Dataset Information

Systematic framework to assess social impacts of sharing platforms: Synthesising literature and stakeholder perspectives to arrive at a framework and practice-oriented tool.

ABSTRACT: (1) BACKGROUND:Research and user experience suggests both positive and negative social impacts resulting from practices in the sharing economy: social cohesion vs. gentrification; inclusiveness vs. discrimination; flexible employment vs. exploitation. However, as yet, there is no framework for understanding or assessing these social impacts holistically. (2) OBJECTIVE:We aim to improve understanding of the social impacts of sharing platforms and develop a systematic framework to assess these impacts. (3) METHODS:We conduct a narrative literature review and stakeholder workshop, integrating insights to produce a systematic social impact assessment framework and a practice-oriented tool. (4) RESULTS:We identify four social aspects-trust, empowerment, social justice, and inclusivity-and eighteen indicators that make up the framework. We describe each indicator and its relevance to the sharing economy as well as suggest measurable variables in the form of a practice-oriented tool. (5) CONCLUSIONS:The framework and tool are the first holistic method for assessing social impact in the sharing economy, which may inform researchers, sharing platforms, regulators, investors, and citizens to mitigate adverse social impacts while enhancing the overall net social value of the sharing economy.

SUBMITTER: Curtis SK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7544048 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic framework to assess social impacts of sharing platforms: Synthesising literature and stakeholder perspectives to arrive at a framework and practice-oriented tool.

Curtis Steven Kane SK Singh Jagdeep J Mont Oksana O Kessler Alexandra A

PloS one 20201008 10

<h4>(1) background</h4>Research and user experience suggests both positive and negative social impacts resulting from practices in the sharing economy: social cohesion vs. gentrification; inclusiveness vs. discrimination; flexible employment vs. exploitation. However, as yet, there is no framework for understanding or assessing these social impacts holistically.<h4>(2) objective</h4>We aim to improve understanding of the social impacts of sharing platforms and develop a systematic framework to a ...[more]

PMID: 33031483

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunity and stakeholder involvement in decision-making to determine publicly-funded health services and interventions is advocated to fulfil citizens' rights and improve health outcomes. The inclusion of public actors, particularly disadvantaged populations, in priority setting for universal health coverage (UHC) is also enshrined in guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO). However, challenges remain in operationalising this policy aim and ensuring that these approaches are effective and equitable. This study aimed to synthesise published evidence on the role of community and stakeholder participation in determining health service coverage.MethodsA systematic review was conducted, searching the Web of Science, Ovid Global Health, and PubMed Central databases from 2000 onwards, including all study types. A framework synthesis approach was used for charting and synthesising data on mechanisms, effectiveness (equity, depth, and stage), and barriers and facilitators for engagement.ResultsTwenty-seven relevant studies were identified that involve community actors and other stakeholders in priority setting and decision-making processes for defining health benefit packages and UHC, health technology assessment, and pharmaceutical coverage. Mechanisms of engagement include a wide variety of consultation approaches; participation in decision-making committees, advisory councils, and local planning meetings; and appeals mechanisms. Participation occurs primarily at Data and Dialogue stages of decision-making processes, and we found limited depth of engagement among identified cases. Limited consideration of equity was observed in planning and reporting on community involvement in priority setting. A number of challenges are identified in the literature, which we typologise as institutional, procedural, technical, and structural / normative barriers to meaningful participation.ConclusionsThis systematic review identifies key gaps and opportunities in the literature and practice related to effective and equitable community and stakeholder participation in determining health service coverage. It offers essential considerations for planning and executing inclusive approaches to priority setting for publicly-funded health services and interventions and defining health benefit packages for UHC.

Dataset Information

Systematic framework to assess social impacts of sharing platforms: Synthesising literature and stakeholder perspectives to arrive at a framework and practice-oriented tool.

Publications

Systematic framework to assess social impacts of sharing platforms: Synthesising literature and stakeholder perspectives to arrive at a framework and practice-oriented tool.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets