IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/228462.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extending the framework of algorithmic regulation. The Uber case

Author

Listed:
  • Eyert, Florian
  • Irgmaier, Florian
  • Ulbricht, Lena

Abstract

In this article, we take forward recent initiatives to assess regulation based on contemporary computer technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence. In order to characterize current phenomena of regulation in the digital age, we build on Karen Yeung's concept of “algorithmic regulation,” extending it by building bridges to the fields of quantification, classification, and evaluation research, as well as to science and technology studies. This allows us to develop a more fine‐grained conceptual framework that analyzes the three components of algorithmic regulation as representation, direction, and intervention and proposes subdimensions for each. Based on a case study of the algorithmic regulation of Uber drivers, we show the usefulness of the framework for assessing regulation in the digital age and as a starting point for critique and alternative models of algorithmic regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Eyert, Florian & Irgmaier, Florian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2022. "Extending the framework of algorithmic regulation. The Uber case," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 23-44.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:228462
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/228462/1/Full-text-article-Eyert-et-al-Extending-the-framework.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12371?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Warren Pearce & Sujatha Raman, 2014. "The new randomised controlled trials (RCT) movement in public policy: challenges of epistemic governance," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 387-402, December.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    3. Hood, Christopher & Rothstein, Henry & Baldwin, Robert, 2004. "The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199270019.
    4. Koop, Christel & Lodge, Martin, 2017. "What is regulation? An interdisciplinary concept analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62135, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Ulbricht, Lena, 2020. "Scraping the demos. Digitalization, web scraping and the democratic project," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 426-442.
    6. Linder, Stephen H. & Peters, B. Guy, 1989. "Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 35-58, January.
    7. Kurunmaki, Liisa & Mennicken, Andrea & Miller, Peter, 2016. "Quantifying, economising, and marketising: democratising the social sphere?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67549, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Héritier, Adrienne & Lehmkuhl, Dirk, 2008. "The Shadow of Hierarchy and New Modes of Governance," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Greif, Avner, 1993. "Contract Enforceability and Economic Institutions in Early Trade: the Maghribi Traders' Coalition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(3), pages 525-548, June.
    10. Willem Boom, 2011. "Price Intransparency, Consumer Decision Making and European Consumer Law," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 359-376, September.
    11. K. Sabeel Rahman & Kathleen Thelen, 2019. "The Rise of the Platform Business Model and the Transformation of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism," Politics & Society, , vol. 47(2), pages 177-204, June.
    12. Wildavsky, Aaron, 1987. "Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(1), pages 3-21, 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. Ulbricht, Lena, 2020. "Algorithmen und Politisierung [Algorithms and politicization]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 0, pages 255-278.
    2. Lena Ulbricht & Karen Yeung, 2022. "Algorithmic regulation: A maturing concept for investigating regulation of and through algorithms," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 3-22, January.
    3. Noemi Festic, 2022. "Same, same, but different! Qualitative evidence on how algorithmic selection applications govern different life domains," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 85-101, January.
    4. Rocco Bellanova & Marieke de Goede, 2022. "The algorithmic regulation of security: An infrastructural perspective," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 102-118, January.
    5. Tobias D. Krafft & Katharina A. Zweig & Pascal D. König, 2022. "How to regulate algorithmic decision‐making: A framework of regulatory requirements for different applications," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 119-136, January.

    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. Florian Eyert & Florian Irgmaier & Lena Ulbricht, 2022. "Extending the framework of algorithmic regulation. The Uber case," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 23-44, January.
    2. Macchiavello, Rocco & Casaburi, Lorenzo, 2015. "Firm and Market Response to Saving Constraints: Evidence from the Kenyan Dairy Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 10952, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Lena Ulbricht & Karen Yeung, 2022. "Algorithmic regulation: A maturing concept for investigating regulation of and through algorithms," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 3-22, January.
    4. Gorwa, Robert, 2024. "The Politics of Platform Regulation: How Governments Shape Online Content Moderation," EconStor Books, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 299876, September.
    5. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2021. "Cultural Theory's Contributions to Risk Analysis: A Thematic Review with Directions and Resources for Further Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 429-455, March.
    6. Javier Leonardo Garay Vargas & Juan Bautista Pavajeau, 2021. "Ideas erradas, acciones equivocadas : cómo el contexto internacional impide la generación de desarrollo," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Finanzas, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales, number 151, April.
    7. Koehler, Johanna & Thomson, Patrick & Goodall, Susanna & Katuva, Jacob & Hope, Rob, 2021. "Institutional pluralism and water user behavior in rural Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    8. Johanna Karolina Louise Koehler, 2023. "Not all risks are equal: a risk governance framework for assessing the water SDG," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 179-189, June.
    9. Salvador Parrado, 2020. "The culture of risk regulation: Responses to environmental disasters," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 599-615, July.
    10. Janvier D. Nkurunziza, 2005. "Reputation and Credit without Collateral in Africa`s Formal Banking," Economics Series Working Papers WPS/2005-02, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    11. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    13. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    14. Karla Hoff & Mayuresh Kshetramade & Ernst Fehr, 2011. "Caste and Punishment: the Legacy of Caste Culture in Norm Enforcement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(556), pages 449-475, November.
    15. Pyle, William, 2006. "Resolutions, recoveries and relationships: The evolution of payment disputes in Central and Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 317-337, June.
    16. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    17. Yuheng Lin & Dooruj Rambaccussing & Yu Zhu, 2024. "The impact of international students in the UK on the cultural goods trade," French Stata Users' Group Meetings 2024 29, Stata Users Group.
    18. Koszegi, Botond & Rabin, Matthew, 2004. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt0w82b6nm, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    19. Daniel Agness & Travis Baseler & Sylvain Chassang & Pascaline Dupas & Erik Snowberg, 2022. "Valuing the Time of the Self-Employed," Working Papers 2022-2, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    20. Konstantin Yanovsky & Ilia Zatcovetzky & Sergei Zhavoronkov & Ekaterina Reva, 2013. "Modern Anti-Capitalistic Ideologies," Working Papers 0059, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, revised 2013.

    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:zbw:espost:228462. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.