Monitoring eAccessibility in Europe: 2011 Annual Report

The strong commitment to improving Web accessibility in the EU may explain why average levels of internet accessibility policy implementation are greater in the EU countries than in the countries outside the EU included in the study, especially in regard to certification or labelling schemes, recognition of international standards and guidelines, capacity building or labelling schemes and enforcement of the implementation of web accessibility obligations. By contrast, statutory provisions to ensure accessibility to websites are more developed in the countries outside the EU analysed.

Figure . Status of Internet accessibility policy in EU and non-EU countries

Source: Own elaboration, 2011. Unit: Percentages

Figure . Status of Internet accessibility policy, by country

Overall, Spain scored the highest on web-accessibility policy, followed by Portugal, Czech Republic, Italy and the Netherlands. Germany and the USA also scored above average on web-accessibility policy.

Scoring for statutory obligations to ensure accessibility to websites is based on the following two questions:

1. 
   Is legislation/ regulation addressing public websites accessibility in place?
   
2. 
   Is legislation/ regulation addressing private websites accessibility in place?
   

Spain and Norway scored highest on statutory obligations to ensure accessibility to websites, followed by United Kingdom, Germany, Portugal and Canada. Spain and Norway have introduced legal regulation in this domain fairly recently. In the English-speaking countries, the regulations are stronger in the public sector than in the private sector or only exist in the public sector.

Scoring for recognition of international eAccessibility standards and guidelines is based on the following seven questions:

1. 
   Does your country recognize guidelines on accessibility to websites from the World Wide Web Consortium? (No / Yes).
   
2. 
   Have guidelines on accessibility to websites from the World Wide Web Consortium been translated into your national language? (No / Yes).
   
3. 
   Is there a central source of expertise that can be consulted by parties responsible for implementing web accessibility? (No / Yes).
   
4. 
   Has the country revised the official web accessibility guidelines and standards to comply with WCAG 2.0? (No / Yes).
   
5. 
   What is the deadline for implementation of WCAG 2.0 in public websites (if any)? (No deadline / Between 2012-2015 / Before end 2011).
   
6. 
   What is the deadline for implementation of WCAG 2.0 in private sector websites (if any)? (No deadline / Between 2012-2015 / Before end 2011).
   
7. 
   How is your country interpreting the implementation of WCAG 2.0? (There are some restrictions or limitations / Interpretation is strict, Level AA / There are some additions or extensions to WCAG 2.0).
   

It should be pointed out that that no EU country analysed has a deadline for implementation of WCAG 2.0 in private sector websites. For the public websites, however, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Portugal, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia have a deadline for implementation of WCAG 2.0 in public websites before 2015. Denmark, although without a specific deadline, has a start date, 2008, since when it has been mandatory for new solutions to comply with WCAG unless certain conditions are involved, such as accessible solutions costing more than otherwise or special considerations with regards to privacy or security.

Scoring for monitoring for compliance with existing web accessibility requirements and recommendations is based on the following two questions:

1. 
   Does the country regularly monitor for compliance with the appropriate web accessibility (at least once a year) and report for all public facilities and services? (No / Yes).
   
2. 
   Does the country regularly monitor for compliance with the appropriate web accessibility (at least once a year) and report for all private facilities and services? (No / Yes).
   

Scoring for capacity building and awareness raising programmes is based on the following three questions:

1. 
   Do national laws, policies and/or programmes exist which provide practical support to procurers of web related services? (No / Yes).
   
2. 
   Do national laws, policies and/or programmes exist which are responsible for delivering information about, and training on, web accessibility? (No / Yes).
   
3. 
   Do national laws or policies require ICT accessibility training for public employees (executive, legislative, judicial) (No / Yes).
   

Scoring for prevalence of certification or labelling of accessibility in public website accessibility policy is based on the following two questions:

1. 
   To what extent is certification or labelling of accessibility in use in public website accessibility policy? (Certification or labelling not yet playing a significant role / Web accessibility certification or labelling is an integral part of policy approach).
   
2. 
   What kinds of certifications are most common in your country? (No certification / Self-declaration / NGO certification or label / Third-party certification).
   

Scoring for Enforcement of Web accessibility obligations is based on the following three questions:

1. 
   Are there national or local agencies coordinating and supporting the enforcement of current regulations, laws and policies on web accessibility? (No / Yes).
   
2. 
   Do national or local agencies have sanctions (penalties) available to enforce the accessibility requirements to websites in public sector? (No / Yes).
   
3. 
   Do national or local agencies have subsidies, awards, or other forms of support to support and foster the accessibility requirements for websites? (No / Yes).