The Experts below are selected from a list of 35190 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Juliet B. Schor - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Sharing Economy
The Oxford Handbook of Consumption, 2018Co-Authors: Juliet B. Schor, Mehmet CansoyAbstract:The “Sharing Economy” has become highly contentious. This chapter takes a broad view, addressing key issues in ongoing debates: terminology, participation, experiences, regulation, discrimination, and inequality. High cultural capital (HCC) participants, who are the majority, see themselves creating a virtuous moral alternative to the conventional market. However, their activities increasingly take place on large for-profit platforms that are resulting in a series of undesirable outcomes. These include pervasive racial and class discrimination, and the generation of inequality. The two largest platforms (Airbnb and Uber) have had adverse effects on urban housing and transportation, which have been the subject of recent regulatory efforts. Ultimately, the dynamism of the Sharing Economy, and the lack of fixed institutions, norms, and participants, means consumer researchers should be asking critical questions about the sector, its claims of common good, and its impact on social life.
-
Putting the Sharing Economy into perspective
Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 2017Co-Authors: Koen Frenken, Juliet B. SchorAbstract:We develop a conceptual framework that allows us to define the Sharing Economy and its close cousins and understand its sudden rise from an economic-historic perspective. We then assess the Sharing Economy platforms in terms of the economic, social and environmental impacts. We end with reflections on current regulations and future alternatives, and suggest a number of future research questions.
-
putting the Sharing Economy into perspective
Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 2017Co-Authors: Koen Frenken, Juliet B. SchorAbstract:We develop a conceptual framework that allows us to define the Sharing Economy and its close cousins and we understand its sudden rise from an economic-historic perspective. We then assess the Sharing Economy platforms in terms of the economic, social and environmental impacts. We end with reflections on current regulations and future alternatives, and suggest a number of future research questions.
Raz Godelnik - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Sharing Economy dilemma: the response of incumbent firms to the rise of the Sharing Economy
International Journal of Innovation, 2020Co-Authors: Raz GodelnikAbstract:Objective of the Study : This paper explores whether and to what degree incumbent firms innovate in response to competition from the Sharing Economy. Methodology/Approach : Data on incumbents’ actions related to the Sharing Economy between 2011 and 2015 was collected from multiple resources. Two conceptual frameworks, the OECD Oslo Manual and Pisano’s Innovation Landscape Map, were jointly used to determine whether incumbents’ actions could be considered as innovation and their level of innovativeness. Originality/Relevance : As the Sharing Economy has grown rapidly in the last decade, offering new ways to create value, so has the discourse about its disruptive capacity. Yet, not enough is known about the Sharing Economy’s impact on incumbent firms beyond the disruptive capacity narrative. Main Results : The study identified 187 actions related to the Sharing Economy that were taken by 134 incumbent firms between 2011 and 2015. Less than half of these actions are considered innovative, and the majority among them are at the lowest end of the innovation continuum. Theoretical/Methodological Contribution : This study contributes to the literature on the Sharing Economy by developing a synthesized innovation-based framework to evaluate incumbent firms’ response to Sharing Economy entrants. Social/management contributions : The results of this study and the methodology it uses provide benchmarking opportunities for incumbents in similar circumstances, and also puts into question the disruptive narrative around the Sharing Economy.
Georg Reischauer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Social Organization of the Sharing Economy
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017Co-Authors: Johanna Mair, Georg Reischauer, Siobhan O'mahonyAbstract:Existing research on the Sharing Economy has mainly focused on economic outcomes and consequences. In this symposium we pay attention to the social organization of the Sharing Economy and thus how ...
-
Capturing the dynamics of the Sharing Economy: Institutional research on the plural forms and practices of Sharing Economy organizations
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2017Co-Authors: Johanna Mair, Georg ReischauerAbstract:Abstract To date, management research has paid little attention to dynamics of the Sharing Economy: how markets for Sharing resources emerge and change, and the intended and unintended consequences of resource Sharing. We propose a definition of the Sharing Economy that brings the role of organizations as infrastructure providers to the fore and helps us to assess the culturally rooted pluralism of forms and practices in these organizations. We introduce two perspectives in research on organizational institutionalism that focus on culture and pluralism – institutional complexity and institutional work – and argue that unpacking the pluralism of organizational forms and practices is critical to examine the dynamics of the Sharing Economy. We propose an agenda for research to capture the dynamics of the Sharing Economy at the organizational, field, and inter-field level. Such an agenda helps to document and analyze how the Sharing Economy manifests and evolves across various economic systems and has the potential to refine and recast existing management theory.
Koen Frenken - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Putting the Sharing Economy into perspective
Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 2017Co-Authors: Koen Frenken, Juliet B. SchorAbstract:We develop a conceptual framework that allows us to define the Sharing Economy and its close cousins and understand its sudden rise from an economic-historic perspective. We then assess the Sharing Economy platforms in terms of the economic, social and environmental impacts. We end with reflections on current regulations and future alternatives, and suggest a number of future research questions.
-
putting the Sharing Economy into perspective
Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 2017Co-Authors: Koen Frenken, Juliet B. SchorAbstract:We develop a conceptual framework that allows us to define the Sharing Economy and its close cousins and we understand its sudden rise from an economic-historic perspective. We then assess the Sharing Economy platforms in terms of the economic, social and environmental impacts. We end with reflections on current regulations and future alternatives, and suggest a number of future research questions.
John Infranca - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Place of the Sharing Economy
2018Co-Authors: Nestor M. Davidson, John InfrancaAbstract:The Sharing Economy is grounded — situated in place — in ways that many other recent technological transformations have not been. And, as we have argued in prior work, the Sharing Economy is a particularly urban phenomenon. Appreciating the place of the Sharing Economy sheds light not only on the nature of this phenomenon, but also on the regulatory landscape it has engendered. This chapter, which will appear in the forthcoming Cambridge Handbook on the Law of the Sharing Economy, examines how the political Economy of regulation and innovation in this sector has grown more complex as some Sharing firms have circumvented local authorities and bargained for more favorable and uniform regulation at the state level. The result has been tensions not just between regulators and the regulated, but in some cases among regulators themselves as states and cities pursue different agendas. The tension between allowing space for local innovation — economic and regulatory — and establishing uniformity and oversight up the geographic scale is not unique to the Sharing Economy but is increasingly central to understanding the regulatory landscape. The chapter surveys these tensions and argues for a (cautious) presumption in favor of retaining a strong role for local regulation. While legitimate concerns about local parochialism and capture bear consideration, the advantages of experimentation and the reflection of local preferences auger against overly aggressive state preemption.
-
The Sharing Economy as an Urban Phenomenon
Yale Law & Policy Review, 2016Co-Authors: Nestor M. Davidson, John InfrancaAbstract:Seemingly overnight, companies like Uber, Lyft, Airbnb, WeWork, Taskrabbit, Shyp, and many others have transformed transportation, accommodations, personal services, and other sectors. The evolving regulatory response to this “Sharing Economy” presents an intriguing puzzle. Where telephone, broadband, early Internet companies, and similar previous technologies were shaped by battles with federal regulators, the fate of Sharing enterprises is playing out in front of taxi and limousine commissions, zoning boards, and city councils.The reason for this atypical dynamic, this Article argues, is that — unlike prior technological disruptions — the Sharing Economy is fundamentally an urban phenomenon. The platforms that enable Sharing leverage or confront conditions of density, proximity, specialization, and even anonymity that mark city life. And many Sharing companies flourish through a kind of regulatory arbitrage that finds value in frictions and barriers generated by urban regulatory regimes.A fascinating experimentalist dialectic is emerging from the resulting decentralized regulatory landscape. Local economic, political, legal, and social conditions are generating regulatory responses that range from full embrace to open hostility. And Sharing enterprises are responding by adjusting their business models and reconciling in various ways to these regulatory constraints. These compromises are generating creative solutions to balancing innovation and public welfare.The interaction between urban governance and the Sharing Economy, however, flows both ways. Local governments are being pushed to be more transparent about their policy interests, creating spillover effects in regulatory regimes beyond the Sharing Economy. And the Sharing Economy is transforming cities themselves. The shift from ownership to access is altering development and mobility patterns as traditional links between transportation, housing, and labor markets and the shape of metropolitan space morph.By framing the Sharing Economy as an urban phenomenon, this Article sheds important new light on a rapidly emerging scholarly discourse. To date, scholars have failed to recognize the Sharing Economy’s deep reliance on the urban fabric and its potential to mold that fabric. Understanding this relationship will also lead to better calibrated regulatory responses that reflect the Sharing Economy’s holistic impact on cities. Equally important, it will firmly ground our understanding of the Sharing Economy in its urban birthplace as it matures.
-
The Sharing Economy as an Urban Phenomenon
Yale Law & Policy Review, 2016Co-Authors: Nestor M. Davidson, John InfrancaAbstract:Seemingly overnight, companies like Uber, Lyft, Airbnb, WeWork, Taskrabbit, Shyp, and many others have transformed transportation, accommodations, personal services, and other sectors. The evolving regulatory response to this “Sharing Economy” presents an intriguing puzzle. Where telephone, broadband, early Internet companies, and similar previous technologies were shaped by battles with federal regulators, the fate of Sharing enterprises is playing out in front of taxi and limousine commissions, zoning boards, and city councils.The reason for this atypical dynamic, this Article argues, is that — unlike prior technological disruptions — the Sharing Economy is fundamentally an urban phenomenon. The platforms that enable Sharing leverage or confront conditions of density, proximity, specialization, and even anonymity that mark city life. And many Sharing companies flourish through a kind of regulatory arbitrage that finds value in frictions and barriers generated by urban regulatory regimes.A fascinating experimentalist dialectic is emerging from the resulting decentralized regulatory landscape. Local economic, political, legal, and social conditions are generating regulatory responses that range from full embrace to open hostility. And Sharing enterprises are responding by adjusting their business models and reconciling in various ways to these regulatory constraints. These compromises are generating creative solutions to balancing innovation and public welfare.The interaction between urban governance and the Sharing Economy, however, flows both ways. Local governments are being pushed to be more transparent about their policy interests, creating spillover effects in regulatory regimes beyond the Sharing Economy. And the Sharing Economy is transforming cities themselves. The shift from ownership to access is altering development and mobility patterns as traditional links between transportation, housing, and labor markets and the shape of metropolitan space morph.By framing the Sharing Economy as an urban phenomenon, this Article sheds important new light on a rapidly emerging scholarly discourse. To date, scholars have failed to recognize the Sharing Economy’s deep reliance on the urban fabric and its potential to mold that fabric. Understanding this relationship will also lead to better calibrated regulatory responses that reflect the Sharing Economy’s holistic impact on cities. Equally important, it will firmly ground our understanding of the Sharing Economy in its urban birthplace as it matures.
-
Intermediary Institutions and the Sharing Economy
2016Co-Authors: John InfrancaAbstract:In Regulating Sharing: The Sharing Economy as an Alternative Capitalist System, Professor Rashmi Dyal-Chand challenges the assumption – implicit in the fast-growing legal literature on the “Sharing Economy” – that companies in this sector operate in the manner of traditional firms. Framing the Sharing Economy as a “nascent form of a coordinated market Economy”, Dyal-Chand calls for regulation rooted in a deeper understanding of the institutions – both the technological platforms most commonly associated with the Sharing Economy (Uber, Airbnb, TaskRabbit, and their ilk) and a burgeoning collection of more organic and democratic organizations — that shape this Economy.This short invited Response focuses on the potential of this second category of institutions to achieve a more equitable distribution of the economic benefits of the Sharing Economy. While I agree that much can be gained from a more critical reflection on the nature of the institutions that shape the Sharing Economy, I harbor skepticism regarding the current vitality and future potential of these alternative institutions. I first explore how intermediary institutions might strengthen the position of workers in the Sharing Economy. I then express a few hesitations regarding the prospects of intermediary institutions to adequately counterbalance the technological platforms that dominate the Sharing Economy. Finally, I offer suggestions for how, by drawing on discussions of the role of institutions in other areas of legal doctrine; an “institutional turn” in thinking about the Sharing Economy might inform both legal scholarship and regulation.