One sport, one family: negotiating inclusion, identity, and difference in national sports organizations

Introduction Efforts to advance equity, diversity, and inclusion in sport aim to challenge systemic discrimination and promote equitable participation. In Sweden, Strategy 2030 represents a national initiative to integrate parasport into mainstream sport structures by embedding inclusive practices across all national sports organizations (NSOs). This study examines how key stakeholders within Swedish NSOs construct, interpret, and implement inclusion in this policy context. Guided by social identity theory (SIT), the study explores how processes of categorization, identification, and comparison influence ingroup/outgroup boundaries and shape inclusion practices. Methods The study draws on qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 12 stakeholders formally mandated to implement inclusion within Swedish NSOs. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns in how inclusion is understood, negotiated, and enacted within organizational settings. Results The analysis revealed persistent tensions between formal commitments to inclusion and structural conditions that reproduce hierarchies of ability and belonging. Participants expressed strong normative support for inclusive values but described challenges in translating these values into practice within entrenched organizational cultures marked by ableist norms and resource disparities. Stakeholders also negotiated identity boundaries beyond the abled/disabled binary, indicating that inclusion efforts are shaped by intersecting dimensions of identity. Discussion The findings illuminate how identity processes, power relations, and normative assumptions influence the implementation of inclusion policy at the organizational level. Despite policy ambitions, structural and cultural constraints limit transformative change. The study contributes to understanding the complexities of fostering inclusion in sport governance and underscores the need for more equitable, reflexive, and context-sensitive policy frameworks.