Advertisement

What drives the governance of ridesharing? A fuzzy-set QCA of local regulations in China

  • Yanwei Li
  • Liang MaEmail author
Research Article
  • 158 Downloads

Abstract

Ridesharing or ride-hailing services have received substantial attention from scholars and practitioners around the world, and it has become an urgent issue for the government to find solutions to mitigate their negative externalities and to provide room for their development. Since the Chinese central government legalized ridesharing in 2016, cities across provinces have adopted dissimilar strategies in governing ridesharing. In this contribution, we use a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis approach to explain the variations in regulatory strategies adopted by 25 Chinese capital cities to govern ridesharing. Our study has identified seven paths to explain both the stringent and loose regulation of municipalities on ridesharing. These findings enrich our understanding of the choices of government strategies in regulating ridesharing. We conclude that regulators should adopt a network governance approach to achieve a win–win outcome in governing ridesharing.

Keywords

Governance Ridesharing Fuzzy set QCA China 

Notes

Funding

The authors are grateful to Weiwei Kou, Lu Zhou, Qiaochu Han, and Hao Zhang for excellent research assistance. The authors would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers and the editor for helpful comments and suggestions. Funding was provided by Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (Grant No. 18JZD048) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71774164 and 1633004).

References

  1. Agatz, N., Erera, A., Savelsbergh, M., & Wang, X. (2012). Optimization for dynamic ride-sharing: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 223(2), 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akyelken, N., Banister, D., & Givoni, M. (2018). The sustainability of shared mobility in London: The dilemma for governance. Sustainability, 10, 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (2010). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Belk, R. (2010). Sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 715–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1595–1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beroldo, S. (1990). Casual carpooling in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation Quarterly, 44(1), 133–150.Google Scholar
  7. Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  8. Christensen, C. M. (2006). The ongoing process of building a theory of disruption. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clewlow, R. R., & Mishra, G. S. (2017). Disruptive transportation: The adoption, utilization, the impacts of ride-hailing in the United States. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, Research report, 17-07.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, M., & Sundararajan, A. (2015). Self-regulation and innovation in the peer-to-peer sharing economy. The University of Chicago Law Review, 82, 116–133.Google Scholar
  11. Cortez, N. (2014). Regulating disruptive innovation. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 29(1), 175–228.Google Scholar
  12. Fahnenschreiber, S., Gundling, F., Keyhani, M. H., & Schnee, M. (2016). A multi-modal routing approach combing dynamic ride-sharing and public transport. Transportation Research Procedia, 13, 176–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Frenken, K., & Schor, J. (2017). Putting the sharing economy into account. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goertz, G. (2006). Social science concepts: A user’s guide. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hong, S., & Lee, S. (2017). Adaptive governance and decentralization: Evidence from regulation of the sharing economy in multi-level governance. Government Information Quarterly.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hong, S., & Lee, S. (2018). Adaptive governance, status quo bias and political competition: Why the sharing economy is welcome in some cities but not in others. Government Information Quarterly., 35, 283–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hood, C. (2010). The blame game: Spin, bureaucracy, and self-preservation in government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Interian, J. (2016). Up in the air: Harmonizing the sharing economy through AirBnb regulations. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 39, 129–161.Google Scholar
  19. Isaac, E. (2014). Disruptive innovation: Risk-shifting and precarity in the age of Uber. Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy BRIE workshop paper, 2014-7.Google Scholar
  20. Katz, V. (2015). Regulating the sharing economy. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 30, 1067–1126.Google Scholar
  21. Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. (2016). Governance network in public sector. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Li, Y. W. (2018). Governing environmental conflicts. Oxon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li, Y. W. (2019). Governing the sharing economy smartly: A tale of two initiatives in China. Public Policy and Administration.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076719852421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li, Y. W., Taeihagh, A., & de Jong, M. (2018). The governance of risks in ridesharing: A revelatory case from Singapore. Energies, 11, 1277–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li, Y. W., Verweij, S., & Koppenjan, J. (2016). Governing environmental conflicts in China: Under what conditions do local governments compromise? Public Administration, 94(3), 806–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ma, L., & Li, Y. W. (2018a). How do governments regulate the sharing economy: An empirical study on Chinese cities’ regulations on ridesharing. E-Government, 4, 9–20. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  27. Ma, L., & Li, Y. W. (2018b). Vested interests, multiple motivations, and the governance of the sharing economy: An empirical study on Chinese cities’ regulation policies on ridesharing. Journal of Gansu Institute of Public Administration, 5, 4–10. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  28. Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  29. Ragin, C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ragin, C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rauch, D. E., & Schleicher, D. (2015). Like Uber, but for local government policy: The future of local regulation of the “sharing economy”. George Mason University of Law and Economics Research paper series.Google Scholar
  32. Schlozman, K. L., Verba, S., & Brady, H. E. (2012). The unheavenly chorus: Unequal political voice and the broken promise of American democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schor, J. B., Fitzmaurice, C., Carfagna, L. B., Attwood-Charles, W., & Poteat, E. D. (2016). Paradoxes of openness and distinction in the sharing economy. Poetics, 54, 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shaheen, S. A., Cohen, A. P., & Chung, M. S. (2010). North American carsharing: A ten-year retrospective. Transportation Research Record, 2010, 35–44.Google Scholar
  36. Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  37. Sundararajan, A. (2016). The sharing economy: The ends of employment and the rise of crowd-based capitalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Tham, A. (2016). When Harry met Sally: Different approaches towards Uber and Airbnb—an Australian and Singapore perspective. Information Technology & Tourism, 16(4), 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomann, E., Hupe, P., & Sager, F. (2017). Serving many masters: Public accountability in private policy implementation. Governance.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang, R. (2011). Shaping carpool policies under rapid motorization: The case of Chinese cities. Transport Policy, 18(4), 631–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Witt, A., Suzor, N., & Wikstrom, P. (2015). Regulating ride-sharing in the peer economy. Communication Research and Practice, 1(2), 174–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Public AdministrationNanjing Normal UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.School of Public Administration and PolicyRenmin University of ChinaBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations