Gig Economy or Digital Inequality? Lessons for Indonesia’s Labour Future
Keywords:
Gig economy digital inequality labour future Indonesia work culture inclusive growthAbstract
The gig economy has been widely celebrated for its potential to boost national productivity and generate flexible employment opportunities. Yet, beneath its promise lies the paradox of digital inequality. In Indonesia, the rapid growth of platform-based work in transportation, delivery, and online freelancing demonstrates the gig economy’s increasing visibility. However, compared to countries such as India, Brazil, and the United States, the measurable contribution of gig work to long-term economic resilience is less certain. Drawing on secondary data from the ILO, World Bank, and OECD, this paper argues that the gig economy, while expanding labour absorption, disproportionately depends on precarious, low-wage arrangements that limit upward mobility and sustainable growth. From a cultural perspective, gig work normalises hyper-flexibility and individualisation, reshaping the meaning of employment in ways that weaken collective bargaining and career stability. Comparative analysis reveals that countries with robust labour regulations have managed to harness gig productivity without exacerbating inequality, whereas emerging economies with weaker systems, such as Indonesia, risk deepening informalization. This study contends that Indonesia’s policy challenge is not whether the gig economy should grow, but whether it can grow inclusively. Without deliberate labour governance, Indonesia may face a dual economy: one sector benefiting from digital innovation, and another trapped in precarious, digitally mediated inequality.
References
Allon, G., Cohen, M. C., & Sinchaisri, W. P. (2023). The Impact of Behavioral and Economic Drivers on Gig Economy Workers. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, 25(4), 1376–1393. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2023.1191
Anatan, L., & Nur. (2023). Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises’ Readiness for Digital Transformation in Indonesia. Economies, 11(6), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11060156
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. (2023). Traversing New Heights: The Future Is Digital. https://www.bsp.gov.ph/PaymentAndSettlement/2023_Report_on_E-payments_Measurement.pdf
Barcellos, V. (2024). Emerging trends in the regulation of platform work in Brazil : a preliminary report Emerging trends in the regulation of platform work in Brazil : a preliminary report.
Barra, C., & Papaccio, A. (2024). Does Regulatory Quality Reduce Informal Economy? A Theoretical and Empirical Framework. Social Indicators Research, 172(2), 543–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03319-6
Berry, A. (2025). Labor markets in developing countries. International Handbook of Development Economics, Volumes 1 & 2, 328–340. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511582578.009
Bianchini, M., & Kwon, I. (2021). Enhancing SMEs ’ Resilience through Digitalisation: The Case of Korea. OECD SME and Entrepreneurship Papers, 27, 37. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/paper/23bd7a26-en
Cayli Messina, B. (2024). The Dual-Edged State Paradox: Fighting for Justice When the State is Unreliable. Sociological Inquiry, 95(4), 689–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12643
Chong, & Kyounghee. (2024). The Republic of Korea Extending social insurance to digital platform workers 1. 1–8.
Demir, İ. (2024). Errand Runners of Digital Platform Capitalism: The Errand Economy as a Contribution to the Discussion on the Gig Economy. TripleC, 22(1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v22i1.1438
Deruelle, T., Montero, A. U., & Wagner, J. (2024). The Impact of Technological Progress on the Future of Work: Insights from a Survey on Alternative Employment Contracts in OECD Countries. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 16345–16372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-01733-2
Dhanya, M. (2024). Platform Employment: Role In The Labour Market and Problems of Platform Workers’ Labour Regulation. https://vvgnli.gov.in/sites/default/files/Platform Employment.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Eichhorst, W., Hemerijck, A., & Scalise, G. (2020). Welfare States, Labor Markets, Social Investment and the Digital Transformation. In SSRN Electronic Journal (Issue 13391). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3631602
European Parliament. (2024). EU directive on platform work: At A Glance Plenary – April II 2024. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2024/760437/EPRS_ATA%282024%2 9760437_EN.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Fairwork. (2023). Fairwork Brazil Ratings 2023 Still Pursuing Decent Work in the Platform Economy. 1–48. https://fair.work/en/fw/publications/fairwork-brazil-ratings-2023-still-pursuing-decent-work-in-the-platform-economy/
Fu, L., Pei, T., Xu, J., Han, J., & Yang, J. (2024). Inspecting the “health poverty trap” mechanism: self-reinforcing effect and endogenous force. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18464-3
Goldman, T., & Weil, D. (2020). Who ’ s Responsible Here ? Establishing Legal Responsibility in the Fissured Workplace * Tanya Goldman and David Weil ‡. 114.
Gregori, P., Holzmann, P., & Audretsch, D. B. (2024). Sustainable entrepreneurship on digital platforms and the enactment of digital connectivity through business models. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 1173–1190. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3551
Gross, T., Layton, T. J., & Prinz, D. (2022). The Liquidity Sensitivity of Healthcare Consumption: Evidence from Social Security Payments. American Economic Review: Insights, 4(2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1257/aeri.20200830
Jafar, K., Unnimaya, U. G., & Malaiarasan, U. (2024). Flexibility, Vulnerability, and Inclusiveness in the Gig Economy: A Review of India’s Experience in the Context of Informalisation. Informal Economy and Sustainable Development Goals: Ideas, Interventions and Challenges, October, 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83753-980-220241014
Jiang, S., & Sinchaisri, W. (2025). Learning on the Go: Understanding How Gig Economy Workers Learn with Recommendation Algorithms. SSRN Electronic Journal, 9(7). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5376462
Kerikmäe, T., & Kajander, A. (2022). Gig economy workers in the European Union: towards change in their legal classification. Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internacionals, 131, 117–139. https://doi.org/10.24241/rcai.2022.131.2.117
Kim, M. S., Oh, J., Sim, J., Yun, B. Y., & Yoon, J. H. (2023). Association between exposure to violence, job stress and depressive symptoms among gig economy workers in Korea. Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 35(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.35371/aoem.2023.35.e43
Njuguna S. Ndung’u. (2021). A Digital Financial Services Revolution in Kenya: The M-Pesa Case Study. https://aercafrica.org/old-website/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/AERC-MPesa-Case-
Study.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Novianto, A. (2025). Revisiting employment standards: Informalized formal job and bogus partnership in platform courier work. Critical Sociology, 08969205251377006.
Panimbang, F. (2021). Solidarity across boundaries: a new practice of collectivity among workers in the app-based transport sector in Indonesia. Globalizations, 18(8), 1377–1391. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2021.1884789
Ryandika, Meifrinaldi, Pribadi, K. S., Martek, I., & Chan, T. K. (2023). Informality of Labour in the Indonesia Construction Industry. Construction Economics and Building, 23(3–4), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v23i3/4.8404
Shekhawat, V. (2025). Legal Protections for Gig Workers : A Comparative Socio-legal Study of Indonesia and India THE INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIO-LEGAL STUDIES ( IJSLS ).
5(1). https://doi.org/10.54828/ijsls.2025v5n1.2 Vandaele, K. (2003). Unionisation of Digital Labour.
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indonesia Forum on Labour and Productivity
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.