The concept of “sharing economy” is often used interchangeably with the
notions of “collaborative consumption” (Hamari, Sjöklint, & Ukkonen,
2016), “collaborative economy” (Bauwens, Mendoza, & Iacomella, 2012;
Botsman & Rogers, 2010), “crowd-based capitalism” (Sundararajan, 2016),
“peer economy” (Bradley, 2014), “gig economy” (Friedman, 2014; Mulcahy, 2016),
“peer-to-peer economy” (Koopman, Mitchell, & Thierer, 2014) and “platform
economy” (Parker, Van Alstyne, & Choudary, 2016), to name a few. It has
become an umbrella term becoming increasingly relevant to both the daily lives
of private individuals and to the direction and operation of social and
political systems, thereby covering a large number of peer sharing behaviours
across several sectors, such as accommodation (Airbnb, Couchsurfing), delivery
and home services (Instacart), and transportation (Lyft, Uber).
One of the key elements in the multiple definitions of the sharing
economy concept is the sense of belonging to community which is implied in the
sharing behaviours of involved actors. This community spirit is reflected in
the definition of Hamari et al. (2016: n.p.), defining the sharing economy as a
“peer to peer activity of obtaining, giving, or sharing the access to goods and
services, coordinated through community-based online services”. The operation
of sharing transactions via collaborative platforms, such as online connecting
platforms which are owned and controlled by the consumers themselves, is the
main driver behind the sense of community surrounding the concept of the
sharing economy. Consequently, sharing with no true sense of community and
collaboration among the actors, even when sharing is not at all accompanied by
economic transactions, or sharing via for-profit intermediaries, as in the case
of Uber, do not count as examples of genuine sharing economy (Belk, 2014).
The opportunities within the sharing economy are enormous and are not
just for big businesses. For many, and in particular young people and women,
the sharing economy allows them to save money by accessing goods and services
rather than buying them, or only paying for them when they need them. The
democratization of access to resources, accompanied by the development and
implementation of more sustainable economic and environmental models is the
main outcome expected by the engagement of people in peer sharing behaviours. A
study of Wosskow (2014) showed that people are not just saving money, they have
also reported having a positive or very positive experience with shared models
of consumption. For women within the UK, the sharing economy seems to have a
real impact on how British women work. It allows them to work more flexibly
when they have a family, and to have a lifeline back to work. It also seems
that around a third of women in the UK founded or co-founded a sharing economy
business. In these given examples, the new economy can have its implications on
the organisation of work and life, and in particularly in exploring flexible
working patterns, long working hours and homeworking and in sharing caring
responsibilities among partners or others (Perrons, 2003).
The sharing economy, however, is not only creating opportunities, it is
also presenting different governance challenges. One of them is the creation of
inequality in the ‘renting’ economy. Although the sharing economy claims to
de-emphasize ownership, it is mostly those who have the assets that will
accumulate money from it. If government agencies would partner here with
sharing economy platforms, it could only further deepen economic issues and
class divisions (Ganapati & Reddick, 2018). Another challenge is the
governance of the new working force that are operating as independent
contractors, and typically do not get the work security of full-time workers.
This might lead to unfair competition in the market, such as the recent
protests of taxi drivers against ride-sharing platforms such as Uber.
Against this backdrop and cited examples of mostly commercial business,
this call for papers is particularly interested in empirical research such as
case studies focusing on exploring the outcomes and challenges of government
innovation related to the sharing economy. Nowadays, we witness that
governments are not fully embracing the opportunities offered by the sharing
economy, although it could make their operations more efficient and lead
towards a better usage of their public resources. Local authorities could
explore the sharing of IT systems, the sharing of heavy equipment or local
spaces, or support ride-sharing as part of public transport. Apart from renting
models, government departments could also embrace the time banking system as a
way to give their staff the opportunity to volunteer with local charities and services,
or as a way to broaden access to certain services, such as childcare. Empirical
studies could particularly focus on the usage of or collaboration with online
platforms to facilitate collaborative consumption and delivery of public goods
or services, and how the creation of these tool creates a tension between the
public and private sector.
Given the multitude of sharing activities that could fall under the
concept of sharing economy, this call for papers welcomes any contribution in
the following classification: rental economy, peer-to-peer economy, on-demand
economy, time banking, open source software and social lending/crowdfunding
(Pais & Provasi, 2015); with a particular interest in case studies that
demonstrate the value of innovation management frameworks, models and plans of
government bodies or alternatives to public services.
We encourage interdisciplinary contributions that would cross the
boundaries between the fields of cultural and media studies, urban studies,
science and technology studies, platform studies, management and innovation
studies, policy studies, economics.
We look forward to papers that broadly deal with following topics, but
are certainly not limited to the following:
- The methodological and empirical challenges associated with the critical study of the Sharing Economy in the context of government innovation
- Public service delivery in the sharing age (e.g., informal childcare service)
- Opportunities, challenges, impacts of the sharing economy on governance and public sector
- The role of the public sector in the sharing economy (vis-à-vis the private sector)
- The willingness of government bodies to adopt sharing economy solutions
- Microentrepreneurs or peer-to-peer communities providing an alternative to public services, or access to public resources
- Citizen perception studies or impact assessment studies of (better) sharing public services as a new economy
- Case studies illustrating either successful or unsuccessful government innovation in sharing economy (lessons learned)
Planning
750-words abstracts should be emailed to Shenja.vanderGraaf@imec.be by
January 24, 2020.
Abstracts will be reviewed by the Tim Review Editorial Board and the
special issue editors. Any queries can be addressed to the (guest) editors.
Authors of selected abstracts will be notified by February 7, 2020 and
invited to submit full manuscripts by March 31, 2020.
These manuscripts are subject to full blind peer review according to TIM
Review’s policies. The issue will be published in May 2020. Please check the
author guidelines for full submission.
The TIM Review in an is an online open-access peer-reviewed journal and
brings together diverse viewpoints - from academics, entrepreneurs, companies
of all sizes, the public sector, the community sector, and others - to bridge
the gap between theory and practice, with a particular focus on the topics of
technology and global entrepreneurship in small and large companies. No Article Processing Charges (APC)
Important dates:
January 24th: Submission of abstracts
February 7th: Invitation for full submission
March 31st: Full submission deadline
May 2020: Special issue publication
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario