The Value Of Digital Platforms For Development: Categorization And Characteristics Essay.

The paper aims to contribute to this ongoing debate about ICT4D research and information systems by addressing several questions. The development in a holistic sense is considered that is going beyond such economic growth (Bonina, et al., 2021). It provides the categorization differentiating between innovation and transaction platforms and helps to synthesize all major characteristics.

The intention is to understand all ways by which these digital platforms are contributing to the development outcomes, in place of focusing upon the adoption and diffusion of all digital platforms within the developing countries. Hence, this decision to have a wide view of the development allows accommodating.

This article is conceptual as this supports all arguments based upon persuasive and logical reasoning. This paper aims to foster all impacts and significance of all digital platforms. While these digital platforms could make efficient contributions to release the SDGs, all positive outcomes could not be taken casually. This paper makes 2 crucial contributions to ICT4D research and information systems regarding all digital platforms. It helps to contribute to the digital platform's scoping within the field. By bringing all together, such as categorization, extant debates within ICT4D literature, linkages to all development outcomes, and all sociotechnical dimensions, the paper identifies several research questions for understanding these digital platforms.

All digital platforms worldwide present potential for generating economic and social value for the developments. Although such digital platform organizations have generated huge wealth in a record time, such wealth is concentrated over some countries and organizations, raising the concerns of development effects such new technologies might have (Nielsen, 2017). Part of this issue to grasp all implications of these platforms for the development within the information systems' field lacks clarity regarding this overall understanding of all digital platforms.

Some of the biggest organizations regarding the market value are Alphabet, Amazon. Apple, and Microsoft, all these organizations are platform organizations. Every digital platform for development is isolated from the complicated social dynamics rarely, problems of driving forces and power behind them. These digital platforms are some challenging objects spread over different regions (Koskinen, Bonina & Eaton, 2019). It is understood that every digital platform is an IT artefacts' class having unique purposes that certain underlying digital properties or characteristics could enable.

Every digital platform holds some central position within every business model of the biggest organizations worldwide, changing all traditional roles within the areas such as innovation activities, productivity, and employment. Several basic characteristics are shared by these digital platforms. These enable interaction among the user groups are technically mediated and allow such user groups carrying out all defined tasks. Every digital platform is the digital resources' set that facilitates all interactions between the participants.

Results

The analysis of this literature suggests that these digital platforms could afford 2 underlying themes for development. Every digital platform offers some opportunities for accessing services to all people. Along with widening access, every digital platform possesses all potential for removing different transactions along with market frictions. These are suggested relevant to several South settings globally, regarding every cost of transaction is quite common due to inadequate infrastructure, poor communication network, or inefficient institutions (Masiero & Arvidsson, 2021). It is suggested from the literature that many instances where these platforms failed to consider all contextual factors and could have left all target groups.

Regarding this, the development potentials of all such platforms don't materialize by existence; however, these depend upon all factors, like design and operating context. It is also acknowledged that this phenomenon of digital platforms could have been pointed out within several industries (Heeks, et al., 2020). The methods of computational science and context analysis could be used in future studies for covering this extensive view about this subject, depending upon digital platforms' analytical typology being offered. Additionally, all future studies might focus upon reviewing certain applications and industries for under covering digital platforms' characteristics that could promote perspectives of such development.

The article aims to foster all impacts and significance of all digital platforms. The article demonstrates how crucial characteristics of 2 basic categories of the platform have some applications besides commerce in wider social settings. The article shows that this is possible in imposing sub-categorization of the platforms. However, several of such labels could be driven from the understanding of all commercial platforms within the North settings. 2 crucial contributions are being made by this paper to ICT4D research and information systems regarding all digital platforms (Rossotto, et al., 2018).

It provides the categorization differentiating between innovation and transaction platforms. The article identifies several issues, such as issues of openness and greater flexibility for enabling innovation, the digital platform's role for creating eroded institutions having implications for all development outcomes, and categorization of the nuanced platform. The literature of this article indicates that this could be possible in identifying an effective categorization along with sub-categorization of all platforms encompassing both more profound and wider views upon development. The authors of this article have called for more research in the future for generating some clarity within all platforms' categorization for development. It could lead to sophisticated research, uncovering a much better understanding of all issues regarding these platforms and lead to a much better design (Martin & Taylor, 2021).

Contributions

The aim of the article is contributing to this ongoing debate in ICT4D research and information systems for understanding the value of these digital platforms for the purpose of development. For doing so, the authors define the digital platforms and differentiate among innovation and transaction platforms. They explain all key characteristics of these digital platforms regarding their purpose, business models, material properties, and research foundations (Weitzberg, et al., 2021). Sociotechnical contexts of these digital platforms and all linkages to the developmental outcomes are added by the authors. Then a review is conducted in this article for exploring the current areas, issues which emerge, tensions, and development goals within this literature upon platforms for identifying the gaps within the knowledge.

The article includes 6 research questions for advancing the studies upon the digital platform for the purpose of development. The focus of this article is understanding the ways these digital platforms are used to contribute to all development outcomes, in place of focusing upon the adoption as well as diffusion of these digital platforms. For achieving this purpose, the article offers the typology of all digital platforms depending upon the extant literature from the platforms and management research. The authors in this article differentiate between all categories of different platforms and demonstrate all major characteristics regarding their purpose, value creation approach, material properties, and research foundations.

A common and crucial finding from this literature is the overall significance of this context and the need for the provided development setting for having some strong infrastructural and institutional bases. These seem crucial constraints for these digital platforms for functioning and embracing several development-related objectives (Nicholson, Nielsen & Saebo, 2021). If concerning innovation or transaction platforms, the authors reviewed some explored ways where all socio-political contexts had some implications upon the functionalities as well as usage of these platforms. The authors also found few emerging works which noted all risks for such platforms in ending up exacerbating all existing inequalities further.

The analysis of this literature of this article suggested 2 underlying themes which digital platforms could afford for the development, such as removing all market frictions and widening access. The authors in this article stated that digital platforms offer several opportunities for accessing the services to people. Additionally, to widening access, all digital platforms possess the potential for removing different transaction as well as market frictions (Blaschke, et al., 2018). The article suggests many occasions where the platforms have failed to consider contextual factors. Another finding from this article is the presence of all non-commercial actors that lead to these platforms' deployment within the South settings. The authors reviewed several publications concentrated upon these platforms that were in the idea stage still without being developed properly.

Foundation

Many papers haven't considered the perspectives of the platforms and aren't included within this review. Future studies would help to include those and review certain applications and industries. There exists a concern that how such a gig economy is being driven by such platforms (Spremi?, Ivancic & Vukši?, 2020). There exist more dimensions for the scholars in exploring while considering such platforms' all negative effects upon this labour force within several development dimensions.

The authors of this journal understand all digital platforms as IT artefacts' classes having unique purposes and enabled by certain digital characteristics. The authors also understand the platform to reside within the sociotechnical setting in where these could interact with the ecosystem of stakeholders along with a wider set of spatial, institutional, organizational, or economic forces (Page-Tickell & Yerby, 2020). Such a wide understanding of the digital platforms informs the literature review upon platforms and enables to generate several key dimensions characterizing this literature of this journal.  

This journal has been cited by 38 individuals. There were no datasets generated for this study. The citing literature of this journal is 14 as per CrossRef. Using keywords could have limited appropriate work in the outlets that have been included within this literature review of this article. The authors of this journal acknowledge that this phenomenon of digital platforms, along with its implication for the development, could be raised within several industries; all digital outlets were out of this work's scope. The authors also understand that every other field other than development studies and information systems has produced some crucial work within the relevant research works being omitted from the journals' initial list that the authors investigated. However, there exists some limitations within the method of this article. Context analysis could be used for future studies to undercover the extensive view upon the subject, depending upon digital platforms' analytical typology that the authors offer.

Several comparative studies could research the effectiveness of all approaches of these digital platforms in the future. There are several rising issues regarding these platforms for such gig economy and their effects upon all workers. Uncertainty over all potentials of these platforms could lead to some confusion in case of more complicated structures (Sanchez?Cartas & León, 2021). A few of the questions that aren't reviewed in this article are:

Do the inclusive processes of innovation reduce inequalities for accessing all applications of these digital platforms?

General Critique

The literature review of this article doesn't conduct much research on all platforms of innovation and how these are linked with all development outcomes. Expensive as well as intensive resources are required by these platforms of innovations for establishing and operating. As noticed in this literature section of this article, the focus of most of the studies is upon transaction instead of these innovation platforms. An appropriate framework could be provided by this inclusive inclusion (Rietveld & Schilling, 2021). There is little knowledge about how all processes of innovation might result in better developmental approaches. Open data implementations of the governments are considered to be one of the innovation platforms as these governments depend upon the innovator's ecosystem, who have the capability to provide crucial services to all people and these governments for generating values.

What local approaches could be applied for maintaining governance that might work better for allowing some expansion of all these indigenous platforms?

As this literature of this article suggests, several positive benefits could be delivered by all these platforms might for development. Although, these digital platforms' negative consequences aren't available (Heeks, et al., 2021). All such negative consequences are considered within the global North, as there is a need for more work for exploring all dark sides of these digital platforms in the ICT4D as well as IS communities.

How do these digital platforms evolve within the global South compared with the global North?

The literature in this article uncovered several transaction platforms, some of the innovation platforms; however, the article didn't review any hybrid platforms. The costs to develop all these innovative platforms, as well as hybrid platforms, are quite high, and the architecture of these platforms are complex also (Msiska & Nielsen, 2018). While such platforms could be used for creating along with deploying all services within the South; however, there exist some complicated platforms which could be indigenous to this South. There exist few patterns of evolving these platforms within the global North.

Conclusion and Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge that such a phenomenon of these digital platforms could be raised within several industries. It is clear to the authors that fields excluding development studies and information systems have produced several vital works within appropriate research work. The aim of the authors is fostering the impact as well as the significance of all digital platforms that could be used for development. The literature review of this article suggests that all dark sides of these platforms are starting to show up eventually. However, several future studies need to be conducted for exploring more about these platforms.

References

Blaschke, M., Haki, K., Aier, S., & Winter, R. (2018, December). Capabilities for digital platform survival: Insights from a business-to-business digital platform. Association for Information Systems.

Bonina, C., Koskinen, K., Eaton, B., & Gawer, A. (2021). Digital platforms for development: Foundations and research agenda. Information Systems Journal, 31(6), 869-902.

Heeks, R., Eskelund, K., Gomez-Morantes, J. E., Malik, F., & Nicholson, B. (2020). Digital Labour Platforms in the Global South: Filling or Creating Institutional Voids?.

Heeks, R., Gomez-Morantes, J. E., Graham, M., Howson, K., Mungai, P., Nicholson, B., & Van Belle, J. P. (2021). Digital platforms and institutional voids in developing countries: The case of ride-hailing markets. World Development, 145, 105528.

Koskinen, K., Bonina, C., & Eaton, B. (2019, May). Digital platforms in the global South: foundations and research agenda. In International conference on social implications of computers in developing countries (pp. 319-330). Springer, Cham.

Martin, A., & Taylor, L. (2021). Exclusion and inclusion in identification: Regulation, displacement and data justice. Information Technology for Development, 27(1), 50-66.

Masiero, S., & Arvidsson, V. (2021). Degenerative outcomes of digital identity platforms for development. Information Systems Journal, 31(6), 903-928.

Msiska, B., & Nielsen, P. (2018). Innovation in the fringes of software ecosystems: the role of sociotechnical generativity. Information Technology for Development, 24(2), 398-421.

Nicholson, B., Nielsen, P., & Saebo, J. (2021). Digital platforms for development. Information Systems Journal, 31(6), 863-868.

Nielsen, P. (2017, May). Digital innovation: A research agenda for information systems research in developing countries. In International Conference on social implications of Computers in developing countries (pp. 269-279). Springer, Cham.

Page-Tickell, R., & Yerby, E. (Eds.). (2020). Conflict and shifting boundaries in the gig economy: An interdisciplinary analysis. Emerald Group Publishing.

Rietveld, J., & Schilling, M. A. (2021). Platform competition: A systematic and interdisciplinary review of the literature. Journal of Management, 47(6), 1528-1563.

Rossotto, C. M., Lal Das, P., Gasol Ramos, E., Clemente Miranda, E., Badran, M. F., Martinez Licetti, M., & Miralles Murciego, G. (2018). Digital platforms: A literature review and policy implications for development. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, 19(1-2), 93-109.

Sanchez?Cartas, J. M., & León, G. (2021). Multisided platforms and markets: A survey of the theoretical literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(2), 452-487.

Spremi?, M., Ivancic, L., & Vukši?, V. B. (2020). Fostering innovation and value creation through ecosystems: case of digital business models and digital platforms. In Leadership, Management, and adoption Techniques for Digital Service Innovation (pp. 25-44). IGI Global.

Weitzberg, K., Cheesman, M., Martin, A., & Schoemaker, E. (2021). Between surveillance and recognition: Rethinking digital identity in aid. Big Data & Society, 8(1), 20539517211006744.