D-LoT E-Learning Course

MODULE III

Planning Inclusive Communities

Contents
LEARNING OUTCOMES: .............................................................................................................. 2
KEY MESSAGES OF THE MODULE ............................................................................................... 2
III.1 Inclusion and the relevance of local communities .............................................................. 2
III.2 Inclusive communities, innovation and participatory local planning ................................. 5
III.2.1 UN CPRD as a Social Innovation for Local Communities .............................................. 6
III.3 Local planning for full inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities .................. 7
III.3.1 Local planning for full inclusion and participation persons with disabilities must be
driven by values ...................................................................................................................... 7
III.3.2 Local planning processes for full inclusion and participation of persons with
disabilities must be participatory and conceptualized as learning processes. ...................... 8
III.3.3 Social planning must take into account different community social patterns and
different developmental paths. What works in one community may not work in another 10
III.3.4 Social planning must be partisan for the interests of disadvantaged target groups
and political because it wants to facilitate collective action in a situation where consensus
cannot be expected .............................................................................................................. 11
III.3.5 Implementation of plans by active initiation and agenda setting.............................. 13
III.4 Dimensions and sub-dimensions of planning inclusive communities .............................. 14
III.5 Planning circle and stages of local planning ...................................................................... 16
Figure 1 Process circle for planning inclusive community ................................................ 17
III.6 Experiences with Local Planning of Full inclusion and Participation of Persons with
Disabilities in Europe ................................................................................................................ 18
BIBLIOGRAPHY/RECOMMENDED TEXTS .................................................................................. 20
RESOURCES 21
TRAINING MATERIALS .............................................................................................................. 21

1
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
AUTHOR:
Prof. Dr. Johannes Schaedler, University of Siegen, Germany

LEARNING OUTCOMES:
A. (Knowledge) By the end of the course, participants will be able to recall:
a. The relevance of the local political level for the implementation of the UN
CPRD
b. How a planning process can be structured in dimensions and sub-dimensions
c. The key stages of the ‘planning circle’
B. (Skills) By the end of the course, students will be able to:
a. Identify key actors for a planning process
b. Set up a planning structure for the planning process
c. Develop a strategy and use the planning circle for conceptualization of a
planning process
C. (Attitudes) By the end of the course, students will:
a. Understand the meaning of participation in planning
b. Understand the meaning of ‘application of a plan’ in a strategy for change
c. Understand the roles of local governments and other actors
KEY MESSAGES OF THE MODULE
The UNCPRD has led to a new legal framework with consequences for the local political
level. However, it cannot be expected that new legal prescriptions are automatically
transferred into changes of given local structures and day-to-day practices. Processes of
implementation need active initiation. Local planning can lead to adequate policies for an
“inclusive community” that respect diversity, local developmental paths and provide
conditions for accessible infrastructure and inclusive services for persons with disabilities.

III.1 Inclusion and the relevance of local communities

It was a great progress both for the development of Human Rights’ legislation and for the
disabled people’s movement when in the 1970s the United Nations started to expand the
principle of human rights for persons with disabilities . In 1971, the United Nations

2
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
proclaimed the ‘Declaration of the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons’ and in 1975 the
‘Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons’. In the following years, these and other
declarations were followed by the ‘Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for
People with Disabilities’ approved by the United Nations in 1993. This raised the question on
how such high level documents could be made relevant for people with disabilities on
‘ground level’. An important answer to this question was the AGENDA 22, an instrument
developed by the Swedish Co-operative Body of Organisations of Disabled People
(Rönnerstein 2003). The AGENDA 22 transferred the 22 criteria of the ‘standard rules’ in a
tool for their implementation on municipality level. Its concept contained inter alia:
 to weave disability aspects into all planning and activities from the very beginning of
any product, whether it is a disability-focused project or not;
 to use the local authority to act as a good example;
 to determine specific long-term objectives and measures for implementation; and
 to include a method of evaluation and review.
On its basis every local municipality in Sweden had to develop a disability plan for full
implementation of the UN Standard Rules (Färm, 2005). Even though, AGENDA 22 was
translated in many other languages, raised a lot of attention and had a lot of support e.g. by
the European disability movement due to a variety of reasons, e.g. its voluntary character
and its underlying somehow technical planning assumptions it was not systematically
adopted outside Scandinavia.

When the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) was accepted
in 2006, it could not be expected that this document was so intensively received in Europe
and all around the world. Today nearly all European countries and the European Union itself
have ratified the UN CPRD and have thus legally committed themselves to its
implementation “with all available resources”. The UN CPRD specifies the general standards
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and of earlier UN-conventions for the
perspective of persons with disabilities. This is reflected in the formulation of principles of
the Convention in Article 3 of UN CRPD, among which inclusion and full participation became

3
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
of central importance. The convention has recognized that disability is “an evolving concept
and that disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments,
attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in
society on an equal basis with others” (Convention Preamble). Disability is, thus, seen as a
problem not in the person but in the interaction between the person, the physical and social
surroundings. It should not be accepted that disabilities result in exclusion; instead, efforts
must be devoted to the removal of barriers in the environments in order to provide the
disabled persons with the same opportunities as others.

The duty to implement the Convention falls to all government levels of the countries that
have ratified it. On national level Article 35 of the Convention requests from participating
states regularly national reports on implementation progress. Meanwhile, such reports have
been produced and published by many countries. Also, regional level plans for
implementation of the UN CRPD have been developed. As a result of these efforts it became
clear that the implementation of UN CRPD needs a multi-level approach, in which national
and regional actors have clear responsibilities, e.g. to provide inclusive legal frameworks and
strong entitlements for socially vulnerable groups, such as persons with disabilities. But it
also became evident that the more the general demands of the CRPD are to be concretized
into actions, the more the importance of the local political level increases. By local level,
here it is referred to the governing body of a politically defined territory and its population.
This is commonly a city, district, town, or village, or a small grouping of them, all categorized
in the Eurostat-system as NUTS 3 or 4. Normally this level has its own democratically elected
representative leadership, a local administration and a local parliament with budget rights.
Although established by national law, local authorities in most countries have certain
autonomy especially in planning and providing services of general interest. The roles and
responsibilities of the local authorities range from energy and water supply, sewage and
waste disposal, hospitals, social housing, public transport to educational, cultural, sporting
and social services. In these areas the major challenges for implementing inclusive principle
become real. The planning process is to be based on the specific conditions of their local

4
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
situation and culture as starting points for local development strategies. The importance of
the local political level for implementing UN CPRD is crucial because of its proximity to the
life-world of citizens. A very clear example gives art. 9 of the UN CPRD:

Article 9 ‘Accessibility”
1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects
of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities
access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to
information and communications, including information and communications technologies
and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban
and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include the identification and elimination of
obstacles and barriers to accessibility, shall apply to, inter alia:
a) Buildings, roads, transportation and other indoor and outdoor facilities, including schools,
housing, medical facilities and workplaces;
b) Information, communications and other services, including electronic services and
emergency services. […]

III.2 Inclusive communities, innovation and participatory local planning

The UN-Convention on Rights for Persons with Disabilities has led to a new legal framework
with consequences for the local political level. However, it cannot be expected that new
legal prescriptions are automatically transferred into changes of given local structures and
day-to-day practices. Processes of implementation of the UN CPRD in a municipality don’t
just happen out of themselves but need active initiation. Therefore it is suggested to
perceive the UN CPRD as a social innovation to be adopted by local communities to become
an integral part of their institutional, social and cultural reality. This process of adoption of
the UN CPRD in a local community can be conceptualized in the form of local planning for
full inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities. Local planning can lead to
adequate strategies and non-discrimination politics for an “inclusive community” that

5
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
respect diversity, local developmental paths and provide conditions for accessible
infrastructure and inclusive services for persons with disabilities. This will be further
explained in the following.

III.2.1 UN CPRD as a Social Innovation for Local Communities

According to the classic work of Everett M. Rogers (2003) on diffusion of innovations, the
implementation of the UN CRPD can be seen as a social innovation for local governments
and local civil society. The implementation of the UN CPRD needs forms of action perceived
as new by local decision-makers who in the thinking of Rogers (Rogers 2003, S. 12pp) have to
make a decision on their adoption. The adoption of an innovation is the result of a decision-
making process in which decision makers decide e.g. that new measures are taken and that
‘transition costs’ arising from changing modes of actions are tolerated. Whether or not
innovations are adopted, this depends on a variety of factors, such as e.g. how the
innovation is communicated and explained to decision-makers and to what extend it is
compatible to given conditions, but also to how put pressure on the decision-makers for this
adoption. The adoption process of an innovation is necessarily on the adopter’s side
connected with the challenge to ‘re-invent’ the innovation, i.e. if a local government decides
to integrate the UN CPRD in its structures there is the task to adapt the convention to the
concrete situation of the municipality or district. Innovations have the strongest effects
when they are tied to the local conditions.

In many European countries local communities have already started to develop strategies for
local implementation of the UN CPRD. Backed by initiatives from the civil society they work
on local planning and develop ‘local inclusion plans’. These local governments can be seen as
‘pioneers’ whose planning approaches are adopted by others in a ‘process of diffusion’:
„Diffusion is the process in which an innovation is communicated through certain channels
over time among the members of a social system“ (Rogers 2003: 12). Successful diffusion of
innovation in this context would mean that more and more local governments make the
decision to adopt the UN CPRD. Put in the concept of Rogers, it can be expected that the
number of ‘early adopters’ gradually grows. This could lead to a dynamic process in which by

6
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
communication and mutual support the so-called “critical mass” (Rogers 2003: 11) is
reached and a majority of local governments decides to adopt the UN CPRD in their
structures.

III.3 Local planning for full inclusion and participation of persons with
disabilities
Local planning for full inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities is to be seen as
a part of communal social planning. Social planning stands for processes by which
policymakers - legislators, government agencies, planners, and, often, funders - try to solve
problems in a community or improve conditions of the infrastructure as well as the services
related the collective public well-being. These policies might range from child welfare to
aging may take the form of laws, regulations, incentives, media campaigns, programs or
services, information - a wide range of possibilities. Social planning makes use of rational
problem-solving techniques and data-driven approaches to identify, determine, and help
coordinate services and life-conditions for target populations. Social planning focuses on
getting results in a dialogue with target groups and people that are affected by planning
activities. Because it is based on statistics and other types of data, social planning is
traditionally seen be seen as a rather "scientific" approach. Thus, the use of "experts" may
be considered a characteristic part of social planning. However, in the past decades, social
planning has passed through important phases of theoretical development. (Merchel 2005,
Fürst 2008, Schaedler 2013). In this process of theory building, important lessons were
learned that can be used for the conceptualization of local planning for persons with
disabilities.

III.3.1 Local planning for full inclusion and participation persons with
disabilities must be driven by values
The value base of local planning for persons with disabilities can be found in the UN CPRD.
Derived from the UN CPRD, it is suggested to use “inclusive community” as a programmatic
and strategic principle for planning purposes (Rohrmann / Schädler et al. 2014). The
“Inclusive community” stands for the objective to create conditions in a community that
allow persons with disabilities to develop their biography within the common stages of the

7
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
life-course on an equal basis with others. The perspective of participation can be seen as a
new and external element in the field of disability policies. The International Classification of
Functioning (ICF) defines participation as “involvement in a life situation” and participation
restrictions as ‘’problems an individual may experience in involvement in life situations”. But
also other meanings of participation are relevant in the context of planning inclusive
communities such as the aspect of self-representation of persons with disabilities in
individual and public contexts, the right of persons with disabilities to access to mainstream
services of general interest and the right of persons with disabilities to social services.

III.3.2 Local planning processes for full inclusion and participation of

persons with disabilities must be participatory and conceptualized as
learning processes.
Local planning processes must not be practiced in a top-down manner, executed by experts
and politicians that want to impose ‘their’ results on community inhabitants. On the
contrary, it is necessary to understand that local planning works best as communicative and
dialogical activities. Planning for “Inclusive communities” should therefore be seen as a
participatory and learning oriented process, in which under the political leadership of local
governments, relevant local actors develop their pathway towards an inclusive community‘.

Usually co-operation arrangements between politics, administration, and service-providers

have a dominating influence on local conditions and support system for people with
disabilities. Very often there are formal and informal settings where decisions for the local
disability system are prepared and made. In these settings mostly those powerful
stakeholders are involved that represent the given local system. The decisions made are
usually based on traditional assumptions and are often limiting the developments of new
ideas. Therefore it is necessary to check how also other relevant actors with different or new
knowledge can be involved in planning processes. The involvement of disabled persons
organizations or key individuals with disabilities stakeholders is of special importance and
helps to identify new strategies. On the other hand, it is necessary that the process of
planning as an activity which aims to have a real impact on services and other local

8
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
structures is linked to the functioning of communal politics. This underlines the importance
of a communal co-ordination of the planning process.

On this background it makes sense to distinguish the following three forms of participation
of local planning for inclusion of persons with disabilities a) the open forum, b) the arena and
c) the parliament.

 Open Forum
Open forums are used to gather all stakeholders in the planning process. This includes also
stakeholders from outside the disability field. The forums establish the social basis of
planning processes, and serve for mobilization of political enforcement for the planning
process. In the open forums the collected data and information is discussed and a collective
processes of interpretation can take place. This implies the discussion of recommendations
for the local action plan for inclusion.
 Arena
The arenas in this context are the steering committees in the planning process (e.g.
“planning councils”), in which “planning policy” is made. The composition of the arenas
should represent the entire spectrum of stakeholders including disability organizations,
service providers, stakeholders from other welfare or societal fields and politicians should be
represented in the ‘arena’. Co-ordinated by the local government in the ‘steering
committee’, papers are developed on the basis of discussions in the open forums, positions
exchanged, conflicts handled, and consensus sought. In the arenas of the planning process,
the drafts of the local strategy for an inclusive strategy are discussed and formulated. Crucial
preliminary decisions on the contents of the action plan for inclusion are taken and
submitted to the communal parliament to be passed.

 Communal Parliament
According to the principle of a representative democracy, the communal parliament is the
centre of political power in the community. But at the same time it is recognized that in
modern democratic societies also on local level the power structures are multiple, and

9
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
diverse power centres exist in communities parallel that are interlinked with each other and
with the government. Still, in such a governance arrangement the communal parliaments,
governments, and administrations are responsible for services of public interest and decide
on public budgets. A local plan for full inclusion and participation attains a binding character
through a formal decision of the parliament.

The development of local strategies for an inclusive community can take place in all forms of
participation discussed above. The borders between them can be fluid, for example, arenas
can take elements of open forums through the arrangement of meetings, and in reverse
forums to arenas. It is important to keep in mind that wherever decisions are prepared and
made, the perspectives and interests of groups whose skills to articulate their interest are
limited are included. This could mean e.g. that information is translated in “easy-to-read
language” for people with learning difficulties, or that contributions of persons with
disabilities with a ‘weak voice’ are prepared in advance or other forms of supported
participation are used.

III.3.3 Social planning must take into account different community

social patterns and different developmental paths. What works in one
community may not work in another
Local planning for an “inclusive community” is striving for a non-discriminative culture,
accessible infrastructure, representation and participation of persons with disabilities and -
very important - for a system of inclusive services for people with disabilities. Therefore on
the one hand planning activities must be tied to the local community and its cultural
characteristics in general, but also on the network of services for people with disabilities in
the region. This network is often a highly structured “organizational field” (Powell &
DiMaggio, 1991:64) in which its actors consisting of service providers, disability organizations
and funding agencies - have already been operating for many years, and have developed a
specific local history and organizational power structures in their field. The local disability
field can be dominated e.g. by a traditional institution that has been established many years
ago or by a strong self-help tradition that has led to a high sensitivity for disability and non-
discrimination issues. Also other decisions in the initial stages of the local disability field can

10
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
have ongoing influence on practices and local service models, e.g. how local authorities have
been active in policy making or involved in the financing system of services.
The terms “culture” and the “organisational field” stem from neo-institutional approaches in
social sciences (Powell & /DiMaggio 1991) and have become important in planning theory
(Healey 2006). They believe that the actions of individuals and organizations are pre-
structured through significant and stable sets of rules which provide the stakeholders in a
certain field with binding orientation for day-to-day performance. These set of rules are
rooted in specific development paths and - over the time - lead to routinized behaviour both
in service organizations and in their organizational fields. The routinized behaviour is based
on assumptions on the purpose of the field and on action patterns to be used for problem-
solving. A traditional but still very relevant assumption can for instance be that adult persons
with intellectual disabilities with a certain degree of support needs are to be cared for in
institutions. Such institutionalized routines are considered self-evident and ‘taken-for
granted’. They become stable ‘institutions’ that are reproduced in a field through certain
forms of interaction between actors with the isomorphic effect that organisations in a field
become gradually similar to each other. Stability offers reliability of day-to-day-routines.
The negative aspect of this institutional stability is its resistance against innovations and
changes. Planning processes must connect with these specific local characteristics and try to
understand these interdependencies in the local disability field. In other words, „reading
local cultures“(Healey 2006: 208) is necessary for the development of action plans and
concrete recommendations tied to local situations.
III.3.4 Social planning must be partisan for the interests of
disadvantaged target groups and political because it wants to
facilitate collective action in a situation where consensus cannot be
expected
Local planning is conceptualised here as a strategy that identifies and promotes the rights of
persons with disabilities as a part of common concerns and public interest. But it must be
acknowledged that in local communities, societal breaks exist, and that people with very
different lifestyles, political positions and cultural and material interests live there. For
service-provider institutional changes might cause high “transition costs” of material and

11
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
non-material nature, loss of power, increased workloads and uncertainty. These effects of
institutional change can bring actors to a position that the maintenance of a suboptimal
status quo seems to be a rational goal for an organizational actor even if there are better
alternatives available. (Schädler, 2003). As a result, consensus on common interests and
objectives cannot be expected as being natural. When actions are planned to improve living
conditions for people with disabilities there might be reasons for some stakeholders to try to
oppose or avoid them. In local planning processes some actors might also get in interaction
with “strangers” from other local networks and cultures. In these processes clarification
strategies might become necessary and decisions can lead to “winners” and “losers” (Healey
2006: 60). However, actors in a community are not to be seen only as stakeholders for their
own maximum interests. Generally people are interested to find ways of good co-existence
with others. Through communication in planning forums local actors can find out which
social, ecological or material concerns and objectives they have in common. Therefore
planning approaches can be based on the assumption that despite existing differences local
actors share common interests due to the fact that they as ‘locals’ share space and time.
This common basis of interests does not only refer to environmental conditions like clean air
and quality drinking water, but also to the quality and accessibility to public infrastructure in
its broadest sense. This understanding facilitates an approach that co-operative problem
solving and consensus building is for the benefit of the general public. In this perspective,
collaborative planning approaches want to achieve more than “win-win” results. They aim
“to reframe how people think about winning and losing with questions such as “Can we all
get on better if we change how we accommodate to what other people think. If this can be
done, then we might think about winning and losing in a different way” (Healey 2006: 312).

The fact that in a community consensus on measures for full inclusion and participation
cannot be expected make planning processes necessarily political. Strategies for change
must be developed on sense-making arguments and perspectives to which the stakeholders
can relate to with conviction. To develop strategies means to organize thinking of actors in
field in a certain direction (Healey 2006: 244). Strategies are important for the day-to-day

12
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
decision-making of actors in a field because they have the potential to reduce complexity.
Following a strategy allows actors to concentrate on the handling of routines and the solving
of concrete, everyday problems in their ongoing work. If the direction is accepted, the
decision-makers can find in it the normative benchmarks that allow them to orient their
overall approach towards it. An appropriate strategy must contain normative guidelines on
the one hand, and, on the other hand, should give the stakeholders room for deviant
decisions that can be found in emerging problems in a concrete situation. This strategic
approach doesn’t imply to renounce prescriptions, guidelines and goal setting, but to accept
the actors’ relative autonomy as a productive element in the process of system change.

In the planning processes discussed here the strategic goal of an “inclusive community” has
to be well communicated in a sense-making intention. It is not expected from the actors in
the community so-to-say mechanically implement the “plan” but that they “use” it in their
daily practice. That means that collective learning processes can be promoted, which affect
the operative decisions in turn. The more stakeholders support concept of the “Inclusive
Community” and change their institutional practices, the more this is rewarded with
incentives and also, the more the pressure to change other people’s views on the reform.
Consequently, the potential for micro political conflict between those interested in reform
and other stakeholders increase, and the solutions out of the conflict’s productive resolution
can support the strategy of change. All in all, “strategy consistent behaviour” is promoted,
which over time can produce a growing approximation to the planning goals of more and
more stakeholders (Mintzberg 2008). In so doing, the possibility is provided to merge
decisions of individuals and organizations gradually into a new development pattern for
inclusion of people with disabilities.

III.3.5 Implementation of plans by active initiation and agenda setting

Planning processes can be distinguished from the everyday routine because they are
conducted in the form of a project. Project of local planning for an inclusive community does
not just happen, but must be actively initiated in the flow of daily actions. In other words, it
requires activities for ‘Agenda Setting', like public mobilization and PR-work to convince

13
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
political leaders, to agree to a planning project, to organize political support, provide
resources and to bring the planning process on the way. The impulse for initiating a planning
process can come and be promoted from very different sides. Committees or organizations
of the civil society, service providers, local representatives of political parties, administrators
of welfare agencies, etc. can start to lobby for setting a planning project for an inclusive
community on the communal agenda. Experience show that the ‘agenda setting’ for a
planning project is easier if initiators manage to form a local coalitions of different actors
that can campaign effectively together. It turned out that successful coalitions for change
include individuals or organizations that have political power, professional expertise and
communication skills (Kristof, 2013).

III.4 Dimensions and sub-dimensions of planning inclusive communities

The basic value of full inclusion and participation for persons with disabilities must be
operationalized in dimensions that that can be made relevant for planning and collective
action. On the basis of comparison of various implementation instruments it is suggested to
structure planning concepts for an inclusive community in five main dimensions with sub-
dimensions (Rohrmann/ Schädler et. al. 2013):

A. Developing participation and self-representation of people with disabilities and other

socially vulnerable groups on an equal basis with others.
 Local culture of participation in political decision-making processes
 Formal prescriptions and regulations to enable participation in political decision-
making processes
 Quality of experiences of participation
 Existence and quality of representation of disabled persons (local ombudsman,
disability council, etc.)
 Support for self-help groups and disabled people’ organisation
B. Raising sensitivity and awareness for specific risks of discrimination
 Importance of principles of diversity and inclusion in local planning

14
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
  Degree of flexibility and needs-orientation of local service infrastructure
 Active public campaigns for diversity and stimulation of learning processes to
interact with persons with disabilities
 Involvement of expert competences of persons with disabilities in developing
accessibility in local infrastructure
 Existence of rituals for public recognition of ‘good practice’ like awards, etc.
 Support for the provision of inclusive spaces/rooms for meetings and public
activities
C. Identifying barriers and improving accessibility and usability of public spaces
 Importance of ‘accessibility’ as a general planning principle for public and private
infrastructure
 Availability of accessible housing infrastructure
 Availability of information accessible infrastructure (services, day-to-day facilities)
 Availability of complaint – and development system for barriers
D. Mainstreaming educational facilities and all other services for the general public
 Importance of universal design thinking and practice in public and private
agencies and organization
 Performance of ‘role-model-function’ for accessibility of public agencies,
administration facilities, public institutions
 Inclusive practice and development in the local education system (pre-school,
school, adult-training)
 Strategies to support the organizational development for inclusion in various
parts of local social life (leisure time, sports, health care, employment etc.)
 Availability of mutual exchange and learning options with other national and
international local communities
E. Developing flexible and inclusive support services for people with disabilities as social
rights

15
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
  Existence and quality of cooperation structures between actors in the local
disability field relevant for planning an inclusive community
 Degree of inclusiveness of local disability service system
 Affordability of services and non-discriminative application procedures
 Availability and quality of person-centred planning routines for developing
individual service arrangements
 Monitoring and development routines for the local disability service system as a
whole
These dimensions can be used to initiate planning projects. They can either be
conceptualized for a local community in a broad process that comprehends all five
dimensions or in a step-by-step process according to agreed priorities. Whatever way is
decided, in each dimension a systematic analysis of given situations can be started, data and
information can be collected and the planning process can be compared with inclusive
standards derived from the UNCPRD. This can lead to an action plan with recommendations
for concrete measures of improvement in a mid-term perspective (5–7 years). The action
plan is addressed to decision-makers of local authorities but can be adopted also to the
general public to raise support.

III.5 Planning circle and stages of local planning

Local planning processes for an inclusive community can be described in a so-called
‘planning circle’ that is structured by various stages (cf. Rohrmann / Schaedler 2014: 47).

16
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
Figure 1 Process circle for planning inclusive community

After a successful agenda-setting, the idea of the planning project must be concretized in an
initial concept paper that can be formally presented to the local parliament. This paper
should contain all information necessary for a political decision, i.e. conceptual ideas,
description of procedures, structures, time-line and costs of the planning process. When the
formal decision to conduct a planning project has been approved by the parliament,
planning structures, rules for procedure and a steering committee can be established. Then,
planning process can be started with an official kick-off event where the objectives and the
methodology can be presented to the public. Practical planning work begins with collection
of data and information on the current situation inclusion and participation in the selected
dimensions mentioned above (see: III.2 2) The results of the surveys are evaluated by
planning experts in the form of short reports and prepared for discussions in one or more
planning forums. As a result, recommendations for improvement measures are developed
and put together in a draft version of a written action plan. This action plan would then be
made the subject of political decision-making in local and regional political bodies in order to

17
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
achieve its official recognition. This is certainly possible the easier, the greater the potential
of public attention and mobilization is that could be unfolded in the planning activities.

The adoption of the action plan by the municipal parliament in an official decision does not
mean the end of the process. The challenge is to realize the potential for change in the ‘plan
for an inclusive community’ by using it in local practice. It is necessary to assure a
continuous monitoring and evaluation on the status of implementation of agreed measures.
This could become part of the social planning routines in the municipality. The more
successful the experience with such a planning “episode” is the more it can become an
encouraging part of a “collaborative local governance culture” with a high sensitivity for
social justice (Healey 2006: 327).

III.6 Experiences with Local Planning of Full inclusion and Participation of

Persons with Disabilities in Europe
It is not possible to give a systematic overview on experiences with implementing the
UNCPRD by local planning approaches. E.g. the Swedish government institute ‘Handisam’
has developed a tool-box with indicators for reporting on local implementation of UNCPRD
(Linden 2013), the Ministry of Social Affairs in Northrhine-Westfalia, Germany, has
commissioned a ‘Manual for Planning Local Communities’ that was published by the,
University of Siegen in 2014 (Rohrmann / Schaedler et.al.2014). So far no European
comprehensive mapping research has been conducted on that matter. However, it can be
assumed that in many more European countries research and development activities have
been conducted to elaborate appropriate concepts.
An exploratory study by the German University of Siegen (2013) indicates that the way the
CRPD is received on a local level in the different countries depends to a high degree on the
general cultural and political frameworks. They are determining the overall development
path of disability political topics in a country. Municipalities in Nordic countries which have a
stronger tradition of response to international legal frameworks are more likely to respond
to the detailed implementation of the CRPD than communities in countries where there is a
less strong tradition. At the same time, despite negative experiences with planning in the

18
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
past, in some of the Central and Eastern European countries transformation is obligatory as
there are planning structures in the local communities with participation structures that
recognise disability organisations.
The implementation of the CRPD on the local level is, in some countries, mirrored within a
comprehensive disability political action plan, while in other countries selective actions are
more common. In countries in which a rights based approach is common (particularly in
Nordic countries) formally constituted participation structures such as Disability Councils are
the norm, while in other countries with a more charity or medically based tradition of
disability politics (like France, Portugal, Spain) the cooperation is more informal.
In communities in the same country with the same overall developmental path, different
policies for the implementation of the convention can be observed, though within a
common national and regional framework. The CRPD can be seen as a social innovation
which can be “re-invented” in the process of adoption in every implementing community.
This local flexibility is strength, provided there is variation and not deviation. The major
differences in the way of reception of the UN-CRPD on national country level indicate that
there is ‘room to manoeuvre’ for the adopting community and that the path determination
is not limiting special developments in a too intense way. This observation of varieties in
adopting the UN CRPD is important because it underlines the potential of exchange of
experiences and knowledge between local governments on national and European level.
To the same degree in which the UN-CRPD in the political and social discourse is perceived
as important in a country or a political level, it can be used for the interests of stakeholders
in the different contexts. It can be assumed that the innovative potential develop most
effectively, if the convention is seized up by civil rights activists who engage for the
implementation of the principles. The effectiveness of this local freedom of action is
significantly dependent on the formation of “coalitions for change”. Successful inclusion is
more likely to happen when stakeholders who are active in disability politics, political
decision makers, and other community activists collaborate to use the Convention to
achieve political actions to bring forward full inclusion and participation of persons with
disabilities.

19
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
BIBLIOGRAPHY/RECOMMENDED TEXTS
 European Commission, 2014, Report on the implementation of the UN Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) by the European Union
 European Foundation Center (EFC), 2011, Study on Challenges and Good Practices in
the Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
 In German: Färm, Ingemar (2005): AGENDA 22 – UN Standard Rules and local
disability planning; University of Siegen, cf , 29.01.2016
 In German: Fürst, Dietrich; Scholles, Frank (Ed.), Handbuch Theorien und Methoden
der Raum- und Umweltplanung. 3., vollst. überarb. Aufl. Dortmund, Rohn, S. 265–
275.
 Healey, Patsy (2006) Collaborative Planning. Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies,
2. Aufl. Houndmills-Basingstoke
 In German: Kristof, Kora (2010): Models of change. Einführung und Verbreitung
sozialer Innovationen und gesellschaftlicher Veränderungen in transdisziplinärer
Perspektive. 2006--Zugl.: Habil.-Schrift, 2006. Zürich: vdf-Hochschulverl 28.08.2013.
 Linden, Arvid (2013): Handisam-Checklist, Workshop Planning Inclusive Communities,
University of Siegen 8/9 October 2013, Accessed 10 August 2015
 Mintzberg, Henry u.a. (2008), Strategy Safari. Eine Reise durch die Wildnis des
strategischen Managements, München 2007
 Powell, Walter W. / DiMaggio, Paul J. (Hrsg.) (1991), The New Institutionalism in
Organisational Analysis, Chicago / London
 Rogers, Everett M. (2003): Diffusion of innovations. 5. Aufl. New York, NY [u.a.]: Free
Press.
 In German: Rohrmann, Albrecht/Schädler, Johannes/Kempf, Matthias/Konieczny,
Eva/Windisch, Marcus (2014a): Inklusive Gemeinwesen Planen. Abschlussbericht
eines Forschungsprojektes im Auftrag des Ministeriums für Arbeit, Integration und
Soziales in Nordrhein - Westfalen. (Abruf 10.12.2015).
 In German: Rohrmann, Albrecht/Schädler, Johannes/Kempf, Matthias/Konieczny,
Eva/Windisch, Marcus (2014b): Inklusive Gemeinwesen Planen. Eine Arbeitshilfe,

20
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by
 hrsg. vom Ministerium für Arbeit, Integration und Soziales des Landes Nordrhein-
Westfalen, Düsseldorf, 2014.
 In Swedish: Rönnerstein, Maryanne (Ed.) / Swedish Disability Federation, HSO (2001:
AGENDA 22; Sundybyberg, (29.01.2016)
 In German: Schädler, Johannes (2003), Stagnation oder Entwicklung in der
Behindertenhilfe. Chancen eines Paradigmenwechsels unter Bedingungen
institutioneller Beharrlichkeit. Hamburg
RESOURCES

 European Disability Forum (EDF), Disability Glossary

 Eurostat, Disability statistics
 Zero Project website (UN CRPD implementation: indicators and good practices)
 United Nations Enable website
 DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, EU Framework for the UN Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
 United Nations Convention for Rights of Persons with Disabilities:
 UN CRPD in English
 UN CRPD in various languages and formats
TRAINING MATERIALS
 Färm, Ingemar (2005): AGENDA 22 – UN Standard Rules and local disability planning;
University of Siegen, cf. , 29.01.2016

END OF HANDOUT

21
The Disability Leaders of Tomorrow Project
(D LoT) is generously supported by