Sharing Cities for Urban Transformation: Narrative, Policy and Practice

Sharp, Darren

doi:10.4324/9781003010753-9

Cited by 8 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Humphery analyzes the framing of the ethical enterprise of alternative consumption in Australia (Humphery, 2017). Sharp argues that narrative framing of the sharing economy for community empowerment and grassroots mobilization has been used by Shareable to drive a "sharing transformation" and by Airbnb through "regulatory hacking" to influence urban policy (Sharp, 2018). The developed country focus of these papers signals the urgent need to enrich the discussion of framing analysis in sharing economy in developing-economy contexts.…”

Section: Frame Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing the sharing economy: A media analysis of ridesharing platforms in Indonesia and the Philippines

Yuana

Sengers

Boon

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few studies on ridesharing have so far been conducted in developing countries. To explore this, the present paper presents a frame analysis of news content on ridesharing platforms in Indonesia and the Philippines. We identify five distinct frames, perceiving ridesharing as a (1) commuter solution, (2) unregulated public transport service, (3) cooperative business, (4) non-conformity solution, and (5) informal livelihoods. We show how these frames emerge from a particular developing-economy context characterized by gridlock problems in densely populated cities, the utilization of "informal transport" as a gap-filler, and an emphasis on collectiveness. The paper furthermore argues that the identified frames shape different policy responses to ridesharing in Indonesia and the Philippines, which 1) address the absence of legal status; 2) ease traffic congestion. The paper concludes that these responses are driven primarily by commercial and legal concerns rather than sustainability concerns.

show abstract

Section: Frame Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing the sharing economy: A media analysis of ridesharing platforms in Indonesia and the Philippines

Yuana

Sengers

Boon

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is particularly so for 'sharing economy' platforms such as Uber and Airbnb, who compete with traditional service providers by operating beyond established licensing and planning regulations. These platforms have engaged in what has been described as "regulatory entrepreneurship" (Pollman and Barry, 2016), or simply "hacking" (Sharp, 2018), designed to grow their market share while mobilising broad based support through platform users (riders, hosts, guests) and their elected representatives (McNeill, 2017).…”

Section: Notes On Contributormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, during a period when short-term rental regulations were under active review, an Australian government agency offered seniors $100 vouchers to become Airbnb hosts (NSW Government 2018). Sharp (2018) writes that Airbnb staff studied the tactics used by grassroots organisations and emulated these by sponsoring "home-sharing clubs" that can be readily mobilised to defend/ attack policies and attend protests. The campaigns waged by Airbnb have been effective in not only achieving deregulation, but also reregulation that has changed the rules of combat in their favour .…”

Section: Three-pronged Attackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning and the So-Called ‘Sharing’ Economy / Can Shared Mobility Deliver Equity?/ The Sharing Economy and the Ongoing Dilemma about How to Plan for Informality/ Regulating Platform Economies in Cities – Disrupting the Disruption?/ Regulatory Combat? How the ‘Sharing Economy’ is Disrupting Planning Practice/ Corporatised Enforcement: Challenges of Regulating AirBnB andOther Platform Economies/ Nurturing a Generative Sharing Economy for Local Public Goods and Service Provision

Kim

Brown

Nelson

et al. 2019

Planning Theory & Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sharing economy' technology platforms now encompass housing (most prominently Airbnb); transport (from taxi-replacements Uber and Lyft to short-term rental bicycles and electric scooters); to temporary labor (TaskRabbit). Undoubtedly, more such concepts are being developed, funded, and deployed as we speak. 'Sharing' platform creators describe their work as 'disruptive' and 'innovating in the regulatory sphere' and in many cities have been at odds with both planners and residents as well as competing industries. Planning scholars and practitioners have been caught on the back foot due to the rapid speed at which the 'sharing economy' has emerged and the lack of data available publicly for assessing its scale and how it's affecting the cities we plan. We invited authors to discuss how we ought to conceive of the sharing economy, how we might understand its impacts across people and places, and how planning could or should respond to its emergence and growth. The papers we received span two issues of interface. In this issue, the writing focuses on the planning regulatory response to platforms; and in issue 20.2 we will take up the implications of these platforms for work and labor in the city. These authors connect the 'new' sharing economy to older more endemic forms of informality, to reiterate that in some ways we are still dealing with questions around whether or not informality can be regulated, and also if the extractive platform sharing economy maintains some relationship to the other versions of sharing. What the sharing economy has always done, even before the emergence of large corporations as mediators, is to challenge what Brown calls the "status quo." An important question she asks in her piece for this Interface is whether or not the status quo, in this case the traditional taxi industry, was good to begin with. Brown directly compares ride-share platforms to a taxi industry that has presented significant barriers to African American mobility. While digital infrastructure is still uneven, and ride hailing via apps might result in a user's "delayed mobility", the traditional taxi industry for some people of color in some neighborhoods meant no mobility at all. A question I would also like to raise is how the more visible version of ride-hailing has replaced and possibly displaced the pre-existing informal and underground community mechanisms for how African American or Latinx or Asian immigrants solved mobility problems before, through similar but differently accessed informal ride-sharing strategies (Blasi & Leavitt, Driving Poor, 2006). We as planners are asked to think about allowing for, and being comfortable with allowing the informal to exist and to also question planning's primary impulse to regulatechallenged by any version of the sharing economy. Nelson & Ehrenfeucht reflect that the question of the

show abstract

“…personability, ability, performance, integrity, transparency, achievements, or history). Trust, a scarce resource, is identified as a key driver of the sharing economy [ 97 , 98 ] and a key enabler of transactions in ICT-mediated business models [ 39 , 40 ]. Trust is particularly important in two-sided markets [ 20 , 99 ] in the sharing economy, where the platform facilitates an exchange between a resource owner and resource user.…”

Section: Social Sustainability Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some authors argue that the sharing economy contributes to social justice [ 55 , 98 , 137 ], but more research is needed to operationalise the concept in the context of the sharing economy and to describe the specific mechanisms that may enhance social justice. The term relates to issues of equity, defined by Young [ 138 ] as “…the morally proper distribution of social benefits and burdens among society’s members”.…”

Section: Social Sustainability Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%