Regulating ride-sharing in the peer economy

The rise of the peer economy poses complex new regulatory challenges for policy-makers. The peer economy, typified by services like Uber and AirBnB, promises substantial productivity gains through the more efficient use of existing resources and a marked reduction in regulatory overheads. These services are rapidly disrupting existing established markets, but the regulatory trade-offs they present are difficult to evaluate. In this paper, we examine the peer economy through the context of ride-sharing and the ongoing struggle over regulatory legitimacy between the taxi industry and new entrants Uber and Lyft. We first sketch the outlines of ride-sharing as a complex regulatory problem, showing how questions of efficiency are necessarily bound up in questions about levels of service, controls over pricing, and different approaches to setting, upholding, and enforcing standards. We outline the need for data-driven policy to understand the way that algorithmic systems work and what effects these might have in the medium to long term on measures of service quality, safety, labour relations, and equality. Finally, we discuss how the competition for legitimacy is not primarily being fought on utilitarian grounds, but is instead carried out within the context of a heated ideological battle between different conceptions of the role of the state and private firms as regulators. We ultimately argue that the key to understanding these regulatory challenges is to develop better conceptual models of the governance of complex systems by private actors and the available methods the state has of influencing their actions. These struggles are not, as is often thought, struggles between regulated and unregulated systems. The key to understanding these regulatory challenges is to better understand the important regulatory work carried out by powerful, centralised private firms – both the incumbents of existing markets and the disruptive network operators in the peer-economy.

Privatisation et commercialisation de la sécurité : nouvelles perspectives sur les relations entre secteurs public et privé

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

La gouvernance nodale de la sécurité locale

Le présent travail de recherche se propose d’analyser les dispositifs de gouvernance nodale de la sécurité locale en France, alors que le paradigme a vu le jour et s’est développé dans les pays anglo-saxons fortement décentralisés. C’est qu’en France les dispositifs de gouvernance nodale s’apparentent bien plus à un dialogue entre central et local qu’entre secteur public et privé. La recherche identifie ainsi les caractéristiques de la gouvernance nodale au cœur des dispositifs partenariaux de la sécurité locale, supportés par le Contrat Local de Sécurité (CLS), le Conseil Local de Sécurité et de Prévention de la Délinquance (CLSPD) ou encore le Groupe Local de Traitement de la Délinquance (GLTD). La recherche identifie ainsi les stratégies de décentrage de l’État et de transfert de la production de sécurité vers une diversité d’acteurs locaux, dont les maires et les services municipaux. Une diversité de politiques publiques locales de sécurité de pertinences différentes voit alors le jour. Le premier enseignement de cette recherche est l’importance du rôle joué par le node super-structurel, que nous appelons super-node et qui regroupe le maire ou l’élu local à la sécurité, le responsable de la police d’État, celui de la police municipale et le représentant de l’État. Il apparaît que dans le dispositif de gouvernance nodale, ce groupe informel génère la dynamique collective qui permet de regrouper, tant les producteurs que les consommateurs de sécurité locale gravitant au sein du réseau local de sécurité. La quarantaine d’entrevues qualitatives permet également d’identifier que la Justice, productrice de sécurité comme peut l’être aussi la sécurité privée ou la médiation sociale, apparaît plus distante que ce que pouvait laisser penser l’étude des textes réglementaires organisant le partenariat. Les bailleurs sociaux, les transporteurs et l’Éducation nationale apparaissent clairement comme des acteurs importants, mais périphériques de sécurité, en intégrant cette « famille élargie » de la sécurité locale. Le deuxième enseignement est relatif au fonctionnement même du dispositif nodal ainsi que du super-node, la recherche permettant d’identifier les ressources mutualisées par l’ensemble des nodes. Cela permet également d’identifier les mécanismes de répartition des tâches entre les différents acteurs et plus particulièrement entre les deux organisations policières d’État et municipale, travaillant autant en compétition, qu’en complémentarité. Cette recherche explore également le rôle joué par l’information dans le fonctionnement du super-node ainsi que l’importance de la confiance dans les relations interpersonnelles des représentants des nodes au sein du super-node. Enfin, l’étude permet également de mettre en perspective les limites du dispositif actuel de gouvernance nodale : le défaut avéré d’outils performants permettant d’informer convenablement le super-node quant aux phénomènes de violence ainsi que d’évaluer l’efficience du dispositif. Cela permet également de questionner l’autonomie des dispositifs de gouvernance nodale, la confiance pouvant ouvrir à la déviance et la collégialité au défaut de la traçabilité de la responsabilité. La fracture avec la société civile apparaît clairement et ne facilite pas le contrôle sur un mode de production de sécurité qui se développe en parallèle des dispositifs traditionnels de démocratie locale.

Private security companies and domestic violence: a welcome new development?

Due to the poor reputation of the private security industry and the multiple lines of concerns raised by scholars over the potentially corrosive costs of commercial security provision, it is important to consider whether for-profit companies are a welcome addition to the network of actors who respond to the needs of domestic violence victims. Using the case study of ‘Protective Services’ in Victoria, Australia, who appear to be one of the first known instances of a private security company offering services to victims of domestic violence, we argue that there may be advantages for victims engaging with commercial providers and reasons for optimism that commercial outfits can improve feelings of safety for a particularly vulnerable and underprotected population.

Investigating policy processes: The Governance Analytical Frame-work (GAF)

Societies develop ways of making decisions regarding collective problems, thereby creating norms, rules, and institutions; this is what governance is about. In policy research, governance has become an important focus of attention; but debates show a lack of clarity at the conceptual level and a confusion between the use of the concept for prescriptive and analytical purposes. The present article is based on the hypothesis that using a clarified, non-normative governance perspective in policy research can contribute to an improved understanding of political processes, including formal and unrecognised ones, those embedded in larger and smaller social systems, as well as both vertical and horizontal political arrangements. The paper is the result of a collaborative engagement with the concept of governance within several networks, leading to the development of the Governance Analytical Framework (GAF). The GAF is a practical methodology for investigating governance processes, based on five analytical tools: problems, actors, social norms, processes, and nodal points. Besides describing the conceptual sources and analytical purpose of these five tools, the paper presents examples of how the GAF can be operationalised.

Nonprofit Boards in Australia: A Distinctive Governance Appoach

This article reports the findings into patterns of governance on nonprofit boards in Australia. The research surveys 118 boards, upon which serve a total of 1405 directors. The findings indicate that nonprofit boards can mimic some aspects of a shareholder approach to governance. But nonprofit boards, in the main, indicate priorities and activities of a stakeholder approach to governance. The features of `isomorphism' that arise largely stem from legislative requirements in corporate governance. Generally, nonprofit directors are influenced by agenda and motivations that can be differentiated from the influences upon director activity in the corporate sector. The study indicates that nonprofit boards prize knowledge and loyalty to the sector when considering board composition. The survey suggests nonprofits ``compensate'' for the demands placed upon them about fiduciary duty and due diligence responsibilities with the diverse intellectual expertise of non-executive directors. Nonprofit boards possess greater diversity than boards in the corporate sector; they include more women as directors than corporate boards and they include a greater proportion of directors from minority groups. While strategic issues feature significantly as a task of the nonprofit board, they distinguish themselves from their corporate counterparts by engaging in operational management. The findings indicate that, in the main, directors on nonprofit boards deliberate and operate in ways distinctive from their corporate counterparts. Such findings offer a contribution to the reform of Corporations Law in other countries and the likely consequence on boards outside the corporate sector.