What does it take to get to work?  

For most Sri Lankans, the question barely registers. But for a person with a mobility disability, the answer is often: another person. Someone to push. Someone to accompany.  

Sri Lanka has made genuine investments to improve accessibility. Standard wheelchairs are provided through government support schemes. Accessible low-floor buses have been introduced on key corridors. Customs-duty relief has been extended to imported assistive devices, and there are plans to strengthen local repair and manufacturing capacity. 

Yet, for many wheelchair users, the journey to work, school, university or a vocational training center remains difficult. The missing piece is not necessarily another wheelchair. It is whether the wheelchair a person receives actually enables them to move independently. That gap is what LIRNEasia’s work on accessible mobility seeks to address. 

A Gap Measured in Distance and Dignity 

The economic exclusion faced by people with mobility disabilities in Sri Lanka is substantial. According to Sri Lanka’s 2024 Census of Population and Housing, 91.5% of people aged 15 and above with a disability affecting walking or climbing steps are economically inactive (Department of Census and Statistics, 2026). This figure does not mean mobility is the only reason people are outside the workforce. Disability, health, discrimination, education, and labor market conditions all matter. But mobility can be a barrier that is sometimes possible to address. 

Earlier LIRNEasia research found a similar pattern. In its nationally representative AfterAccess survey of persons with disabilities conducted in Sri Lanka in 2018, only 15% of respondents reported having monthly income, compared with 73% of the general population. Among those who wanted an assistive device but did not have one, affordability was the most cited barrier. For those who used assistive devices, mobility was by far the most common purpose (LIRNEasia, 2020). Without affordable access to appropriate mobility devices, opportunities to work and participate in public life can remain out of reach. 

A more recent peer-reviewed Lancet study conducted nationally found that 7.5% of persons with disabilities in Sri Lanka had an unmet need for appropriate assistive technology (Patel et al., 2026). The finding points to a broader gap between the need for appropriate assistive technology and access to it. For wheelchair users, this raises an additional question: does receiving a wheelchair necessarily mean gaining independent mobility?  

Accessible low-floor buses deployed under the President’s ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ program represent a meaningful public commitment (President’s Media Division, 2026). But accessible buses alone cannot produce their intended inclusive mobility outcome if the person who needs them cannot complete the first and last mile to the bus stop independently. Standard chrome-steel wheelchairs can be relatively heavy (~18 kg in our assessment), making sustained self-propulsion more demanding for some users, particularly over the distances required to reach public transport, navigate a workplace or attend classes. 

The barrier, in other words, is not always the bus. It is often the space before and after the bus. This is why personal mobility, and public transport should be thought of as parts of the same journey rather than separate policies. 

Why Wheelchair Design Matters 

It might seem that a wheelchair is simply a wheelchair. However, for people who self-propel, weight and design affect how much physical effort is needed. Research shows that wheelchair weight and design can influence how efficiently a person propels the chair and how much physical strain is involved (van der Woude et al., 2001). The answer, therefore, is not simply to provide a wheelchair, but to provide the right wheelchair for the individual. WHO’s Wheelchair Provision Guidelines (2023) recommend that wheelchair selection be based on an individual assessment of the user’s physical and functional needs, environment, lifestyle and preferences, followed by appropriate fitting, training and follow-up. 

The Weight of Appearance 

Rarely acknowledged in policy discussions is that barriers to mobility are not only physical. Our preliminary consultations with wheelchair users suggest that weight, design and appearance may also influence how comfortable some users feel traveling independently in public. Some participants associated heavier, institutional-looking wheelchairs with dependence, poverty or the need for assistance from others. These observations are not nationally representative, but they are consistent with the national Lancet study’s finding that stigma and negative social attitudes can discourage the use of assistive technology and reinforce exclusion (Patel et al., 2026). 

This matters because a wheelchair can only enable mobility if it works for the person using it. A wheelchair that is difficult to propel or that a person is reluctant to use in public may limit rather than enable independent mobility. 

Rethinking What Success Looks Like 

The right measure of success is not the number of wheelchairs distributed. It is what those wheelchairs enable. Our analysis points to the need for differentiated provision pathways for lightweight manual and electric wheelchairs, alongside the existing standard wheelchair program. These would be targeted at assessed, working-age users whose employment, education or vocational training is constrained by an unsuitable device. 

Eligibility should be clearly defined. A recipient would need to demonstrate a verified goal related to work, education or training; have a feasible transport journey that greater independent mobility could make viable; and participate in fitting, training, follow-up and outcome monitoring. Placing users at the center of wheelchair provision is not only consistent with WHO guidance (2023), but is also supported by evidence from Bangladesh, where greater user involvement in wheelchair service delivery was associated with better reported outcomes (Borg et al., 2012). 

For users who can self-propel, an appropriately configured lightweight wheelchair can reduce the physical effort required for propulsion and make independent travel more practical. For users who require powered mobility, an electric wheelchair may provide greater independence, although at substantially higher cost and with greater maintenance and repair requirements. The appropriate choice should therefore depend on the individual’s functional needs, environment and intended use. 

The success metrics for such a program should be deliberately human-centered: independent journeys completed, employment retained or entered, use of accessible low-floor buses, reduction in caregiver-assisted travel, and user confidence and dignified participation in public life. The policy should be oriented not towards a product distributed, but towards a life enabled. 

Reducing the Hidden Burden on Families 

When someone cannot travel independently, family members often provide the missing mobility by pushing the wheelchair, accompanying journeys, waiting during appointments, or helping with transfers. Much of this support is unpaid and is often provided by women within households (ILO, 2024). 

If a person can complete more journeys independently, the benefits may extend to the rest of the family. Caregivers may spend less time accompanying routine trips and gain greater flexibility in their own work and household responsibilities. 

The impact of better mobility should therefore be measured not only for wheelchair users, but also for the family members who support them. Changes in weekly assistance hours, accompanied journeys and workdays missed can help show whether greater independent mobility is also reducing the demands placed on caregivers. 

A Phased, Need-Based Approach to Expanding Access 

Scaling access to appropriate wheelchairs should be guided by verified need rather than unconfirmed demand projections. A first-year allocation for 250–500 assessed users would allow the government to test this approach before considering wider expansion. For lightweight wheelchairs, the estimated additional cost above existing standard wheelchair support would be approximately LKR 7.5–15 million, depending on the number of users supported. Electric wheelchairs would require a substantially larger allocation and should therefore be provided only where individual assessment establishes the need for powered mobility. 

Importantly, wheelchair provision should begin with the person, not the product. Each recipient should undergo an individual functional assessment, with the type of wheelchair determined by their needs, abilities, environment and intended use. An interim review after six months could then assess demand, wheelchair use, supplier performance, repair needs and early mobility outcomes before decisions are made about further funding or expansion. 

The Deeper Policy Question 

The choice before government is not simply whether to spend more. Sri Lanka has already invested in wheelchair provision and accessible public transport. The question is whether these investments work together to enable people to travel independently and participate in work, education and public life. 

An accessible bus can only achieve its purpose if the person who needs it can reach the bus stop, board the bus and complete the rest of the journey. This requires thinking beyond individual products and services towards the entire journey. When these connections are missing, the benefits of public investment remain only partially realized, while families often continue to provide the assistance needed to bridge the gaps. 

A phased, evidence-led approach provides an opportunity to change this. Starting with a targeted pilot, measuring what actually enables independent mobility, and scaling based on verified outcomes would allow Sri Lanka to build on investments it has already made. The goal is not simply better wheelchair provision or more accessible buses, but a care infrastructure that enables persons with disabilities to participate more independently in economic and public life. 

Authored by Suhail Sinnalebbe (Researcher, LIRNEasia) and Isuru Samaratunga (Senior Research Manager, LIRNEasia)

---

References 

Borg, J., Larsson, S., Ostergren, P. O., Rahman, A. S., Bari, N., & Khan, A. H. (2012). User involvement in service delivery predicts outcomes of assistive technology use: a cross-sectional study in Bangladesh. BMC health services research, 12, 330. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-330 

Department of Census and Statistics. (2026). Census of population and housing 2024: Final report. Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development. https://www.statistics.gov.lk/Population/StaticalInformation 

International Labour Organization. (2024). Chapter 4: Strengthening social protection for all throughout the life course. In World Social Protection Report 2024–2026: Universal social protection for climate action and a just transition. International Labour Office. https://webapps.ilo.org/static/english/reports/flagship/world_social_protection_report_2024-26/Chapter%2004.html 

LIRNEasia (2020). ICT access and use by Persons with Disabilities (PWD) in Sri Lanka (Presentation). LIRNEasia. https://lirneasia.net/2020/05/ict-access-and-use-by-persons-with-disabilities-pwd-in-sri-lanka-presentation/ 

Patel, D., Danemayer, J., Jayawardena, P., Wijesekara, H., De Silva, N., Kett, M., & Austin, V. (2026). Assistive technology unmet need and barriers to access in Sri Lanka: A mixed-methods study (2024). *The Lancet Regional Health – Southeast Asia, 51, 100807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lansea.2026.100807 

President’s Media Division (PMD). (2026, April 21). Priority bus service for persons with disabilities launched under ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ programme. President’s Office. https://www.presidentsoffice.gov.lk/news/?slug=priority-bus-service-for-persons-with-disabilities-launched-under-clean-sri-lanka-programme 

van der Woude, L. H., Veeger, H. E., Dallmeijer, A. J., Janssen, T. W., & Rozendaal, L. A. (2001). Biomechanics and physiology in active manual wheelchair propulsion. Medical engineering & physics, 23(10), 713–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1350-4533(01)00083-2 

World Health Organization. (2023). Wheelchair provision guidelines. https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/fe56c4c4-adaf-4302-b354-b0f329bac6f7/content