Universal accessibility: a world within everyone’s reach

There are design approaches that identify accessibility as a baseline condition and a measure of quality. On one hand, there is Universal Design, developed in the United States in the 1980s by Ronald Mace, with the goal of creating spaces, products, and services that can be used by the greatest number of people from the outset, without the need for specialized adaptations later. On the other hand, there is Design for All, which originated in Europe and was formalized in 2004 with the Stockholm Declaration by EIDD – Design for All Europe. This approach embraces human diversity, social inclusion, and equality, focusing on the process and the participation of people.

As Erica Isa Mosca, architect and PhD researcher on Design for All, explains: “Universal Design and Design for All are two complementary approaches that share the same goal: designing for the greatest number of people. A central aspect is recognizing human diversity as a fundamental condition that can manifest at different moments in life.”

Designing a space or developing a service while taking human differences into account is essential to ensure inclusion for everyone. How do Universal Design and Design for All incorporate this idea?
Imagine being in a large building and needing to carry bulky loads to the top floor, but the elevator is too small. Or struggling to grip a knob handle due to limited hand mobility. Or attending a conference without being able to follow the content because the videos have no subtitles and you have hearing loss. In each of these situations, the space or service fails for the person. These limitations are not only permanent: they can be temporary, like a fracture, or situational, like trying to hear an announcement in a noisy train station without visual support. Universal Design and Design for All arise from this awareness: there is no “standard user,” but a variety of people, conditions, and contexts. When a project does not consider human diversity from the start, it creates barriers. When it does, it enhances the quality of the experience for everyone.

Often, when planning buildings or other spaces, accessibility is considered an addition to the project rather than a fundamental element. How do inclusive design approaches differ?
Accessibility is often seen as a purely technical requirement that must be addressed only at a final stage, once the main project has been drafted. This approach, of course, leads to solutions that are not very effective in terms of accessibility. Universal Design, instead, proposes a shift in perspective: how can we design, from the very beginning, spaces or products that work for everyone? It is not just about meeting minimum regulatory requirements, but about integrating inclusion throughout the entire design process.

You recently founded Inclusiva Design, a company that supports professionals and organizations in creating inclusive spaces, products, and services. How does it embrace Universal Design and Design for All, and what are the main challenges?
Inclusiva Design is born from my professional journey focused on Universal Design and Design for All. Today it supports companies, studios, and institutions in making spaces, services, and experiences genuinely inclusive, using these approaches as a practical guide. The first challenge is therefore making them truly applicable and overcoming the notion that accessibility is merely a regulatory obligation. Regulations are important, to be clear, but they alone are not enough to make a space or product truly inclusive for all. Inclusiva Design’s work consists of translating solid theoretical foundations, developed through years of research, into operational tools and concrete design choices. This means transforming the complexity of human diversity into actionable strategies, integrating physical, sensory, and cognitive accessibility, and incorporating users’ needs into a coherent design. Training is an integral part of this process: without cultural and methodological updating, even the best strategies risk remaining isolated.

Have Universal Design and Design for All ever addressed artificial intelligence? Can you provide some examples?
Although Universal Design and Design for All were developed before AI emerged, today they provide an important reference for new technologies. In inclusive design, artificial intelligence can be used to collect and analyze large amounts of data on people’s needs. For example, regarding architecture and services, AI can analyze data on actual space usage collected via sensors or digital models. The goal is to identify critical issues that could not be noticed through traditional observation. Another example is scenario simulation during the design phase to evaluate how the performance of a space changes depending on different users and their needs (e.g., mobility, sensory, cognitive limitations). This allows potential barriers and issues to be identified before final implementation. Finally, AI is widely used in the digital realm: think of automatic subtitles, speech synthesis systems, and interface adaptation based on user needs.

What about the risks of using AI? Could it create a condition of exclusion? I am thinking of potential biases in AI that could affect accessibility design.
Absolutely. These risks exist and can occur when AI is trained on data or needs that are not fully representative of the diversity of people. This happens when we take a “standard user” as a reference, without considering specific needs. For instance, elderly people or those with cognitive disabilities may struggle with complex digital interfaces, apps, or chatbots; in these cases, technology can become a barrier. That is why it is crucial for AI to be guided by Universal Design and Design for All principles, because AI alone cannot devise inclusive solutions: the involvement of people in the design phases is central.