[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc109190.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An overview of European Platforms: Scope and Business Models

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Fabo

    (Centre for European Policy Studies)

  • Miroslav BEBLAVY

    (Centre for European Policy Studies)

  • Karolien LENAERTS

    (Centre for European Policy Studies)

  • Zachary KILHOFFER

    (Centre for European Policy Studies)

Abstract
The platform economy has become an important consideration within the European Commission’s Digital Economy agenda. By mapping the platform economy within the 28 European Union (EU) Member States, this report draws on a database of 200 service platforms active in Europe, and aims to serve as a resource for the development of a European policy response. It identifies a huge diversity of platforms within the EU in terms of size, geographical scope, services offered and business models. Further, the innovative potential of platforms is confirmed, notably the way in which they employ technology to facilitate socially beneficial activities, such as volunteering or ridesharing. At the same time, we note the tendency of a number of platforms to withhold information about their functioning. There are also inconsistencies in the treatment of service providers, whose autonomy in organising their work is quite limited even though their status is almost universally that of independent contractors, which raises questions about the protection of workers. The European platform environment comprises both domestic and international actors, with the latter usually being the market leaders. These platforms often operate across national boundaries, strengthening the case for EU-level intervention.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Fabo & Miroslav BEBLAVY & Karolien LENAERTS & Zachary KILHOFFER, 2017. "An overview of European Platforms: Scope and Business Models," JRC Research Reports JRC109190, Joint Research Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc109190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC109190
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tijdens Kea, 2014. "Dropout Rates and Response Times of an Occupation Search Tree in a Web Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 30(1), pages 23-43, March.
    2. Tsang, Eric W. K., 2014. "Old and New," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 390-390, November.
    3. Martin, Chris J., 2016. "The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 149-159.
    4. De Groen, Willem Pieter & Maselli, Ilaria & Fabo, Brian, 2016. "The Digital Market for Local Services: A one-night stand for workers? An example from the on-demand economy," CEPS Papers 11438, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    5. Maselli, Ilaria & Lenaerts, Karolien & Beblavý, Miroslav, 2016. "Five things we need to know about the on-demand economy," CEPS Papers 11209, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    6. Cristiano Codagnone & Bertin Martens, 2016. "Scoping the Sharing Economy: Origins, Definitions, Impact and Regulatory Issues," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2016-01, Joint Research Centre.
    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. Werner Hölzl & Susanne Bärenthaler-Sieber & Julia Bock-Schappelwein & Klaus Friesenbichler & Agnes Kügler & Andreas Reinstaller & Peter Reschenhofer & Bernhard Dachs & Martin Risak, 2019. "Digitalisation in Austria. State of Play and Reform Needs," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61892, March.

    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. Ethem Ilbiz & Christian Kaunert, 2022. "Sharing Economy for Tackling Crypto-Laundering: The Europol Associated ‘Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, May.
    2. Fabo, B., 2017. "Towards an understanding of job matching using web data," Other publications TiSEM b8b877f2-ae6a-495f-b6cc-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Daisy Bertrand & Pierre-Yves Léo & Jean Philippe, 2019. "The New Go-Between Services: Peer-To-Peer Sharing Platforms In Hospitality Services," Post-Print hal-02299130, HAL.
    4. Manuel Sánchez-Pérez & Nuria Rueda-López & María Belén Marín-Carrillo & Eduardo Terán-Yépez, 2021. "Theoretical dilemmas, conceptual review and perspectives disclosure of the sharing economy: a qualitative analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1849-1883, October.
    5. Cristiano Codagnone & Federico Biagi & Fabienne Abadie, 2016. "The Passions and the Interests: Unpacking the ‘Sharing Economy’," JRC Research Reports JRC101279, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Tomasz Zalega, 2020. "The Sharing Economy and the Behaviour of Young Polish Singles: The Case of BlaBlaCar," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 4, pages 105-134.
    7. Heiland, Heiner, 2020. "Workers' Voice in platform labour: An Overview," WSI Studies 21, The Institute of Economic and Social Research (WSI), Hans Böckler Foundation.
    8. Jancsik, András & Michalkó, Gábor & Csernyik, Márta, 2018. "Megosztás megosztottság nélkül - az Airbnb és a budapesti szálláshelypiac átalakulása [Shared but not divided: Airbnb and transformation of the accommodation market in Budapest]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 259-286.
    9. Guo Bai & S. Ramakrishna Velamuri, 2021. "Contextualizing the Sharing Economy," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 977-1001, June.
    10. Dominika Wruk & Achim Oberg & Jennifer Klutt & Indre Maurer, 2019. "The Presentation of Self as Good and Right: How Value Propositions and Business Model Features are Linked in the Sharing Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 997-1021, November.
    11. Chan Liu & Raymond K. H. Chan & Maofu Wang & Zhe Yang, 2020. "Mapping the Sharing Economy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-19, August.
    12. Maike Gossen & Jonas Pentzien & Jan Peuckert, 2019. "What use is it really for sustainability? Potentials and impacts of peer-to-peer sharing in the domains of accommodation and mobility," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 125-138, June.
    13. Mohammed Alraeeini & Qiuyan Zhong & Elena Antarciuc, 2019. "Analysing Drivers and Barriers of Accommodation Sharing in Dubai Using the Grey-DEMATEL Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-24, October.
    14. Lenaerts, Karolien & Kilhoffer, Zachary, 2017. "Government Responses to the Platform Economy: Where do we stand?," CEPS Papers 12773, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    15. Piotr Zmyślony & Grzegorz Leszczyński & Anna Waligóra & Wiesław Alejziak, 2020. "The Sharing Economy and Sustainability of Urban Destinations in the (Over)tourism Context: The Social Capital Theory Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-26, March.
    16. Ali Shalizar Jalali, 2018. "Male Fertility as a Bull’s Eye for Mastocytosis," Global Journal of Reproductive Medicine, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 3(3), pages 58-60, February.
    17. Küper, Inken & Edinger-Schons, Laura Marie, 2020. "Is sharing up for sale? Monetary exchanges in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 223-234.
    18. Hui Yan & Guixiang Liu, 2021. "Fire’s Effects on Grassland Restoration and Biodiversity Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
    19. Werner Eichhorst & Ulf Rinne, 2017. "Digital Challenges for the Welfare State," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 18(04), pages 03-08, December.
    20. Michal Plaček & Martin Schmidt & František Ochrana & Michal Půček, 2017. "Do the Selected Characteristics of Public Tenders Affect the Likelihood of Filing Petitions with the Regulators of Public Tenders?," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2017(3), pages 317-329.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Digital labour platform; collaborative economy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc109190. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.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.