This article explores the integration of neurodiverse individuals into urban decision-making processes through the concept of “NeurodiverCITY.” By merging the neurodiversity paradigm with deliberative theory and the practice of urban democratic innovations, the authors propose a concept where the unique cognitive strengths of neurodiverse individuals, such as logical thinking, attention to detail, and creativity, enhance the quality of urban deliberations. The article critically reviews existing literature on neurodiversity and urban studies, identifies gaps in current research, and discusses the potential benefits and challenges of inclusive urban planning. The findings suggest that inclusive deliberative practices not only improve decision-making processes but also contribute to more equitable and innovative urban environments. The authors argue for the proactive inclusion of neurodiverse individuals in urban governance to leverage their potential for the benefit of all city inhabitants.
AkindejoyeFEzedinmaUIkeN (2021) A case study of urban design for wellbeing and mental health in Lagos, Nigeria. Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health7: 10.
2.
AnkenmanKElginJSullivanK, et al. (2014) Nonverbal and verbal cognitive discrepancy profiles in autism spectrum disorders: Influence of age and gender. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities119(1): 84–99.
3.
AnsellCSørensenETorfingJ (2024) The democratic quality of co-creation: A theoretical exploration. Public Policy and Administration39(2): 149–170.
4.
ArmstrongT (2010) Neurodiversity: Discovering the Extraordinary Gifts of Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, and Other Brain Differences. Hachette.
5.
BachtigerANiemeyerSNebloM, et al. (2010) Disentangling diversity in deliberative democracy: Competing theories, their blind spots and complementarities. Journal of Political Philosophy18(1): 32–63.
6.
BaggS (2018) Can deliberation neutralise power?European Journal of Political Theory17(3): 257–279.
7.
BainesS (2023) Sustaining and growing innovations in democracy and co-creation. Polish Political Science Yearbook52: 13–25.
8.
Baron-CohenSAshwinEAshwinC, et al. (2009) Talent in autism: Hyper-systemizing, hyper-attention to detail and sensory hypersensitivity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences364(1522): 1377–1383.
9.
BegeerSBoukSEBoussaidW, et al. (2009) Underdiagnosis and referral bias of autism in ethnic minorities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders39: 142–148.
10.
BensonJ (2021) The epistemic value of deliberative democracy: How far can diversity take us?Synthese199(3): 8257–8279.
11.
BirchJRishbethCPayneSR (2020) Nature doesn’t judge you – How urban nature supports young people’s mental health and wellbeing in a diverse UK city. Health & Place62: 102296.
12.
BlackMHMcGarrySChurchillL, et al. (2022) Considerations of the built environment for autistic individuals: A review of the literature. Autism26(8): 1904–1915.
13.
BrosnanMAshwinC (2023) Thinking, fast and slow on the autism spectrum. Autism27(5): 1245–1255.
14.
ChapmanR (2019) Neurodiversity and its discontents: Autism, schizophrenia, and the social model. In: TekinSBluhmR (eds) The Bloomsbury Companion to the Philosophy of Psychiatry. Bloomsbury, pp. 371–389.
15.
ChapmanR (2020) Defining neurodiversity for research and practice. In: RosqvistHBChownNStenningA (eds) Neurodiversity Studies: A New Critical Paradigm. Routledge, pp. 218–220.
16.
ClimieEAMastorasSM (2015) ADHD in schools: Adopting a strengths-based perspective. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne56(3): 295.
17.
CohenJ (1989) Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In: HamlinAPetitP (eds) The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State. Blackwell, pp. 17–34.
18.
CohenJ (2009) Truth and public reason. Philosophy & Public Affairs37(1): 2–42.
19.
De GrootKVan StrienJW (2017) Evidence for a broad autism phenotype. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders1: 129–140.
20.
DickinsonD (2020) Deliberation enhances the confirmation bias in politics. Games11: 57.
21.
DochertyIGoodladRPaddisonR (2001) Civic culture, community and citizen participation in contrasting neighbourhoods. Urban Studies38(12): 2225–2250.
22.
DryzekJS (1990) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge University Press.
23.
ElstubSErcanSMendonçaRF (2016) Editorial introduction: The fourth generation of deliberative democracy. Critical Policy Studies10(2): 139–151.
24.
EraydinATasan-KokTVrankenJ (2010) Diversity matters: Immigrant entrepreneurship and contribution of different forms of social integration in economic performance of cities. European Planning Studies18(4): 521–543.
25.
EstlundD (2012) The truth in political liberalism. In: ElkinsJNorrisA (eds) Truth and Democracy. University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 251–271.
26.
FerencKPłatosMByrkaK, et al. (2023) Looking through rainbow-rimmed glasses: Taking neurodiversity perspective is related to subjective well-being of autistic adults. Autism27(5): 1348–1361.
27.
FinniganKA (2024) Sensory responsive environments: A qualitative study on perceived relationships between outdoor built environments and sensory sensitivities. Land13(5): 636.
28.
FloridaR (2003) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. Basic Books.
29.
FujinoJTeiSItahashiT, et al. (2019) Sunk cost effect in individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders49: 1–10.
30.
GoslingCJMoutierS (2018) Brief report: Risk-aversion and rationality in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders48(10): 3623–3628.
31.
GrygieńćJ (2023) Democracy in the Post-Truth Era: Restoring Faith in Expertise. Edinburgh University Press.
32.
GutmannAThompsonD (1996) Democracy and Disagreement. Belknap Press.
33.
HabermasJ (1992) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. MIT Press.
34.
Hameed KhanMGrabarskiMKAliM, et al. (2023) Insights into creating and managing an inclusive neurodiverse workplace for positive outcomes: A multistaged theoretical framework. Group and Organization Management48(5): 1339–1386.
35.
HappéFFrithU (2020) Annual research review: Looking back to look forward – Changes in the concept of autism and implications for future research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry61(3): 218–232.
36.
HealeyP (1997) Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. Macmillan.
37.
Hedensted LundD (2018) Co-creation in urban governance: From inclusion to innovation. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration22(2): 3–17.
38.
HendrickxSGouldJ (2018) Kobiety i Dziewczyny ze Spektrum Autyzmu: Od Wczesnego Dzieciństwa do Późnej Starości. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
39.
HoneybourneV (2018) The Neurodiverse Classroom: A Teacher’s Guide to Individual Learning Needs and How to Meet Them. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
40.
HoogmanMStolteMBaasM, et al. (2020) Creativity and ADHD: A review of behavioral studies, the effect of psychostimulants and neural underpinnings. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews119: 66–85.
41.
HughesJMF (2016) Increasing Neurodiversity in Disability and Social Justice Advocacy Groups (White paper). Autistic Self Advocacy Network.
42.
HupfeldKEAbagisTRShahP (2019) Living “in the zone”: Hyperfocus in adult ADHD. Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders11: 191–208.
43.
HullLPetridesKVMandyW (2020) The female autism phenotype and camouflaging: A narrative review. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders7: 306–317.
44.
JaakkolaE (2020) Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review10(1): 18–26.
45.
JaarsmaPWelinS (2012) Autism as a natural human variation: Reflections on the claims of the neurodiversity movement. Health Care Analysis20: 20–30.
46.
JacobsJ (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House.
47.
KennaT (2022) Cities of neurodiversity: New directions for an urban geography of neurodiversity. Area54: 646–654.
48.
KennaT (2023) Neurodiversity in the city: Exploring the complex geographies of belonging and exclusion in urban space. The Geographical Journal189(2): 370–382.
49.
KirbyASmithT (2021) Neurodiversity at Work: Drive Innovation, Performance and Productivity with a Neurodiverse Workforce. Kogan Page.
50.
LandemoreH (2017a) Beyond the fact of disagreement? The epistemic turn in deliberative democracy. Social Epistemology31(3): 277–295.
51.
LandemoreH (2017b) Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. Princeton University Press.
52.
LauritsenMBAstrupAPedersenCB, et al. (2014) Urbanicity and autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders44(2): 394–404.
53.
LeinoHPuumalaE (2021) What can co-creation do for the citizens? Applying co-creation for the promotion of participation in cities. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space39(4): 781–799.
54.
MackenzieCSorialS (2022) The empathy dilemma: Democratic deliberation, epistemic injustice and the problem of empathetic imagination. Res Publica28(2): 365–389.
55.
MacLennanKO’BrienSTavassoliT (2022) In our own words: The complex sensory experiences of autistic adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders52(7): 3061–3075.
56.
MansbridgeJBohmanJChambersS, et al. (2010) The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy18(1): 64–100.
57.
MansbridgeJJ (2009) Deliberative and Non-Deliberative Negotiations. HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series RWP09-010. Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/hrv/hksfac/4415943.html (accessed 16 September 2024).
58.
MazalánPMazalánP (2021) The city as a place prepared for neurodiversity. Architektúra & Urbanizmus55(1–2): 18–31.
59.
MiltonD (2012) On the ontological status of autism: The “double empathy problem”. Disability & Society27(6): 883–887.
60.
MinJBWongJK (2018) Epistemic approaches to deliberative democracy. Philosophy Compass13(6): e12497.
61.
MostafaM (2014) Architecture for autism: Application of the autism ASPECTSS™ design index to home environments. The International Journal of the Constructed Environment4(2): 25.
62.
MostafaM (2020) Architecture for autism: Built environment performance in accordance to the autism ASPECTSS design index. In: DasUPapaneophytouNEl-KourT (eds) Autism 360°. Academic Press, pp. 479–500.
63.
MurrayDLesserMLawsonW (2005) Attention, monotropism and the diagnostic criteria for autism. Autism9(2): 139–156.
64.
Ne’emanA (2010) The future (and the past) of autism advocacy, or why the ASA’s magazine, The Advocate, wouldn’t publish this piece. Disability Studies Quarterly 30(1). DOI: 10.18061/dsq.v30i1.1059.
65.
NiemeyerSDryzekJS (2007) The ends of deliberation: Meta-consensus and inter-subjective rationality as ideal outcomes. Swiss Political Science Review13(4): 497–526.
66.
NoconASRoestorfAMenéndezLMG (2022) Positive psychology in neurodiversity: An investigation of character strengths in autistic adults in the United Kingdom in a community setting. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders99: 102071.
OrtegaF (2009) The cerebral subject and the challenge of neurodiversity. BioSocieties4(4): 425–445.
69.
PisulaEPłatosMBanasiakA, et al. (2024) Neuroróżnorodność na Polskich Uczelniach: Doświadczenia Osób Studiujących: w Spektrum Autyzmu, z ADHD i z Dysleksją. Oficyna Wydawnicza Impuls.
70.
PutnamRD (2007) E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century. Scandinavian Political Studies30(2): 137–174.
71.
QuigleyJM (1998) Urban diversity and economic growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives12(2): 127–138.
72.
QuinnPOMadhooM (2014) A review of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in women and girls: Uncovering this hidden diagnosis. The Primary Care Companion for CNS Disorders16(3): 27250.
73.
RawlsJ (1971) A Theory of Justice. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
74.
RoeJMcCayL (2021) Restorative Cities: Urban Design for Mental Health and Wellbeing. Bloomsbury.
75.
RozenkrantzLD’MelloAMGabrieliJD (2021) Enhanced rationality in autism spectrum disorder. Trends in Cognitive Sciences25(8): 685–696.
76.
RuzichEAllisonCSmithP, et al. (2016) Subgrouping siblings of people with autism: Identifying the broader autism phenotype. Autism Research9(6): 658–665.
77.
SarmientoC (2022) Not diverse enough? Displacement, diversity discourse, and commercial gentrification in Santa Ana, California, a majority-Mexican city. Urban Studies59(9): 1782–1799.
78.
SaylorsJ (2024) Authentic autism. In: BojeDM (ed.) A World Scientific Encyclopedia of Business Storytelling Set 2: Methodologies and Big Data Analysis of Business Storytelling Volume 3: Business Storytelling Communication. World Scientific, pp. 255–265.
79.
SchippersLMGrevenCUHoogmanM (2024) Associations between ADHD traits and self-reported strengths in the general population. Comprehensive Psychiatry130: 152461.
80.
ScudderMF (2020) The ideal of uptake in democratic deliberation. Political Studies68(2): 504–522.
81.
SennettR (2017) The open city. In: HaasTWestlundH (eds) In the Post-Urban World. Routledge, pp. 97–105.
82.
SetäläM (2025) Inclusive deliberation for future-regarding governance: Potentials and pitfalls. Policy Studies. Epub ahead of print 22January2025. DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2025.2454488.
83.
ShieldsKBeversdorfD (2021) A dilemma for neurodiversity. Neuroethics14(2): 125–141.
84.
SonHMCalubCAFanB, et al. (2024) A quantitative analysis of fidgeting in ADHD and its relation to performance and sustained attention on a cognitive task. Frontiers in Psychiatry15: 1394096.
85.
SonnbergerMLindnerD (2021) Participation in real-world laboratories in a new light?! Closing the gap between co-creative and deliberative participation. Raumforschung und Raumordnung | Spatial Research and Planning79(4): 424–437.
86.
StoryMF (2011) The principles of universal design. In: SmithKHPreiserWFE (eds) Universal Design Handbook, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, pp. 4.3–4.12.
87.
Tasan-KokTVan KempenRRacoM, et al. (2014) Towards Hyper-Diversified European Cities: A Critical Literature Review. Utrecht University, Faculty of Geosciences.
88.
TokarekAUfelW (2024) Consensus, colonization, and counterpower? Deliberative democracy, uncharted evolution, and its potential to be decolonized. Praktyka Teoretyczna3(53): 91–119.
89.
TolaGTaluVCongiuT, et al. (2021). Built environment design and people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD): A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health18(6): 3203.
90.
TonkensEVerhoevenI (2019) The civic support paradox: Fighting unequal participation in deprived neighbourhoods. Urban Studies56(8): 1595–1610.
91.
ToronyiD (2021) Hidden geographies: Design for neurodivergent ways of hearing and sensing. Cities & Health5(1–2): 133–137.
92.
VanoloA (2023) Autistic cities: Critical urbanism and the politics of neurodiversity. City27(1–2): 190–208.
93.
von SchneidemesserDOppoldDStasiakD (2023) Diversity in facilitation: Mapping differences in deliberative designs. Journal of Deliberative Democracy19(1). DOI: 10.16997/jdd.1096.
WhiteHAShahP (2006) Uninhibited imaginations: Creativity in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Personality and Individual Differences40(6): 1121–1131.
96.
WhiteHAShahP (2011) Creative style and achievement in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Personality and Individual Differences50(5): 673–677.
97.
YeJ (2017) Contours of urban diversity and coexistence. Geography Compass11(9): e12327.
98.
YoungIM (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford University Press.
99.
ŻakM (2025) The theory of epistemic (in)justice in the perspective of the performance of law: An approach based on the concept of hermeneutic therapy. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica109: 199–236.
100.
ZielińskiMUfelW (2024) The intersectional limits to feminist democratic representation in deliberative social innovations. Teoria Polityki9: 125–147.
