This special issue aims to unravel the deeply intertwined dialectics between property and sharing. We do so by examining the paradoxes thrown up as legal forms of property interact with the emergent economic activity of sharing, and investigating how these may be resolved by designing institutional frameworks to better align their values. These paradoxes are sometimes productive, driving property and sharing forward to produce new configurations of use and privilege; sometimes disruptive, as sharing throws new light on how property orders economic and social relations by pushing against the boundaries of established property forms. But they are always revealing.

The sharing economy is anchored to two opposite logics: sharing and market exchange. This results in tensions between a pro-social orientation and communal norms on the one hand (i.e. solidarity, mutuality, generalized reciprocity and communal belonging) and a for-profit orientation and market norms on the other hand (i.e. profit maximization, self-interest and utilitarian motives). This article aims to distinguish among the different practices and phenomena related to the sharing economy, focusing on the tensions emanating from renting private possessions through collaborative consumption platforms.

This article analyses shifts in consumers’ preferred forms of use following the rise of the access economy and evaluates the subversive potential of access as a non-hierarchical, open form of use. Access consists of an aggregation of multiple licenses that amounts to a consistent form of use and has social, cultural and legal implications. My definition of ‘access’ focusses on material practices of property rather than on formal legal categories, and I compare access to both formal and informal forms of long-term use. I explore themes of power and vulnerability and individualism and communities and consider whether access merely adds to the property landscape or provokes contested forms of use. The article reveals the complex relationships between ownership (and other forms of long-term possession) and access, as access both challenges ownership and reinforces its power. Ultimately, I conclude that access fails to achieve its subversive potential.

What would the ‘sharing economy’ look like if platform providers optimised for racial and other forms of diversity? This article considers that question. Following the Introduction, Part 2 of this article reviews the widespread nature of race and other forms of discrimination in platform technologies. Part 3 uses core strands of property theory to analyse the ways in which racial privilege translates into property entitlements. Part 4 discusses a range of reforms within property law that can contribute to eliminating the value – and ultimately the fact – of whiteness as a property entitlement in the platform economy.

This article explores how the risk structure currently adopted by the sharing economy, in particular the highly formalised and contrived systems of contract constructed by platforms, is largely constituted by the rules of property law. This effectively ties sharing activities to the old model of private property and its accompanying boundaries of privatised risk and value and undermines the efforts of collaboration to supersede those boundaries through peer-to-peer co-production of value. This article aims towards presenting an alternative model of risk distribution for the sharing economy that is more reflective of its collaborative nature. To this end, I will draw on ideas from commons and mutualism and propose the possibility of creative use of contracts to stipulate positive duties and obligations between collaborative partners as a device to construct a collective and/or mutual risk system.

This paper presents an analytical mapping of institutional design possibilities for alternative ways for digital platforms to institutionalise property and corporate form. It builds on the institutional imagination catalysed by three vignettes of experimental sharing economy initiatives presented towards the start of the paper, each of which highlights the imbrication and interdependence between economic and social dimensions of the sharing economy. The paper then interrogates the vignettes through three analytical entry points to the institutional design of commons-based sharing economies: platform, care and place. By remapping the vignettes’ practices around these three entry points, the paper shows how they help constitute the incipient formalisation of commons-based approaches to the sharing economy. The prospects for carrying out a redesign of property and corporate forms more generally thereby become more visible, providing a sound foundation for more in-depth empirical and historical work on alternative trajectories of the sharing economy in the future.

This article addresses the significant research gap concerning the regulation of surrogacy intermediaries in China’s rapidly growing surrogacy market. Employing a ‘law in context’ perspective, it explores the question of how to effectively regulate surrogacy intermediaries in the Chinese context. Situated within China’s unique socio-cultural landscape, where procreation carries profound significance, the study navigates the complexities of surrogacy regulation, including ethical dilemmas, rights infringements and regulatory ambiguities. The article advocates for the regulation of surrogacy in China to prevent possible exploitation, referencing three international models: prohibiting commercial surrogacy, governing non-profit surrogacy organisations and imposing duties on for-profit surrogacy agents. The aim is to construct a robust, context-sensitive regulatory framework for surrogacy in China, focusing on identifying suitable intermediaries and defining the scope of effective regulatory oversight.

The aim of this article is to open a new way of understanding corruption by examining its place within the law and culture of the European semi-periphery, with a focus on inter-war Romania. My intention is to operate a twofold displacement of the analysis of the anti-corruption and the status of constitutional practice in this context. First, I aim to reposition the question of political corruption within a jurisprudential and legal historical context. In this way I inquire what is the legal theoretical importance of political corruption in a post-dependency context? In other words, what can the representation of corruption entail for law, and for a particular legal historical trajectory within the European periphery. Second, I move towards exploring the context of the inter-war period as well as the discursive construction of political corruption within the law and through the fascist criticism levelled against it.

This paper explores the way in which childhood is socially constructed in the context of child marriage regulation. Despite extreme social and cultural diversity, there is a core ideology in UN human rights instruments, around which official versions of childhood pivot. International law recommends setting the minimum age of marriage at 18years. This article problematizes the progressively depoliticizing effects of a seemingly neutral regulatory drive at the heart of the UN’s promotion of a standardized construction of childhood. The immediate purpose of this article is not to offer solutions to child marriage, but to bring together some elements that may form a basis for understanding the way in which conceptions of childhood are contextually constructed. My hope is that a familiarity with these social perceptions will help to explain the present struggle and resistance to apply universal rights constructions of childhood to non-western societies.

New technologies and the new business practices that they bring often raise difficult questions about the application of the law. This often stems from the difficulty of clarifying the impact of new technologies on the interests of different groups in society and, in particular, the difficulty of measuring the public interest brought about by new technologies. In practice, in disputes arising from new technologies, the users of the new technologies often justify their actions in terms of the public interest. In this paper, we compare data collection cases in the US, EU and China and extract the types of public interests discussed in typical cases in different countries, including (1) data-related property rights protection and commercial principles to prevent free-riding; (2) privacy, personal data protection and data security; (3) competition and innovation interests related to the free flow of data; and (4) freedom of expression. The comparison shows that an appropriate focus on the public interest in data flow has led Chinese and US courts to rule in favour of scrapers in a few recent cases, in contrast to the judicial attitude of EU courts, whicht value privacy. The author applauds the attitude of the courts in the US and China and argues that free competition and innovative interests based on data flows are public interests that should be prioritized in data scraping cases.

Laws seeking to resolve war-related problems face a significant dilemma. While the legal establishment in a war-affected country drafts laws based on normative approaches suited to peacetime and stable settings, the civilian population pursues crises livelihoods that are markedly unsuited to compliance with or use of such laws. What emerges are socio-legal instabilities that aggravate instead of resolve wartime problems. With a socio-legal examination of Ukraine’s wartime housing Compensation Law, this article describes six sets of instabilities that compromise the utility of the law and aggravate or create additional problems: (1) the case-by-case approach, (2) administrative and institutional capacities, (3) legal vs. available evidence, (4) the timeframe for claims submission and awareness raising, (5) excluded segments of civil society and (6) prohibitions on selling properties. Approaches from international best practice that may be able to attend to these instabilities are then suggested.

How does the understanding of law among individuals involved in the crypto phenomenon originate, and how does it impact the trajectory of this innovation? This article examines the legal consciousness of crypto industry participants and state actors, exploring their ideologies on law, property and innovation through extensive document and archival research. It highlights the interplay between the crypto industry’s perception of crypto-assets’ possessing dynamic and self-regulating qualities beyond traditional legal boundaries and the increasing willingness of state actors, despite their reservations, to utilise law as a flexible tool to embrace innovation and promote economic competitiveness. By employing Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis, this article contextualises such legal consciousness within the financial system and contends that collective legal consciousness and associated behavioural dynamics substantially shape state–industry interactions, with the potential to destabilise the financial system. This article sheds light on the challenges presented by crypto-assets and the intricate interplay between law and technological advancements.

The introduction of algorithms in courts is currently the object of much scrutiny, attempting to find balance between increasing efficiency to the legal system and avoiding associated risks. This paper aims to explore how the judiciary organisations responsible for implementing algorithms describe the temporal demands of continuity and change, through a case-study of the Brazilian National Council of Justice (CNJ). Through its centralised, collaborative and open-access based platform, the CNJ views algorithms as a necessary step to deal with excessive case-load, and as a rationality-instituting mechanism for a currently dysfunctional situation. It attempts to deal with risks of disruption by placing itself in a supervisory role regarding all algorithms developed by courts across the country, ensuring the quality of the data and excluding the moment of judicial decision-making from automation, but this does not exclude the representation of the new technology as an instrument to implement specific doctrinal positions.