IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/pbrief/pb22-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The online gig economy's impact is not as big as many thought

Author

Listed:
  • Lee G. Branstetter

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

The explosive global growth of online ride-hailing platforms raised concern (and, in some quarters, optimism) that similar growth in other platforms could rapidly disrupt traditional labor arrangements on a large scale in advanced economies. But the evidence to date suggests no significant changes in the overall importance of "gig" work in the US labor market nor a significant decline in the importance of traditional employment relationships. Online platforms may play a growing role (relative to traditional "brick-and-mortar" intermediaries) in connecting gig workers to their customers, but that alone does not guarantee a large increase in the importance of gig work. Branstetter reviews this evidence, noting the gaps in labor market data series that make the measurement of this phenomenon so difficult. Even if traditional employment relationships are not likely to decline significantly in the near future, the rise of online gig work nevertheless highlights longstanding inadequacies of labor market regulations, which recognize employees and truly independent contractors but struggle with the intermediate kinds of worker-firm relationships the online platforms enable. Branstetter summarizes proposals for regulating gig economy work and the lessons policymakers in South Korea and other economies can learn from the literature he reviews in this Policy Brief.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee G. Branstetter, 2022. "The online gig economy's impact is not as big as many thought," Policy Briefs PB22-9, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb22-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/online-gig-economys-impact-not-big-many-thought
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:iie:pbrief:pb22-9. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.html .

    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.