The Politics of Platform Technologies: A Critical Conceptualization of the Platform and Sharing Economy

被引：0
作者：
Shaked Spier [1 ]
机构：
[1] Philosophy Section, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente, Enschede
来源：
Philosophy & Technology | 2025年 / 38卷 / 1期
关键词：
Critical theory of technology; Digital platforms; Platform cooperatives; Platform economy; Politics of technology; Sharing economy;
D O I：
10.1007/s13347-025-00840-5
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
This paper offers a political analysis of the platform and sharing economy—an economic model in which digital platforms facilitate social and economic interactions. Its two central models, mainstream and cooperative platforms, offer similar applications and services (e.g., home-sharing, food delivery), but fundamentally differ in their ownership and governance structures, economic models, and technical designs. Building on literature from the politics of technology (PoT), the paper develops an approach for the political analysis of platform technologies, combining central components from the works of Winner, Feenberg, and Pfaffenberger. This approach is then applied to analyze the platform and sharing economy, highlighting the political significance of platform technologies. The analysis reveals three key insights. First, when incorporated into particular social arrangements, digital platforms become means for shaping social realities rather than mere tools for specific uses. Second, mainstream platforms perpetuate capitalist conditions in the digital sphere and therefore necessitate platform capitalism to function, whereas cooperative platforms resist and undermine it. Third, the dynamics between the platform models embody a struggle over the question of the good life in the digital economy. Additionally, the paper uncovers a philosophical weakness in Winner’s definition of “inherently political technologies” that warrants further attention in PoT literature. © The Author(s) 2025.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Bantwal Rao M., Jongerden J., Lemmens P., Ruivenkamp G., Technological Mediation and Power: Postphenomenology, critical theory, and Autonomist Marxism, Philosophy & Technology, 28, 3, pp. 449-474, (2015)
  • [2] Berg M., The politics of technology: On bringing Social Theory into Technological Design, Science Technology & Human Values, 23, 4, pp. 456-490, (1998)
  • [3] Bialski P., Authority and Authorship: Uncovering the Sociotechnical Regimes of Peer-to-Peer Tourism, Reinventing the Local in Tourism, pp. 35-49, (2016)
  • [4] Botsman R., Rogers R., What’s mine is yours: how collaborative consumption is changing the way we live (Rev, and updated ed.), (2011)
  • [5] Brey P., Worker autonomy and the Drama of Digital Networks in Organizations, Journal of Business Ethics, 22, 1, pp. 15-25, (1999)
  • [6] Brey P., The Technological Construction of Social Power, Social Epistemology, 22, 1, pp. 71-95, (2008)
  • [7] Brey P., Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn, Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 14, 1, pp. 36-48, (2010)
  • [8] Bridges J., Vasquez C., If nearly all Airbnb reviews are positive, does that make them meaningless?, Current Issues in Tourism, 21, 18, pp. 2065-2083, (2018)
  • [9] Buhler M.M., Calzada I., Cane I., Jelinek T., Kapoor A., Mannan M., Unlocking the Power of Digital Commons: Data Cooperatives as a Pathway for Data Sovereign, Innovative and Equitable Digital Communities, Digital, 3, 3, pp. 146-171, (2023)
  • [10] Cheng M., Foley C., Algorithmic management: The case of Airbnb, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 83, pp. 33-36, (2019)
123456