disability activism and the politics of...

Disability activism and the politics of scale

ROB KITCHINDepartment of Geography and National Institute for Regional and Spatial Analysis (NIRSA), National University of Ireland, Maynooth, County Kildare, Ireland(e-mall: [email protected])

ROBERT WILTONSchool of Geography and Geology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada LBS 4MI (e-mall: [email protected])

In this paper, we examine the role of spatial scale inmediating and shaping political struggles betweendisabled people and the state. Specifically, we drawon recent theoretical developments concerning thesocial construction of spatial scale to interpret twocase studies of disability activism within Canada andIreland. In particular, we provide an analysis of howsuccessful the disability movement in each locale hasbeen at )iumping scale' and enacting change, as wellas examining what the consequences of suchscaling-up have been for the movement itself. Wedemonstrate that the political structures operatingin each country markedly affect the scaled nature ofdisability issues and the effectiveness of politicalmobilization at different scales.

Dans cette dissertation, nous examinons le rdle del'dchelle spatiale dans la mediation et leddveloppement des luttes politiques entre leshandicapes et l'Etat. Spdcifiquement, nous nousinspirons des recents de'veloppements theoriquesconcernant la structure sociale de l'ichelle spatialepour interprdter deux etudes de cas d'activisme deshandicapes au Canada et en Irlande. Dans ces deuxdtudes, nous analysons en particulier le taux desuccds obtenu par les mouvements des handicapesdans chacun de ces pays en matidre de << sautd'dchelle X et pour provoquer un changement. Nousexaminons aussi les retombdes d'une telleaugmentation d'echelle sur le mouvement lui-me^me.Nous ddmontrons que les structures politiquespriesentes dans chaque pays affectent profonde'mentla nature hierarchique des questions dinvalidite' etl'efficacite de la mobilisatioh politique d diffdrentesdchelles.

The Canadian Geographer/ Le Geographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003) 97-11 5© / Canadlan Association of Geographers / LAssoclation canadienne des geographes

98 Rob Kitchin and Robert Wilton

Introduction

Disabled people remain one of the most margin-alized groups in many developed societies.Despite this marginalization-and, in part,because of it-the last three decades have seenthe emergence of a political presence for disabledpeople in many countries. Since the early 1970s,activists have challenged the view of disability asan individualized, medical phenomenon andrejected pity and paternalism in favour of equalityand empowerment. International, national,regional and local disability organizations haveemerged, although the presence and politicaleffectiveness of these organizations varies mark-edly between different countries and contexts.

In this paper, we examine the role of spatial scalein mediating and shaping political strugglesbetween disabled people and the state. We draw onrecent theoretical developments concerning thesocial construction of spatial scale to interpret twocase studies of disability activism within Canadaand Ireland. A number of questions guide ourwork: At what scales are political (state) decisionsmade that impact the lives of disabled people? Towhat extent have disabled people been able tomobilize effectively at those scales that mattermost for sociospatial justice? How successful havegroups been at 'jumping scale'-whereby politicalclaims and power established at one geographicalscale can be expanded to another-and with whatconsequences? How has the restructuring ofpolitical scales wrought by neoliberalism influ-enced the nature and relative success of disabilitymovements in different contexts? Ultimately, wefocus on spatial scale to provide additional insightinto the nature of disability politics in Canada andIreland and the opportunities and challengesfacing disability movements in both contexts. Assuch, the paper builds upon and extends researchthat has investigated the geographies of disability(e.g., Imrie 1996; Butler and Parr 1999; Gleeson1999; Kitchin 2000) and social movements (e.g.,Cresswell 1996; Brown 1997; Routledge 1997)more generally.

The paper proceeds as follows. We first examinerecent theoretical developments in work on thepolitics of scale. We then discuss the developmentof disability movements in Western societies,thinking specifically about the significance of themovements, factors facilitating and/or constrain-

ing their succeFs and the spatial scales at whichsuch movements have been operating. The mainfocus of the paper comprises two case studies ofdisability activism. The first of these is in Ontario,with emphasis on the scaling up of activism fromthe municipality to the provincial level in a periodof municipal restructuring. The second case dealswith disability activism in Ireland. Emphasis isplaced on the significance of political clientelismas an explanation for the relative success ofactivists at the local level and their relativeabsence at the national scale. Finally, we identifylessons for disability activism and the politics ofscale.

The Politics of Scale

Recent geographic research has challenged ourunderstanding of spatial scale as 'unproblematic,pre-given and fixed hierarchy of bounded spaces',with theorists suggesting instead that scale be'conceptualized as socially constructed ratherthan ontologically pre-given, and that the geo-graphic scales constructed are themselves impli-cated in the constitution of social, economic andpolitical processes' (Delaney and Leitner 1997, 93;see also Herod 1998; Marston 2000; Miller 2000).As part of broader developments in the theoriza-tion of social space, a number of authors haveargued (1) that scale is produced by actors andtherefore open to transformation and (2) that thediscourses and actions constituting the politics ofscale are a fundamental ingredient of the ways inwhich we go about creating, living within andstruggling over a complex set of power relationspresent within spaces of production and reproduc-tion (Herod 1991; Jonas 1994; Miller 2000). In add-ition, research indicates that the politicalconstruction of scale is not confined to themechanisms of formal state power, but occursacross a broader range of actors, allowing forgreater recognition of the role of social movementsand other entities (Herod 1991; Miller 2000). AsDelaney and Leitner (1997, 95) posit, scale is(re)produced and transformed through the inter-play of 'context, actors, strategies, maneuvers,stakes, ideologies and time'. Thus, Marston (2000,221) argues that as geographers, '[O]ur goal withrespect to scale should be to understand how par-ticular scales become constituted and transformedin response to particular sociospatial dynamics'.

The Canadian Geographer / Le CGographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)

Disability activism and the politics of scaie 99

In thinking about the social construction ofscale, some recent work emphasizes the role struc-tural forces play in shaping and reshaping scales atwhich political action occurs. Here, considerableemphasis has been given to the relationship betweencapital, globalization and a rescaling of the state atlocal, national and international levels. For exam-ple, Smith (1984) argues that scale is producedthrough the contradictory discursive and materialpractices of capital as expressed through thetensions of mobility and fixity, equalization anddifferentiation, cooperation and competition thatlead to uneven development (Herod 1997). How-ever, as Marston (2000) indicates, it is not justcapital/forces of production that determine thesocial construction of scale. Social relations ofreproduction and consumption are also central tothe structure and function of different scales,including that of the household. Moreover, otherscholars emphasize the importance of oppos-itional politics, with writers such as Herod (1997),Leitner (1997) and Miller (2000) arguing that thesocial construction of scale is an outcome ofstruggles between actors. In other words, labour(and other groups) are also involved in using andshaping scales for political action.

Struggles over spatial scale are both material andsymbolic in nature. In material terms, actors makestrategic decisions about the scale(s) at which theirorganizing and political activity should take place.Miller (2000), discussing the scaled nature of thestate, argues that social movements need notmobilize at the scale at which their grievanceexists if more favourable political opportunitiesexist elsewhere. For the same reason, actors mayseek to change the scale at which material pro-cesses operate. Interrelated in complex ways withthe scaling of material processes are symbolicstruggles over the meaning of different scales.Drawing on the work of Henri Lefebvre and DavidHarvey, Miller (ibid.) argues that we can think ofthese struggles in terms of 'representations ofscale' that offer competing conceptions of thescales at which material processes operate, aswell as the (in)appropriateness of different spatialscales for the mobilization of collective actors andthe articulation of political demands. In this sense,the relative potency of representations and coun-terrepresentations may be vital in determining thepossibility for and outcome of political strugglesat different scales.

Of particular interest in thinking about oppos-itional social movements in general and the disabil-ity movement in particular is the way in whichcollective political actors are able to move acrossor jump scales, using political gains made at onelevel to challenge barriers encountered at others-either to operate over multiple scales or to move toa new scale of operation at which resistancebecomes more effective at engendering change(Smith 1992; Jonas 1994; Staeheli 1994; Pastor2001). Focusing on urban social movements,Pastor (ibid.) argues that the interdependence ofinner city and suburb has made the urban region akey scale for social-movement actors. Writing aboutthe labour movement, Herod (1998, 18) arguesthat scaling up effectively gives campaigns ororganizations access to a broader range ofresources and support for a campaign. Examiningthe 1989 student protests in China, the mid-1980sFilipino protests against the Marcos regime and thecivil-rights movement in the United States, Adams(1996, 416) documents how social movementsscaled up, using telecommunications media toshift localized political struggles onto nationaland international stages, allowing them to chal-lenge 'territorially bounded authority systems...[and] escape the social confines of territorialspace'. Such single-issue organizing (e.g., aroundthe environment or human rights) can destabilizetraditional party politics through their failure torecognize constituent, and often national, bound-aries (Agnew 1997). For Cox (1998, 2), this jumpingof scales is about attempting to reconcile 'spacesof dependence' (the locales at which materialevents and injustices happen) with 'spaces ofengagement' (the 'space in which the politics ofsecuring a space of dependence unfolds').

Shifting the scale of struggle can be difficult foropposition movements to achieve, however,because the hegemonic construction (and enforce-ment) of scale by dominant interests may preventeffective mobilization at politically potent scales.For example, political systems that operatethrough local clientelism mean that political actionat regional and national scales is difficult. toenact, as power rests locally. When power residescentrally, localized political causes can fail tojump scale because they are labelled as parochialand particularized and are therefore open to belit-tling and suppression (Lake 1994; Staeheli andCope 1994). Miller (1994, 404) details how the

The Canadian Geographer / Le Geographe canadlen 47, no 2 (2003)

1 00 Rob Kitchin and Robert Wilton

Cambridge (Massachusetts) peace movement man-aged to scale up from the local to national scale,but notes that '[The] peace movement was onlyable to mobilize when provocative central stateactions produced openings for consensus buildingaround strongly felt grievances'; otherwise, it waseffectively blocked by the state's insistence thatdefence policy should be debated nationally, notlocally. Similarly, as Adams (1996) notes in rela-tion to his three examples, scaling-up was onlypartial and largely failed to enact widespreadsocial and material change, because the scalesjumped up to did not contain the politicalopportunities necessary to engender change onthe ground.

In the analysis below, we examine ongoing strug-gles between disability organizations and the stateat multiple scales in different contexts. Our analy-sis focuses on the ways in which disabled people,as political actors, organize at existing scales,work to scale up to effect broader change andseek, in some instances, to create new scales forpolitical action. At the same time, we focus on howthe state uses its power in different contexts toconstrain or deflect the political pressure of thesegroups, both through its control of materialresources and through its ability to reshape thestructure and function of different scales of polit-ical action. Recognizing the interplay of actors withdiffering interests and ideologies, we illustratehow scale is caught in a tension of fixing andunsettling, of stability and instability-a tensionthat opens up possibilities for social change bycreating space for political maneuvering at thesame time as it seeks to close down such possibi-lities. We also show how political structuresoperating in different contexts-namely, Canadaand Ireland-shape the effectiveness of politicalmobilization at different scales.

Disability Politics

Beginning in the late 1960s and early 1970s, inde-pendent groups of disabled persons began to organ-ize for social change. These disabled individualshad what Campbell and Oliver (1996, 62) describeas '[a] gradual recognition that neither party politicsnor charitable and voluntary organizations wereserving their interests'. Moreover, their involve-ment in antiwar protests, the civil-rights move-ment and the feminist movement contributed a

collective political consciousness (Driedger 1989,1993; Gooding 1994; Fleischer and Zames 2001).

Political mobilizations often began at the locallevel, with small groups articulating a collectivecritique of the sociospatial status quo. Over time,and through the coordinated efforts of activists,larger groups began to emerge, capable of lobby-ing the state at scales above and beyond the locallevel, using existing legal provisions where possi-ble and coordinating mass demonstrations similarto those of other oppositional social movements.In Cox's (1998) terms, disabled people sought toreconcile local spaces of dependence throughexpanding their spaces of engagement.

There has been considerable geographicalvariation in the nature and extent of this politicalmobilization. In the United Kingdom, groups suchas the Union of Physically Impaired Against Segre-gation (formed in the 1970s), the British Council ofDisabled Persons (formed in the 1980s) and theDirect Action Network (a product of the early1990s) have had an important influence on disabil-ity politics at a national scale. In the United States,the Independent Living Movement had a profoundimpact on disability politics in the early 1970s.Other influential groups to emerge in this periodincluded the American Coalition of Citizens withDisabilities, a cross-disability coalition of local andregional groups that formed a base for politicalaction at the national level, and the ParalyzedVeterans of America. More recently, the direct-action tactics of Americans Disabled for AttendantPrograms Today-better known by its acronym,ADAPT-have had an important impact on disabil-ity politics at federal and state levels (Russell1998; Fleischer and Zames 2001).

In Canada, studies suggest the disability move-ment had its origins among local organizationsformed in Saskatchewan and Manitoba in theearly 1970s (Driedger 1993; Crichton andJongbloed 1998). These organizations created theCoalition of Provincial Organizations of theHandicapped in 1976, now known as the Councilof Canadians with Disabilities (CCD). The CCD hada significant political impact, notably throughpressure to include disability as a proscribedground for discrimination in the Canadian Charterof Rights and Freedoms (Rioux and Frazee 1999).Other organizations have appeared in recent dec-ades. Some are national in scale with local andprovincial chapters, such as the DisAbled Women's

The Canadlan Geographer / Le Ceographe canadlen 47, no 2 (2003)

Disability activism and the politics of scale 1 01

Network (Chouinard 1999). Others are stand-alonegroups focused on municipal politics. In Ireland,while there has been activity at the local level interms of disability politics, much of it has beensporadic and all of it has focused on local clien-telism. In addition, an independent disabilityorganization has yet to emerge at the nationallevel, for reasons that will become clear in ouranalysis below. Instead, recent legislation has beenproscribed by the European Union (EU), rather thanthrough pressure exerted on the state from below.

Clearly, there has been considerable growth anddevelopment of disability politics in many coun-tries since the early 1970s, with groups and organ-izations working at a number of geographicscales, from the local to the international. Inmany contexts, activists have achieved importantgains in education, legal protection against discrim-ination, modification of the built environmentand transportation. At the same time, disabilitymovements face ongoing challenges in areas suchas housing, employment and social assistance. AsChouinard (2001) notes, the existence of legalprotections is no guarantee that they will be usedeffectively in practice. Activists also face ongoingproblems in sustaining organizations and groupsthat comprise the disability movement. Some ofthese problems are direct products of the oppres-sion faced by disabled people in everyday life,such as lack of resources, powerlessness andcontinued marginalization (Scotch 1988). Otherproblems arise from ongoing tensions betweenthe need for a collective political identity and thediversity of people involved in terms of disability,demographics and political philosophy (McGuire1994).

In this paper, we focus attention on the socialconstruction of scale in different contexts, Canadaand Ireland, and its significance for the nature andoutcomes of disability activism. Our analysis isbroadly reflective of two key traditions within thesocial-movement literature. On the one hand,Resource Mobilization theory places emphasis onthe necessity of resources for social movements(Tilly 1977; Carroll 1997). Time, money and otherresources, as well as political opportunities to act,must be available for successful mobilization. Onthe other hand, New Social Movements theory,identified with scholars such as Melucci (1989),focuses attention on the challenge of forging col-lective identities within social movements (see

also Gamson 1992). We treat these issues as inter-related and closely connected to the politics ofspatial scale. At different scales, the potential forsuccessful mobilization with the necessaryresources, opportunities and collective identityvaries. In resource terms, many disabled peopleare disadvantaged materially. While some groupsreceive public funding, budgets are often small,and groups rely on the work of volunteers. Towhat extent, then, do the material constraintsfacing individuals and groups limit their effortsto build political momentum concurrently at dif-ferent scales? Are gains at one scale accompaniedby losses at another? Structures of political oppor-tunity also vary considerably between scales, andare dynamic at each scale. Decisions about whereto focus the resources of an organization and theway in which actions at this scale are legitimatedare both important influences on movement suc-cess. How does the social construction of scales ineach of the contexts we examine facilitate and/orconstrain disability activists' efforts to facilitatechange? To what extent are disability movementsable to create and exploit opportunities at differ-ent scales? Lastly, the scaling up of political activ-ity may make the sustaining of a collective politicalidentity more difficult. Work on mobilizationaround the US Americans with Disabilities Actsuggests that a key challenge facing the nationalConsortium for Citizens with Disabilities wasbalancing member groups' interests to sustainsolidarity (McGuire 1994). McGuire (ibid., 119)argues 'that the capacity of the group to cohere asa political community was easier to realize in thecontext of civil rights claims ... than it would havebeen, and is, in efforts to acquire limited federalservices and resources'. While not explicitly con-cerned with spatial scale, McGuire draws attentionto links between resources, identity and spatialscale that we explore in this paper.

Methods

Scholars have recently called for theoreticallyinformed studies of collective action (Wilson2001) that draw on qualitative/ethnographic datato situate social movements in context (Herbert2001). In this paper, we compare and contrast dis-ability movements that emerged in two differentcontexts. To do so, we draw on several primarysources of data. First, both of us are working with

The Canadian Geographer / Le Geographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)


disability rights groups and thus draw on participantobservation as a key source of insight into disabil-ity politics within Canadian and Irish contexts. Ourparticipation means that we are not 'neutral' obser-vers, and this has undoubtedly influenced ourinterpretation of events. This approach is shapedby ongoing debates within the social sciences con-cerning the politics of research and the question of'positionality' (Gottfried 1991; Nast 1994; Wilton2000). Recognizing the problematic nature ofscholarly claims to objectivity and neutrality, ouraim has been to balance an explicit commitment tosocial change by and for disabled people with anunderstanding of the need to reflect critically onthe process of change.

Additional sources of data bring in the perspec-tive of others. In both contexts, key informantinterviews were conducted with activists to under-stand more about the strategies and tactics of indi-vidual activists and disability organizations. InOntario, nine people in Hamilton were interviewedabout their experiences in disability activism andtheir perspective on the municipal and provincialdisability movement. The leader of the provincialmovement was also interviewed about the devel-opment of the movement and its relationship tolocal disability groups. In Ireland, five activistswere interviewed. In both contexts, interviewswere taped and transcribed in full for analysis.

Third, the fact that disability activism in bothcontexts was waged in the court of public opinionprovided a large amount of archival material,including newspaper reports of disability organ-izations' actions and events. These materials wereused to supplement participant observation andkey-informant interviews. In the Canadian context,newspaper coverage of disability activism withinthe city of Hamilton was collected for a period ofthree decades and examined systematically todetermine issues of importance, the frequency ofpolitical mobilization and the names of active indi-viduals and organizations.

Finally, a fourth source was drawn upon inrelation to Ireland. This consisted of a survey car-ried out by Rob Kitchin (with Paul Finn) betweenJune and September 2001. This survey sought todetermine the range, level and structuring of dis-abled services in the Dublin region, focusing oneducation, employment, housing, transport, pub-lic services and care provision provided by state,semi-state, voluntary and charity organizations. In

total, 214 organizations were contacted (68responded) and were asked to provide policy andlegal documents, organization mission statementsand publications. In addition, a number of key fig-ures were intetviewed and the Web sites of otherorganizations were examined. Pseudonyms areused throughout.

Disability Activism in Ontario

In recent decades, disability groups in Canadahave been active at national, provincial and locallevels (Driedger 1993; Chouinard 1999; Rioux andFrazee 1999). Considerable attention has beenpaid to the federal level, in part because the Cana-dian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is perceivedas key to a citizenship agenda (Torjman 2001).However, other scales of government have influ-ence over the lives of disabled people. Whilefederal employment standards cover sectors suchas banking and communications, provinces andterritories have jurisdiction over most industrialand commercial activities. Provinces also controlhealth and social-services policy and exerciseinfluence over local transit, education and hous-ing. In addition to the federal code, human-rightscodes exist for each province. And while munici-palities have traditionally had little power relativeto the provinces, they exert some control over theprovision of local transit and social services, aswell as municipal codes (Isin 1998). Moreover, thesituation has changed in recent years, with areshuffling of responsibilities between scales ofgovernment. In this section, we look at disabilityactivism in the province of Ontario and the city ofHamilton. We examine efforts by disability activ-ists to scale up from municipal to provincialpolitics as part of a coalition pressing for anOntarians with Disabilities Act (ODA).

Disability activism in the city of Hamilton has along history. In 1967, local media reported that adelegation of disabled people delivered a petitionto the city council requesting amendments to thebuilding code. Activists emphasized the inaccessi-bility of City Hall and the fact that lack of access atpolling stations meant that disabled people weresometimes stopped from voting. Similar storiesappeared in the late 1960s and 1970s. In the early1980s, local organizing was facilitated by develop-ments at the international scale with the UnitedNations' declaration of 1981 as the International

The Canadlan Geographer/ Le G6ographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)


Year of the Disabled Person (IYDP). A committeeformed in Hamilton to organize events throughoutthe year brought local activists together. In theyears following the IYDP, activists formed UnitedDisabled Consumers (UDC), a group explicitly con-cerned with political advocacy by and for disabledpeople. Both interviews with group members andarchival material offer some insight into thegroup's tactics and effectiveness. Organizersfocused attention on issues of common interestto many people with disabilities, including trans-portation, employment and physical-accessissues, something that may have been importantin terms of fostering a sense of collective identity.Two people played key roles initially, sustainingthe group's momentum and fostering politicalconsciousness among members. One womandescribed her initial experiences in the mid-1980s:

The people who were running IUDC] ... He was blind.She had arthritis, quadriplegic in that sense. Theywere a little bit radical, but they taught me an awfullot. Radical in demanding better income support,and demanding accessible streets, and I'm, like, 'Dowe have the right to ask for that'?

The effectiveness of the group was bolstered bythe existence of an advisory committee for peoplewith physical disabilities established by Hamilton-Wentworth region.' This committee, co-chaired bya city councillor and a member of the disabilitycommunity, served as a forum for disability issuesand a conduit through which calls for socialchange could be advanced.

UDC was successful in efforts to bring aboutmaterial change, improving the local environmentfor people with disabilities. Two issues are illus-trative. First, working with the regional advisorycommittee, UDC members lobbied for improvedaccessibility in the physical environment. Whilethe city had already taken steps toward the imple-mentation of curb cuts and other changes, theinvolvement of people with disabilities alongsidenondisabled city planners was essential to ensurean environment that actually worked for disabledpeople. In addition, members lobbied for improve-ments to public transit in Hamilton. In 1990, sev-eral disabled people were hired by the transitauthority to assess accessibility at bus stopsaround the city. The city introduced the first low-floor buses in the mid-1990s, although disabled

people have continued to encounter problemswith the city's public-transit system, a factdiscussed in more detail below.

In addition to substantive changes effected byUDC, the group's activities earned it legitimacywithin the context of municipal politics. This isevidenced by the frequency with which the group'sname surfaces in our analysis of local media.Angela, who served as chair of the group in thelate 1980s, spoke about this in an interview, sayingthat 'I would be called two or three times a monthby the newspapers asking for the UDC slant on thislegislation, that legislation'. By the early 1990s,activists in Hamilton had organized effectively,improving the quality of life for disabled peopleand achieving a collective political identity.

Scaling up: the Ontarians with Disabilities ActCommitteeIn 1994, a group of disability activists in Torontocame together to push for comprehensive provin-cial legislation in Ontario that would establish andenforce standards of accessibility in employment,services, goods, facilities and accommodation.They lobbied the left-wing New Democratic Party(NDP) government and were able to secure hear-ings on disability rights. Frustrated by an initiallack of momentum, the activists formed the Ontar-ians with Disabilities Act (ODA) Committee. In1995, the ODA committee lobbied provincialparties, seeking pre-election promises to enact astrong and effective act. All parties-including theProgressive Conservatives, who won a landslidevictory later that year-committed to disabilitylegislation within their first term.

C6ncurrent with lobbying efforts at the provin-cial parliament, the Toronto group began to forgeconnections with other disability activists acrossOntario. Their intent was to organize a provincialODA movement that would comprise pre-existinggroups and organizations. Scaling up posed atleast two challenges. The first concerned an explic-itly spatial dimension of collective identity, as thegroup recognized that its organizing could be hin-dered by a perception that the ODA movement wasToronto-centric. To address this, the group soughtto build the movement as a coalition of regionalcommittees, with each committee adopting the gen-eral principles of the ODA movement but designingand implementing its own actions. A second issue



concerned the diversity of the disabled population.The question of how to foster and sustain a sense ofpolitical unity had been in the forefront of theToronto group's thinking from the beginning. Toachieve this, ODA principles were grounded in thenotion of a 'barrier-free' province, which wouldappeal to people with many different disabilities.Gerry, the chair of the provincial committee,explained in an interview:

At the core of the ODA is a concept, and that's theconcept of a barrier-free society, so whether it'sAngela in a chair, or me being blind, or Gary beingdeaf, we all understand what our barriers are. That'show people buy in. They want an ODA to get rid oftheir barriers Ihis emphasis].

At the same time, the framing of the movement'sgoal as a barrier-free Ontario can be seen asan attempt to articulate what Miller (2000, 140)terms a 'new representational space' at the provin-cial scale, one in which physical, social and attitu-dinal barriers to full participation were removed.

Significantly, Hamilton was the first site to organ-ize a local ODA committee outside Toronto. Gerrydescribed how contact was made between Torontoand Hamilton:

A few months after we got started, we had an event inToronto... At the end of it a woman came up to meand said: 'I've come up from Hamilton', told us whoshe was, and would we like her to organize an eventin Hamilton. She got a bunch of people together, andwe came down and spoke, and said 'How would youlike to form a group?'

The proactive nature of Hamilton activists isfurther evidence of the effectiveness of their localorganizing. The fact that a network of activistsexisted and that they had already enjoyed somepolitical success at the local level meant the shiftin focus from municipal to provincial politics-thescaling up-could occur relatively rapidly. Gerryidentified UDC and the city's advisory committeeon physical disability as key factors in theemergence of the city's ODA group.

After the 1995 election, the ODA movementspent more than two years working to hold thegovernment to its promise to enact comprehensivelegislation in its first term (Chouinard 1999).Despite the government's resistance, those

involved felt their efforts were building towardchange, and that they were part of a larger provin-cial movement. Eileen commented:

It was the summer of 1998, I think. All across theprovince, it was very clear what people wanted.They still had that fire in their bellies and they stillsaid this is what the disabled need. It was veryexciting.

Successful organizing meant that the provincialmovement was able to keep disability rights onthe political agenda. One indication of this wasthe regular media coverage of ODA issues. InHamilton, media coverage took increasing note ofthe ODA Committee as part of a larger provincialmovement (Morrison 1995; Crone 1996; HamiltonSpectator 1996; Macrury 1997, 1998a, 1998b; Prete1997; Szymanski 1998; see also Monsebraaten1997; Toronto Star 1997; Lepofsky 1998; Dirks1999).

Responding to pressure from the disabilitymovement, the government brought forward anOntarians with Disability Act (Bill 83) in November1998. Members of the ODA committee condemnedthe bill, as it ignored the majority of barriers facedby disabled people. Bill 83 required provincialministries to prepare annual plans for the identifi-cation, removal and prevention of barriers in theirlegislation, policies and programs, but there wasno requirement for ministries to implement barrier-removal. Crucially, the bill was silent on theresponsibilities of the private sector to recognizethe rights of disabled people as workers andconsumers. The bill was also condemned by oppos-ition parties and was subsequently withdrawn.

In 1999, the Progressive Conservatives won asecond provincial election. The ODA movementagain began to press for substantive disabilitylegislation (De Mara 1999; Toronto Star 1999). Inresponse, the government introduced a secondOntarians with Disabilities Act (Bill 125) in November2001. Public statements by the governmentemphasized their commitment to a barrier-freeprovince, drawing on the new representationalspace articulated by the ODA committee. Thepreamble to the bill, for example, contained thefollowing statement:

The Government of Ontario Is committed to workingwith every sector of society to build on what it has



already achieved together with those sectors andto move towards a province in which no newbarriers are created and existing ones are removed(Ontarians with Disabilities Act 2001).

However, the legislation still failed to addressmany of the issues identified by the ODA Commit-tee. Discussion of barriers in the bill was largelylimited to physical barriers, with little mention ofsocial barriers. The bill was again concerned exclu-sively with the public sector.

Of significance for a scale analysis is the fact thatBill 125, which was passed into law, places consid-erable emphasis on the role of municipalities infacilitating access for people with disabilities.The bill requires municipalities with populationsof 10,000 or more to prepare accessibility plans toaddress 'the identification, removal and preven-tion of barriers to persons with disabilities inthe municipality's by-laws and in its policies,programs, practices and services' (Ontarians withDisabilities Act 2001). Plans are to be updatedannually, with emphasis placed on steps taken toidentify and address barriers. Public-transit oper-ators are required to prepare similar accessibilityplans. Municipalities are also expected to establishaccessibility advisory committees, made up ofpeople with disabilities, to provide input on theimplementation and effectiveness of plans.

The inclusion of municipalities in the bill can beinterpreted as necessary and appropriate, giventhe role that local governments play .in people'slives. Moreover, responsibilities given to munici-palities under the act are similar to those dutiesassigned to provincial ministries. Yet the focus onmunicipalities can also be interpreted more crit-ically. The requirement to establish an advisorycommittee on disability, for example, failed toacknowledge that a significant number of munici-palities-including Hamilton-already had com-mittees in place. The emphasis on municipalitiesalso needs to be situated within ongoing changesin the structure and content of political scales. Inrecent years, provincial downloading has meantthat municipalities must now meet a greater pro-portion of the costs of services and programsincluding housing, child care, transportation andsocial assistance (Dale 1999; Sancton 2000). In thiscontext, the emphasis on municipalities can beinterpreted as being a way for the province toeschew responsibility for change.

The theme of municipal responsibility perme-ated statements made by the Minister for Citizen-ship prior to the bill's introduction. Meeting withHamilton activists in September 2001, the Ministermade repeated reference to the importance of hav-ing municipalities on board. Noting that it wouldbe hard to secure municipalities' compliance withthe legislation, he expressed interest in establish-ing a provincial enforcement agency but cautionedthat the agency would be unable to force munici-palities to change; it could not be a 'disabilitypolice'. These statements imply not only that themunicipal scale is where substantive improvementsin access can and should occur, but also that itis municipalities, rather than the province, thatare reluctant to support disability rights. Thus,the provincial government's public statementsendorsed the goal of a barrier-free province,yet the Minister's comments implied that theprovince was not the most appropriate scale forchange to occur, and the wording of the billassigned considerable responsibility for materialchange to local government. We now examinethe impacts of provincial government policy onthe municipal scale as a context for collectiveaction.

A changing context for disability activismDisabling policy changes: The ODA movement workedhard to secure a promise from the Progressive Con-servatives for disability legislation, and its organ-izing meant that the government could notsimply renege on this promise following its elec-tion to power. However, policy changes implemen-ted by the government produced an increasinglydisabling social environment. General welfare ben-efits were cut by 21.6 percent in 1995, and newrequirements for disability benefits were intro-duced two years later. The government repealedthe provincial Employment Equity Act in the sameyear, and abandoned a policy stipulating that newbuses had to be accessible in order to qualify forprovincial subsidies (Walkom 1997; Orwen 1998).This latter change is painfully ironic in light of Bill125's requirement that public-transit services pre-pare plans to address barriers to disabled users.The government also reduced funding for the pro-vincial Human Rights Commission, despite pre-election promises to the contrary (Chouinard 1999).Municipal parallel-transit systems have faced



increasing financial pressure with downloading(Bell 2001). Hamilton's DARTS program cut morethan CAD$200,000 from its budget and currentlyhas a two- to three-week waiting list for 'nonessen-tial' trips.

These changes affected the ability of people tofunction as political actors and, in turn, mayhave impacted disability activism in contextssuch as Hamilton. The transit issue provides agood example, since organizing and collectiveaction is often contingent upon an ability to cometogether as a group. Dave, a disability activist,stated angrily:

Our most pressing problem is the lack of sufficientDARTS trips. Now that DARTS requires us to bookthree weeks in advance, we may as well be shut-ins!Does anyone know what he or she'll be doing threeweeks from now? Of course not.

Moreover, problems with transportation were alsodemoralizing to activists who had spent consider-able time in the early 1990s working to improvethe transit system.

UDC, which had been an important base forHamilton's ODA group, began to experience arapid decline in its active membership in the late1990s. Reasons for the decline are complex andmanifold. Several core members had shifted atten-tion away from the group to focus on the ODAcampaign. At the same time, personal differencescreated irreparable divisions between remainingmembers. To some extent, these tensions may besymptomatic of the powerlessness experienced bydisabled people (cf. Scotch 1998), but problemsexperienced by UDC have to be situated withinthe context of the government's reforms (Ibbitson1997). Disabled people were forced to negotiatechanges in social assistance and public transit, aswell as cuts in programs such as home care(Aronson and Neysmith 2001). Funding cuts anddownloading, while not the sole cause of UDC'spredicament, did create an increasingly disablingpolitical environment.Resealing municipal governance: Since 1995, the Pro-gressive Conservative government has orchestratedmunicipal amalgamation in several large centres inOntario, including Toronto, Hamilton and London,despite resistance from cities themselves.2 Thegovernment has not been alone in pursuit ofthis goal (the left-wing NDP planned the Toronto

amalgamation), but the Conservatives have usedamalgamation to rescale municipal governancein the interests of neoliberalism (Isin 1998; Todd1998). The creation of 'megacities' has beenportrayed as a response to the demands of globalcapitalism, with cities as entrepreneurs, pursuingcapital investment and economic development(Keil 1998).

While the message of neoliberalism has been'less government', recent municipal change can beinterpreted more accurately as a shift in emphasis,with the introduction of new techniques ofgovernance (Isin 1998). For the purposes of thispaper, three techniques are notable. The firstinvolves shifting responsibility from governmen-tal departments to nongovernmental organiza-tions that are not democratically accountable tothe public (Todd 1998). Examples include subcon-tracting and privatization of services previouslyprovided by the public sector. Second, Isin (ibid.)argues that subjects of governance have beenincreasingly reconceived as customers or con-sumers, rather than citizens. Emphasis on individualresponsibility-a leitmotif of neoliberalism-hasalso meant that individuals who are unable tomake choices are blamed for their shortcomings.Third, the rescaling effected by amalgamationhas made municipal politics increasingly inac-cessible, particularly to already marginalizedpopulations.

To date, critical scholarship on amalgamation inOntario has focused on Toronto. Our analysis ofHamilton's experience finds similar techniques ofgovernance in evidence. The Hamilton megacity,which came into being in January 2001, broughttogether six existing cities, reducing elected repre-sentatives from 56 (in pre-existing municipalitiesand the region of Hamilton-Wentworth) to 15. Thearchitect of the new city, an appointed transitionboard, was explicit about its corporate approach:residents were to be 'customers' of the new city.Arguments presented in favour of amalgamationfocused on streamlining government for businessdevelopment, financial savings through consolida-tion and privatization.

For disability activists, the effects of megacityrestructuring are already being felt. They recognizethat downloading has made the municipal a moreimportant scale for political action: 'Since all ofthese programs have been handed down by theprovince to the municipality, effective the first of

The Canadlan Geographer / Le Ceographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)


the year 2001, basically... people like me have toreach the people that are going to be in the nextmunicipal government' (Margaret, Hamilton acti-vist). At the same time, rescaling has made the taskfacing disability activists (and others) all the moredifficult. In 2001, in an effort to streamline citygovernment, the city council considered abolishingmany of the citizens' advisory committees that hadpreviously existed under the individual municipali-ties and replacing them with ten larger umbrellacommittees. Among the committees recommendedfor dissolution was the advisory committee on dis-ability (Hughes 2001). Thus, while Bill 125 requiresmunicipalities to have advisory committees ondisability, amalgamation, pursued as part of aneoliberal rescaling of governance, threatens theexistence of such committees. These developmentshave provoked consternation on the part of acti-vists, who saw the regional committee as a vitalpolitical conduit for disabled people in Hamilton.

Along with the changing nature of local politics,activists are also concerned about the ability andwillingness of the new city to fund services fordisabled people. Again, accessible transit offers agood example. Downloading has placed consider-able strain on accessible transit systems, leadingto cutbacks, waiting lists and restrictions onusage. In Hamilton, the city's transition boardrecommended restructuring and privatization ofthe DARTS service. The service is already operatedat arms'-length from the city, a fact that allows themayor to evade questions concerning the service sability to meet transit needs. When asked about ahuman-rights complaint filed by two riders, themayor explained that he 'was not familiar withthe complaint ... [and] said that because DARTS isa subcontractor, the city is not directly responsiblefor its policies' (Bell 2001, Al). In this and otherinstances, techniques of governance allow munici-pal government to deflect demands for publicaccountability (cf. Isin 1998).

SummaryBy the 1980s and early 1990s, disability-rightsorganizations in Hamilton had begun to effectchange in the structure of the local environment.Working at tiers of both city and regional govern-ance, activists were able to convey what wasrequired for a more accessible urban environmentand to press for material change in areas such as

physical design and public transit. Moreover, theorganizing of groups such as UDC proved import-ant in efforts to establish a provincial movementcapable of pushing for comprehensive disability-rights legislation that, in turn, allowed Hamilton-based activists to jump scale.

In a Canadian context, the province has been animportant scale for disability activism, since it ishere that legislation and funding decisions con-cerning employment, social services and healthservices are made and changed. Recognizing this,Toronto-based activists sought to build a provin-cial disability movement. Their organizing effortswere successful, in part, because of an initial sen-sitivity to concerns about a Toronto-controlledprovincial movement, as well as because of theirability to frame the movement as one in pursuit ofa barrier-free province that accommodated thediversity of all disabled people. Over a period offour years, ODA groups across the provinceworked to publicize the new representationalspace of a barrier-free province and to hold thegovernment to its promise to enact comprehensivelegislation that would bring about the necessarychanges to the physical and social environment.

Legislation brought forward by the governmentconstituted an effort to respond to the new repre-sentational space articulated by the ODA group. Inpublic statements, the provincial governmentstated that the legislation would mean significantchange for disabled people. In fact, the bill man-dated little change-none within the private sec-tor. At the same time, the government, as isevident in both the wording of the legislation andstatements by the minister, began a partial 'scalingdown' of disability-access issues from the provinceto the municipal scale. This was not so muchan attempt to delegitimize a scale for politicalaction (Miller 2000) as it was an attempt to claimsupport for the idea of a barrier-free provincewhile avoiding, through rescaling, responsibilityfor material change. These developments tookplace within broader municipal restructuring.Funding cuts and downloading held negativeconsequences for disabled people as politicalactors and for the organizational capacity ofgroups such as UDC. Amalgamation, driven byneoliberalism, reconstituted the municipal as ascale of governance within which public participa-tion and accountability were more difficult toachieve and sustain.



Disability Activism in Ireland

The local level is more responsive to the needs of theIndividual. The national level Is responsive to theneeds of the bureaucracy that is set up. Jlm, Kildareactivist)

Interviews with disabled activists in Ireland indi-cate that the scaled nature of the political systemproduces a very different landscape for disabilitypolitics than that found in Ontario. As Breathnach(1992) and Komito (1984, 1992) note, the Irishpolitical landscape reflects the dominance oflocal clientelism as a mode of political operation.Here, politicians act as gatekeepers to services andthus brokers of power between the public withintheir constituency and the state. This situation,Breathnach (1992) suggests, is a legacy of Britishcolonialism, when power was centralized inDublin, and the fact that there has been no majorlocal government reform since the 1898 LocalGovernment Act, with a gradual erosion of localgovernment in the following century. Moreover,the high representative ratio between each TD(member of parliament) and the public (approxi-mately 1:8,000, the lowest in Europe) and a systemof proportional representation that supports fouror five TDs representing each constituency, havefostered clientelism, as this allows the publicgreater access to their political representativesand the ability to force constituency TDs to corm-pete against one another. This is also facilitated byIreland's urban spatial structure, which is skewedtowards small towns (only four cities have popula-tions larger than 80,000, and the vast majority ofregional and county towns have populations lessthan 20,000 [OCPS 1996]).

In terms of the politics of scale in Ireland, thesecontextual factors have three main effects. Thefirst is the development of sophisticated-andquite powerful-networks of local and communitygroups (residential associations, business alli-ances, interest groups) that seek to influencedevelopments at the local level. The second is therelative weakness of and similarity betweennational parties (which are all centrist) and thesuccess of independent candidates and familyseats (e.g., generations of a family representing aconstituency). The third is that it is in politicians'interest to foster clientelism and to block local

government reform, as reform would erode theirpower and affect their ability to get re-elected.

Until recently, disabled people have not soughtto exploit clientist politics to any great degree.Historically, disabled people were marginalizedand 'hidden' within communities, with disabilityseen as a family and charity issue. As a conse-quence, a strong dependency-based model of dis-ability, rather than a rights-based one, hasprevailed. This has led, in turn, to the growth of avast array of charities and voluntary groups, manyof which are national in scope, providing servicesto and representing disabled people. While manyof these groups arose out of frustration and localagitation in order to provide a voice and services toa neglected population, it can be argued that theyhave not been effective champions of disabledpeople's rights (although most undoubtedly haveimproved services) for a number of reasons.

First, their ethos is almost universally charity-centred rather than rights-based, and most do nothold the same values of the disability movementsthat emerged in other contexts (indeed manywould be the foci of criticism). Second, because ofthe historical circumstances of welfare provisionin Ireland, state services are now almost univer-sally provided through these charity and voluntarybodies, some of which operate nationally withregional offices and others of which are more local-ized. The vast majority of these bodies then workclosely with government, and the state is theirmain source of funding. As a result, it is not inthe financial ihterests of charities and voluntarybodies to become radical voices for disabledpeople-nor does it comply with their mission state-ments. As Jane, a Kildare activist, states, 'I think alot of them are afraid to rock the boat, as they areafraid because they feel they mightn't get themoney'. As a consequence, the unrest and radicalvoices that led to many of these organizationsforming have quickly been subverted by the for-mation of close business liaisons with the state.Third, because they usually represent specificgroups of disabled people as defined by impair-ment, charity and voluntary groups tend to focustheir work solely in relation to these individuals,rather than forming pandisability alliances. As Jimnotes:

I bring it back to the fact that it is a power and con-trol game as much as anything else. You know, It's

The Canadian Geographer / Le G6ographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)

Disability activism and the politics of scale 1 09 0

the impairment-specific groups fighting each otherfor the little crumbs from the table.

Finally, it is not in the interests of these groups towork closely with each other, because, as theycompete for public funding, partnerships wouldform the basis for rationalization, which none ofthe groups want because it would reduce theirrelative power and lead to redundancies (theseare, after all, large multimillion-Euro businesses).Again, Jim states:

The charities will not work together on the philo-sophical side. There are over five hundred disabilityorganizations receiving state funding; the vastmajority have big bureaucratic set-ups as well.There's a fear that-and I know it's a very genuinefear among a lot of them-that they are going to beforced to amalgamate and to get together to reducecosts and put more into direct services.

Taken together, these points mean that charitiesand voluntary groups do not necessarily hold thesame values as the disability-rights movement, nordo they present a united voice. Indeed, our surveyrevealed a comprehensive picture of how they failto interconnect. At the same time, their power increating and sustaining a dependency model ofdisability has marginalized more radical views.For example, Kitchin and colleagues (1998) arguethat many disabled people have been afraid to jointhe disability movement and to openly challengethe state and these bodies for fear of losing theirservices, a point echoed in a recent interview withFiona, a Kildare activist: 'I still think people areapprehensive of joining it [People with DisabilitiesIreland Ltd, or PWDI; see below] because they arescared that they might rock the boat and theirservice provider might object because an awful lotof the service providers are against PWDI for somereason'. In addition, these issues mean that thedisabled services landscape is highly fragmented,ad hoc and difficult for disabled people-and,indeed, anyone else-to navigate.

Scale and the disability movement in IrelandDespite the obstructive role of charities and volun-tary bodies, a disability movement in Ireland hasstarted to emerge over the past decade. At present,this movement is highly fragmented, and has gen-

erally been organized at the local, constituencyscale, at which change can be effected throughthe use of the clientist system. An example of agroup working at this scale is the NewbridgeAccess Group (NAG). NAG was formed in 1997after a 'listening' meeting conducted by NewbridgeCommunity Development Ltd. to determine localissues relating to youth, old age and disability inthe town. A small group with a core of around tenactive members, NAG has as its objective simply tomake Newbridge (population 13,363 [OCPS 1996])more accessible for disabled people. It has beenrelatively effective in this, we would argue,because of its strategic ability to engage in localclientelism, as explained by Jane and Jim:

Things work at the local level here. It's why I'minvolved, why I'm sticking with the access group isbecause if you take that organic approach it willihavea ripple effect, you know. Already I think that hasproved to be [unclear]... and I think access to ourlocal politicians would be an argument for that. Iknow a lot of people compare our access to polit-icians here with that in England, and they can't getover how readily our politicians will come to meet-ings and things like that, you know.... Town com-missioners will follow-up on stories In thenewspaper [gives example]. That's what we havewanted the politicians to do-just take up the batonand run with it-because we can't, as volunteers, befulltime nagging away and trying to implementchanges, you know. Uane)

It comes down to the fact that people are prepared tooperate on a local level because again there is aknowledge of the individuals, a knowledge of theimpact; it's not as bureaucratic as the national legis-lation or national activities. At that level, rather thanmaking things simple, it 'is made as obstructive aspossible and it's made as bureaucratic as possible,so that if a paper trail is right it does not matter adamn. Whereas at a local level the paper trail doesn'tmatter a damn, it's what an actual individual needs.(Jim)

NAG has cultivated key alliances with ASK(Action South Kildare), Newbridge CommunityDevelopment Ltd., Tidy Towns, the Rotary Club,local businesses (e.g., organizing sign-languagetraining for business staff), local press and thenearest university. Moreover, NAG has used

The Canadlan Geographer / Le Geographe canadlen 47, no 2 (2003)


these alliances to elect members to key town andcounty policy groups and to find funding for itswork. Initiatives include working with town andcounty planners, lobbying developers, organizingaccess awards, feeding stories to local press,undertaking an access audit and presenting thefindings at local events. NAG has also sought touse the clientist system, targeting specific localpoliticians to affect change, especially in relationto the built environment. While individual mem-bers have links to national organizations such asPWDI (see below) and national charities, NAG'swork is almost exclusively aimed at Newbridgeand its environs.

Given the importance of the local scale in Irishpolitics, grassroots groups such as NAG havebeen both unable and unwilling to jump scale. It issignificant, then, that in 1995, the final report ofthe Commission on the Status of People with Dis-abilities-a body formed at the initiative of a gov-ernment advisor, rather than as a result ofpressure from the disability movement-recom-mended the establishment of a national networkof disabled people. This network, entitled the 'IrishCouncil of People with Disabilities' (ICPD; now'People with Disabilities Ireland Ltd', or PWDI),was approved and funding allocated to it by gov-ernment in 1998. The stated aim of this networkwas to continue the work of the commission inhighlighting disability issues and to foster dia-logue among people with different disabilities. Intotal, 30 networks were formed, one for each ofthe 26 counties, with four for Dublin and two forCork, and four development workers employed,plus other staff. Initially very active and quite rad-ical in its aims and outlook, this national networksoon floundered-including an acrimonious div-ision within the organization and bad press-andmany local networks became largely inactive. Asmall number still operate relatively effectively(e.g., Kildare, Kerry, Wexford, Wicklow, Cork), butthey tend to work independently of each other,focusing attention on local issues.

Acknowledging the failure of the initial net-works, PWDI has recently organized a series oftraining workshops concerned with organizingand maintaining successful networks, and is cur-rently compiling a new strategy document. How-ever, the concept of an organization run by and fordisabled people has, to a degree, been abandoned.Most of PWDI's staff members are nondisabled, and

the chief executive seemingly has no backgroundin disability politics, being a former policeman(and he certainly is not radical). Moreover, thegroup's newly acquired charitable status means ithas had to remove the aim of political lobbyingfrom its constitution, severely undermining itscredibility among disabled activists. As Fionanotes:

At the AGM [Annual General Meeting], they took lob-bying out of their constitution, which leaves themwith not an awful lot to do, I don't think any-way.... It's something to do with charitable status.You can't have charitable status and be a lobbygroup apparently. That's meant to be their purpose.

Some activists argue that a reliance on governmentfunding has meant that whatever radical impulsesinformed the commission's report, PWDI has beendepoliticized at the national level and its radicalimpulses limited to the local networks. While theorganization had input on recent national legisla-tion, the legislation is regarded as weak and largelycosmetic. In Foucault's terms, PWDI has enteredinto a phase of self-disciplining, its political poten-tial subverted by its partnership with the state(Foucault 1980). One interviewee stated: '[I]t's likethe employers paying for unions'. This has leftmany activists cynical: as Jane states,

We often wonder whether the people there are thereto just run it down-just run it right into theground-and then they could say, 'We told you so,we gave you the opportunity and you didn't take it'.That's being really cynical.

Jim notes that this is not the story PWDI would tell:'They will tell you that they are so busy and there isso much good going on out there'. Indeed, Roisin, aPWDI worker, offers a different account during aninterview:

There is a lot of local activity. Some networks areextremely effective and have got enormous amountsdone in their local areas through their local councils.Other networks wouldn't be as effective. But atnational office we have seen huge change throughthings that we have lobbied for on legislation anddifferent things.... It has definitely moved thingsalong, you know... It isn't always as fast as we'dlike, but there is definite movement there.

The Canadian Geographer / Le G4ographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)

Disability activism and the politics of scale 111

PWDI has been complemented by the NationalDisability Authority (NDA), a state agency set upin 1998 to advise the Minister for Disability(another body recommended by the commissionreport). The NDA is made up of representativesfrom charities and service providers as well asdisabled people themselves, all of whom arepolitical appointees. As yet, the group seemspolitically toothless. That said, it is experimentingwith advocacy and participatory research and isprogressively minded. Like PWDI, the NDA seemscommitted to the emancipation of disabled people,but over a long time frame and from a largelynonradical position.

Future scales for action?The focus on local clientelism and the failure tocreate a radical, grassroots and independentnational disability movement has profound impli-cations for disabled people in Ireland. Primarily, itmeans that disabled people remain highly disen-franchised in Irish society (e.g., high rates ofunemployment, very limited physical and socialaccess), that disability politics has been for themost part limited to the local arena, that disabledpeople have few rights protected by legislativemeasures and that there have been slow and geo-graphically uneven changes in the conditions ofdisabled people's lives. Where legislation exists, itis weak and cosmetic, full of loopholes and unen-forced. The 1998 Irish Education Act, for example,states that disabled children and their parentshave the right to seek.an education in their localcommunity, and that schools should be resourcedto accommodate local disabled children, yet thereare few signs that the legislation has been or willbe enforced (Kitchin and Mulcahy 1999). Indeed.there are still ongoing court cases between thestate and parents over some disabled children'sright to an education with reference to the Irishconstitution. Similarly, we know of no cases ofbuilding developers being actively pursued by thestate for failure to comply with Part M of the Build-ing Regulations Act (1991, 1997). The Irish govern-ment recently acknowledged the failure of thelegislation, condemning those who have used the'reasonable provision' clause to make minimumaccess provisions (Department of the Environmentand Local Government 1999; Kitchin and Law2001).

Similarly, the Equal Status Act (2000) is meant toprovide protection against discrimination for dis-abled people. However, the act individualizesdiscrimination and places the burden of proof onthe disabled person. For example, a disabled personasked to leave a bar because they are deemed tobe a fire/safety hazard has to prove they were notsuch a hazard, rather than the bar owner having toprove they were. An Equality Authority-an agencyset up by the government to pursue cases underthe Equal Status Act-will only take 'test cases',and only if it thinks it will win. Once a precedentis set, people are expected to bring their own casesusing their own resources, rather than relying onthe state to enforce change. Similarly, the new pro-posed Disability Bill (2001) is full of ioopholes, hasan excessively long timetable for implementationand offers few mechanisms for enforcement. Itsets out what disabled people are entitled to intheory (though the word 'right' is never used), butwith weak procedures to ensure delivery (theMinister of Disability has the power to decideindividual cases).

Disability activists feel that these pieces of legis-lation and agencies of the state will not changetheir local environment: legislation works only ifit has 'real' implications and it is enforced. Theseperceptions further reinforce activists' belief thatthe only way to change their environment is at thelocal scale through clientelism.

At the same time, this is not to say that the Irishsystem is static and beyond change. Two newscales of political activism offer potential. First,there is the possibility for the development of abroader grassroots movement forming from thebottom up rather than being instilled top-down.Preliminary evidence that such a development ispossible can be found in County Kildare. Such hasbeen success of NAG in engendering changethat two other access groups have formed intwo nearby towns, Monasterevin and Naas. Bothgroups have used NAG as a role model, andthere has been some limited interaction betweenthe groups, with NAG providing support andguidance along with the Kildare Community Net-work. There have also been attempts to formaccess groups in Athy and Clane. These develop-ments open up possibilities for a new scale of polit-ical action at the county level (south Kildare), andmay represent the first step in a jump in scale,if groups can work together in a concerted and


- 112 Rob Kitchin and Robert Wilton

coordinated way. As Pat, a local activist, states, 'Weare trying to stretch it out to a wider area'. Thelinks forged between NAG and other groups mayalso mean that the region (county) emerges as animportant scale for organizing (cf. Pastor etal.2000).

However, scaling up is dependent upon access toresources and an ability to sustain a collectiveidentity. Activists are cognizant of the importanceof key individuals who are willing and able toinvest time and energy over a long period. Suchpeople have also been essential to the effective-ness of local groups, and this raises questionsabout the ability to sustain activities at bothscales, particularly given the experiences docu-mented in the previous case study. Activists Alsoargue that 'people are slow to come along' andexpect organizations to go to them. As Jane notes,

What I can't understand when I meet people withdisabilities is that they are so complacent. Theythink somebody else should be doing this. Theydon't realize that there is a row still on theirhands.... Or they have too low expectations andthey are too slow at getting involved in the disabilitymovement.... Maybe It's because of the attitudes todisability in this country, I don't know.

Possibilities for political action also exist at theEuropean scale. Many disabled people in Irelandexpect stronger legislation to come, not from pres-sure within the state on the part of the disabilitymovement, but rather from policy formulation atthe European Union (EU) level to which Ireland willhave to comply as a member state. In fact, existinglegislation, such as the Irish Education Act andthe Employment Equality Act, has its roots in EUmandates concerning educational mainstreamingand employment directives. As one activist explains:

What is going to happen in Ireland, Rob, is very sim-ply, they are going to have to follow the EuropeanUnion directives.... If you look at all of the equalitylegislation it is all permeating from EU directivesthat were issued in the first place.... You are lookingat two different scales in Ireland. You are looking atthe local level which is extremely active, extremelyvociferous, and you are looking at a very limitednumber of people acting at the broader macrolevelof Europe rather than the national level... .The sand-wich between the European and the local level is

going to have to bring the national level forward.(Jim)

European directives on disability are positivelyframed and demand enforcement. To date, how-ever, the Irish government has been slow torespond, although it is hoped that a system ofpenalties will force the state to comply. For some,this has meant the abandoning of the nationalscale-in the belief that change, if and when itdoes come, will come from the EU-and a focusingof effort instead on changing the here-and-now atthe local scale.

Summary

In an Irish context, much of the social changewrought by disability movements to date hasoccurred at the local level. As the experience ofactivists in Newbridge illustrates, groups havebeen able to organize effectively and articulatedemands for greater access in the local environ-ment. The clientist system, with its emphasis onlocal patronage, is well suited to demands forsmall-scale change in specific contexts. At thesame time however, the taken-for-granted natureof the clientist system has made it difficult fordisability organizations to work toward broaderstructural change at the national level. Concomi-tantly, the historical proliferation of nationaldisability charities and services as part of theshadow state and the recent emergence of a state-sponsored network of disability groups has leftlittle 'political space' (cf. Magnusson 1996) forgrassroots organizing at the national scale bydisabled persons. As the interviews conducted forthis study demonstrate, many activists are cynicalabout the potential for effective national disability-rights legislation. Their cynicism appearswell founded, given the shortcomings of currentlegislation.

Nevertheless, political opportunities appear tobe emerging at two different but potentiallyrelated scales. The development of disabilitylegislation as part of the ongoing evolution of theEU suggests that this supranational scale may holdimportant implications for Irish context. At thesame time, if groups like the NAG can organizein county-based coalitions, this may foster thecreation of a novel scale for political action.Regional coalitions, established through grass-



roots pressure from the local level, may be able todraw political power collectively from several localclientist systems. These coalitions will be facedwith challenges, such as limited resources andthe need to sustain a broader collective identity,but they may 'be able to articulate a broaderconception of accessible environment and to pressfor regional change, such as accessible transit.

Conclusion

In this paper, we have used two case studies toexamine the political construction of scale in rela-tion to the disability movement. In particular, wehave highlighted how the scaled political struc-tures operating in different settings shape theeffectiveness of political mobilization arounddisability issues, and how these shift over time toboth facilitate and constrain opportunities forreform and jumping scale. Indeed, it is clear fromour analysis that an historicized analysis is import-ant for tracing out the interplay between propon-ents of stasis and reform, revealing the ways inwhich actors such as governments and stateagencies 'organize themselves and their messagesthrough the ways in which they divide and orderspace' (Agnew 1997, 118) and illuminating howsuch ordering seeks to channel and delineatesocial relations whilst limiting political oppositionand challenge.

In relation to our case studies, such an analysisreveals how, in Ontario, organizing around thecomprehensive Ontarians with Disabilities Act(ODA) at the provincial scale was made possiblein part by the existence of groups, such as UDC inHamilton, that had already organized at the muni-cipal scale to effect change. ODA organizingopened up the possibility of a new scale of politicalaction, giving impetus to the mobilization of aprovincewide movement. At the same time, theprovincial government's program of cutbacks anddownloading, coupled with a neoliberal rescalingof governance, shifted responsibility for accessprovisions to an increasingly inaccessible munici-pal government. In addition, the jumping of scalestretched resources within local groups and mayhave contributed to a weakening of the disabilitymovement at the municipal scale at precisely thetime at which this scale was being transformed.Here, it is apparent that the material constraintsfacing disabled individuals and groups limit their

efforts to build political momentum concurrentlyat different scales. As a consequence, scaling updid pose challenges to collective political identityby undermining and overstretching local groupsand the individuals within them. I

Similarly, in Ireland, a system of local clientel-ism, coupled with the political ineffectiveness ofthe voluntary and charity groups who have tradi-tionally represented disabled people, has meantthat the disability movement has been unsuccess-ful at jumping scales to the national arena and hasbeen reluctant to attempt that jump. When anattempt to create such a national movement wasmade, it quickly failed, because its initial impetuswas stifled and its power co-opted by the state.Interestingly, for some, disability activism at thenational scale has become redundant due the influ-ence of a larger and more powerful political scale,that of the European Union. For these activists,there is little pressure or reason to scale up, as itis perceived that a different set of actors will enactchange. However, there is also evidence of politicalactivity being coordinated at a regional scale, aslocal groups begin to forge ties with one another,and this may create opportunities for new forms ofpolitical mobilization beyond the local level. Hereagain, successful mobilization may depend on anability to sustain local activity while concomitantlydeveloping the capacity for collective action at thecounty level.

Taken together, the case studies illustrate howdisability politics is scaled and how such scaling iscontinually being constructed, negotiated andtransformed through the interplay of 'context,actors, strategies, maneuvers, stakes, ideologiesand time' (Delaney and Leitner 1997, 95)-howscale is caught in a tension of fixing and unset-tling,' of stability and instability. Disabled peoplein Canada and Ireland are engaged in struggles toreconcile spaces of dependence with spaces ofengagement, and in doing so they seek to organizeat existing scales (notably the local), work to 'scaleup' to effect broader change and, in some,instances, create new scales for political action.At the same time, the state and other actors usetheir power to constrain or deflect the collectivemobilizations of disability groups in an effort tomaintain existing scaled relations.

Finally, the case studies point to the importanceof work on the spatiality of social movements, par-ticularly as it relates to the politics of scale. Recent

The Canadlan Geographer / Le Geographe canadIen 47, no 2 (2003)


work has emphasized the importance of 'spatialconsciousness' in social-movement organizing(Soja 2000). In both Ontario and Ireland, disabilityactivists are cognizant of the opportunities andconstraints of organizing at different scales, sug-gesting that critical scholarship on scale politicsmight be used both to draw lessons from andto inform ongoing organizing in these and othercontexts.

Acknowledgements

We wlsh to thank David Edginton and three anonymous reviewersfor helpful comments and suggestlons on an earlier draft of thispaper.

Notes

I From 1974 to 2001, the Hamilton region had a two-tiered systemof municipal governance, with Hamilton and adjacent municipal-lties coordinating some services through the region of Hamilton-Wentworth.

2 Forced amalgamation Is possible under Section 92(8) of the Con-stitution Act, which grants provinces authority over municipal-ities.

References

ADAMS, P. 1996 'Protest and the scale polltics of telecommunications'Political Geography 15, 419-442

AGNEW, J. 1997 'The dramaturgy of horizons: geographical scale onthe "Reconstructlon of Italy" by the new Italian political parties,1992-95' Political Geography 16, 99-122

ARONSON, j., and NEYSMIT1l, 5. 2001 'Manufacturing social exclusion Inthe home care market' Canadian Public Policy 27, 151-165

sEr, j. 2001 'DARTS put to the test' Hamilton Spectatori4 April, AlBREATHINACId, P. 1992 The Sad Saga of Local Government Reform In

Ireland. Paper presented at conference on 'The State of the IrishPolltical System', Cork, May

sRowN, M. 1997 RePlacing Citizenship: AIDS Activism and RadicalDemocracy (New York: Guilford)

BUTER, R., and PARR, Il. 1999 Mind and Body Spaces (New York:Routledge)

cAMPsEL,J., and ouvnR, si. 1996 Disability Politics: Understanding OurPast, Changing Our Future (New York: Routledge)

cARRoLL, iv., ed. 1997 Organizing Dissent: Contemporary SocialMovements in Theory and Practice (Toronto: Garamound Press)

CIHOVINARD, V. 1999 'Body polltics: disabled women's activism InCanada and beyond' in Mind and Body Spaces, ed R. Butler andH. Parr (New York: Routledge) 269-294

-. 2001 'Legal peripheries: struggles over disabled Canadians'places In law, society and space' The Canadian Geographer 45,187-192

cox, K. 1998 'Spaces of dependence, spaces of engagement and thepolltics of scale: or, looking for local politics' Political Geog-raphy 17, 1-24

cRSswtu, T. 1996 In Place/Out of Place: Geography, Ideology andTransgression (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press)

CRICltTON, A., and JoNcsBoLM, L 1998. Disability and Social Policy InCanada (North York, ON: Captus Press)

CRONE, c. 1996 'Legislature Inaccessible to the disabled' HamiltonSpectator 17 May, A6

DALE, S. 1999 Lost In the Suburbs: A Political Travelogue (Toronto:Stoddart)

DEMARA, s. 1999 'Voters accuse Bassett of failing disabled' TorontoStar 20 May, A8

DELANtY, D., and LTsNER, It. 1997 'The political construction of scale'Political Geography 16, 93-98

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 1999 ConsultationDocument: Revislon of Part M: Building Regulations (Dublin:Department of the Environment and Local Government)

DIRKS, c. 1999 'Barrier busters' London Free Press 11 September, FlDRIEDGER, D. 1989 The Last Civil Rights Movement: Disabled People's

International (New York: St. Martin's Press)-. 1993 'Dlscoverlng disabled women's history' In And Still We

Rise: Feminist Political Mobilizing In Canada, ed L. McCarthy(Toronto: Women's Press) 173-187

LEIScIIER, D., and zAMEs, r. 2001 The Disability Rights Movement(Philadelphia: Temple University Press)

roucAuLT, M. 1980 Power/Knowledge (Brighton: Harvester)CAMSON, w. 1992 'the social psychology of collective action' In

Frontiers In Social Movement Theory, ed A. Morris andC. McClurg-Mueller (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press) 53-76

GLEsoN, s. 1999 Geographies of Disability (New York: Routledge)GOODINC, c. 1994 Disabling L.aws, Enabling Acts: Disability Rights In

Britain and America (London: Pluto Press)GOTTFRIED, Il., ed. 1991 Feminism andSoclal Change: Bridging Theory

and Practice (Urbana: University of Ililnois Press)HAItLTON SPECTATOR 1996 'Conservatives promoted myths to stop

equity' 28 November, D4HEROD, A. 1991 'The production of scale In United States labour

relations' Area 23, 82-8-. 1997 'Labor's spatial praxis and the geography of contract

bargaining In the U.S. East Coast longshore Industry, 1953-89'Political Geography 16, 145-170

-. 1998 'The spatiality of labor unionism: a review essay' in Organ-izing the Landscape: Geographical Perspectives on Labor Union-Ism, ed A. Herod (Minneapolis: University of MinnesotaPress) 1-38

IIERBERT, S. 2001 'On geography and social movements: how thesociologist skeptic might respond' Political Geography 20,928-932

IIUGIIES, R. 2001 'Board urges cuts to citizens' panels' HamiltonSpectator 4 January, A3

IBBerSON, J. 1997 Promised Land: Inside the Mike Harris Revolution(Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall Canada)

IMRIE, R. 1996 Disability and the City (London: Paul ChapmanPublishers)

ISIN, F. 1998 'Governing Toronto without government: liberalismand neoliberalism' Studies In Political Economy 56, 169-191

JONAS, A. 1994 'The scale politics of spatlality' Environment andPlanning D:Soclety and Space 12, 257-264

KEIL, R. 1998 'Toronto In the 1990s: dissociated governance' StudiesIn Political Economy 56, 151-167

KILDARE COMMUNITY NETWORK Web site http://kildare.le/knpd/Index.html (last accessed 17 April 2003)

KrrClIIN, R. M. 2000 Disability, Space and Society (Sheffleld: Geograph-Ical Association)

KITCHIlN, R.M., and LAW, R. 2001 'The soclospatlal construction ofdisabled-access toilets' Urban Studies 32, 287-298

The Canadian Geographer/ Le Geographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)

Disability activism and the politics of scale 115 I 5

Kr CIIIN, R.M., and MULCAIIY, F. 1999 Disability, Access to Education andFuture Opportunities (Dublin: Combat Poverty Agency)

KJTCIIIN, RLM., siliRLow, P. and sNUTTLEWORTi, I. 1998 'On the margins:disabled people's access to and experiences of employment inDonegal, West Ireland' Disability andSociety 13, 785-806

KONErro, L 1984 'Irish clientism: a reappraisal' Economic and SocialReview 15, 173-194

-. 1992 'Brokerage or friendship7 Politics and networks In Ireland'Economic and Social Review 23, 129-145

LMzE, R. 1994 'Negotiating local autonomy' Political Geography 13,423-442

Lum4ER, i. 1997 'Reconfiguring the spatiality of power: the construc-

tion of a supranational migration framework for the EuropeanUnion' Political Geography 16, 123-144

LEPOFSKY, D. 1998 'We must have strong disabilities act' Toronto Star22 July, A16

NACRURY, A. 1997 'Community must campaign for change' HamiltonSpectator 8 December, AS

-. 1998a 'Disabled demand tougher laws' Hamilton Spectator13 August, A4

-. 1998b 'No big loss: Ontarlo's disabilities bill has died' HamiltonSpectator 28 December, 7

MAGNUSSON, w. 1996 The Search for Political Space: Globalization,Social Movements and the Urban Political Experience (Toronto:University of Toronto Press)

MARSTON, s. 2000 'The social construction of scale' Progress InHuman Geography 24, 219-242

MCGUIRE, J. 1994 'Organizing from diversity In the name of commu-

nity: lessons from the disability civil rights movement' PolicyStudlesJournal 22, 112-122

MNEUCCI, A. 1989 Nomads of the Present: Social Movements andIndividual Needs In Contemporary Society (Philadelphia: TempleUniversity Press)

MILLER, s. 1994 'Political empowerment, local-central state relations,and geographically shifting political opportunity structures:strategies of the Cambridge, Massachusetts peace movement'

Political Geography 13, 393-406-. 1997 'Political action and the geography of defense investment:

geographical scale and the representation of the MassachusettsMiracle' Political Geography 16, 171-185

-. 2000 Geography andSocial Movements: Comparing AntinuclearActivism In the Boston Area (Minneapolis: University ofMinnesota Press).

MONSEsRAATEN, L 1997 'Province to pass new law' Toronto Star15 December, AB

MORRISON, s. 1995 'Disabled need louder voice In housing: expert'

Hamilton Spectator 1 June, C2NAST, it. 1994 'Opening remarks on "women in the field"' The Profes-

sional Geographer 46, 54-66OFFICE OF cENsus AND POPULATION SURVEYS (ocPs) 1996 Small Area Population

Statistics (Dublin: OCPS)oNTARLANswml DisAsuLmEsAcT 2001 http://www.gov.on.ca/citizenship/

accessibillty/english/act200l.htm (last accessed 23 April 2003)

ORWEN, P. 1998 'More disabled workers losing jobs, report says'

Toronto Star 1 May, Al 8PASTOR, M. 2001 'Common ground at Ground Zero7 The new economy

and the new organizing In Los Angeles' Antipode 33, 260-289

PASTOR, M., DREIER, P., CRIGSBY, J.L. Ill and LOPEz-cARzA, M. 2000 Regions that

Work: How Cities and Suburbs Can Grow Together (Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press)

PRErt, c. 1997 'Disabled urged to take action' Hamilton Spectator1 December, A3

RIOUX, M., and RAzEr, c. 1999 'The Canadian framework for disability

equality rights' in Disability, Diversability and Legal Change, edM. Jones and L.A. Basser Marks (Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Pub-

lishers) 171-188ROUTLDGE, P. 1997 'Pollock Free State and the practice of postmodern

politics' Transactions, Institute of British Geographers 22,359-377

RUSSELL, M. 1998 Beyond Ramps: Disability at the End of the SocialContract (New York: Vintage Press)

sANcroN, A. 2000 'The municipal role In the governance of Canadian

cities' In Canadian Cities In Transition, ed T. Bunting and

P. Fillon (Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press) 425-442

ScOTcII, R. 1988 'Disability as the basis for a social movement: advo-

cacy and the politics of definition' Journal of Social Issues 44,

159-172s&tmi, N. 1984 Uneven Development (Blackwell: Oxford)

-. 1992 'Contours of a spatlalized politics: homeless vehicles and

the production of geographical scale' Social Text 33, 54-81

SOJA, L 2000 Postmetropolls: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions(Oxford: Blackwell)

STADIEU, L 1994 'Empowering political struggle: spaces and scales

of resistance' Political Geography 13, 387-392

sTAIIEu, L, and coPE, u. 1994 'Empowering women's citizenship'

Political Geography 13, 443-460SZYMANSKI, R. 1998 'The right to enjoy self-respect' Hamilton Specta-

tor 17 August, A8TILLY, c. 1977 From Mobilization to Revolution (Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley)TODD, G. 1998 'Megacity: globalization and governance In Toronto'

Studies In Political Economy 56, 193-216roRJMAN, s. 2001 'Canada's federal regime and persons with disabil-

ities' In Disability and Federalism: Comparing DifferentApproaches to Full Participation, ed D. Cameron and F. Valentine

(Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press) 15 1-195

ToRomnosrAR 1997 'Poll backs disability access law' 27 May, A27

-. 1999 'Disabled cheer step toward rights law' 24 November

WALKOM, T. 1997 'The Harris government: restoration or revolution?'

In The Government and Politics of Ontario, ed G. White (Toronto:

University of Toronto Press) 402-417

WILSON, D. 2001 'Introduction to forum on Byron Miller's book

Geography and Social Movements' Political Geography 20,925-928

WILTON, R. 2000 'Sometimes it's okay to be a spy: ethics and politics

In disability research' Ethics, Place and Environment 3, 91-98

The Canadlan Geographer / Le G6ographe canadien 47, no 2 (2003)

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Disability activism and the politics of scaleSOURCE: Can Geogr 47 no2 Summ 2003

WN: 0319604020001

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and itis reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article inviolation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher:http://www.uwindsor.ca/cag/

Copyright 1982-2003 The H.W. Wilson Company. All rights reserved.

disability activism and the politics of...

Documents