Keywords

1 The Scenaristic Dimension of Current Social Changes

The scenario of the contemporary world requires new visions and new attitudes, also cultural, to address the current socio-demographic phenomena. Design for inclusion, through its various approaches, offers effective tools with which to address these challenges positively.

1.1 The Social Scenario of Contemporary Life

Contemporary society is changing in character and expectations, with increasing rapidity dynamics. Aging, Disability, multi-ethnicity and multiculturalism, deurbanization, migration flows: these are in fact some of the most important socio-demographic phenomena that characterize today’s society, and which presumably will increase in intensity in the coming decades, especially in Europe, where the economic crisis of the past years has contributed to exasperate their negative effects, highlighting tensions and conflicts between peoples, cultures and territories.

With regard to aging, just in Europe, the percentage of the population over 65 has increased by almost 4% in only twenty yearsFootnote 1, with the prediction that in 2060 about 30% of Europe’s population will be over 65. Even the growth of “oldest old” (over 80) is particularly significant, quadrupling from 1990 to 2060, reaching 12% of the total population. It is, however, people are often still widely active and so they may have a participatory role and support to social development, from the domestic dimension to that of local communities.

If, with the increase of elderly people in the global demographic picture, also disabilities and sensory, cognitive and physical limitations increase in percentage terms, these add up to those people who have forms of permanent disability: due to medical advances and improved hygienic conditions, in fact, the life expectancy of people with chronic diseases has increased, and this together with a heightened social and cultural awareness to issues of disability, who has put in light requirements and expectations of people with disabilities for a better quality of life and social relationships. This occurred as early as the US movement “barrier free” of the fiftiesFootnote 2, which launched in the Western world a change in public policy process.

In parallel to the qualitative change in the overall demographic picture, in recent decades we are witnessing around the world also to an overall increase of the phenomena related to the mobility of individuals: it is related both to migration of populations who, for various reasons (economic, political, etc.) move between continents, nations, territories, and to the individual scale, leading to the advancement of transportation systems. And if in some ways migration, if properly managed, can probably be for some areas the only possibility of replacement of their working population (and therefore to address the economic difficulties due to the aging of the local population or to the emigration of young generations to richer areasFootnote 3), these phenomena also have an immediate effect on increasing of human diversity (social, ethnic, cultural), immediately putting new issues and challenges to deal with.

1.2 Inclusion and Design for Inclusion

The multigenerational, multi-ethnic and multicultural dimension of contemporary society makes it necessary to reflect on possible ways in which generations, different ethnic groups and cultures can meet for a positive share and aware of intercultural conditions, making the relationship between different cultures a tool of coexistence, of wealth and fruitfulnessFootnote 4.

The way in which different social groups can relate in a positive manner between them are basically two: integration and inclusion, with significant conceptual differences between them.

Social inclusion can be defined as the situation where, in reference to a series of multidimensional aspects (culture, traditions, psychological and physical conditions, etc.), Individuals manage to live according to their original values and traditions and cultures, while improving their own conditions and in mutual respect of other traditions and cultures which they are called to compare with: in this sense the differences between individuals and between the different identities of the groups are socially acceptable, and indeed represent the real wealth of community to which individuals belong.

The term social integration means, however, something deeper, that is the inclusion of different identities (cultural, behavioral, etc.). In one unified and uniform framework, within which is not however present any discrimination. Integration is therefore understood as the process by which a social system acquires structural and functional unit, compared to which all are called to conform, acquiring rules and conventions.

In this sense, if social inclusion appears as the first step of an evolutionary process, actually it enhances diversities in the best way and therefore it is more promising in terms of innovation, also from a design point of view.

It follows that design for social inclusion can have clear positive economic and social effects, both in terms of opportunities and visibility for individuals, and especially of collective well-being for the entire economic, social and cultural local systems. Design for inclusion, in fact, is a powerful tool to give a design response to major contemporary socio-demographic phenomena previously mentioned, which represent challenges with which all economic, social and cultural actors will have to compare in the coming decades.

The design for inclusion approaches, however, are numerous, even if related to a common principle and goal, which can be summarized as: “human diversity is a value and every person has the right to receive dignified treatment”. Among the main approaches are Universal Design, Inclusive Design and Design for All.

Universal Design (UD).

First one to be developed, it not only focuses on people with disabilities, but defines the user extensively, suggesting to make all products and spaces accessible and usable by the greatest extent possible of people. Born in the USA, the didascalic reduction of design validation to seven principles, simple and schematic to be applied and therefore rapidly spreading around the world, it tends not to take into account the individual’s complexity and the diversity and variability of mankind.

Inclusive Design (ID).

It develops especially in countries of British influence, and poses no dogmatic design principles, but defines a real careful approach to human diversity, based on the idea that no criterion, principle or guideline can be absolute but must always deal with the multiplicity of users, contexts and goals. Inclusive Design, in fact, considering the wide range of skills, languages, cultures, genders, ages and all other possible forms of differences among individuals, bases its approach on three “dimensions”: to recognize the diversity and uniqueness of individuals, to consider the inclusiveness of the tools and design methodologies, to evaluate the breadth of the impact in terms of benefits.

Design for All (DfA).

It aims to improve the quality of life of individuals through the enhancement of their specificity and diversity: a holistic approach to processes and methods of the environments, equipments and services project, accessible “in an autonomous manner” from people with different needs and abilities. It does so mainly through the design development process, which itself is inclusive, participatory and at the same time effective educational, dissemination and social awareness tool, also referred to the same principles of DfA, which was succinctly defined as the “design for human diversity, social inclusion and equality” (EIDD, Stockholm declaration, 2004).

2 The Didactic Dimension of Design for Inclusion

Through new educational experiences included in university courses, aimed at enhancing human diversity and multidisciplinary approach also in addressing simple and seemingly mature project issues, it is possible to start a process of social inclusion, starting from those who will be directly responsible of it in the decades to follow.

2.1 Culture, Behavior and Shared Social Conscience

The first step for inclusion, as complex as necessary, is what needs to be done on the cultural and thus the behavioral level, considering the same “culture” primarily as a cognitive structuring system of experience, individual and collective.

For this purpose it is important, indeed essential, to act on the sensitivity of individuals and their awareness that human diversity is a value and not a problem of contemporary society.

Among them, the designers play a very central role in any planning process. But they are not the only ones to hold this responsibility: it is equally important to involve the largest possible number of active participants to the so-called “value chain” in this action of “conscious awareness” referred to the positive usual meaning of human diversity. This in the idea that to achieve truly “inclusive” projects are not sufficient skill and experience of the designer and the project can not be reduced to simple comparison between client, designer and experienced employees. The best design solution can and must instead come from a widespread social consciousness of participation, including through initiatives to promote “design process” and the dissemination of its results, involving in different ways other social, economic and particularly political “decision makers”.

2.2 Some Didactic Experiences

The training time is particularly significant and stimulating to increase the sensitivity of young designers on the themes of human diversity and social inclusion.

In particular, in the Department of Architecture of the University of Chieti-Pescara in recent years some educational experiences aimed at stimulating awareness of young designers on the issues of human diversity and design for inclusion were carried out (in particular concerning the Design for All approach). In particular, among the many possible application areas in relation to which to conduct educational workshops, recently were investigated the productive sectors of equipment and tools of preparation and consumption of food (“Tutti a Tavola!”), and the domestic activities of gardening (“Green for All”).

“Tutti a Tavola!”.

Recently had a particularly successful a teaching project entitled “Tutti a tavola!” (“The dinner is ready … for All!”). A group of about 70 students of the fourth year of Architecture have addressed the issue of preparation and consuption of food and drink products, through the design of equipment and tools that had to respect the production constraint of being made of ceramic. The most interesting aspect of the experience relates to the diffusion and dissemination of the initiative, which has been able to directly involve different local stakeholders, including government agencies, companies and craftsmen. In fact, a selection of twenty projects have been developed to obtain ceramic prototypes (See Fig. 1). A series of public events organized during the various stages of implementation of the prototypes also allowed to convey awareness on issues of DfA. Finally, the prototypes formed the basis of a collection for a traveling exhibition which has also been presented in the course of some events related to Expo Milano 2015 [1].

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Some moments of the prototype production during public events

Full size image

“Green for All”.

A second educational experience, entitled “Green for All”, dealt with the issue (in the rapid spread) of home gardening, considered both as a response to the growing awareness of environmental issues, both as a therapy tool (orthicultural therapy) and rehabilitation of specific psychopathology neurological through the care and management of green (growing of flowers, vegetables and other plants). By extending these benefits also to the categories of users not strictly related to disability, and verifying the possible applications in relation to even unconventional contexts, the design workshop urged the students to cope with the design for all issue related to gardening, primarily domestic. With the production constraint of terracotta, the projects were intended to encourage the cultivation of ornamental plants or household spices even in unusual contexts of use (in the kitchen, in the bathroom, in the living room, but also by bike, on the desk or on the bedside table, in the bedroom or in a clinic for long stays). The comparison of the students even with specialists from different fields (technical designer of gardens, etc.) has enabled them to verify the importance of developing multidisciplinary teams (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.
figure 2

A design concepts from the didactic lab “Green for All”: “height adjustable pot”

Full size image

3 Conclusions

The experiences synthetically reported in these pages highlight how the training time can be particularly significant and stimulating to increase the sensitivity of young designers on the themes of human diversity and social inclusion.

At the same time educational experiences described also demonstrate how the approach of design for inclusion can be a useful tool to foster innovation, simply by defining design concept referring to productive sectors already consolidated and mature.