IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v50y2017i4d10.1007_s11077-017-9303-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crowdsourcing: a new tool for policy-making?

Author

Listed:
  • Araz Taeihagh

    (Singapore Management University)

Abstract

Crowdsourcing is rapidly evolving and applied in situations where ideas, labour, opinion or expertise of large groups of people is used. Crowdsourcing is now used in various policy-making initiatives; however, this use has usually focused on open collaboration platforms and specific stages of the policy process, such as agenda-setting and policy evaluations. Other forms of crowdsourcing have been neglected in policy-making, with a few exceptions. This article examines crowdsourcing as a tool for policy-making and explores the nuances of the technology and its use and implications for different stages of the policy process. The article addresses questions surrounding the role of crowdsourcing and whether it can be considered as a policy tool or as a technological enabler and investigates the current trends and future directions of crowdsourcing.

Suggested Citation

  • Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Crowdsourcing: a new tool for policy-making?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 629-647, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:50:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-017-9303-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-017-9303-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-017-9303-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-017-9303-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward L. Glaeser & Andrew Hillis & Scott Duke Kominers & Michael Luca, 2016. "Crowdsourcing City Government: Using Tournaments to Improve Inspection Accuracy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 114-118, May.
    2. Joshua C. Gellers, 2016. "Crowdsourcing global governance: sustainable development goals, civil society, and the pursuit of democratic legitimacy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 415-432, June.
    3. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Crowdsourcing, Sharing Economies and Development," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 33(2), pages 191-222, June.
    4. Andy Hira, 2017. "Profile of the Sharing Economy in the Developing World: Examples of Companies Trying to Change the World," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 33(2), pages 244-271, June.
    5. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Network-centric policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 317-338, June.
    6. Ben Taieb, Souhaib & Hyndman, Rob J., 2014. "A gradient boosting approach to the Kaggle load forecasting competition," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 382-394.
    7. De Groen, Willem Pieter & Maselli, Ilaria & Fabo, Brian, 2016. "The Digital Market for Local Services: A one-night stand for workers? An example from the on-demand economy," CEPS Papers 11438, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    8. Wei Li & Michael N. Huhns & Wei-Tek Tsai & Wenjun Wu (ed.), 2015. "Crowdsourcing," Progress in IS, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-662-47011-4, February.
    9. David F. Hendry & Neil R. Ericsson (ed.), 2003. "Understanding Economic Forecasts," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582422, December.
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:411-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    12. Triparna de Vreede & Cuong Nguyen & Gert-Jan de Vreede & Imed Boughzala & Onook Oh & Roni Reiter-Palmon, 2013. "A theoretical model of user engagement in crowdsourcing," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01244682, HAL.
    13. Barry L. Bayus, 2013. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 226-244, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kotzebue, Julia R., 2022. "Integrated urban transport infrastructure development: The role of digital social geo-communication in Hamburg's TEN-T improvement," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & Roberto Vivona, 2021. "Positioning public procurement as a procedural tool for innovation: an empirical study [Creating the Conditions for Radical Public Service Innovation]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(3), pages 379-396.
    3. Certomà, Chiara & Corsini, Filippo & Frey, Marco, 2020. "Hyperconnected, receptive and do-it-yourself city. An investigation into the European “imaginary” of crowdsourcing for urban governance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    4. Pashchenko Yana & Ye Chengang & Zhu Yue, 2022. "Organizational Ambidexterity and Crowdsourcing Through the Lens of Open Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 8(1), pages 95-111.
    5. Andrea Ballatore & Teun Johannes Verhagen & Zhije Li & Stefano Cucurachi, 2022. "This city is not a bin: Crowdmapping the distribution of urban litter," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(1), pages 197-212, February.
    6. Aarthi Raghavan & Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & Araz Taeihagh, 2021. "Public Health Innovation through Cloud Adoption: A Comparative Analysis of Drivers and Barriers in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-30, January.
    7. Regina Lenart-Gansiniec & Łukasz Sułkowski, 2018. "Crowdsourcing—A New Paradigm of Organizational Learning of Public Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, September.
    8. Devyani Pande & Araz Taeihagh, 2021. "The Governance Conundrum of Powered Micromobility Devices: An In-Depth Case Study from Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, May.
    9. Bertie Vidgen & Taha Yasseri, 2020. "What, when and where of petitions submitted to the UK government during a time of chaos," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 535-557, September.
    10. Luciana Cingolani & Tim Hildebrandt, 2022. "Incentive Structures for the Adoption of Crowdsourcing in Public Policy: A Bureaucratic Politics Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Crowdsourcing, Sharing Economies and Development," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 33(2), pages 191-222, June.
    2. Yanwei Li & Araz Taeihagh & Martin De Jong, 2018. "The Governance of Risks in Ridesharing: A Revelatory Case from Singapore," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    3. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    5. Yan Huang & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2014. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas Under Consumer Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(9), pages 2138-2159, September.
    6. Prpić, John, 2017. "A Framework for Policy Crowdsourcing," SocArXiv pmfdx, Center for Open Science.
    7. Boons, Mark & Stam, Daan, 2019. "Crowdsourcing for innovation: How related and unrelated perspectives interact to increase creative performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1758-1770.
    8. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Bordunos, A. & Kokoulina, L. & Ermolaeva, L., 2015. "Role of enterprise gamified system in fostering innovation capacity: A field experiment," Working Papers 6420, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    10. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    11. Dominik Mahr & Aric Rindfleisch & Rebecca Slotegraaf, 2015. "Enhancing Crowdsourcing Success: the Role of Creative and Deliberate Problem-Solving Styles," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(3), pages 209-221, September.
    12. Dahlander, Linus & Piezunka, Henning, 2014. "Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 812-827.
    13. Elina H. Hwang & Param Vir Singh & Linda Argote, 2019. "Jack of All, Master of Some: Information Network and Innovation in Crowdsourcing Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 389-410, June.
    14. Prpić, John, 2017. "Experiments on Crowdsourcing Policy Assessment," SocArXiv qznpk, Center for Open Science.
    15. Paul W. Fombelle & Sterling A. Bone & Katherine N. Lemon, 2016. "Responding to the 98%: face-enhancing strategies for dealing with rejected customer ideas," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 685-706, November.
    16. Natalicchio, A. & Messeni Petruzzelli, A. & Garavelli, A.C., 2017. "Innovation problems and search for solutions in crowdsourcing platforms – A simulation approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 64, pages 28-42.
    17. Dahlander, Linus & Beretta, Michela & Thomas, Arne & Kazemi, Shahab & Fenger, Morten H.J. & Frederiksen, Lars, 2023. "Weeding out or picking winners in open innovation? Factors driving multi-stage crowd selection on LEGO ideas," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    18. Serpil ÇİĞDEM, 2019. "Endüstri 4.0 ve Dijital Emek Platformlarının İnsana Yakışır İş Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi," Journal of Social Policy Conferences, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 0(77), pages 157-199, December.
    19. Gillier, Thomas & Chaffois, Cédric & Belkhouja, Mustapha & Roth, Yannig & Bayus, Barry L., 2018. "The effects of task instructions in crowdsourcing innovative ideas," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 35-44.
    20. Nirup Menon & Anant Mishra & Shun Ye, 2020. "Beyond Related Experience: Upstream vs. Downstream Experience in Innovation Contest Platforms with Interdependent Problem Domains," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1045-1065, September.
    21. Steils, Nadia & Hanine, Salwa, 2019. "Recruiting valuable participants in online IDEA generation: The role of brief instructions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 14-25.
    22. Shi, Xiaoxiao & Evans, Richard & Shan, Wei, 2022. "Solver engagement in online crowdsourcing communities: The roles of perceived interactivity, relationship quality and psychological ownership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:50:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-017-9303-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.