Focus on disability: Economic Benefits of Making Built Environment Accessible to Persons with Disabilities Cont’d

Team Based Analysis

In the absence of direct measures of individual productivity, it was assumed in the analysis that the average productivity of Federal team is equal to the average Federal wage rate of that team.

Since workers with disabilities and their teamwork throughout the Federal government, the average wage rate of all teams that benefit was equivalent to the average Federal wage rate. Recognizing the limitations listed above, this assumption is consistent with economic theory, claimed the author.

Improve access to electronic and technology increases the productivity of the Federal worker with disability, modelled as percentage increase of the average Federal wage for that worker. Although the Federal worker with disabilities typically have an average Federal wage lower than the average wage of all Federal workers, this analysis uses the Federal wage of all Federal workers on the general schedule which is $44,824 according to 1998 OPM data. This assumption was chosen to recognise that greater productivity by one member of Federal team (the worker with disability) leads for a greater productivity for the entire group. The analysis models this spillage effect by applying the percentage increase in productivity to the higher, average Federal wage rate.

The dollar of this increase in productivity was calculated by multiplying the average Federal wage by the estimated increase in productivity and then by the number of workers with disabilities in the Federal force. The analysis used two estimates of the number of workers with targeted disabilities to provide a range of potential benefits. The lower bound is the number of workers with targeted disabilities. This data may understate an actual increase in productivity due to some limitations, the author acknowledged.

As shown in the table below, the standard are projected to increase the value of government outputs by a conservative lower bound estimate of $62.8 million to $125.7 million per year. Considering all the workers with reported disability, the benefits are estimated to range from $375.7 million to $751.3 million.

In concluding his report, the author enumerated his principal findings as:
The primary beneficiaries of the standards are federal employees with disabilities who will have an increase ability to use the same electronic and information technology available to other federal employees. The universal accessibility features will also make it easier for employees with disabilities to change between jobs in the federal government, and may make it possible to work more flexibly in existing positions.

Benefits to other individuals and entities include:
Federal agencies will experience gains in productivity as workers with disabilities are more able to take advantage of the productivity enhancing benefits of electronic and information technology

The perceived transaction costs associated with hiring persons with disabilities will be reduced for federal agencies, benefiting both persons with disabilities seeking federal employment and the federal government by expanding the quantity and quality of available employees.

Federal employees who are not disabled, or do not consider themselves to have a disability, may benefit from increase usability of electronic and information technology associated with disability. For example, the ability to increase size of the text on a computer screen may be necessary to make the technology accessible to an individual with limited vision, but it can also provide benefits to employees who are moderately farsighted or simply prefer large texts.

The limitations of the team-based approach include:
1. Choice of specific productivity increase as a result of these standards is arbitrary.
2. Team assumption does not hold true everywhere in the Federal government.

Some social studies that are very essential in economic decisions have also been conducted. Kern & James (1994) in their study of the pattern of participation of the persons with disabilities in leisure and recreation depicted the following patterns. The pattern of participation in outdoors recreation was similar across most activities for persons with and without disabilities. Activities with the highest rates of participation among persons with disabilities also tended to show the highest rate of participation among persons without disabilities.

In out door recreation activities, persons with disabilities in middle age groups reported less participation than persons without disabilities. However, in the youngest and oldest age groups, persons with disabilities participate, at rates equal to or greater than persons without disabilities.

In nature study activities, persons with disabilities participate at rates higher than persons without disabilities. Although most persons with disabilities reported experiencing few barriers to outdoor recreation, majority of the complainants associated barriers such as problems with their health conditions and physical limitations. Most persons with disabilities did not report needing accommodations or assistive devices for participation in outdoor recreation. Among those requiring assistance, the most common assistive devices/accommodations were mobility aids, a companion/assistant, and architectural modification.

Attitudes towards accessibility seem to indicate that persons with disabilities generally felt that no outdoor recreation should be completely inaccessible, however concord that more primitive areas will be generally less accessible than less primitive areas. In addition, persons with disabilities tended to favour preservation of environment over accessibility in the National Wilderness Preservation System.

However, there was a general agreement that environmental modifications in the National Wilderness Preservation System areas should be made accessible to persons with disabilities. Sproates, J. (1996) did a similar study in Canada concentrating on activities such as adventure, watercraft and culture. The aim of the study was to aid decision makers in the tourism sector in prioritising barrier removal.

Adventure Activities
Adventure activities showed the lowest rate of participation between both persons with and without disabilities. The relative participation was similar across both groups regardless of whether age-average or total participation rates are used. For example, primitive camping had the highest rates of participation for both groups and orienteering had the lowest participation rates.  In all activities in this category, the average rate of participation indicated that persons with disabilities participate at higher rates than persons without disabilities. In contrast, total participation rates reflected the opposite pattern, where persons with disabilities participated at higher rates than persons without disabilities.

Watercraft Activities
Power boating was one of the most popular for both persons with and without disabilities. Approximately, one-quarter of all persons with disabilities had participated in power boating in the last 12 months. This figure was similar for persons without disabilities. Participation rates in physically demanding activities such as water skiing and jet skiing showed that persons without disabilities had higher rates of participation regardless of which participation rate was used.

When less physically demanding watercraft activities was examined, the relative rates of participation vary on the total versus average rates. For example, the total rates of participation in canoeing indicated that persons with disabilities participated at a higher rate than persons without disabilities, but when age-averaged rates of participations were compared there appears no difference. Another example of relative differences in participation based on the rates is seen in rafting, where a higher proportion of persons without disabilities participated if total participation is used and lower proportion participate if average rate is used