Abstract
Platform-produced data play an important role in techno-capitalist platforms. Especially important in this context are open and free geospatial data, as geospatial data are becoming increasingly relevant in all aspects of daily life as well as for Web businesses. This chapter focuses on the example of the OpenStreetMap project and contrasts it with two techno-capitalist platforms: Meta/Facebook and Grab. OpenStreetMap is often considered the most successful crowdsourced geodatabase, which derives its prosperity from communities of map contributors. Conversely, companies such as Meta/Facebook and Grab are seen as part of platform capitalism, and for them to succeed, they need geospatial data. To satisfy this craving for geospatial data, these companies have chosen not to develop complete solutions or use other commercial data sources. Instead, they tap into data that OpenStreetMap provides and have started to contribute both data and software to OpenStreetMap. This chapter theoretically contextualizes the growing relevance of techno-capitalist platforms for OpenStreetMap: on the one hand, actors of platform capitalism may dominate epistemologies or exploit volunteers by using their “map** labor” for their commercial purposes; on the other hand, techno-capitalist platforms may also provide incentives for empowering marginalized groups who can now literally put themselves on the map.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Altenried M, Animento S, Bojadžijev M (2021) Plattform-Urbanismus. sub\urban. zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 9(1/2):73–91. https://doi.org/10.36900/suburban.v9i1/2.605
Barbrook R, Cameron A (1996) The Californian ideology. Sci Cult 6(1):44–72
Beer D (2018) The data gaze: capitalism, power and perception. SAGE
Bittner C (2014) Reproduktion sozialräumlicher Differenzierungen in OpenStreetMap: das Beispiel Jerusalems. Kartographische Nachrichten 64(3):136–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03544143
Bittner C (2017) Diversity in volunteered geographic information: comparing OpenStreetMap and Wikimapia in Jerusalem. GeoJ 82(5):887–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-016-9721-3
Breen J, Dosemagen S, Warren J, Lippincott M (2015) Map** grassroots: geodata and the structure of community-led open environmental science. ACME Int J Crit Geograph 14(3):849–873. https://acme-journal.org/index.php/acme/article/view/1236
Chapman K (2015) Commoning in Katastrophenzeiten. In: Helfrich S, Bollier D (eds) Die Welt der Commons. transcript Verlag, pp 200–203
Clark C (2021, July 9) Why does Sexism within OpenStreetMap matter? State of the map 2021. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1svHer7tj-I0yKNSb6u1tdr1h75599b36XU9oTFzfNks/edit#slide=id.p
Crampton JW (2009) Cartography: maps 2.0. Prog Human Geogr 33(1):91–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508094074
Dittus M, Garcia D (2019, September 23) Caretography – map** difficult issues with OpenStreetMap during difficult times. State of the map 2019. https://2019.stateofthemap.org/sessions/F9D8QG/
Dodge M, Perkins C (2008) Reclaiming the map: British geography and ambivalent cartographic practice. Environ Plan A 40(6):1271–1276. https://doi.org/10.1068/a4172
Dunn PT (2020) Participatory infrastructures: the politics of mobility platforms. Urban Plan 5(4):335–346. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i4.3483
Foflia J, Bulusu A (2019, September 21) Driving South East Asia forward with OpenStreetMap. State of the Map 2019, Heidelberg. https://2019.stateofthemap.org/sessions/PAG8CN/
Gardner Z, Mooney P, de Sabbata S, Dowthwaite L (2020) Quantifying gendered participation in OpenStreetMap: responding to theories of female (under) representation in crowdsourced map**. GeoJ 85(6):1603–1620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-019-10035-z
Gartner G (2011) Web map** 2.0. In: Dodge M, Kitchin R, Perkins CR (eds) Routledge studies in human geography: vol. 28. Rethinking maps: new frontiers in cartographic theory. Routledge, pp 277–290
Glasze G, Perkins C (2015) Social and political dimensions of the OpenStreetMap project: towards a critical geographical research agenda. In: Helbich M (ed) Lecture notes in geoinformation and cartography Ser. Openstreetmap in GIScience: experiences, research, and applications, 1st edn. Springer, pp 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14280-7_8
Goodchild MF (2007) Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJ 69(4):211–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-007-9111-y
Grab (2022, June 8) Grab to be fully powered by its own map** technology by Q3 2022. https://www.grab.com/sg/press/tech-product/grab-to-be-fully-powered-by-its-own-map**-technology-by-q3-2022/
Graham M (2020) Regulate, replicate, and resist – the conjunctural geographies of platform urbanism. Urban Geogr 41(3):453–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2020.1717028
Hormann C (2022) Over engineering. http://blog.imagico.de/over-engineering/
Leszczynski A (2012) Situating the geoweb in political economy. Prog Human Geogr 36(1):72–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132511411231
Leszczynski A (2019) Platform affects of geolocation. Geoforum 107:207–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.011
Michel B, Schröder-Bergen S (2022) The politics of geodata in urban platform capitalism. In: Bauriedl S, Strüver A (eds) Platformization of urban life, 1st edn. transcript Verlag, pp 73–84. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839459645-005
Morozov E (2014) To save everything, click here: the folly of technological solutionism. J Inf Policy 4:173–175. https://doi.org/10.5325/**fopoli.4.2014.0173
Mouton M, Burns R (2021) (Digital) neo-colonialism in the smart city. Reg Stud 20(5):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1915974
Neis P, Zielstra D, Zipf A (2013) Comparison of volunteered geographic information data contributions and community development for selected world regions. Future Intern 5(2):282–300. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi5020282
OSM Forum (2018) Facebookstreetmap.com. https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=63456
Pánek J (2013) The commercialisation of public data – how does participatory data-mining look on a global scale? South Afr J Geomat 2:231–245. https://www.academia.edu/en/20075483/The_Commercialisation_of_Public_Data_How_Does_Participatory_Data_mining_Look_on_a_Global_Scale
Patel D (2018, July 30) OSM at facebook. State of the Map 2018, Milan. https://2018.stateofthemap.org/2018/T078-OSM_at_Facebook/
Plennert M, Glasze G, Schlieder C (2019) The socio-technical background of an unconventional software architecture in OpenStreetMap: understanding the implementation of ‘Folksonomy’. Comput Cult 7. http://computationalculture.net/the-socio-technical-background-of-an-unconventional-software-architecture-in-openstreetmap-understanding-the-implementation-of-folksonomy/
Schranz C (2018) Commons for cartography: how social computing changes the design of interfaces. Interface Critique 1:168–175. https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/ic/article/download/44740/41705
Schröder-Bergen S, Glasze G, Michel B, Dammann F (2021) De/colonizing OpenStreetMap? Local mappers, humanitarian and commercial actors and the changing modes of collaborative map**. GeoJ 87:S. 5051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-021-10547-7
Seemann M (2021) Die Macht der Plattformen – Politik in Zeiten der Internetgiganten. Informationen zum Buch und portofrei bestellen. Ch. Links Verlag. https://www.christoph-links-verlag.de/index.cfm?view=3&titel_nr=E9075
Srnicek N (2017) Platform capitalism. Wiley
Staab P (2019) Digitaler Kapitalismus: Markt und Herrschaft in der Ökonomie der Unknappheit. Suhrkamp Verlag
Steele AL (2022, August 21) Map** crises, communities and capitalism on OpenStreetMap: situating humanitarian map** in the (open source) map** supply chain. State of the Map 2022, Florence. https://2022.stateofthemap.org/sessions/NWB9QF/
Stephens M (2013) Gender and the GeoWeb: divisions in the production of user-generated cartographic information. GeoJ 78(6):981–996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-013-9492-z
Turner F (2006) From counterculture to cyberculture. University of Chicago Press
van Dijck J, Poell T, de Waal M (2018) The platform society, vol 1. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Finn Dammann, Boris Michel, and Georg Glasze for their helpful comments and valuable support on earlier versions of this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schröder-Bergen, S. (2024). Crowd-Based Geodata Production and Platform Capitalism: The Case of OpenStreetMap. In: Vale, M., Ferreira, D., Rodrigues, N. (eds) Geographies of the Platform Economy. Economic Geography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53594-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53594-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-53593-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-53594-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)