首页> 外文OA文献 >The Sharing Economy - A Vehicle for Innovation or a Source for More Regulation? A comparative case study on the European Commission versus France and the Netherlands
【2h】

The Sharing Economy - A Vehicle for Innovation or a Source for More Regulation? A comparative case study on the European Commission versus France and the Netherlands

机译:共享经济 - 创新的载体还是更多监管的源泉?欧盟委员会与法国和荷兰的比较案例研究

摘要

This thesis focuses on the policy-challenges in the sharing economy in relation to innovation and regulatory principles in the European Union. It is a qualitative thesis that takes the form of a comparative case study, comparing the European Commission on a supranational level with France and the Netherlands on national level, as two Member States of the EU. The aim of the thesis is to identify how the EU and its Member States understand and frame the sharing economy from an innovation perspective. It also aims to clarify how governmental bodies in the EU deal with tensions in policy-making in the area of the sharing economy. This is done by drawing on the theoretical framework of institutional logics and sensemaking. The main empirical material consists of official governmental documents of the respective actors and is supported by qualitative interviews. The results found that the European Commission is acting as a forum for discussion rather than a supranational regulator. France understands their own approach towards the sharing economy as more careful, while the Netherlands prefer little government interference. This thesis looks at what constitutes these different approaches, what sensemaking procedure it is subject to, and what logic they make out of it. It can be concluded that regulation in the sharing economy is interpreted very differently across the EU, based on different institutional logics and sensemaking processes.
机译:本文着眼于共享经济中与欧盟创新和监管原则相关的政策挑战。这是定性论文,采用比较案例研究的形式,将超国家级的欧洲委员会与国家和地区的法国和荷兰作为欧盟的两个成员国进行了比较。本文的目的是从创新的角度确定欧盟及其成员国如何理解和构架共享经济。它还旨在阐明欧盟政府机构如何应对共享经济领域决策中的紧张局势。这是通过利用制度逻辑和理性解释的理论框架来完成的。主要的经验材料包括各个参与者的官方政府文件,并辅以定性访谈。结果发现,欧洲委员会正在充当讨论论坛,而不是超国家监管机构。法国更加谨慎地理解自己对共享经济的态度,而荷兰则希望政府很少干预。本文着眼于什么构成了这些不同的方法,它遵循什么意义的程序,以及它们从中得出什么逻辑。可以得出结论,基于不同的制度逻辑和合理的理解过程,整个欧盟对共享经济中的监管的解释截然不同。

著录项

  • 作者

    Dohmen Bo;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号