Neoliberalism and the legality of peer platform markets

McKee, Derek

doi:10.1016/j.eist.2017.04.001

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…22.7% [35][36][37] Institution and governance system Proposals for implementation of regulation and laws; analysis of matters of ethics and labor; discussion on asymmetric power relationships 18.7% [38][39][40]…”

Section: User Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing the Sharing Economy State of the Research: A Systematic Map

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sharing economy is an emerging niche for innovation capable of disrupting established socio-technical and economic regimes. Because of this potential to cause radical changes in a wide array of domains, research in multiple disciplines addressing various aspects entailing this phenomenon is proliferating. In this emerging body of literature, the understanding and framing of the sharing economy are often different. Without knowledge about the current state of the research related to the sharing economy, delineating research trends, gaps, and needs for directing effectively primary research are not possible. This study aimed to synthesize the state and distribution of existing publications related to the sharing economy in multiple disciplines. We used the systematic mapping technique to scope, identify, and classify the publications at a fine level of granularity. We reviewed 589 journal articles (published from 1978 to 2017), and 454 met the selection criteria. The journal articles reviewed were published in 284 different journals. Intriguingly, 15 journals published five to 13 publications each and 221 journals had a single article about the topic. Journals belonging to the subject areas "business, management and accounting" (42.1%) and "social sciences" (35.2%) published more than 70% of the reviewed publications. Accommodation (19.8%) and car and ridesharing (17.2%) were the two most prominent sectors; 50.2% of the publications addressed C2C transactions (10.6% B2C, 24.4% more than one type); 62.3% were about accessing resources, and 5.1% concerned transfer of ownership (i.e., second-hand or donation); and 19.2% covered access and transfer of ownership simultaneously. While empirical studies were the majority (53.1%, when comparing with conceptual ones), qualitative approaches were most common (51.5% against 24.9% quantitative and 17.4% mixed methods). Literature review (22.9%), survey (13.2%), case study (7.3%) and interview (7%) were the most frequently used methods. User behavior (26.4%), business models and organizational aspects (22.7%), institution and governance system (18.7%), conceptualization matters (17%), and sustainability evaluation (15.3%) are research clusters identified from a grounded approach. The link between user behavior and net environmental impacts of sharing options was the largest gap found in the research needing attention from a sustainability perspective. Accordingly, multidisciplinary investigations quantifying behavioral root causes, magnitude, and likelihood of environmental rebound effects using real-world data are strongly encouraged.

show abstract

Section: User Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing the Sharing Economy State of the Research: A Systematic Map

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies reveal disagreement in aspects ranging from relationships with the market, government, workers, consumers (users), to sustainability and environmental issues (Murillo, Buckland, & Val, 2017). The assumption taken for granted, as far as digital platforms are concerned, is that there should be minimum state interference in the market, i.e., the neoliberal idea of the less regulated the market, the wider the benefits to shareholders (McKee, 2017). This is inherent in the way corporations such as Uber are replacing current jobs with precarious gigs that lack protection and legal benefits (Zwick, 2018).…”

Section: Se Arguments (Still) Unlikely To Agreementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is inherent in the way corporations such as Uber are replacing current jobs with precarious gigs that lack protection and legal benefits (Zwick, 2018). It turns out, advocate McKee (2017), that such platforms ended up being the result of self-regulated rules adopted by SE's new models and state regulatory laws. The logic of an inclusive and empowering job is still not clear and brings instability and tension: the most influential and powerful SE firms are private and profit-driven but still not as taxed and regulated as the traditional ones (Laurell & Sandström, 2017).…”

Section: Se Arguments (Still) Unlikely To Agreementioning

confidence: 99%

Empowering and Resisting in a Sharing Economy: Two Sides of the Same Coin

Bó

Petrini

2019

BAR, Braz. Adm. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some can regard the sharing economy (SE) as a sustainable economy for allowing innovative (even disruptive) business opportunities and for encouraging new forms of consumption. There are, however, controversies about SE's role in being a commercially-oriented economy taking advantage of regulatory and market failures. Such ambiguous trajectories provide opportunities for research, and one of them brings attention to power's exercise to promote or influence change. This research, a single-case study of Uber, aims to understand the connections between framings to empower and to resist in a SE context. Three two-sided (empower and resist) perspectives -the economic system, the business market, and the sustainable-driven perspectives -and two strengthening actions -searching for legitimacy and fighting and calling for status quo -arise within the SE context analyzed. Empowering framings sounded more convincing compared to resisting ones, and resisting framings highlighted contradictions not expected from SE initiatives. Our findings suggest that SE does have the potential to stimulate a kind of nonreversible sustainable mindset, but this path choice is still unclear.

show abstract

“…Immers, de platformen worden doorgaans ontwikkeld en beheerd door een (op winst georiënteerd) bedrijf, maar hun dienst bestaat eruit dat zij een marktplaats organiseren waarop burgers goederen en diensten kunnen aanbieden en afnemen. Deze markt is evenwel geen vrije markt, omdat het platform kan bepalen wie mag participeren op het platform (McKee, 2017). Daarbij stelt het platform zich op als (zelf-)regulerende instantie die mensen weert die zich in de ogen van de platformbeheerder niet kwalificeren als voldoende kundig of sociaal (bijvoorbeeld blijkens negatieve reviews of klachten die tot het platform worden gericht).…”

Section: Deeleconomie En Kluseconomieunclassified

“…Platformen zijn evenzeer een institutionele innovatie. Het platform fungeert namelijk niet alleen als algoritmisch intermediair, maar als ook als een private toezichthouder (McKee, 2017). Door online gedragingen van gebruikers te registeren en offline gedragingen te laten beoordelen door peers, houdt het platform zicht op uitwassen en wanprestaties.…”

Section: Platforminnovatie In Historisch Perspectiefunclassified

Publieke belangen in de deel- en kluseconomie1

Frenken¹,

Waes²,

Smink³

et al. 2018

Mens &Amp; Maatschappij

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public interests in the sharing and gig economy The success of Airbnb and Uber has given rise to a public debate about the pros and cons of online sharing and gig platforms. This article reports on five case studies of platforms operating in car sharing (SnappCar), home sharing (Airbnb), home restaurants (Airdnd), ride hailing (UberPop) and cleaning (Helpling). The article then puts the sharing and gig economy into a historical perspective to highlight that the platforms build on pre-existing social practices. and presents a policy framework based on four basic policy options: enforce existing regulations, enact new regulations, deregulate, or tolerate.

show abstract

Neoliberalism and the legality of peer platform markets

Cited by 21 publications

References 21 publications

Characterizing the Sharing Economy State of the Research: A Systematic Map

Characterizing the Sharing Economy State of the Research: A Systematic Map

Empowering and Resisting in a Sharing Economy: Two Sides of the Same Coin

Publieke belangen in de deel- en kluseconomie1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About