Can We Build a Fairer Platform Economy? Here’s How Counterhegemonic Alternative Platforms Are Trying

16 December 2025 By

Tech giants—Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft (GAFAM)—shape the platform economy through business models that often prioritise profit over fairness. This has sparked growing interest in alternative corporate governance models that prioritise fairness, transparency and inclusivity.

The latest INCA report, “Report on the Potentialities of Alternative Platforms”, examines how counterhegemonic alternative platforms promote fairer, more inclusive governance models by prioritising transparency, ethical data use, and equitable labour practices.

To do so, we explored the corporate governance practices of social enterprises and cooperatives in three different platform market segments:

  1. Information market: Social media, information aggregators and content platforms
  2. Complementary innovation market: Cloud services
  3. Multisided transaction market: Logistics and delivery

Here’s what we found.

Key insights: What’s different about these platforms?

For users

  • Data sovereignty: these platforms minimise data collection and reject exploitative monetisation models, that is, they collect only what is necessary and refuse to sell personal information.
  • Content moderation: community-based content moderation is gaining traction, reducing reliance on opaque algorithms to avoid censorship and foster democratic oversight.  
  • Decentralised model: federated networks empower local governance and user control. 

For workers

  • Fair employment: they offer formal contracts, fair pay and career development opportunities instead of gig traps.
  • Worker well-being: emphasis on protective measures, safety training and work-life balance initiatives.
  • Algorithmic management: algorithmic tools support rather than monitor workers, particularly in smaller, trust-based organisations, thus reducing pressure and surveillance.

Challenges ahead

Despite their promise, counterhegemonic alternative platforms face significant hurdles:

  • Market dominance: GAFAM’s scale creates high entry barriers.
  • Funding and regulation: limited access to capital and uneven regulatory conditions disadvantage smaller players and hinder growth.
  • Scalability: thin margins and consumer price sensitivity hinder growth.
  • Institutional support: lack of consistent public backing undermines long-term viability.

Policy recommendations

To foster a more equitable platform ecosystem, the INCA report calls for:

  • Public endorsement: governments should promote European platforms through government use and partnerships.
  • Enhanced digital sovereignty: via strong regulations and investment in open-source ecosystems and public digital infrastructure.
  • Fair labour standards: enforce ethical practices and raise awareness of the true costs behind “cheap” digital services.

Conclusion

Counterhegemonic alternative platforms offer a compelling vision for a fairer, more inclusive platform economy. However, their success hinges on overcoming structural challenges and securing robust institutional backing. With the right policies and public engagement, these models can provide a viable counterbalance to Big Tech.