The Problem with "Inclusion"? It Is Done to Someone by Someone

In this paper, we aim to contribute to an enhanced theoretical ground for Universal Design (UD) by examining the concept of "inclusion", presenting a conceptual critique of it based on our research on categorisation and UD, and proposing a way forward. This study is based on a comprehensive analysis of a range of photographs related to inclusion and exclusion collected during five recent research projects. We employ theories on categorisation and UD to inform our critique and discussion of inclusion. The findings show that inclusion 1) entails categorisational ambivalence, 2) upholds patterns of norm and deviation, and 3) results in power being redone, rather than undone. Consequently, inclusion becomes paradoxical, where efforts to promote equity and empowerment simultaneously become another reification of existing power structures and marginalisation. To address this issue, we propose moving beyond "inclusion" to "nonclusion" and the corresponding "nonclusive design" as a foundation for UD. This entails a shift in categorisation towards design that resists categorisations of bodies, persons, and roles. We argue that such a shift can usher in a new paradigm regarding how the path towards a society where everyone belongs can be conceptualised and realised.