Value and virtue in the sharing economy

Abstract

Critical accounts suggest that the ‘sharing economy’ is mainly an ideological entity, bringing together a wide range of diverse empirical phenomena that have little in common, apart from their common adherence to an ideology of ‘sharing’. This article suggests that the sharing economy can be empirically understood as instances of peer production attempting to ‘come to market’ via the use of a common ‘sharing fiction’. Analysing the origins and present functions of this fiction, the author suggests that we can conceptualize differentials in economic power within the sharing economy in terms of the work that goes into the reproduction of this sharing fiction and the ability to capitalize on it in terms of price differentials.

Generic and Specific Skills as Components of Human Capital: New Challenges for Education Theory and Practice

“…The large sets of data that result from this are analyzed with the help of artificial intelligence (AI), allowing precise models of market trends to be created. Changes in economic behavior resulting from the new platforms can be interpreted in various ways, from total denial of the platforms' structural importance to deeming them harbingers of the end of the market economy, which will be replaced by fundamentally new, altruistic forms of economic management [Arvidsson, 2018]. Other researchers believe that the platforms do not decrease competition, but rather escalate it [Arvidsson, 2018].…”

“…Changes in economic behavior resulting from the new platforms can be interpreted in various ways, from total denial of the platforms' structural importance to deeming them harbingers of the end of the market economy, which will be replaced by fundamentally new, altruistic forms of economic management [Arvidsson, 2018]. Other researchers believe that the platforms do not decrease competition, but rather escalate it [Arvidsson, 2018]. Some see the reconfiguration of the economic behavior of platform participants as increasing the demand for aspects of human capital such as creativity, as well as social skills like the ability to form relationships based on solidarity [Carfagna, 2018].…”

Conceptual controversies at the boundaries between markets: the case of ridesharing

“…The sharing economy represents a low consensus paradigm encompassing a great wealth of concepts hybridising different practices and ideals. While these hybrid forms of economic organising are certainly not unprecedentedmarkets in early stages of formation are often "impure"the blurring of conceptual market boundaries and the confusion they engender, is arguably more intense in the sharing economy than in mature markets (Arvidsson 2018). Disciplines as diverse as cultural theory, environmental economics, social anthropology and consumer behaviour attempt to frame the sharing economy on the basis of their respective understanding, turning the sharing economy literature into a conceptual maze (Dredge and Gyimóthy 2015).…”

Introduction to the Handbook of the Sharing Economy: the paradox of the sharing economy

“…For example, Pitt, Eriksson, and Plangger (Chapter 25) demonstrate the role of electronic word of mouth in engendering trust in accessbased consumption platforms, highlighting how goodwill influences rating inflation, with ratings being the main proxy for trust in sharing economy platforms. Gandini (Chapter 29) argues that reputation, as garnered via ratings systems in the sharing economy, is the basis for trust among strangers and, further, serves as the mechanism for the economic becoming re-embedded into the social (Arvidsson 2018). In this way, Gandini provides a framework for understanding the paradox of the sharing economy: that is, that it embraces both market and social characteristics; that it is a space that allows them both to exist, in a hybrid form, via the reputations mechanisms embedded within the system.…”