I have recently developed a new notion I call “zooinclusivity.” Simply put, it is the idea that animals should be included in the way we plan cities, decide what to eat individually and collectively, organise gardens and university campuses, teach in primary, secondary and higher education, rewild areas, etc. It is essentially a sentientist approach, but it spans, to some extent, animal and environmental issues as it tackles such questions as biodiversity and conservation. How can the notion of zooinclusivity help reconsider relationships to the nonhuman world, and revise practices and behaviours at the individual, collective and political levels? I would like to argue that implementing a deep cultural change, a zooinclusive change, and addressing the question of acceptability of practices is a necessary step to take alongside developping rights as political and social tools, in order to make the world more sustainable, and a better place for animals. Indeed, how can we undo the anthropocentric structure of our social, ethical, political and legal systems without rethinking our relationship to the nonhuman world generally, and without addressing the social cost of change as well as other mechanisms which prevent the inclusion of nonhumans into the moral and political sphere? To rethink this relationship effectively, I suggest the notion of zooinclusivity - a notion that is, as I will strive to show, different from animal welfare, veganism, or animal rights - to help the transition towards a more-than-human world.