wolbring

Ability Expectation/Ableism glossary


Just a starting point We first have stuff on ableism  with some references where we covered given content  and then references to all our work covering/using ableism are at the end.

Ability Studies

Ability studies investigates how ability expectation (want stage) and ableism (need stage) hierarchies and preferences come to pass and the impact of such hierarchies and preferences. [1]. Within it, it allows to investigate eco-ability expectations and eco-ableism that focuses on ecological dynamics of human-human; human-animal and human-environment relationships [2,5].

Ability Studies allows for the study of multiple subject formations, social relationships, and lived experiences based on diverse ability expectations and the actions linked to such expectations. It encourages the study of how legal, ethical/moral, biological, cultural and social constructs are exhibiting ability expectations and how such ability expectations and the actions they trigger leads to an ability based and ability justified understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment [1,4]]. Ability studies can be used in inter-, trans- and intra- disciplinarily ways to generate policies and advance the relationship between humans, animals and their environment [1,2,5].

Ability expectation: One likes as an individual or as a social structure to have a certain ability),

Ableism: One perceives as an individual or as a social structure certain ability as essential

Disablism: A given ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social structure to disabled the one without that ability

Active disablism: One actively tries to generate social conditions that disable the one without the ability or where one generates new ability expectations with the expressed purpose to generate a hierarchy between social groups with one being the dominant one. So the primary purpose is to disable one based on the difference in abilities (perceived or real)

Omission or passive disablism: One disables someone else by not accommodating the other individual or social group that does not exhibit the ability due to simply not being aware, not thinking about it (see further down section on ability privilege). The primary purpose was not to generate the disablement due to ability differences (perceived or real) but it’s a side effect of one not wanting or one being unable to accommodate the other (see ability privilege further down).

Passive disablism can become active disablism and vice versa

Enablism: A given ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social structure to enable other individuals  or social structures

Scope of Ability expectation and Ableism

“The concept of ableism was developed by the disabled people’s rights movement to question species-typical, normative body ability expectations and the ability privileges (i.e. ability to work, to gain education, to be part of society, to have an identity, to be seen as citizen) that come with a species-typical body (although they did not use the term ability privilege). Disablism conceptualized within this meaning of ability privilege suggests that people with expected, normative body abilities are not willing to give up their ability privileges” [5]

Or in other words

Ableism: A set of beliefs, processes and practices that produce based on ones abilities a particular kind of understanding of oneself, one‟s body and one‟s relationship with others of one‟s species, other species and one‟s environment and includes one being judged by others [1].

Or in other words

Ableism privileges „species-typical abilities‟ while labelling „sub species-typical abilities‟ as deficient, as impaired and undesirable often with the accompanying disablism the discriminatory oppressive, or abusive behaviour against the sub species-typical people [5]

We list many ableism papers focusing on disabled people here (not complete but a start).

However we suggest that ableism is a cultural reality moving beyond disabled people.

Moving beyond disabled people

Ableism exhibits in general a favouritism for certain abilities that are projected as essential while at the same time labelling real or perceived deviation from or lack of these essential abilities as problematic leading or contributing to the justification of a variety of other isms such as sexism, racism, castism, Age-ism and so forth [1, 4,5].

Here the claim is not about species-typical versus sub species-typical, but that one has – as a species or a social group- superior abilities compared to other species or other segments in ones species.

Moving beyond the body

Ableism exhibits in general a favouritism for certain abilities that are projected as essential for certai humans to exhibit while at the same time labelling real or perceived deviation from or lack of these essential abilities as problematic leading or contributing to the justification of a variety of other isms such as GDP-ism, consumer-ism, productivity-ism, competitiveness-ism  and so forth [1, 4, 5] and here.

Moving to the inclusion of human-animal and human-nature relationships

Eco-ableism is a conceptual framework for analysing enabling and disabling human ability desires, a class of desires that shape the relationship between humans, between humans and animals and humans and their environment [2, 5, 6, 14].

Moving beyond the species-sub-species typical

Human related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices that perceive the improvement of human body abilities beyond homo sapiens typical boundaries (species-typical and sub species-typical) as essential. This enhancement version of ableism, sees all human bodies as limited, defective and in need of constant improvement of their abilities beyond homo sapiens -typical boundaries. The  body ability enhancement can be of three types a) external by shaping the environment, b) internal reversal by modifying bodily structures in an reversible fashion and c) internal non-reversal by modifying bodily structures in a non-reversible fashion.

Animal related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices which champions the especially cognitive enhancement of animal species beyond species typical boundaries leading to cognitive or otherwise “enabled species‟.

Environment related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices which champions the a) enhancement of especially the Homo sapiens beyond species typical boundaries to cope with the environmental challenges to come b) shaping the environment (geo-engineering, gated biospheres…)

Moving beyond the negative aspect of Ability Expectation and Ableism

Exhibition of ability expectations or ableism’s can also have positive consequences(enablement/enablism)[7] and here. Ones desire to have the ability to live in an equitable society could be seen as a enabling ability expectation. Some see the concept of sustainable development as positive step in what humans expect ability wise from nature [7,12]. The capability approach can be interpreted as a list of positive abilities one is supposed to be able to act upon [12].  And many abilities are linked to the concept of an active citizen [13].

Some Ability Studies concepts

 Ethics of Ableism/Ableism Ethics is a framework of standards and values that (a) guide beliefs, processes and practices that produces based on ones abilities a particular kind of understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment and includes one being judged by others; (b) guide the favouritism for certain abilities and how one decide which abilities to favour over others; (c) guide the reactions towards humans and other biological entities that are seen -real or perceived- to lack these essential abilities. whatever set of abilities one has, and that one will not be forced to have a prescribed set of abilities to live a secure life. [1, 2, 8]

Ability Security        

that one is accepted, and is able to live one’s life with whatever set of abilities one has, and that one will not be forced to have a prescribed set of abilities to live a secure life [2].

Governance of ability expectations / Ability expectation Governance

is about how we govern ability expectations and ableism, the favouritism for certain abilities and the reaction towards non favoured abilities (for example [9-10].“Ability expectation governance” focuses on how to navigate the societal aspects of ability expectations. see here.

Ability expectation literacy

means people understand the consequences of ability expectations see here.

Ability discrimination

meaning that one is oppressed because their ability is different see here.

Ability expectation oppression

Being oppressed by ability expectations of others [11] see linkage to colonial theory [11] see also here and here

Ability expectation and ableism apartheid 

individuals or social structures deprive other individuals or social structures of a decent life based on the disabling use of ability expectation and ableism (see  also concept of ability security and ability identity security). For example the term ability expectation apartheid was used explicitly and covered by a paper I did together with the great scholar Anita Ghai.  [11]  How our paper was interpreted: “Wolbring and Ghai discuss how new technologies of enhancement are generating both new categorisations and new life forms. They end up drawing on Foucault’s (1976) analysis of biopower to argue that ‘ability expectation apartheid is one form of social apartheid'”

My group also linked ability expectation to certain forms of apartheid (one can say have their roots in ability expectation and ableism used in a disabling way)  here, here , and here from me) (all linked to adaptation apartheid),  and here  (linked to occupational apartheid). For description of the term “occupational apartheid” see  here (Wikipedia)   here (OT textbook) (and open access here  and here  and here ) and “adaptation apartheid”  here (page 166  original quote from Desmond Tutu).

 

Ability-expectation creep

meaning that we seem to constantly expect more abilities see [7] here also here.

Ability expectation (Ableism) Foresight

To anticipate and understand shifting social dynamics enabled by advancing sciences and technologies [1].

Ability Privilege

Ability privilege describes the advantages enjoyed by those who exhibit certain abilities and the unwillingness of these individuals to relinquish the advantage linked to the abilities especially with the reason that these are earned or birth given (natural) abilities. To link it back to disabled people as the originator of the term ableism. The concept of ableism was developed to question the ability privileges (i.e. ability to work, to gain education, to be part of society, to have an identity, to be seen as citizen) that come with a species-typical body (although they did not use the term ability privilege)[5] and see my paper in here. Disablism conceptualized within this meaning of ability privilege suggests that people with expected, normative body abilities are not willing to give up their ability privileges [5] and see my paper in  here. The cultural phenomenon of Ability privileges, however, can be employed beyond the social group of disabled people and their encounter with the ‘ability normative’ body.

Ability privileges can play themselves out between traditionally defined social groups (e.g. race, gender, class). However at the same time social groups are also formed based on ability privileges whereby the social group is defined by whether its members have or don’t have a given ability (the ability-have and the ability-non-have social groups). Ability privilege  also influences how one relates to nature and to animals and shapes one identity [5]  and see my paper in here

Ability Inequity and inequality from [3]

 For both, ability inequity and ability inequality two subgroups exist. One group is linked to intrinsic bodily abilities and the other group is linked to external abilities, abilities generated by human interventions that impact humans. These two subgroups of internal and external ability inequities and inequality are quite distinct in their effects and discourse dynamics, involved stakeholders and goals.

Definition: Ability inequality is a descriptive term denoting any uneven distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions, right or wrong

Example: Lack of access to education employment….  Ability inequalities also are experienced by so called body normative people. Eating certain food leads to better abilities, but not everyone has access to this food. Clean water leads to better abilities, but not everyone has access to it.

Definition: Ability inequality is a descriptive term denoting any uneven judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body, right or wrong

Example: Negative judgments of people who ‘lack’ certain ‘normative’ intrinsic set of body related abilities as defective (e.g. not hearing as impairment person versus ability diverse person), at the same time people do not define themselves as defective because they cannot fly; or less payment for the same amount of work for women versus men….

 

Definition: Ability inequity is a normative term denoting an unjust or unfair distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions

Example: One could say that one of the purposes of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  was to highlight which ability inequities are unjust and to prescribe some remedies for them

Definition: Ability inequity is a normative term denoting an unjust or unfair judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body

Negative judgment linked to the abilities or perceived lack thereof of disabled people or women are judged unfairly with their abilities in work payments.

 

[1] Wolbring, G., Why NBIC?  Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research 2008, 21 (1), 25-40

[2] Wolbring, G., Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health, Gislason, M. K., Ed. Emerald: London, UK, 2013; Vol. 15, pp 91-107

[3] Wolbring, G., Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality, Cozzens, S.; M.Wetmore, J., Eds. Springer: New York, 2010; pp 89-104.

[4]  Wolbring, G., The Politics of Ableism. Development 2008, 51 (2), 252-258.

[5] Wolbring, G., Ability Privilege: A Needed Addition to Privilege Studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies 2014, 13 (2). P.118-141  see http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/volume12-issue-2-2014/

[6] Wolbring, G., Eco-ableism. Anthropology News 2012, Sept. 14.

[7] Wolbring, G., & Yumakulov, S. (2015). Education through an Ability Studies Lens.

Zeitschrift für Inklusion, 10(2), no page number. Retrieved from: http://www.inklusion

online.net/index.php/inklusion-online/article/view/278/261

[8] Wolbring, G., Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012, 4 (4), 293-309

[9] Wolbring, G., & Diep, L. (2016). Cognitive/Neuroenhancement through an Ability Studies lens. In F. Jotterand & V. Dubljevic (Eds.), Cognitive Enhancement (pp. 57-75). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press

[10] Wolbring, G (2015) Human Enhancement verlangt die Auseinandersetzung mit Fähigkeitserwartungen in special issue “Schwerpunkt// Der optimierte Mensch in «Soziale Sicherheit CHSS» Social Security, Journal of the Federal Social Insurance Office, Switzerland Vol 16, Issue 1, p 16-19  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=de The French version of full journal issue is  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=fr  The English version Human Enhancement: The need for Ability Expectation Governance available upon request

[11] Wolbring, G., & Ghai, A. (2015). Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond. Disability and the Global South, 2(2), 667-685.

[12] Wolbring, G.; Burke, B., (2013) Reflecting on Education for Sustainable Development through Two Lenses: Ability Studies and Disability Studies. Sustainability 2013, 5 (6), 2327-2342.

[13] Wolbring, Gregor (2012) Citizenship Education through an Ability Expectation and “Ableism” Lens: The Challenge of Science and Technology and Disabled People in Educ. Sci. 20122(3), 150-164;

[14] Wolbring G. and Lisitza A. (2017) Justice Among Humans, Animals and the Environment: Investigated Through an Ability Studies, Eco-Ableism, and Eco-Ability Lens in Weaving Nature, Animals and Disability for Eco-ability: The Intersectionality of Critical Animal, Disability and Environmental Studies, editors Anthony J. Nocella II, Amber E. George, JL Schatz, Lexington Books, p 41-62

All our work using Ableism

  1. Wolbring Gregor (2019) Ability expectation and ableism governance: An essential aspect of a culture of peace   in the book “Legacies of Love, Peace and Hope: How Education can overcome Hatred and Divide” Editor Darryl R.J. Macer, Eubios Ethics Institute (Christchurch Tsukuba Science City Bangkok), pp.116-126.
  2. Hoffmann, T. & Wolbring, G. (2019): Zwischen Superkrüppel und Cybathlon: Behinderung und Spitzensport in den Medien. In: Vierteljahresschrift für Heilpädagogik und ihre Nachbargebiete (VHN), 88(4), p. 321-324
  3. Wolbring, Gregor and Djebrouni, Manel (2018)  Motivated Reasoning and Disabled People in Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Equality and Diversity Volume 4 Issue 2 no page number
  4. Wolbring, G. and Martin B. (2018)   Analysis of the Coverage of Paratriathlon and Paratriathletes in Canadian Newspapers  Sports 20186(3), Article 87
  5. Wolbring, G. (2018) Eltern ohne Vorurteile: in Empowerment und Exklusion: Zur Kritik der Mechanismen gesellschaftlicher Ausgrenzung  Editors Thomas Hoffmann, Wolfgang Jantzen and Ursula Stinkes; Psychosozial-Verlag, Giessen. p. 393-397   

  6. Wolbring, G and Diep, L (2018) Antizipatorische Governance bedarf antizipatorischer Interessenvertretung: Der Fall der Governance von Fähigkeitserwartungen: in Empowerment und Exklusion: Zur Kritik der Mechanismen gesellschaftlicher Ausgrenzung  Editors Thomas Hoffmann, Wolfgang Jantzen and Ursula Stinkes; Psychosozial-Verlag, Giessen, p. 345-373

  7. Wolbring G. (2018) Prostheses and Other Equipment: The Issue of the Cyborg Athlete—Interrogating the Media Coverage of the Cybathlon 2016 Event. In: Brittain I., Beacom A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Paralympic Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p 439-459  link
  8. Wolbring G., (2017) Teaching About Ability expectation and its governance: the issue of STEM in Education and New Technologies Perils and Promises for Learners Edited by Kieron Sheehy, Andrew Holliman Routledge p.121-140
  9. Wolbring, G. (2017)  The gift of belonging: From parents to society . In K. Scorgie, & D. Sobsey, (Eds.) Working with Families for Inclusive Education: Navigating Identity, Opportunity and Belonging Vol. 10 in C, Fortin (series editor) International Perspectives on Inclusive Education.  San Diego, CA: Emerald p. 63-70
  10. Wolbring G. and Lisitza A. (2017) Justice Among Humans, Animals and the Environment: Investigated Through an Ability Studies, Eco-Ableism, and Eco-Ability Lens in Weaving Nature, Animals and Disability for Eco-ability: The Intersectionality of Critical Animal, Disability and Environmental Studies,
    editors Anthony J. Nocella II, Amber E. George, JL Schatz, Lexington Books
    p41-62
  11. Wolbring, Gregor (2017)  Why “ability expectations” must be central to debates on science and our future The Conversation, Canada
  12. Wolbring, Gregor (2017)  Why “ability expectations” must be central to debates on science and our future reprint in National Post, Canada
  13. Wolbring, G. and Ghai, A. (2016) Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond. In Danforth, S. and Gabel, S. L. (Eds.) Vital Questions Facing Disability Studies in Education, 2nd edition (pp. 249-268). New York: Peter Lang. reprint of an article published first in Disability and the Global South 2(2) pp. 667-685
  14. Wolbring Gregor and Chai Tsing-Yee (Emily) (2016) Investigating Occupational Therapy: from Disability Studies to Ability Studies Chapter 23, pp 211-219 in Occupational Therapy without Borders new edition for 2016: Editors Nick Pollard and Dikaios Sakellariou, Elsevier Publisher preproof version online with permission of publisher here
  15. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.(2016) The Discussions around Precision Genetic Engineering: Role of and Impact on Disabled People Laws5(3), 37; doi: 10.3390/laws5030037 for metrics
  16.  Wolbring, G.; Diep, L. Cognitive/Neuroenhancement through an ability studies lens. In Cognitive enhancement, Jotterand, F.; Dubljevic, V., Eds. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2016; pp 57-75
  17. Wolbring, Gregor (2015) Gene editing: Govern ability expectations Nature, 527(7579), 446-446. doi: 10.1038/527446b
  18. Diep, Lucy; Cabibihan John-John and Wolbring Gregor (2015)  Social Robots: Views of special education teachers p 160-164 in Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on ICTs for improving Patients Rehabilitati on Research Techniques 01st-02nd of October 2015 University Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologías Lisbon, Portugal Editors: Habib M. Fardoun, Pedro Gamito, Víctor M. R. Penichet, Daniyal M. Alghazzawi
  19. Diep Lucy and Wolbring Gregor (2015) “Perceptions of Brain-Machine Interface Technology among Mothers of Disabled Children“. in Disability Studies Quarterly, Volume 35/4 December 16,
  20. Wolbring, G (2015) (link to German Version of the full issueHuman Enhancement verlangt die Auseinandersetzung mit Fähigkeitserwartungen in special issue “Schwerpunkt// Der optimierte Mensch in «Soziale Sicherheit CHSS» Social Security, Journal of the Federal Social Insurance Office, Switzerland Vol 16, Issue 1, p 16-19 The French version of full journal issue is here The English version Human Enhancement: The need for Ability Expectation Governance available upon request
  21. Wolbring G and Ghai Anita (2015) Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond in Disability and the Global South 2(2) pp. 667-685
  22. Wolbring G and Yumakulov S (2015) Education through an Ability Studies Lensin Zeitschrift für Inklusion 10(2) no page number Special Issue on Ableism: Behinderung und Befähigung im Bildungswesen Editor Lisa Pfahl and Tobias Buchner link to full issue
  23. Wolbring Gregor (2014) Ability Privilege: A needed addition to privilege studies:In Journal for Critical Animal Studies  Vol. 12, No. 2, p.118-141
  24. Ball, Natalie and Wolbring Gregor (2014) “Cognitive Enhancement: Perceptions among parents of children with disabilities” In: NeuroethicsPublished online February 21,
  25. Billawala, Alshaba and Wolbring Gregor (2014) “Analyzing the discourse surrounding Autism in the New York Times using an ableism lens”.In Disability Studies Quarterly Vol 34(1), no page number
  26. Wolbring, G., Hearing Beyond the Normal Enabled by Therapeutic Devices: The Role of the Recipient and the Hearing Profession. Neuroethics 2013, 6 (3), 607-616.
  27. Tynedal, J.; Wolbring, G., Paralympics and Its Athletes Through the Lens of the New York Times. Sports 2013, 1 (1), 13-36.
  28. Diep, L.; Wolbring, G., Who Needs to Fit in? Who Gets to Stand out? Communication Technologies Including Brain-Machine Interfaces Revealed from the Perspectives of Special Education School Teachers Through an Ableism Lens. Education Sciences 2013, 3 (1), 30-49.
  29. Wolbring, G.; Leopatra, V., Sensors: Views of Staff of a Disability Service Organization. Journal of Personalized Medicine 2013, 3 (1), 23-39.
  30. Wolbring, G.; Burke, B., Reflecting on Education for Sustainable Development through Two Lenses: Ability Studies and Disability Studies. Sustainability 2013, 5 (6), 2327-2342.
  31. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.; Yumakulov, S.; Ball, N.; Yergens, D., Social Robots, Brain Machine Interfaces and Neuro/Cognitive Enhancers: Three Emerging Science and Technology Products through the Lens of Technology Acceptance Theories, Models and Frameworks. Technologies 2013, 1 (1), 3-25.
  32. Wolbring, G., Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health, Gislason, M. K., Ed. Emerald: London, UK, 2013; Vol. 15, pp 91-107.
  33. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.; Yumakulov, S.; Ball, N.; Leopatra, V.; Yergens, D., Emerging Therapeutic Enhancement Enabling Health Technologies and Their Discourses: What Is Discussed within the Health Domain? Healthcare 2013, 1 (1), 20-52.
  34. Noga, J.; Wolbring, G., An Analysis of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio +20) Discourse Using an Ability Expectation Lens. Sustainability 2013, 5 (9), 3615-3639.
  35. Wolbring, G.; Mackay, R.; Rybchinski, T.; Noga, J., Disabled People and the Post-2015 Development Goal Agenda through a Disability Studies Lens Sustainability 2013, 5 (10), 4152-4182.
  36. Wolbring, G., ‘Culture of Peace’ from an Ability and Disability Studies Lens. In Expanding Peace Ecology: Peace, Security, Sustainability, Equity and Gender; Perspectives of IPRA’s Ecology and Peace Commission, Oswald Spring, U.; Brauch, H.-G.; Tidball, K., Eds. Springer: New York, 2013; Vol. 12, p 193.
  37. Wolbring, G.; Rybchinski, T., Social Sustainability and Its Indicators through a Disability Studies and an Ability Studies Lens. Sustainability 2013, 5 (11), 4889-4907.
  38. Hutcheon, E.; Wolbring, G., Deconstructing the Resilience Concept Using an Ableism Lens: Implications for People with Diverse Abilities. Dilemata 2013, (11), 235-252.
  39. Ball, N.; Wolbring, G., Portrayals of and Arguments around different Eugenic Practices: Past and Present. International Journal of Disability, Community & Rehabilitation 2013, 12 (2), Article 2.
  40. Hutcheon, E.; Wolbring, G., “Cripping” Resilience: Contributions from Disability Studies to Resilience Theory. M/C Journal 2013, 16 (5).
  41. Wolbring, G., Therapeutic bodily assistive devices and paralympic athlete expectations in winter sport. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 2012, 22 (1), 51-57.
  42. Wolbring, G., Therapeutic Enhancements and the view of Rehabilitation Educators. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2012, (8), 169-183.
  43. Wolbring, G., Paralympians outperforming Olympians: An increasing challenge for Olymp-ism and the Paralympic and Olympic movement. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2012.
  44. Hutcheon, E. J.; Wolbring, G., Voices of disabled post secondary students: Examining higher education “disability” policy using an ableism lens. 2012.
  45. Wolbring, G., Expanding Ableism: Taking down the Ghettoization of Impact of Disability Studies Scholars. Societies 2012, 2 (3), 75-83.
  46. Wolbring, G.; Ball, N., Nanoscale Science and Technology and People with Disabilities in Asia: An Ability Expectation Analysis. NanoEthics 2012, 6 (2), 127-135.
  47. Wolbring, G., Eco-ableism. Anthropology News 2012, Sept. 14.
  48. Wolbring, G., Citizenship Education through an Ability Expectation and “Ableism” Lens: The Challenge of Science and Technology and Disabled People. Education Sciences 2012, 2 (3), 150-164.
  49. Wolbring, G., Nanotechnology for Democracy versus Democratization of Nanotechnology. In Little by Little: Expansions of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies, Lente, H. v.; Coenen, C.; Fleischer, T.; Konrad, K.; Krabbenborg, L.; Milburn, C.; Thoreau, F., Eds. AKA-Verlag/IOS Press: Dordrecht, 2012.
  50. Yumakulov, S.; Yergens, D.; Wolbring, G., Imagery of people with disabilities within social robotics research. Proc.ICSR, LNAI 2012, 7621, 168-177.
  51. Wolbring, G., Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012, 4 (4), 293-309.
  52. Wolbring, G., Ableism and energy security and insecurity:. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2011, 5 (1), Article 3.
  53. Wolbring, G., People with disabilities and social determinants of health discourses. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2011, 102 (4), 317.
  54. Wolbring, G., Nanotechnology and the Transhumanization of Health, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. Lee Kleinmann, D.; Delborne, J.; Cloud-Hansen, K.; Handelsman, J., Eds. Mary Ann Liebert: New Rochelle, NY, 2010; pp 290-303.
  55. Wolbring, G., Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality, Cozzens, S.; M.Wetmore, J., Eds. Springer: New York, 2010; pp 89-104.
  56. Wolbring, G., Obsolescence and body technologies Obsolescencia y tecnologías del cuerpo. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2010, 2 (4), 67-83.
  57. Burke, B.; Wolbring, G., Beyond Education for All: Using ableism studies lens and the BIAS FREE framework. Development (Rome) 2010, 53 (4), 535-539.
  58. Coenen, C.; Schuijff, M.; Smits, M.; Klaassen, P.; Hennen, L.; Rader, M.; Wolbring, G. Human Enhancement Study; (IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005-28/SC35, 41 & 45) PE 417.483; 2009, 2009.http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/publications/studies/stoa2007-13_en.pdf
  59. Wolbring, G., Bionics, ‘therapeutic’ enhancement, the UN Convention on the rights off persons with disabilities and the way ahead. Journal of International Biotechnology Law 2009, 6 (5), 193-206.
  60. Wolbring, G., A Culture of Neglect: Climate Discourse and Disabled People. Journal Media and Culture 2009, 12 (4).
  61. Wolbring, G., Why NBIC? Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research 2008, 21 (1), 25-40.
  62. Wolbring, G., Oscar Pistorius and the Future Nature of Olympic, Paralympic and Other Sports. SCRIPTed – A Journal of Law, Technology & Society 2008, 5 (1), 139-160.
  63. Wolbring, G., The Politics of Ableism. Development 2008, 51 (2), 252-258.
  64. Wolbring, G., “Is there an end to out-able? Is there an end to the rat race for abilities?”. Journal: Media and Culture 2008, 11 (3).
  65. Wolbring, G., (2008) Ableism, Enhancement Medicine and the techno poor disabled. In Unnatural Selection: The Challenges of Engineering Tomorrow’s People, Healey, P.; Rayner, S., Eds. Earthscan: 2008.
  66. Wolbring, G., (2008) One World, One Olympics: Governing Human Ability, Ableism and Disablism in an Era of Bodily Enhancements. In Human Futures: Art in the Age of Uncertainty, Miah, A., Ed. Liverpool University Press: Liverpool, 2008.
  67. Wolbring, G., A Disability Rights Approach Towards Sex Selection. Development 2006, 48 (4).
  68. Wolbring, G., (2006) The unenhanced underclass. In Better Humans? The politics of human enhancement, Wilsdon, J. M., P, Ed. Demos Institute: 2006.
  69. Wolbring, G. (2005) HTA Initiative #23 The triangle of enhancement medicine, disabled people, and the concept of health: a new challenge for HTA, health research, and health policy; Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR): Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR) webpage, 2005, 2005.http://www.ihe.ca/documents/HTA-FR23.pdf
%d bloggers like this: