Hi there! 👋 I got a question in a comment that inspired this edition: Why did you choose the term “nonclusion”? Good question!
Why we chose the term “nonclusion”
Nonclusion is an aspect of universal design. We first introduced it in a paper in 2022 and have been exploring it since then [1].
For me, nonclusion starts with human variation – and with choosing not to put (categorise) people in boxes based on body, role, or function.
Another way to approach this is by looking at the "clude" part: it comes from "claudere", which is a Latin verb meaning to close, shut, block or enclose.
Thus, to "Include" means to shut in, "exclude" to shut out. Both are acts, and both create and uphold boundaries. Nonclusion, as I see it, is about removing those (often predefined) boundaries altogether. Or, even better, not putting them there in the first place.
Our work on nonclusion builds on theories of categorisation [2]. We have written quite a bit about it by now, but the term, to me, is still more of a question than an answer.
What I hope nonclusion will contribute to
We do not believe in designing for categories:
“Nonclusive design means design that resists categorisations of bodies/roles and that does not come with predefined or presupposed limits in terms of who it is meant for” [1, p.91].
An example: for some years now, I have taken photographs of entrances with red-carpeted staircases. Figure 1 shows a photo collage of five such inaccessible entrances with a red carpet leading straight to a staircase – no ramp, no alternative, just stairs. The red carpet enhances the experience of “us” and “them”. As someone using a wheelchair, they are hard to miss.
The entrances look glamorous at first glance, but to me, they are archetypes of inaccessibility. They celebrate the norm – those who can walk up the stairs – while the red carpet adds to the experience of separation and stigma.
Nonclusion is meant to challenge and provide solutions to the thought pattern that there is a normal person and then those who deviate from that norm [2]. Instead of categorising bodies/roles, human variation should be the foundation for design. Asking a question that starts from nonclusion means asking how a red carpet can meet human variation.
My hope is that nonclusion can add key vocabulary and frameworks that will help us move beyond designing for “us” and “them”. I will return to this in the coming newsletter editions.
Your turn
Thank you, Slávka Fratričová, for posting photos of the House of Disability Organisations in Høje-Taastrup, Denmark, and for our discussion of categorising spaces and toilet signs.
Shout-out to Kirstin Yuzwa, who reposted the newsletter with a beautiful description and interpretation of nonclusion. Kirstin said in a PM: "Thanks for starting this discussion. I think it's an important step forward in how we as a society start to envision the application of universal design."
Thanks to Lisbeth Nilsson for the question that inspired this edition.
One of my goals with the newsletter is to learn in public together with others and make a few friends along the way. Happy to see that this is already happening.
What examples of nonclusive design have you noticed in your daily life? I'd love to hear about your reflections or photos. Let's keep this discussion going. 😊
My friend and colleague Stina Ericsson read and commented on this edition. Stina is a Professor of Swedish at Gothenburg University, specialising in language, interaction and norms. She is the “Ericsson” in the references below, and just as involved in the evolution of nonclusion as I am.
Want to use the photos or illustrations in a publication? Please go ahead. Or in a presentation or video? Please do, and tell me about how you use them and what you learn! I appreciate attribution in some form, i.e., that you tell where you got the material from ("Per-Olof Hedvall"), but it is not mandatory. 👍
References
- Hedvall, P.-O., Price, M., Keller, J., & Ericsson, S. (2022). Towards 3rd Generation Universal Design: Exploring Nonclusive Design. Transforming Our World through Universal Design for Human Development, 85–92. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI220824
- Ericsson, S., & Hedvall, P. O. (2024). Situation, Non-categorisation, and Variation—Conveying Nonclusion Through Text and Image. In Difference – Sketching, Visualising and challenging Universal Design in Sweden (Vol. 19, pp. 31–50). Design for All Institute of India. http://designforall.in/?mdocs-file=2472