scholarly journals SHARING ECONOMY AND ITS POPULARITY IN HUNGARY AND ROMANIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
András Nábrádi ◽  
Tünde Kovács
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Easy Access ◽  
Tertiary Sector ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Economic Markets ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this study aims at introducing the sharing economy, one of the most popular economic mechanisms at present, with special regard to its varieties and definitions. The explosion of the sharing economy into the tertiary sector has changed the balance of powers and paved the way for increasing markets based on a new footing. The emergence of trading platforms has created a wide variety of virtual marketplaces, where consumers and suppliers contact each other directly according to their interests, and may even form groups. The review of the relevant literature can be considered rather inclusive regarding the terms and definitions; therefore, the authors find the separation of suppliers essential, according to whether they are private individuals or entrepreneurs. The literature distinguishes three large groups of the sharing economy: product-service systems, redistribution markets and collaborative lifestyle markets, followed by further sub-categories. This paper focuses on the economic markets of the Hungarian and Romanian sharing economy from supply and demand-side aspects to obtain a clear picture of the sharing economy’s growing range and forms. The paper includes both primary and secondary research, literary sources and the open-access database of the European Commission (2018): Flash Eurobarometer 467 (The Use of the Collaborative Economy), which is analyzed by using the SPSS 24 software. Sharing economies have been studied from both consumer and service provider perspectives. The survey on the percentage of consumers and suppliers, the advantages and disadvantages, the reasons for not using services offered as such, and the motives behind the participation of suppliers on sharing economy platforms was carried out in Hungary and Romania and the EU-28 member states. As regards to the advantages, consumers praise easy access to a given service, and then the sequence of evaluated advantages shows a difference between Romanian and Hungarian users. The estimation of sharing economy services shows a more positive picture among Hungarian residents, whereas Romanian users and service providers as a whole correspond to the EU 28 average. Experience has shown that just like in the 28 members of the EU, the most popular sharing economy platforms are accommodation and ridesharing services in Romania and Hungary. To the best of our knowledge, the analysis of this topic has not been carried out.

Competition Between Two-Sided Platforms Under Demand and Supply Congestion Effects

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Bernstein ◽  
Gregory A. DeCroix ◽  
N. Bora Keskin
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Relative Number ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Problem Definition ◽  
Ride Sharing ◽  
Managerial Implications ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Number Of Customers ◽  
Congestion Effects

Problem definition: This paper explores the impact of competition between platforms in the sharing economy. Examples include the cases of Uber and Lyft in the context of ride-sharing platforms. In particular, we consider competition between two platforms that offer a common service (e.g., rides) through a set of independent service providers (e.g., drivers) to a market of customers. Each platform sets a price that is charged to customers for obtaining the service provided by a driver. A portion of that price is paid to the driver who delivers the service. Both customers’ and drivers’ utilities are sensitive to the payment terms set by the platform and are also sensitive to congestion in the system (given by the relative number of customers and drivers in the market). We consider two possible settings. The first one, termed “single-homing,” assumes that drivers work through a single platform. In the second setting, termed “multihoming” (or “multiapping,” as it is known in practice), drivers deliver their service through both platforms. Academic/practical relevance: This is one of the first papers to study competition and multihoming in the presence of congestion effects typically observed in the sharing economy. We leverage the model to study some practical questions that have received significant press attention (and stirred some controversies) in the ride-sharing industry. The first involves the issue of surge pricing. The second involves the increasingly common practice of drivers choosing to operate on multiple platforms (multihoming). Methodology: We formulate our problem as a pricing game between two platforms and employ the concept of a Nash equilibrium to analyze equilibrium outcomes in various settings. Results: In both the single-homing and multihoming settings, we study the equilibrium prices that emerge from the competitive interaction between the platforms and explore the supply and demand outcomes that can arise at equilibrium. We build on these equilibrium results to study the impact of surge pricing in response to a surge in demand and to examine the incentives at play when drivers engage in multihoming. Managerial implications: We find that raising prices in response to a surge in demand makes drivers and customers better off than if platforms were constrained to charge the same prices that would arise under normal demand levels. We also compare drivers’ and customers’ performance when all drivers either single-home or multihome. We find that although individual drivers may have an incentive to multihome, all players are worse off when all drivers multihome. We conclude by proposing an incentive mechanism to discourage multihoming.

Talking Across Cultures in Early Intervention: Finding Common Ground to Meet Children's Communication Needs

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth D. Peña ◽  
Christine Fiestas
Keyword(s):  
Early Intervention ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Cultural Orientation ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Communication Needs ◽  
Caregiver Role

Abstract In this paper, we explore cultural values and expectations that might vary among different groups. Using the collectivist-individualist framework, we discuss differences in beliefs about the caregiver role in teaching and interacting with young children. Differences in these beliefs can lead to dissatisfaction with services on the part of caregivers and with frustration in service delivery on the part of service providers. We propose that variation in caregiver and service provider perspectives arise from cultural values, some of which are instilled through our own training as speech-language pathologists. Understanding where these differences in cultural orientation originate can help to bridge these differences. These can lead to positive adaptations in the ways that speech-language pathology services are provided within an early intervention setting that will contribute to effective intervention.

Patient and Provider Perspectives Regarding Criteria for Patient Prioritization in Rehabilitation Programs (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Déry ◽  
Angel Ruiz ◽  
François Routhier ◽  
Marie-Pierre Gagnon ◽  
André Côté ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Quebec City ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Rehabilitation Programs ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Patient Prioritization ◽  
Services Sociaux ◽  
Multiple Case ◽  
Patient And Provider Perspectives

BACKGROUND Queueing patients on waiting lists is a common practice to manage access to rehabilitation services. To increase fairness and equity in access, a strategy emerging from the literature is patient prioritization. The goal is for patients with the greatest needs to be treated first and for patient wait times to be determined objectively on the basis of explicit criteria. Selecting criteria, however, is a complex task because it is important to simultaneously consider the objectives of all stakeholders. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare service users’ and service providers’ perspectives regarding patient prioritization criteria in two rehabilitation programs. METHODS We conducted a multiple case study in two rehabilitation programs at the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale in Quebec City (Canada), i.e. a driving evaluation program (DEP) and a compression garment manufacturing program (CGMP). We sent a web-based survey asking two groups (patients and providers) of informed stakeholders to individually produce a set of criteria. We then conducted an inductive thematic analysis where each group’s individual answers were coded and combined in a single set of criteria. RESULTS Stakeholders from the DEP identified a total of 22 criteria to prioritize patients while those from the CGMP listed 27 criteria. Providers shared 76% of the criteria mentioned by patients. Some criteria, such as age, occupation, functional level, pain, absence of caregiver, and time since referral, were considered important by both stakeholders in both programs. CONCLUSIONS Patients and providers tended to have similar opinions about a majority of the criteria to prioritize patients in waitlists. Nonetheless, our study confirms that patients and providers base their choices on different types of knowledge and values, which explains some of the differences observed. Taking into consideration the opinions of all stakeholders concerning prioritization criteria is an important part of the decision-making process, based on a multiple constituency approach.

Behavioural Economic Influences on Primary Market Disclosure – The Case of the EU Regulation on European Crowdfunding Service Providers

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 428-463
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Serdaris
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Preliminary Evaluation ◽  
Full Disclosure ◽  
Content Quality ◽  
Platform Governance ◽  
Capital Markets Union ◽  
Alternative Means ◽  
High Level ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
The Eu

Abstract On 5 October 2020, as part of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) project, the European Parliament adopted, in second reading, Regulation (EU) 2020/1503 on European crowdfunding service providers for business (‘ECSP Regulation’). This Regulation, which shall apply as of 10 November 2021, consists of rules which aim at improving access to crowdfunding for EU businesses in need of capital, particularly start-ups, while, at the same time, providing a high level of protection to investors. To attain that it builds on three sets of measures: clear rules on information disclosures for project owners and crowdfunding platforms; rules on platform governance and risk management; and a coherent approach to supervision and enforcement. The focus of this article is on the disclosure-related set of provisions. Its aim is to demonstrate how the new rules embrace a more behavioural approach to primary market disclosure which, in contrast to the paradigm of full disclosure, focuses on the content, quality and framing of disclosure as an alternative means of enabling informed and, thus, allocatively efficient investment decisions. In a second step, it seeks to provide a preliminary evaluation of these measures both from a practical and a normative perspective.

scholarly journals Circular Agreements—Exploring the Role of Agreements and Deals as a Political Tool for a Circular Economy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Johansson
Keyword(s):  
Value Chain ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Alternative Form ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Free Rider Problem ◽  
Political Governance ◽  
The Eu

AbstractA problem for a circular economy, embedded in its policies, tools, technologies and models, is that it is driven by the interests and needs of producers, rather than customers and users. This opinion paper focuses on an alternative form of governance—agreements, which thanks to their bargaining approach brings actors from across the value chain into the policy process. The purpose of this opinion paper is to uncover and analyse the potential of such agreements for a circular economy. Circular agreements aim at increasing the circulation of materials and are an emerging form of political governance within the EU. These agreements have different names, involve different actors and govern in different ways. However, circular agreements seem to work when other types of regulations fail to establish circulation. These agreements bring actors together and offer a platform for negotiating how advantages and disadvantages can be redistributed between actors in a way that is more suitable for a circular economy. However, circular agreements are dependent on other policy instruments to work and can generate a free-rider problem with uninvolved actors. The agreements may also become too detailed and long term, which leads to problem shifting and lock-ins, respectively.

Last-mile logistics in the sharing economy: sustainability paradoxes

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Btissam Moncef ◽  
Marlène Monnet Dupuy
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Food Delivery ◽  
Logistics Management ◽  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Last Mile ◽  
Last Mile Delivery

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore sustainability paradoxes in sharing economy initiatives by focusing on logistics management in last-mile logistics.Design/methodology/approachIn this exploratory study, a total of 10 case studies were conducted in three categories of companies: anti-waste platforms, food delivery platforms and bicycle delivery companies. Twenty-seven face-to-face interviews with founders and/or managers and contractors (couriers, logistics service providers or volunteers) were the primary source of data collection. The heterogeneity of the sample enabled the authors to build an understanding of sustainability paradoxes in the logistics of sharing economy initiatives.FindingsThe findings indicate how logistics management impacts the sustainability of sharing economy initiatives in last-mile delivery. The authors identify seven paradoxical tensions (five of them social) generated by the contradictions between the organizations' promised environmental and social values and the impacts of their operations.Research limitations/implicationsThis exploratory research is based on a qualitative study of 10 cases and 27 interviews from heterogeneous samples; further empirical research is needed to ensure generalization.Practical implicationsThe paper increases the understanding of environmental and social paradoxical tensions and awareness of logistics challenges.Social implicationsThe paper helps identify ways to reconcile promised values and impacts generated by sharing economy initiatives while managing last-mile delivery.Originality/valueThe results enrich the literature about the paradoxes in sharing economy initiatives by providing illustrations in last-mile logistics and exposing the underlying challenges for sharing economy logistics actors.

Coping with Spatial Mismatch: Subsidy Design for Electric Vehicle and Charging Markets

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Yifan Dou
Keyword(s):  
Electric Vehicle ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Problem Definition ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Theoretic Model ◽  
Spatial Mismatch ◽  
The Government ◽  
Ev Charging

Problem definition: We study how the government should design the subsidy policy to promote electric vehicle (EV) adoptions effectively and efficiently when there might be a spatial mismatch between the supply and demand of charging piles. Academic/practical relevance: EV charging infrastructures are often built by third-party service providers (SPs). However, profit-maximizing SPs might prefer to locate the charging piles in the suburbs versus downtown because of lower costs although most EV drivers prefer to charge their EVs downtown given their commuting patterns and the convenience of charging in downtown areas. This conflict of spatial preferences between SPs and EV drivers results in high overall costs for EV charging and weak EV adoptions. Methodology: We use a stylized game-theoretic model and compare three types of subsidy policies: (i) subsidizing EV purchases, (ii) subsidizing SPs based on pile usage, and (iii) subsidizing SPs based on pile numbers. Results: Subsidizing EV purchases is effective in promoting EV adoptions but not in alleviating the spatial mismatch. In contrast, subsidizing SPs can be more effective in addressing the spatial mismatch and promoting EV adoptions, but uniformly subsidizing pile installation can exacerbate the spatial mismatch and backfire. In different situations, each policy can emerge as the best, and the rule to determine which side (SPs versus EV buyers) to subsidize largely depends on cost factors in the charging market rather than the EV price or the environmental benefits. Managerial implications: A “jigsaw-piece rule” is recommended to guide policy design: subsidizing SPs is preferred if charging is too costly or time consuming, and subsidizing EV purchases is preferred if charging is sufficiently fast and easy. Given charging costs that are neither too low nor too high, subsidizing SPs is preferred only if pile building downtown is moderately more expensive than pile building in the suburbs.

‘Losing Leverage’ in the Neighbourhood: A Cognitive Frame Analysis of the European Union Migration Policy

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-323
Author(s):  
Jyri J. Jäntti ◽  
Benjamin Klasche
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Burden Sharing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cognitive Frames ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Power Shift ◽  
Security Problem ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU)–Turkey deal consolidated a shift in the EU’s migration policy. The deal is the culmination of the dominance of the security frame and depicts the continuous externalization of the EU’s responsibility of asylum protection and burden sharing. The strengthening of the security frame has weakened the humanitarian norms that previously dictated EU’s behaviour. This has led to the EU losing some of its comparative advantages in negotiations. Simultaneously, the instrumentalization of the value of asylum, paired with an increased number of asylum seekers, has given negotiation leverage to the neighbouring countries turned service providers. These changes in perception and norms have created a power shift, at the disadvantage of the EU, creating a more leveled playing field for negotiations between the parties. This article tracks the historical shifts in the global refugee regime to explain how today’s situation was created. Hereby, the existence of two competing cognitive frames—humanitarian and security—is assumed, tracked and analysed. While looking at the EU–Turkey deal, the article shows that the EU has started treating refugees as a security problem rather than a humanitarian issue, breaking the normative fabric of the refugee regime in the process. The article also displays how Turkey was able to capitalise on this new reality and engage with negotiations of other neighbouring countries of EU that point towards a change of dynamics in the global refugee regime.

Drivers, Riders, and Service Providers: The Impact of the Sharing Economy on Mobility

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saif Benjaafar ◽  
Harald Bernhard ◽  
Costas Courcoubetis ◽  
Michail Kanakakis ◽  
Spyridon Papafragkos
Keyword(s):  
Operations Management ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Car Ownership ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Ride Sharing ◽  
Finite Set ◽  
Nonatomic Game ◽  
Payoff Functions ◽  
The Impact

It is widely believed that ride sharing, the practice of sharing a car such that more than one person travels in the car during a journey, has the potential to significantly reduce traffic by filling up cars more efficiently. We introduce a model in which individuals may share rides for a certain fee, paid by the rider(s) to the driver through a ride-sharing platform. Collective decision making is modeled as an anonymous nonatomic game with a finite set of strategies and payoff functions among individuals who are heterogeneous in their income. We examine how ride sharing is organized and how traffic and ownership are affected if a platform, which chooses the seat rental price to maximize either revenue or welfare, is introduced to a population. We find that the ratio of ownership to usage costs determines how ride sharing is organized. If this ratio is low, ride sharing is offered as a peer-to-peer (P2P) service, and if this ratio is high, ride sharing is offered as a business-to-customer (B2C) service. In the P2P case, rides are initiated by drivers only when the drivers need to fulfill their own transportation requirements. In the B2C case, cars are driven all the time by full-time drivers taking rides even if these are not motivated by their private needs. We show that, although the introduction of ride sharing may reduce car ownership, it can lead to an increase in traffic. We also show that traffic and ownership may increase as the ownership cost increases and that a revenue-maximizing platform might prefer a situation in which cars are driven with only a few seats occupied, causing high traffic. We contrast these results with those obtained for a social welfare-maximizing platform. This paper was accepted by Charles Corbett, operations management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document