Digital platforms have transformed many economic sectors by enabling new forms of coordination, data aggregation, and value capture. Research on these dynamics has focused largely on information-good sectors, where platform-based business models have often produced disruptive market effects. It remains less clear how platformisation unfolds in sectors where value creation is closely tied to material production processes. This exploratory study examines platformisation in German agriculture, a sector that is increasingly data-driven but has not experienced platform-led disruption. Based on 16 semi-structured expert interviews with stakeholders from the German agricultural platform ecosystem, the analysis focuses on the development of data infrastructures and the reorganisation of economic relations around platforms. The findings show that fragmented data standards, limited interoperability, and a small, highly heterogeneous user base constrain the emergence of scalable, multi-sided platforms. Instead, platformisation primarily proceeds through incumbent-owned farm management systems that centralise machine- and sensor-generated data. These systems support coordination and customer retention and tend to reinforce existing market structures rather than enable disruptive entry. By analysing platformisation in a non-information good sector, the study contributes to platform research by identifying sector-specific limits to scalability and by illustrating how platform power can expand incrementally through incumbent-driven digital infrastructures.
Recent developments in platform governance have empowered regulators to require platforms to take down harmful and unlawful content such as the live streaming of violence and child sexual abuse material. However, platform responsibility for content that is health-demoting but not criminal or violent has been relatively neglected. This paper focuses on how platforms create advertising environments that promote unhealthy diets, which we label an ‘algorithmic determinant of health’. We propose a human rights-based approach (HRBA) to digital platform regulation that would require both governments and platforms to protect individuals from health demoting flows of food marketing content online. We use our HRBA to review the policies of twelve major advertiser-funded digital platforms regarding food marketing. We conclude they do not comply with platforms’ human rights obligations. Accordingly, governments should regulate platforms’ online advertising. We argue that initiatives like the UK Online Safety Act are too narrow for this purpose, and that the imposition of a digital duty of care on platforms, such as seen in the EU Digital Services Act, is a more promising step. While applied to food marketing in this paper, our HRBA is relevant to other health demoting marketing content online such as gambling and alcohol.
In 2022, the European Union legislator adopted Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2) and Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 (DORA). Combined, these laws introduced mandatory cybersecurity and supply chain security controls for several in-scope companies. However, their introduction raised the question of whether they improved cybersecurity practices or merely increased formal compliance. This article seeks to answer this question using annual reports. Annual reports are publicly available documents through which a company explains to its stakeholders the risks it faces and how it manages them. If, over time, a company changes its internal policies and practices for a given risk, subsequent annual reports will reflect these changes in the way that risk is disclosed. As cyber and supply chain risks are included in annual reports, changes in cybersecurity disclosure can signal shifts in how the company perceives and manages these risks. This article uses the annual reports of 67 Dutch companies listed on the AEX, AMX, and AscX to investigate whether observable changes in cybersecurity disclosure occurred before and after the introduction of NIS2 and DORA. A change in cybersecurity disclosure might be a signal that the new cybersecurity legislation has possibly contributed to ensure a shift in internal practices, going beyond mere compliance.
This article investigates how trust and distrust in internet voting are constructed in Estonia, the only country to have used nationwide internet voting in legally binding elections for two decades. Drawing on expert interviews and Q-methodology with Estonian citizens, the study maps how both expert and public discourses articulate confidence and scepticism toward internet voting. Three discourses emerge: 1) Institutional trust and practical optimism, highlighting habitual use, institutional reliability, and everyday convenience; 2) Concerns over transparency and accessibility, emphasising openness, communication, and inclusivity; and 3) Scepticism about security and human vulnerabilities, focusing on system opacity, the concentration of control, and human error. The analysis reveals an asymmetry between trust and distrust narratives: while trust discourses are well-developed and grounded in experience and institutional legitimacy, distrust discourses remain reactive and less differentiated, blending technical and political concerns. The findings suggest that in digitally advanced contexts, long-term exposure to functioning e-governance systems consolidates complex justifications for trust, whereas scepticism, though persistent, lacks structural articulation. The study contributes to broader debates on democratic legitimacy in digital elections, demonstrating that trust in internet voting depends as much on political culture and institutional transparency as on technological performance.
The legal sphere is increasingly moving towards the metasphere, through the adoption of virtual reality technologies across legal procedures, processes, and education. This article examines how this shift affects the execution and experience of criminal justice. Drawing on procedural justice theory and sociological perspectives, it explores how metaverse-based justice reshapes human connection, communication, and the rituals that underpin the fairness and legitimacy of criminal proceedings. While virtual reality promises greater efficiency and accessibility in criminal trials, it challenges the traditional conception of the courtroom as a physical space where justice is enacted and experienced. Emphasising participation, dignity, and trust, the analysis highlights the importance of experiential dimensions in perceptions of fairness. Key sociological themes are explored, including how virtual environments shape interaction and entrainment. The article argues that the metaverse may transform the social practices that constitute a fair trial, with potential consequences for the core principles of criminal justice. Ultimately, it contributes to critical debates on legal digitalisation by questioning whether virtual technologies can reconcile efficiency with the essential human experience of justice.
