IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p5023-d546603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Gig Economy: Current Issues, the Debate, and the New Avenues of Research

Author

Listed:
  • Radosław Malik

    (SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Al. Niepodległości 162, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Anna Visvizi

    (SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Al. Niepodległości 162, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland
    Effat College of Business, Effat University, Jeddah 21551, Saudi Arabia)

  • Małgorzata Skrzek-Lubasińska

    (SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Al. Niepodległości 162, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

In the context of the debate on platform economy, on the one hand, and the gig economy, on the other, this paper delineates the conceptual boundaries of both concepts to query the gig economy research included in the Web of Science database. The initial search, cutoff date February 2020, targeting “gig economy” returned a sample of 378 papers dealing with the topic. The subsequent analysis, employing the science mapping method and relating software (SciMAT), allowed to query the body of research dealing with gig economy in detail. The value added by this paper is fourfold. First, the broad literature on gig economy is mapped and the nascent synergies relating both to research opportunities and economic implications are identified and highlighted. Second, the findings reveal that while research on gig economy proliferates, the distinction between “platform” and “gig” economy frequently remains blurred in the analysis. This paper elaborates on this issue. Third, it is highlighted that the discussion on gig economy is largely dispersed and a clearer research agenda is needed to streamline the discussion to improve its exploratory and explanatory potential. This paper suggests ways of navigating this issue. Fourth, by mapping the existing research on gig economy and highlighting its caveats, the way toward a comprehensive research agenda in the field is highlighted.

Suggested Citation

  • Radosław Malik & Anna Visvizi & Małgorzata Skrzek-Lubasińska, 2021. "The Gig Economy: Current Issues, the Debate, and the New Avenues of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5023-:d:546603
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5023/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5023/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berger, Thor & Chen, Chinchih & Frey, Carl Benedikt, 2018. "Drivers of disruption? Estimating the Uber effect," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 197-210.
    2. Castillo-Vergara, Mauricio & Alvarez-Marin, Alejandro & Placencio-Hidalgo, Dario, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of creativity in the field of business economics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-9.
    3. Dzikowski, Piotr, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of born global firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 281-294.
    4. Mucha, Tomasz & Seppälä, Timo, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence Platforms – A New Research Agenda for Digital Platform Economy," ETLA Working Papers 76, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    5. Alexandrea J. Ravenelle, 2017. "Sharing economy workers: selling, not sharing," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(2), pages 281-295.
    6. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans & Katy Börner, 2005. "Mapping the backbone of science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(3), pages 351-374, August.
    7. Thed van Leeuwen, 2006. "The application of bibliometric analyses in the evaluation of social science research. Who benefits from it, and why it is still feasible," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(1), pages 133-154, January.
    8. Lehdonvirta, Vili, 2018. "Flexibility in the Gig Economy: Managing Time on Three Online Piecework Platforms," SocArXiv k3hy4, Center for Open Science.
    9. Andrew Stewart & Jim Stanford, 2017. "Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options?," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(3), pages 420-437, September.
    10. Sunyu Chai & Maureen A. Scully, 2019. "It’s About Distributing Rather than Sharing: Using Labor Process Theory to Probe the “Sharing” Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 943-960, November.
    11. David Chafe & Lisa Kaida, 2020. "Harmonic Dissonance: Coping with Employment Precarity among Professional Musicians in St John’s, Canada," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(3), pages 407-423, June.
    12. Cyrille Schwellnus & Assaf Geva & Mathilde Pak & Rafael Veiel, 2019. "Gig economy platforms: Boon or Bane?," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1550, OECD Publishing.
    13. Kate Minter, 2017. "Negotiating labour standards in the gig economy: Airtasker and Unions New South Wales," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(3), pages 438-454, September.
    14. Martin Kenney & John Zysman, 2020. "The platform economy: restructuring the space of capitalist accumulation," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 13(1), pages 55-76.
    15. Gerald Friedman, 2014. "Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 171-188, April.
    16. Hsin-Ning Su & Pei-Chun Lee, 2010. "Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: a first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 65-79, October.
    17. Santana, Monica & Cobo, Manuel J., 2020. "What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 846-862.
    18. Roman Wosiek & Anna Visvizi, 2021. "The VWRCA Index: Measuring a Country’s Comparative Advantage and Specialization in Services. The Case of Poland," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-12, April.
    19. Xu, Xun & Lee, Chieh, 2020. "Utilizing the platform economy effect through EWOM: Does the platform matter?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    20. M.J. Cobo & A.G. López-Herrera & E. Herrera-Viedma & F. Herrera, 2012. "SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(8), pages 1609-1630, August.
    21. Enric Camón Luis & Dolors Celma, 2020. "Circular Economy. A Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-23, August.
    22. Henry Small, 1999. "Visualizing science by citation mapping," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 50(9), pages 799-813.
    23. Cobo, M.J. & López-Herrera, A.G. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2011. "An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 146-166.
    24. De Stefano, Valerio., 2016. "The rise of the "just-in-time workforce" : on-demand work, crowdwork and labour protection in the "gig-economy"," ILO Working Papers 994899823402676, International Labour Organization.
    25. Kapoor, Kawaljeet & Ziaee Bigdeli, Ali & Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Schroeder, Andreas & Beltagui, Ahmad & Baines, Tim, 2021. "A socio-technical view of platform ecosystems: Systematic review and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 94-108.
    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. Radosław Malik & Anna Visvizi & Orlando Troisi & Mara Grimaldi, 2022. "Smart Services in Smart Cities: Insights from Science Mapping Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Wim Coreynen & Arjen van Witteloostuijn & Johanna Vanderstraeten, 2021. "Toward Servitized Research: An Integrated Approach for Sustainable Product-Service Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, July.
    3. Ostoj Izabela, 2024. "Platform-mediated work in Poland: Worker characteristics and prevalence in society," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 60(2), pages 132-146.
    4. Anna Visvizi & Shahira Assem Abdel-Razek & Roman Wosiek & Radosław Malik, 2021. "Conceptualizing Walking and Walkability in the Smart City through a Model Composite w 2 Smart City Utility Index," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Marek Bodziany & Zbigniew Ścibiorek & Zenon Zamiar & Anna Visvizi, 2021. "Managerial Competencies & Polish SMEs’ Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Insight," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, October.

    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. Santana, Monica & Cobo, Manuel J., 2020. "What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 846-862.
    2. Radosław Malik & Anna Visvizi & Orlando Troisi & Mara Grimaldi, 2022. "Smart Services in Smart Cities: Insights from Science Mapping Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Tan, Zhi Ming & Aggarwal, Nikita & Cowls, Josh & Morley, Jessica & Taddeo, Mariarosaria & Floridi, Luciano, 2021. "The ethical debate about the gig economy: A review and critical analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    4. Kevin Hu & Feng Fu, 2021. "Evolutionary Dynamics of Gig Economy Labor Strategies under Technology, Policy and Market Influence," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-31, June.
    5. Carmen Díaz-López & Alessandra Bonoli & María Martín-Morales & Montserrat Zamorano, 2021. "Analysis of the Scientific Evolution of the Circular Economy Applied to Construction and Demolition Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    7. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    8. Carlos Sánchez‐Camacho & Rocío Carranza & David Martín‐Consuegra & Estrella Díaz, 2022. "Evolution, trends and future research lines in corporate social responsibility and tourism: A bibliometric analysis and science mapping," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 462-476, June.
    9. Adermon, Adrian & Hensvik, Lena, 2022. "Gig-jobs: Stepping stones or dead ends?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    10. Eduardo Terán-Yépez & David Jiménez-Castillo & Manuel Sánchez-Pérez, 2021. "International opportunity recognition: A comprehensive bibliometric review," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 18-52, March.
    11. Mónica Santana & Rafael Morales-Sánchez & Susana Pasamar, 2020. "Mapping the Link between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Human Resource Management (HRM): How Is This Relationship Measured?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-28, February.
    12. Uchiyama, Yosuke & Furuoka, Fumitaka & Md. Akhir, Md. Nasrudin, 2022. "Gig Workers, Social Protection and Labour Market Inequality: Lessons from Malaysia," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 56(3), pages 165-184.
    13. Andrea Moretta Tartaglione & Ylenia Cavacece & Giuseppe Russo & Giuseppe Granata, 2019. "A Systematic Mapping Study on Customer Loyalty and Brand Management," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-21, January.
    14. Francisco Javier Blanco-Encomienda & Elena Rosillo-Díaz, 2021. "Quantitative evaluation of the production and trends in research applying the structural equation modelling method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1599-1617, February.
    15. Monica Santana & Alvaro Lopez‐Cabrales, 2019. "Sustainable development and human resource management: A science mapping approach," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1171-1183, November.
    16. Fernando Zambrano Farias & María del Carmen Valls Martínez & Pedro Antonio Martín-Cervantes, 2021. "Explanatory Factors of Business Failure: Literature Review and Global Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    17. Serpil ÇİĞDEM, 2019. "Endüstri 4.0 ve Dijital Emek Platformlarının İnsana Yakışır İş Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi," Journal of Social Policy Conferences, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 0(77), pages 157-199, December.
    18. Alejandro Bengoa & Amaia Maseda & Txomin Iturralde & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1514-1550, October.
    19. Shashi & Piera Centobelli & Roberto Cerchione & Amit Mittal, 2021. "Managing sustainability in luxury industry to pursue circular economy strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 432-462, January.
    20. Xiaoguang Wang & Qikai Cheng & Wei Lu, 2014. "Analyzing evolution of research topics with NEViewer: a new method based on dynamic co-word networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1253-1271, November.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5023-:d:546603. 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.