barcelona
2022, Research in Transportation Business and ManagementCitation Excerpt :The findings of this study can help transport operators to adjust their transport innovations and thus redesign their encounters and relationships with PwD amidst COVID-19 for a more sustainable and accessible public transport experience (Farinloye et al., 2019). We have empirically explored Machala and Havíř's (2019) claim that digitalisation can positively impact on user experience, and we can conclude, in line with Holstein et al. (2021) that a combination of digital and non-digital resources provided by transport operators increases PwD's perception of safety and accessibility. Likewise, our results may guide transport operators in determining what digital and non-digital resources provide the greatest value for PwD.
Digital citizenship and disability in the covid era
2024, New Media and Society