Radical inclusion names the removal of physical, informational, regulatory, attitudinal and political barriers that prevent participation; accessibility therefore ceases to be a technical specification and becomes a constitutional property of the environment. Pineo makes the same move within digital archives. Discoverability, usability and readability are not secondary interface virtues but conditions determining whether preserved information is effectively public at all. A document can exist, be legally open and remain practically inaccessible because the path toward it is obscure, its interface excludes particular users, or its descriptive language is unusable. Access is consequently not equivalent to presence. The OECD’s formulation of digital public infrastructure extends this principle from the archive to government: digital identity, payments, data-sharing systems, registries, notification systems and gateways create shared layers through which services become reachable and interoperable, yet the same infrastructures can reproduce exclusion, dependence, surveillance and security vulnerability unless governance, safeguards and human-centred design are built into their operation. The electric grid described by Sovacool, Carley and Kiesling exposes the material analogue of this argument. Poles, wires, substations and transformers appear technically neutral only when their social geography is ignored. Blackout frequency, investment quality, siting burdens, environmental damage and long-term climate risk are unequally distributed across demographic groups, territories, generations and species. Van der Wel, Akerboom and Meijer show why justice can disappear even inside institutions explicitly committed to transition: decision-makers operate among competing public values and may overlook justice, redefine it through another administrative category or subordinate it to efficiency, reliability, cost, security or speed. Infrastructure therefore acts politically through prioritisation as much as through prohibition. Tierens and colleagues bring this mechanism into cognition itself by defining GenAI as a thinking infrastructure: an arrangement that structures attention, valuation, decision-making and knowledge production while becoming mundane enough to recede from view. The question is no longer simply whether a student has access to ChatGPT but how an infrastructural relation reorganises what counts as writing, expertise, effort, acceptable knowledge and autonomous thought. Educational commons offer a counter-architecture in which access is joined to co-production. Horizontal relations, democratised decision-making, shared resources and collective management transform education from delivery into commoning; redistribution, recognition and participation become properties of the learning environment rather than external ethical criteria. Dorji and colleagues make the epistemic consequences sharper through Indigenous knowledge, which is embedded in intergenerational practices, land relations, prediction, adaptation and locally accumulated ecological experience. To “integrate” such knowledge into scientific governance cannot simply mean extracting statements from their social and territorial conditions. Admission without authority is another form of exclusion: a knowledge system can accept data while refusing the epistemic position from which those data become meaningful. Rani, Pesole and González Vázquez reveal the same asymmetry in algorithmic management. Logistics and healthcare systems may retain workers inside the organisational structure while progressively removing their capacity to determine pace, route, sequence and judgement; monitoring, benchmarking and automated recommendations convert participation into measurable compliance unless workers retain meaningful discretion and channels of negotiation. The central political distinction is therefore between being inside a system and possessing agency within it. Paradelo, Herbón and Barral demonstrate that even soil can be read through this logic of admission. Urban compaction, sealing, permeability and organic matter regulate which flows of water, roots, microorganisms and material transformations the ground can sustain. Desire lines, machinery and landscaping practices materially rewrite infiltration and erosion. Castillo and colleagues make spatial routing explicit at metropolitan scale: micro-hubs reorganise the passage of parcels by coupling facility location, transport mode, public regulation, underused urban space and adaptive algorithms. A city is continuously admitting and redirecting bodies, goods, water, energy, information, claims and forms of knowledge. Infrastructure is the grammar through which those passages become possible, differentiated and consequential. A field organised through this principle cannot understand openness as the simple multiplication of entries. Its decisive problem is the governance of admission: how heterogeneous things become legible enough to enter relation without being stripped of the conditions that make them distinct. Socioplastics becomes particularly precise when treated as such an admission architecture. A node, reference, image, DOI, video, operator, field observation or institutional trace does not acquire value solely because it has been accumulated. It acquires operational force through thresholds: naming conventions determine whether it can be indexed; metadata determine whether it can be retrieved; formats determine whether it can circulate; interfaces determine who can use it; classifications determine its neighbours; repositories determine its persistence; citation structures determine its recognisability; and editorial decisions determine which distinctions remain visible after compression. Pineo’s distinction between discoverability, usability and readability therefore becomes more than an archival accessibility framework: it offers three separate tests for public knowledge infrastructure. A corpus may be discoverable yet unusable, usable yet conceptually unreadable, or readable in isolation while impossible to locate relationally. Pineda’s radical inclusion raises the standard further. Access cannot be measured by whether an entry point formally exists; the system must be assessed by the agency available after entry. Can users traverse the corpus through different disciplinary vocabularies? Can they contest classifications, recover provenance, identify absences, move between levels of complexity and reconstruct the evidential path beneath a compressed claim? The OECD’s account of reusable digital building blocks adds another requirement: interoperability should increase movement without enforcing sameness. Shared protocols become productive when they allow distinct objects and communities to connect while preserving enough autonomy to prevent infrastructural lock-in. Griffiths’s pluralism makes this preservation of difference political. A transdisciplinary corpus should not reproduce legal centralism epistemically by forcing architecture, environmental psychology, urban ecology, Indigenous knowledge, labour studies and energy research into one sovereign explanatory language. It requires overlapping regimes of validity whose relations can be made explicit without pretending that one method adjudicates all others. Educational commoning provides a governance model for this plurality: knowledge is strengthened when participation includes the capacity to shape the conditions of production, not simply consume outputs. The same applies to AI. Tierens’s thinking infrastructure warns that every search, ranking, summarisation and generative layer participates in valuation; an interface does not merely expose a corpus but directs attention and creates practical hierarchies among sources. Algorithmic assistance must therefore remain inspectable as an operation rather than masquerade as neutral retrieval. Rani and colleagues offer the labour equivalent: automation becomes politically consequential when recommendation hardens into instruction while responsibility remains human. For Socioplastics, this means that computational routing, tagging and synthesis should expand navigation without silently transferring epistemic authority from source relations to opaque ranking mechanisms. Energy justice supplies the scalar correction. The effects of an infrastructure are distributed not only among present users but across territories, social groups, ecological systems and future conditions. The corpus likewise has externalities: over-represented languages amplify some intellectual geographies; repository choices produce uneven global access; broken links generate temporal inequality; computational formats privilege machine-readable material; high-volume fields can overwhelm fragile or poorly digitised traditions. Dorji’s account of Indigenous knowledge makes provenance indispensable because situated knowledge loses epistemic force when detached from land, social transmission and collective authority. Paradelo’s soil research offers a material analogue for maintaining such a system. Healthy permeability depends on avoiding excessive sealing and compaction while preserving structure and organic matter; epistemic infrastructures likewise require enough organisation to remain stable without becoming impermeable. Excessive classification compacts a field. Total openness erodes it. Maintenance consists in sustaining channels through which difference can circulate without destroying the structure that makes circulation intelligible. Castillo’s micro-hubs provide the spatial model: strategically positioned intermediary nodes can reduce friction and extend reach because location and routing are treated together. Readers, DOI anchors, thematic indexes, bibliographic clusters and cross-field essays can function as epistemic micro-hubs, concentrating enough relation to make the larger field traversable without demanding a single central route. This changes the meaning of scale. Ten thousand nodes are not an achievement because ten thousand objects exist; they matter if the architecture permits multiple publics, disciplines and future inquiries to enter at different points and continue acting upon what they encounter. Public legibility then becomes neither simplification nor universal accessibility in the abstract. It is the designed possibility of consequential participation: the capacity to find, interpret, connect, challenge, reuse and return knowledge while keeping its provenance and differences active. Socioplastics gains from this combined field a politics of infrastructural hospitality in which every threshold is simultaneously technical and normative, every route distributes authority, every format admits some operations while excluding others, and every interface constructs a public. The strongest condensation of this architecture is FormatAdmission.
Anto Lloveras is an architect and urban researcher working across spatial practice, epistemology, archives, infrastructures and transdisciplinary knowledge systems through LAPIEZA LAB and Socioplastics.
Cappello, G., Siino, M., Fernandes, N. and Arciniega-Cáceres, M. (eds.) (2024) Educational Commons: Democratic Values, Social Justice and Inclusion in Education. Cham: Springer.
Castillo, C., Panadero, J., Alvarez-Palau, E.J. and Juan, A.A. (2024) ‘Towards greener city logistics: an application of agile routing algorithms to optimize the distribution of micro-hubs in Barcelona’, European Transport Research Review, 16, 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-024-00669-7.
Dorji, T., Rinchen, K., Morrison-Saunders, A., Blake, D., Banham, V. and Pelden, S. (2024) ‘Understanding How Indigenous Knowledge Contributes to Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience: A Systematic Literature Review’, Environmental Management, 74, pp. 1101–1123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-02032-x.
Griffiths, J. (1986) ‘What is Legal Pluralism?’, Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 24, pp. 1–55.
OECD (2024) Digital Public Infrastructure for Digital Governments. OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 68. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Paradelo, R., Herbón, C. and Barral, M.T. (2025) ‘Physical properties of the urban soils of Santiago de Compostela (Spain)’, Journal of Soils and Sediments, 25, pp. 462–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-024-03833-7.
Pineda, V.S. (2024) Inclusion and Belonging in Cities of Tomorrow: Governance and Access by Design. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pineo, E.A. (2025) ‘Discoverability, usability, and readability: a framework for assessing accessibility for disabled users of online archives’, Archival Science, 25, 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-025-09495-9.
Rani, U., Pesole, A. and González Vázquez, I. (2024) Algorithmic Management Practices in Regular Workplaces: Case Studies in Logistics and Healthcare. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/712475.
Sovacool, B.K., Carley, S. and Kiesling, L. (2024) ‘Energy justice beyond the wire: Exploring the multidimensional inequities of the electrical power grid in the United States’, Energy Research & Social Science, 111, 103474.
Tierens, T., Decuypere, M., Hartong, S. and Alirezabeigi, S. (2025) ‘Schooling the (Artificially) Intelligent Writer: GenAI Technologies as Thinking Infrastructures in School Education’, Postdigital Science and Education, 7, pp. 1250–1269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-025-00585-6.
van der Wel, K., Akerboom, S. and Meijer, A. (2024) ‘A public values perspective on energy justice: Building a theoretical lens for understanding decision-making in the energy transition’, Energy Research & Social Science.
