With the widespread adoption of ICT technologies, platforms, social media and sharing economy businesses have emerged as models of economic organization. This paper examines their functioning on a micro level to provide a thorough critique. The theory of cognitive capitalism and opposing arguments are explored in order to bring a holistic understanding and observe how value is captured and accumulated with the use of technological apparatuses. Cognitive capitalism is not uniform, however, and recognition of the special properties displayed by networks makes it possible to identify the challenge posed by the rising array of netarchist platforms. Platform cooperativism is the proposed egalitarian and long-term sustainable counter, as it aims to design new tools in line with the commons paradigm. Finally, the paper provides key insights into the specifications, difficulties, and next steps required to lead to better platform co-ops and a better future.
The public sphere needs an ' ecosystem of trust' which could set out objectives of re-usage of data for the common good while protecting individual rights. This study analyses the emerging models of data governance through the lenses of science and technology studies (STS), critical data studies (CDS), and institutional economics, investigating which data governance model creates conditions for data stewardship guided by European values and rights. We critically examine two prominent, yet highly arguable, paradigms related to data, asserting that the systemic level of data assemblage must be re-conceptualised to reject the data-as-a-commodity view and take public interest into consideration. For data stewardship to achieve its goals, it is necessary to consider the inherent properties of data as commons, in the sense of a common-pool resources (CPR) framework. Therefore, we point towards public data commons as the model that is best suited to secure European rights and values while increasing data sharing at the same time. The design of such public data commons is the challenge of our time.
Issue 3This paper is part of Governing "European values" inside data flows, a special issue of Internet Policy Review guest-edited by Kristina Irion, Mira Burri, Ans Kolk, Stefania Milan.
Most of the discussions on data governance stress legal and technological aspects, while avoiding the discussion of power, stakeholder interests, and value. In order to move from formal debates to operational institution-building, we ask about the goals of data governance for different stakeholders and why data commons can be useful in achieving them. We discuss the evolution of data governance over time and cast light on the antagonism between three main goals of data governance: protecting fundamental rights, generating economic value and serving public interest. Given the necessity to navigate this conflicted political economy of data, we introduce the data governance trilemma (DGT) model. We turn to data commons as an institution capable of solving the collective action problem and negotiating acceptable configuration of the DGT goals. In order to operationalize data commons using DGT, we conducted workshops combining the critical success factors (CSFs) method with a deliberative Delphi technique. We find that the systemic configuration of data governance should be restructured towards data sovereignty, founded on institutional trust, protection of rights, and obligatory data sharing with the public interest in mind. Based on our results, we claim that unless we build data commons to steward data as a democratic medium, a lack of legitimization will riddle attempts to govern data better, and societal benefits will fail to manifest.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.