Smartphones demand landscape

Few comprehensive data exist on smartphone demand in LMICs specifically for persons with disabilities. However, experts consulted suggest their demand is unlikely to be lower than that of the general population, as smartphones would generally be used for similar tasks in most cases; it is only the features and functions to deliver those tasks that vary. Therefore population-level smartphone demand data are used as a proxy to estimate demand among persons with disabilities.

GSMA’s Mobile Internet Connectivity Index estimates the smartphone demand trends in LMICs (see Figure 5) [29]. All countries in scope are seeing notable growth in demand, as evidenced by 10 of the 14 illustrated countries having a year-over-year growth rate of over 2 per cent. However, the trend resembles an inverted bell shape, with slower growth at the extremes of smartphone penetration and higher year-over-year growth in the mid-range. For example, China has a high mobile ownership rate but displays the smallest year-over-year growth. Low-income countries like Ethiopia and Liberia also show relatively small year-over-year growth, under 2 percentage points. Comparatively,

37

countries like Cambodia and Kenya, in the mid-range of the overall ownership figures, display relatively high ownership growth rates of over 3 percentage points.

Figure 5: Mobile ownership (per cent of the population, ranked by ownership rate)

bar chart

Image Description

Horizontal bar chart comparing percentages for the years 2022 and 2023 across various countries. Each country is listed on the left, with two bars extending to the right for each year: a lighter blue for 2022 and a darker blue for 2023. The percentages increase from left to right, starting at 0% and going up to 100%.

From top to bottom, the countries listed are: China, Georgia, South Africa, Egypt, India, Cambodia, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, Zambia, Pakistan, Liberia, and Ethiopia.

China has the highest percentages for both years, with the 2023 bar slightly longer than 2022, reaching close to 90%. Georgia follows closely, also with high percentages for both years. The percentages decrease as you move down the list, with Ethiopia at the bottom, having the lowest percentages for both years, just above 30%.

In general, most countries show an increase from 2022 to 2023, as the darker blue bars (2023) are longer than the lighter blue bars (2022) for each country.

Figure 6: Mobile ownership year-over-year growth rate (per cent; 2022-2023, ranked by growth rate)

bar chart

Image Description

Horizontal bar chart showing the percentage values for different countries. The countries are listed on the left, with bars extending to the right to indicate their respective percentages. The percentages range from 0.0% to 4.5%.

Egypt has the longest bar, just over 4.0%, followed closely by Cambodia and South Africa. Kenya and India follow, with bars slightly shorter, around 3.5%. Indonesia, Georgia, and Nigeria have bars between 2.5% and 3.0%. Rwanda, Zambia, and Liberia are just under 2.5%. Pakistan, Ethiopia, and China have the shortest bars, with China being the lowest at just above 1.0%.

The chart uses a light blue background and dark blue bars.

38

While smartphone adoption is growing, disparities exist in access for persons with disabilities. For example, in the United States, 72 per cent of persons with disabilities own a smartphone, compared to 88 per cent of persons without a disability [30]. Among LMICs, the gap can be significant. In countries like Algeria, only about 15 per cent of persons with disabilities own a smartphone, compared to 63 per cent of persons without disabilities. This represents an absolute gap of 48 percentage points, meaning that persons with disabilities have a 76 per cent lower smartphone ownership rate relative to those without disabilities [31].

In addition to smartphone access, there is a lack of understanding on accessibility features. Many persons with disabilities are unaware of the built-in accessibility features of their devices beyond the more widely known tools like video conferencing, or may struggle to use multiple accessibility features simultaneously, highlighting digital literacy as a challenge to adopting smartphones as AT [32]. For example, in Ghana, less than 20 per cent of persons with disabilities are aware of the accessibility features built into their mobile devices [33]. As highlighted in the previous report, product selection also matters, as lower-cost devices are often produced by smaller manufacturers that may not have the capacity to test all accessibility features thoroughly. Experts note that, in such cases, software updates can inadvertently alter or disrupt these features.

CHAI analysis found that governments in LMICs often perceive smartphones as luxury items rather than potential assistive products. This perception limits policy interest and procurement programmes, leading to funding schemes that prioritise specialised equipment, even when smartphone features align with AT requirements. While recent regulatory developments like the European Accessibility Act suggest a shift toward recognizing mainstream consumer technologies like smartphones as assistive tools, this trend has yet to take hold in LMICs [34].

LMIC government market

Some LMIC governments have begun recognizing smartphones as assistive products, but few have established direct procurement or subsidy programmes. Based on a survey across 10 LMICs, CHAI found that only three countries procure smartphones for public programmes, as shown in Table 6, but volumes are small. As experts indicated, the limited procurement indicates the nascent stage of LMIC government involvement in this market. Globally, some exceptions exist. Israel and Australia have integrated smartphones in their public funding schemes through technology-agnostic mechanisms that do not prescribe specific devices for different user needs. 7 However, no similar approaches were identified in LMICs.

7.Assistive technology (equipment, technology and devices). National Disability Insurance Scheme, d. ↩︎

39

Table 6: Smartphone inclusion efforts and volume within public AT procurement programmes (within survey reporting period)

Country Government efforts # of smartphones distributed
Georgia The State Programme for Social Rehabilitation and Childcare contains specific provisions for the financing of smartphones with videocall capabilities. 100% of device cost covered. 50
India The Digital India initiative incorporates smartphones under certain programmes (e.g. Assistance to Disabled Persons scheme), with a focus on increasing access for young people seeking education. Information not available
South Africa Digital AT, under which smartphones may be included, can be provided directly through by the government, potentially subsidized, or accessible through an insurance scheme. Information not available

A growing number of LMICs have developed priority assistive product lists, and while some include mobile phones, only two include smartphones. (see Table 7).

Table 7: List of countries with priority assistive product lists (APLs) that include smartphones

Country Smartphone included in APL?
Cambodia NA*
China No
Egypt NA*
Ethiopia No
Georgia NA*
Kenya No (only simple phones included)
Liberia Yes (categorized as a Personal Digital Assistant)
India Yes
Indonesia Not applicable*
Pakistan No
40
Country Smartphone included in APL?
Nigeria No (only simple phones included)
Rwanda Not applicable*
South Africa Not applicable*
Zambia Not applicable*

*Priority assistive product list does not exist or is in development.

Note: some countries may have a list of priority assistive products, but this may not be officially categorized as an APL.

NGO market

Very few NGOs operate in this sector, and none have international reach, resulting in sparse market data. Experts highlighted that local NGOs, often in collaboration with Organizations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs) provide smartphones including training, and maintenance. For example, Vision Aid has distributed smartphones for people with visual impairments in India [35]. However, the small number of NGOs engaged in smartphone distribution, and likely the smaller volume of smartphones distributed by each, makes it difficult to capture these data.

Collaboration between mobile network operators (MNOs), governments and NGOs can lower costs and improve distribution. Experts have pointed at MNOs, because of their unique position, as important stakeholders in driving increased accessibility of smartphones. This is echoed by GSMA, which specifically highlights multiple interventions by MNOs, including offering discounted mobile packages to customers with disabilities, and promoting products and services in accessible formats, following the guidelines laid out by the Global Accessibility Reporting Initiative [36]. Experts suggest that strengthening the collaboration efforts between MNOs, OPDs and government can result in more accessible products and services, which will further increase demand for them.