The Zero Project Conference 2016 took place for the fifth time from 10th to 12th February and was held at the United Nations Office in Vienna. I received an invitation to this event, making it my first experience of this international gathering. As more than a week has passed, it has been a good time for me to process all the impressions and gain some distance before writing these lines.
Essl Foundation
Firstly, I want to introduce you to the organisation behind this event. As stated on their website, the Zero Project is an initiative of the Essl Foundation, which was established in March 2008 and whose focus is set on the Zero Project. The Essl Social Prize – an award for outstanding social entrepreneurs, supporting social innovation with an emphasis on people with disabilities and job creation in Austria, Sinnstifter – joint activities with other Austrian Foundations, and the "Verband für Gemeinnütziges Stiften" for supporting philanthropy in Austria.
Behind the Zero Project
The Zero Project itself focuses on the rights of people with disabilities globally. It provides a platform where the most innovative and effective solutions to problems that people with disabilities face are shared. Its sole objective is to assist in creating a world without barriers.
They use a solution-based approach for their work. Together with their continuously growing network of over 3,000 disability experts in over 150 countries, they seek to identify the most innovative and effective policies & practices that improve the lives of people with disabilities. More information can be found on their website.
Impressions
Now I want to share my impressions, which started on the second day of this event with the official opening ceremony and ended with the final plenary. I appreciate this experience, stepping outside of my usual surroundings of recent years. There was a little bit of a return to fields of activity where I have been for years, meeting people again after a long time, as well as meeting new ones, which resulted in interesting conversations. Therefore, I want to thank the Zero Project very much for the invitation.
CROSS-SECTIONAL TOPIC AS PROGRAMME
It was not possible to attend all sessions because there were three sessions running simultaneously. As a result, I focused only on sessions that met my personal and professional interests. The conference topics can be broadly summarised into three fields: Policy, Education, and Information & Communication Technology. I must mention that the field of disability, inclusion, accessibility, and sustainability is a large cross-sectional topic. Hence, it is in its nature that these are controversial topics too.
SHORTCOMINGS
For me, it is important to have the possibility to discuss in a well-balanced and fair manner, and these were shortcomings for deaf people with sign language as their first language. This was because there was only one room providing sign language interpreting. The interpreters did incredible work because they made an unbelievable extra effort. Every room provided English captions of the spoken topics. If deaf people wanted to participate in discussions, there was no possibility, unless they had brought their own interpreter. And networking without sign language interpreting is a matter of enormous extra effort for most of them. Therefore, I would say it was only a partially accessible event.
PR STUNT VS. ACCESSIBILITY
We cannot really talk about inclusion if there is partial exclusion, even if not intended. I am not sure what people with hearing impairments or cochlear implants thought. Because only one room was clearly marked out by providing an induction loop for access with hearing aids. Perhaps this was a public relations stunt by the event sponsor who, in their own session in this room, only spoke about the costs and benefits of their hearing implant technology and surprisingly dropped really important and neutral arguments in the session summary in the final plenary. I found fairness lacking in this issue, and the session chair was not unbiased. One of these arguments will be explained here later.
ACCESSIBILITY IS A FULL SERVICE
It is not only a matter of money or intent whether you provide a service or not. It is a cause of clear communication or information. As I always write, accessibility is a business of balance within a range of possibilities. If you are providing a service, then do it as a full service and make clear statements. Partial service is likely to be a Russian roulette gun for public relations. Clear communication, clear information, and clear services – then you can be sure there will be a greater atmosphere and experience for all stakeholders, which can foster a new culture in sharing expertise and understanding people. It is not about providing everything but about maintaining a well-thought-out balance within the possibilities.
It is not my intent to blame the event. No, I want to point out possible blind spots that can be improved for future activities. Nonetheless, it has been an interesting experience getting the possibility to attend the Zero Project Conference, which left me inspired to gain more insights. Therefore, it is a great effort by the Essl Foundation to make this possible. Chapeau!
ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY
As I am familiar with conferences in the field of web accessibility, there were different approaches concerning the topics. The focus had a strong bias towards assistive technologies in general. Despite their importance, they are only one side of the bridge to overall accessibility. Technology alone does not guarantee the involvement of all stakeholders because it is also a matter of culture. Imagine, if you have access to everything but you do not feel welcomed or engaged? You would miss something and would not stay long. I am sure if there is an understanding for that, then technology will be understood and used well. Why are you doing that? What do you believe in? This is important to get the commitment of the stakeholders. I think it is also a matter of how people with disabilities are viewed in general. They are not homogeneous; they are diverse. To be fair, this is only a small impression, and I have not attended the complete session programme.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN
Nonetheless, the discussions were interesting at this international level. For example, the piece of information about accessibility as an issue in the negotiations about TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership). A very appealing issue for me has been the strong bias towards Universal Design. Its role in accessible tourism, urban development, and sustainability. Especially the material produced by the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design in Ireland was really impressive, as were some pieces from the technology show. It gave me some impressions outside of my personal bias.
INVESTMENT AND RETURN
And the most impressive statement, which left me thinking a lot, was made by Dr. Christian Schober from the NPO Competence Centre at the Vienna University of Economics and Business. He said in the session about "Increasing access by using hearing implant technology" that it is not about costs and benefits but about investment and return, no matter the cause. I recognised the general meaning of his statement, not only for this session, and it was indeed an eye-opener even for business in general.
Conclusion
At the Zero Project Conference, there was much more in the session programme which is not covered by this blog post. And there are many more statements I have certainly missed. Despite the facts I have stated above, I would go there again if I had the possibility.
