Researcher Spotlight: David Pettinicchio

David Pettinicchio is Associate Professor of Sociology and Public Policy at the University of Toronto, affiliated with the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, and author of Politics of Empowerment (Stanford) and Sixty Years of Visible Protest in the Disability Struggle for Equality, Justice, and Inclusion (Cambridge). He serves as Interim Department Chair at the University of Toronto Mississauga and was Associate Chair of the tri-campus graduate programme.

David’s research — including his project, Disability-Based Inequalities — examines how social policy is implemented, with emphasis on disability, care, and economic insecurity.

How did you first become interested in your area of research?

I first became interested in disability politics as an undergraduate in sociology, when I was drawn to the disability rights movement and the larger question of how marginalized groups actually effect change. That curiosity quickly turned into a broader interest in the relationship between advocacy and policymaking especially how movements shape policy, but also how policies reshape movements, sometimes in ways activists don’t expect. That became the core of my first book, Politics of Empowerment, which traces the push-and-pull between activism, policy gains, and periods of retrenchment. Over time, my focus expanded from “how policy change happens” to “what policy change actually delivers”—especially the policies that most directly affect everyday life, like employment, income security, health, and care. 

What is something surprising that has emerged during your research?

One of the most surprising things I’ve learned is how rarely policy outcomes match the simplicity of policy intent. We often talk about laws as clear “wins” or “failures,” but many policies land somewhere in between. And, who gets to define success matters a lot. In disability rights, for example, antidiscrimination laws were designed in part to improve employment and economic well-being, yet the real-world outcomes depend heavily on enforcement, employer responses, and court interpretation. Another surprise is how porous the boundary is between “insiders” and “outsiders”: activists, advocates, and policy elites often work in the same strategic space, shifting roles over time as political opportunities open and close. 

What challenges/social problems have you encountered through your research, and what kinds of policies are required for addressing them?

A recurring challenge in my research is the persistence of disability-based economic inequality even in places with strong rights frameworks. Employment gaps, earnings penalties, and job segregation are not only about individual health or skill but they reflect institutional practices, workplace norms, and uneven policy implementation. 

Another major issue is the “household dimension” of disability. Disability can shape work and economic security not only for disabled people, but also for family members who provide care, often with real consequences for employment and financial stability. Policy-wise, this points to the need for packages rather than single fixes like stronger enforcement of antidiscrimination and accommodations, proactive workplace inclusion (not just complaint-driven systems), robust income supports, and care infrastructure (e.g., leave policies, caregiver supports, and affordable services that reduce the hidden costs of disability for households).

What do you wish the general public knew about your research, and what would you like them to do with this knowledge?

I wish more people understood that disability inequality is not a niche issue but rather it’s a central lens on how institutions distribute opportunity. Disability is deeply connected to work, care, and economic security across the life course, and it often reveals the limits of systems that are designed around an “ideal” worker who has no access barriers and no caregiving responsibilities. 

What I’d like people to do with this knowledge is to treat disability policy as mainstream social and economic policy. That means supporting enforcement and accessibility as normal parts of good governance and good workplaces, not special add-ons. And it also means listening seriously to disabled people and caregivers when they say where policies break down in practice, because implementation is where equality succeeds or fails.

What advice do you have for students who are interested in doing research that takes up themes that are similar to yours?

First, start with a real puzzle, that is, something you can’t explain with a simple story about good intentions or bad actors. The most compelling research questions often come from tensions between what policies promise and what they actually produce. Second, take institutions seriously. Learn how policymaking, enforcement, and courts interact, and don’t assume a law’s passage tells you what happens on the ground.  Third, be methodologically flexible. That also means combining theory with evidence that can capture both lived experience and large-scale patterns. And finally, stay close to the communities and organizations connected to your topic as collaboration and accountability make the work better, and they help you ask questions that matter beyond academia.