OUR BLOG

Rethinking Universal Design: A Call for a Habitable World

Universal design promises accessibility for all, but does it truly serve disabled people? We visit some leading thinkers, scholars and persons with lived experience about this idea. Aimi Hamraie, Associate Professor of Medicine, Health, & Society and American Studies at Vanderbilt University, and director of the Critical Design Lab,  and Quill Kukla, Professor of Philosophy at Georgetown University,  think differently about universal design, highlighting that we need to move beyond universal design’s limitations. Instead, they advocate for a “habitable world,” where the perspectives of people living with disabilities take center stage in shaping spaces and systems.

Universal Design’s Origins and Shortcomings

Since its start in the late 20th century, universal design aimed to make public spaces accessible for disabled people. However, as Aimi Hamraie points out, the concept evolved into a broad, trendy approach that prioritizes “everyone” over the specific needs of disabled individuals. This shift diluted its original focus and allowed ableist assumptions to dominate.

For instance, universal design often introduces ramps, wider doorways, or larger bathroom stalls. While these features are helpful, they’re often mere add-ons to spaces still fundamentally shaped by non-disabled perspectives. Aimi critiques this as a “bandaid solution” that supports ableist design patterns instead of rethinking spaces entirely.

Ableism in Everyday Spaces

Quill Kukla’s work emphasizes how ableism permeates everyday spaces, such as supermarkets. These spaces are designed for efficiency—not accessibility—leaving behind those who need quieter environments, mobility aids, or more time to navigate. Quill emphasizes that even essential activities like grocery shopping are built on ableist assumptions, excluding many disabled individuals.

Imagine supermarkets designed by disabled people: aisles wide enough for mobility aids, low-stimulation shopping hours, and checkout processes that don’t rush users. Such changes require rethinking who designs these spaces and whose needs they prioritize.

A Habitable World, Not a Universal One

Aimi Hamraie introduces the idea of a “habitable world,” where disability isn’t an afterthought but a central focus. This concept challenges the belief that life without disability is preferable. Instead, it celebrates disability as a valid and valuable way of being.

A habitable world goes beyond retrofitting existing designs. It asks: What would our spaces look like if disabled people led the design process? Bathrooms might not just feature accessible stalls but be entirely reimagined. Public transportation could prioritize ease of use for all, with input from disabled users shaping every detail.

Addressing Common Objections

Some may argue that universal design’s goal of barrier-free spaces is ideal. But Aimi and Quill highlight the flaw in this thinking: it assumes everyone should participate in life the same way. This ableist perspective erases the diversity of human experiences and reinforces the narrative that disability is something to eliminate.

True inclusivity doesn’t mean designing for sameness; it means designing for difference. It’s not about fitting everyone into a universal mold, but about creating spaces where diverse needs are acknowledged and celebrated.

Building a Habitable Future

To create a habitable world, voices of those living with disabilities must guide the conversation. This shift requires undoing ableist structures and reimagining spaces from the ground up. By centering disability in design, we can move toward a world that values and celebrates diverse ways of thinking, living, moving, and being.

Aimi Hamraie and Quill Kukla’s insights remind us that true inclusivity is not about universal solutions but about fostering a world where everyone can thrive. 

Let’s stop aiming for universality and start building a habitable world.

To read more from Aimi Hamraie.

To read more from Quill Kukla. 

Works Cited

Hamraie, Aimi. “Universal Design and the Problem of ‘Post-Disability’ Ideology.” Design and Culture, vol. 8, no. 3, 2016, pp. 285–309, https://doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2016.1218714.

Kukla, Quill R. “City Spaces, Pace Bias, and the Production of Disability.” OUPblog, 1 Dec. 2021, blog.oup.com/2021/12/city-spaces-pace-bias-and-the-production-of-disability. Accessed 24 Nov. 2024.