Auditing the ‘Social’ Using Conventions, Declarations, and Goal Setting Documents: A Scoping Review

Abstract

The state of the ‘social’ that individuals, social groups and societies experience are a focus of international conventions, declarations and goal setting documents. Many indicators of the ‘social’ and measures of well-being that contain sets of indicators of the ‘social’ exist to ascertain the state of the ‘social’ of individuals, social groups, and societies. Marginalized groups are well known to have problems with the ‘social’ they experience. Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) and similar phrases are used in policy discussions to deal with ‘social problems’ within research, education, and general workplace environments encountered by women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+. The prevention of the worthening of the ‘social’ is one focus of science and technology governance and ethics discussions. Many health professions are also concerned about the ‘social’ such as the well-being of their clients and their roles as stated by many of their associations include being advocates and change agents. The objective of the study was to ascertain how the ‘social’ is engaged with in conjunction with the following international documents (“Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, “Convention on the Rights of the Child”, “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”, “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination”, “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change”, “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” and “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”; from now on called “the documents”). A scoping review using the academic databases SCOPUS, Web of Science, databases accessible under Compendex, and the databases accessible under EBSCO-HOST, coupled with a manifest hit-count coding approach was uses to answer five research questions: (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures of the ‘social’ are present in the literature searched (2) Which of the social issues flagged in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are present in the academic abstracts mentioning the other eight documents? (3) Which EDI frameworks, phrases and social groups covered under EDI are present in the literature covered. (4) Which technologies, science and technology governance terms and ethics fields are present in the literature covered? (5) Which health professions are mentioned in the literature covered? The results reveal vast gaps and opportunities to engage with the ‘social’ in relation to “the documents” covered for all five questions.

1. Introduction

International documents have been used by organizations such as the United Nations to promote social, economic, and political wellbeing for all. We decided to use the following international documents covering social groups “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” [1], “Convention on the Rights of the Child” [2], “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women” [3], “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” [4], “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” [5] “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” [6], and three documents related to environmental issues “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” [7], “Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” [8] and “UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development: Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities” [9] (from now on called “the documents”) to investigate the coverage of the ‘social’. Making use of a variety of indicators of the ‘social’ available in the literature [10,11] and measures of well-being [10,11] specifically the four measures Social Determinants of Health, Better Life Index, Canadian Index of Well-being, and the Community Based Rehabilitation Matrix [10] that contain sets of indicators of the ‘social’, our first research question was (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures of the ‘social’ are engaged with in “the documents” and the abstracts of the academic literature engaging with “the documents”?

Every one of the nine documents we selected flags social issues linked to the topic “the documents” cover. Using the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” as an example we asked (2) Which of the social issues flagged in the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities“ (CRPD) are present in the academic abstracts mentioning the other eight documents?

Marginalized groups are well known to experience problems with the ‘social’ they live in. Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) and similar phrases and frameworks are increasingly used in policy discussions to identify and rectify ‘social problems’ within research, education, and general workplace environments of for example women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+ [12]. As such our third research question was (3) Which EDI frameworks, phrases and social groups covered under EDI are present in the literature covered?

Technologies are well known to have an impact on the social and social implications of emerging technologies [11,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20] are one focus of science and technology governance discussions [10]. As such we asked (4) Which technologies, science and technology governance terms and ethics fields are present in the literature covered?

Many groups engage with the ‘social’. For this study we selected health professionals because according to their associations they are to be advocates for their clients and their profession, educators, researchers and change agents [21,22,23,24,25,26,27]. As such, we asked (5) Which health professions are mentioned in the literature covered?

1.1. The ‘Social’ and “the Documents”

The international documents we covered can be seen as documents that call out many problematic aspects of the ‘social’. All “the documents” use the term “social”. For example, in section (m) of the preamble of the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” it is noted that one of the purposes of the convention is to decrease “the profound social disadvantage of persons with disabilities and promote their participation in the civil, political, economic, social and cultural spheres with equal opportunities, in both developing and developed countries” and discrimination is defined as “Discrimination on the basis of disability means any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field” [1]. The “Convention on the right of the child” mentions the term social in article 4, 17 and 27 [2] the “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women” argues that discrimination “in the political, social, economic and cultural life“ hinders women in many ways the term ‘social’ is also mentioned in article 1 and 3. In article 5 it is demanded “To modify the ‘social’ and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women” [3]. The “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” mention ‘social’ in “Affirming further that all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust” and “Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources,” and article 3 and 21 [4]. The “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” mentions social in article 22 and 28 [6]. The “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” mentions the term social in “Convinced that any doctrine of superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and that there is no justification for racial discrimination, in theory or in practice, anywhere” and article 1 and 5 [5]. The “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” mentions social four times in the preamble and in article 4 (g) and (h); “(h) Promote and cooperate in the full, open and prompt exchange of relevant scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and legal information related to the climate system and climate change, and to the economic and social consequences of various response strategies” [7]. The “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” states: “A world with universal literacy. A world with equitable and universal access to quality education at all levels, to health care and social protection, where physical, mental and social well-being are assured. A world in which every woman and girl enjoys full gender equality and all legal, social and economic barriers to their empowerment have been removed. A just, equitable, tolerant, open and socially inclusive world in which the needs of the most vulnerable are met” [8]. Finally, the “UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development: Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities” mentions the term ‘social’ over 365 times.

Given that the ‘social’ is mentioned in “the documents”, the question is how the abstracts of academic articles covering “the documents” engage with the ‘social’ including whether they link “the documents” to measures of the ‘social’ [10,11] and terms linked to the ‘social’ [10,11] such as the indicators present in the following measures (Social Determinants of Health, Better Life Index, Canadian Index of Well-being, and the Community Based Rehabilitation Matrix) [10,11].

1.2. Governance of Sciences and Technologies

Many concepts such as “democratizing science, and technology”, “participatory technology assessment”, “technology assessment”, “parliamentary technology assessment”, “anticipatory governance”, “upstream engagement”, “responsible innovation”, “responsible research and innovation” and most recently “transformative vision assessment” and fields such as AI-ethics, bioethics, computer science ethics, information technology ethics, nanoethics, neuroethics, robo-ethics emerged to engage with the recognized reality that scientific and technological advancements have social, legal, ethical and economic consequences [10,11,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]. A recent addition to technology governance is the effort of the National Academy of Medicine’s Committee on Emerging Science, Technology, and Innovation in health and medicine (CESTI) to generate a new technology impact and governance framework “to inform social, ethical, and legal governance frameworks for a range of cutting-edge technologies” [28]. As such the question is which technologies and which science and technology governance terms and ethics fields are present in the abstracts covering “the documents”.

1.3. Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI)

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), other EDI phrases and EDI frameworks [10,12] are increasingly employed in various workplaces including universities to improve the ‘social’ in the areas of research, education, and general workplace environments for marginalized groups such as women, Indigenous Peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+ [12]. Individual EDI terms are engaged with in the academic literature in conjunction with the international documents we investigated for example: “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” in conjunction with equity [29,30,31,32], equality [33,34,35,36,37], inclusion [38,39] and diversity [40]; “Convention on the Rights of the Child” with equity [41,42] equality [43] inclusion [44] and diversity [45]; “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women” with equity [46] equality [47] diversity [48] and inclusion [49]; “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” with equity [50] equality [51] inclusion [52] and diversity [53,54]; “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” with equity [55] equality [56] diversity [57] and inclusion [58]; “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” with equity [59] equality [60] inclusion [61] and diversity [62]; “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” with equity [63] equality [64] inclusion [65] and diversity [66] and “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” with equity [67,68] equality [69,70] and diversity [71]. Question is whether the abstracts engaging with “the documents” also engage with the actual EDI policy phrases and frameworks and which marginalized groups they engage with.

1.4. Healthcare Professionals

Health professionals are expected to perform many roles beyond clinical services such as being an advocate for their field and their clients, being educators and researchers, being involved in political processes and being change agents [21,22,23,24,25,26]. As such health care professionals ought to engage with the ‘social’. The ‘social’ is impacted by technologies and at the same time health professionals use technologies [27,72,73] and technologies impact their jobs [20]. Given their roles of being advocate for their field and their clients and being educators and researchers, being involved in political processes and being change agents healthcare professionals should be also involved in the governance of science and technology [74,75,76,77] as part of their engagement with the ‘social’. Various statements of associations of health profession make the linkage between their members work and the ‘social’. According to the Canadian Federation of Social Workers Code of Ethics, “social’ implications provide occupational guidelines that allow social workers to engage in the best interest of the client. Social Workers are responsible for advocating for disadvantaged populations as well as promoting social development” [78]. “Social workers also push for social fairness to reduce barriers to the ‘social’, oppose prejudice and discrimination and question stereotypes” [78]. Social work set up a sub area called eco-social work [79,80,81] to cover the ‘social linked to environmental issues. In a similar fashion, the World Federation of Occupational Therapist aim to reduce social problems and they see the ‘social’ to become important when addressing occupational injustice [82]. According to the policy statement “Ethical principles and the responsibilities of physiotherapists and member organisations” by the organization “World Physiotherapy” “professionals in the field have the capacity to advocate for social change” [83]. The term ‘social’ can be seen through, “address broader social determinants of health by advocating for social and political change towards greater equity in society in general, including those from minority groups in these initiatives” [83]. Speech Language (S-LPs) Pathologists are linked to the ‘social’ by seeing as one of their tasks “to address barriers to social communication [84]. According to “The World Psychiatric Association”, “current measures to address mental illness are not suffice in providing social justice. A lack of appropriate consultation with person with disabilities create gaps in current measure and result in poor mental health outcomes. The World Psychiatric Association endorses The UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities and recognize it as essential to promote social justice” [85]. Various associations of health professions cover a variety of “the documents” albeit none covers all “the documents” we chose: the Declaration of Human Rights [78,82,86,87,88], Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) [83,89,90,91,92], the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women [91,93], UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [94,95], the Convention on the rights of people with disabilities [83,92,96,97,98] and the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development [99]. Some made statements that suggest the need for engagement with all of them such as the World Physiotherapy stating: “WCPT recognises and supports the international declarations and work programmes of the United Nations and World Health Organization in support of diversity and inclusion [100] (p. 1). Question is whether the abstracts engaging with “the documents” link to health professionals.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Research Questions

Scoping studies are useful in identifying the extent of research that has been conducted on a given topic [101,102] and the current understanding of a given topic. In this case, we aimed to answer the following research questions: (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures of the ‘social’ are present in the literature searched? (2) Which of the social issues flagged in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are present in the academic abstracts mentioning the other eight documents? (3) Which EDI frameworks, phrases and social groups covered under EDI are present in the literature covered? (4) Which technologies, science and technology governance terms and ethics fields are present in the literature covered? (5) Which health professions are mentioned in the literature covered? To answer the research questions, we applied three approaches. In the first approach we performed quantitative hit count searches for the presence of given terms in the nine documents and in the second approach for the presence of given terms in the academic abstract engaging with “the documents”. In the third approach we used the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” as a case study to identify social issues flagged in the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” and to what extent these social issues are also mentioned in the other eight documents and the academic abstracts engaging with the documents.

For research question 1 we (a) searched for 35 terms and phrases linked to the ‘social’ in academic literature [10,11,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141], (b) how often abstracts engaging with one of “the documents” also cover any of the other eight documents and (c) for the presence of the very phrases depicting 21 composite wellbeing measures [10,11] and all the indicators used by the four composite measures (Social determinants of health, Better life index, Canadian Index of well-being, Community based rehabilitation matrix). For research question 2 we first identified social issues flagged in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Appendix A) and then investigated the presence of these social issues in the other documents and the abstracts engaging with the documents. For research question 3, we investigated the presence of EDI terms [12,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162,163,164,165,166,167] present in the academic literature and terms linked to groups covered within EDI discussions. For research question 4 we investigated which technologies and science, and technology governance terms and ethics fields were mentioned. For research question 5 we searched for the presence of various terms depicting health professions and health professionals.

2.2. Data Sources, Data Collection and Inclusion, Exclusion Criteria

On 6 February 2022, the academic databases EBSCO-HOST (an umbrella database that includes over seventy other databases itself), SCOPUS (which incorporates the full Medline database collection), Web of Science, and databases accessible through Compendex, (which include IEEE sources) were searched with no time restrictions. These databases contain journals that cover a wide range of topics from areas of relevance to answer the research questions. As to inclusion criteria, scholarly peer reviewed journals were included in the EBSCO-HOST search and reviews, peer reviewed articles, conference papers, and editorials in SCOPUS and the Web of Science and Compendex search was set to all document types.

2.3. Data Analysis

To answer the research questions, a descriptive quantitative analysis approach [168,169] (manifest coding [170,171] was performed. As sources for analysis we first downloaded the actual nine documents we investigated (“Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, “Convention on the Rights of the Child”, “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”, “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change”, “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development”, “UN flagship report on disability and development”, “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination”).

To generate the abstracts for the manifest coding we downloaded the abstracts generated through strategies 1–9 (

Table 1. Search strategies used to obtain academic abstracts for quantitative hit counts.

Strategy	Sources Used	Search Term (Abstract)
1	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	“Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”
2	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	“Convention on the Rights of the Child”
3	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	“Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”
4	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	“Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”
5	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	“Universal Declaration of Human Rights”
6	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
7	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	“transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development”
8	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	UN flagship report on disability and development
9	SCOPUS/EBSCO-HOST/Compendex//Web of Science	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

and

Table 2. Obtaining the abstracts for analysis.

Strategy	Document Names	Abstracts	Abstracts Remaining after Removable of Duplicates
1	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”	2832	1775
2	“Convention on the Rights of the Child”	5457	3050
3	“Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”	738	493
4	“Universal Declaration of Human Rights”	3761	2487
5	“Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”	880	543
6	“International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination”	130	107
7	“UN Framework Convention on Climate Change”	1050	683
8	“transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development”	125	79
9	“UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”	1	1

).

Then, both authors performed three strategies of analysis. For the first strategy we used the CTRL F function of the Adobe Acrobat software for the actual nine documents such as the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” and added an x to indicate which document contained the terms we searched for. In this case, we did not generate a frequency of how often a term was present. Both authors peer debriefed on the obtained hitcounts [172]. No differences were present.

For the second strategy the abstracts were downloaded as part of the citations into the Endnote Software and the Endnote software was used to delete all duplicate abstracts and non-English documents ending up with a starting point of abstracts for each of the strategies (Table 2). All abstracts for each of “the documents” were exported from the Endnote software as one RTF file and converted into a PDF. The manifest coding was performed within the PDF using the CTRL F function of the Adobe Acrobat software whereby making sure that the hitcounts reflected the number of abstracts and not the number of hits. As we only found one abstract for the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” (strategy 9) we did not use the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” for our analysis of abstracts. Both authors peer debriefed on the obtained hitcounts [172]. No differences were present.

For the third strategy we named social issues linked to every action item evident in the CRPD (Appendix A). We then debriefed on how we named them, and the few differences were resolved through peer debriefing between the two authors. We then identified which of these social issues were already covered by the social terms we used for our analysis and then we listed the ones not yet mentioned and analysed how often they showed up in the academic abstracts of the other documents we covered.

3. Results

In this section, we first provide a summary of our findings for all five research questions. Then, we provide the tables in five sections reflecting the five research questions For each research question, we show first tables that cover the results related to the actual documents such as the conventions. We use an “x” to indicate the presence of a given term in a given “documents”. We do not provide actual hitcounts for the presence of a given search term in “the document”. No “x” means the given term was not present. We then show the tables with the hit counts for the abstracts downloaded. We list the hits for actual abstracts containing a term (so multiple mentioning of a term in a given abstract counts as one hit). For terms that generate more than 100 hits we added a “x” into the document and not the final abstract tally.

As to research question 1,

Table 3. hit counts for other social indicators from existing literature [103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141] in the actual document such as the conventions.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
Well-Being
Well being OR well-being or wellbeing	x	x		x	x			x	x
“Economic wellbeing” or “Economic well-being” or “Economic well being”
“Emotional wellbeing” or “Emotional well-being” or “Emotional well being”
“environmental wellbeing” or “environmental well-being” or “environmental well being”
“Psychological wellbeing” or “Psychological well-being” or “Psychological well being”									x
“social wellbeing” or “social well-being” or “social well being”									x
“Societal wellbeing” or “Societal well-being” or “Societal well being”
“Subjective wellbeing” or “Subjective well-being” or “Subjective well being”									x
“the documents”
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”	x								x
“Convention on the Rights of the Child”	x	x						X	x
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	x		x	x					x
“Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”					x
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	x					x
“Universal Declaration of Human Rights”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change							x
“transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development”								x	x
UN flagship report on disability and development									x
Various indicators of the social
“autonomy”	x				x				x
“bias”									x
“covid”
“data protection”	x
“dignity”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“environmental activism”
“environmental issues”
“ethic*”	x							x
“good life”
“health equity”
identity	x			x	x	x		x	x
independence	x		x			x		x	x
“interdependence”	x
“interdependent”	x
“justice”	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
privacy	x	x		x	x
“quantum ethics”
“respected”	x				x
“respecting”								x	x
“self-determination”			x		x
“social good”
“social impact*”
“social implication*”
social responsibility									x
“social”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“societal impact*”
“societal implication*”
“societal”									x
“solidarity”									x
“stereotyp*”	x	x							x
“stigma”									x
“technological deskilling” or deskilling

,

Table 4. Hit counts for the terms used for 21 “wellbeing measures” in the actual document such as the conventions.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
Aqol
“Better life index”
“Brief Inventory of Thriving”
“Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life”
“Canadian Index of well being”
“Capability approach”
“Community based rehabilitation”									x
“Community based rehabilitation matrix”
“Community rehabilitation”
“Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving”
“Determinants of health”									x
“Flourishing Scale”
“Index of well-being”
“Meaning in Life”
“Perceived Life Satisfaction”
Satisfaction with life scale
“Scale of Positive and Negative Experience”
“Social determinants of health”
“The Disability and Wellbeing Monitoring Framework and Indicators”
“The Quality of Being Scale”
“Well-being index”

,

Table 5. Presence of Community Based Rehabilitation Matrix indicators in the actual document such as the conventions.

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
Health		x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
	“healthcare” OR “health care”	x	x	x					x	x
	“assistive technology” OR “assistive technologies” OR “assistive device” OR “assistive devices”	x								x
	“Health promotion”									x
	“Health prevention”
	Rehabilitation	x	x					x		x
Education		x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
	“Childhood education”
	“Primary education”	x	x						x	x
	“Secondary education”	x	x						x	x
	“Non-formal”			x
	“Life-long learning”									x
Livelihood					x				x	x
	“Skills development”
	“Self-Employment”	x		x						x
	“Financial services”								x	x
	“Wage employment”									x
	“Social protection”	x			x				x	x
social		x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
	“social relationship”									x
	family	x	x	x	x				x	x
	“Personal Assistance”	x								x
	Culture	x	x			x	x	x	x	x
	Arts		x		x	x				x
	Recreation OR leisure OR sport	x	x	x	x	x			x	x
Empower*		x				x	x		x	x
	Communication*	x	x	x			x	x	x	x
	“Social mobilization”
	“Political participation”								x	x
	“Self-help groups”									x
	“Disabled people’s organization”									x

,

Table 6. Presence of Canadian Index of Wellbeing indicators in the actual document such as the conventions.

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
“Social Relationship*”										x
	“Social engagement”									x
	“Social Support”									x
	“Community safety”
“Social norms”										x
“Democratic engagement”
	Participation	x	x	x	x	x	x	x		x
	Communication*	x	x	x			x	x	x	x
	Leadership								x	x
Education		x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
	Competencies
	knowledge	x	x	x		x		x	x	x
	skill	x	x						x	x
Environment		x	x				x	x	x	x
	Air									x
	Energy									x
	Freshwater or water	x	x	x		x		x	x	x
	“Nonrenewable material”
	“Biotic resources”
“Healthy population”
	“personal wellbeing” or “personal well-being” or personal well being”
	“Physical health”									x
	“Life expectancy”								x	x
	“Mental health”		x			x			x	x
	“functional health”									x
	Lifestyle
	“Public health”	x	x			x		x		x
	Healthcare or “health care”	x	x	x					x	x
Culture		x	x			x	x	x	x	x
Leisure		x	x		x					x
“Living standard”										x
	income							x	x	x
	“Economic security”
Time		ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND

,

Table 7. Presence of Better Life Index indicators in the actual document such as the conventions.

Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
“Civic Engagement”
“Community”	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
“Education”	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Environment	x	x				x	x	x	x
“Health”	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Housing	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“Income”							x	x	x
“Jobs”								x	x
“Life Satisfaction”
“Jobs”								x	x
“Physical environment”	x						x		x
“Safety”	x	x	x					x	x
“Work life balance”

and

Table 8. Presence of Social determinants of health (SDH) indicators in the actual document such as the conventions.

Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
“Aboriginal” OR “first nations” OR “Metis” OR “indigenous peoples” OR “Inuit”	x	x			x			x	x
“advocacy”									x
“coping”									x
“Women with disabilities” or “Disabled women”	x								x
“discrimination”	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
“Early Childhood Development”
“Education”	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
“Employment”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“Ethnic”									x
“Food Insecurity”									x
“Gender”	x							x	x
“genetic”						x		x
“globalization”									x
“Health Service*”	x				x				x
“Housing”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“immigration”									x
“Income”							x	x	x
“Job Security”									x
“Literacy”			x					x	x
“physical environment”	x						x		x
“Race” or “racialized”	x	x		x	x			x	x
“social engagement”
“Social Exclusion”									x
“social integration”		x							x
“Social Safety Network”
“Stress”								x	x
“Transportation”	x								x
“Unemployment”			x	x		x		x	x
“vocational training”	x	x	x			x		x	x
“walkability”
“social status”
“Socio-economic status”									x

give some sense of words linked to the ‘social’ present in “the documents”. This includes also the mentioning of any of “the other documents” in any given document. For the convention and declaration documents it is not surprising that some terms we used to look at the ‘social’ are not present such as the wellbeing measure terms, missing of others terms may be less so. As to the two reports that were part of our selection the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” covered many more of the term linked to the ‘social’ in our tables including referring to some well-being measures than the “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” document. As to the abstracts covering “the documents” the mentioning of terms linked to the ‘social’ were also very uneven such as the low to no mentioning of the 21 well-being measures and of “the documents”. Many more terms linked to the ‘social’ listed in

Table 9. hit counts for terms linked to the social from existing literature [10,11,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,173] in abstracts mentioning “the documents”.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
Well-being
“wellbeing” OR “well-being” OR “well being”	36	x	11	90	13	0	4	5
“Economic wellbeing” or “Economic well-being” or “Economic well being”	1	1	2	2	0	0	0	0
“Emotional wellbeing” or “Emotional well-being” or “Emotional well being”	1	4	0	0	0	0	0	0
“environmental wellbeing” or “environmental well-being” or “environmental well being”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Psychological wellbeing” or “Psychological well-being” or “Psychological well being”	0	3	0	0	0	0	0	0
“social wellbeing” or “social well-being” or “social well being”	1	4	2	7	0	0	0	0
“Societal wellbeing” or “Societal well-being” or “Societal well being”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Subjective wellbeing” or “Subjective well-being” or “Subjective well being”	2	8	0	1	0	0	0	0
“the documents”
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”	x	39	8	9	1	2	0	0
“Convention on the Rights of the Child”	29	x	44	62	6	7	2	0
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	4	46	x	36	0	11	0	0
“Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”	0	7	0	9	x	0	0	0
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	1	7	13	8	0	x	0	0
“Universal Declaration of Human Rights”	9	59	35	x	9	8	2	2
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	0	2	0	1	0	0	x	0
“transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development”	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	x
UN flagship report on disability and development	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Various indicators linked to the social
“Autonomy”	x	51	12	38	22	0	2	0
“Bias”	9	6	4	22	0	0	1	0
“COVID”	11	20	0	16	3	1	0	0
“data protection”	0	5	0	10	0	0	0	0
“dignity”	x	x	13	x	11	4	0	1
“environmental activism”	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0
“Environmental issues”	0	1	1	7	1	0	6	2
“Ethic*”	44	x	9	x	14	0	6	4
“good life”	1	4	0	0	2	0	0	0
“Health Equity”	1	7	0	5	1	0	0	1
Identity	17	54	11	68	35	7	3	0
Independence	22	5	0	2	3	0	0	0
Interdependence	8	13	1	9	1	1	0	0
Interdependent	4	11	2	16	1	0	1	0
“Justice”	x	x	51	x	32	16	27	5
“Privacy”	9	42	5	0	1	0	0	0
“Quantum ethics”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Respected”	17	57	2	27	2	0	1	1
“Respecting”	0	3	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Self-determination”	23	31	3	28	x	0	0	0
“social good”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Social impact*”	0	2	0	4	0	0	0	0
“Social implication*”	3	4	2	7	0	0	0	1
“Social responsibility”	4	4	0	20	1	0	1	3
Social	1128 (hits not abstracts)	2153 (hits not abstracts	347 (hits not abstracts	1894 (hits not abstracts	140 (hits not abstracts	34	68	23
“Societal impact*”	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Societal implication*”	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Societal”	37	49	9	37	6	0	8	1
“Solidarity”	11	8	5	x	6	3	4	4
Stereotype	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Stigma	30	8	0	5	0	0	0	0
“technological deskilling” or “deskilling”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

,

Table 10. Hit counts for the terms used for 21 “well-being measures” in abstracts mentioning “the documents”.

Well-Being Measures Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
Aqol	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Better life index”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Brief Inventory of Thriving”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Canadian Index of well being”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Capability approach”	4	7	0	1	4	0	0	0
“Community based rehabilitation”	9	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Community based rehabilitation matrix”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Community rehabilitation”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Determinants of health”	6	17	0	11	2	0	0	0
“Flourishing Scale”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Index of well-being”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Meaning in Life”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Perceived Life Satisfaction”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Satisfaction with life scale	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Scale of Positive and Negative Experience”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Social determinants of health”	6	10	0	3	0	0	0	0
“The Disability and Wellbeing Monitoring Framework and Indicators”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“The Quality of Being Scale”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Well-being index”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

,

Table 11. Presence of Community Based Rehabilitation Matrix indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents”.

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
Health		x	x	x	x	x	4	x	19
	“healthcare” OR “health care”	x	x	8	x	0	0	0	4
	“assistive technology” OR “assistive technologies” OR “assistive device” OR “assistive devices”	x	0	0	2	0	0	0	0
	“Health promotion”	8	14	0	7	0	0	0	1
	“Health prevention”	1	3	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Rehabilitation	x	44	1	6	2	0	0	0
Education		x	x	x	x	x	5	8	22
	“Childhood education”	4	x	0	8	2	0	0	2
	“Primary education”	4	19	2	7	0	0	0	2
	“Secondary education”	4	8	0	5	0	0	0	0
	“Non-formal”	1	3	0	1	0	0	0	3
	“Life-long learning”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Livelihood		8	4	4	5	3	0	4	0
	“Skills development”	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Self-Employment	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0
	“Financial services”	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0
	“Wage employment”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“Social protection”	15	7	3	11	0	0	1	0
social		1128 (hits not abstracts)	2153 (hits not abstracts	347 (hits not abstracts	1894 (hits not abstracts	140 (hits not abstracts	34	68	23
	“social relationship”	2	6	0	0	1	0	0	0
	family	x	x	x	x	4	3	1	0
	“Personal Assistance”	7	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Culture	41	39	39	x	51	6	2	1
	Arts	6	15	2	23	4	0	3	0
	Recreation OR leisure OR sport*	x	x	3	x	2	0	1	0
Empowerment		41	34	19	22	5	0	1	1
	Communication	x	x	4	x	5	3	9	4
	“Social mobilization”	0	2	1	0	2	0	0	0
	“Political participation”	9	8	12	7	6	1	0	0
	“Self-help groups”	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“Disabled people’s organizations”	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

,

Table 12. Presence of Canadian Index of Wellbeing indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents.

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
“Social Relationship*”		2	5	0	0	1	0	0	0
	“Social engagement”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“Social Support”	9	6	2	5	0	0	0	0
	“Community safety”	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Social norm*”		4	5	3	6	0	0	0	0
“Democratic engagement”		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Participation	x	x	42	x	38	7	27	2
	Communication	x	x	4	x	5	3	9	4
	Leadership	15	24	13	17	5	0	22	3
Education		x	x	x	x	x	5	8	22
	competencies	11	15	0	7	0	0	0	2
	knowledge	x	x	14	x	44	0	31	8
	skill	9	2	0	3	0	0	0	0
Environment		x	11	x	17	x	1	x	15
	Air	0	10	1	5	1	0	x	1
	Energy	1	8	1	9	9	0	x	11
	Freshwater	0	0	0	0	x	0	x	0
	“Nonrenewable material”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“Biotic resources”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Healthy population”		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“personal wellbeing”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“Physical health”	4	6	0	4	1	0	0	0
	“Life expectancy”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	“Mental health”	x	x	0	33	3	0	1	0
	“functional health”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Lifestyle	4	15	0	1	1	0	4	0
	“Public health”	55	x	13	x	6	1	5	2
	Healthcare or health care	x	x	8	x	7	0	0	4
Culture		41	39	39	x	51	6	2	1
Leisure	0	x	x	x	x	0	0	0	0
“Living standard”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	income	47	63	6	47	1	0	10	1
	“Economic security”	1	4	0	4	0	0	0	0
Time		ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND

,

Table 13. Presence of Better Life Index indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents”.

Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
“Civic Engagement”	0	4	0	0	0	0	0	0
Community	x	x	33	x	x	9	47	8
Education	x	x	x	x	x	5	8	22
Environment	x	11	x	17	x	1	x	15
Health	x	x	x	x	x	4	x	19
Housing	25	20	4	x	0	2	1	1
Income	47	63	6	47	1	0	10	1
Jobs	6	3	3	13	0	0	1	0
“Life Satisfaction”	0	x	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Physical environment”	6	6	0	1	0	0	0	0
Safety	16	67	5	39	1	0	4	2
“Work life balance”	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0

and

Table 14. Presence of Social determinants of health (SDH) indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents”.

Indicator	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
“Aboriginal” OR “first nations” OR “Metis” OR “Indigenous peoples” OR “Inuit”	4	x	3	42	x	3	6	0
advocacy	x	x	15	48	13	2	3	3
Coping	3	8	0	2	0	0	5	1
discrimination	x	x	x	x	24	x	1	1
“Early Childhood Development”	2	11	0	0	0	0	0	0
Education	x	x	x	x	x	5	8	22
Employment	x	27	22	x	2	0	2	1
“Food Insecurity” or “food security”	0	7	0	24	2	0	11	3
Ethnic	9	50	5	50	22	23	0	1
Gender	44	x	x	x	7	7	5	3
genetic	7	14	0	7	6	0	1	0
globalization	4	22	10	45	3	0	0	0
“Health Services”	52	61	14	19	3	2	1	1
Housing	25	20	4	x	0	0	10	1
immigration	3	46	3	31	5	1	0	0
literacy	16	15	1	18	0	0	0	3
“physical environment”	6	6	0	1	0	0	0	0
Race or racialized	13	15	11	70	2	20	0	0
“social engagement”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Social Exclusion”	16	15	0	8	3	0	0	0
“social integration”	8	4	0	5	0	0	0	0
“Social Safety Network”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“social status”	4	9	3	5	0	0	0	0
Stress	5	26	1	19	0	1	2	x
Transportation	15	2	1	3	0	1	4	0
“vocational training”	11	2	0	0	0	0	0	0
walkability	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Women with disabilities” or “Disabled women”	16	0	2	0	0	0	0	0

could have been mentioned and many could have been mentioned more given that the data sources were abstracts engaging with “the documents”.

As to research question 2 (

Table 15. Keywords of social issues identified from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) document (Appendix A) not already in the list of the pre-set keywords from existing literature in the other documents.

Terms Reflecting Social Issues	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
“Abandonment”	x
“Ability”	x							x	x
“Abuse”	x	x						x	x
“Academic development”	x
“Access to information”	x	x					x	x	x
“Accessible information”	x								x
“Adoption”	x	x	x			x	x	x	x
“Affirmative action’	x								x
“alternative communication”									x
“Armed conflict”	x	x							x
“Art”		x		x	x		x
“augmentative communication”	x
“Awareness”	x		x				x	x	x
“Awareness raising”	x							x	x
“Best practice”	x							x	x
“Braille”	x								x
“Capacity building”	x						x		x
“Child rearing”	x	x
“Clothing”	x	x		x
“Concealment”	x
“Creativity”	x							x	x
“Cultural identity”	x	x
“Cultural life”	x	x	x	x	x				x
“Economic assistance”	x
“Entrepreneurship”	x							x	x
“Exploitation”	x	x	x		x			x	x
“Food”	x	x	x	x			x	x	x
“Freedom of expression”	x	x			x				x
“Fundamental freedom”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“Guardianship”	x		x						x
“Habilitation”	x
“Harassment”	x				x				x
“Harmful”	x	x	x		x	x		x	x
“Health insurance”	x								x
“Human rights”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“Humanitarian emergencies”	x							x	x
“Intellectual property”	x	x			x			x
“International collaboration”	x
“Isolation”	x								x
“Knowledge”	x	x	x		x		x	x	x
“Lack of knowledge”
“Life insurance”	x
“Linguistic identity”	x
“living condition”	x	x	x						x
“marriage”	x	x	x	x		x		x	x
“media portrayal”	x
“mentorship” or “mentor”
“mobility”	x							x	x
“natural disaster”	x						x	x	x
“neglect”	x	x						x	x
“peer support”	x								x
“personal mobility”	x								x
“personhood”
“political life”	x		x						x
“political parties’	x
“political rights’	x	x	x		x	x
“portrayal”	x
“poverty”	x		x				x	x	x
“prejudice”	x		x		x	x	x	x	x
“public life”	x		x			x		x	x
“reasonable accommodation”	x								x
“receptiveness (to rights)”	x
“research and development”	x						x	x	x
“respite care”	x
“segregation”	x					x			x
“self-respect”	x	x
“self-worth”	x
“sign language”	x								x
“social development”	x	x			x		x	x	x
“social environment”	x								x
“standard of living”	x	x		x				x	x
“talent”	x	x							x
“technical assistance”					x			x	x
“training”	x	x	x		x	x	x	x	x
“universal design”	x								x
“violence”	x	x			x	x		x	x
“voting”	x	x	x	x		x	x	x	x
“water”	x	x	x		x		x	x	x
“welfare”	x	x	x	x			x		x

covering the documents themselves and

Table 16. Keywords of social issues identified from the CRPD document (Appendix A) not already in the list of the present keywords from existing literature in the abstracts.

Terms Reflecting Social Issues	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
“Abandonment”	4	11	0	2	0	0	0	0
“Ability”	x	x	15	x	4	2	16	0
“Abuse”	37‘	x	26	x	9	8	0	0
“Academic development”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Access to information”	27	9	1	19	2	0	0	0
“Accessible information”	7	2	0	3	0	0	0	0
“Adoption”	68	x	41	x	75	4	4	6
“Affirmative action”	5	1	0	6	1	0	2	0
“alternative communication”	6	0	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Armed conflict”	5	64	6	24	0	1	0	1
“Art”	43	50	2	54	12	1	4	0
“augmentative communication”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Awareness raising”	8	7	0	1	0	0	1	0
“Awareness”	70	x	15	68	9	0	7	5
“Best practice”	10	13	0	4	3	0	0	1
“Braille”	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Capacity building”	6	3	1	1	0	0	9	0
“Child rearing”	3	15	1	0	0	0	0	0
“Clothing”	0	5	1	14	0	0	0	0
“Concealment”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Creativity”	0	7	0	8	2	0	0	0
“Cultural identity”	2	4	0	5	9	1	0	0
“Cultural life”	6	7	1	18	1	0	0	0
“Economic assistance”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Entrepreneurship”	0	1	0	3	0	0	2	0
“Exploitation”	14	x	9	22	7	1	4	1
“Food”	8	x	8	x	7	3	29	7
“Freedom of expression”	3	23	1	x	0	4	0	0
“Fundamental freedom”	13	14	7	44	5	3	0	0
“Guardianship”	x	9	1	0	1	0	0	0
“Habilitation”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Harassment”	1	6	11	3	0	0	0	0
“Harmful”	2	30	9	2	1	0	6	1
“Health insurance”	3	4	0	8	0	0	0	0
“Humanitarian emergencies”	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Human Rights	x	x	x	x	x	x	18	8
“Intellectual property	3	0	1	25	11	0	2	0
“International collaboration”	2	1	0	2	0	0	1	0
“Isolation”	14	18	0	9	4	0	2	0
“Knowledge”	x	x	16	x	43	0	31	9
“Lack of knowledge”	3	5	1	1	1	0	0	0
“Life insurance”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Linguistic identity”	2	0	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Living condition”	8	13	0	2	2	0	0	0
“Marriage”	7	x	x	x	0	0	0	2
“Media portrayal”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Mentorship” or “mentor”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Mobility”	29	6	0	13	0	0	0	0
“Natural disaster”	1	2	0	5	1	0	2	0
“neglect”	7	x	3	12	2	1	4	1
“Peer support”	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Personal mobility”	4	0	0	2	0	0	0	0
“Personhood”	6	2	0	12	0	0	0	0
“Political life’	4	1	2	3	2	1	0	0
“Political parties”	0	2	4	7	0	0	0	0
“Political rights’	19	71	41	x	12	23	1	0
“Portrayal”	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0
“Poverty”	26	x	23	x	9	2	12	13
“Prejudice”	16	6	3	10	3	2	1	0
“Public life”	10	7	9	7	0	0	0	1
“Reasonable accommodation”	51	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Receptiveness (to rights)”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Research and development”	2	4	0	3	0	0	6	3
“Respite care”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Segregation”	20	1	2	5	0	4	0	0
“Self-respect”	0	4	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Self-worth”	1	2	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Sign language”	33	3	0	2	0	0	0	0
“Social development”	8	33	8	15	3	0	3	2
“Social environment”	11	12	0	1	3	0	0	2
“Standard of living”	8	24	3	x	0	0	0	2
“Talent”	1	1	0	4	0	0	1	0
“Technical assistance”	1	1	0	2	0	0	3	0
“Training”	x	x	11	38	1	2	4	4
“Universal design”	32	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Violence”	35	x	x	x	5	6	0	0
“Voting”	15	4	2	14	6	4	0	0
“Water”	9	31	3	x	9	0	x	5
“Welfare”	65	x	16	x	7	0	4	4

covering the abstracts) the presence of keywords linked to social issues identified from the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” document were the most within the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” but much less in the other documents (Table 15). Table 16 shows that the term “Human Rights” gained a substantial amount of hits across abstracts mentioning all seven documents. Other terms such as adoption, political rights, and art garnered a number of hits with abstracts covering some of “the documents”. Indictors such as receptiveness, media portrayal, augmentative communication, and academic development gained no hits in our searches.

As to research question 3 covering EDI (

Table 17. Presence of EDI phrases and frameworks and marginalized groups covered within EDI in the actual document such as the conventions.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
EDI phrases and frameworks
(“Athena SWAN” OR “See change with STEMM Equity Achievement” OR “Dimensions: equity, diversity and inclusion” OR “Science in Australia Gender Equity” OR “NSF ADVANCE” OR “equity, diversity and inclusion” OR “equality, diversity and inclusion” OR “diversity, equity and inclusion” OR “diversity, equality and inclusion”)
“Belonging, Dignity, and Justice: OR “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging” OR “diversity, Dignity, and Inclusion” OR “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Accessibility” OR “Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion” OR “Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Accessibility” OR “Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Accountability” OR “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Decolonization”
Individual EDI terms
Accessibility	x								x
accountability							x	x	x
belonging	x	x				x
Decolonization
dignity	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
diversity	x	x			x			x	x
equality	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
Equity			x				x		x
inclusion	x						x	x	x
justice	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
EDI covered groups related terms
“gender”	x	x	x	x	x	x		x	x
“women”	x	x	x	x	x			x	x
“ethnic groups”									x
“racialized minorities”
“visible minorities”
“Racialized”
“Ethnic*”	x	x			x	x			x
“Disabled (a person, like girl or child or)”	x	x							x
“with disabilities”	x				x			x	x
“Impair*”									x
“Deaf”	x								x
“Adhd” OR “autism” OR ASD									x
“neurodiverse” OR “neurodiversity”
“Indigenous” OR “first nations” OR “Metis” OR “Inuit” OR “Aboriginal”	x	x			x			x	x
“LGB*” gay or lesbian or sexual orientation or two spirit*
“Transgender”
“Patients”									x

covering the documents themselves and

Table 18. Presence of EDI phrases and frameworks and marginalized groups covered within EDI in abstracts mentioning “the documents”.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
EDI phrases and frameworks
(“Athena SWAN” OR “See change with STEMM Equity Achievement” OR “Dimensions: equity, diversity and inclusion” OR “Science in Australia Gender Equity” OR “NSF ADVANCE” OR “equity, diversity and inclusion” OR “equality, diversity and inclusion” OR “diversity, equity and inclusion” OR diversity, equality and inclusion”)	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Belonging, Dignity, and Justice: OR “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging” OR “diversity, Dignity, and Inclusion” OR “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Accessibility” OR “Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion” OR “Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Accessibility” OR “Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Accountability” OR “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Decolonization”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Individual EDI terms
accessibility	x	23	3	27	1	0	0	2
accountability	13	45	14	29	5	1	6	4
belonging	7	15	0	23	5	1	1	0
Decolonization	0	2	0	10	8	0	0	0
dignity	68	73	13	x	11	4	0	1
diversity	43	48	8	x	22	6	25	0
equality	x	51	x	x	15	12	8	2
Equity	34	38	18	48	8	2	20	7
inclusion	x	x	8	66	8	1	12	6
justice	x	x	43	x	33	17	27	5
EDI covered groups related terms
“gender”	24	49	x	50	6	6	5	4
“women”	33	x	x	x	11	12	3	2
“ethnic groups”	1	4	0	5	5	1	0	1
“racialized minorities”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“visible minorities”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Racialized”	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0
“Ethnic*”	10	27	7	27	13	14	0	2
“Disabled (a person, like girl or child or)”	x	26	2	8	0	0	0	0
“with disabilities”	x	x	5	22	2	2	0	1
“Impair*” related to disabled people	x	10	0	0	1	0	0	0
“Deaf”	1	4	0	3	0	0	0	0
“Adhd” OR “autism” OR ASD	29	6	0	4	0	0	0	0
“neurodiverse” OR “neurodiversity”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Indigenous” OR “first nations” OR “Metis” OR “Inuit” OR “Aboriginal”	4	x	3	42	x	3	6	0
“LGB*” or gay or lesbian or sexual orientation	1	19	12	20	0 (two spirit* also 0)	1	0	0
“Transgender”	0	3	2	11	0	0	0	1
“Patients”	35	23	0	31	0	0	0	1

covering the abstracts) none of the EDI phrases and frameworks were present in any of “the documents” themselves. As to individual EDI terms justice was present in each document. Equality and dignity were present in all documents other than the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Accessibility was only present in the disability related documents and belonging only in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Convention on the Rights of the Child. Decolonization was not present in any. Other individual EDI terms were present in some documents. As to marginalized groups covered in the EDI discussions gender or women were present in all documents other than the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. For, LGB*, Transgender, racialized minorities, visible minorities, and neurodiverse*, we obtained no hits (Table 17). As to the abstracts (Table 18) EDI phrases and frameworks were also not present except for one hit for “Athena Swan” in conjunction with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Individual EDI terms such as equity, equality, inclusion, accountability, and justice gained hits across all documents. As to EDI groups the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was the only one with hits for neurodiverse*. Other EDI groups were mentioned in abstracts covering a variety of the document. Women were mentioned in every document.

As to research question 4 covering technologies (

Table 19. hit counts for some established and emerging technologies we selected that are discussed as having an impact on the ‘social’ in the actual document such as the conventions.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women	Universal Declaration of Human Rights	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities
Some examples for existing and emerging technologies discussed
“Artificial intelligence” or “machine learning”
“Assistive technolog*”	x								x
“Brain computer interface”
“Cochlear implant*”
“Communication technolog*”	x								x
“Deep brain stimulation”
“EEG”
“Engineering”									x
“Genetic science”
“Genetic technolog*”
“Information technolog*”									x
“neuroenhancement*” OR “neuro enhancement*” OR “moral enhancement*” OR “cognitive enhancement*”, OR “human enhancement”
“Neuroscience*”
“Quantum”
“Reproductive technolog*”
“robotics” or “robot” OR “robots”
“Technolog*”	x		x	x		x	x	x	x
“virtual reality”

covering the documents themselves and

Table 20. hitcounts for some established and emerging technologies we selected that are discussed as having an impact on the ‘social’ of abstracts mentioning technologies.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
Some examples for existing and emerging technologies discussed
“Artificial intelligence” or “machine learning”	16	1	1	4	0	0	3	2
“Assistive technolog*”	45	1	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Brain computer interface”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Cochlear implant*	6	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Communication technolog*”	18	1	1	4	1	0	0	1
“Deep brain stimulation”	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“EEG”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Engineering”	3	3	0	3	3 (geoengineering	0	5	0
“Genetic science”	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Genetic technolog*”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Information technolog*”	10	0	0	6	0	0	0	1
“neuroenhancement*” OR “neuro enhancement*” OR “moral enhancement*” OR “cognitive enhancement*”, OR “human enhancement”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Neuroscience*”	4	9	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Quantum”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Reproductive technolog*”	0	6	2	1	0	0	0	0
“robotics” or “robot” OR “robots”	2	1	0	3	0	0	0	0
“Technolog*”	x	x	4	x	1	35	x	x
“virtual reality”	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Science and Technology governance terms
“Anticipatory governance”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Democratizing science and technology”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Parliamentary technology assessment”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Participatory technology assessment “	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Responsible innovation”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Responsible research and innovation”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Science and technology governance”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Technology assessment”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Transformative vision assessment”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Upstream engagement”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Technology governance”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Some ethics fields
“AI-ethics”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Bioethics”	9	37	2	40	1	0	0	0
“Computer science ethics”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Information technology ethics”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Nanoethics”	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0
“Neuroethics”	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
“Robo-ethics”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

covering the abstracts) across all documents our results indicate that there is limited mention of technologies. However, it can be noted that “technolog*” as a broad term has garnered hits with all documents but “Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)” and “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”. Results for “assistive technolog*” only generated hits for documents focusing on disabled people (“UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” and “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”). We did not look for ethics terms and science and technology governance terms in the actual documents. As to the abstracts substantial hits were found for “technolog*” for the following documents, “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, “Convention on the Rights of the Child”, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, “UN framework Convention on Climate Change” and “Transforming our world: 2030 agenda for sustainable development”. Specific technologies were mentioned much less to not at all. For example, artificial intelligence and machine learning were mentioned the most in relation to “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” but not at all in relation to the “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” and the “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination”. As to ethics fields nanoethics was mentioned only in relation to the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (one hit), for neuroethics we obtained two hits for the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”. None of the science and technology governance terms generated any hits.

As to research question 5 (abstracts

Table 21. Hitcounts of abstracts mentioning health professionals.

Terms	Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) N = 1775 Abstracts	Convention On the Rights Of the Child (CRC) N = 3050 Abstracts	Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women N = 493 Abstracts	Universal Declaration of Human Rights N = 2487 Abstracts	Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples N = 543 Abstracts	International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination N = 107 Abstracts	UN Framework Convention on Climate Change N = 603 Abstracts	“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” N = 79 Abstracts	UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities (Not Enough Abstracts Therefore Not Done)
Social Work*	23	128	10	29	2	5	0	0
Occupational therap*	14	3	0	2	1	0	0	0
Nursing/nurses	16	37	2	36	0	0	0	0
Speech language pathology*/speech therap*/audiolog*	4	2	0	29	0	0	0	0
Physical therap*/physiotherapy*	7	2	0	0	0	0	0	1
Therapist*	13	8	0	0	0	0	0	0
Professional*	x	x	7	135	8	6	2	8
Practitioner	4	18	3	2	2	1	5	4
Rehabilitation	X	43	1	6	2	0	2	0
Health profession*	15	21	0	11	0	0	0	0
health-care profession*/healthcare profession*	4	10	0	2	0	0	0	0
medical profession*	1	3	1	5	0	0	0	0
Allied health profession*	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0

) focusing on health professionals we did not perform searches for the presence of health professionals in the actual documents. As to the abstracts our search for healthcare professionals revealed the most hits for “social work” followed by nursing. In general, the most hits were linked to the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”.

3.1. Research Question 1: The Issue of the ‘Social’

3.1.1. Results for the Actual Documents

We use x to indicate the presence of a given term in each document. We do not provide actual hitcounts for the presence of a given search term in a document. No x means the given term was not present.

Table 3 shows which terms linked to the ‘social’ in existing literature [10,11,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,173] are used within the nine documents. Only justice was mentioned in all nine documents. Many were rarely to not at all mentioned. Table 3 also indicates that the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” contained the most terms from the table followed by the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, “Convention on the Rights of the Child”, “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” and UN framework Convention on climate Change. Table 3 also shows that any given document mostly did not refer to another of the document. Finally, we also searched for “environmental activism” and “environmental issues” as terms as they are very much part of the ‘social’ and we found no hits.

Table 4 shows the use of the actual terms depicting 21 well-being measures across “the documents”.

Only the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” mentioned Community based rehabilitation and determinants of health (Table 4). All other terms were not present in any of “the documents” (Table 4).

Table 5 covers the presence of Community Based Rehabilitation Matrix indicators in the actual documents. Only three terms were present in all documents (health, education, social). Some were specific to documents linked to disabled people (assistive technology, personal assistance). Some were only present in the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” (disabled people’s organizations).

Table 6 covers indictors found within the Canadian Index of wellbeing and assessed their use within “the documents”. As to the primary indicator terms education is present in all documents whereby “social norm*” is only present in the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”. Some like “democratic engagement” were not present at all. As to the secondary indicators not one was present in all documents.

Table 7 shows the presence of terms found in the Better Life Index within “the documents”. When performing a search with indictors set out by the better life index, hits were found across all documents for education, community, and health. Housing was covered in all documents, but the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Jobs, income, and physical environments revealed only a handful of hits, however all are present in the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”. Regarding Civic Engagement and Life Satisfaction, our searches revealed no hits.

Table 8 shows the presence of social determinants of health (SDH) within “the documents”. Based on SDH indictors education gained results for all documents. Notably Table 8 shows, employment and housing to garner hits for all documents other than the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Some were only present in the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” namely food insecurity, social exclusion, immigration, globalization, coping and, socioeconomic status. Some were not present at all namely early childhood development, social safety network, walkability, social engagement, and social status.

3.1.2. Results for the Abstracts Downloaded

Table 9 shows how the abstracts mentioning “the documents” use terms linked to the ‘social’ found in the academic literature [10,11,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,173]. The terms “solidarity” and “justice” were found within abstracts covering all 8 documents (as indicated we did not find abstracts mentioning the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” and as such the maximum number of documents is eight not nine in all sections that reflect on the abstracts). Low hits were found for indictors such as, data protection, respecting, and psychological wellbeing. No hits were obtained for technology deskilling, environmental wellbeing, social wellbeing, and social good.

When looking at whether other actual documents were mentioned within the abstracts focusing on another of “the documents” we found no, to few, hits. The UN flagship report on disability and devolvement pulled no hits within the abstracts focusing on any of the other documents. Finally, we also searched for “environmental activism” and “environmental issues” as terms they are very much part of the ‘social’ and we found little to no hits.

Table 10 shows that of the twenty-one phrases depicting well-being measures only the phrases “Capability approach”, “Social determinants of health”, “Determinants of health” and “Community based rehabilitation” were mentioned in abstracts of some of the eight documents.

Table 11 shows the presence of the Community based rehabilitation matrix indicators in the abstracts mentioning “the documents”. Our searches revealed hits abstracts covering all “the documents” for the primary indicators health, education, and social. Livelihood was not mentioned in the abstracts covering the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Empowerment generated hits for all but abstract’s concerning the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Table 11 shows that some indicators such as healthcare, assistive technology, and rehabilitation are mostly mentioned in the abstracts concerned with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities with abstracts covering themselves with the other documents mentioned the terms much less to not at all. Across all documents the secondary indicator pertaining to health prevention gained the least amount of hits. Under education: Childhood education gained many hits for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. No hits were found for lifelong learning. Secondary indictors under livelihood revealed minimal hits. Several hits were found for the primary indicator “social”, however the secondary indicators generated much less to no hits.

Table 12 shows the presence of the Canadian Index of Wellbeing indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents”. Primary indicators such as environment and education were mentioned extensively. Our searches on democratic engagement, living standard, and time yielded no hits. Secondary indictors under participation and communication revealed a large hit count for abstracts concerning the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Convention on the Rights of the Child and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Limited results were found for social norms, social relations environments, and healthy population. It is important to mention that the term mental health was mentioned with abstracts concerning the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as well as the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Table 13 shows the presence of the Better Life Index indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents”. Our search generated hits for abstracts concerning all documents for the following terms, health, education, environments, and community. Limited data was found for life satisfaction and work life balance as both terms are only covered by abstracts mentioning the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Table 14 shows the presence of the Social determinants of health (SDH) indicators in abstracts mentioning “the documents”. Many hits for discrimination were found in abstracts covering the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Similarly for health services our search pointed to large amount of hits in abstracts mentioning the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as well as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Limited results were found for social engagement, physical environments, vocational training, women with disabilities and early childhood development. No hits were found for, walkability, social safety network, and job security.

3.2. Research Question 2 Keywords of Social Issues Identified from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) Document (Appendix A)

Results for the Actual Documents

Table 15 show the presence of keywords linked to social issues identified from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities document in the other seven documents and not already listed in the prior tables. Most of the indictors were present within “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” and heavily mirror the social concerns evident in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Indicators such as, human rights, fundamental rights, training, voting, harmful, prejudice, and knowledge gained hits across the majority of “the documents”. Our searches revealed no hits for, lack of knowledge, international collaboration, portrayal, media portrayal, personhood, and academic development.

Table 16 shows that the term “Human Rights” gained a substantial amount of hits across abstracts mentioning all seven documents. Other terms such as adoption, political rights, and art garnered a number of hits with abstracts covering some of “the documents”. Indictors such as receptiveness, media portrayal, augmentative communication, and academic development gained no hits in our searches.

3.3. Research Question 3: EDI

3.3.1. Results for the Actual Documents

Table 17 shows the presence of EDI terms phrases and frameworks and marginalized groups covered in the EDI discussions in the nine documents. None of the EDI phrases and frameworks were present in any of “the documents”. As to individual EDI terms justice was present in each document. Equality and dignity were present in all documents other than the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Accessibility was only present in the disability related documents and belonging only in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Convention on the Rights of the Child. Decolonization was not present in any. Other individual EDI terms were present in some documents.

As to marginalized groups covered in the EDI discussions gender or women were present in all documents other than the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. For, LGB*, Transgender, racialized minorities, visible minorities, and neurodiverse*, we obtained no hits.

3.3.2. Results for the Abstracts Downloaded

Table 18 shows the presence of EDI terms phrases and frameworks and marginalized groups covered in the EDI discussions within abstracts engaging with “the documents”. EDI phrases and frameworks generated no hits except for one hit for “Athena Swan” in conjunction with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Individual EDI terms such as equity, equality, inclusion, accountability, and justice gained hits across all documents. As to EDI groups the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was the only one with hits for neurodiverse*. Other EDI groups were mentioned in abstracts covering a variety of the document. Women were mentioned in every document.

3.4. Research Question 4: Technologies

3.4.1. Results for the Actual Documents

Table 19 shows the presence of technologies within “the documents”. Across all documents our results indicate that there is limited mention of technologies. However, it can be noted that technolog* as a broad term has garnered hits with all documents but “Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)” and “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”. Results for “assistive “technolog*” only generated hits for documents focusing on disabled people (“UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” and “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”). We did not look for ethics terms and science and technology governance terms in the actual documents.

3.4.2. Results for the Abstracts Downloaded

Table 20 shows the presence of technologies, science and technology governance and ethics terms within the abstracts mentioning “the documents”. Based on the search preformed substantial hits were found for “technolog*” for the following documents, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Convention on the Rights of the Child, Human Rights, UN framework Convention on Climate Change and Transforming our world: 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Artificial intelligence/machine learning was mentioned (Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 16, Convention on the Rights of the Child 1, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 1, Universal Declaration of Human Rights 4, UN Framework Convention on Climate change 3, transforming our world 2030 agenda for sustainable development 2), and communication tech (Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 8, Convention on the Rights of the Child 1, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 1, Universal Declaration of Human Rights 4, Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 1, transforming our world 2030 agenda for sustainable development 1).

As to ethics fields nanoethics was mentioned only in relation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1 hit), for neuroethics we obtained two hits for the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. None of the science and technology governance terms generated any hits.

3.5. Research Question: Health Professionals

3.5.1. Results for the Actual Documents

We did not perform searches for the presence of health professionals in the actual documents.

3.5.2. Results for the Abstracts Downloaded

Table 21 shows the presence of health professionals within the abstracts mentioning “the documents”. Our search for healthcare professionals revealed the most hits for “social work”, all documents other than the “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” and “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” documents generated hits. Most prominently the Convention on the Rights of the Child, with 128 hits. Following social work, nursing covered the second most documents, with the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” gaining 36 hits. Occupation therapy covered four out of the 8 documents with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities gaining 14 hits. Speech language Pathology gained hits with 3 documents with “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” gaining twenty-nine hits. Under therapist two documents were covered with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities gaining 13 hits. Finally, Physical therapist gained the least amount of hits with just the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities getting 1 hit. In general, the most hits were linked to the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”.

4. Discussion

The results reveal vast gaps and opportunities to engage with the ‘social’ in relation to “the documents” covered for all five questions. We discuss our findings in the remainder of the section in order of the lenses evident in the research questions (the ‘social’, EDI, science and technology governance and ethics and health professionals).

4.1. The ‘Social’ (Research Question 1 and 2)

Many indicators of the social exist [10,11,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,173] and measures such as various wellbeing measures one could categorize to cover aspects of the ‘social’ and contain sets of indicators of the ‘social’ [10,11]. Many of these terms show up in “the documents” although there are differences between “the documents”. Although it was not expected that all the terms from Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7 and Table 8 were to show up in “the documents” given the nature of “the documents”, it is interesting which terms did show up and which did not. Quite a few were specific to documents of a given focus such as the ones dealing with disabled people (“Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” and “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”). Some were only in the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” such as “interdependence” and “interdependent”. The “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” was the one covering the highest amounts of the terms. Indeed, it is interesting how many it covered. It is noteworthy that the terms naming the well-being measures were not present in any of “the documents”. Although this is understandable for the convention and declarations, the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” and the “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” report could have made the linkage. In general, we think that our results show how useful the terms are to audit how the ‘social’ is engaged with in “the documents”. We also investigated how much a given document mentions the other documents. To just recap two here; the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” did not mention the “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” and the “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” which is problematic given that indigenous disabled people face very specific social realities as do disabled people belonging to a marginalized ethnic group. It is also interesting that the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” did not mention the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change which we suggest could have been used to strengthen the case of the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”. The “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” report only mentioned the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” and the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” which we suggest is problematic given that marginalized groups are experiencing a more problematic social reality around environmental issues such as emergencies and disasters [174].

As to the abstracts covering “the documents” the results also showed many gaps as to what aspects of the ‘social’ are engaged with within abstracts covering “the documents”. Given that these are academic inquiries engaging with “the documents” the gaps we found are highly problematic as they suggest a disconnect of concepts being investigated in conjunction with a given document. For example, health equity is described in [11], citing others, as “Health equity means that everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be as healthy as possible. This requires removing obstacles to health such as poverty, discrimination, and their consequences, including powerlessness and lack of access to good jobs with fair pay, quality education and housing, safe environments, and health care” [175] (p. 2) and “The state in which everyone has the opportunity to attain full health potential and no one is disadvantaged from achieving this potential because of social position or any other socially defined circumstance” [176] (p. xiv) and “equity in health is the absence of systematic disparities in health (or in the major social determinants of health) between groups with different levels of underlying social advantage/disadvantage—that is, wealth, power, or prestige” [177] (p. 254). Given that “the documents” are about the ‘social’ as is “health equity” all the abstracts engaging with “the documents” could have employed the concept of health equity and linking “the documents” to health equity could strengthen the discussions around the ‘social’ aspect of health equity. The same reasons stand with terms such as “social good” and “good life”, concepts used in various policy discussions which are about the ‘social’. These terms could be strengthened by employing “the documents” that clearly show what should be part of the “social good” and “good life”.

It is also troubling that the terms depicting wellbeing measures showed up little to not at all in the abstracts covering “the documents” as it indicates a disconnect between the academic and policy discussions employing wellbeing measures and the ones engaging with “the documents”. It is also problematic how many of the indicators used by the four well-being measures we selected were employed not at all or little in the abstracts that focus on “the documents”; for example, interdependence and social norms could have been employed much more. Given that the abstracts use the term “social” to a great extent, one wonders what aspects of social really are the focus, or if it is just used as a generic term. Social norms are one factor in whether and if yes, to what extent, and how “the documents” are acted upon, and interdependency could be extremely useful to deal with silos and lack of intersectionality. We also found little to no use of the terms “environmental issues” and “environmental activism” just two terms that could bring together the documents from our list that covers the topic of the environment together with “the documents” covering groups as the groups focused on in our documents are impacted by the issue of the environment. As such this seems to be a missed opportunity given that environmental issues impact in particular marginalized groups [173,174]. We also investigated how much the abstracts focusing on a given document mentions the other documents. We found little hits which we see as another gap and big opportunity given that people often belong to more than one of the groups covered in “the documents” and that the belonging to more than one group often is a cause of conflict.

As to our research question 2 covering keywords of social issues identified from the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” document (Appendix A) it is revealing how many of the terms originating from the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” are mentioned in the “UN Flagship Report on Disability and Development: Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with Persons with Disabilities”. Our finding suggests that identifying terms depicting the ‘social’ could be useful to audit other policy documents for example, the “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” could be used to see how many of the social issues it raised show up in the Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” report. It is also interesting which terms linked to highlight social issues present in the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” are employed in the other documents and which are not suggesting whether the different documents identify different or similar social issues. One can make a case that many terms from the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” might be specific to disabled people such as “reasonable accommodation” but if one looks at the term “reasonable accommodation” through an EDI lens (next section) everyone has accommodation needs whether its cultural accommodation or other forms of accommodation.

Very few of the term depicting social issues in the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” were present in the abstracts covering the other documents although many of the terms could be also applied to the discussions of the other documents.

4.2. EDI (Research Question 3)

Individual EDI terms are engaged with in the academic literature (not limited to abstracts) in conjunction with “the documents” we investigated for example (“Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” equity [29,30,31,32], equality [33,34,35,36,37], inclusion [38,39] and diversity [40], “Convention on the Rights of the Child”, equity [41,42] equality [43] inclusion [44] diversity [45], “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women”, equity [46] equality [47] diversity [48] inclusion [49], “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”, equity [50] equality [51] inclusion [52] diversity [53,54], “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, equity [55] equality [56] diversity [57] inclusion [58], “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change”, equity [59] equality [60] inclusion [61] diversity [62], “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development”, equity [63] equality [64] inclusion [65] diversity [66], “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” equity [67,68] equality [69,70] diversity [71] and the “flagship report on disability and development” equality [178,179,180], inclusion [178,179,180], equity [179,181] and diversity [180,182].

Our study found that many of the individual terms making up the phrases were present in some of “the documents”. However, only the term “justice” was present in all “the documents”. As to be expected the EDI frameworks and phrases were not present in any of “the documents”. As to EDI groups, however, we found also little to no intersection in “the documents” which we suggest is a problem.

As to the abstracts covering “the documents” none included the phrases “equality, diversity, and inclusion”, “equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI), other EDI phrases and EDI frameworks [10,12]. This is a missed opportunity of strengthening the EDI discourse by employing “the documents” to interrogate the EDI discussions using the content of “the documents”. Individual EDI terms were present in abstracts covering many of “the documents” with equity, equality, inclusion, accountability and justice being used in abstracts covering all documents albeit in different amounts. However, the EDI phrases and frameworks were developed because the individual EDI terms are not enough to make the ‘social’ of EDI covered groups better. An intersectionality approach to EDI groups such as women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+ [12] also was rarely to not at all present in the abstracts mentioning “the documents” (depending on the EDI groups).

Our findings are problematic; to use again wording from the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”: “Protect the rights of persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, to just and favorable conditions of work, including equal opportunities and equal remuneration for work of equal value, safe and healthy working conditions, including protection from harassment, and the redress of grievances” and “Prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability with regard to all matters concerning all forms of employment, including conditions of recruitment, hiring and employment, continuance of employment, career advancement and safe and healthy working conditions”. The two quotes from the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” make it clear that EDI discourses could and should use the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” and vice versa. It is well known that EDI efforts fail disabled people for example in universities [12,183,184,185,186,187,188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195,196,197]. For example, according to a Statistics Canada survey from 2019 35% of disabled University professors, instructors, teachers, or researchers “experienced unfair treatment or discrimination in the past 12 months” and 47% saw themselves “subjected to at least one type of harassment in the past 12 months” [198]. With that, the numbers for disabled University professors, instructors, teachers, or researchers are the highest of all groups recorded [198]. The respective numbers for, for example “no self reported disability” were 15.4% and 26.0%; “female gender”, 23.0% and 34.0%.; “visible minorities”, 23.0% and 28.0%; and “indigenous identity”, 30.0% and 37.0% [198] quoted in [12]. Indeed, all six documents covering social groups can be used to strengthen the EDI discussions and vice versa. Furthermore, EDI demands also certain actions that impact the content of the three documents covering environmental issues and vice versa.

4.3. Governance of Sciences and Technologies (Research Question 4)

We selected terms depicting some established and some emerging technologies we identified from academic literature as to be seen to have an impact on the ‘social’. We found few to no hits in “the documents” and the abstracts covering “the documents”. For “the documents” the generic term technolog* led to some hits. Although it might make sense for the declarations and conventions not to go into specific technologies, the “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development” report and the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities” could have engaged with various specific technologies beyond “assistive technolog*” covered in the “UN flagship report on disability and development Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities”.

Within the abstracts covering “the documents” we suggest that the lack of engagement of technologies through the lens of “the documents” especially the conventions and declarations is problematic, and a missed opportunity given that technologies impact the ‘social’ of the topic of every document. For example, it is known that artificial intelligence, machine learning and machine reasoning use poses various problems such as algorithm/algorithmic bias in relation to marginalized groups [199,200,201,202,203,204,205,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213,214,215,216], which could have been discussed using all of “the documents” including the three documents focusing on environmental issues as algorithm/algorithmic bias are also identified in using artificial intelligence, machine learning and machine reasoning to deal with environmental issues.

A thorough understanding of the ‘social’ is flagged as important in science and technology governance and science and technology focused ethics discourses [11,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,28]. Science and technology governance concepts have been developed to engage with the recognized reality that scientific and technological advancements have social, legal, ethical and economic consequences [10]. We did not search for the science and technology governance terms and specific ethics fields in “the documents”. However, the search of the abstracts engaging with “the documents” should have generated science and technology governance terms (“democratizing science, and technology”, “participatory technology assessment”, “technology assessment”, “parliamentary technology assessment”, “anticipatory governance”, “upstream engagement”, “responsible innovation”, “responsible research and innovation” and “transformative vision assessment”) and ethics fields (AI-ethics, bioethics, computer science ethics, information technology ethics, nanoethics, neuroethics, robo-ethics) as lenses to discuss the social implications of a given technology on the social issues flagged in “the documents” and it is problematic that they were not.

In the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” it is for example stated “To undertake or promote research and development of, and to promote the availability and use of new technologies, including information and communications technologies, mobility aids, devices and assistive technologies, suitable for persons with disabilities, giving priority to technologies at an affordable cost”, “To undertake or promote research and development of universally designed goods, services, equipment and facilities, as defined in article 2 of the present Convention, which should require the minimum possible adaptation and the least cost to meet the specific needs of a person with disabilities, to promote their availability and use, and to promote universal design in the development of standards and guidelines”, “To provide accessible information to persons with disabilities about mobility aids, devices and assistive technologies, including new technologies, as well as other forms of assistance, support services and facilities”, To promote access for persons with disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet”, “To promote the design, development, production and distribution of accessible information and communications technologies and systems at an early stage, so that these technologies and systems become accessible at minimum cost”, “Facilitating access by persons with disabilities to quality mobility aids, devices, assistive technologies and forms of live assistance and intermediaries, including by making them available at affordable cost”, “Encouraging entities that produce mobility aids, devices and assistive technologies to take into account all aspects of mobility for persons with disabilities”, “Providing information intended for the general public to persons with disabilities in accessible formats and technologies appropriate to different kinds of disabilities in a timely manner and without additional cost”, “shall promote the availability, knowledge and use of assistive devices and technologies, designed for persons with disabilities, as they relate to habilitation and rehabilitation”, “Facilitating cooperation in research and access to scientific and technical knowledge”, “Providing, as appropriate, technical and economic assistance, including by facilitating access to and sharing of accessible and assistive technologies, and through the transfer of technologies”.

All these statements suggest that various science and technology governance and ethics fields could have been used as lenses to audit the compliance with the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” demands. Furthermore, the science and technology governance lenses could also be used to discuss the impact of a given scientific or technological advancement on the social issues flagged by the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”. Additionally, one could also query the limitation of the wordings around technologies in the “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” [217].

The science and technology governance lenses could also be used to discuss the impact of a given scientific or technological advancement on the social issues flagged by the other documents. A recent addition to technology governance is the effort of the National Academy of Medicine’s Committee on Emerging Science, Technology, and Innovation in health and medicine (CESTI) to generate a new technology impact and governance framework “to inform social, ethical, and legal governance frameworks for a range of cutting-edge technologies” [28]. This initiative could also use “the documents” to strengthen their impact and governance framework.

4.4. Healthcare Professionals (Research Question 5)

Health care professionals ought to engage with the ‘social’ [78,82,83,84,85] and associations of healthcare professionals mention a variety of “the documents” [78,86,89,90,91,93,94,96,99]. However, few to no abstracts linked “the documents” to health professions. This is problematic and a missed opportunity. We suggest that engaging with “the documents” in conjunction with health professionals enhances the expected roles of health professionals such as being advocate for their field and their clients, educators, researchers, being involved in political processes and change agents [21,22,23,24,25,26]. Engaging in academic research with “the documents” fits with the self understanding that social work contributes to the “practical and tangible advancements of human rights in people’s daily lives” [86] and that on a community level, social workers influence the rights of people by shaping public decisions on policy impacting vulnerable populations such as women, people with disabilities and Indigenous peoples [86] and that “ occupational therapists around the world are obligated to promote occupational rights as the actualization of human rights” [82] and to decrease occupational injustice [82]. The World Psychiatric Association endorses The UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities and recognize it as essential to promote social justice” [85] but our findings do not indicate studies that would engage with how best to do so or how well it is done by their members.

4.5. Limitations

The search was limited to a few databases and English language literature. As such, the findings are not to be generalized to the whole of academic literature, non-academic literature, or non-English literature, which was also not our intent. Generalizability was also not our intent. However, as for transferability, the description of our method gives all the required information to others so they may decide whether they want to apply our keyword searches to other data sources such as grey literature, literature in other languages, and other academic literature, or whether they want to perform more in-depth research such as qualitative work on what was said in relation to the keywords, we did manifest coding on. Furthermore, as to the academic database searches only abstracts were searched. That means that relevant content that would only be evident in the main body of an article would have been missed. Finally, there are many more phrases containing the term ‘social’, and indicators one can link to the ‘social’. Although this study has various limitations and boundaries, the findings allow for conclusions to be made within the parameters of the searches and the character of the analysis.

5. Conclusions and Future Research

Our study revealed quite a difference in abstracts covering the various documents to start with and showed numerous gaps in discussing and using “the documents” in relation to all research questions we posed. Our findings suggest many research opportunities that could fill the gaps we found such as the lack of coverage of intersectionality especially in relation to EDI related groups.

Our CRPD (Appendix A and Table 15 and Table 16) approach could be applied to the other 8 documents we investigated and the identified social issues in all 9 of them could be used as another list of social indicators to audit all the topics we covered in our study and other topics.

The “documents” could be used:

 

• to facilitate collaborations between many groups and individuals such as scholars, policymakers, educators, professionals, active citizens and stakeholders including marginalized groups on any given topic
• to strengthen the discussions around and auditing of the ‘social’ related to many topics
• to strengthen the field of eco-social work [79,80,81].
• to strengthen the EDI discourse
• as one list of social indicators to be used as self-assessment tools by many such as students, researchers, teachers, professionals, practitioners, active citizens, stakeholders, designers of products, engineers, coders, or policymakers to ascertain their literacy of the ‘social’ on climate change, sustainable development goals, emergency and disaster management, impact of technologies, governance of science and technology, EDI and other topics
• to audit science and technology governance discussions
• to query EDI engagements in science and technology including science and technology governance something which is often missing [10].
• to ascertain how literate people involved in “the documents” are on the topic covered in our study and vice versa.
• to investigate curricula including curricula covering the topics of our study