“I Don’t Think My Landlord Will Find Out:” Airbnb and the Challenges of Enforcement

Leshinsky, Rebecca; Schatz, Laura

doi:10.1080/08111146.2018.1429260

Cited by 32 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following their adoption, the implementation of the new regulations -an aspect which cannot be developed in this paper -has been highly challenging. As noted by other scholars, enforcing regulation is very difficult, as public authorities have limited capacity for the inspection of STR uses (Leshinsky and Schatz, 2018). The governments of the three cities have dedicated starkly different amounts of resources to that task (see Table 3).…”

Section: Explaining the Adoption Of Different Regulations: Actors Multi-level Governance And Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In critical urban studies, some authors have highlighted the role played by transnational corporate platforms in urban politics and public policy, epitomized by the campaigning activities of Airbnb in San Francisco in 2015 against the so-called 'Proposition F' intended to limit PM-STR (McNeill, 2016;Sharp, 2018;Stabrowski, 2017). More recently, planning scholars have investigated how local planning policies have responded to PM-STR (Ferreri and Sanyal, 2018;Gurran, 2018;Gurran and Phibbs, 2017;Holman et al, 2018;Leshinsky and Schatz, 2018), showing that traditional zoning or land use regulatory mechanisms are not very effective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Explaining the diversity of policy responses to platform-mediated short-term rentals in European cities: A comparison of Barcelona, Paris and Milan

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-term rentals facilitated by online platforms (like Airbnb) have recently become an object of intense debate, leading many city governments to pass new regulations attempting to control both their proliferation and platform activities. While these policy responses vary greatly from city to city, there is little comparative research to explain this diversity. This paper employs a sociological approach to public policy analysis to compare the politicization process, collective action around, and regulation of platform-mediated short-term rentals (PM-STR) in three cities-Barcelona, Paris and Milan. They were chosen to represent most-dissimilar cases in terms of regulatory outputs, both in terms of stringency (weak in Milan, intermediate in Paris, strong in Barcelona) and choice of policy sectors (sharing economy and tourism in Milan, housing and land use in Paris, urban planning and tourism in Barcelona). Two main findings emerged from the comparison. First, the differences between regulations can be explained by the type of actors who politicized the issue in the first place and framed it within a specific policy sector, the pre-existing policy instruments traditionally used in that sector, and the distribution of competences between the city and higher tiers of government. Second, the regulations remain continuously subject to intense political mobilisation by six types of actors with clashing interests: professional STR operators, associations of hosts or 'home-sharers', the hotel industry, residents' associations or citizens' movements, 'sharing economy' advocates, and corporate platforms. Each actor constructs different narratives regarding PM-STR, claiming different types of rights in this contentious politics of regulation.

show abstract

Section: Explaining the Adoption Of Different Regulations: Actors Multi-level Governance And Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the diversity of policy responses to platform-mediated short-term rentals in European cities: A comparison of Barcelona, Paris and Milan

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most consequentially, these firms exert their control over information flows to advance their financial and political interests by withholding the platform data that policymakers need to enforce current regulations, let alone craft new ones. Accordingly, a growing body of research argues that effective local regulation of STR platforms is at a minimum fraught and potentially unachievable (Ferreri and Sanyal 2018;Kerrigan and Wachsmuth 2021;Leshinsky and Schatz 2018;Wegmann and Jiao 2017;Yeon et al 2020). For example, these scholars argue that the information necessary to regulate Airbnb hosts-minimally, their identities, the addresses of their STR listings, and the volume of activity of those listings-cannot be feasibly obtained by governments without the cooperation of Airbnb itself or private third-party firms such as Host Compliance.…”

Section: The Non-neutrality Of Housing Platform Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Tilted platforms: rental housing technology and the rise of urban big data oligopolies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article interprets emerging scholarship on rental housing platforms—particularly the most well-known and used short- and long-term rental housing platforms—and considers how the technological processes connecting both short-term and long-term rentals to the platform economy are transforming cities. It discusses potential policy approaches to more equitably distribute benefits and mitigate harms. We argue that information technology is not value-neutral. While rental housing platforms may empower data analysts and certain market participants, the same cannot be said for all users or society at large. First, user-generated online data frequently reproduce the systematic biases found in traditional sources of housing information. Evidence is growing that the information broadcasting potential of rental housing platforms may increase rather than mitigate sociospatial inequality. Second, technology platforms curate and shape information according to their creators’ own financial and political interests. The question of which data—and people—are hidden or marginalized on these platforms is just as important as the question of which data are available. Finally, important differences in benefits and drawbacks exist between short-term and long-term rental housing platforms, but are underexplored in the literature: this article unpacks these differences and proposes policy recommendations. Policy and practice recommendations As rental housing technologies upend traditional market processes in favor of platform oligopolies, policymakers must reorient these processes toward the public good. Long-term and short-term rental platforms offer different market benefits and drawbacks, but the latter in particular requires proactive regulation to mitigate harm. At a minimum, policymakers must require that short-term rental platforms provide the information necessary for cities to enforce current, let alone new, housing regulations. Practitioners should be cautious inferring market conditions from rental housing platform data, due to difficult-to-measure sampling biases.

show abstract

“…The first domain—legal and regulatory elements—addresses questions on how to keep platforms accountable (Duguay, 2018) and secure (Fraile et al , 2018), how to regulate (Thelen, 2018) and enforce law on global, boundaryless platforms (Leshinsky and Schatz, 2018), how to protect the privacy of platform users and the data generated (Evans, 2019) and how to deal with surveillance issues (Schneider, 2018). The second domain—competition law and property—focuses on antitrust law and policy (Katz, 2019), anticompetitive conduct (Bostoen, 2018), platform merges/acquisitions (Zhou et al , 2018a, b) and intellectual property (Niculescu et al , 2018).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local on-demand fabrication: microfactories and online manufacturing platforms

Barrera

Olleros

2020

JMTM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis article explores a particular on-demand fabrication unit, the microfactory (MF). It identifies and contrasts several MFs and proposes a taxonomy. This research also explores online manufacturing platforms (OMP) that complement certain MFs.Design/methodology/approachThis research implements a multiple case study (71 cases in 21 countries), triangulating data available on the web with interviews, virtual/physical tours and experiential research.FindingsThe results suggest that automation and openness are the main dimensions that differentiate the MFs. Using these dimensions, a taxonomy of MFs is created. MFs with relatively low automation and high openness tend to be innovation-driven microfactories (IDMFs). MFs with high automation and low openness levels tend to be customization-driven microfactories (CDMFs). And MFs with relatively low automation and low openness tend to be classic machine shops (MSs). There are two types of OMP: closed (COMPs) and multisided (MOMPs). MOMPs can be low-end or high-end.Practical implicationsIn a world where online platforms are becoming central to the reinvention of manufacturing, multisided online platforms and small fabricators will become strongly symbiotic.Originality/valueThis paper offers a clearer conceptualization of MFs and OMPs, which may help to better understand the reality of local on-demand fabrication. Moreover, it explores a new type of experiential research, which tries to describe and interpret firms through transactional activities. Many details of a firm that are difficult to capture via interviews and netnography can be revealed this way.

show abstract

“I Don’t Think My Landlord Will Find Out:” Airbnb and the Challenges of Enforcement

Cited by 32 publications

References 17 publications

Explaining the diversity of policy responses to platform-mediated short-term rentals in European cities: A comparison of Barcelona, Paris and Milan

Explaining the diversity of policy responses to platform-mediated short-term rentals in European cities: A comparison of Barcelona, Paris and Milan

Tilted platforms: rental housing technology and the rise of urban big data oligopolies

Local on-demand fabrication: microfactories and online manufacturing platforms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About