No abstract

No abstract

Financial inclusion has been defined and understood primarily in terms of access, thereby constituting 'inclusion'/'exclusion' as a binary. This paper argues such a view to be myopic that risks treating financial inclusion as an end in itself, and not as means to a larger end. 'Access' oriented perspectives also fail to take into account considerations of structural factors like power asymmetries and pay inadequate attention to user practices. Through the case of auto-rickshaw drivers in Bangalore, India, and their use of Ola, a peerto-peer taxi hailing service similar to Uber, we show that access is a necessary, but not sufficient condition to achieve financial inclusion in a substantive sense. By examining in detail, the financial needs and practices of rickshaw drivers, we identify the opportunities and constraints for digital technology to better support their financial practices and enhance their wellbeing. The paper proposes adding 'autonomy' and 'affordances' as two crucial factors to be included in the discourse on financial inclusion. Finally, we outline design implications for P2P technologies to contribute towards the financial inclusion of drivers.

ThispaperaddstotheresearchondigitizationandmoneyinHCI.Bypresentingacaseofrickshaw driversinIndiaandtheiruseofOla,anapp-basedtaxiservicelikeUber,andOlaMoney,anembedded m-wallet,thispapermakesathreefoldcontribution.First,itshowshowcashanddigitalmoneyare notsimplydifferentmanifestationsofthe'same'moneyforusers.Theyprovidedistinctaffordances andhavedifferentmeaningsandvalues,yieldingrichinsightsfordesign.Second,itseekstohighlight thehiddenworkdonebyusersaroundmakingdigitalmoney'work'forthem.Indoingso,itcalls for a broader understanding of 'moneywork' that goes beyond a temporal analysis, through the conceptof'mobilitywork'.Finally,ithighlightstheroleof'friction'indesign.Frictioniscrucialto users'negotiationofthetrade-offbetweenconsumptionandsaving,andcanbeleveragedtoprovoke reflectionanduser-awareness.

There is growing evidence of ride-hailing platforms' adverse impact on drivers. Nonetheless, hundreds of thousands of drivers continue to work on these platforms. Why? What considerations propel their continued usage over time? By drawing upon a qualitative study with auto-rickshaw drivers using Ola, a ride-hailing platform similar to Uber in India, we show how Ola over time shapes relations between itself, customers and drivers. The platform adds to the drivers' precarity and provides little benefit, and the platform's customer-centric design often leads to tensions with drivers. We illustrate how this has come about through the impact of ride-hailing platforms on the market: The duopolistic (Uber vs Ola) nature of the urban taxi market in India, paralleled by a shift of more and more customers from street-hailing to app-based hailing over time, has forged new dependencies for drivers on these platforms, which leaves drivers with little choice but to accept them. Thus, drivers continue to work for the platform, not because of any benefits, but because of the 'new dependencies' created by the infrastructuralization of ride-hailing platforms like Ola in the urban transport market. Our findings also reveal some ancillary benefits for drivers from their use of ride-hailing applications as first-time internet/smartphone users. The paper concludes with key implications for regulation as well as platform design that can improve customer-driver interaction as well as make the marketplace fairer, more equitable, and protect drivers' welfare.