Platform Economy

Uluslararası Çalışma Örgütü'nün (İLO) Küresel Emek Üniversitesi'nin (Global Labor University) 'Covid-19 Döneminde Küresel Tedarik Zincirleri' çevrimiçi eğitim programı dahilinde, motorlu kurye işçileri odaklı lojistik işkolunda emek, işçi sağlığı ve örgütlenme sorunları toplantısının güncellenmiş slaytları

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how rating mechanisms encourage emotional labor norms among sharing economy consumers. Design/methodology/approach This study follows a mixed-methods research design. Survey data from 207 consumers were used to quantify the impact of three distinct rating dimensions on a consumer behavioral outcome (emotional labor). In the second step, 18 focus groups with 94 participants were used to investigate the conditioning functions of ratings in more depth. Findings Rating mechanisms condition consumers toward performing socially desirable behaviors during sharing transactions. While consumers accept the necessity of bilateral rating mechanisms, they also recognize their coercive nature. Furthermore, the presence of bilateral rating mechanisms leads to negative outcomes such as annoyance and frustration. Originality/value This study contributes to sharing economy literature by examining bilateral rating mechanisms as a means of behavioral cond...

The platform economy is growing exponentially while creating expectations for its potential to contribute to a sustainable development. However, research aimed at showing the potential contribution of each platform's business model to sustainable development is needed. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are driving the policy agenda, but it remains unclear how far they encourage a sustainable platform economy. First, this article aims to study how each different type of platform contributes to sustainable development. Second, it analyses if and how the factors that contribute to the sustainable design of platforms are considered in SDGs. The paper departs from a framework of sustainable democratic qualities of the platform economy that considers governance, economic sustainability, technological and data policies, social responsibility, and external impact dimensions. The study is based on an empirical analysis of 60 platforms. The results show that a sustainable design of...

Practices and rhetorics of sharing. Operators of the sharing economic and forms of economic, social and normative innovation

The lack of a shared definition of «sharing» is a recurring subject in the academic literature. In this article sharing economy is investigated as an umbrella term that refers to social innovation experiences in the context of the economic crisis that began in 2007-2008. In this framework there was a convergence between several processes: technological (the development of web 2.0 and the availability of apps that disintermediate the relations between producers and consumers), socio-cultural (the emergence of new forms of collaboration based on trust) and economic (in the form of new markets for investors and professional opportunities for individuals and families distressed because of the crisis); this convergence created the premises for the development of the sharing economy as an industry and as a cultural phenomenon.
This contribution critically investigates the way industry operators are building, through their so- cial practices, an operational definition of sharing economy. The sample consists of 47 providers of goods/services belonging to 32 cases of sharing economy, interviewed with non-directive techniques in the frame of a national research that this special issue is devoted to.
The analysis of empirical material draws on the following research question: through what practices and discursive forms do the sharing economy operators shape the theme of sharing? The results highlight the emphasis of operators on the theme of trust as consumer motivation, while economic reasons are underestimated; their self-presentation as carriers of economic, social and normative in- novation; a fideistic attitude towards sharing as a force of socio-economic change; an ideological view of the sharing economy. Criticism in the sharing economy is raised by small-scale service providers, while large platform operators show an acritic attitude towards the many problematic issues related to the sharing economy (tension between relational and commercial aspects, regulation, injunction to share, quality of the innovation produced by the sharing economy).

Over the past decade, the rise of online marketplaces such as Amazon.com has profoundly changed the retail landscape. The current pandemic has further accelerated consumers' shift towards online buying in general and online marketplaces in particular. As a result, traditional distribution chains have been replaced by a market structure which is dominated by digital intermediaries. While this development has increased consumer choice, it has also enabled the influx of unsafe and defect products to US and EU consumer retail markets. It is a matter of controversy whether and how product liability rules, which have been designed for the traditional distribution chain model, can be applied to online intermediaries. Against this background, this Article explores how courts and lawmakers on both sides of the Atlantic are trying to adjust the existing product liability framework to the new reality of the platform economy. The comparative analysis shows that the regulatory strategies in Europe and the US differ considerably. While US law focusses on indirect regulation through product liability, EU law puts its emphasis on direct regulation through public enforcement of product safety rules and market surveillance by public authorities. In this regard, the proposal for a Digital Services Act, published by the European Commission in December 2020, will not bring much of a change. The Article calls for a reform of the EU Product Liability Directive that takes inspiration from recent developments in US product liability law. This could lead not only to a more balanced regulatory framework within the EU, but also to a transAtlantic convergence in the field of product liability. Building on the findings of the comparative analysis, the Article outlines several options for law reform and discusses how the regulatory design of product liability rules could affect the market structure and competition in the platform economy.

In dit preadvies wordt uitgelegd wat de platformeconomie is en hoe het begrip 'platformeconomie' zich onderscheidt van vergelijkbare begrippen, zoals de deeleconomie. Vervolgens wordt een uitgebreide analyse gemaakt van de impact van digitale platformen op grondrechten zoals privacyrechten, vrijheidsrechten, gelijkheidsrechten en procedurele rechten. Daarbij komen zowel positieve consequenties als risico's aan bod.

Resumen: Las plataformas intermediarias en línea se han convertido en protagonistas del desarro-llo del mercado digital y generan retos normativos importantes. Las nuevas tecnologías han favorecido nuevas formas de intercambio en las que el operador de la plataforma adopta una posición especial y compleja. El trabajo se centra en el análisis de las plataformas que, siendo prestadores de servicios de la sociedad de la información, actúan como intermediarias (también en sentido material), favoreciendo las transacciones entre los usuarios de la plataforma que pueden ser iguales (peer to peer, P2P, Consumer to Consumer, C2C) o entre empresarios (Business to Business, B2B), o entre empresario y consumidor (Business to Consumer, B2C). Se genera una relación contractual compleja: contrato celebrado por los usuarios con la plataforma que les permite el acceso para poder lograr la interacción y, posteriormente, el contrato celebrado entre los usuarios. El objeto del presente trabajo es el diagnóstico y propuesta de solución de los problemas que sus-cita la contratación a través de plataformas intermediarias en línea. Tenemos nuevos operadores que no encajan exactamente en los modelos regulados en la legislación de comercio electrónico lo que plantea problemas para determinar su responsabilidad en las transacciones realizadas por los usuarios a través de las plataformas. La "horizontalidad" de las relaciones jurídicas entre pares que se producen en un mercado multilateral es la que genera retos normativos. El acervo comunitario en materia de protección de los consu-midores está basado en un modelo de distribución en cadena: fabricante, mayorista, minorista y consu-midor en una escala vertical. El desequilibrio entre las posiciones de las partes cuando el empresario es proveedor y el adquirente consumidor (B2C), sirvió de justificación para el diseño de un sistema contractual de protección del consumidor, propio de la contratación en masa. La economía de la plataforma deja obsoleto este esquema porque los bienes y servicios se intercambian entre pares y los particulares actúan como proveedores (prosumidores). Y en este caso ¿Cuál es la parte débil que hay que proteger? En la primera parte del trabajo se analiza el fenómeno de la contratación a través de plataformas intermediarias en línea, tradicionalmente vinculado a la denominada "economía colaborativa".

Online intermediary platforms have become major players in the development of the digital marketplace and raise important regulatory challenges. Technological progress
This article focus on the analysis of platforms which are information society service providers and act as intermediaries (also in the material sense) enabling transactions between all kind of platform users: consumers (peer to peer, P2P, Consumer to Consumer, C2C) or entrepreneurs (Business to Business, B2B). A complex contractual relationship is generated: the contract concluded by the users with the platform that allows them access in order to achieve the interaction and, subsequently, the contract concluded between the users.
The purpose of this paper is to diagnose and propose solutions to problems arising from contracting through online intermediary platforms. We have new operators who do not exactly fit into the models regulated in e-commerce legislation, which poses problems in determining their responsibility for the transactions carried out by users through the platforms. 
The "horizontality" of the legal relationships between peers in a multilateral market that creates regulatory challenges. The Community acquis on consumer protection is based on a chain distribution model: manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer and consumer on a vertical scale. The imbalance between the positions of the parties when the entrepreneur is a supplier and the purchaser a consumer (B2C), served as a justification for the design of a contractual system of consumer protection, typical of mass contracting. The economics of the platform makes this scheme obsolete because goods and services are exchanged between peers and individuals act as suppliers (prosumers). And in this case, what's the weak part to protect?
The first part of the paper analyses the phenomenon of recruitment through online intermediary platforms, traditionally linked to the so-called "collaborative economy". After the necessary conceptual clarifications, the general characteristics are listed, at the same time as the problems that this contracting modality causes are diagnosed. Online reputation systems and the problems caused by false reviews, custom pricing are some of the topics discussed.
The second part of the article analyses the problems that the triangular structure of this kind of way of contract. It analyses the relationship between users and the platform operator, the rights and obligations of the parties, as well as contracts between users among themselves to which the platform operator is not a party, but is actively involved. The paper concludes with proposals for legal reform to promote transparency in this type of contract and clarify the liability regime of the platform operator.

The rise of digital platforms such as Uber and Airbnb has sparked a controversy about how to fit the new business models into existing legal categories and whether there is a need to adapt the regulatory framework to the new platform economy. In December 2017, in a much publicised judg- ment, the CJEU held that Uber is not a just a digital intermediary providing ‘information society services’, but a transport service provider. Consequently, according to the CJEU, Uber does not benefit from the ‘internal market clause in Article 3(2) of Directive 2000/31/EC, which precludes Member States from restricting the freedom to provide cross-border information society services. While Uber has discontinued its services in several EU Member States, the focus of the regulatory battle is now shifting towards short-term rental platforms. Thus, on 16 July 2018, the European Commission and a phalanx of national consumer authorities have called on Airbnb to comply with EU consumer law rules. At the same time, Member States are tightening their regulatory grip on short-term rentals. Now, the first request for a preliminary ruling concerning Airbnb has reached the CJEU. The brief case note provides some very first reflections on the pending case.

รายงานการศึกษานี้ ผู้เขียนถือเป็นการวิจัยขนาดย่อม เริ่มต้นมาจากความสนใจในประเด็นแรงงานและต้องเกี่ยวข้องกับนโยบายสาธารณะ จึงเลือกภารกิจของกระทรวงแรงงานต่อกรณีของงานบริการเรียกรถและส่งอาหารโดยแอปพลิเคชัน ได้อาศัยการศึกษาสภาพปัญหาจริงพร้อมกับสำรวจวรรณกรรมเพื่อคลี่คลายข้อสงสัยบางประการ มีระยะเวลาศึกษาระหว่างเดือนกันยายน-พฤศจิกายน 2562 เป็นส่วนหนึ่งของรายวิชา “การศึกษาดูงานด้านโยบายสาธารณะ” ในหลักสูตรรัฐประศาสนศาสตรดุษฎีบัณฑิต คณะสังคมศาสตร์และมนุษยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยมหิดล จึงขอขอบพระคุณผู้รับผิดชอบรายวิชานี้คือ รองศาสตราจารย์ ดร.นภเรณู สัจจรักษ์ ธีระฐิติ และคณาจารย์ทุกท่านในหลักสูตรที่ให้ความรู้มาตลอดระยะเวลาหนึ่งปีที่ผ่านมา

รายงานนี้ แบ่งออกเป็นสามส่วน คือ การศึกษาด้วยตนเองและสำรวจสภาพปัญหาจริงในภาคสนาม จำนวน 40 ชั่วโมง และศึกษาในองค์กรภาครัฐ จำนวน 20 ชั่วโมง จึงขอความอนุเคราะห์มาศึกษาที่กระทรวงแรงงานเพื่อพิจารณานโยบายแรงงานและภารกิจต่าง ๆ ใช้ประกอบการเขียนรายงานนี้ จึงขอขอบพระคุณ คุณสุรีย์พร ทัพภสุต ผู้อำนวยการกลุ่มงานวิชาการเศรษฐกิจการแรงงาน สำนักงานปลัดกระทรวงแรงงาน ที่รับผิดชอบดูแลการศึกษาครั้งนี้ ต่อมาขอขอบพระคุณผู้บริหารกระทรวงแรงงาน คุณพัฒนา พันธุฟัก ผู้ช่วยปลัดกระทรวงแรงงาน ที่เสนอภาพรวมนโยบายแรงงานและแนวทางที่เป็นไปได้ต่อผลกระทบของงานในเศรษฐกิจแพลตฟอร์ม ท้ายนี้ขอบพระคุณ คุณมยุรีย์ สาชุม กลุ่มงานวิจัยและพัฒนา และคุณประมร เชื้อปาศักดิ์ กลุ่มงานพัฒนายุทธศาสตร์ ที่ให้ความรู้และร่วมสนทนาประเด็นของการจ้างงานรูปแบบใหม่ ภาคนอกระบบ ยุทธศาสตร์การบริหารแรงงาน 20 ปี รวมทั้ง คุณสมศักดิ์ พรหมดำ ผู้อำนวยการสำนักพัฒนาผู้ฝึกและเทคโนโลยีการฝึก กรมพัฒนาฝีมือแรงงาน และท่านอื่น ๆ ที่ให้ความรู้เกี่ยวกับแนวทางของการพัฒนาทักษะ

รายงานนี้เป็นการศึกษารายประเด็น โดยบางส่วนจะใช้พัฒนาต่อยอดในดุษฎีนิพนธ์ และคาดหวังว่าข้อเสนอบางประการจะทำให้กระทรวงแรงงานและภาคธุรกิจของบริษัทจัดเตรียมแพลตฟอร์มใส่ใจต่อคุณภาพชีวิตของแรงงานพร้อมสร้างงานที่มีคุณค่า เพื่อก้าวสู่ความยุติธรรมทางสังคมตามที่องค์การแรงงานระหว่างประเทศ (ILO) เสนอไว้เมื่อ 100 ปีที่แล้ว ประจวบเหมาะกับประเทศไทยเป็นสมาชิกมาตั้งแต่แรกเริ่มการก่อตั้งหลังสงครามโลกครั้งที่หนึ่ง ในปี ค.ศ. 1919 จึงไม่ควรเพิกเฉยต่อสิทธิแรงงานที่ถูกเอารัดเอาเปรียบโดยกลวิธีใหม่ของการว่าจ้างรายครั้งผ่านแอปพลิเคชัน หรือการจ้างงานเหมาช่วงรูปแบบใหม่ เพราะกรณีที่มีสื่อกลางจัดเตรียมแพลตฟอร์มให้เกิดความสัมพันธ์การจ้างงาน ย่อมไม่สามารถเรียกว่าเป็นการทำงานอิสระ หากรายงานการศึกษานี้มีข้อผิดพลาดประการใด ผู้เขียนขอน้อมรับไว้ โดยไม่เกี่ยวข้องกับบุคคลอื่นที่กล่าวถึง

Seit Jahren fordern die Arbeitnehmer:innenvertretungen, darunter auch die AK, einen Rechtsrahmen für Arbeitskräfte, die über Online-Plattformen berufstätig sind, um Mindeststandards hinsichtlich der rechtlichen und sozialen Absicherung sicherzustellen. Daher begrüßt die AK, dass die Kommission einen Richtlinienvorschlag zur Verbesserung der Arbeitsbedingungen in der Plattformarbeit vorgelegt hat.
Positiv ist unter anderem die Beweislastumkehr, nach der die Arbeitsplattform es belegen muss, wenn kein Arbeitsverhältnis vorlegt. Jedoch sind in einigen Bereichen auch Nachschärfungen notwendig: Die Kriterien für die gesetzliche Vermutung sind zu restriktiv und es brauchte eine klare Definition der Person, die die rechtlich verantwortliche Dienstgeberin ist.

บทความนี้ทำความเข้าใจความสัมพันธ์การจ้างงานและสถานะการจ้างงานของ Gig economy โดยทัศนมิติแรงงาน งานที่มีคุณค่าเป็นทัศนมิติของผลกระทบเชิงบวกเพราะใช้อธิบายปรากฎการณ์ของการครอบงำรูปแบบธุรกิจใหม่แพลตฟอร์ม และสะท้อนให้เห็นช่องว่างของมาตรฐานแรงงานสากล แต่ Gig economy ยังขาดความชัดเจนในการตีความ บ่อยครั้งให้ความสำคัญที่ทัศนมิติทางธุรกิจ จนละเมิดสิทธิแรงงานและไม่สามารถเข้าถึงระบบการคุ้มครองทางสังคม ดังนั้นข้อเสนอแนะสำหรับแพลตฟอร์มแรงงาน และแสดงภาพรวมของแรงงานกลุ่มที่มีระดับความเสี่ยงสูง เช่น งานขับขี่ส่งอาหารและงานภายในบ้าน นอกจากนี้ กระทรวงแรงงานควรทบทวนบทบาทของการบริหารแรงงาน เนื่องจากการจ้างงานแบบ Gig economy ไม่ใช่การทำงานอาชีพอิสระ แท้จริงแล้วมีความสัมพันธ์การจ้างงานในรูปแบบของการจ้างงานเหมาช่วงโดยผู้แทนจัดหางาน
----------------
This paper provides more understandings or concept of the employment relations and status of the gig economy from the labour perspective. The decent work is perspectives of positive impact because it explains the phenomenon of the dominance of a new platform business and reflects a gap of international labour standards. However, the gig economy is lack of a clear interpretation, it often focuses on the business perspective and leads to human rights abuse and exclusion of social protection systems. Therefore, preliminary suggestions for labour platforms and reveal an overview of labour in the group of high-risk levels, such as food delivery and domestic work. Furthermore, the Ministry of Labour should review the role of labour administration because types of employment in the gig economy are not self-employment. In fact, it is an interaction of employment relations in the form of subcontracting by a private employment agency.

This article adds to the debate on digital labour by including sexual labour, a feminised form of work that is traditionally excluded from official labour statistics and mainstream labour politics because of the embedded sociolegal, cultural and political context that defines female sexual labour as illegitimate work. This exclusion has been extended to digital labour politics. This article draws on a four-year multi-method qualitative study in the UK, which in part focused on sex work mediated and managed by digital platforms. Drawing on and adding to the literature on women's digital entrepreneurialism, I argue that digital sex workers embody an 'entrepreneurial subjectivity' and narrate ideals of flexibility and choice. However, on closer inspection, digital platforms shape and manage the labour so that agency over labour practices and processes become coerced choices. keywords technology; digital labour; sex work; gig economy; digital sexual labour; platforms; platform-managed labour; gig work 879749F ER0010.1177/0141778919879749Feminist ReviewRand

Одной из ключевых особенностей развития цифровой экономики является процесс «платформизации», оказывающий существенное трансформирующее воздействие на традиционные рынки товаров и услуг, отрасли экономики и бизнес-модели под влиянием развития и распространения цифровых платформ.
В настоящее время крупнейшими по показателю рыночной капитализации компаниями в мире являются преимущественно платформенные компании (Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook и др.).

แรงงานแพลตฟอร์มต้องเผชิญกับงานที่มีความเสี่ยง ไม่มั่นคง และภยันตรายในอนาคตของทุนนิยม จึงเป็นการเปลี่ยนผ่านจากงานที่มีสัญญาระยะยาวและสั้น กลายสู่งานเป็นรายครั้งตามความต้องการ ลำดับแรกเป็นการทำความเข้าใจแรงงานแพลตฟอร์มในประเด็นต่าง ๆ ไม่ว่าจะเป็นรูปแบบของการจ้างงาน สถานะของแรงงานเสี่ยง และเส้นแบ่งระหว่างภาคที่เป็นทางการและไม่เป็นทางการ ถัดมาเป็นการพิจารณาดิจิทัลแพลตฟอร์มคือความสัมพันธ์หลายฝ่าย ได้แก่ ผู้รับจ้าง ผู้ว่าจ้าง และผู้ให้บริการแพลตฟอร์ม ท้ายสุดคือการอธิบายสถานะของแรงงานแพลตฟอร์มเหมือนกับผู้รับจ้างอิสระ และมีข้อโต้แย้งต่อเศรษฐกิจแบ่งปัน เพราะการจัดสรรทรัพยากรที่ไม่เป็นธรรมในโครงสร้างทางเศรษฐกิจ ยิ่งกว่านี้ข้อเสนอของความยืดหยุ่นทำให้เกิดงานที่ไร้คุณค่า และเป็นการกดขี่ขูดรีดรูปแบบใหม่ของทุนเสรีนิยมใหม่โดยผู้ให้บริการแพลตฟอร์ม
------------------------------------
In the future of capitalism, platform workers have to face precarious work, insecurity, and dangerousness, which is transitioning from long-term and short-term contracts to on-demand work. The first step is understanding platform workers in many issues, such as forms of work, the status of precarious labour, and obstacles between the formal sector and the informal sector. The second is a consideration of digital platforms those are a multi-sided platform (e.g. contractors, clients, and platform providers). The final is an explanation of the status of platform workers as an independent contractor and have the argument to sharing economy because unfairness of resource distribution in the economic structure. Furthermore, the argument of flexibility is becoming indecent work, and it is exploitation in the new form of neoliberal capitalism by platform providers.

The microblogging platform Twitter is the largest global network for the exchange of brief information from all areas of social life. The platform has been in existence for fourteen years, but has only stabilized its financial results in recent years. Contrary to the inclining growth and stabilization of financial results, the number of beneficiaries has declining growth, which points to the conclusion of saturation of income and number of beneficiaries. The largest number of users of the platform is in the USA, and they generate the largest number of tweets. During the pandemic, presidential elections took place in the USA, which brought the platform to the attention of the world public due to the tweets the politicians posted. All this affected the recovery and growth of the number of users on the platform. The aim of this paper is to investigate the financial operations of the platform at the beginning of the Covid 19 pandemic, as well as the movement of the number of users at that time. The results of the research can serve as a basis for other research in the field of social sciences, related to the phenomenon of the Twitter platform.

This workshop addresses the changing nature of work and the important role of exchange platforms as both intermediaries and managers. It aims to bring together interdisciplinary and critical scholars working on the power dynamics of digitally mediated labor. By doing so, the workshop provides a forum for discussing current and future research opportunities on the digital economy, including the sharing economy, the platform economy, the gig economy, and other adjacent framings. Of particular interest to this workshop is the intersection between worker and provider subjectivities and the roles platforms take in managing work through algorithms and software. Our one-day workshop accommodates up to 20 participants.

The Global Financial Crisis of 2008 ushered neoliberal capitalism into a prolonged hegemonic crisis. From Brexit, to Trump, from record inequality, to climate politics, the elites of the world-system are increasingly divided on what is to be done. A generalised crisis of legitimacy is thus affecting the world-system, whereby the people as a subject no longer believe as they once did and are no longer capable of acting accordingly. The Coronavirus Crash of 2020 heightened these contradictions dramatically, leading many to begin questioning whether neoliberalism will survive this latest crisis and what will replace it? Historical equivalents of such political-economic transitions suggest that a new social order will be built out of the ashes of the old. But if this is the case, why has a transition to a more progressive next system not occurred already? An eruption of mass movements has been observed globally since the financial crisis of 2008, yet after a month or a year, we hear little about what consequences these exhortations for popular sovereignty actualised. It is precisely within this space – between the several years of aftermath of a social movement’s major mobilisations and political-economic transition – that this thesis seeks to make an original contribution to knowledge. The central research question animating this thesis is how have the consequences attributable to three left-populist movements in the wake of their major mobilisations in 2015-2017 shaped the emergent transition to what comes after neoliberalism and what strategy for the institutionalisation of their goals has been the most effective over the medium term? In response, my overall argument is that, as a result of both the external structural barriers and internal collective-agential choices facing the three movements, the Climate Justice Movement in Australia, the Podemos Movement-Party in Spain and the Black Lives Matter Movement in the US, they have each struggled to guide the transition beyond neoliberalism in the direction of a more democratic, just, and sustainable system. I identify the three movement’s strategies, respectively, as co-optive institutionalisation (similar to NGO-isation), disruptive institutionalisation (sometimes referred to in the literature as ‘from protest to politics’) and disruptive non-institutionalisation (effectively indefinite protest and a refusal to develop into any formal organisation over time). Instead of a single revolutionary moment of rupture, the most likely transition, which I argue we have begun living through with the Coronavirus Crash of 2020, is a slow decay from the neoliberal model of capitalism into ‘techno-feudalism’. I argue that this represents a new mode of production which can summarily be defined as a return to some characteristics of pre-capitalist class society, and the instrumentalisation of technology for social control. As Wolfgang Streeck’s How Will Capitalism End? noted (2016, p. 28 drawing on Winters 2011) present levels of wealth inequality between the richest 400 Americans and the rest of the American population are comparable to that seen at the height of the Roman empire between a senator and a slave. The emergence of techno-feudalism can be observed in a new rentier-based economy dominated by a handful of platform economy corporations wherein the rapid flows of intangible capital and immaterial labour are determined by oligarchs who control – not so much the physical infrastructure of mines, factories and shops as the dominant class did under capitalism – but rather the crucial vectors of information exchange which figures such as Jeff Bezos of Amazon and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook have used to become among the wealthiest and influential human beings in history. Techno-feudalism is distinct from capitalism in that it features a new class structure of Techno-Rentier Oligarchs who own the giant platform corporations and a popular class which lives under the dictatorship of the algorithm who have been made increasingly precarious by automation and global labour market competition which I call the Techno-Precariat Commoners. Rather than at the point of production only, as per class struggle under industrial capitalism, under techno-feudalism the elite seeks to everywhere create regimes of New Enclosure by controlling, monopolising, privatising and then militarising all societal resources from public space to creative media shared over the internet. New state functions render the social contract of liberal democratic capitalism void since political and economic power is increasingly concentrated in the hands of this oligarchy and the state repressive apparatus (policing, prisons, intelligence agencies and so on) grows more sophisticated by the year. Cast against this dystopian spectre of technology for social control, the popular class of the Techno-Precariat Commoners employ the social movement strategy of commoning to create New Commons systems of open access and democratically negotiated management. Remunicipalisation movements provide a model for reversing the privatisation of city-scale utilities like water, electricity, gas, public transport and other services. The thesis is shaped by a post-Marxist theoretical framework driven by the ideas of Paolo Gerbaudo, Laurence Cox, Guy Standing, Chantal Mouffe, Nick Srnicek, and Andre Gorz. Within a political economy framework influenced by their ideas, the consequences of the three movements are analysed in relation to mass culture, institutions and policy. Having established that these movements are confronted with a new form of political economy in techno-feudalism, I argue that this is the meta-reason it is so difficult for social movements to have a major impact on society today. Techno-feudalism has created a steeper terrain of struggle in which political opportunity structural barriers have made pursuing the political goals of left-populist movements objectively more difficult than under conditions of neoliberalism, social democracy or early capitalist expansion. Mass surveillance, the capacity for hyper-targeted repression and spectacular algorithmic forms of distraction are new challenges to which social movements will have to adapt and overcome. This does not amount to a call for defeatism. History is simultaneously moving forwards technologically while at the same time it is being driven backwards politically. Technology can provide the illusion that progress happens by default. But when progressive social movements and parties retreat, history does not move forward, nor does it stand still, patiently waiting. Regressive movements, parties and oligarchs have their own visions for what kind of system should replace neoliberal capitalism and it is this revanchist revolutionary subject that has stepped in to fill the void.

The Uber business model has not only disrupted the labour-economy by technological intervention, but also raised apprehensions about the new framework within which the platform economy governs the relationship between Uber and its drivers. Through an in-depth survey of fifty Uber drivers, this research paper attempts to discuss: the forms of labour control on Uber driver-partners by the Uber company, customers and the government within the broader framework of neoliberal platform economy; the challenge of increasing flexibility at the cost of rising informalisation of work in the platform economy; and policy implications and a way forward.

This article discusses platformization and its impact on urban planning. Platformization refers to an increased utilization of platform logic in society. In urban planning, it is manifest in the emergence of digital co-production platforms. They offer a range of genuinely beneficial features-especially digitally-assisted collaborative mapping, ideation, sharing, and analytics-and facilitated integration of citizen input into democratic planning system. As such, they have a potential to develop into a new urban planning model that meets the needs of a complex late modern society.

Esta investigación explora la realidad de las mujeres que trabajan dentro de las plataformas Uber Eats y Glovo en la capital de Ecuador: Quito. Estas plataformas sostienen que el trabajo de repartición es un emprendimiento, donde quien realiza las entregas es independiente, no tiene jefe, maneja su propio tiempo y tiene sus propios medios de trabajo. Sin embargo, esta actividad se desempeña bajo una exacerbada inestabilidad laboral, un control estricto por parte de las plataformas sobre los horarios, rutas y precios de repartición – en si, una actividad laboral cargada de vulneraciones. Con una metodología que integra la historia oral con las críticas feministas de posicionalidad y un marco teórico que recupera las propuestas de economía feminista, interseccionalidad y colonialidad de género, este estudio sitúa a las mujeres entrevistadas como sujetos productores de conocimiento con experiencias de resistencia. A través de tres historias de vida, se hacen visibles las violencias que enfrentan las mujeres que trabajan en estas plataformas. De esta forma, se entiende la matriz de dominación como un entretramado de sistemas de opresión donde el género, la clase y la nacionalidad se articulan para producir experiencias complejas de las personas repartidoras – y sobre todo de las mujeres. Como resultado, este estudio hace visible tres de los aspectos que generan mayor vulnerabilidad a las mujeres repartidoras: el racismo, el acoso sexual y la carga de trabajo reproductivo.

The political conflicts and struggles around urban platforms shape how they are understood and what their implications are. The argument is that more analysis of these struggles is needed, and the chapter takes this task forward, comparing across several platforms in order to identify common patterns and to note the effect of treating platforms as a very broad sector, captured in formulations such as ‘sharing economy’ and ‘collaborative economy’. In the face of criticism, social movement mobilisation and attempts by states to regulate platform businesses, some common legitimation tactics are employed by the businesses. The chapter introduces two of these: platforms’ discursive claims to be vectors of progress which frame states and regulation as backward; and platform sponsored grassroots lobbying, where civil society pressures are created or co-opted to influence public opinion and regulation. I identify three broad approaches to platform sponsored based grassroots lobbying: the direct mobilisation of platform users, the creation of front groups, and partnerships with existing grassroots groups.

This report compiles emerging reflections and insights from the
research project ‘Policy frameworks for digital platforms - Moving from
openness to inclusion’. The project seeks to explore and articulate
institutional-legal arrangements that are adequate to a future economy
that best serves the ideas of development justice.This work is drawn
from preliminary research being undertaken by an interdisciplinary
research network from the global South and North. The initiative is led
by IT for Change, India, and supported by the International
Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada.

This article takes the case of Uber, a global platform specialized in transport technologies, to reappraise the claims of the sharing economy. The case presents a chronology of the struggles over the regulation of these digital markets in the US and France, using Uber´s self-description and web discourse for additional illustrative purposes. It exposes Uber´s
business model, the key driving actors and their strategies as well as multi-scalar countermovements. The analysis is framed from a Hayekian and a Polanyian perspective, and the potential of the sharing economy to go beyond market fundamentalism. The Polanyian utopia of sharing as more than market relations based on self-interest is mobilized for legitimizing the platform. The Hayekian utopia of a market society which transforms social relations of friendship and community service into market activities is describing actual development. Finally, Polanyian “counter movements” are described and their potentials are discussed.

Leveraging a literature review performed by the author, the work has explores what is a platform and how it works. Next, it explores how technology advances are shaping platforms and the shift of the focus on the ecosystems. It has been found that in the future the competition will be ecosystems against ecosystems and not platforms versus platforms anymore.

This course examines the streaming platforms and their cultural impacts. Grounding the course in readings from film, media, and communication studies, we will examine the general state of writings around platforms, as well as the blind-spots of platform research. This will include attention to geopolitics (platform imperialism), attention to the new manners in which film and media industries globalize (in both production and circulation), the ways that nations or regions are born out of particular media platform configurations, and the impact of earlier formats such as broadcast television on streaming platforms. This course will introduce students to crucial texts in the expanded field of platform studies (from analyses of Netflix to theories of platform capitalism), while also extending debates from film and media studies to address lacunae in current platform analyses.

This course will focus on streaming platform research in particular, across a number of geographical and regional contexts. Drawing on the increasingly rich work on Asian platforms (East Asian and South Asian especially), this could will focus on this region to decenter the presumed dominance of so-called “Western” (i.e. Silicon Valley) platforms. Adopting a case study model, this course will include weekly presentations on platform case studies, as well as attention to major streaming players such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video and the models of global media they develop.

Ekonomi gig, sebagai bentuk ekonomi yang menekankan pada upah berdasarkan jumlah barang/jasa yang diselesaikan, kini semakin banyak diperbincangkan. Di satu sisi, banyak yang menyanjung ekonomi gig sebagai ekonomi masa depan, karena telah mampu menyerap jutaan tenaga kerja, memberi mereka fleksibilitas, dan menunjang pertumbuhan ekonomi. Namun di sisi lain, ekonomi gig telah berkontribusi pada kerentanan kerja, karena ketiadaan perlindungan sosial dan kepastian pendapatan bagi para pekerjanya. Kerentanan tersebut memungkinkan untuk terjadi, karena mereka diklasifikasikan sebagai kontraktor independen dengan hubungan kemitraan, bukan hubungan kerja buruh-pengusaha. Dampaknya, pekerja gig menjadi belum menikmati perlindungan kerja berupa upah minimum, jam kerja 40 jam/minggu, hak berserikat, hak libur, dan jaminan sosial sebagaimana yang diterima pekerja dalam hubungan kerja buruh-pengusaha. Sementara itu, hubungan kemitraan berjalan dengan tidak adil, karena setiap keputusan dilakukan sepihak oleh perusahaan platform, sehingga merugikan pekerja gig. Dalam buku ini, kami mengurai persoalan yang terjadi dalam ekonomi gig di Indonesia. Buku ini menyajikan analisis tentang belum tercapainya kondisi kerja layak dan adil bagi pekerja gig, baik yang bekerja sebagai pengemudi ojek online, kurir, musisi, buruh jahit, dan pekerja kreatif. Persoalan tersebut dianalisis dari kacamata yang beragam, dari pendekatan ekonomi politik, regulasi, budaya kritis, hingga kekuasaan. Buku ini menjadi bacaan awal yang penting untuk memahami beragam persoalan di ekonomi gig dan bagaimana untuk mendorong terwujudnya kerja layak dan adil bagi pekerja gig.

Per clausola del cliente più favorito si intende quel patto con cui il predisponente si obbliga ad accordare al beneficiario le condizioni più vantaggiose concesse al proprio "cliente più favorito". Il saggio, dopo un'analisi delle diverse strutture e tipologie della clausola, esamina le funzioni del patto e gli effetti dello stesso sul mercato e sulla concorrenza. Nella complessità delle soluzioni, la questione ha trovato recente disciplina nel settore turistico-alberghiero, ove la pattuizione, in virtù dell'art. 1, comma 166, L. 4.8.2017, n. 124, è stata dichiarata nulla.

The so-called most favoured customer clause is an arrangement whereby a supplier is obliged to offer to a customer terms that are at least as favourable as those offered by the same supplier to his "most favoured" customer. The paper starts off by distinguishing between different structures and types of the clause. Moreover, it analyses the functions of the clause and its consequences on market and competition. Within the complexity of solutions, the issue has been recently regulated in the hotel booking sector by the Competition Law 124/2017, article 1, paragraph 166.

TESI DI LAUREA TRIENNALE - FILOSOFIA

L’innovazione tecnologica ha conosciuto negli ultimi anni un’innegabile accelerazione, in ragione della quale si definisce quarta rivoluzione industriale il processo, ancora in corso, di ridefinizione dei modelli produttivi, dei meccanismi di estrazione di profitto nonché delle relazioni industriali e sociali. Con l’automazione si è compiuto il processo, iniziato alla fine dello scorso secolo, di definitiva affermazione della rete come elemento chiave della produzione, a livello di spazio così come di modalità di organizzazione della stessa. Le piattaforme web sono divenute uno dei protagonisti dell’economia contemporanea, luogo di raccordo tra domanda e offerta e tra produzione e consumo, nonché uno spazio di sperimentazione di nuove forme di sfruttamento fondate sul controllo delle prestazioni e sulla tracciabilità, attraverso l’accesso ai dati e la loro elaborazione e messa a valore tramite gli algoritmi (si parla non a caso di platform economy e società dei big data). Nello spazio del web si sono articolate gerarchie di potere velate da una cortina di inintelligibilità costruita attraverso un discorso ottimistico, volto a presentare il progresso come un elemento neutrale e svincolato dai rapporti di potere esistenti, sottratto di conseguenza dallo spazio del dibattito pubblico: la presunta neutralità della tecnica si è tradotta dunque in uno strumento utile in primis alla neutralizzazione del conflitto. Quest’ultima è stata perseguita attraverso molteplici strumenti, che interessano il campo delle politiche industriali, economiche e sociali. Non si tratta di un processo particolarmente innovativo: il tentativo da parte del potere di disciplinare, pacificare e neutralizzare le istanze dei subalterni non nasce con l’automazione, ma è oggi agevolato da una disponibilità pressoché esclusiva di mezzi di controllo ad elevatissimo potenziale di pervasività, da uno sbilanciamento del mercato su pochi monopoli e dalla frammentazione sociale determinata dalle politiche portate avanti dai governi occidentali negli ultimi 40 anni.
La domanda alla quale nel corso dell’elaborato si proverà dunque a fornire alcune possibili risposte è se, nella società delineata, esistano la necessità e lo spazio per una rinnovata pratica del conflitto, e come questo possa articolarsi.

This chapter analyses the right to data portability and its peculiarities in the platform economy, where this right is fundamental for competition law, users’ protection and privacy, because of the presence of strong direct and indirect network effects and consequent high switching costs. In particular, it analyses the right to data portability as settled out in the GDPR, together with the interpretation given by the Article 29 Working Group, and the other “porting rights” in the Digital Single Market strategy and in the European Commission Proposals “for a Regulation on a framework for the free flow of non-personal data in the European Union”, “for a Regulation on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services” and in the proposed “Directive on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content”.
It underlines six critical issues related to the right to data portability: 1) a privacy issue, due to the huge sharing of data of other individuals; 2) the need to establish also the portability of non-personal data; 3) the need to establish the portability also for professional users that are not natural person; 4) the need to protect the rights of the controller and his investment when the data are not merely collected but also reworked; 5) the risk of decreased competition with a strong and non-scalable regulation; 6) the necessity to pay attention at the technical solutions available in order to assure practicable application methods, in particular considering the needs of smaller operators.

The “sharing economy”, a term often used interchangeably with the “collaborative economy” and “collaborative consumption”, is a recurrent topic both in public and academic debate on new Web-based services characterized by forms of peer-to-peer or business-to-peer sharing. This paper investigates it theoretically as an “anti-concept”, that is, an unnecessary and rationally unusable label forged to replace a concept endowed with greater legitimacy. A critique of the sharing economy as a common-sense construct is carried out in order to suggest its rejection as an analytical and interpretative category and to question any unconditioned cultural legitimacy of the sharing economy under its promoters’ economic interests. Four main critical issues are discussed: (a) the contradiction between the relational and the commercial dimension; (b) regulatory challenges related to the dimensions of labour, trust, risk and agency; (c) the injunction to share; and (d) the consequences of the sharing economy in terms of social change. The notion of neoliberal entanglement economy is proposed to replace that of sharing economy.

Contents

1. Introduction
2. “I think we’re in the midst of a revolution”
3. Genesis of a successful subject
4. Discussion: Critical issues
5. Breaking with common sense
6. Conclusion

L’entreprise de taxi « Uber » s’est rapidement implantée dans la plupart des grandes villes du monde. Elle gagne en popularité grâce à son application mobile qui met directement en contact ses « chauffeurs-partenaires » et des clients et clientes, et offre des déplacements à des tarifs concurrentiels. Son apparition s’est produite en tension, voire en confrontation avec les principaux acteurs de l’industrie du taxi traditionnelle, car le modèle Uber, associé à l’économie de plateforme, repose sur l’idée de la libre entreprise. C’est pourquoi Uber tente par différents moyens dont des activités de lobbying, une présence dans les médias de masse et les médias sociaux, de même que le recours à des moyens juridiques afin de faire dérèglementer l’industrie du taxi. À Montréal, comme ailleurs, il en résulte une baisse de valeurs des permis de taxi et une diminution des revenus chez les chauffeurs de l’industrie traditionnelle. Face aux inquiétudes de ces derniers et à la résistance des propriétaires de permis, le gouvernement du Québec propose un projet pilote pour permettre à Uber de poursuivre ses opérations dans un nouveau cadre légal. L’objectif principal de ce mémoire est de mettre en lumière les conditions nécessaires à l’implantation et à la consolidation d’Uber dans la région métropolitaine. Pour y parvenir, nous avons fait appel à une perspective de géographie critique et en particulier aux travaux de Brenner qui nous permettent d’avancer que l’implantation d’Uber relève de trois processus de transformations sociospatiales soit la mondialisation, la métropolisation et la néolibéralisation. Nous avons été en mesure de voir que la stratégie adoptée par Uber vise la « destruction » ou le démantèlement de certains arrangements institutionnels mis en place pendant la période keynésienne-fordiste et la « création » de nouveaux arrangements favorables à la libre-concurrence et à l’économie de plateforme.

Pg. 92-128

The disruptions created by the digital platform economy have caused both policy makers and workers to generate adaptations to a rapidly changing context. These disruptions are challenging existing definitions of informality and precarity, as well  as  standard  policy  responses  to  worker  rights  and  protections.  While  pre-venting precarity is still very much the goal of policy interventions, the idea that ‘informality’ is the cause of precarity has come to be questioned. In this article we introduce the decent work standard developed by Richard Heeks for digital online labour markets like Freelancer, Upwork or Amazon Mechanical Turk.  We use a literature review of empirical research about ride-hailing to adapt this framework to the ‘location-based service delivery’ market. This new framework is then tested against an in-depth analysis of informality and precarity in the ride hailing sec-tor  in  Cali-Colombia.    Findings  from  this  research  show  that  platform  workers  lack  many  of  the  protections  recommended  by  Heeks’  decent  work  framework.    However,  the  case  study  also  demonstrates  that  workers  are  evolving  some  creative ways to  grapple with specific aspects of precarity within the ride-hailing sector. Based on this analysis, we argue that policy analysis and worker innova-tions need to ‘meet in the middle’ and suggest some specific policy reforms that will be appropriate to the Colombian and Latin American context.

The platform model is the distinguishing organizational form of the early decades of the twenty-first century. Whereas actors in markets contract, hierarchies command, and networks collaborate, platforms co-opt assets, resources, and activities that are not part of the firm. As a distinctive organizational form, the platform model confronts a distinctive managerial challenge: how to manage value-creating activities that are undertaken on the platform but not in the firm? In a triangular geometry, platform owners co-opt the behavior of providers and users, enrolling them in the practices of algorithmic management without managerial authority having been delegated to them. Acting on their own behalf, the ratings and other activities of providers and consumers are algorithmically translated into rankings and other calculating devices that circulate through feedback loops that are twisted rather than circular. Algorithmic management involves a peculiar kind of cybernetic control because at each fold of the feedback loop accountability can be deflected and denied. Whereas Scientific Management in the early twentieth century offered a legitimating principle for the growth of a new managerial class, algorithmic management in the early twenty-first century is reshaping the managerial class. Its power asymmetries at the organizational level are related to coalitions at the regulatory level in which platform owner and investors are in alliance with platform consumers.