27 Crowdsourcing

Porter, Amanda J.; Diriker, Damla; Hellemans, Ilse

doi:10.1515/9781501508059-027

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We argue in this paper that increased scholarly attention is needed to understand how focal interactions on SODPs can manage these paradoxes and tensions (Bonina et al, 2021). A handful of studies to date have examined the micro‐level interactions between stakeholders on digital platforms (de Liddo & Shum, 2014; Majchrzak & Malhotra, 2016, 2019; Malhotra & Majchrzak, 2014), indicating that certain types of mechanisms to share and integrate knowledge for solutions to societal problems can help to manage the paradoxical nature of SODPs (Majchrzak & Malhotra, 2016; Porter et al, 2021). While these studies provide a useful starting point, understanding how digital platforms can stimulate fruitful interactions among participants without succumbing to their paradoxical effects is still an unresolved puzzle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harnessing digitalization for sustainable development: Understanding how interactions on sustainability‐oriented digital platforms manage tensions and paradoxes

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the digital age, interactions among heterogenous actors are increasingly mediated by digital platforms. While sustainability‐oriented digital platforms (SODPs) have the potential to accelerate sustainability through increased connectivity, knowledge sharing, and co‐creation, they also have a dark side, leading to unexpected tensions and paradoxical effects that may risk the creation of value for societal actors. Understanding how digital platforms can be designed to stimulate fruitful interactions among participants without succumbing to their paradoxical effects is still an unresolved puzzle. In this paper, we examine how the bright sides of SODPs can be brought to light while reducing their associated tensions and paradoxes through a qualitative study of micro‐level knowledge integration interactions on an open platform to tackle food waste. Our analysis identified 11 distinct mechanisms and 3 main interactional patterns through which participants framed the scale of the sustainability problem, mobilized resources for their solutions, and generated breadth and diversity of knowledge on the platform to tackle the problem of food waste. Our study contributes to research on SOPDs by showing how participants can take on a “distributed brokering” role through their interactions on the platform. We also provide implications to policy‐oriented practitioners regarding platform design choices to help manage known paradoxes and tensions of SOPDs.

show abstract