Assistive technology use is associated with reduced capability poverty: a cross-sectional study in Bangladesh

Abstract

Assistive technology use is associated with reduced capability poverty: a crosssectional study in Bangladesh.Borg, Johan; Östergren, Per-Olof; Larsson, Stig; Rahman, Asm Atiqur; Bari, Nazmul; Khan, Ahm Noman Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Borg, J., Östergren, P-O., Larsson, S., Rahman, A. A., Bari, N., & Khan, A. N. (2012). Assistive technology use is associated with reduced capability poverty: a cross-sectional study in Bangladesh. Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology, 7(2), 112-121. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2011.602173 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Focusing on the ends rather than the economic means of human development, the capability approach offers an alternative view of poverty. The purpose was to explore the relation between assistive technology use and capability poverty in a low-income country.Method: Self-reported data on food intake, health care, education, politics, self-determination, selfrespect, family relationships and friendships were collected in Bangladesh through interviews of people with hearing impairments using and not using hearings aids, and people with ambulatory impairments using and not using manual wheelchairs (N=583). Differences in outcomes between users and non-users of assistive technology were analyzed using logistic regression.Results: Assistive technology users were more likely than non-users to report enhanced capabilities, hearing aid users to a larger extent than wheelchair users. Synergistic effects between assistive technology use and education were found. Conclusion:The use of assistive technology is predictive of reduced capability poverty in Bangladesh. Lack of wheelchair accessibility and the nature of selected outcomes may explain the limited association in the ambulatory group. Enhancing the effects of the other, there is support for providing education in combination with hearing aids.2

Assistive technology use and human rights enjoyment: a cross-sectional study in Bangladesh

“…The findings provide empirical support for using assistive technology interventions to facilitate full enjoyment of human rights. The results complement a previous report from the same sample, which found that assistive technology use is associated with better opportunities to do things one has reason to value and with better attitudes from neighbours [38]. …”

Assistive technology and people: a position paper from the first global research, innovation and education on assistive technology (GREAT) summit

“…The experience of impairment may be a "central and structuring" part of their experience [53,p.238], in which case interventions such as AT do not attempt to "fix" the body, but to address the elements which are "disabling" in a person's situation or environment [54]. Congruent with this idea is the capability approach, where developmental economists [55,56] suggest that disability, like poverty, social exclusion and other forms of disadvantage, be viewed through a "capability lens" and resources allocated to close the capability gap between a person's capacities and their aspirations [56]. Secondly, "disability" is a contested term [57,58] and does not fully represent all AT users: many with long-term illness and people experiencing the impact of agerelated conditions may not identify as disabled, yet benefit from assistive technologies.…”

Assistive products and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

“…End poverty in all its forms everywhere Conceptualization: Poverty is both a significant cause and consequence of impairment and disability. Assistive products are powerful enablers for people with impairments to overcome poverty. Target 1.2: By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions. Example: A study in Bangladesh found that the use of hearing aids and wheelchairs amongst people with hearing and ambulatory impairments respectively was predictive of reduced poverty (Borg et al, [15]). SDG 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture Conceptualization: Assistive products enable people with impairments to have the opportunity to contribute to the production of food. Target 2.3: Increase the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women and family farmers (among others, through non-farm employment). Example: Victims of landmines are often farmers from low and middle-income countries.…”