A Social Justice Approach to Assistive Technology and Well-Being of People With Visual Disabilities in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Qualitative Narrative Study

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Background: The United Nations’ third Sustainable Development Goal emphasizes ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being (WB) for all, which requires effective assistive technology (AT) for persons with disabilities. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), however, AT remains largely inaccessible, and high abandonment rates indicate that many existing solutions fail to meet users’ needs. To improve AT design and effectiveness, a deeper understanding of users’ lived experiences and the ways AT influences WB is essential. Objective: This study aimed to explore how technology creates opportunities or barriers in the daily lives of persons with visual disabilities in LMICs and how it affects their WB. Methods: We conducted a qualitative narrative study guided by deductive qualitative analysis, using the capability approach (CA) and disadvantage theory (DT) as theoretical frameworks. Nineteen adults with visual disabilities from Cali, Colombia, participated in in-depth, semistructured interviews. A focus group (n=5) deepened the exploration of shared experiences. Data analysis followed three stages: (1) deductive coding using Nussbaum list of central capabilities and key CA constructs (functionings, conversion factors, and agency); (2) recoding through DT concepts (insecure functioning, corrosive disadvantages, and fertile functionings); and (3) inductive analysis to capture emergent sociocultural themes. Results: AT shaped both opportunities and constraints in participants’ lives. While functionings such as employment, mobility, and affiliation were highly valued, they often remained insecure due to systemic barriers. Corrosive disadvantages—such as unemployment, exclusion, and limited spatial autonomy—undermined multiple capabilities simultaneously. Conversely, fertile functionings such as equitable employment, adaptive sports, and access to well-designed AT supported agency and resilience. The inductive analysis revealed 3 interconnected themes: the aspiration to explore and expand movement, the desire to appear attractive, and the adoption of nonconfrontational strategies to maintain social harmony. These findings highlight how emotional, aesthetic, and cultural dimensions shape the experience and meaning of AT. Conclusions: While AT research in LMICs often emphasizes availability, it rarely addresses how social norms, structural violence, and fear affect meaningful use. The combined CA and DT lens reveals that AT can either enable or constrain WB depending on how it aligns with users’ lived contexts. Designing for fertile functionings—those that support agency, safety, and resilience—is essential. Participatory, context-sensitive design must prioritize not only functionality, but also aesthetic dignity, cultural relevance, and emotional security. Including the voices—and silences—of persons with disabilities in the Global South is crucial for transforming AT from a mere tool into a catalyst for real freedom and WB.

This publication has 84 references indexed in Scilit: