ӣ��Ӱ��

Topic

Constructing Disability in Policy: The Discursive Construction of Disability in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act and the Accessible British Columbia Act

School of Public Administration

Date & location

• Monday, December 9, 2025

• 10:00 A.M.

• Virtual Defence

Reviewers

Supervisory Committee

• Dr. Sarah Marie Wiebe, School of Public Administration, ӣ��Ӱ�� (Supervisor)

• Dr. Robert Lapper, School of Public Administration, UVic (Member) 

External Examiner

• Dr. Jennifer White, School of Child and Youth Care, ӣ��Ӱ�� 

Chair of Oral Examination

• Dr. Sandra Marquis, School of Public Health and Social Policy, UVic

   

Abstract

This research examines how cultural and political biases are embedded within Canadian accessibility legislation, focusing on the Accessible British Columbia Act (ABCA) and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA). It is guided by two research questions: 

1. What biases are present in the AODA and ABCA, and how do they impact disabled individuals in these provinces?
2. What specific language and terminology in the AODA and ABCA express these biases? 

The study employs a qualitative, interpretive design that combines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) with a comparative case study of British Columbia and Ontario. Using Fairclough’s CDA framework, the research reveals the powers and ideologies embedded in accessibility legislation and examines how subsequent regulations and amendments may influence accessibility for disabled individuals. 

Five key biases were identified within the AODA: (1) structural and authoritative bias, (2) ambiguity and neoliberal governance, (3) symbolic inclusion, (4) economic framing, and (5) enforcement and compliance. Four primary biases emerged within the ABCA: (1) equality over equity, (2) tokenism and volunteerism, (3) technocracy, temporality, and optimism, and (4) ambiguity and authority. Each theme is illustrated with examples from the legislation and analyzed through a critical discourse lens. 

For practice, the findings underline the need for policymakers to shift from reactive, compliance-driven approaches to proactive, rights-based frameworks that anticipate and prevent barriers before they arise. Current systems often place the burden on disabled individuals to identify barriers and file complaints, rather than embedding accessibility as a baseline expectation. From a research perspective, the comparative analysis of the AODA and ABCA highlights the value of examining accessibility legislation across jurisdictions rather than in isolation. Expanding this approach to other provinces and territories could provide a more comprehensive understanding of how disability is discursively constructed in law across Canada. 

Keywords: Disability Policy, Bias, Critical Discourse Analysis, Accessibility, Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, Accessible British Columbia Act, Ontario, British Columbia