Mobilizing a pluralist theoretical approach to understand microlending digital platforms: the AfricaMC case
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-03-2020-0041Palabras clave:
Microfinance, Emerging countries, Theoretical pluralism, Microlending platforms, Online auction modelsResumen
Purpose – This study aims to explore how a microlending digital platform connects social investors in developed countries and micro-entrepreneurs in Africa. However, additional research is necessary to discuss how online auction models are designed and implemented and how existing theories can explain their use in the so-called developing countries.
Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on a single case study: an online auction model for microlending named AfricaMC. Two main methods collected empirical data, namely, online participant observation, i.e. real-time participation in the online auction market and in the forum of discussions, where the authors observed the processes of microlending transactions as registered members; analysis of online documents, by reviewing forum discussions, analyzing reports, blogs, chats and other materials.
Findings – The results suggest that using sociological and information systems theoretical lenses in a complementary manner could provide greater value than using economics.
Originality/value – The study makes two main contributions. First, it mobilizes a pluralist theoretical approach based on economic, sociological and information systems perspectives to improve the understanding of microlending digital platforms using online auction models. Second, it uses the understanding produced from data analysis of one particular African case to validate propositions derived from these three theoretical approaches that might be applied to other cases
Descargas
Referencias
Akerlof, G. (1970). The market for lemons: Qualitative uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488–500. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431.
Akhter, J., & Cheng, K. (2020). Sustainable empowerment initiatives among rural women through microcredit borrowings in Bangladesh. Sustainability, 12(6), 2275 doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062275.
Al-Dmour, F. (2016). Towards understanding the factors that affecting the online bidding implementation: Based on grounded theory method. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 21(2), 1–20.
Arozamena, L., Fioriti, A., & Weinschelbaum, F. (2021). From auction theory to market design: Paul milgrom and robert wilson’s contributions to economics. Estudios Econômicos, 38(76), 279–296. doi: https://doi.org/10.52292/j.estudecon.2021.2248.
Bakos, J.Y. (1991). A strategic analysis of electronic marketplaces. MIS Quarterly, 295–310. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/249641.
Chemin, M., & de Laat, J. (2013). Can warm glow alleviate credit market failures? Evidence from online peer-to-peer lenders. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 61(4), 825–858. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/670374.
Diniz, E., Pozzebon, M., & Jayo, M. (2009). The role of ICT in helping parallel paths to converge: Microcredit and correspondent banking in Brazil. Journal of Global Information Technology Management (JGITM), Special Issue on Information Technology Research in Brazil, 12(2), 80–103.
Edelman, B., Ostrovsky, M., & Schwarz, M. (2007). Internet advertising and the generalized SecondPrice auction: Selling billions of dollars worth of keywords. American Economic Review, 97(1), 242–259. doi: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.1.242.
França-Filho, G. C., Silva Júnior, J. T., & Rigo, A. S. (2012). Solidarity finance through community development banks as a strategy for reshaping local economies: lessons from banco palmas. Revista de Administração, 47(3), 500–515. doi: https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1054.
Galal, H. S., & Youssef, A. M. (2019). Trustee: full privacy preserving vickrey auction on top of ethereum. International conference on financial cryptography and data security, pp. 190–207. Cham: Springer. In
Gonzalez, L., Diniz, E. H., & Pozzebon, M. (2015). The value of proximity finance: how the traditional banking system can contribute to microfinance innovations. Technology. Governance, Globalization, 10(1-2), 125–137. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/inov_a_00233.
Greenberg, R., Wong-On-Wing, B., & Lui, G. (2008). Culture and consumer trust in online businesses. Journal of Global Information Management, 16(3), 26–44.
Grover, V., & Ramanlal, P. (1999). Six myths of information and markets: Information technology networks, electronic commerce, and the battle for consumer surplus. MIS Quarterly, 23(4), 465–495, doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/249486.
Kambil, A., & Van Heck, E. (2002). Making markets, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Karnani, A. (2007). The mirage of marketing to the bottom of the pyramid: How the private sector can help alleviate poverty. California Management Review, 49(4), 90–111. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/41166407.
Klemperer, P. (1999). Auction theory: a guide to the literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 13(3), 227–286. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6419.00083.
Koppius, O. (2002). Information architecture and electronic market performance. Ph.D. thesis, Rotterdam: Erasmus University.
Kuruzovich, J., & Etzion, H. (2018). Online auctions and multichannel retailing. Management Science, 64(6), 2734–2753. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2732.
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710. doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2553248.
Lee, H. G. (1998). Do electronic marketplaces lower the price of goods? Communications of the ACM, 41(1), 73–80. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/268092.268122.
Lucking-Reiley, D. (1999). Using field experiments to test equivalence between auction formats: Magic on the internet. American Economic Review, 89(5), 1063–1080. doi: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.89.5.1063.
Malone, T., Yates, J., & Benjamin, R. (1987). Electronic markets and electronic hierarchies. Communications of the ACM, 30(6), 484–497. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/214762.214766.
Markus, M. L. (1983). Power, politics and MIS implementation. Communications of the ACM, 26(6), 430–444. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/358141.358148.
McGrath, F. L., Carrasco, L. R., & Leimona, B. (2017). How auctions to allocate payments for ecosystem services contracts impact social equity. Ecosystem Services, 25, 44–55. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.02.017.
Milgrom, P. (1989). Auctions and bidding: a primer. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(3), 3–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.3.3.3.
Nørskov, S., & Rask, M. (2011). Observation of online communities: a discussion of online and offline observer roles in studying development, cooperation and coordination in an open source software environment. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12.
Pettigrew, A. M. (1990). Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice. Organization Science, 1(3), 267–292. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.267.
Podolny, J. M. (1994). Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 458–483. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2393299.
Pozzebon, M., & Van Heck, E. (2006). Local adaptations of generic application systems: the case of veiling holambra in Brazil. Journal of Information Technology, 21(2), 73–85. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000059.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hart, S. L. (2002). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy þ Business, 26(1), 1–14.
Roth, A. E. (2002). The economist as engineer: Game theory, experimentation, and computation as tools for design economics. Econometrica, 70(4), 1341–1378. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00335.
Rothkopf, M. H., Teisberg, T., & Kahn, E. (1990). Why are vickrey auctions rare? Journal of Political Economy, 98(1), 94–109. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/261670.
Rothkopf, M. H., & Harstad, R. M. (1994). Modeling competitive bidding: a critical essay. Management Science, 40(3), 364–384. doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.40.3.364.
Sam, M. K. (2020). Trust measurement and classification data for online auctions using intelligent system. Journal of Computer Science and Information Systems, 12(3).
Smith, C. W. (1989). Auctions: the social construction of value, Berkeley: University of CA Press. RAUSP 57,1 20
Smith, C. W. (2007). Markets as definitional practices. The Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie, 32(1), 1–39. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/20460614.
Spagnoletti, P., Resca, A., & Lee, G. (2015). A design theory for digital platforms supporting online communities: a multiple case study. Journal of Information Technology, 30(4), 364–380. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2014.37.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2000). Capital market liberalization, economic growth, and instability. World Development, 28(6), 1075–1086. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00006-1.
Thomas, G. (2010). Doing case study: Abduction not induction. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(7), 575–582. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410372601.
Toewiwat, A., Upngoen, C., Thaiprasert, N., & Leurcharusmee, S. (2014). Modeling the impacts of online auction via eBay on economic welfare. International Journal of Intelligent Technologies & Applied Statistics, 7(2), 171–184.
Varian, H. (2007). Position auctions. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25(6), 1163–1178. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2006.10.002.
Vickrey, W. (1961). Counter speculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. The Journal of Finance, 16(1), 8–37. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1961.tb02789.x.
Yum, H., Lee, B., & Chae, M. (2012). From the wisdom of crowds to my own judgment in microfinance through online peer-to-peer lending platforms. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(5), 469–483. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2012.05.003.
Yunus, M. (1999). The grameen bank. Scientific American, 281(5), 114–119. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1199-114.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 Eric van Heck, Ana Clara Souza, Marlei Pozzebon and Maira Petrini
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Management Department of the School of Economics, Management and Accounting of the University of São Paulo.
The publication of article segments is allowed, subject to prior authorization and source identification.
Copyright is regulated under Licença Creative Commons Attribution
