In academic literature, loneliness is often described as a mental health problem of individuals. In the paper ‘Loneliness and Absence in Psychopathology’ (Krueger, Osler & Roberts, 2021, p. 1195) the authors take a more delicate stand to loneliness delving in the relationship between the psychopathological perspective and loneliness. This aligns with a trend in psychopathology, as the authors describe, where “increased attention has been paid to social, emotional, and relational aspects of mental disorders.” (Kruger, Osler & Roberts, 2021, p. 1199) In this contribution I want to broaden this debate to discuss how the absence of social goods can lead to a reduced sense of agency and how social context can have influence on the perceived loneliness. I do this by looking at the impact of algorithmic management on the perceived loneliness and agency of delivery riders in the gig economy, who perform deliveries using platforms such as Uber and Deliveroo. To thereby contribute to the philosophical debate on the multi-layeredness and social engineering of loneliness and agency.

The gig economy, which is defined as “online platforms which mediate the independent contractors (the platform worker) with platform clients for paid services” (Koutsimpogiorgos, van Slageren, Herrmann & Frenken, 2020, p. 527), is seen by many as a testing ground of algorithmic management in the workplace (Das, Zoomer, Kool, Preenen & van der Torre, 2024). Platforms operating in highly fragmented markets use algorithms not only to organise the market, but also to isolate market actors. Isolating the actors in the market ensures that the platform maintains its dominant position and optimises profits and shareholder value. “Algorithms facilitate hereby new relationships of domination by sustaining a socio-technical system in which the owners and managers of a company dominate workers” (Muldoon & Raekstad, 2022, p. 587).

Workers have no understanding of - and a say in - the algorithms that determine their access to - and conditions of - work. The “use of algorithmic control and distancing strategies undermine worker autonomy and social connection” (Gavin, Bierman & Schieman, 2021, p. 399). Therefore, the algorithmic nature of platform work undermines worker autonomy and individuality (Anwar & Graham, 2021, p. 237). “These mechanisms of control can result in … social isolation, working unsocial and irregular hours, overwork, sleep deprivation and exhaustion” (Wood, Graham, Lehdonvirta & Hjorth, 2021, p.56). To summarise, algorithms in the gig economy can lead to reduced agency and increased loneliness. Two concepts that cannot be seen separately. That’s how Sarah Drew Lucas (2019) described the “absence of agency … as a condition for loneliness”. (Krueger, Osler & Roberts, 2021, p. 1198)

This results not from environmental or individual factors, but from a deliberately designed technological system where workers experience perceived social isolation.To add an extra layer to this elaboration and to highlight the complexity of the topic, I share one of the conclusions of the paper ‘Dependence and precarity in the platform economy’ (Schor, Attwood-Charles, Cansoy, Ladegaard & Wengronowitz, 2020), in which they establish a link between the extent to which a worker is dependent on the platform for his or her income and the extent to which they feel ‘oppressed’ by the platform's ‘black box algorithm’. Which practically boils down to the question: what do you have to lose. This research shows the layering of the impact that the same system can have on individuals in different situations. Which challenges us to approach the discussion in an even more open and nuanced way.

This essay has shown how algorithmic management in the gig economy significantly increases the perception of loneliness and lack of autonomy among workers by creating isolated, impersonal work environments. By reducing workers' control, these systems create social isolation, where individuals are disconnected despite being part of a broader workforce. The fact that loneliness and decrease of agency are caused by human-designed technology invites a philosophical reconsideration of how technology shapes our social and work lives. To counter this, (grassroots) unions, activists, policymakers, and philosophers must collaborate to create human-centered systems that restore agency and foster social connection, challenging exploitative and isolating technologies.

Literature

Anwar, M. A., & Graham, M. (2021). Between a rock and a hard place: Freedom, flexibility, precarity and vulnerability in the gig economy in Africa. Competition & Change, 25(2), 237–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/  1024529420914473

Das, D., Zoomer, T., Dam, L., Kool, L., Preenen, P., van der Torre, W,.  TNO / Rathenau Instituut (2024) Eigen ritme of algoritme? – Een verkenning van algoritmisch management voorbij de platformeconomie. https://www.rathenau.nl/sites/default/files/2024-03/Rapport_Eigen_ritme_of_algoritme_Rathenau_Instituut.pdf

Glavin, P., Bierman, A., & Schieman, S. (2021). Über-Alienated: Powerless and Alone in the Gig Economy. Work and Occupations, 48, 399 - 431. https://doi.org/10.1177/07308884211024711.

Krueger J, Osler L, Roberts T. Loneliness and Absence in Psychopathology. Topoi (Dordr). 2023 Apr 25:1-16. doi: 10.1007/s11245-023-09916-3. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 37361724; PMCID: PMC10129314. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11245-023-09916-3

Koutsimpogiorgos, N., van Slageren, J., Herrmann, A. and Frenken, K. (2020), Conceptualizing the Gig Economy and Its Regulatory Problems. Policy & Internet, 12: 525-545. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.237

Lucas SD (2019) Loneliness and appearance: toward a concept of ontological agency. Eur J Philos Sci 27(3):709–722 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ejop.12432

Muldoon, J., & Raekstad, P. (2022). Algorithmic domination in the gig economy. European Journal of Political Theory, 22, 587 - 607. https://doi.org/10.1177/14748851221082078.

Schor, J.B., Attwood-Charles, W., Cansoy, M. et al. Dependence and precarity in the platform economy. Theor Soc 49, 833–861 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09408-y

Wood, A., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2018). Good Gig, Bad Gig: Autonomy and Algorithmic Control in the Global Gig Economy. Work, Employment & Society, 33, 56 - 75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616.