The concept of a ‘smart city’ emerged from studies in urbanism, combined with information and communications technologies (ICTs). It now extends to include interactions with and between governmental organizations, involving broader society, and the use of technology through technology-enablers such as the Internet, and early onset of ‘artificial intelligence’ (Ruohomaa et al., 2019). The term ‘smart city’ became popular around 2009, arising from several descriptive adjectives being used about cities, such as: virtual, digital, wired, intelligent, information, knowledge, creative, green, and clever (Kola-Bezka et al., 2016; Thompson, 2016; Veselitskaya et al., 2019; Min et al., 2019). In the course of this linguistic history, many definitions and classifications have been proposed, yet there is still no agreed upon definition of what constitutes a ‘smart city’. Instead, multiple definitions are now available based on varying perspectives (Meijer & Bolivar, 2016; Serrano, 2018; Schipper & Silvius, 2018).
“智慧城市”的概念源于对城市化的研究，并结合了信息和通信技术(ict)。它现在扩展到包括与政府组织之间的互动，涉及更广泛的社会，以及通过互联网等技术推动者使用技术，以及“人工智能”的早期发作(Ruohomaa等人，2019)。“智慧城市”一词在2009年左右开始流行，源于对城市的几个描述性形容词，例如:虚拟的、数字的、有线的、智能的、信息的、知识的、创造性的、绿色的和聪明的(Kola-Bezka et al.， 2016;汤普森,2016;Veselitskaya等人，2019;Min et al.， 2019)。在这个语言学的历史过程中，许多定义和分类被提出，但对于什么是“智慧城市”的定义仍然没有达成一致。相反，基于不同的视角，现在可以获得多种定义(Meijer & Bolivar, 2016;Serrano 2018;Schipper & Silvius, 2018)。
{"title":"What are the Challenges of Building a Smart City?","authors":"Haven Allahar","doi":"10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1388","url":null,"abstract":"The concept of a ‘smart city’ emerged from studies in urbanism, combined with information and communications technologies (ICTs). It now extends to include interactions with and between governmental organizations, involving broader society, and the use of technology through technology-enablers such as the Internet, and early onset of ‘artificial intelligence’ (Ruohomaa et al., 2019). The term ‘smart city’ became popular around 2009, arising from several descriptive adjectives being used about cities, such as: virtual, digital, wired, intelligent, information, knowledge, creative, green, and clever (Kola-Bezka et al., 2016; Thompson, 2016; Veselitskaya et al., 2019; Min et al., 2019). In the course of this linguistic history, many definitions and classifications have been proposed, yet there is still no agreed upon definition of what constitutes a ‘smart city’. Instead, multiple definitions are now available based on varying perspectives (Meijer & Bolivar, 2016; Serrano, 2018; Schipper & Silvius, 2018).","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"38-48"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48721493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial: Innovating in Times of Crisis","authors":"S. Tanev, G. Sandstrom","doi":"10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1390","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":" ","pages":"3-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45926598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Innovation refers to the series of steps organizations take to transform ideas into improved products, services, or processes, as a way of competing to differentiate themselves in the marketplace (Baregheh et al., 2009). Up to this point, innovation studies have been primarily concerned with innovations that mainly emanate from research and development (R&D) departments. Recently, the roles of ordinary employees in innovation processes have become a focal point in innovation literature (Aasen et al., 2012; Deslee & Dahan, 2018; Voxted, 2018). It has become imperative to regard all employees, irrespective of their role or capacity, as the “innovation capital” or asset of every organization (Kesting & Ulhøi, 2010). As a result, organizations today expect more creativity, innovation, and involvement from employees in the rapidly changing business environment. This has led to a focus on the potential of ordinary employees as contributors to innovation (Price et al., 2012; Wihlman et al., 2014; Engen & Magnusson, 2015).
创新是指组织将想法转化为改进的产品、服务或流程的一系列步骤，作为在市场中脱颖而出的一种竞争方式(Baregheh et al.， 2009)。到目前为止，创新研究主要关注的是主要来自研发部门的创新。近年来，普通员工在创新过程中的角色已成为创新文献的焦点(Aasen et al.， 2012;Deslee & Dahan, 2018;Voxted, 2018)。将所有员工，无论其角色或能力如何，视为每个组织的“创新资本”或资产已经变得势在必行(Kesting & Ulhøi, 2010)。因此，在快速变化的商业环境中，今天的组织期望员工有更多的创造力、创新和参与。这导致人们关注普通员工作为创新贡献者的潜力(Price et al.， 2012;Wihlman et al.， 2014;engen&magnusson, 2015)。
{"title":"An Empirical Study into the Individual-Level Antecedents to Employee-Driven Innovation","authors":"Chukwuemeka K. Echebiri","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1367","url":null,"abstract":"Innovation refers to the series of steps organizations take to transform ideas into improved products, services, or processes, as a way of competing to differentiate themselves in the marketplace (Baregheh et al., 2009). Up to this point, innovation studies have been primarily concerned with innovations that mainly emanate from research and development (R&D) departments. Recently, the roles of ordinary employees in innovation processes have become a focal point in innovation literature (Aasen et al., 2012; Deslee & Dahan, 2018; Voxted, 2018). It has become imperative to regard all employees, irrespective of their role or capacity, as the “innovation capital” or asset of every organization (Kesting & Ulhøi, 2010). As a result, organizations today expect more creativity, innovation, and involvement from employees in the rapidly changing business environment. This has led to a focus on the potential of ordinary employees as contributors to innovation (Price et al., 2012; Wihlman et al., 2014; Engen & Magnusson, 2015).","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"42-52"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48643758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article we examine how the strength of the intellectual property rights (IPR) regime drives technology entrepreneurship innovation (TEI). The latter is comprised of novel unfamiliar technological products and new business models, which in turn lead to new product-market combinations. We consider TEI to be a two-stage process that involves access to and use of new technologies and technological resources by entrepreneurs. While stronger IPR may constrain easy availability of new technologies and technological resources for entrepreneurs, using technology itself helps lead to TEI. We suggest that stronger IPR regimes could lead to TEI. The positive effect of TEI is felt through easier accessibility to the latest technologies and technology resources by entrepreneurs. Our model contributes to understanding the effect of strong IPR regimes on different stages of the innovation process. Intellectual-property rules are clearly necessary to spur innovation: if every invention could be stolen, or every new drug immediately copied, few people would invest in innovation. But too much protection can strangle competition and can limit what economists call 'incremental innovation' innovations that build, in some way, on others.
{"title":"A Two-Staged Approach to Technology Entrepreneurship: Differential Effects of Intellectual Property Rights","authors":"Saurav Pathak, Etayankara Muralidharan","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1364","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1364","url":null,"abstract":"In this article we examine how the strength of the intellectual property rights (IPR) regime drives technology entrepreneurship innovation (TEI). The latter is comprised of novel unfamiliar technological products and new business models, which in turn lead to new product-market combinations. We consider TEI to be a two-stage process that involves access to and use of new technologies and technological resources by entrepreneurs. While stronger IPR may constrain easy availability of new technologies and technological resources for entrepreneurs, using technology itself helps lead to TEI. We suggest that stronger IPR regimes could lead to TEI. The positive effect of TEI is felt through easier accessibility to the latest technologies and technology resources by entrepreneurs. Our model contributes to understanding the effect of strong IPR regimes on different stages of the innovation process. Intellectual-property rules are clearly necessary to spur innovation: if every invention could be stolen, or every new drug immediately copied, few people would invest in innovation. But too much protection can strangle competition and can limit what economists call 'incremental innovation' innovations that build, in some way, on others.","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43015977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Economic growth requires participation from small businesses, which also act as an important tool for equitable development. The World Bank (2012a) calculated that around 200 million people are currently unemployed, while 600 million jobs need to be created by 2020, mainly in developing countries. A number of those jobs are expected to be generated by small and medium enterprises (SMEs), given their high labour intensity. SMEs thus have a key role to play in facilitating the development of the global economy. SMEs constantly provide a significant contribution to the economy through the creative process, encouraging the advancement of technology, organizational innovation, job creation, income generation, economic competitiveness, and other aspects of social development in general, along with industrial expansion, in particular.
{"title":"Technology Adaptation and Survival of SMEs: A Longitudinal Study of Developing Countries","authors":"S. Das, A. Kundu, Arabinda Bhattacharya","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1369","url":null,"abstract":"Economic growth requires participation from small businesses, which also act as an important tool for equitable development. The World Bank (2012a) calculated that around 200 million people are currently unemployed, while 600 million jobs need to be created by 2020, mainly in developing countries. A number of those jobs are expected to be generated by small and medium enterprises (SMEs), given their high labour intensity. SMEs thus have a key role to play in facilitating the development of the global economy. SMEs constantly provide a significant contribution to the economy through the creative process, encouraging the advancement of technology, organizational innovation, job creation, income generation, economic competitiveness, and other aspects of social development in general, along with industrial expansion, in particular.","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"64-72"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42143152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ten years ago, Pascal Gallo, a French researcher with a fresh doctorate in physics from Toulouse University embarked on a new journey at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL). During his postdoctorate studies, he began the first experiments on technologies related to growing synthetic diamonds. Later, in 2015, he founded LakeDiamond, a start-up located at the EPFL Innovation Park specializing in lab-grown diamonds. According to LakeDiamond, these lab-grown diamonds have unique properties. Among others, they are “transparent to light, conductors of heat, eco-friendly, chemically inert, hard and elastic and biocompatible” (LakeDiamond – Summary fact sheet, October 2018), a set of characteristics that sounds extraordinary.
{"title":"Fundraising Campaigns in a Digital Economy: Lessons from a Swiss Synthetic Diamond Venture's Initial Coin Offering (ICO)","authors":"Jahja Rrustemi, Nils S. Tuchschmid","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1368","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1368","url":null,"abstract":"Ten years ago, Pascal Gallo, a French researcher with a fresh doctorate in physics from Toulouse University embarked on a new journey at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL). During his postdoctorate studies, he began the first experiments on technologies related to growing synthetic diamonds. Later, in 2015, he founded LakeDiamond, a start-up located at the EPFL Innovation Park specializing in lab-grown diamonds. According to LakeDiamond, these lab-grown diamonds have unique properties. Among others, they are “transparent to light, conductors of heat, eco-friendly, chemically inert, hard and elastic and biocompatible” (LakeDiamond – Summary fact sheet, October 2018), a set of characteristics that sounds extraordinary.","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"53-63"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47118881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the most valuable resources a company owns is the “portfolio of value propositions” to its diverse external stakeholders, such as customers, investors, and resource owners. In this article, we fill a gap in the value proposition literature by identifying features that make the value propositions of new companies different from other resources, along with factors that make them valuable. A value proposition is conceived as being what enables and improves business transactions between a new company and external stakeholders. We reason that two features in particular make value propositions of new companies distinct: (1) business transactions between a new company and one or more external stakeholders, and (2) investments to create and improve a new company's value propositions that enable business transactions. We provide a definition of “value proposition” and postulate that a value proposition will benefit a new company when it: (1) strengthens the new company's capabilities to scale; (2) increases demand for the new company's products and services; and (3) increases the number, diversity, and rapidity of external investments in the new company's value proposition portfolio.
{"title":"What Makes Value Propositions Distinct and Valuable to New Companies Committed to Scale Rapidly?","authors":"Tony Bailetti, S. Tanev, C. Keen","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1365","url":null,"abstract":"One of the most valuable resources a company owns is the “portfolio of value propositions” to its diverse external stakeholders, such as customers, investors, and resource owners. In this article, we fill a gap in the value proposition literature by identifying features that make the value propositions of new companies different from other resources, along with factors that make them valuable. A value proposition is conceived as being what enables and improves business transactions between a new company and external stakeholders. We reason that two features in particular make value propositions of new companies distinct: (1) business transactions between a new company and one or more external stakeholders, and (2) investments to create and improve a new company's value propositions that enable business transactions. We provide a definition of “value proposition” and postulate that a value proposition will benefit a new company when it: (1) strengthens the new company's capabilities to scale; (2) increases demand for the new company's products and services; and (3) increases the number, diversity, and rapidity of external investments in the new company's value proposition portfolio.","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"14-27"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44818331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Diane A. Isabelle, Kevin Horak, Sarah McKinnon, C. Palumbo
Porter's Five Forces (P5F) framework, published in 1979, helps us to understand the attractiveness of an industry. The five competitive forces are: the threat of new entrants, the bargaining power of buyers, the bargaining power of suppliers, the threat of substitute products of services, and the rivalry among existing competitors. This framework has recently come under scrutiny and been called into question. To contribute to the debate, this paper investigates the relevance of Porter's framework by contrasting vastly different industries. The use cases consist of a resource-based, capital-intensive industry, the mining industry, and a knowledge-based, labor-intensive industry, the information technology industry. Drawing from research on Porter's Five Forces framework, and through an internationalization lens, the paper proposes a modified framework augmented with four additional forces. These additional forces are: the competitor's level of innovativeness, exposure to globalization, threat of digitalization, and industry exposure to de/regulation activities. These forces were added to capture the increased interconnectivity and complexity of businesses operating in the 21st century. The paper contributes to this body of knowledge by augmenting a popular framework and applying it to vital industrial sectors. The findings aim to incite researchers, managers, entrepreneurs and policymakers to go beyond the traditional five forces as a way to help monitor their business environment and enhance decision-making processes, particularly in a post-COVID-19 world.
{"title":"Is Porter's Five Forces Framework Still Relevant? A study of the capital/labour intensity continuum via mining and IT industries","authors":"Diane A. Isabelle, Kevin Horak, Sarah McKinnon, C. Palumbo","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1366","url":null,"abstract":"Porter's Five Forces (P5F) framework, published in 1979, helps us to understand the attractiveness of an industry. The five competitive forces are: the threat of new entrants, the bargaining power of buyers, the bargaining power of suppliers, the threat of substitute products of services, and the rivalry among existing competitors. This framework has recently come under scrutiny and been called into question. To contribute to the debate, this paper investigates the relevance of Porter's framework by contrasting vastly different industries. The use cases consist of a resource-based, capital-intensive industry, the mining industry, and a knowledge-based, labor-intensive industry, the information technology industry. Drawing from research on Porter's Five Forces framework, and through an internationalization lens, the paper proposes a modified framework augmented with four additional forces. These additional forces are: the competitor's level of innovativeness, exposure to globalization, threat of digitalization, and industry exposure to de/regulation activities. These forces were added to capture the increased interconnectivity and complexity of businesses operating in the 21st century. The paper contributes to this body of knowledge by augmenting a popular framework and applying it to vital industrial sectors. The findings aim to incite researchers, managers, entrepreneurs and policymakers to go beyond the traditional five forces as a way to help monitor their business environment and enhance decision-making processes, particularly in a post-COVID-19 world.","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"28-41"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48794161","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
2017). On the other hand, even strict regulations can contribute positively to the supply of sharing economy services by making it Sharing economy services is one of the fastest growing segments in today’s economy, especially in urban centres. However, some cities have taken a negative stance and sought to prohibit sharing economy services, which has raised tensions between citizens and the local government. This paper adopts a case study approach to investigate what the main topics are in citizen perceptions of their government’s resistance to shared parking in Ottawa, the capital city of Canada, where shared parking is considered illegal. In so doing, the study applies topic modelling on readers’ comments following news about local residents being threatened with legal action by the city for providing shared parking services to government employees suffering from insufficient office parking resources. Based on six identified topics, the study establishes a conceptual framework that contributes to the literature on sharing economies by illustrating how citizens perceive their government’s resistance toward sharing economies. The paper considers whether sharing economy services could be an innovation that would benefit societies, and how understanding citizen perceptions through online comments can help a government to solve policy issues and create win-win resolutions. Citation: Citizen Perceptions of Government’s Resistance to Shared Parking. Technology Innovation Management , 10(5):
{"title":"Citizen Perceptions of Government’s Resistance to Shared Parking","authors":"M. Westerlund","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1354","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1354","url":null,"abstract":"2017). On the other hand, even strict regulations can contribute positively to the supply of sharing economy services by making it Sharing economy services is one of the fastest growing segments in today’s economy, especially in urban centres. However, some cities have taken a negative stance and sought to prohibit sharing economy services, which has raised tensions between citizens and the local government. This paper adopts a case study approach to investigate what the main topics are in citizen perceptions of their government’s resistance to shared parking in Ottawa, the capital city of Canada, where shared parking is considered illegal. In so doing, the study applies topic modelling on readers’ comments following news about local residents being threatened with legal action by the city for providing shared parking services to government employees suffering from insufficient office parking resources. Based on six identified topics, the study establishes a conceptual framework that contributes to the literature on sharing economies by illustrating how citizens perceive their government’s resistance toward sharing economies. The paper considers whether sharing economy services could be an innovation that would benefit societies, and how understanding citizen perceptions through online comments can help a government to solve policy issues and create win-win resolutions. Citation: Citizen Perceptions of Government’s Resistance to Shared Parking. Technology Innovation Management , 10(5):","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41821705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The emergence of the term ‘sharing economy’ has evoked hopes for a more sustainable future, as well as fears of a rawer capitalism (Martin, 2016). In this context, the state is called upon in its capacity as regulator, which must counteract problems created by the sharing economy. Increasingly, however, the public sector is also called upon to renew and reinvent itself from the very model of sharing economy. In this context, ‘sharing economy’ not only refers to an emergent new economic order, but also to an organizational form that unsettles the state itself (Lovink & Rossiter, 2019). The idea of ‘sharing’ as the digitally mediated distribution of access to underused resources, here comes into sight as a possible way to address the pressure of complex problems, ageing populations, and tight budgets that many western welfare states currently face (give&take.eu; Vive, 2017).
{"title":"More for Less? Sharing Economy as a Driver of Public Welfare Innovation","authors":"Eva Pallesen, M. Aakjær","doi":"10.22215/timreview/1353","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1353","url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of the term ‘sharing economy’ has evoked hopes for a more sustainable future, as well as fears of a rawer capitalism (Martin, 2016). In this context, the state is called upon in its capacity as regulator, which must counteract problems created by the sharing economy. Increasingly, however, the public sector is also called upon to renew and reinvent itself from the very model of sharing economy. In this context, ‘sharing economy’ not only refers to an emergent new economic order, but also to an organizational form that unsettles the state itself (Lovink & Rossiter, 2019). The idea of ‘sharing’ as the digitally mediated distribution of access to underused resources, here comes into sight as a possible way to address the pressure of complex problems, ageing populations, and tight budgets that many western welfare states currently face (give&take.eu; Vive, 2017).","PeriodicalId":51569,"journal":{"name":"Technology Innovation Management Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"19-27"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42119196","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：