References
- Acuto, M. (2013). City Leadership in Global Governance. Global Governance 19(3), 481–498. DOI: 10.1163/19426720-01903008.
- Adam Hernández, A. & Schneider, C. (2022). Experimenting for long-term transformation. Key insights into 20 years of German pilot schemes for innovative rural public service and infrastructure provision. Europa XXI 41(5), 107–128. DOI: 10.7163/Eu21.2021.41.5.
- Anderson, A. R., Wallace, C. & Townsend, L. (2016). Great expectations or small country living? Enabling small rural creative businesses with ICT. Sociologia Ruralis 56(3), 450–468. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12104.
- Aring, J. & Reuther, I. (2008). Die Regiopole – vom Arbeitsbegriff zur konzeptionellen Idee. In Aring, J. & Reuther, I., eds., Regiopolen – Die kleinen Großstädte in Zeiten der Globalisierung (pp. 8–33). Berlin: Jovis Verlag.
- Atkinson, R. & Kintrea, K. (2001). Disentangling Area Effects. Evidence from Deprived and Non- Deprived Neighbourhoods. Urban Studies 38(12), 2277–2298. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120087162.
- Beer, A. & Clower, T. (2014). Mobilizing leadership in cities and regions. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 1(1), 5–20. DOI: 10.1080/21681376.2013.869428.
- Beer, A., Ayres, S., Clower, T., Faller, F., Sancino, A. & Sotarauta, M. (2019). Place leadership and regional economic development: A framework for cross-regional analysis. Regional Studies 53(2), 171–182. DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2018.1447662.
- Beetz, S., Hunning, S. & Plieninger, T. (2008). Landscapes of Peripherization in North-Eastern Germany's Countryside: New Challenges for Planning Theory and Practice. International Planning Studies 13(4), 295–310. DOI: 10.1080/13563470802518909.
- Benner, M. (2020). Mitigating human agency in regional development: the behavioural side of policy processes. Regional Studies, Regional Science 7(1), 164–182. DOI: 10.1080/21681376.2020.1760732.
- Belshaw, D. (2012). What Is "Digital Literacy”? A Pragmatic Investigation. Durham: Durham University.
- Binder, J. (2022). Die smarte Region. In Ermann, U., Höfner, M., Hostniker, S., Preininger, E. M. & Simić, D., eds., Die Region – eine Begriffserkundung (pp. 253–262). Bielefeld: transcript.
- Binder, J. & Matern, A. (2020). Mobility and social exclusion in peripheral regions. European Planning Studies, 28(6), 1047–1069. DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1689926.
- Binder, J. & Witting, A. (2022). Digital pioneers in rural regional development: A bibliometric analysis of digitalisation and leadership. Zeitschrift für Raumforschung und Raumordnung 80(3), 266–227. DOI: 10.14512/rur.103.
- Blokland, T., Giustozzi, C., Krüger, D. & Schilling, H. (2016). Introduction. In Blokland, T., Giustozzi, C., Krüger, D. & Schilling, H., eds., Creating the Unequal City. The Exclusionary Consequences of Everyday Routines in Berlin (pp. 1–28). Farnham: Ashgate.
- Bonfiglio, A., Camaioni, B., Coderoni, S., Esposti, R., Pagliacci, F. & Sotte, F. (2017). Are rural regions prioritizing knowledge transfer and innovation? Evidence from Rural Development Policy expenditure across the EU space. Journal of Rural Studies 53, 78–87. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.05.005.
- Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In Richardson, J.G., ed., Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.
- Bria, F. (2015). Growing a digital social innovation ecosystem for Europe: DSI final report. Luxembourg: Publications Office.
- Buck, N. (2001). Identifying Neighbourhood Effects on Social Exclusion. Urban Studies 38(12), 2251–2275. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120087153.
- Budd, L. & Sancino, A. (2016). A framework for city leadership in multilevel governance settings: The comparative contexts of Italy and the UK. Regional Studies, Regional Science 3(1), 129–145. DOI: 10.1080/21681376.2015.1125306.
- Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural Holes and Good Ideas. The American Journal of Sociology 110(2), 349–399. DOI: 10.1086/421787.
- Calderón Gómez, D. (2020). Technological Socialization and Digital Inclusion: Understanding Digital Literacy Biographies among Young People in Madrid. Social Inclusion 8(2), 222–232. DOI: 10.17645/si.v8i2.2601.
- Cambra-Fierro, J. J & Pérez, L. (2022). (Re)thinking smart in rural contexts: a multi-country study. Growth and change 53, 868–889. DOI: 10.1111/grow.12612.
- Cowie, P., Townsend, L. & Salemink, K. (2020). Smart rural futures: Will rural areas be left behind in the 4th industrial revolution? Journal of Rural Studies 79, 169–176. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.08.042.
- Christmann, G. (2014). Social Entrepreneurs on the Periphery: Uncovering Emerging Pioneers of Regional Development. disP – The Planning Review 50(1), 43–55. DOI: 10.1080/02513625.2014.926725.
- Christmann, G. (2019). Spatial Pioneers. In Orum, A. M. ed., The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies (pp. 1982–1984). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. DOI: 10.1002/9781118568446.
- Christmann, G., O'Shaughnessy, M. & Richter, R. (2023). Dynamics of Social Innovations in Rural Communities. Journal of Rural Studies 99, 187–192. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.09.010.
- Cvar, N., Trilar., J., Kos, A., Volk, M. & Stojmenova Duh, E. (2020). The Use of IoT Technology in Smart Cities and Smart Villages: Similarities, Differences, and Future Prospects. Sensors 20(14). DOI: 10.3390/s20143897.
- Dargan, L. & Shucksmith, M. (2008). LEADER and innovation. Sociologia Ruralis, 48(3), 274–291. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2008.00463.x.
- Döringer, S. & Eder, J., eds. (2020). Schlüsselakteure der Regionalentwicklung: Welche Perspektiven bietet Entrepreneurship für ländliche Räume? Wien: Institut für Stadt- und Regionalforschung.
- Emirbayer, M. & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network Analysis, Culture, and the Problem of Agency. American Journal of Sociology 99(6), 1411–1454.
- Emirbayer, M. & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology 103(4), 962–1023. DOI: 10.1086/231294.
- Faber, K. (2013). Raumpioniere. Vom Bürgerbus bis zur Schulgründung – neue Wege der Daseinsvorsorge in ländlichen Regionen. Der Kritische Agrarbericht, 161–164.
- Faber, K. & Oswalt, P., eds. (2013). Raumpioniere in ländlichen Regionen. Neue Wege der Daseinsvorsorge. Leipzig and Dessau: Edition Bauhaus.
- Falter, M. & Jóhannesson, T. G. (2022). Hacking Hekla: Exploring the dynamics of digital innovation in rural areas. Sociologia Ruralis 63(2), 328–247. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12412.
- Ferrari, A., Bacco, M., Gaber, K., Jedlitschka, A., Hess, S., Kaipainen, J., Koltsida, P., Toli, E. & Brunori, G. (2022). Drivers, barriers and impacts of digitalisation in rural areas from the viewpoint of experts. Information and Software Technology 145, 106816. DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2021.106816.
- Gailing, L. & Ibert, O. (2016). Schlüssselfiguren: Raum als Gegenstand und Ressource des Wandels. Raumforschung und Raumordnung 74(5), 391–403. DOI: 10.1007/s13147-016-0426-3.
- Garcia-Ayllon, S. & Miralles, J. L. (2015). New Strategies to Improve Governance in Territorial Management: Evolving from “Smart Cities” to “Smart Territories”. Procedia Engineering 118, 3–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.396.
- Grillitsch, M. & Sotarauta, M. (2020). Trinity of change agency, regional development paths and opportunity spaces. Progress in Human Geography 44(4), 704–723. DOI: 10.1177/0309132519853870.
- Gust-Bardon, N. I. (2012). Regional development in the context of an innovation process. Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.
- Howaldt, J. & Schwarz, M. (2010). Soziale Innovation – Konzepte, Forschungsfelder und – perspektiven. In Howaldt, J. & Jacobsen, H., eds., Soziale Innovation (pp. 87–108) Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
- Keim-Klärner, S., Bernard, J., Bischof, S., van Dülmen, C., Klärner, A. & Steinführer, A. (2021). Analyzing social disadvantage in rural peripheries in Czechia and Eastern Germany. Conceptual model and study design. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institute.
- Kukartz, U. & Rädiker, S. (2024). Fokussierte Interviewanalyse mit MAXQDA. Schritt für Schritt. Wiesbaden: Springer.
- Küpper, P. (2016). Abgrenzung und Typisierung ländlicher Räume. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institute.
- Küpper, P. & Mettenberger, T. (2020). Regionale Anpassungsstrategien der Daseinsvorsorge für schrumpfende ländliche Räume. Europa Regional 26(3), 22–39.
- Larsen, L., Harlan, S. L., Bolin, B., Hackett, E. J., Hope, D., Kirby, A., Nelson, A., Rex, T. R. & Wolf, S. (2004). Bonding and Bridging: Understanding the Relationship between Social Capital and Civic Action. Journal of Planning Education and Research 24(1), 64–77. DOI: 10.1177/0739456X04267181.
- Lindberg, J. & Lundgren, A. S. (2022). The affective atmosphere of rural life and digital healthcare: Understanding older persons’ engagement in eHealth services. Journal of Rural Studies 95, 77–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.07.020.
- Maschke, L., Mießner, M. & Naumann, M. (2021). Kritische Landforschung. Konzeptionelle Zugänge, empirische Problemlagen und politische Perspektiven. Bielefeld: Transcript.
- Matthiesen, U. (2012). Raumpioniere und ihre Möglichkeitsräume. In Faber, K. & Oswalt, P., eds., Raumpioniere in ländlichen Regionen. Neue Wege der Daseinsvorsorge (pp. 153–161). Leipzig und Dessau: Edition Bauhaus.
- Mettenberger, T. & Küpper, P. (2019). Potential and impediments to senior citizens' volunteering to maintain basic services in shrinking regions. Sociologia Ruralis 59(4): 739–762. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12254.
- Mettenberger, T. & Küpper, P. (2021). Innovative Versorgungslösungen in ländlichen Regionen: Ergebnisse der Begleitforschung zum Modellvorhaben Land(auf)Schwung im Handlungsfeld "Daseinsvorsorge". Braunschweig: Thünen Institute. DOI: 10.3220/REP1634815865000.
- Mettenberger, T., Zscherneck, J. & Küpper, P. (2021). Wenn Neues aufs Land kommt. Entwicklung, Umsetzung und Verbreitung innovativer Lösungen zur digitalen Daseinsvorsorge. Zeitschrift für Raumforschung und Raumordnung 79(6), 543–556. DOI: 10.14512/rur.90.
- Mollenhorst, G., Völker, B. & Flap, H. (2008). Social contexts and personal relationships: the effect of meeting opportunities on similarity for personal relationships of different strength. Social Networks 30(1), 60–68. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2007.07.003.
- Moulaert, F. (2010). Social innovation and community development. Concepts, theories and challenges. In Moulaert, F., Swyngedouw, E., Martinelli, F. & Gonzales, S., eds., Can neighbourhoods save the city? (pp. 4–16). London: Routledge.
- Naumann, M. & Reichert-Schick, A. (2012). Infrastrukturelle Peripherisierung: Das Beispiel Uecker- Randow (Deutschland). disP – The Planning Review 47(1), 27–45. DOI: 10.1080/02513625.2012.702961.
- Neumeier, S. (2012). Why do Social Innovations in Rural Development Matter and Should They be Considered More Seriously in Rural Development Research? – Proposal for a Stronger Focus on Social Innovations in Rural Development Research. Sociologia Ruralis 52(1), 48–69. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2011.00553.x.
- Novikova, M. (2021). Transformative Social Innovation in Rural Areas: Insights from a Rural Development Initiative in the Portuguese Region of Baixo Alentejo. European Countryside 13(1), 71–90. DOI: 10.2478/euco-2021-0005.
- Parada, J. (2017). Social innovation for ‘smart territories’: fiction or reality? Problemas del Desarollo 48(190), 1–11.
- Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
- Qureshi, I., Pan, S. & Zeng, Y. (2021). Digital social innovation: An overview and research framework. Information Systems Journal 31(5), 647–671. DOI: 10.1111/isj.12362.
- Raagmaa, G. (2015). Territorial governance and core-periphery relations: the implications of European Policy Concepts for Central and Eastern Europe. In Lang, T. H., Henn, S., Sgibnev, W. & Ehrlich, K., eds., Understanding geographies of polarization and peripheralization (pp. 287–308). Basingstoke: Palgrave and Macmillan.
- Richter, R. & Christmann, G. (2023). On the Role of Key Players in Rural Social Innovation Processes. Journal of Rural Studies 99, 213–222. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.04.010.
- Richter, R. (2019). Rural Social Enterprises as Embedded Intermediaries: The Innovative Power of Connecting Rural Communities with Supra-Regional Networks. Journal of Rural Studies 70(8), 179–187. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.12.005.
- Rietmann, C. (2021). Digital pioneers in the periphery? Toward a typology of rural Hidden Champions in times of digitalization. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship 36(2), 281–301. DOI: 10.1080/08276331.2021.1979909.
- Roberts, E. & Townsend, L. (2016). The contribution of the creative economy to the resilience of rural communities: exploring cultural and digital capital. Sociologia Ruralis 56(2), 197–219. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12075.
- Rundel, C. T. & Salemink, K. (2021). Bridging Digital Inequalities in Rural Schools in Germany: A Geographical Lottery? Education Sciences 11(4), 181. DOI: 10.3390/educsci1104018.
- Salemink, K., Strijker, D. G. & Bosworth, G. (2017). Rural development in the digital age: A systematic literature review on unequal ICT availability, adoption, and use in rural areas. Journal of Rural Studies 54, 360–371. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.09.001.
- Sampson, R. J. (2001). How Do Communities Undergird or Undermine Human Development? Relevant Contexts and Social Mechanisms. In Booth, A. & Crouter, A. C., eds., Does it Take a Village? Community Effects on Children, Adolescents and Families (pp. 3–47). London and Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
- Sancino, A. & Hudson, L. (2020). Leadership in, of and for smart cities – Case studies from Europe, America, and Australia. Public Management Review 22(5), 701–725. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2020.1718189.
- Sept, A. (2020). Thinking Together Digitalization and Social Innovation in Rural Areas: An Exploration of Rural Digitalization Projects in Germany. European Countryside 12(2), 193–208. DOI: 10.2478/euco-2020-0011.
- Shearmur, R., Charron, M. & Pajevic, F. (2017). La ‘reìgion rurale intelligente’ aÌ l’aune de la ‘ville intelligente’: Deìfinition, critique et enjeux [Working paper prepared for the Centre de Recherche de Développement Territorial]. Rimouski: CRDT.
- Siedentop, S. & Stroms, P. (2021). Stadt und Land: gleichwertig, polarisiert, vielfältig. Eine Metastudie zu Stadt-Land-Beziehungen im Auftrag der ZEIT-Stiftung. Hamburg: ZEIT-Stiftung Evelin und Gerd Bucerius.
- Slee, B. (2019). Delivering on the Concept of Smart Villages – in Search of an Enabling Theory. European Countryside 11(4), 634–650. DOI: 10.2478/euco-2019-0035.
- Sotarauta, M., Beer, A. & Gibney, J. (2017). Making sense of leadership in urban and regional development. Regional Studies 51(2), 187–193. DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1267340.
- Thewes, C., Sept, A. & Richter, R. (2024). A voluntary divide? Exploring the role of digitalisation in German rural volunteering. European Countryside 16(1), 43–63. DOI: 10.2478/euco-2024-0004.
- Townsend, L. & Noble, C. (2022). Variable rate precision farming and advisory services in Scotland: Supporting responsible digital innovation? Sociologia Ruralis 62(2), 212–230. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12373.
- Townsend, L., Wallace, C., Smart, A. & Norman, T. (2016). Building virtual bridges: How rural Micro- Enterprises develop social capital in online and Face-to-Face settings. Sociologia Ruralis 56(1), 29–47. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12068.
- Unthan, N., Heuser, J. & Kratzer, A. (2022). Das Recht auf Dorf. Von Experimenten, Pionieren und (sozialen) Innovationen in ländlich-peripheren Biosphärenreservaten. In Belina, B., Kallert, A., Mießner, M. & Naumann, M., eds., Ungleiche ländliche Räume. Widersprüche, Konzepte, Perspektiven (pp. 217–233). Bielefeld: Transcript.
- Vercher, N., Barlagne, C., Hewitt, R., Nijnik, M. & Esparcia, J. (2021). Whose narrative is it anyway? Narratives of social innovation in rural areas – a comparative analysis of community-led initiatives in Scotland and Spain. Sociologia Ruralis 61(1), 163–189. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12321.
- Visvizi, A., Lytras, M. D. & Mudri, G., eds. (2019). Smart villages in the EU and beyond. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
- Witzel, A. (1989). Das problemzierte Interview. In Jüttemann, G., ed., Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie. Grundfragen, Verfahrensweisen, Anwendungsfelder (pp. 227–256). Springer: Heidelberg.
- Woolcock, M. (2001). The place of social capital in understanding social and economic outcomes. Canadian Journal of Policy Research 2(1), 11–17.
- Zerrer, N. & Sept, A. (2020). Smart Villagers as Actors of Digital Social Innovation in Rural Areas. Urban Planning 5(4), 78–88. DOI: 10.17645/up.v5i4.3183.
- Zirbes, L. & Rietmann, C. (2021). Hidden Champions als zentrales Element der Stabilisierung ländlicher Regionen in Zeiten der Digitalisierung. Vorstellung eines Bundesforschungsvorhabens. HAL-Mitteilungen 60, 19–22.
- BBSR – Federal Institute for Resarch on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development (2017). Wachsende und schrumpfende Kreise. BBSR: Bonn. Last accessed 12th February 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.bbsr.bund.de/BBSR/DE/forschung/raumbeobachtung/Raumabgrenzungen/deutschland/kreise/wachsend-schrumpfend-kreise/wachsend-schrumpfend-kreise.html.
- Fraunhofer IESE (n.d.) Digitale Dörfer. Kaiserslautern: Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering IESE. Last accessed 15th August 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.iese.fraunhofer.de/en.html.
- Interreg Alpine Space (n.d.) SmartVillages. Smart digital transformation of villages in the Alpine Space. Salzburg: Interreg Alpine Space Programme. Last accessed 15th August 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.alpine-space.eu/project/smartvillages/.
- Interreg Europe (n.d.) Carpe Digem. European Regional Development Fund. Last accessed 6th September 2024. Retrieved from: https://carpedigem.eu/.
- Thünen Institute (n.d.) Thünen-Landatlas. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institute. Last accessed 12th February 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.landatlas.de.
- University of Ljubljana (n.d.) LABLOG. Meet our local heroes. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana. Last accessed 15th August 2024. Retrieved from: https://blog.ltfe.org/local-heroes-lokalne-face/.