Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The rapid advancement of AI has led to increased reliance on data labeling workers, yet those with disabilities remain understudied in this context. This article applies critical disability studies and theory of accumulation by dispossession to analyze the dynamics within China’s data labeling industry. We examine the interplay among capital, central and local governments, Disabled People’s Organizations (DPOs), and workers with disabilities in the AI data labeling value chain. Our findings highlight the pivotal role of DPOs in reallocating surplus labor and capital across spatial and temporal dimensions. By supplementing functions traditionally associated with government entities, these organizations significantly influence the industry’s landscape. Furthermore, we reveal how DPOs foster labor agency, creating spaces for work dignity among workers with disabilities. Through their efforts to navigate and mitigate algorithmic control, DPOs contribute to a more inclusive labor environment, challenging societal norms.

Keywords

Capital accumulation critical disability studies data annotation data labeling DPOs workers with disabilities

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chinese Government (2022) Chengxiang canjiren jiuye guimo da 881.6 wanren. Available at: http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2022-04/14/content_5685156.htm (accessed 24 June 2024).

Edwards

(1979) Contested Terrain: The Transformation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.

Fuchs

(2013) Digital presumption labor on social media in the context of the capitalist regime of time. Time & Society 23(1): 97–123.

Garland-Thomson

(1997) Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press.

Goodley

(2017) Disability Studies: An Interdisciplinary Introduction. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Goods

Veen

Barratt

(2019) “Is your gig any good?” Analyzing job quality in the Australian platform-based food-delivery sector. Journal of Industrial Relations 61(4): 502–527.

Graham

Isis

Vili

(2017) Digital labor and development: impacts of global digital labor platforms and the gig economy on worker livelihoods. Transfer: European Review of Labor and Research 23(2): 135–162.

Grand View Research (2021) Data labeling solution and services market report, 2028. Available at: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/data-labeling-solution-services-market-report (accessed 24 June 2024).

Gray

Suri

(2019) Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

10.

Griesbach

Reich

Elliott-Negri

, et al (2019) Algorithmic control in platform food delivery work. Socuis: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World 5: 1–15.

11.

Harvey

(2004) The “new” imperialism: accumulation by dispossession. Socialist Register 40: 63–87.

12.

Harvey

(2006) The Limits to Capital. London: Verso Books.

13.

Hodson

(2001) Dignity at Work. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

14.

Hong

(2024) Curative platforms: disability, access, and food delivery work in Singapore. New Media & Society 26(5): 2593–2613.

15.

Howcroft

Birgitta

(2019) A typology of crowdwork platforms. Work, Employment and Society 33(1): 21–38.

16.

Irani

(2015) Difference and dependence among digital workers: the case of Amazon Mechanical Turk. South Atlantic Quarterly 114(1): 225–234.

17.

Jammaers

Williams

(2021) Care for the self, overcompensation and bodily crafting: the work-life balance of disabled people. Gender, Work & Organization 28: 119–137.

18.

Kohrman

(2005) Bodies of Difference: Experiences of Disability and Institutional Advocacy in the Making of Modern China. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

19.

Kshetri

(2021) Data labeling for the artificial intelligence industry: economic impacts in developing countries. IEEE IT Professional 23(2): 96–99.

20.

Lei

(2021) Delivering solidarity: platform architecture and collective contention in China’s platform economy. American Sociological Review 86(2): 279–309.

21.

Milberg

Winkler

(2013) Outsourcing Economics: Global Value Chains in Capitalist Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

22.

Mitchell

Snyder

(2015) The Biopolitics of Disability: Neoliberalism, Ablenationalism, and Peripheral Embodiment. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

23.

Posada

(2022) Embedded reproduction in platform data work. Information, Communication & Society 25(6): 816–834.

24.

Postone

(1993) Time, Labor, and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx’s Critical Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Randle

Hardy

(2017) Macho, mobile and resilient? How workers with impairments are doubly disabled in project-based film and television work. Work, Employment and Society 31(3): 447–464.

26.

Reuters (2023) China’s Baidu launches $145 million venture capital AI fund. Reuters, 31 May. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-baidu-launches-145-million-venture-capital-ai-fund-2023-05-31/ (accessed 15 June 2023).

27.

Rosa

(2013) Social Acceleration: A New Theory of Modernity. New York: Columbia University Press.

28.

Rosenblat

(2018) Uberland: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the Rules of Work. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

29.

Rosenblat

Stark

(2016) Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: a case study of Uber’s drivers. International Journal of Communication 10: 3758–3784.

30.

Ross

Irani

Silberman

, et al (2010) Who are the crowdworkers? Shifting demographics in Amazon Mechanical Turk. In: CHI ’10: CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Atlanta, GA, 10–15 April, pp. 2863–2872. New York: ACM.

31.

Schildt

(2017) Big data and organizational design – the brave new world of algorithmic management and computer-augmented transparency. Innovation 19(1): 23–30.

32.

Schiller

(2014) Digital Depression: Information, Technology, and Economic Crisis. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.

33.

Schmidt

(2022) The planetary stacking order of multi-layered crowd-AI systems. In: Graham

Ferrari

(eds) Digital Work in the Planetary Market. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 137–155.

34.

Snyder

(2016) The Disrupted Workplace: Time and the Moral Order of Flexible Capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

35.

Srnicek

(2017) Platform Capitalism. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

36.

State Council (2008) Regulation on the Employment of the Disabled. China Law Translate.

37.

Titchkosky

(2011) The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

38.

Vallas

Schor

(2020) What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology 46(1): 273–294.

39.

Veen

Barratt

Goods

(2019) Platform-capital’s “App-etite” for control: a labour process analysis of food-delivery work in Australia. Work, Employment and Society 34(3): 388–406.

40.

Wajcman

(2015) Pressed for Time: The Acceleration of Life in Digital Capitalism. Chicago, IL; London: University of Chicago Press.

41.

Wood

Graham

Lehdonvirta

, et al (2018) Good gig, bad gig: autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society 33(1): 56–75.

42.

(2023) Good for tech: disability expertise and labor in China’s artificial intelligence sector. First Monday 28(1): 12887.

43.

Xinhua Net (2024) Data is a high-quality production factor that forms a new type of productivity. Available at: http://www.news.cn/politics/20240423/013154764d764000a71e091af8368fe5/c.html (accessed 28 November 2024).

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.08 MB

0.05 MB