Lubna Alli

Reading: 

Good or bad? Ridesharing’s impact on Canadian cities. 

Zwick, A., & Spicer, Z. (2018).

Zwick and Spicer write a compelling and cohesive paper on the impacts of ridesharing on Canadian cities, specifically on the Uber vs taxi debate. Ridesharing has experienced phenomenal growth in the last few years, which has impacted the taxi industry. Zwick argues that ride sharing has been detrimental to Canadian cities because it compromises safety standards, increases precarious labour, and intensifies congestion. Spicer, on the other hand, argues that ride sharing has been a positive for Canadian cities because it generates consumer surplus, creates new employment opportunities, and disrupts broken markets. Both authors agree that Uber ought to be legalized and regulated, but ultimately they disagree on the appropriate standard. Zwick is more regimented in his approach, and believes that the regulatory bar for health, safety, and taxation should not be lowered to accommodate ride sharing. Spicer, is willing to compromise, as he believes there is an opportunity for various stakeholders to collaborate to arrive at a consensus. Considering both conclusions, the implications for each would differ. Zwick is not entirely against ride sharing so long as it is within a government regulatory framework. What would this framework look like and what policies would get pushed to the back burner for the sake of a more important pillar? I would that with Spicer’s conclusion, there is still a regulatory framework of some sort in place, even if it is collaborative. This part of this thought process was not clarified enough. Yes, he believes in compromise and collaboration, but what will be the outcome as a result of this? Most likely a series of mandates that are derived as a result of the discussions with the two actors. Without a document in writing, the issue of lack of transparency in the platform sharing economy will continue to reappear as a major problem and cause for critique in this area.