‘Bridging the Gap’: Integrating Human Rights- Based Approaches to Disability Welfare in Local Government in Uganda

Localizing inclusion and strategies for disability mainstreaming

The integration of a human rights-based approach to disability welfare mainstreaming in local government is crucial for inclusive development. The approach emphasises the recognition of individuals with disabilities as rights holders rather than mere recipients of charity, advocating for their full participation in the community (Degener 2016). The human rights model approach by Degener holds that the social model of disability is a heuristic for a rights-based approach to disability that focuses on anti-discrimination law rather than on welfare programmes. In contrast, the human rights model encompasses values for disability policy that acknowledge the human dignity of disabled persons. Therefore, by aligning disability welfare with social and human rights models and principles, local governments can foster environments that promote equality and dignity for all citizens, including those with disabilities. The model therefore balances the rights-based approach with the state’s role as a provider, ensuring equal access to essential services through a system that upholds equal rights for all (Patel and Mitlin 2009). Whereas human rights-based models offer robust guidelines that complement international and national frameworks for inclusive development, challenges remain in their operationalisation. The gap between political and social spaces seen in Uganda demonstrates the complexities involved in translating rights into tangible social-economic benefits (Zoanni 2022).

Notwithstanding the above, scholars of human rights and disability (Bahner 2022; McVeigh, et al. 2021; Stein and Lord 2021) continue to advocate for dismantling barriers that prevent full participation in society by promoting inclusive development at the local level. McVeigh, MacLachlan, Ferri and Mannan emphasize those successful outcomes in mainstreaming disability into policy-making and national planning, while Bahner considers promoting inclusive development better achieved through collaborative relationships with the state rather than relying solely on advocacy campaigns.

Although Sherlaw and Hudebine (2015) assert that political representation has improved, the social integration and empowerment of persons with disabilities remain limited. This has been attributed to the deeply rooted discrimination through cultural norms related to gender and race (Andrews 2020; Cole 2022). According to Hutchinson (2013), the cultural norms related to family misdeeds significantly impact the implementation of policies, thus leading to negative community responses and hindering the inclusion of disabled individuals in many aspects of community life. Studies and practices further indicate that, in mainstream disability welfare, the complex interplay between economic, social, and political factors must be highly considered (Liasidou 2013).

Whereas cultural barriers cause significant marginalisation of development programs for persons with disabilities, socio-economic difficulties related to limited access to opportunities are set in further as a result of the latter (Campbell and Mike 2013). Nevertheless, by leveraging positive cultural beliefs and practices and ensuring coordinated policies grounded in a social-cultural community set-up, local governments can stand a chance of supporting the mainstreaming of disability welfare. However, the economic barriers identified by Musyoki (2016) significantly hinder the effective mainstreaming of disability welfare at the local government level. These barriers, including funding, policy implementation, and socio-economic challenges, may thus affect both persons with disabilities and the local authorities responsible for their welfare (Musyoki 2016).

In addition, Uvin 2004 in Human Rights and Development noted that ‘human development approach has been implemented by the main development actors with boundaries between human rights and development, such processes can build on economic growth, strengthen neglect, or undermine local capacities, local networks, local knowledge and the underprivileged’. In Uganda, studies indicate that the welfare of persons with disabilities has remained poor, and they continue to experience a lower quality of life than the general population (Banks et al. 2020; Eide, Nanono and Omona 2021; Kyazze, Wesson and Naudé 2019). Existing literature has focused on civil rights as a positive political change and development discourse as separate from the involvement of PWDs (Katsui and Kumpuvuori 2008). By using a human rights-based approach, the study highlights the specific barriers persons with disabilities face in accessing social services, participating in local governance and benefiting from economic opportunities. This study further answers the question of whether the persisting poor welfare and quality of life among persons with disabilities in Uganda is linked to the approaches, which are used for disability mainstreaming.

A Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA) is a framework that integrates human rights principles and standards into policies, programs, and practices. It aims to promote and protect human rights, dignity, and well-being in the design and implementation of development programs, enabling individuals, organizations, and governments to work together to advance dignity, well-being, and social justice for all (Berman 2008). HRBA to development is linked to equal people’s participation in decision-making processes that affect their lives, by claiming their entitlements and working towards overcoming their disadvantage. First, a rights-based approach creates claims and not charity. Second, a rights-based approach shapes how development actions are implemented (Sengupta 2000). Therefore, rights-based expose the hidden priorities and structures behind violations and challenge the conditions that create and undermine wellness (Arimoro 2025). Moreover, from a social model perspective, disability is therefore viewed as a socially produced injustice, which it is possible to challenge and eliminate through radical social change in the context of persons affected by disability. Therefore, by locating the main problem in societal factors external to the individual, this account highlights similarities between the human rights and social models of disability (Lawson and Beckett 2021).

In this study, compliance was explored by looking at the implications of key principles of HRBA, which include equality, inclusion, equity, accountability, empowerment, and participation (D’Hollander, Pollet and Beke 2013), for persons with disabilities at the grassroots in terms of how their welfare aspects are integrated into the development process. Thus, the study highlights the specific barriers that persons with disabilities face in accessing social services, participating in local governance, and engaging in the broader development process to improve their wellbeing and inclusivity.

The welfare of persons with disabilities encompasses a range of social and financial support systems designed to assist individuals with disabilities. This includes healthcare, education, belonging, assistive devices, support services, security, legal, income, and other social services, aiming to promote their productivity, wellbeing, independence, and participation in society (Devandas 2017). This study investigated the process of designing and implementing existing welfare social services and programs for the general population by local governments in Uganda, including education, health, water, transport, legal protection, and livelihood programs, and how this process promotes inclusivity and equal involvement of persons with disabilities.

Scholars continue to emphasise the importance of person-centred approaches to address individual human rights and social justice for persons with disabilities (Glicksman et al. 2017). Thus, using the HRBA framework is paramount for understanding how development processes affect the welfare and quality of life of persons with disabilities at the grassroots level.

This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by focusing on the often-overlooked role of local governments in mainstreaming disability welfare within Uganda’s development framework. While much of the current research examines disability at the national or global level, this article delves into the localised challenges and opportunities for improving disability inclusion at the grassroots level. By using a human rights-based approach, the study highlights the specific barriers persons with disabilities face in accessing social services, participating in local governance and benefiting from economic opportunities.

Moreover, the study provides practical insights into the disconnect between international commitments, national policies, and their implementation at the local level, offering a nuanced understanding of the governance, cultural, and economic factors that influence disability welfare mainstreaming. The findings aim to inform policymakers, development practitioners, and local government officials on how to enhance disability-inclusive development, thus contributing to the ongoing discourse on inclusive development.

Moreover, there is no doubt that other researchers will build on this study’s findings to conduct further research to confirm, expand, improve, or enrich them in different contexts of the human rights-based approach and development, including disability mainstreaming. This will, in the long run, change the trajectory of the class of elites in the respective departments, who think and propose solutions to address the society’s social-economic challenges, which are more charity-based (Hogan 2019).

Design and sampling procedure

The study applied a phenomenological case study research design using qualitative methods to address the research questions. The aim of using a phenomenological research design was to explore the lived experiences and realities of the welfare of persons with disabilities. At the same time, a case study enables the uncovering of the in-depth particularities that shed light on the prominence of certain complex events and processes that shape disability mainstreaming in local government development plans. Purposive sampling was employed to select professionals and disability bodies who are fully involved in the development of district development plans (Denieffe 2020). In this case, 16 participants were selected from formal district disability bodies, which include the District Disability Council and the District Disability Union.

In contrast, six professionals were selected from community development, planning, probation, and human rights commission officers. In addition, 12 non-unionised persons with disabilities and 11 parents of children with disabilities with varying levels of impairments, which included both sensory, intellectual, and physical impairments, were selected. Snowball sampling was crucial in identifying and locating non-unionised persons with disabilities who are often not involved in disability formal structures (Naderifar, Goli and Ghaljaie 2017). Through working with sub-county development offices and local council leaders, families of persons with disabilities were visited in the communities of Buabale, Rwanyamahembe, Bucuro, Bwizibwera town council, and Kashare sub-county. The identified families also helped in identifying and locating other persons with disabilities who live in similar situations. The sample reached saturation at 23 primary respondents and 22 key informants, after which no new insights emerged (Braun and Clarke 2021).

Study population and data collection procedure

To explore the diversity of experiences, two participants were drawn from the planning department, which is the highest level of decentralization system of governance in Uganda. Moreover, the district planning process provides a clear picture of what is fed into the National Development Plan (Ayeko-Kümmeth 2014). Three officers from the main community development office, the probation office, and the special needs education office provided further insights into the process of mainstreaming services for marginalized groups, including persons with disabilities, within local government structures. In contrast, an officer from the regional human rights commission shared views on inclusivity and the rights of persons with disabilities. On the other hand, participants from the Disability Council and the District Disability Union included 12 persons with disabilities and their four members, who represent CSOs and government departments, and discussed how policies and programs are developed and the participation of persons with disabilities in the development process. Cognizant of the fact that there are non-unionized persons with disabilities who are isolated and remain less involved in disability formal structures (Eide, Nanono and Omona 2021) and therefore may have unexplored experiences and challenges, twelve non-unionized persons with disabilities were selected, while eleven parents of children with disabilities were also selected. Parents of children with disabilities were targeted because they often bear the burden of managing barriers which affect the welfare of their children (Bannink, Idro and Van Hove 2016). The participants in this category had impairments ranging from sensory to intellectual and physical.

In-depth interviews with key informants explored how disability policy framework has facilitated disability mainstreaming in the development process. These were envisaged to provide in-depth information on disability welfare mainstreaming in the development process, by virtue of their mandate to mainstream the development concerns of vulnerable and marginalized groups, including persons with disabilities, into the District and National development plans (Eide, Nanono and Omona 2021). Documentary review was also applied to obtain previously documented guidelines, such as National and local policies, government reports, budget documents, and other related legal frameworks (Trautrims et al. 2012). This was important for identifying key resource allocations and for triangulating policy intentions with on-the-ground perspectives gathered from interviews with persons with disabilities and FGDs with disability bodies. The interviews were complemented by observation on how persons with disabilities access information, toilet facilities, bathrooms, water for bathing, food, and other facilities, and how they move from their homes. Direct observation was also important during local government meetings and public service points. Observing real-life interactions and administrative practices helped capture how disability welfare is approached and operationalised and provided valuable contextual data from interviews and document analysis.

Before conducting the interviews, participants aged 18 or older provided written informed consent, while solely their consenting caregivers/parents, not by the children, provided when the information gathered included discussing the rights of children below 18 years old, this information. Additionally, the researcher ensured that respondents’ identities were highly protected. In this case, no respondent’s name was used in the consent and data collection tools; instead, participants were coded whenever necessary to retrieve their information or to reach out to them again, and ethical research clearance was obtained from relevant bodies. For instance, the Research Ethical Review Board, Mbarara University of Science and Technology granted ethical research clearance, reference number MUST-2022–578.

A systematic process of familiarising the self with the data was carried out through transcribing the interviews, bringing together field notes, and reading through several times, during which observations about potential patterns, interesting points, and emerging sub-themes were made. Descriptive labels that capture the essence of the data were identified and noted down. These initial descriptive labels were grouped into broader categories based on their relationship to the research questions, reviewed, and organized into themes where the meanings and significance of these themes were explored, linked with scholarly information to gain insights into how disability mainstreaming is approached and how this affects the welfare of persons with disabilities at the grassroots level.

Fragmented coordination in disability mainstreaming

Although Uganda’s disability policies have led to the development of mainstreaming programs implemented by different government agencies and partners, the participation of persons with disabilities has remained limited. The revised National Disability Act 2020, amended in 2024, remains silent on how to address intertwined disability barriers and on how inclusive services are developed and coordinated across Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) to reach target beneficiaries (Byamukama 2020). In this case, such unaddressed barriers exclude persons with disabilities from effective participation in the development process (Eide, Nanono and Omona 2021). For example, studies have shown that the main challenge that persons with disabilities experience in Uganda is low quality of life, as they are unable to afford supporting aids such as wheelchairs and walking sticks, which they must use to participate in society (Kyazze, Wesson and Naudé 2019, 5)

… Although line ministries, including education, health, and internal affairs, have their own strategies for addressing disability inclusion, some barriers, such as access to assistive devices, information, and interpreters and guides, have remained unaddressed by either. Every challenge that affects persons with disabilities is seen as the responsibility of the community development office, yet our mandate and financing stop at implementing the social protection programs (Community Development Office Mbarara District LG 2022).

Whereas the community development office in local governments is mandated to implement social protection programs for vulnerable populations, including persons with disabilities, it lacks both the mandate and sufficient resources to address intertwined disability barriers across disability functional domains. As a result, the key barriers faced by persons with disabilities remain unaddressed at the local level, weakening the overall impact of disability inclusion efforts.

Relatedly lack of strategies to operationalize the existing policies leaves them unimplemented.

… Although the Inclusive Education Policy emphasises disability mainstreaming, it is silent on the recruitment of special needs teachers, the financing of exceptional facilities and equipment, and access to assistive aids. For example, when our teachers pursue further training in special needs, they are promoted to a higher level of education, not necessarily for special needs assignments. In most schools where we have children with special needs, we lack special needs teachers. As a result, interventions remain piecemeal, and improvements in special needs education are difficult to achieve. The district local authorities are therefore left to deal with the shortfalls in special needs education, such as a lack of teachers and specialised materials, without a direct policy framework for sufficient funding to address these issues (Probation office, Mbarara District LG 2022)

Looking at the Employment Act 2006, which provides for equal consideration of all persons for any job opportunity, and section 34 of the Act prohibits discrimination on grounds of disability among other special categories of employees. However, it does not provide measures to address barriers to information access, physical accessibility, personal guides, and occupational safety, among others. This makes employers forego the requirements of the law when recruiting employees.

… The Employment Act does not address some barriers, such as communication and accessibility issues. Many persons with disabilities may not have heard or read the job advertisements since they are not broadcast on the radio or published in newspapers, thus eliminating the deaf and the blind. In addition, there is no way blind persons can access equal employment opportunities when the public service jobs structure lacks sign language interpreters and guides (Focus group, District Disability Union Mbarara 2022)

Besides, the study’s findings indicate that weak disability monitoring mechanisms pose a policy challenge. The lack of clarity on the mandate and powers of The National Council for Persons with disability (NCD) and The National Union for Persons with disabilities (NUDIPU) has caused a state of ‘to whom it may concern’. NUDIPU neither have the power to regulate the operations of other organisations of persons with disabilities nor hold them accountable for their actions.

… NCD was created by an Act of Parliament in 2003, with the key mandate to monitor and evaluate how the Government, NGOs and the private sector include and meet the needs of persons with disabilities in their work. However, the powers of NCD are not spelt out, nor are the mechanisms for financing its activities at different levels. This leaves government Agencies and NGOs free to incorporate disability rights into their programs. (Focus group, Disability Union Mbarara 2022)

Although most of the literature on disability mainstreaming in Uganda has not articulated the weakness of the disability policy framework as a challenge. This finding is supported by the recent report by the UN Office for the High Commissioner on Human Rights, which criticised Uganda for the persisting gaps in processes intended to address welfare-related critical issues affecting persons with disabilities and for the failure to domesticate the UN CRPD, which it ratified in 2008 (Wickenden et al. 2020).

The dominance of top-down approaches to disability mainstreaming

Contrary to UN CRPD, Article 3 – which states that ‘The principles of the present Convention shall be; to ensure the freedom to make one’s own choices and independence of persons; Non-discrimination, full and effective participation; equality of opportunity; accessibility and equality between men and women with disabilities, disability empowerment programs have to continue to be designed at higher levels. These programs are then pushed down to districts and communities for implementation, often without adequate participation of persons with disabilities in their planning and decision-making processes. For example, the study noted that guidelines for disability emancipation programs and other donor-funded programs, which state the intended beneficiaries and eligibility criteria, do not align with the reality on the ground and fail to address barriers, which exclude persons with disabilities.

… Limited involvement of persons with disabilities from the community level has led to the development of guidelines which become difficult to implement. The majority of persons with disabilities are not benefiting from government programs because they fail to meet the set criteria. some of the guidelines for accessing the national disability grunt include group formation, registration, opening of bank account and completing application forms which exclude those who are already disadvantaged due to their level of impairments, low literacy level, and society attitudes (Probation office, Mbarara District LG 2022)

Relatedly, a report on the Situation Analysis of Persons with Disabilities in Uganda highlights several similar challenges, ‘Although the social development sector, where disability falls, only accounts for 0.6 per cent of the national budget in the financial year 2021/2022. However, even the funds allocated to local governments for social development activities remained unspent. This was mainly because most of the designated disability-specific central government-funded programs or activities are either non-existent at the local government or target beneficiaries fail to meet eligibility criteria, leading to underspending (Eide, Nanono and Omona 2021). This concurs with the study participants’ narratives:

… Only capable persons with disabilities can form groups, and one or two people will lead each group. Other members are just passive participants and may not even know whether the support has been released. This is the reason why the majority of them are not benefiting from government programs (Focus group, Parents Association Mbarara 2022).

While it is true that the government has developed interventions to support persons with disabilities, the majority said they had little information about government programs from political leaders and did not participate because they lacked the means to get involved.

… I have heard about the parish development model and that the president gives funds to women for development. I was also told that the government gives money to people with disabilities, but I don’t know what I can do to get such support. I just leave on my own (A person with disability, Mbarara 2022)

In addition, a member from the district disability union reported, ‘majority of persons with disabilities are not sensitized about their rights and how to participate in the available programs. This has limited the participation of the majority who live in deep communities and has also created a big gap between the few elite persons with disabilities and the rest of the persons with disabilities.

Earlier studies by Zoanni (2022) indicated that Uganda’s progressive disability policy framework has not significantly changed the lives of persons with disabilities. This analysis indicates that the government’s disability emancipation programs demonstrate a commitment to improving the welfare of persons with disabilities in Uganda. However, the freedom of persons with disabilities to voice their needs, contribute suggestions on what works for them, and equally participate in general development remains limited, hence the persisting poor quality of life of the majority of persons with disabilities. The finding agrees with the assertion that the ‘human rights-based approach to development is linked to equal people’s participation in the decision-making processes which affect their lives, by claiming what is their entitlement and working towards coming out of their disadvantage (Sengupta 2000), as opposed to charity and functionalist-based approaches where needs are identified by development professionals (Hogan 2019). The finding also supports Sen’s (2014) work ‘Development as Freedom’, where development is seen as people’s capabilities to fight for their freedoms and influence the direction of their lives.

Limited interventions in creating social space for persons with disabilities

Even when the government of Uganda has taken a firm stance on disability mainstreaming, availability and access to social services by persons with disabilities have not received the necessary attention. A community development officer observed that ‘our health institutions lack rehabilitation professionals, and services and where some rehabilitation services are available, they are too expensive for a common person with disability’. Access to rehabilitation services and assistive devices remains a significant challenge facing persons with disabilities. As a mother of a child with disability narrated;

… When our district leaders come for elections, they tell us they have constructed roads and built hospitals and schools. However, for over 14 years, since I had a child with a disability, I have moved around government hospitals. However, all I am told is that disability services are not available. Therefore, I think the government services exclude the needs of persons with disabilities (A parent of a child, Mbarara 2022)

Similar concerns affect many other spheres of welfare of persons with disabilities. During home visits, the researcher found children with disabilities staying at home when their siblings were away for school. Some of their parents reported having tried several schools, but their children were rejected based on having disability, while others reported finding it difficult to access schools because of the inaccessibility of the structures and lack of mobility aids.

… The majority of children with disabilities whom we refer to schools are either rejected or fail to continue after enrolment due to discrimination and lack of facilities to support their needs (Focus group, Parents Association Mbarara 2022).

Generally, responses indicate that access to social services – including health care, education facilities, legal services, water sources, and transport services – remains a significant challenge for persons with disabilities compared to the general population. In this regard, the researcher observed that some persons with disabilities were crawling on the ground due to a lack of appropriate devices. In contrast, others had assistive devices that were either ill-fitting or non-functional, having been donated to them without any professional assessment or fitting.

Previous studies have also noted that ‘although Uganda has worked to improve the lives of persons with disabilities by mainstreaming disability interventions in the development process, a wide gap between people with disabilities and those without disabilities in access to services such as education, health, legal aid, employment, income, housing condition, and many others remains (Ssemata et al. 2024). Eide, Nanono and Omona (2021) noted that over 50% of persons with disabilities were not aware of important services that could contribute to their welfare and health and are not known or not available. In Uganda, items like suitable assistive devices and orthotics are still costly for parents to afford and are only available through donations (Ganshanga and Asasira 2022).

Knowledge, statistical gaps, and practices

The study revealed that the lack of harmonisation of disability data collected by the National Identification and Registration Authority (NIRA), the Health Management Information System (HMIS), CSOs, and other OPDs across the country creates significant gaps in the available disability data.

… There is a lack of a formal system for assessment, registration and harmonising data on disability across all levels to inform planning. For example, NUDIPU only registers its member organisations, not individuals; NIRA collects basic data on disability, but this is self-reported and less disaggregated; and the MGLSD obtains its data from CSO reports on individual CSO objectives. So, which data should we rely on to plan for people with disabilities? (Community Development Office, Mbarara District LG 2022)

Additionally, the knowledge gaps on what disability is, what causes disability and the paradigm shift in approaches to addressing disability remain a significant challenge for disability welfare mainstreaming in the development process

… When we complained about the inaccessibility of public buildings, one of our leaders said, ‘What do you want us to do, all these buildings are not accessible and we do not have money to demolish them and put up new structures’. I wonder whether our leaders have an idea about the reasonable accommodation principle, which would help to improve accessibility (Focus group, Mbarara District LG 2022).

Other group members reported that public buildings are still put up when they are not accessible to persons with disabilities. The analysis confirms earlier findings that the general absence of data and statistics on disability, both at the national and local levels, reduced the significance of programming and resource allocation to services for persons with disabilities within general programming. (Atim 2023; Eide, Nanono and Omona 2021; Kyazze, Wesson and Naudé 2019). This explained the persisting gaps in disability welfare mainstreaming.

Attitudes towards disability

Negative attitudes towards disability remain one of the major challenges to disability welfare mainstreaming. The negative attitudes towards disability are not only at the community level but also among service providers and leaders who influence the planning and implementation of government programs, as narrated.

… An example is the parish development model (PDM) program, which allocates 10% of its funds to support persons with disabilities. However, in most of the SACCOs which have been formed, persons with disabilities have not been involved. Leaders never inform them of this opportunity, and those who apply to join the SACCOs are equally discriminated against (Community Development office, Mbarara District 2022).

During the interviews, some participants expressed their frustration towards government programs because of the way they are treated by the general population.

… I have previously tried to get support from the government without success. When I asked to be registered with the ‘Emywoga’ SACCO, a government economic empowerment program, our community leaders told me to join groups for persons with disabilities, not general development groups. I have now given up (A person with disability, Mbarara District 2022)

Although the attention has been given to civic rights, persons with disabilities are still discriminated against for property rights, matters relating to marriage, family, parenthood, relationships and belonging.

… Of recent we have had a case of a girl child with a disability who was impregnated by a man and when we tried to intervene neither community members nor leaders have shown interest to hold the defiler for this abuse. This negative mindset towards disability in our community is a big setback (Human Rights Commission officer, Mbarara 2022).

In addition, negative attitudes also affect other family members including parents, especially mothers and siblings. Some children with disabilities are either neglected by fathers to mothers or altogether abandoned to ‘old’ grandparents. During home visits, the researcher observed that some of the children with disabilities were either found with old grandparents while others were under the care of single mothers, as one mother stated;

… I have struggled to raise this child single handed because when I produced him, the father abandoned us in a rental house saying that in their family, they do not produce children with disabilities (Mother of a Child with Disability, Mbarara 2022)

Previous studies by Bannink, Idro, and Van Hove (2016) indicated high levels of stress among mothers of children with disabilities and affecting their function. Therefore, mainstreaming disability should go beyond individual persons with disabilities as attitudes towards disability have social-economic implications for both parents and other family members.

The impact of social norms on the application of human rights-based approach

The researchers identified an ambivalent role of social norms and traditions about disability. The social norms account for professionals’ and other community members’ behaviour, in which persons with disabilities are seen as objects of help, support, care, and compassion. On the other hand, the second connotation curries the negative attitude that persons with disabilities are ‘useless’ beings; they are therefore not seen as human rights holders.

In interviews with government officials, they mostly stated; ‘we give, we support or we provide…’ to persons with disabilities rather than ‘we engage, we involve, and we build…’ persons with disabilities. Therefore, the role of persons with disabilities as rights holders in the development process is so limited, as persons with disabilities have been conditioned to beg and wait for government, NGOs, politicians and well-wishers to provide. This represents a ‘Charity’ approach to disability interventions as opposed to a human rights approach, as observed by the participant.

… Our leaders think that people with disabilities only need material help with money, food and assistive aids. They do not recognise that we have the same rights to access information, education, property, relationships and employment as other people in society. Because of this perception, some persons with disabilities have been turned into baggers (focus group, Parents Association Mbarara 2022)

During home visits, the researcher observed that some of the persons with disabilities have more than one wheelchair while others have none. Some wheelchairs were inappropriate (too big), which causes secondary disabilities like postural deformities due to poor sitting posture.

Therefore, the dominance of social norms and traditions which support ‘Charity’ and or ‘Functionalism’ as opposed to a paradigm shift in understanding disability towards ‘Social model’ (Glicksman et al. 2017), accounts for the limited involvement of persons with disabilities in identifying their needs and in possible solutions that can influence the direction of their lives. This kind of approach has implications for the whole disability welfare mainstreaming process, where government interventions have remained inadequate, inappropriate and exclusive.

Limitations of the study

The study examined the entire process of disability mainstreaming in development, not isolated spheres. Therefore, the findings may not capture the details of how the process influences each sphere of life for persons with disabilities. This was a qualitative study involving small numbers of participants from one local government from one region of the country. Therefore, the results may not be empirically generalised to all local governments, especially to expose the hidden structural violations that undermine the welfare rights of all persons with disabilities in Uganda, taking into account the different historical practices and other environmental factors in other regions.