Abstract

Design is never neutral, as it reflects and reinforces societal norms, values, and power structures. As the design field faces growing concerns about relevance and responsibility, norm-critical and participatory approaches offer ways to challenge dominant assumptions. Norms in design shape who gets to design, what is considered good design, and who benefits. By making these norms visible, norm-critical design questions exclusionary practices and provides alternative perspectives. Participatory design has long emphasized co-creation with marginalized groups, redistributing design agency, and ensuring that design is done with users, not just for them. In today’s rapidly shifting landscape, marked by technological change, economic uncertainty, and political tensions, such approaches become even more crucial. Without intentional inclusion, the design practice risks reinforcing dominant perspectives and excluding diverse voices. This contribution argues that norm-critical participatory design offers a path toward more just and inclusive design practices. By addressing implicit biases and engaging underrepresented groups, designers can create solutions that do not merely accommodate diversity but actively challenge exclusionary norms. In shaping the future of design, embracing these perspectives is not just an ethical choice—it is a necessity.

Norm-critical Participatory Design: Navigating the State of Design in 2025

Design is never neutral, as it is embedded and inherently shaped by cultural, social, and political norms, values, and power structures of its time (Dunne & Raby, 2001; Manzini, 2015). Every design decision reflects underlying values and assumptions that shape not only the artifacts themselves but also the ways in which they are used and interpreted (see Bardzell, 2010; Bardzell & Bardzell, 2013, 2015; Rommes, 2006).

Moving into the year 2025, the design discourse is undergoing a significant shift, increasingly reflecting concerns about the role of designers in shaping, reinforcing, or challenging societal norms. The call for State of Design 2025 highlights several crucial turning points. These shifts are not solely about technological advancements like AI but are deeply intertwined with economic slowdowns, geopolitical tensions, and shifting cultural narratives (in line with Richard, 2025 https://www.designcriticalthinking.com/call-for-participation-state-of-design-2025/). Within this complex landscape, norms in design play a critical role—both in shaping and being shaped by these broader forces. Participation and co-creation are another aspect that plays a crucial role in this complexity. Not the least participation of a diversity of groups, users, and stakeholders. Thus, this contribution aims to contribute to the discussion by perspective on how norms and participation in design influence design practices, the design professions, and user interactions. By exploring norm-critical design approaches, combined with participatory design and the representation of vulnerable groups in design practices I would like to suggest a contribution to the State of Design discussion 2025. By examining how norms are reproduced, challenged, or transformed through design, we can better understand the role of design in shaping societal structures and power relations. In line with this, by including a diversity of participants and actors in the norm-critical design efforts the design work has the potential to challenge societal norms within the evolving landscape of the design disciplines.

Understanding Norms in Design

Norms are socially constructed expectations that define appropriate behaviors and values within a given context (Butler, 2004; Kumashiro, 2002). They are often implicit, shaping how people interact with others, but also with their surroundings, objects, services, or digital environments, for that matter. Norms are neither static nor predetermined, but enacted through situated actions and interactions (Garfinkel, 1967; Suchman, 2007). Design, as a field of practice, reflects and constructs social norms, thereby influencing how users experience and engage with technology and services (Jonsson & Lundmark, 2014; Lundmark & Normark, 2014; Lundmark, 2016). Norms in design, much like societal norms, evolve through repeated behaviors and shared understandings. Norms in design are not neutral as they reflect power structures and reinforce existing hierarchies, shaping who gets to design, what is considered good design, and who benefits from design interventions. The current narratives around design tend to present the disciplines as rather narrow, focused on self-imposed deficiencies rather than acknowledging the systemic forces at play (cf. Richard, 2025 https://www.designcriticalthinking.com/call-for-participation-state-of-design-2025/). These current narratives may create a feedback loop in which designers seek internal solutions to external challenges, reinforcing existing norms rather than questioning them. Norms in design are also manifested in multiple ways, from the assumptions embedded in user personas to the biases in AI-driven design systems. As can be argued, design decisions are always value-laden, consciously or unconsciously shaping the user experience and broader social impact. This means that norms in design can be both restrictive and liberating. Norms can influence everything from accessibility considerations to gendered interactions with technology. They can create a sense of professional identity, but they can also confine design within predetermined boundaries. The concept of norm-critical design here seeks to uncover and challenge these implicit assumptions (Lundmark, 2016; Jonsson & Lundmark, 2014).

Understanding Participation in Design

Participation in design refers here to the active involvement of diverse stakeholders, particularly those affected by design decisions, in shaping processes, outcomes, and strategies. Rooted in traditions such as participatory design and co-design (Björgvinsson, Ehn & Hillgren, 2012, Schuler & Namioka, 1993), participation challenges the notion of designers as sole experts, instead positioning them as facilitators within collaborative knowledge production. This shift is particularly relevant in contemporary discussions on the evolving role of design, where concerns about power, inclusivity, and justice have become increasingly central (cf. Costanza-Chock, 2020; Manzini, 2015). As design navigates the uncertainties of 2025—marked as mentioned by geopolitical tensions, economic instability, and technological disruptions—participatory approaches offer an alternative to traditional top-down methodologies by foregrounding lived experiences and redistributing design agency. However, participation is not inherently emancipatory; its impact depends on how power relations are negotiated and whether it transcends mere consultation to enable meaningful decision-making.

Design has, as mentioned, always been shaped by cultural norms, socio-political structures, and the broader systems in which it operates. However, the current discourse in the field reveals a moment where this can be acknowledged. In 2025, the trends being highlighted indicate a potential for the acceptance of transformation (Teixeira & Braga, 2025 https://trends.uxdesign.cc). This potential opens up, as I see it, for a re-examination of the norms that underpin design practice and a move towards more inclusive, participatory, and critically engaged design methodologies.

Norm-Critical Participatory Design: Challenging the Status Quo and Providing Opportunities for Empowerment

Norm-critical design challenges dominant assumptions by making visible the privileges embedded in design decisions and questioning who benefits from existing structures (Bromseth & Darj, 2010; Lundmark, 2016). This approach is particularly relevant in areas, where design choices can either reinforce or disrupt normative expectations related to gender, ability, age, and other social categories. A key feminist strategy within norm-critical design is to reveal normative conventions and explore alternative design solutions that challenge dominant discourses (cf. Bardzell, 2010; Jonsson & Lundmark, 2014). This can be achieved through methods such as participatory design, speculative design, and critical design, all of which aim to involve diverse perspectives in the design process and to foster more inclusive and reflective practices. Norm-critical design moves beyond inclusive design by not only seeking to accommodate diverse users but actively questioning the norms that create exclusion in the first place. For example, in user interface design, norm-critical approaches might challenge default settings that assume binary gender identities or reimagine digital interfaces to better support diverse groups of users (Jonsson & Lundmark, 2014).

Digital technologies play a crucial role in reinforcing or subverting social norms. Websites, online services, and digital interfaces are often designed with implicit assumptions about users' identities and behaviors (cf. Lundmark, 2016; Pauwels, 2012). A norm-critical perspective on digital design emphasizes the importance of questioning these assumptions and ensuring that digital environments are inclusive and accessible (Bardzell & Bardzell, 2014; Johannsen & Kensing, 2005). One example can be drawn from design examples where the purpose is to design for vulnerable groups, situations, or contexts. One example from my design research is the design and development of youth counseling services and platforms specific but can be generalized to other digital health services (Lundmark, 2016). These services are often designed with normative expectations about young people’s needs and behaviors. By incorporating norm-critical perspectives into the design of these services, designers could create more empowering and user-centered solutions that better accommodate diverse experiences and identities. To implement these kinds of efforts in design there is a strong emphasis on the understanding of the ones being affected by the implementation of new systems or services, or being the real users of the services beyond economic, effectiveness, or other common measurements.

However, norm-critical perspectives are not enough here, as the voices of those not being heard in design processes tend to be excluded in these approaches where the designers are the ones addressing the norms. Here, participatory design has long been a method, or approach, for including underrepresented voices in the design process (Björgvinsson, Ehn & Hillgren, 2012). Participatory design also provides the opportunity to challenge norms by foregrounding collaboration and co-creation with those who are most affected by design decisions (McCarthy & Wright, 2015). In particular, participatory design emphasizes the involvement of marginalized and vulnerable groups, ensuring that design is not only for them but with them (Schuler & Namioka, 1993). This approach counters the traditional notion of designers as detached experts and instead frames design as a collective process where power is redistributed. However, in the design landscape we are in right now, discussions highlight a growing tension: as designers seek to address systemic injustices, they must also navigate the limitations of institutional structures that often resist fundamental change. A key aspect of this challenge is ensuring that participatory processes do not merely tokenize vulnerable groups but instead redistribute design agency. Much of the theoretical contribution to the design field influenced by the focus on feminism and critical perspectives highlight the importance of taking a reflexive interest in enabling people by offering “expositions and analyses of social injustices, including their mechanisms of reproduction, and seek[ing] to disrupt those mechanisms, and to introduce the possibility of bringing into being more just systems” (Bardzell & Bardzell, 2015, p. 116). As Costanza-Chock (2020) emphasizes in her work on design justice, co-designing with marginalized communities requires dismantling traditional hierarchies and acknowledging the lived expertise of those often excluded from design decisions.

Another key concept here is empowerment, which can be seen as a central concept in norm-critical design, particularly in participatory design processes. Participatory design aims to engage users as active participants in the design process, ensuring that their voices and experiences shape the final design outcomes. However, empowerment in design is complex and context-dependent, requiring careful attention to power dynamics and the risk of reproducing existing hierarchies (Ladner, 2015; Lundmark, 2018; Savigny, 2013; ). Participatory methodologies can serve as a means of disrupting dominant design narratives. By including diverse perspectives, participatory design challenges the assumption that design must conform to pre-established norms and instead embraces the fluidity and multiplicity of design practices (cf. DiSalvo & Meng, 2021).

Conclusion: The Future of Norm-Critical Participatory Design

In this short essay, a norm-critical participatory design approach is highlighted as one important aspect of the changing design discourse. The State of Design 2025 call highlights a critical moment in the field, that designers are being forced to reckon with their relevance. This critical moment parallels broader societal changes, where economic instability, political upheaval, and AI-driven automation are reshaping the professional landscapes (Teixeira & Braga, 2025, https://trends.uxdesign.cc). In this context, norm-critical and participatory approaches are more urgent than ever. Thus, norm-critical perspectives in design provide valuable tools for questioning and transforming the implicit assumptions embedded in design processes, as well as in artifacts or systems. By making visible how design reproduces social norms, designers can develop more inclusive and empowering solutions that challenge existing power structures. The integration of norm-critical approaches into digital design, participatory design, and design strategies opens up new possibilities for more equitable and reflective design practices. Future research and practice should continue to explore how norm-critical design can contribute to broader social change by fostering inclusivity, accessibility, and critical engagement with design processes.

However, in this context, norm-critical perspectives alone are not enough, as the voices of those marginalized in design processes often remain unheard, even when designers take on the role of identifying and challenging norms. Consequently, norm-critical participatory design emerges as a crucial framework or approach for critically examining underlying assumptions and promoting more equitable design practices, ensuring that design not only responds to societal needs but also actively contributes to shaping more just and inclusive futures. By including a participatory, co-creation approach to norm-critical design the design practice will benefit from the lived experiences of those often excluded from design decisions. For marginalized communities, this exclusion presents a risk. Without intentional inclusion, design can become even more exclusionary, reinforcing dominant perspectives. However, when guided by participatory and inclusive principles, this fluidity can enable new voices to emerge, fostering a design practice that is genuinely reflective of diverse experiences (Costanza-Chock, 2020). As design often tends to enter a liminal space, caught between past assumptions and an uncertain future, embracing norm-critical perspectives offers a way forward. Rather than merely adapting to change, designers must actively shape new paradigms that challenge exclusionary practices and elevate marginalized voices. This requires moving beyond traditional user-centered design toward more radical, participatory, and justice-oriented approaches.

As 2025 unfolds, the future of design is uncertain, but it is precisely this uncertainty that presents opportunities for transformation. By critically examining and challenging norms, embracing participatory design, and addressing structural inequalities, designers can move beyond fear and towards a more just and equitable design practice. By integrating norm-critical participatory design perspectives into the ongoing design discourse, one approach is highlighted that aims to visualize the common norms, providing methods that make it possible to question or contest the present norms, by including more voices of marginalized groups or those being affected by design.

References

Bardzell, S. (2010). Feminist HCI: Taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, 1301-1310.

Bardzell, J., & Bardzell, S. (2013). What is critical about critical design? Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 3297-3306.

Bardzell, J., & Bardzell, S. (2015). Humanistic HCI: Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics. San Rafael, CA: Morgan Claypool Publisher.

Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P-A. (2012). Design things and design thinking: Contemporary participatory design challenges. Design Issues, 28(3), 101-116.

Butler, J. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge.

Bromseth, J., & Darj, F. (2010). Normkritisk pedagogik. Makt, lärande och strategier för förändring. Uppsala: Skrifter från Centrum för genusvetenskap.

Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.

Costanza-Chock, Sasha (2020). Design Justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

DiSalvo, C., & Meng, A. (2021). Agonistic events to remember. In M. Erlhoff & M.

Rezai (Eds.), Design and democracy: activist thoughts and examples for political empowerment (pp. 110–118). Birkhäuser.

Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2001). Design Noir: The Secret Life of Electronic Objects. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.

Ertner, M., Kragelund, A.M., & Malmborg, L. (2010). Five enunciations of empowerment in participatory design. Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, 191-194.

Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Goffman E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life New York: First Anchor Books.

Johannsen, N., & Kensing, F. (2005). Empowerment reconsidered. Proceedings of CC '05 the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing: Between Sense and Sensibility. New York: ACM Press, 203-206.

Jonsson, F. & Lundmark, S. (2014). An interaction approach for norm-critical design analysis of interface design. Paper presented at CaTaC’14, Ninth International Conference on Culture, Technology, Communication, Oslo, Norway.

Kumashiro, K. K. (2002). Troubling Education: Queer Activism and Antioppressive Education. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Ladner, R. E. (2015). Design for user empowerment. Interactions, 22(2), 24-29.

Lundmark, S. (2018) Design project failures: Outcomes and gains of participation in design. Design Studies. 59, 77-94.

Lundmark, S. (2016). Designing for Online Youth Counselling: Empowerment through Design and Participation. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Education, Uppsala University.

Lundmark, S., & Normark, M. (2014). Designing gender in social media: Unpacking interaction design as a carrier of social norms. International Journal of Gender, Science, and Technology, 6(2), 223-241.

Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everyone designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT Press

McCarthy, J., & Wright P. (2015). Taking [A]part: The Politics and Aesthetics of Participation in Experience-Centered Design. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Pauwels, L. (2012). A multimodal framework for analyzing websites as cultural expressions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(2012), 247-265.

Rommes, E. (2006). Gender sensitive design practices. In E. M. Trauth (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Gender and Information Technology (pp. 675-681). London: Idea Group Reference.

Richard, 2025 https://www.designcriticalthinking.com/call-for-participation-state-of-design-2025

Savigny, H. (2013). Media, politics and empowerment. In whose interest? In R. Scullion, R. Gerodimos, D. Jackson, & D. Lilleker (Eds.), The Media, Political Participation and Empowerment (pp. 13-23). London: Routledge.

Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Suchman, L. (2007). Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions (2nd Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Teixeira, F., & Braga, C. (2025). The State of UX in 2025. UX Collective https://trends.uxdesign.cc

Written by Sofia Lundmark.

Sofia Lundmark is a design researcher and associate professor in Media Technology at Södertörn University in Sweden. She holds a PhD in pedagogy, and her thesis work revolved around norm-critical design, empowerment, and participation in the design and development of online youth counselling services. She is currently involved in several design research projects. Her research interests cover participatory processes, participatory design in societal processes, norms in design, and design pedagogy.

Links