1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 資源受限社區中的拼湊式創新：部落裡的無人商店
Technology Bricolage in Resource-Constrained Indigenous Communities: Unmanned Smart Stores
作者 許雅婷
Xu, Ya-Ting
貢獻者 蔡瑞煌
Tsaih, Rua-Huan
許雅婷
Xu, Ya-Ting
關鍵詞 數位拼湊
資源受限創新
原住民社區
無人商店
行動研究
Digital Bricolage
Resource-Constrained Innovation
Indigenous Community
Unmanned Store
Action Research
日期 2025
上傳時間 3-Nov-2025 14:46:18 (UTC+8)
摘要 原住民社區在推動數位創新時，往往因基礎設施不足、資源匱乏及數位素養低落而面臨系統性障礙。現有的數位轉型研究大多聚焦於大型企業或都市情境，對於小型社區企業如何在此類限制下進行創新，卻研究不足。基於拼湊理論（bricolage theory），本研究探討一間資源受限的原住民雜貨店在轉型為無人商店過程中的數位創新實踐。透過理論導向的行動研究方法，本研究分析了設計、測試與調整的反覆循環，並歸納出三項核心拼湊策略精簡（slimming）、替代（substitution）與轉置（transplant），這些策略使數位技術能夠有效地適應在地條件。案例顯示，像 Raspberry Pi、開源軟體與輕量化人工智慧模型等平價工具，經過重新組合後，可以構建出可行且具情境的零售系統。在理論層面，本研究將拼湊理論延伸至數位系統設計領域，並提出適用於資源有限環境的策略類型學。
Indigenous communities often face systemic barriers to digital innovation due to limited infrastructure, scarce resources, and low digital literacy. While existing research on digital transformation largely emphasizes large firms or urban contexts, less is known about how indigenous community enterprises innovate under such constraints. Drawing upon bricolage theory, this study investigates how digital innovation unfolds in a resource-constrained Indigenous grocery store transitioning to an unmanned model. Using a theory-informed action research approach, we analyze iterative cycles of design, testing, and refinement to identify three core bricolage strategies: slimming, substitution, and transplant that enabled the adaptation of digital technologies to local conditions. The case demonstrates how affordable tools such as Raspberry Pi, open-source software, and lightweight AI models were recombined to create a viable, context retail system. Theoretically, this study extends bricolage research into the domain of digital system design, offering a typology of strategies applicable to resource-limited environments.
參考文獻 Ahuja, S., Chan, Y., & Sadreddin, A. (2023). Innovating within institutional voids: A digital health platform in India. Altglas, V. (2014). ‘Bricolage’: reclaiming a conceptual tool. Culture and Religion, 15(4), 474-493. Anthony, S. D., Johnson, M. W., & Sinfield, J. V. (2008). Institutionalizing innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review. Azhar, S. (2016). Information systems to support planning and decision-making in construction organizations using action research methodology. In Research Methodology in the Built Environment (pp. 208-228). Routledge. Bacq, S., Ofstein, L. F., Kickul, J. R., & Gundry, L. K. (2015). Bricolage in social entrepreneurship: How creative resource mobilization fosters greater social impact. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 16(4), 283-289. Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative science quarterly, 50(3), 329-366. Baskerville, R. L., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996). A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of information Technology, 11(3), 235-246. Bell, M., & Taylor, J. (2003). Population mobility and indigenous peoples in Australasia and North America (Vol. 4). Routledge. Boulton, G. (2010). Digital Scotland. http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/enquiries/Digital_Scotland/Digital%20Scotland%20(med%20res).pdf Britain, D. (2009). Final Report Department for Culture, Media and Sport; Department for Business Innovation and Skills. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228844/7650.pdf Busch, C., & Barkema, H. (2021). From necessity to opportunity: Scaling bricolage across resource-constrained environments. Strategic Management Journal, 42(4), 741-773. Busch, C., & Barkema, H. (2022). Planned luck: How incubators can facilitate serendipity for nascent entrepreneurs through fostering network embeddedness. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 46(4), 884-919. Cohen, J. H. (2005). Remittance outcomes and migration: Theoretical contests, real opportunities. Studies in comparative international development, 40(1), 88-112. Costello, G. J., Conboy, K., & Donnellan, B. (2011). Dialogical action research as engaged scholarship: an empirical study. Couture, S., Toupin, S., & Mayoral Baños, A. (2024). Resisting and Claiming Digital Sovereignty: The Cases of Civil Society and Indigenous Groups. Policy & Internet, 16(4), 739-749. Cullen, R. (2001). Addressing the digital divide. Online information review, 25(5), 311-320. Deltour, F., Le Gall, S., & Lethiais, V. (2020). L’accompagnement de l’innovation par le numérique: quelles opportunités pour les PME? Reflets et Perspectives de la vie économique(1), 101-114. Desa, G. (2012). Resource mobilization in international social entrepreneurship: Bricolage as a mechanism of institutional transformation. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 36(4), 727-751. Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(4), 681-703. Domon, G. (2011). Landscape as resource: Consequences, challenges and opportunities for rural development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100(4), 338-340. Downes, D. R. (2000). How intellectual property could be a tool to protect traditional knowledge. Colum. J. Envtl. L., 25, 253. Duymedjian, R., & Rüling, C.-C. (2010). Towards a foundation of bricolage in organization and management theory. Organization studies, 31(2), 133-151. Ferneley, E., & Bell, F. (2006). Using bricolage to integrate business and information technology innovation in SMEs. Technovation, 26(2), 232-241. Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research policy, 32(2), 277-300. Ghalwash, S., & Ismail, A. (2024). Resource orchestration process in the limited resource environment: The social bricolage perspective. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 15(3), 866-893. Grau, H. R., & Aide, T. M. (2007). Are rural–urban migration and sustainable development compatible in mountain systems? Mountain research and development, 27(2), 119-123. Guertler, M., Sick, N., & Kriz, A. (2019). A discipline-spanning overview of action research and its implications for technology and innovation management. Hajji, W., & Tso, F. P. (2016). Understanding the performance of low power raspberry pi cloud for big data. Electronics, 5(2), 29. Hosny, K. M., Magdi, A., Salah, A., El-Komy, O., & Lashin, N. A. (2023). Internet of things applications using Raspberry-Pi: a survey. International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering (2088-8708), 13(1). Hota, P. K., Mitra, S., & Qureshi, I. (2019). Adopting bricolage to overcome resource constraints: The case of social enterprises in rural India. Management and Organization Review, 15(2), 371-402. Hsiao, R.-L., Ou, S.-H., & Chen, H.-F. (2014). Innovating under Disadvantages: Bricolage Behaviors in van Gogh Art Curation. Sun Yat-sen Management Review., 22(2), 323-367. Indouw, L., Maturbongs, R. A., & Prabawardani, S. (2022). Lesson learned and enhanced adaptation strategies for isolated indigenous community in West Papua. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Intahchomphoo, C. (2018). Indigenous peoples, social media, and the digital divide: A systematic literature review. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 42(4), 85-111. Janssen, F., Fayolle, A., & Wuillaume, A. (2018). Researching bricolage in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 30(3-4), 450-470. Karanasios, S., Senyo, P., Effah, J., & Zorina, A. (2022). Digital bricolage: creating a digital transformation from nothing. Klooster, D. J. (2005). Producing social nature in the Mexican countryside. cultural geographies, 12(3), 321-344. Kukutai, T., & Taylor, J. (2016). Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward an agenda. ANU press. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1962). La pensée sauvage [La Pensée sauvage]. (1962, Paris: Librairie Plon) Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). La pensée sauvage (Paris: Plon, 1962). See also idem: e sauvage Le totémisme aujourd-hui. Lieberman, A. E. (2003). Taking ownership: Strengthening indigenous cultures and languages through the use of ICTs. Retrieved February, 11(2008), 83-116. Lynch, C. R. (2020). Contesting digital futures: Urban politics, alternative economies, and the movement for technological sovereignty in Barcelona. Antipode, 52(3), 660-680. Malecki, E. J. (2003). Digital development in rural areas: potentials and pitfalls. Journal of Rural Studies, 19(2), 201-214. Martins, P. (2024). Applying a Tech Lens to the Right to Information: Part. Mateus, S., & Sarkar, S. (2024). Bricolage–a systematic review, conceptualization, and research agenda. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 36(7-8), 833-854. Middleton, J. W., McCormick, M., Engel, S., Rutkowski, S. B., Cameron, I. D., Harradine, P., Johnson, J. L., & Andrews, D. (2008). Issues and challenges for development of a sustainable service model for people with spinal cord injury living in rural regions. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 89(10), 1941-1947. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks. Park, H. J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Technology readiness and technology paradox of unmanned convenience store users. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 65, 102523. Popadiuk, S., & Choo, C. W. (2006). Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related? International journal of information management, 26(4), 302-312. Roy, S. K., Balaji, M., Quazi, A., & Quaddus, M. (2018). Predictors of customer acceptance of and resistance to smart technologies in the retail sector. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 42, 147-160. Senyard, J., Baker, T., & Davidsson, P. (2009). Entrepreneurial bricolage: Towards systematic empirical testing. Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, 29(5), 5. Senyard, J., Baker, T., Steffens, P., & Davidsson, P. (2014). Bricolage as a path to innovativeness for resource-constrained new firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 211-230. Sharabati, A.-A. A., Ali, A. A. A., Allahham, M. I., Hussein, A. A., Alheet, A. F., & Mohammad, A. S. (2024). The impact of digital marketing on the performance of SMEs: An analytical study in light of modern digital transformations. Sustainability, 16(19), 8667. Simba, A., Ojong, N., & Kuk, G. (2021). Bricolage and MSEs in emerging economies. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 22(2), 112-123. Sommer, C., Chilla, T., Birnbaum, L., & Kroener, S. (2025). Digital social innovations in rural areas–process tracing and mapping critical junctures. Journal of Rural Studies, 114, 103510. Stephens, C., Porter, J., Nettleton, C., & Willis, R. (2006). Disappearing, displaced, and undervalued: a call to action for Indigenous health worldwide. The lancet, 367(9527), 2019-2028. Turner, R. J. (2007). Diffusion of Innovations, Everett M. Rogers, Free Press, New York, NY (2003), 551 pages. In: Elsevier. VanWey, L. K., Tucker, C. M., & McConnell, E. D. (2005). Community organization, migration, and remittances in Oaxaca. Latin American Research Review, 40(1), 83-107. Velaga, N. R., Beecroft, M., Nelson, J. D., Corsar, D., & Edwards, P. (2012). Transport poverty meets the digital divide: accessibility and connectivity in rural communities. Journal of Transport Geography, 21, 102-112. Warchivker, I., Tjapangati, T., & Wakerman, J. (2000). The turmoil of Aboriginal enumeration: mobility and service population analysis in a central Australian community. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 24(4), 444-449. West, P., Igoe, J., & Brockington, D. (2006). Parks and peoples: The social impact of protected areas. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35, 251-277. Wetherill, M. S., Williams, M. B., Taniguchi, T., Salvatore, A. L., Jacob, T., Cannady, T., Grammar, M., Standridge, J., Fox, J., & Spiegel, J. (2020). A nutrition environment measure to assess tribal convenience stores: the THRIVE study. Health promotion practice, 21(3), 410-420. Witell, L., Gebauer, H., Jaakkola, E., Hammedi, W., Patricio, L., & Perks, H. (2017). A bricolage perspective on service innovation. Journal of Business Research, 79, 290-298. Wu, E., & Maslov, D. (2022). Raspberry Pi Retail Applications. New York: Apress. p93-121. Yamanoor, N. S., & Yamanoor, S. (2017). High quality, low cost education with the Raspberry Pi. 2017 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC).
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
資訊管理學系
112356051
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112356051
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 蔡瑞煌zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Tsaih, Rua-Huanen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 許雅婷zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Xu, Ya-Tingen_US
dc.creator (作者) 許雅婷zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Xu, Ya-Tingen_US
dc.date (日期) 2025en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-Nov-2025 14:46:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-Nov-2025 14:46:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Nov-2025 14:46:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0112356051en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/160074-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 資訊管理學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 112356051zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 原住民社區在推動數位創新時，往往因基礎設施不足、資源匱乏及數位素養低落而面臨系統性障礙。現有的數位轉型研究大多聚焦於大型企業或都市情境，對於小型社區企業如何在此類限制下進行創新，卻研究不足。基於拼湊理論（bricolage theory），本研究探討一間資源受限的原住民雜貨店在轉型為無人商店過程中的數位創新實踐。透過理論導向的行動研究方法，本研究分析了設計、測試與調整的反覆循環，並歸納出三項核心拼湊策略精簡（slimming）、替代（substitution）與轉置（transplant），這些策略使數位技術能夠有效地適應在地條件。案例顯示，像 Raspberry Pi、開源軟體與輕量化人工智慧模型等平價工具，經過重新組合後，可以構建出可行且具情境的零售系統。在理論層面，本研究將拼湊理論延伸至數位系統設計領域，並提出適用於資源有限環境的策略類型學。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Indigenous communities often face systemic barriers to digital innovation due to limited infrastructure, scarce resources, and low digital literacy. While existing research on digital transformation largely emphasizes large firms or urban contexts, less is known about how indigenous community enterprises innovate under such constraints. Drawing upon bricolage theory, this study investigates how digital innovation unfolds in a resource-constrained Indigenous grocery store transitioning to an unmanned model. Using a theory-informed action research approach, we analyze iterative cycles of design, testing, and refinement to identify three core bricolage strategies: slimming, substitution, and transplant that enabled the adaptation of digital technologies to local conditions. The case demonstrates how affordable tools such as Raspberry Pi, open-source software, and lightweight AI models were recombined to create a viable, context retail system. Theoretically, this study extends bricolage research into the domain of digital system design, offering a typology of strategies applicable to resource-limited environments.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 1. Introduction 1 2. Literature review 3 2.1 Digital innovation for indigenous communities 3 2.2 Bricolage 6 3. Methodology 14 3.1 Case Description 16 3.2 Data Collection 18 3.3 Data analysis 27 4. Data Analysis and Finding 29 4.1. System Workflow Description 30 4.2. Functional Slimming 31 4.3. Substitution as a Situated Bricolage 33 4.4. Functional Transplantation 34 5. Discussion 36 5.1 Deliberate Simplification under Constraints 37 5.2 Substitution and Resources-at-Hand 38 5.3 Transplant as Situated System Reconfiguration 39 6. Conclusion 42 6.1 Theoretical Contributions 42 6.2 Practical Contributions 44 6.3 Limitations and Future Research 45 References 48 APPENDIX – Interview Questions 53zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1349967 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112356051en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 數位拼湊zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 資源受限創新zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 原住民社區zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 無人商店zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 行動研究zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Digital Bricolageen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Resource-Constrained Innovationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Indigenous Communityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Unmanned Storeen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Action Researchen_US
dc.title (題名) 資源受限社區中的拼湊式創新：部落裡的無人商店zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Technology Bricolage in Resource-Constrained Indigenous Communities: Unmanned Smart Storesen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ahuja, S., Chan, Y., & Sadreddin, A. (2023). Innovating within institutional voids: A digital health platform in India. Altglas, V. (2014). ‘Bricolage’: reclaiming a conceptual tool. Culture and Religion, 15(4), 474-493. Anthony, S. D., Johnson, M. W., & Sinfield, J. V. (2008). Institutionalizing innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review. Azhar, S. (2016). Information systems to support planning and decision-making in construction organizations using action research methodology. In Research Methodology in the Built Environment (pp. 208-228). Routledge. Bacq, S., Ofstein, L. F., Kickul, J. R., & Gundry, L. K. (2015). Bricolage in social entrepreneurship: How creative resource mobilization fosters greater social impact. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 16(4), 283-289. Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative science quarterly, 50(3), 329-366. Baskerville, R. L., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996). A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of information Technology, 11(3), 235-246. Bell, M., & Taylor, J. (2003). Population mobility and indigenous peoples in Australasia and North America (Vol. 4). Routledge. Boulton, G. (2010). Digital Scotland. http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/enquiries/Digital_Scotland/Digital%20Scotland%20(med%20res).pdf Britain, D. (2009). Final Report Department for Culture, Media and Sport; Department for Business Innovation and Skills. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228844/7650.pdf Busch, C., & Barkema, H. (2021). From necessity to opportunity: Scaling bricolage across resource-constrained environments. Strategic Management Journal, 42(4), 741-773. Busch, C., & Barkema, H. (2022). Planned luck: How incubators can facilitate serendipity for nascent entrepreneurs through fostering network embeddedness. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 46(4), 884-919. Cohen, J. H. (2005). Remittance outcomes and migration: Theoretical contests, real opportunities. Studies in comparative international development, 40(1), 88-112. Costello, G. J., Conboy, K., & Donnellan, B. (2011). Dialogical action research as engaged scholarship: an empirical study. Couture, S., Toupin, S., & Mayoral Baños, A. (2024). Resisting and Claiming Digital Sovereignty: The Cases of Civil Society and Indigenous Groups. Policy & Internet, 16(4), 739-749. Cullen, R. (2001). Addressing the digital divide. Online information review, 25(5), 311-320. Deltour, F., Le Gall, S., & Lethiais, V. (2020). L’accompagnement de l’innovation par le numérique: quelles opportunités pour les PME? Reflets et Perspectives de la vie économique(1), 101-114. Desa, G. (2012). Resource mobilization in international social entrepreneurship: Bricolage as a mechanism of institutional transformation. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 36(4), 727-751. Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(4), 681-703. Domon, G. (2011). Landscape as resource: Consequences, challenges and opportunities for rural development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100(4), 338-340. Downes, D. R. (2000). How intellectual property could be a tool to protect traditional knowledge. Colum. J. Envtl. L., 25, 253. Duymedjian, R., & Rüling, C.-C. (2010). Towards a foundation of bricolage in organization and management theory. Organization studies, 31(2), 133-151. Ferneley, E., & Bell, F. (2006). Using bricolage to integrate business and information technology innovation in SMEs. Technovation, 26(2), 232-241. Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research policy, 32(2), 277-300. Ghalwash, S., & Ismail, A. (2024). Resource orchestration process in the limited resource environment: The social bricolage perspective. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 15(3), 866-893. Grau, H. R., & Aide, T. M. (2007). Are rural–urban migration and sustainable development compatible in mountain systems? Mountain research and development, 27(2), 119-123. Guertler, M., Sick, N., & Kriz, A. (2019). A discipline-spanning overview of action research and its implications for technology and innovation management. Hajji, W., & Tso, F. P. (2016). Understanding the performance of low power raspberry pi cloud for big data. Electronics, 5(2), 29. Hosny, K. M., Magdi, A., Salah, A., El-Komy, O., & Lashin, N. A. (2023). Internet of things applications using Raspberry-Pi: a survey. International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering (2088-8708), 13(1). Hota, P. K., Mitra, S., & Qureshi, I. (2019). Adopting bricolage to overcome resource constraints: The case of social enterprises in rural India. Management and Organization Review, 15(2), 371-402. Hsiao, R.-L., Ou, S.-H., & Chen, H.-F. (2014). Innovating under Disadvantages: Bricolage Behaviors in van Gogh Art Curation. Sun Yat-sen Management Review., 22(2), 323-367. Indouw, L., Maturbongs, R. A., & Prabawardani, S. (2022). Lesson learned and enhanced adaptation strategies for isolated indigenous community in West Papua. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Intahchomphoo, C. (2018). Indigenous peoples, social media, and the digital divide: A systematic literature review. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 42(4), 85-111. Janssen, F., Fayolle, A., & Wuillaume, A. (2018). Researching bricolage in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 30(3-4), 450-470. Karanasios, S., Senyo, P., Effah, J., & Zorina, A. (2022). Digital bricolage: creating a digital transformation from nothing. Klooster, D. J. (2005). Producing social nature in the Mexican countryside. cultural geographies, 12(3), 321-344. Kukutai, T., & Taylor, J. (2016). Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward an agenda. ANU press. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1962). La pensée sauvage [La Pensée sauvage]. (1962, Paris: Librairie Plon) Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). La pensée sauvage (Paris: Plon, 1962). See also idem: e sauvage Le totémisme aujourd-hui. Lieberman, A. E. (2003). Taking ownership: Strengthening indigenous cultures and languages through the use of ICTs. Retrieved February, 11(2008), 83-116. Lynch, C. R. (2020). Contesting digital futures: Urban politics, alternative economies, and the movement for technological sovereignty in Barcelona. Antipode, 52(3), 660-680. Malecki, E. J. (2003). Digital development in rural areas: potentials and pitfalls. Journal of Rural Studies, 19(2), 201-214. Martins, P. (2024). Applying a Tech Lens to the Right to Information: Part. Mateus, S., & Sarkar, S. (2024). Bricolage–a systematic review, conceptualization, and research agenda. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 36(7-8), 833-854. Middleton, J. W., McCormick, M., Engel, S., Rutkowski, S. B., Cameron, I. D., Harradine, P., Johnson, J. L., & Andrews, D. (2008). Issues and challenges for development of a sustainable service model for people with spinal cord injury living in rural regions. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 89(10), 1941-1947. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks. Park, H. J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Technology readiness and technology paradox of unmanned convenience store users. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 65, 102523. Popadiuk, S., & Choo, C. W. (2006). Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related? International journal of information management, 26(4), 302-312. Roy, S. K., Balaji, M., Quazi, A., & Quaddus, M. (2018). Predictors of customer acceptance of and resistance to smart technologies in the retail sector. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 42, 147-160. Senyard, J., Baker, T., & Davidsson, P. (2009). Entrepreneurial bricolage: Towards systematic empirical testing. Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, 29(5), 5. Senyard, J., Baker, T., Steffens, P., & Davidsson, P. (2014). Bricolage as a path to innovativeness for resource-constrained new firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 211-230. Sharabati, A.-A. A., Ali, A. A. A., Allahham, M. I., Hussein, A. A., Alheet, A. F., & Mohammad, A. S. (2024). The impact of digital marketing on the performance of SMEs: An analytical study in light of modern digital transformations. Sustainability, 16(19), 8667. Simba, A., Ojong, N., & Kuk, G. (2021). Bricolage and MSEs in emerging economies. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 22(2), 112-123. Sommer, C., Chilla, T., Birnbaum, L., & Kroener, S. (2025). Digital social innovations in rural areas–process tracing and mapping critical junctures. Journal of Rural Studies, 114, 103510. Stephens, C., Porter, J., Nettleton, C., & Willis, R. (2006). Disappearing, displaced, and undervalued: a call to action for Indigenous health worldwide. The lancet, 367(9527), 2019-2028. Turner, R. J. (2007). Diffusion of Innovations, Everett M. Rogers, Free Press, New York, NY (2003), 551 pages. In: Elsevier. VanWey, L. K., Tucker, C. M., & McConnell, E. D. (2005). Community organization, migration, and remittances in Oaxaca. Latin American Research Review, 40(1), 83-107. Velaga, N. R., Beecroft, M., Nelson, J. D., Corsar, D., & Edwards, P. (2012). Transport poverty meets the digital divide: accessibility and connectivity in rural communities. Journal of Transport Geography, 21, 102-112. Warchivker, I., Tjapangati, T., & Wakerman, J. (2000). The turmoil of Aboriginal enumeration: mobility and service population analysis in a central Australian community. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 24(4), 444-449. West, P., Igoe, J., & Brockington, D. (2006). Parks and peoples: The social impact of protected areas. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35, 251-277. Wetherill, M. S., Williams, M. B., Taniguchi, T., Salvatore, A. L., Jacob, T., Cannady, T., Grammar, M., Standridge, J., Fox, J., & Spiegel, J. (2020). A nutrition environment measure to assess tribal convenience stores: the THRIVE study. Health promotion practice, 21(3), 410-420. Witell, L., Gebauer, H., Jaakkola, E., Hammedi, W., Patricio, L., & Perks, H. (2017). A bricolage perspective on service innovation. Journal of Business Research, 79, 290-298. Wu, E., & Maslov, D. (2022). Raspberry Pi Retail Applications. New York: Apress. p93-121. Yamanoor, N. S., & Yamanoor, S. (2017). High quality, low cost education with the Raspberry Pi. 2017 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC).zh_TW