Govt drafts accessibility standards for everyday products, but gaps remain

The government has unveiled draft accessibility standards for everyday products from kitchenware and furniture to grooming items and digital payment systems to claiming they will ensure barrier-free access for persons with disabilities.

However, while ambitious on paper, the proposals raise questions about implementation, affordability, and whether industry will genuinely embrace the change.

The framework, prepared by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPwD) under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and Supreme Court directions, adopts the global “POUR” approach comprising of the points Perceivable, Operable, Understandable and Robust. In practice, this means designs should be intuitive, inclusive and usable with minimal effort.

The draft ambitiously covers 20 categories, ranging from kitchenware, grooming products and adaptive clothing to medical supplies, lifts, ATMs and childcare equipment.

Standards include braille and pictogram labels on food packaging, Velcro or magnetic fastenings on clothing, and wheelchair-friendly home layouts. Digital platforms, meanwhile, are expected to ensure screen-reader compatibility and voice-control features.

Yet, past experience suggests that lofty guidelines often fail at the ground level. The Accessible India Campaign, launched with similar fanfare, has struggled with patchy adoption and weak enforcement.

The current draft assumes that manufacturers will redesign products without significant cost escalation, while simultaneously insisting affordability will not be compromised.

It remains unclear how this balance will be achieved, particularly in price-sensitive segments such as food packaging and personal care items.

The government has proposed subsidies, tax incentives and inclusive distribution channels to offset costs, alongside mandatory accessibility testing and certification from Level A to Level AAA.

Non-compliance could attract penalties, recalls and public disclosure. But such “carrot-and-stick” enforcement may flounder without robust monitoring and industry buy-in. AI-driven systems and audits have been suggested, but details on who will oversee and fund them remain sketchy.

Another glaring gap is accountability. The draft stresses that persons with disabilities should be involved throughout product design and testing. Yet, disability rights advocates note that representation in such processes has historically been tokenistic, with user feedback often ignored in the final product rollout.

While the guidelines borrow heavily from international norms including the ADA in the US and the EU’s accessibility legislation, India’s compliance record with its own building codes and transport standards raises doubts about how quickly, or seriously, these rules will be enforced.

Critics argue that without legal teeth and sustained monitoring, the risk is that manufacturers will treat accessibility features as an afterthought, ticking boxes for certification rather than committing to meaningful change. For persons with disabilities, that could mean more well-intentioned policy that never quite makes it into practice.

With PTI inputs