How can we achieve disability inclusion?
Understanding the social model and the framing of the CRPD
Introduction: why disability inclusion matters
Disability inclusion is about creating societies where all people – regardless of how they move, communicate, think or interact – can participate equally. Yet millions of children with disabilities remain excluded from education, healthcare, play, and decisions that affect their lives. This exclusion is not inevitable; it is the result of choices, systems, and environments that fail to accommodate human diversity. This article explores how we can achieve meaningful disability inclusion by rethinking disability itself, using international human rights frameworks like the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), embracing inclusive language, and building policies and programmes on strong research evidence.
Rethinking disability: the social model and the CRPD
The CRPD, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2006 and entering into force in 2008, marked a transformative shift in international human rights law. Unlike earlier treaties that focused on specific services or accommodations, the CRPD reframed disability through a lens of rights, dignity, and equality. It emerged from the active leadership of persons with disabilities and their representative organisations, and it obliges States to take concrete steps to ensure full participation in all areas of life.
"Millions of children with disabilities remain excluded from education, healthcare, play, and decisions that affect their lives. This exclusion is not inevitable; it is the result of choices, systems, and environments that fail to accommodate human diversity."
At the heart of the CRPD lies Article 1, which defines its purpose as: “to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.” This statement conceals a shift in legal and social thinking. Rather than treating persons with disabilities as objects of charity or welfare, the CRPD affirms them as rights-holders – individuals with autonomy and agency, fully entitled to participate in shaping the policies and decisions that affect their lives.
Perhaps most significantly, the CRPD challenges assumptions about the nature of disability itself. It moves away from the Medical Model, which sees disability as a defect within the person to be treated or cured, and adopts a social and rights-based model. In this view, people are not disabled by their impairments but by the barriers around them – physical, legal, institutional, or attitudinal – that restrict their participation.
This approach reframes disability as a universal human condition. All individuals, at different points in life, may encounter impairments or functional limitations. Disability, then, is not a marginal issue affecting a small minority, but a core part of human diversity. Consequently, the built, legal, and social environment must be designed to reflect that diversity.
What the CRPD means in practice
The implications of the CRPD are far-reaching. States that ratify the Convention are legally bound to revise their domestic laws, policies, and programmes to reflect its principles. This includes dismantling legal and social barriers that prevent access to education, employment, healthcare and community life.
Critically, the CRPD demands a fundamental reorientation in how societies respond to disability: away from viewing disability as an individual tragedy, and toward understanding it as a mismatch between people and their environments. Achieving inclusion means removing the disabling barriers, not attempting to ‘fix’ the person. This includes reforming discriminatory laws (whether explicit or unintended), redesigning public spaces and services to be accessible, and ensuring that children with disabilities are not segregated or left out of mainstream systems.
Put simply, dignity and equality cannot be achieved by accident. Societies must take deliberate, proactive steps to build environments in which everyone can thrive.
The role of language: person-first terminology
One visible expression of this shift is the use of inclusive and respectful language. The term “children with disabilities” reflects the person-first language adopted by the CRPD and across the United Nations system. It emphasizes that disability is just one part of a child’s identity – it does not define who they are.
This approach supports a rights-based model of inclusion, reinforcing the idea that children with disabilities are individuals with equal rights, not cases to be managed. It also helps combat ableism, the set of assumptions and stereotypes that position people with disabilities as lesser or dependent.
"Rather than treating persons with disabilities as objects of charity or welfare, the CRPD affirms them as rights-holders–individuals with autonomy and agency, fully entitled to participate in shaping the policies and decisions that affect their lives"
Some advocacy communities – particularly in the UK and those grounded in the social model – prefer terms like “disabled children” to emphasize that it is society, not the child, that creates disability. While this framing is also valid, international guidance favours person-first terminology to ensure consistency, clarity, and respect across different languages and contexts.
Inclusive language matters. It shapes perceptions, informs policy, and contributes to a cultural shift where children with disabilities are recognised as full, equal participants in society.
Why research evidence is essential for disability inclusion
Achieving disability inclusion is not just a moral or legal imperative – it also requires knowing what works. And for that, we need research. Without robust, inclusive evidence, commitments to disability inclusion risk remaining rhetorical. Research plays a critical role in revealing structural inequalities, identifying barriers to access, and testing the effectiveness of interventions.
Despite global recognition of the CRPD, children with disabilities remain among the most under-researched and underserved populations. Their experiences are often absent from national data systems, rendering them invisible in planning and policymaking. While a rights-based approach requires that inclusion be pursued proactively – regardless of data gaps – the lack of evidence can still contribute to underinvestment, particularly where decision-makers are navigating the tension between human rights commitments and budgetary constraints. Strengthening the evidence base does not replace the obligation to act; rather, it enhances our ability to do so effectively and equitably.
Making the invisible visible
Effective research helps make the unseen visible. It documents the ways in which children with disabilities are excluded – from schools, clinics, playgrounds, and political life – and helps design systems to respond.
"Achieving disability inclusion is not just a moral or legal imperative–it also requires knowing what works. And for that, we need research"
For example, a study in the Philippines found that households with children with disabilities spend up to three times more on healthcare than others, highlighting the need for targeted social protection. In Paraguay, research on digital inclusion led to the adoption of Accessible Digital Textbooks and changes in national education policy. And in the State of Palestine, a KAPB study showed that while parents were strong advocates for their children, they lacked support to challenge entrenched discrimination.
These examples demonstrate that data alone is not enough. It must be turned into actionable insight that guides policy and reform.
Inclusive research, inclusive solutions
Just as programmes must be inclusive, so too must the research that informs them. For too long, research on disability has been conducted about children with disabilities rather than with them. This exclusion limits the relevance and credibility of findings.
Inclusion must begin at the research design stage. Children and youth with disabilities – and their representative organisations – should have the opportunity to identify priority questions, help shape methodologies, participate in data collection, and inform how findings are applied. This is more than consultation – it is co-creation. As the Global Research Agenda for Children with Disabilities puts it: “Research without us is not about us.”
A Global Research Agenda for change
To strengthen the evidence base and close persistent gaps, UNICEF Innocenti led the development of the Global Research Agenda for Children with Disabilities. This framework was co-created with over 170 stakeholders, including children and youth with disabilities, organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs), researchers, and donors.
The Agenda identifies five priority areas where evidence is urgently needed: violence prevention and protection from harm; disability-inclusive social protection; strengthening the role of OPDs in advocacy and research; inclusive education models; and early identification and intervention.
"Inclusion must begin at the research design stage. Children and youth with disabilities – and their representative organisations – should have the opportunity to identify priority questions, help shape methodologies, participate in data collection, and inform how findings are applied. This is more than consultation – it is co-creation."
Each of these reflects not only an absence of data but a pressing need for change. For example, children with disabilities are more likely to experience violence and less likely to report it. Families face higher expenses but are rarely supported through tailored protection schemes. Inclusive education policies exist but often lack the evidence to guide implementation, especially in low-resource settings.
The Research Agenda is a roadmap. It promotes participatory approaches, supports investment decisions, and ensures that evidence leads to practical outcomes.
Intersectionality and methodology: doing research right
Disability never exists in isolation. It intersects with other forms of disadvantage (and advantage) – gender, poverty, geography, conflict, ethnicity – to shape children’s opportunities and risks. An effective research approach must adopt this intersectional lens, capturing the complexity of lived experience.
Equally important is the methodology. Disability-inclusive research means using tools and formats that are accessible to all participants – for example, Easy Read materials, sign language videos, and assistive tech-compatible surveys. It means accounting for diverse types of disability, including intellectual and communication impairments, and ensuring that findings are available in formats that communities can understand and use.
Inclusive methods are not an add-on – they are essential to valid, ethical, and impactful research.
From evidence to action
Research is not the destination – it is the starting point. To realise the CRPD’s vision of dignity, autonomy, and inclusion, evidence must be turned into action. That means ensuring that research findings are integrated into national development plans and donor strategies; that children with disabilities are part of the policy design process; and that inclusive systems are funded, implemented, and held accountable.
Governments, donors, researchers, and civil society all have a role to play. Without a commitment to inclusive evidence and its uptake, inclusion will remain a distant goal.
Conclusion: inclusion is a choice – and a responsibility
Disability inclusion is not a technical challenge – it is a political and moral one. It requires rethinking assumptions, reworking systems, and listening to those whose voices have been excluded for too long. The CRPD gives us the framework. The social model gives us the lens. And research gives us the tools.
But tools must be used. With inclusive research, strong partnerships, and a commitment to action, we can build societies where all children – including those with disabilities – are seen, heard, and valued.
Inclusion is not a favour. It is a right. And it is achievable.