IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v13y2023i3p68-d1096090.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Putting Fairness into the Gig Economy: Delivery Cooperatives as Alternatives to Corporate Platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Ernest Cañada

    (Department of Geography, University of the Balearic Islands, 07122 Palma, Spain
    Investigation and Communication for Development, Alba Sud Research Institute, 08005 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Carla Izcara

    (Investigation and Communication for Development, Alba Sud Research Institute, 08005 Barcelona, Spain)

  • María José Zapata Campos

    (School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden)

Abstract

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, platform capitalism has expanded greatly in the delivery sector. The consolidation of an oligopoly controlled by a few corporate platforms has led to precarious working conditions for “gig economy” workers. Increasing protests and strikes have led to the reform of labour directives and to the emergence of alternative ways of organising work through platform cooperatives. This article examines how these emergent platform cooperatives are mobilised and their challenges and implications. Barcelona, the cradle of many platform economy and delivery sector start-ups, is a critical case for examining the recent birth of alternative delivery cooperatives. This article is informed by the cases of three cooperatives, organised by those working as riders, providing delivery services in the city of Barcelona: Mensakas, Les Mercedes, and 2GoDelivery. The paper shows how the embeddedness of these nascent platform cooperatives in favourable governance arrangements, a supportive social and solidarity movement, the knowledge and experience of workers, and the territory where the cooperatives are embedded are essential for their creation. This multi-layered embeddedness is necessary, but not sufficient, to explain how platform cooperatives thrive. The study concludes that the agency of platform workers, who triggered this transformation, was essential for the emergence of alternative ways of organising work in the platform economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernest Cañada & Carla Izcara & María José Zapata Campos, 2023. "Putting Fairness into the Gig Economy: Delivery Cooperatives as Alternatives to Corporate Platforms," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:68-:d:1096090
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/3/68/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/3/68/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frédéric Dufays & Benjamin Huybrechts, 2014. "Connecting the Dots for Social Value: A Review on Social Networks and Social Entrepreneurship," Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 214-237, May.
    2. Jim Stanford, 2017. "The resurgence of gig work: Historical and theoretical perspectives," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(3), pages 382-401, September.
    3. Apostolos Filippas & John J. Horton & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2020. "Owning, Using, and Renting: Some Simple Economics of the “Sharing Economy”," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4152-4172, September.
    4. Mair, Johanna & Marti, Ignasi, 2009. "Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 419-435, September.
    5. Paola Raffaelli, 2016. "Social and Solidarity Economy in a Neoliberal Context: Transformative or Palliative? The Case of an Argentinean Worker Cooperative," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 5(1), pages 33-53.
    6. Mohammad Amir Anwar & Mark Graham, 2020. "Hidden transcripts of the gig economy: labour agency and the new art of resistance among African gig workers," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(7), pages 1269-1291, October.
    7. Mayo Fuster Morell & Ricard Espelt & Melissa Renau Cano, 2020. "Sustainable Platform Economy: Connections with the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-28, September.
    8. Muñoz, Pablo & Kibler, Ewald, 2016. "Institutional complexity and social entrepreneurship: A fuzzy-set approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 1314-1318.
    9. Francisca GUTIÉRREZ CROCCO & Maurizio ATZENI, 2022. "The effects of the pandemic on gig economy couriers in Argentina and Chile: Precarity, algorithmic control and mobilization," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 161(3), pages 441-461, September.
    10. MariaLaura Di Domenico & Helen Haugh & Paul Tracey, 2010. "Social Bricolage: Theorizing Social Value Creation in Social Enterprises," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(4), pages 681-703, July.
    11. Hannah JOHNSTON, 2020. "Labour geographies of the platform economy: Understanding collective organizing strategies in the context of digitally mediated work," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 159(1), pages 25-45, March.
    12. Vicky Nowak & Paola Raffaelli, 2022. "The interconnected influences of institutional and social embeddedness on processes of social innovation: A Polanyian perspective," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3-4), pages 319-342, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. María José Zapata Campos, 2024. "The Expansion of Alternative Forms of Organizing Integration: Imitation, Bricolage, and an Ethic of Care in Migrant Women’s Cooperatives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 194(4), pages 809-824, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pradeep Kumar Hota, 2023. "Tracing the Intellectual Evolution of Social Entrepreneurship Research: Past Advances, Current Trends, and Future Directions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(3), pages 637-659, January.
    2. Xiaoti Hu & Susan Marlow & Angelika Zimmermann & Lee Martin & Regina Frank, 2020. "Understanding Opportunities in Social Entrepreneurship: A Critical Realist Abstraction," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(5), pages 1032-1056, September.
    3. Kibler, Ewald & Salmivaara, Virva & Stenholm, Pekka & Terjesen, Siri, 2018. "The evaluative legitimacy of social entrepreneurship in capitalist welfare systems," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 944-957.
    4. Dorado, Silvia & Ventresca, Marc J., 2013. "Crescive entrepreneurship in complex social problems: Institutional conditions for entrepreneurial engagement," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 69-82.
    5. Gras, David & Nason, Robert S., 2015. "Bric by bric: The role of the family household in sustaining a venture in impoverished Indian slums," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 546-563.
    6. Molecke, Greg & Pinkse, Jonatan, 2017. "Accountability for social impact: A bricolage perspective on impact measurement in social enterprises," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 550-568.
    7. Saul Estrin & Tomasz Mickiewicz & Ute Stephan, 2013. "Entrepreneurship, Social Capital, and Institutions: Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship across Nations," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(3), pages 479-504, May.
    8. Mengmeng Meng & Jiasu Lei & Jie Jiao & Qiuyan Tao, 2020. "How does strategic flexibility affect bricolage: The moderating role of environmental turbulence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Adélie Ranville & Marcos Barros, 2022. "Towards Normative Theories of Social Entrepreneurship. A Review of the Top Publications of the Field," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(2), pages 407-438, October.
    10. Sahasranamam, Sreevas & Nandakumar, M.K., 2020. "Individual capital and social entrepreneurship: Role of formal institutions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 104-117.
    11. Markus Perkmann & André Spicer, 2014. "How Emerging Organizations Take Form: The Role of Imprinting and Values in Organizational Bricolage," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1785-1806, December.
    12. Golshan Javadian & Crystal Dobratz & Alka Gupta & Vishal K. Gupta & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2020. "Qualitative Research in Entrepreneurship Studies: A State-of-Science," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 29(2), pages 223-258, September.
    13. Onwuegbuzie, Henrietta N. & Mafimisebi, Oluwasoye P., 2021. "Global relevance of scaling African indigenous entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    14. Gupta, Parul & Chauhan, Sumedha & Paul, Justin & Jaiswal, M.P., 2020. "Social entrepreneurship research: A review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 209-229.
    15. Marine Wulleman & Marek Hudon, 2015. "Models of social entrepreneurship: empirical evidence from Mexico," Working Papers CEB 15-024, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    16. Xiangping Jia & Geoffrey Desa, 2020. "Social entrepreneurship and impact investment in rural–urban transformation: An orientation to systemic social innovation and symposium findings," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(4), pages 1217-1239, December.
    17. Diane Holt & David Littlewood, 2017. "Waste Livelihoods Amongst the Poor – Through the Lens of Bricolage," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 253-264, February.
    18. Pradeep Kumar Hota & Balaji Subramanian & Gopalakrishnan Narayanamurthy, 2020. "Mapping the Intellectual Structure of Social Entrepreneurship Research: A Citation/Co-citation Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 89-114, September.
    19. Cherrier, Helene & Goswami, Paromita & Ray, Subhasis, 2018. "Social entrepreneurship: Creating value in the context of institutional complexity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 245-258.
    20. Hertel, Christina & Binder, Julia & Fauchart, Emmanuelle, 2021. "Getting more from many—A framework of community resourcefulness in new venture creation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(3).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:68-:d:1096090. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.