From inclusion to acknowledgment: a paradigm shift

• Date: 26 January 2024
• Pages: 361-385
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-01-2021-0006
• Published date: 26 January 2024
• Author: Ana Argento Nasser

From inclusion to

acknowledgment: a paradigm shift

Ana Argento Nasser

Por Igual Mas Foundation, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba,

Cordoba, Argentina

Abstract

Purpose –This article aims to provide a new paradigm for thinking about disability, which can be applied to

other social groups, historically invisible and whose rights have been violated. The Model of Communication

and Legitimate Acknowledgement of Disability (MCLAD) tries to break with the logic of continuing to add

terms and euphemisms around the issue. The author proposes a new line to think about relationships in

democratic societies. Taking the step from inclusion to acknowledgment does not imply another way of naming

the disability, but rather addressing the problem from concrete practices of recognition. In order to arrive at the

proposal of the MCLAD, the author will make a journey that addresses how disability has been understood

throughout history, according to the study of different authors.

Design/methodology/approach –Disability has been perceived over time in many different ways, which

led some authors to build models in order to explain certain social approaches to the subject. This article traces

a journey from the first model to the present. In turn, it proposes a new one: the MCLAD, which is characterized

by a paradigm shift: moving from inclusion to acknowledgment. To substantiate this, three categories are

presented: acknowledgment, distance and vulnerability. The different theories and concepts that support the

model will also be presented. The purpose of the MCLAD is to deepen the idea of empowering people with

disabilities as part of today’s diverse societies and closing historically constructed gaps which are still in force.

Findings –The MCLAD proposes three categories: acknowledgment, distance and vulnerability. In turn, in each

of them, there is a link between three axes: person with disability/society/state, analyzing the dynamics of these

relationships presented, will provide us with the necessary elements to understand the proposed turnaround.

Research limitations/implications –Although the different models will be presented according to the

chronological order of definition over time, all of them still coexist today, in many cases in hybrid and

naturalizedways insocial practices.Recognizing what practicesand conceptionsare behindeach model,allows

us to recognize and resignify the ways of communicating toward people with disabilities (PWD) and on the

issue of disability. It also allows other specific recognition practices, such as the legitimization of public policies

from the laws that protect them.

Practical implications –To replace the paradigm of inclusion for that of acknowledgmentand to recognize

how the three categories (acknowledgment, distance and vulnerability)are linked with the three issues (PWD –

society and state) allowing specific relationship and practises of legitimate or not acknowledgement. When the

author affirms that theMCLAD implies a paradigm shift, the author means that it provides some elements from

legitimateacknowledgment tocomplement aspectswhich inclusiondoes not address, and that the other models

did not take into account. These are: the self-acknowledgment of people with disabilities and the sense of

responsibility linked to empowerment; vulnerability as a category of reconciliation, which is typical of every

human being; the contribution of the Phenomenology of the Among to think about how relationships and

practices actually occur in society and, finally, the role of the state, which must watch over all its citizens,

avoiding the distance between discourse (laws) and practices and, above all, avoiding exclusion from the

system due to lack of monitoring of actions.

Social implications –It should be noted that the MCLAD starts from the idea of language as a constructor of

realities and conceives communication as an enabler of the acknowledgment of the other, who is also subject to

rights. At the same time, it vindicates the voice of people with disabilities as protagonists (“Nothing about us

without us”) and fosters the need for PWD themselves to be active in their struggles, promulgating legitimate

acknowledgment. At the same time, it points out that the empowerment of PWD implies not only that they are

aware of their rights but also that they themselves know and fulfill their duties within the democratic societies

of which they are a part of and which, at least discursively, are regulated by laws. In other words, being

empowered is also being responsible for living in society.

Originality/value –The main contribution that the MCLAD has to offer is to replace the paradigm of

inclusion for that of acknowledgment. And, throughout the path followed in this article, an attempt has been

Paradigm of

acknowledgement

361

This paper forms part of a special section “Producing Actionable Knowledge about Marginalized

Populations and Communities: A Challenge to Editors and Journals”, guest edited by Harry J. Van Buren

III, Charlotte Karam and Fida Alfiouni.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-7149.htm

Received 6 January 2021

Revised 27 May 2021

23 January 2022

14 May 2023

31 October 2023

Accepted 1 November 2023

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:

An International Journal

Vol. 43 No. 2, 2024

pp. 361-385

© Emerald Publishing Limited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/EDI-01-2021-0006

made to establish that the turnaround is not to capriciously install a new concept (acknowledgment), but to

demonstrate that the new paradigm involves three categories that sustain andsupport a model that seeks to be

the basis for effective public policies, for a society that values diversity and for people who feel worthy and

contribute to dignify others.

Keywords People with disabilities, Acknowledgment, Empowerment, Vulnerability, Distance

Paper type Viewpoint

Introduction

This article aims to provide a new paradigm for thinking about disability, which can be

applied to other social groups, historically invisible and whose rights have been violated. The

Model of Communication and Legitimate Acknowledgement of Disability (MCLAD) tries to

break with the logic of continuing to add terms and euphemisms around the issue. We

propose a new line to think about relationships in democratic societies. Taking the step from

inclusion to acknowledgment does not imply another way of naming disability, but rather

addressing the problem from concrete practices of recognition.

In order to arrive at the proposal of the MCLAD, we will first discusswhy it is necessary to

change the paradigm by questioning the term “inclusion”and proposing the use of the term

“legitimate acknowledgement”. Then we will make a journey that addresses how disability

has been understood throughout history, according to the study of different authors, until

today, when we arrive at the model proposed here. Finally, we will address the implications of

the MCLAD, and we will share our conclusions.

Why is it necessary to change the paradigm?

To understand what the MCLAD proposes, first, it is necessary to explain why we will

question the term “inclusion”and why we propose an alternative: “acknowledgment”[1].

From an etymological point of view, the word “inclusion”derives from the Latin includere,

which means to put inside, to shut in, to insert. The term includere is made up of the

preposition “in”(within, inside) and the verb “claudere”(to enclose, to confine and to make

inaccessible). Inclusion could be understood as the action of bringing something/someone

inside (dictionary.com;etymonline.com). The adjective “social”comes from the Latin soci

alis,

which means to belong to, to be dedicated to, to live with and to join others. Soci

alis is made up

of the noun soci (partners, fellows and comrades), and the suffix 

alis is added to turn the noun

into an adjective (Sandoval



Alvarez, 2016).

In this sense, it is worth askingwhether it is real that some people are outsidesociety and

should beincluded. How can this inside/outside divisionactually take place? In concreteterms,

every personmakes up society; we are all membersof society, the only differenceis that many

people participatein unfavorable conditions (Sen, 2000). It ishard to imagine that people are

“outside”society or completely outside of social and economic life. The same happens with

inclusion: it is very difficult for people to be completely “included”(Macare~

no and Carvajal,

2015).This is why the Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank (BID,in Spanish, 2007) adds question

marks to the title of its report “The outsiders?”, since speaking metaphorically about the

outsidersand the insiders does not allowfor a clear conceptualizationof social inclusion.For its

part,the definition givenby the World Bank makesreference to society byindicating that social

inclusion is “the process of improving the skills, opportunities and dignity of disadvantaged

people on the basis of their identity so that they take part in society”(WB, 2013, p. 7).

Numerous authors (Levitas, 2003;Macare~

no and Carvajal, 2015;Sandoval



Alvarez, 2016;

O’Reilly, 2005;Young, 2000, among others) have investigated social inclusion from different

perspectives and analyses, which accounts for the elasticity of the concept.

FollowingSandoval



Alvarez(2016) it can be saidthat there is a conceptualvaguenessrelated

to social inclusion. Its dimensions, its elements and its constitutive conceptual core have not

EDI

43,2

362