Introduction

This chapter investigates whether community-based rehabilitation (CBR) has been a feasible and ‘practical strategy for the implementation of the [Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, or] CRPD’ in low-income countries (World Health Organization [WHO] et al., 2010: 26), based on lessons drawn from the oldest higher-education-based CBR programme in Ethiopia: the University of Gondar's CBR (UoG-CBR) programme. As the name implies, CBR focuses on community-based initiatives to improve the lives and livelihoods of persons with disabilities (PwDs). Originally focused on rehabilitation programmes, CBR recently has moved towards a broader approach – rebranded as community-based inclusive development (CBID) – which encompasses health, education, livelihoods, social development, and empowerment. In the CBR/CBID approach, Disabled People's Organizations (DPOs) support local communities to create and implement disability programmes best suited to local needs and conditions. Grassroots approaches of this kind might be especially important for achieving disability rights under the CRPD, in light of a persistent lack of political will and inadequate institutional and technical capacities and resources in many countries in the Global South, which have rendered the CRPD and associated policy or legal frameworks ineffective in improving the lives of PwDs and supporting their families and communities. As a result, many families are left to their own devices to support their loved ones with disabilities. CBR/CBID seeks to help families and communities in three ways: by preparing PwDs to operate in an accessible environment, by making the environment more accessible for PwDs, and by creating and empowering DPOs to assist in the process.

The analysis that follows aims to contribute to bridging the perceived knowledge gap (Weber, Pollack, and Hartley, 2015) on the impact and contribution of CBR to creating opportunities for PwDs and promoting an inclusive society. Capturing the outcomes and impact of CBR on peoples’ lives is very challenging conceptually and methodologically. The flexibility and adaptability of CBR – immense advantages in their own right – can make clear monitoring and evaluation guidelines on, and appropriate tools for, CBR programmes very difficult. CBR philosophy and principles are variously operationalized and contextualized in response to local and emerging realities.