Advertisement

Who Gets the Lion’s Share in the Sharing Economy: A Case Study of Social Inequality in AirBnB

  • Afra MashhadiEmail author
  • Clovis Chapman
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11185)

Abstract

Sharing economy platforms have rapidly disrupted and transformed many traditional markets. Companies such as AirBnB, in the housing market, and Uber, in the ride-sharing space, have thrived by creating opportunities for so-called “micro-entrepreneurs”, allowing them to leverage existing personal assets, such as a spare room or car, to generate additional income. While often heralded as an opportunity to reduce income inequality, opening opportunities through technology to a much larger segment of the population, there is however a latent concern that these platforms are in practice not as inclusive as advertised. In this paper we study the AirBnB listings in Chicago and examine a number of different dimensions regarding the hosts, their property and the environment within which they operate. Specifically we examine who the hosts are by detecting hosts’ ethnicity, gender and age using images posted publicly on the site. Leveraging this information and socio-economic metrics from the Census, we examine the properties different hosts offer and what is received in return. Finally we study how these hosts present their properties by measuring the aesthetic score of the main listing photographs using a deep learning algorithm. Our results suggest an ethnical discrepancy that affects minorities from lower socio-economic backgrounds, even when taking into account location and other attributes such as price of AirBnB listings. The findings also suggest that a wider range of factors, such as poorer pictures of listings, maybe affecting the inclusion and that could be corrected with internal policies and assistance of the platform owners.

References

  1. 1.
    Bakhshi, S., Shamma, D.A., Gilbert, E.: Faces engage us: photos with faces attract more likes and comments on instagram. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 965–974. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cesare, N., Grant, C., Nsoesie, E.O.: Detection of user demographics on social media: a review of methods and recommendations for best practices. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.01807 (2017)
  3. 3.
    Clifford, P., Richardson, S., Hémon, D.: Assessing the significance of the correlation between two spatial processes. Biometrics 45, 123–134 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cui, R., Li, J., Zhang, D.J.: Discrimination with incomplete information in the sharing economy: field evidence from Airbnb (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Edelman, B., Luca, M., Svirsky, D.: Racial discrimination in the sharing economy: evidence from a field experiment. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 9(2), 1–22 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fradkin, A., Grewal, E., Holtz, D., Pearson, M.: Bias and reciprocity in online reviews: evidence from field experiments on Airbnb. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, pp. 641–641. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fraiberger, S.P., Sundararajan, A.: Peer-to-peer rental markets in the sharing economy (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frenken, K., Schor, J.: Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environ. Innov. Societal Transitions 23, 3–10 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.01.003. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422417300114. Sustainability Perspectives on the Sharing EconomyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ge, Y., Knittel, C.R., MacKenzie, D., Zoepf, S.: Racial and gender discrimination in transportation network companies. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haklay, M.: How good is volunteered geographical information? a comparative study of openstreetmap and ordnance survey datasets. Environ. Plann. B Plann. Des. 37(4), 682–703 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hecht, B.J., Stephens, M.: A tale of cities: urban biases in volunteered geographic information. ICWSM 14, 197–205 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jin, X., Chi, J., Peng, S., Tian, Y., Xiaodong Li, C.Y.: Deep image aesthetics classification using inception modules and fine-tuning connected layer. In: 8th International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing, WCSP 2016, Yangzhou, China, 13–15 October 2016, pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kooti, F., Grbovic, M., Aiello, L.M., Djuric, N., Radosavljevic, V., Lerman, K.: Analyzing uber’s ride-sharing economy. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion, International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, pp. 574–582 (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, L., Goodchild, M.F., Xu, B.: Spatial, temporal, and socioeconomic patterns in the use of Twitter and Flickr. Cartography Geogr. Inf. Sci. 40(2), 61–77 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mashhadi, A., Quattrone, G., Capra, L.: Putting ubiquitous crowd-sourcing into context. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 611–622. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Milbourn, T.: In the future, employees won’t exist. Tech Crunch (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Murphy, L.W.: Airbnb’s work to fight discrimination and build inclusion. Report submitted to Airbnb 8 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Murray, N., Marchesotti, L., Perronnin, F.: AVA: a large-scale database for aesthetic visual analysis. In: 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 2408–2415. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nunberg, G.: Goodbye jobs, hello ‘gigs’: how one word sums up a new economic reality. In: NPR, January 2016Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Quattrone, G., Capra, L., De Meo, P.: There’s no such thing as the perfect map: quantifying bias in spatial crowd-sourcing datasets. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, pp. 1021–1032. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Quattrone, G., Mashhadi, A., Capra, L.: Mind the map: the impact of culture and economic affluence on crowd-mapping behaviours. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, pp. 934–944. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Quattrone, G., Proserpio, D., Quercia, D., Capra, L., Musolesi, M.: Who benefits from the sharing economy of Airbnb? In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web, International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, pp. 1385–1394 (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schor, J.B.: Does the sharing economy increase inequality within the eighty percent?: findings from a qualitative study of platform providers. Cambridge J. Reg. Econ. Soc. 10(2), 263–279 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smith, A.: Shared, collaborative and on demand: the new digital economy. Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC (2016). Accessed 21 May 2016Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sprague, R.: Worker (mis) classification in the sharing economy: trying to fit square pegs into round holes. ABA J. Labor Employ. Law 31(1), 53 (2015)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thebault-Spieker, J., Terveen, L., Hecht, B.: Toward a geographic understanding of the sharing economy: systemic biases in UberX and TaskRabbit. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 24(3), 21 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zervas, G., Proserpio, D., Byers, J.: A first look at online reputation on Airbnb, where every stay is above average (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.University College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations