Valentino Stella, Matteo Mojoli, Luca Grosso, Andrea Somenzi, Stefano Maffei, Massimo Bianchini
pp. 130-164, download
(https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-069-007)
Abstract
Drawing on a theoretical framing of the relationship between Open and Distributed Design (ODD) and digital technologies (DTs), the contribution adopts a critical, practice-based approach to investigate two interrelated questions: where and how digital technologies intervene across the stages of ODD processes, and whether, and under what conditions, their application can support sustainable and capacity-building design practices within the creative industries. Framing ODD as a design methodology rather than a mere production model, the contribution conceptualises DTs not as inherently sustainable but as enabling devices situated within ODD practices and the communities that sustain them. Two experimental initiatives developed by an academic makerspace within the Creative Europe Distributed Design Platform ground an empirical analysis read through three analytical dimensions: Social, Technical, and Systemic. The findings reveal that while DTs foster capacity-building, through the translation of tacit knowledge and forking, and democratised access, significant barriers persist, from regulatory tensions to infrastructural dependence and the cognitive demands of long-term maintenance. This situated relevance is not incidental to ODD’s sustainability infrastructure, but points to a structural conditionality: the same place-based grounding that constrains scalability is also what sustains ODD’s capacity-building potential for the creative industries.
keywords: Open and Distributed Design, Digital Technologies, Design Methodology, Capacity-building, Creative Industries.
References
1. Matheson, B.: A culture of creativity: design education and the creative industries. Journal of Management Development 25(1), 55–64 (2006).
https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710610637963
2. Ericsson, B., Alnes, P.K.: Cultural and creative industries: innovation, performance and spillovers. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift 78(1), 1–15 (2024).
https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2024.2423651
3. Eglite, Z.: Collaboration in creative industries: from creative individuals and intermediaries to networks. Culture Crossroads 23, 102–117 (2023).
https://doi.org/10.55877/cc.vol23.397
4. Vezzoli, C., Ceschin, F., Diehl, J.C.: Product-Service Systems Development for Sustainability. A New Understanding. In: Vezzoli, C., Garcia Parra, B., and Kohtala, C. (eds.) Designing Sustainability for All: Proceedings of the 3rd LeNS World Distributed Conference. pp. 3–20. Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66300-1_1
5. Marttila S., Botero A.: The ‘Openness Turn’ in co-design: from usability, sociability and designability towards openness. In: Co-Create, pp. 99–111 (2013)
6. Bakırlıoğlu Y., Kohtala C.: Framing open design through theoretical concepts and practical applications: a systematic literature review. Human–Computer Interaction, 34(5-6), pp. 389–432 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2019.1574225
7. Béraud, P., Cormerais, F., Du Castel, V.: Open innovation, economy of contribution and the territorial dynamics of creative industries. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management 10(2), 81–105 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3917/jie.010.0081
8. Radomska, J., Wołczek, P., Hajdas, M., Klimczak, M.: A creative industries perspective on open strategy drivers. Argumenta Oeconomica 1(52), 162–178 (2024). https://doi.org/10.15611/aoe.2024.1.09
9. Menichinelli, M.: A framework for understanding the possible intersections of design with open, P2P, diffuse, distributed and decentralized systems (2016)
http://dx.doi.org/10.21096/disegno_2016_1-2mm
10. Chamorro-Koc, M., Caldwell, G.: Viable futures through design: community engagement experiences in the creative industries. Creativity Studies 11(1), 213–229 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2018.857
11. Snowball, J., Tarentaal, D., Sapsed, J.: Innovation and diversity in the digital cultural and creative industries. Journal of Cultural Economics 45(4), 705–733 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-021-09420-9
12. Bonvoisin J., Mies R.: Measuring openness in open source hardware with the Open-o-Meter. Procedia CIRP, 78, pp. 388–393 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.08.306
13. Boisseau E., Bouchard C., Omhover J.F.: Towards a model of the open-design process. In: Proceedings of ICED 17, 2, pp. 121–130 (2017)
14. Boisseau É., Omhover J.F., Bouchard C.: Open-design: a state of the art review. Design Science, 4, e3 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.25
15. Avital M.: The generative bedrock of open design. In: Van Abel B., Evers L., Klaassen R., Troxler P. (eds.) Open Design Now: Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive, pp. 48–58. BIS Publishers (2011)
16. Menichinelli M., Cangiano S.: Open design as an approach for the commoning of design: the collaborative experience of openly defining open design with an open source process. In: Design as Common Good: Framing Design through Pluralism and Social Values, pp. 466–481. SUPSI (2021)
17. Diez T.: Personal fabrication: Fab Labs as platforms for citizen-based innovation, from microcontrollers to cities. Nexus Network Journal, 14(3), pp. 457–468 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-012-0131-7
18. Uricchio, W.: Beyond the great divide: collaborative networks and the challenge to dominant conceptions of creative industries. In: Internationalizing Cultural Studies, pp. 139–150. Blackwell Publishing (2004) https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877904040607
19. Bonvoisin, J., Mies, R., Boujut, J.: Seven observations and research questions about open design and open source hardware. Design Science 7, e22 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.14
20. Aitamurto T., Holland D., Hussain S.: The open paradigm in design research. Design Issues, 31(4), pp. 17–29 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00348
21. Bonvoisin J., Boujut J.F.: Open design platforms for open source product development: current state and requirements. In: DS 80-8 Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 15), Vol. 8, pp. 011–020 (2015)
22. Fischer, G., Giaccardi, E.: Meta-design: a framework for the future of end-user development. In: Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., Wulf, V. (eds.) End User Development, pp. 427–457. Springer (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5386-X_19
23. Menichinelli M., Valsecchi F.: The meta-design of systems: how design, data and software enable the organizing of open, distributed, and collaborative processes. In: Systems & Design: Beyond Processes and Thinking, pp. 518–537. Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia (2016) https://doi.org/10.4995/IFDP.2016.3301
24. Faludi, J., Acaroglu, L., Gardien, P., Rapela, A., Sumter, D., Cooper, C.: Sustainability in the future of design education. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 9(2), 157–178 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2023.04.004
25. Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Cities and Circular Economy for Food. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019) https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/cities-and-a-circular-economy-for-food/overview
26. Behnert A.K., Arlinghaus J.: Open source as an enabler for circularity: a systematic literature review. Procedia CIRP, 120, pp. 75–80 (2023)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2023.08.014
27. Brandenburger B., Voigt M., Borgel S., Busch M.: Design for product sustainability in a circular economy — using the example of six open source hardware projects. Procedia CIRP, 130, pp. 472–477 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2024.08.125
28. Bakırlıoğlu, Y., Terzioğlu, N., Celik, S., Ulan, A., Segalas, J.: Selection and framing of briefs for educational circular design projects. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 22(5), 1125–1144 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2020-0019
29. Kohtala, C.: Making “making” critical: how sustainability is constituted in fab lab ideology. The Design Journal 20(3), 375–394 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2016.1261504
30. Stange, M., Ihlenfeldt, S.: Sustainability through open-source hardware: a review on sustainability aspects. Procedia CIRP, 136, pp. 401–406 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2025.08.070
31. Prendeville S., Hartung G., Brass C., Purvis E., Hall A.: Circular makerspaces: the founder’s view. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 10(4-5), pp. 272–288 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2017.1317876
32. Rio, M., Tyl, B.: Aligning eco-design methods with makers’ approaches. Design Studies (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2025.101362
33. Rio, M., Tyl, B.: Exploring design to environment methods through grassroots initiatives. arXiv (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2107.04410
34. Jurgilevich, A., Birge, T., Kentala-Lehtonen, J., Korhonen-Kurki, K., Pietikäinen, J., Saikku, L., Schösler, H.: Transition towards circular economy in the food system. Sustainability 8(1), 69 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010069
35. Ratto, M.: Critical making: conceptual and material studies in technology and social life. The Information Society 27(4), 252–260 (2011).
https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2011.583819
36. Tovey, M.: Design Pedagogy: Developments in Art and Design Education, 1st edn. Routledge (2015). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315576695
37. Marion, T.J., Fixson, S.K.: The transformation of the innovation process: how digital tools are changing work, collaboration, and organizations in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management 38(1), 192–215 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12547
38. Li H., Li Q., Xu Z., Ye X.: Digital technologies. Journal of Digital Economy, 3, pp. 240–248 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdec.2025.02.001
39. Anderson C.: Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. Crown Business (2013)
40. Gibson I., Rosen D., Stucker B., Khorasani M.: Additive Manufacturing Technologies, 3rd edn. Springer (2021) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56127-7
41. Gasparotto S.: From 0 to 20: an evolutionary analysis of open design and open manufacturing. Strategic Design Research Journal, 13(1), pp. 57–71 (2020) https://doi.org/10.4013/sdrj.2020.131.05
42. Smith, R.P., Eppinger, S.D.: Identifying controlling features of engineering design iteration. Management Science 43(3), 276–293 (1997).
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.43.3.276
43. Eppinger S.D., Whitney D.E., Smith R.P., Gebala D.A.: A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development. Research in Engineering Design, 6(1), pp. 1–13 (1994) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01588087
44. Cross N.: Engineering Design Methods, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons (2000)
45. Movahed-Khah R., Ostrosi E., Garro O.: Analysis of interaction dynamics in collaborative and distributed design process. Computers in Industry, 61(1), pp. 2–14 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2009.05.007
46. Chesbrough H.W.: Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press (2003) https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060410565074
47. Prisco A., Rey A., Sciarelli M., Tuccillo D.: Linking loops: how digital platforms orchestrate circular economy networks. Sustainable Development (2026) https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.70641
48. Klerkx L., Jakku E., Labarthe P.: A review of social science on digital agriculture, smart farming and agriculture 4.0: new contributions and a future research agenda. NJAS: Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 90(1), pp. 1–16 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2019.100315
49. Nascimento S., Pólvora A.: Maker cultures and the prospects for technological action. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(3), pp. 927–946 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9796-8
50. Dahlander L., Gann D.M.: How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39(6), pp. 699–709 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.013
51. Mies R., Bonvoisin J., Stark R.: Development of open source hardware in online communities: investigating requirements for groupware. In: Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 997–1006. Cambridge University Press (2020) https://doi.org/10.1017/dsd.2020.38
52. Chan L.K., Wu M.L.: Quality function deployment: a literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 143(3), pp. 463–497 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00178-9
53. Berman B.: 3-D printing: the new industrial revolution. Business Horizons, 55(2), pp. 155–162 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.11.003
54. Kohtala C.: Addressing sustainability in research on distributed production and maker culture. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, pp. 654–668 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.039
55. Saadi J.I., Yang M.C.: Generative design: reframing the role of the designer in early-stage design process. Journal of Mechanical Design, 145(4), p. 041411 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4056799
56. Daareyni A., Martikkala A., Mokhtarian H., Ituarte I.F.: Generative AI meets CAD: enhancing engineering design to manufacturing processes with large language models. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 136, pp. 1–10 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-025-15830-2
57. O’Sullivan D., Igoe T.: Physical Computing: Sensing and Controlling the Physical World with Computers. Course Technology Press (2004)
58. Troxler P.: Libraries of the peer production era. In: Van Abel B., Evers L., Klaassen R., Troxler P. (eds.) Open Design Now: Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive, pp. 86–97. BIS Publishers (2011)
59. Pearce J.M.: Building research equipment with free, open-source hardware. Science, 337(6100), pp. 1303–1304 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1228183
60. Camprodon G., González Ó., Barberán V., Pérez M., Smári V., de Heras M.Á., Bizzotto A.: Smart Citizen Kit and Station: an open environmental monitoring system for citizen participation and scientific experimentation. HardwareX, 6, e00070 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ohx.2019.e00070
61. Aflatoony, L., Li, M., Zhang, Y., Jacob, I., Xu, S., Tang, Z., Grossberg, A.: Exploring AI-Fabrication in Shaping the Future of DIY-AT Design: Insights from Makers. In: Proceedings of the 27th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, pp. 1–15. ACM (2025). https://doi.org/10.1145/3663547.3746343
62. Chen, M., Tworek, J., Jun, H., Yuan, Q., Pinto, H.P.D.O., Kaplan, J., Zaremba, W., et al.: Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374 (2021) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.03374
63. Song, F., Agarwal, A., Wen, W.: The impact of generative AI on collaborative open-source software development: evidence from GitHub Copilot. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02091 (2024). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.02091
64. Smith, A., Stirling, A.: Grassroots innovation and innovation democracy. STEPS Working Paper 89, ESRC STEPS Centre (2016)
65. Lim, Y.K., Stolterman, E., Tenenberg, J.: The anatomy of prototypes: prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 15(2), 1–27 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1145/1375761.1375762
66. Camburn, B., Viswanathan, V., Linsey, J., Anderson, D., Jensen, D., Crawford, R., et al.: Design prototyping methods: state of the art in strategies, techniques, and guidelines. Design Science 3, e13 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.10
67. Bonvoisin, J., Mies, R., Boujut, J. F., & Stark, R.: What is the “source” of open source hardware? Journal of Open Hardware 1(1), 5 (2017). https://doi.org/10.5334/joh.7
68. Benkler Y., Nissenbaum H.: Commons-based peer production and virtue. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(4), pp. 394–419 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00235.x
69. European Parliament, Council of the European Union: Regulation (EU) 2021/818 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 establishing the Creative Europe Programme (2021 to 2027) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1295/2013. Official Journal of the European Union L 189, 34–60 (2021).
70. Distributed Design Platform (ed.): This is distributed design: Making a new local & global design paradigm. Distributed Design Platform (2021).
71. Armstrong, K.: Origin story: The rise of distributed design and the platform’s proposition. In: Distributed Design Platform (ed.) This is distributed design: Making a new local & global design paradigm, pp. 16–21. Distributed Design Platform (2021).
72. Polifactory: Open Food Factory – Distributed Design Platform. https://www.polifactory.polimi.it/en/items/distributed-design-platform/ . Accessed 31 July 2026
73. Polifactory: Distributed Food Factory – Distributed Design Platform. https://www.polifactory.polimi.it/en/items/distributed-food-factory/ . Accessed 31 July 2026
74. FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture 2021: Making Agrifood Systems More Resilient to Shocks and Stresses. FAO, Rome (2021) https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4474en
75. FAO: FAO Science and Innovation Strategy. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2022).
https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e9d1ee6c-c0f1-4312-9a1a-c09ba0a4fbdc/content
76. European Commission: A Farm to Fork Strategy for a Fair, Healthy and Environmentally-Friendly Food System (2020). https://food.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-05/f2f_action-plan_2020_strategy-info_en.pdf
77. FAO: Transforming Food and Agriculture Through a Systems Approach. FAO, Rome (2025) https://doi.org/10.4060/cd6071en
78. De Jesus, A., Mendonça, S.: Lost in transition? Drivers and barriers in the eco-innovation road to the circular economy. Ecological Economics 145, 75–89 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.001
79. Dace, E., Cascavilla, A., Bianchi, M., Chioatto, E., Zecca, E., Ladu, L., Yilan, G.: Barriers to transitioning to a circular bio-based economy: findings from an industrial perspective. Sustainable Production and Consumption 48, 407–418 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.05.029
80. De Arquer, M., Ponte, B., Pino, R.: Examining the balance between efficiency and resilience in closed-loop supply chains. Central European Journal of Operations Research 30(4), 1307–1336 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-021-00766-1
81. Srai, J.S., Graham, G., Hennelly, P., Phillips, W., Kapletia, D., Lorentz, H.: Distributed manufacturing: a new form of localised production? International Journal of Operations & Production Management 40(6), 697–727 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2019-0600
82. Geels, F.W.: Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy 31(8–9), 1257–1274 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8
83. Fressoli M., Arond E., Abrol D., Smith A., Ely A., Dias R.: When grassroots innovation movements encounter mainstream institutions. Innovation and Development, 4(2), pp. 277–292 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2014.921354
84. Manzini, E., Rizzo, F.: Small projects/large changes: participatory design as an open participated process. CoDesign 7(3–4), 199–215 (2011).
https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.630472
85. Niwa, R., Chen, D., Seong, Y. A., Jo, K., & Ito, K.: Direct contact of fermented rice bran beds promotes food-to-hand transmission of lactic acid bacteria. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 370, fnad120 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnad120
86. Domingo Club: Domingo Fermenter. https://domingoclub.com/products/domingo-fermenter https://domingoclub.com/products/domingo-fermenter
87. Kostakis, V., Niaros, V., Dafermos, G., Bauwens, M.: Design global, manufacture local: exploring the contours of an emerging productive model. Futures 73, 126–135 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2015.09.001
88. Karana E., Pedgley O., Rognoli V.: Materials Experience: Fundamentals of Design and Experience with Materials. Butterworth-Heinemann (2014)
89. Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 on materials and articles intended to come into contact with food and repealing Directives 80/590/EEC and 89/109/EEC. Official journal of the European Union, L 338, 4–17 (2004)
90. Hall, D.C., Palmer, P., Ji, H.F., Ehrlich, G.D., Król, J.E.: Bacterial biofilm growth on 3D-printed materials. Frontiers in Microbiology 12, 646303 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.646303
91. Formlabs: The Essential Guide to Food-Safe 3D Printing. Formlabs (2023) https://formlabs.com/blog/guide-to-food-safe-3d-printing/
92. Oskui S.M., Diamante G., Liao C., Shi W., Gan J., Schlenk D., Grover W.H.: Assessing and reducing the toxicity of 3D-printed parts. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 3(1), pp. 1–6 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.5b00249
93. Chan Y.J., Yuan T.H., Sun H.C., Lin T.C.: Characterization and exposure assessment of odor emissions from laser cutting of plastics in the optical film industry. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 16(9), pp. 2216–2226 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2016.04.0136
94. Wijnen B., Hunt E.J., Anzalone G.C., Pearce J.M.: Open-source syringe pump library. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e107216 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107216
95. Alima N., Snooks R., McCormack J.: Bio scaffolds: the orchestration of biological growth through robotic intervention. International Journal of Intelligent Robotics and Applications, 6(3), pp. 522–529 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1007/s41315-021-00218-8?urlappend=%3Futm_source%3Dresearchgate.net%26utm_medium%3Darticle
96. Rao B.C.: How disruptive is frugal? Technology in Society, 35(1), pp. 65–73 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.03.003
97. Manzini E.: Design, When Everybody Designs: An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation. MIT Press (2015)
98. Kennedy C., Cuddihy J., Engel-Yan J.: The changing metabolism of cities. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 11(2), pp. 43–59 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1162/jie.2007.1107
99. Wolfert, S., Ge, L., Verdouw, C., Bogaardt, M.J.: Big data in smart farming: a review. Agricultural Systems 153, 69–80 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.01.023
100. Haklay M.: Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: overview and typology of participation. In: Sui D., Elwood S., Goodchild M. (eds.) Crowdsourcing Geographic Knowledge, pp. 105–122. Springer, Dordrecht (2013)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7
101. Kitchin, R.: The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal 79(1), 1–14 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-013-9516-8
102. Oellermann M., Jolles J.W., Ortiz D., Seabra R., Wenzel T., Wilson H., Tanner R.L.: Open hardware in science: the benefits of open electronics. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 62(4), pp. 1061–1075 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/icac043
103. Arancio J., Dosemagen S.: Bringing open source to the global lab bench. Issues in Science and Technology, 38(2), pp. 18–20 (2022)
104. Smith A., Seyfang G.: Constructing grassroots innovations for sustainability. Global Environmental Change, 24, pp. 114–123 (2014) https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12413/3812
105. Smith B.: Generalizability in qualitative research: Misunderstandings, opportunities and recommendations for the sport and exercise sciences, Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 10(1), pp. 137–149 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2017.1393221
106. Flyvbjerg B.: Five misunderstandings about case-study research, Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), pp. 219–245 (2006) https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2928-2004-02-02