This study reports on the results of a systematic literature review on ‘open design’ in academic fields including and beyond design and HCI. The review investigates how studies are framed as open design and open-source design (including ‘open hardware’): how researchers contribute to conceptual theorizing about open design or study its practical operationalization, in do-it-yourself ‘making,’ manufacturing and practices in-between these domains. Most of the papers reviewed were empirical studies from diverse fields. Open design was analyzed not only as contributions and solutions, but also as open-to-participate processes, openly shared processes, and open, closed, and modular (open and closed) outcomes. Various research fields presented an open design framing as an alternative to the status quo: new ways to do business and/or to foster socio-environmental sustainability. On the manufacturing side, open design was sought especially to accelerate innovation cycles; on the making side, it was espoused to foster democratization. However, the studies reviewed indicated that companies do not appear to develop much beyond business-as-usual. From the research perspective, the conceptual potential of open design to promote sustainability saw little practical exploration. Additionally, issues around open design community governance and ownership, safety and reliability of open outcomes require further investigation.

这项研究报告了关于包括“设计”和“ HCI”在内的学术领域的“开放式设计”的系统文献综述的结果。该评论调查了如何将研究划分为开放设计和开放源代码设计（包括“开放硬件”）：研究人员如何在自己动手“制作”，制造和制造过程中为开放设计的概念理论做出贡献或研究其实际操作性在这些域之间进行练习。评论的大多数论文都是来自不同领域的实证研究。开放式设计不仅作为贡献和解决方案进行分析，而且还作为开放参与过程，开放共享过程以及开放，封闭和模块化（开放和封闭）成果进行分析。各个研究领域都提出了一种开放设计框架来替代现状：开展业务和/或促进社会环境可持续性的新方法。在制造方面，寻求开放设计特别是为了加快创新周期。在制造方面，它被鼓励促进民主化。但是，所审查的研究表明，公司似乎没有像往常一样发展。从研究的角度来看，开放设计在促进可持续性方面的概念潜力几乎没有实际探索。此外，有关开放设计社区治理和所有权，开放成果的安全性和可靠性的问题需要进一步调查。回顾的研究表明，公司似乎没有像往常一样发展。从研究的角度来看，开放设计在促进可持续性方面的概念潜力几乎没有实际探索。此外，有关开放设计社区治理和所有权，开放成果的安全性和可靠性的问题需要进一步调查。回顾的研究表明，公司似乎没有像往常一样发展。从研究的角度来看，开放设计在促进可持续性方面的概念潜力几乎没有实际探索。此外，有关开放设计社区治理和所有权，开放成果的安全性和可靠性的问题需要进一步调查。