Analysis of Crowdfunding Research Studies

The provided document is a compilation of research studies related to crowdfunding. It includes 15 references from academic journals and conferences, covering topics such as equity retention, social network theory, mechanism design approach, project success prediction, and renewable energy projects. The studies aim to understand the factors influencing crowdfunding outcomes, including platform creation, demand uncertainty, moral hazard, and sponsor satisfaction. This assignment is suitable for students who want to delve into the research aspects of crowdfunding.

Proposal REPORT
Civic crowdfunding platforms - enablers and impediments of
psychological empowerment and well-being of citizens.
1

Contents
1.Introduction ...............................................................................................................................3
1.1 Problem statement .................................................................................................................4
1.2Research objectives .................................................................................................................5
1.3 Research questions..................................................................................................................6
2 Literature Review......................................................................................................................7
2.1 Crowdsourcing as an innovation.........................................................................................7
2.2 Crowdsourcing in the public sector.....................................................................................8
2.3 Crowdfunding......................................................................................................................9
2.3.1 Civic crowdfunding...................................................................................................10
2.4 Psychological citizen empowerment.................................................................................10
2.5 Psychological well-being of citizens.................................................................................11
2.6 Design of civic technology..............................................................................................12
2.7 Socio-technical Theory.....................................................................................................13
2.8 Diffusion of innovation Theory – not sure about it……...................................................13
3. Research Design ....................................................................................................................13
References...................................................................................................................................13
2

Introduction
The proliferation of social media in the lives of individuals, organisations and nations
has made it an integral part of online existence. They continue to change the way we converse,
create and utilise information as well as collaborate. As they constitute one of the most
transformative influences of technology on our lives, social media continue to record benefits
of adoption across sectors, while advantages of using them have been reported also at
individual level (Aral, Dellarocas & Godes 2013). For reason that their application keeps
evolving, they continue to be an interesting area of study. In fact, it has been observed that
modern technologies are identified as a major tool which affects the life of entire society.
Development of overall nation is very indispensable for success of economy by uplifting the
standard of weaker sections of society (Moritz and Block, 2016). It means social media is
considered as one of the useful or appropriate tool of facilitating customers by considering their
choice or preferences. Mainly, this subject area is seen as a very interesting one because its
main objective is to acquire fund or any other resources from society itself in order to uplift
them as per their demand of need. Moreover, trying to fulfils the requirement of needy people
whosoever are not able to live their livelihood in an appropriate manner.
However, everyone knows that growth of overall nation is one of the mandatory job of
social services or governing bodies because entire population is consider as indispensable asset.
Beside this main objective of this research process is to identify the methods, tools or
appropriate techniques of developing entire association by raising the living standards of
society. Thus, below mentioned report is going to highlight the problems and barriers which is
faced by public or citizens while running their life. Therefore, various social service institutions
are trying to launch numerous of plans or policies for reducing obstacles which is faced by
common people. For example; crowd-funding which act as a useful mode of overcoming
barriers encountering by normal human beings in a minimum time period. Along with this, it is
a technique which supports people in different manner by facilitating them with numerous
things such as; financial services, employment opportunities and so on. Method of gaining
money from public in order to distribute it into general public is known as a crowdfunding
source. Basically, this idea of acquiring fund is utilised by most of large or small companies to
run their business operations in most effective way as well as get succeeded in attaining their
set goals or objectives (Strausz, 2017). But in case of various corporate company they are also
responsible to provide dividends to their stakeholders whereas institution which are engaged in
3

facilitating society are not liable for returning any dividend to their shareholders that are
invested fund in an organisation. Therefore, most of the association is adopting various
advanced methods to deal with situations such as social media or online sources because it is
useful in accomplishing task or activities in a minimum time period.
After considering essential facts or figures it has been analysed that it is not easy to
facilitate millions of customers in a proper manner because UK is having a very large
population due to which it become complex situation while managing problems of general
population. Hence, it is identified that social media is a very useful mode which is used by
service provider in order to overcome problems faced by public. Mainly overall investigation
process is based on focussing major subject that is ; impact of crowd-funding on public
development and barriers which is faced by social service team due to fluctuation in various
other factors (Chen, Chen and Wang, 2016).
One of the areas social media use has evolved into, is its use in soliciting crowd intelligence for
a particular task – crowdsourcing, as introduced by Jeff Howe in 2006 (Liu 2017). This
application of social media has found a place in all sectors, bringing some hope to the ever
challenged public sector which faces problems of a magnitude that requires concerted efforts
from all who affect or are affected by the sector, hence government efforts to work together
with all stakeholders (Calo et al. 2012; Gil-Garcia, Chun & Janssen 2009; Gil-Garcia &
Sayogo 2016). Added to the societal problems it faces, government also has to contend with
budget cuts and fiscal austerity measures while it continues to deliver (Wollmann 2015) to
citizens who are not mere consumers of public goods and services but participants of
collaboration between all sectors of the economy. Crowdsourcing, then, can enable all
stakeholders to participate by facilitating communication and fostering networking among
stakeholders (Calo et al. 2012). In fact it is an appropriate model of in which a person or an
enterprise seek the products or services consist of creative ideas or finances with the help of
instantly developing team of internet users. Mainly, according to this mode work is going to
segmented into various participants for attaining cumulative outcomes. Therefore major
objective of this tool is to serve society with various facilities as well as trying to fulfils their
basic requirements. Beside this, it has been identified that crowd-sourcing is a very
advantageous factors which aids in enhancing the costs, speed, quality and so on. However, in
this activities more or more people are engaged in offering services to needy people in an
appropriate manner because all of them are having similar mentality. In fact, it is very useful
4

for public development or growth by considering their requirement or demands (Gedda and et.
al., 2016).
Within crowdsourcing has emerged crowdfunding, where crowds raise funds for a particular
need (rather than contribute ideas). This has brought about a revolutionary way of financially
supporting events and projects across industries and sectors, further birthing ‘civic
crowdsourcing’. The latter specifically deals with community projects which are funded by a
collaboration between citizens, government and the private sector (Stiver et al. 2015). Since
civic crowdfunding deals with projects that are place-based and of general interest, it needs to
be differentiated from other forms of crowdfunding (Charbit & Desmoulins 2017). This
nascent area of research has potential to contribute to citizen engagement and civic projects’
success. But citizens may not engage if they are not facilitated to use the technologies, if they
are empowered. Studies have shown that an individual’s psychological empowerment actually
enables them to engage with others and form good relationships (Baba et al. 2017), which in
turn enhances their psychological well-being (Pradhan, Hati & Kumar 2017). Therefore,
there’s need to investigate how the use of civic crowdfunding platforms improves
psychological well-being of citizens, as well as their ability to empower users (since they are
tools) (Stiver et al. 2015). This link remains elusive in literature.
To contribute empirical evidence to the study of civic crowdfunding in a dynamic technology
era, this research purposes to establish the role of civic crowdfunding platforms in enabling
psychological empowerment and well-being of citizens. The barriers of these platforms to
improving empowerment and well-being will also be explored. This study contributes in a
number of ways. First, it establishes and compares features of four different civic
crowdsourcing platforms; second, it explores the features against how they empower and
enhance well-being of platform users; third, it also probes into better understanding of the
opportunities and barriers of these features to enhancing empowerment and well-being of
citizens. Finally, studies on social computing technologies and empowerment and well-being
have investigated social media or general computer use, while this study will explore the
utilisation of civic crowdfunding platforms specifically, thereby providing better insights into
this emerging technology. Notwithstanding, like other studies involving technology, the
population of study is users of the systems and not non-users. Civic crowdsourcing is designed
for enhancing the well being of individuals in an effective way with the help of various modern
technologies such as; social media or various other advanced tools. Crowd sourcing is that
sourcing model where organisation receive products and services that includes ideas and
finance, comparatively open and quickly developing groups of internet users and it divide work
5

among participants for achieving accurate results. The major difference between crowd
sourcing and outsourcing involves major features such as large public groups and mix of
bottom up and top processes. The benefit for using crowdsourcing that includes speed, costs,
quality, adaptability, scalability and diversity. Crowdsourcing is that type of participative
online activity where an individual, non profit organisation, company proposes various
knowledge and skills.
It is hoped that this research will provide guidance to future designer efforts for successful
designing of civic crowdfunding platforms. Organisations who provide platforms for civic
crowdfunding will also benefit from knowing what features to insist on when such a platform is
delivered to them, so that they ensure customer satisfaction on their platforms. Government
entities as users of the platforms will greatly benefit from an improved user experience, which
will hopefully encourage other users as well to continue using the platforms; and as
beneficiaries of the funds raised may get more funds from other investors who keep re-visiting
the platforms because of an enriched user experience. Hence, after considering above
information it has been analysed that learner should get aware about the actual benefits of
crowdsouring to customers as well as social service provider. Along with this it also influence
the economy of a nation in distinct manner because people are consider as mandatory asset.
Mainly, entire research is depend upon development of human beings which resulted in growth
of overall European marketplace. Apart from this, several methods of attaining this goals or
objectives is also highlighted that will support investigator while identifying accurate facts or
figures related with consumers (Dushnitsky and et. al., 2016).
Generally it is analysed that civic crowdfunding is only suited for small project because it is
not appropriate for large assignment. As it requires expertise advice for handling or regulating
public in an appropriate manner. Therefore, overall research process is going to classified into
various sections for understanding each or every factors in more effective manner by
considering necessary facts or figures. In fact, it aids learner while decision making process as
well as creates an appropriate opportunity to customers of developing their skills or standards.
The write-up is arranged in the following manner. The introduction here deliberated is
followed by a discussion of the problem statement. Research objectives are presented in the
next section, followed by research questions. Thus, further information related with civic
crowdsourcing is described as follows:-
1.1 Problem statement
6

Human beings are indispensable asset for entire association or for political bodies
because of their necessary roles and responsibilities. Therefore, social methods are adopted by
social service institutions in order to facilitate number of citizens for enhancing personality of
general public. In fact it has been analysed that an association need to make plans or strategies
to overcome barriers or obstacles faced by association while reducing problems. Mainly, it is
not easy to adopt modern technologies due to its high level of complexity as it creates problem
for members who are engaged in offering services (Xu and et. al., 2016). Along with this,
major objective behind using crowdsourcing is to make a environment free from any obstacles.
of Citizens are expected in this era of advanced technologies to be part of a collaborative
venture and solve persistent problems with other stakeholders. Different social computing
technologies may be at their disposal, but do they empower citizens, do they enhance their
well-being enough for them to participate in this venture?
Economy of a nation is full depend upon development of entire society because they are seen
as a necessary asset for UK. Therefore, it is indispensable to consider choice or preferences of
society before designing any plans, programmes, sessions or strategies (Hornuf and
Schwienbacher, 2017). In an economy that considers citizens to be participants of a
collaborative venture between all sectors, there is need for them to have the necessary
psychological empowerment and well-being that can enable them to have control over their
circumstances and participate in partnership activities that can better public service delivery for
their benefit and that of the community. As a result of advancements in technology, social
computing platforms have burgeoned in number and capabilities, but the interest of the
research lies with such platforms that are used for the citizens’ gain, hence the research
narrows in on civic crowdfunding platforms. Binder (2013), Castellacci & Tveito (2018), are
examples of authors who have documented how the use of internet technologies affects well-
being; Erfani, Abedin & Blount (2017) went a step further to consider how social media can
promote psychological well-being in cancer patients; but as observed by Kankanhalli,
Zuiderwijk & Tayi (2017) our studies need to investigate the use of tools beyond social media
(especially studies on the public sector). Moreover, Charbit & Desmoulins (2017) opine that
civic crowdfunding platforms differ from other internet technologies so justify being
investigated on their own. With an established link between psychological empowerment and
psychological well-being, the study will consider the two factors in tandem, in context with
civic crowdfunding platforms. This link is unclear and elusive in literature. After
understanding the actual meaning of crowd sourcing it has been analysed that number of
7

barriers are identified at marketplace while fulfilling needs or demands of customers as well as
entire society. Basically, it is not easy to accomplish the requirement of whole community or
population living in overall nation because it is analysed that according to survey report large
number of public are identified in UK. Thus, service provider faces numerous of issues while
serving them because it requires a big team support, sufficient capital, experienced skills,
talent or knowledge to employees which are involved in dealing with these situation. Mainly,
crowdsourcing is consider as major responsibilities in which number of individuals are come
closer to attain specific outcome in a defined time period. Along with this it is a very broad
concept due to maximum number of roles or responsibilities because most of the consumers are
identified as a needy because there is absence of advanced technologies. Therefore, lots of
obstacles are identified by members involved in facilitating customers with the use of modern
technologies such as; barriers of privacy, hacking issue, complicated features of handling and
various other things that will affect the implementing of crowd-funding (Li, Rakesh and
Reddy, 2016). Along with this, it is not easy to manage all the activities in an appropriate
manner due to high level of complexity that will influence the growth or success of entire
public. Later on report is going to highlight various methods of acquiring information and
shows different factors which is related with process of crowdsourcing and affects the success
of an association. Mainly, this subject is having a very broad concept as it aids in overcoming
issues related with public by implementing various programmes or sessions. But sometimes it
act as a negative source due to emergence of several barriers or fraudulent activities because of
various advancement. Therefore, an organisation need to focus on various factors as well as
need to make more strict policies in order to overcome privacy issues or problems.
Research objectives
Crowdsouring is a major tool of serving customers or general public by considering their needs
or requirements. Therefore, objectives of investigation process becomes more broad in order to
facilitate public by implementing various strategies. Mainly, crowdsourcing is a term whose
main motive is to uplift the community of European marketplace with the help of various
advanced technologies (Audretsch and et. al., 2016). Along with this aids in overcoming issues
or barriers of person life by considering necessary materials. This study seeks to address gaps
in empirical and theoretical knowledge on improving the lives of citizens using platforms of
social computing technologies. The main objective, therefore, is to explore the role of civic
crowding platforms in enhancing the well-being of and empowering citizens by improving
8

collaboration between them and institutions, as well as by peer-to-peer interactions. Hence,
crowodsourcing is having a very broad subsequent objectives which is described as follows:-
- examine the extent to which civic crowdfunding platforms improve the well-being
of and empower citizens
- establish the characteristics of civic crowdfunding platforms which enable effective
empowerment and improvement of well-being of citizens
- compare the features of different civic crowdfunding platforms
- investigate barriers of these features to enhancing empowerment and well-being of
citizens
- determine the features of civic crowdfunding platforms as enable effective peer-to-
firm and peer-to-peer collaboration for improved public services.
- Develop the general public by focussing on their necessity.
- Implement various strategies or policies by considering choice or preferences of
customers in order to satisfy them with requirements.
Consequently it is identified that most of the individuals are believing in developing the
individuals who are not having any additional benefits or sources to live their livelihood in
proper manner. Thus , they are coming with several creative ideas for offering benefits to those
person who are failed in attaining it in an effective manner .
1.3 Research questions
After analysing above information it has been analysed that numerous of questions and doubts
are raised because crowdsourcing is a very large subject due to maximisation of population in
European marketplace. Thus, few of the customers raises number of thoughts on this topic for
better understanding it in a more detail sense (Davidson and Poor2016) . Therefore, it is
essential to address the research objectives above, this study aims to answer the following
primary research question:
 How do civic crowdfunding platforms enhance the psychological empowerment and
psychological well-being of citizens?
Subsequently, the following secondary questions will be addressed as well:
 How do features of civic crowdfunding platforms compare with one another?
 What are the features of civic crowdfunding platforms?
 How usable are the civic crowdfunding platforms?
9

 What features or design capabilities of civic crowdfunding platforms enable them to
empower and improve well-being of citizens?
 Why does one civic crowdfunding platform attract more users than the others?
 How do civic crowdfunding platform features contribute to its usage?
 How do civic crowdfunding platforms vary in their ability to improve the well-
being of and empower underprivileged citizens?
 What are the impediments to effective use of civic crowdfunding platforms for
psychological empowerment and well-being?
Hence, it has been analysed that this above subject highlighting the major roles or
responsibilities of various social service provider by considering need of general public.
Mainly, its all about studying of obligation of various members which comes closer to serve
their consumers in an effective manner. Therefore, further report is going to throw lights on
first or foremost aims or objectives of subject matter in order to understand it in an appropriate
manner (Ryu and Kim, 2016). Thus, further data and upcoming study will produce a theoretical
framework that represents an ambitious interdisciplinary merge of research between social
science, health and information system fields. It signifies an attempt to reconcile heterogeneous
existing literature and come up with a structure that will encourage future research. It is hoped
that the stud’s insights will contribute to the field of study on empowerment, well-being and
civic crowdfunding which presently seems to lack coherence. At last, it has been understood
that number of scholars are coming with their own ideas or opinions on crowdsourcing in
which few members are agree with this strategies or believe in this scheme of service providing
to needy people. Whereas few are raising their voice against it due to its high level of
limitations or constraints as well as increase the level of fraudulent activities because of
introduction of several advanced techniques. Therefore, arguments or a healthy discussion
between various scientist is going to described in further study in order to understand area of
interest in more deeper sense. Thus, main focus of this research project is to improve the well
being of citizens by introducing numerous of tools or techniques of developing things (Lam
and Law, 2016).
2 Literature Review
The internet’s unrelenting insistent “march towards ubiquity at an inexorable speed” (Jiao, Jo
& Sarigöllü 2017, p. 3) continues to catapult the use of social computing technologies into
different life arenas. Across organisations and from within, the influence of these technologies
10

is felt, changing the way sectors are doing work. For instance, because of social computing
technologies, interaction and collaboration is between internal and external actors thereby
creating a socially-entrenched digital space that is more fluid than solid (Abedin & Qahri-
Saremi 2018). Moreover, content can be created, communicated and managed by interactive
and collaborative ventures of more people than used to be the case – from within and without
organisations and sectors.
One of the reasons social computing technologies have attracted interest is that, because of
Web 2.0 technology, they support engagement with a population of people in ‘crowdsourcing’
activities. The public sector has also joined other sectors to seek the ‘wisdom of crowds’ for
various projects (Liu 2012) and in an instance where the bulk of the contributions are focused
within the public sector, it is called ‘citizen-sourcing’ (May & Ross 2018). As alluded to earlier
in the previous chapter, crowdsourcing evolved to involve fundraising ventures, giving rise to
‘crowdfunding’ which also developed further to include community development projects,
giving rise to ‘civic crowdfunding’. This is a type of ‘civic technology’ platform (May & Ross
2018).
Studies have shown that the use of technology may affect the well-being of users (Castellacci
& Tveito 2018; Erfani, Abedin & Blount 2017), but despite their spread, little is known about
how the use of civic technology platforms enhances citizen empowerment and well-being.
Especially in an era where citizenry is faced with wicked problems they have to contribute
solutions to, technology platforms have to enable participation in citizens to improve public
services.
This chapter is organised in this manner. The next section will discuss crowdsourcing as an
innovation, followed by a narrowed down account that situates crowdsourcing within the
public sector. The discussion then progresses on to consider crowdfunding, followed by civic
crowdfunding. Psychological empowerment and well-being follow one another in the order of
discussion, terminating with a brief converse on designing civic technologies, including the
civic crowdfunding platforms.
2.1 Crowdsourcing as an innovation
Information and communication technologies as an innovation have evolved from serving
individual entrepreneurs to corporate innovators, technology adoption to innovation diffusion,
single to multi factor explanations of innovation, single to multi-technology business, closed to
open innovation (Martin 2016). The closed innovation model lost traction at the end of the 20th
century when there was an inevitable increase in the mobility of knowledge workers and
knowledge monopolies dwindled due to better quality university research which was widely
11

distributed. These changes contributed to commercialisation of ideas which can be deployed
outside the organisation, and external ideas implemented in-house; these ideas would have
come from knowledgeable and intelligent individuals, external to the organisation thereby
creating business value (Kankanhalli, Zuiderwijk & Tayi 2017). The individuals could be from
online innovation communities (Li, Kankanhalli & Kim 2016) and solvers in crowdsourcing
sites (Ye & Kankanhalli 2015). This is a shift that organisations (for-profit and not-for-profit
alike) have had to deal with, and because it will not retract, we would do well to take up the
challenge to ‘innovate for well-being’ rather than for ‘wealth’ as has been the case (Martin
2016).
It is an unique idea to collect funds as short amounts and implement all that to needy
people to solve their basic problems of not having food and shelter. This is based on online
collection of money which facilitates people to donate easily and send it to the desired NGOs
or social working authorities by which it can be make sure that donated money will be sent to
right place as it is not wasted (Gierczak and et. al., 2016). It is important that this system will
provide security of implementing the funds will be to the well being of society and health but
never meant to just just collect money to someone's personal use. In some areas, collection of
funds is become a business by having brand of social worker. But crowdsourcing put all the
funds to solve societal health issues and ensure legal use of the same.
This method will help in evaluate the unprecedented amounts of data more effectively
and efficiently to avoid calculating problems. Hence, it is stabilised to subversive the tool
equipment. It may initiate realistic as well as rich efficiency of touching to elaborate views
which are difficult to achieve better. This application is very useful as it render trustful service
to donators by sending funds to needy people as well as contributing adorable service to the
society.
They help to achieve assumptions of social working by providing correct way of utilising
money to improve health of society. It is widely accepted by social workers as it helps in
completing expectations of them having better way to implement their efforts more effectively.
2.2 Crowdsourcing in the public sector
Crowdsourcing is the “process of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting
contributions from a large group of people” (Howe 2008), especially from an online
community instead of the usual staff. It is a way in which tedious tasks can be subdivided and
tackled in smaller, manageable chunks by the crowd.
12

Owing to its openness, crowdsourcing offers challenges to the stoic structures of government
but it has a lot of promise to citizen interactions and engagement (Bertot et.al. 2012). In order
to co-produce and co-create services of the contemporary government, citizens are best-placed
to contribute because they know what they need (Coote 2011), so governments would be
providing relevant services.
This is very beneficial innovative technique which is small scale approach but gain
huge profits and work more efficiently as compared to large scale societal authorities. Most of
organisations have big desires but can't achieve that much as the crowdsourcing is achieving at
its small level. This is the reason behind that it is frequently adopted by people and become
common regarding its impressive benefits of providing more satisfaction to donators as well as
the receivers to built strong and able society amongst world. This can be accepted as an
energetic criteria to establish private-public collaboration to being capable to do large level
projects. It have an innovative method to do projects which are event based, education,
sporting, etc. Its profits make corporate world and government to render help to this
crowdsourcing system as it provides wider range of public receiving benefits by their effort
putting in well being of poor people to raise healthy society. They conducts several procedures
like running campaigns, match funding events, public influencing speeches and donate camps
to collect funds which facilitates to provide money to needy people. This project is basically
popular in urban areas specially which are having standards and can only comfortable for city
area because it has critical platform to generate interest among the people so that they will
become members of the same to establish abutment factor throughout procedures. Again, it is a
small level projects but work in a manner to achieve large level aspects successfully as well as
it is trustworthy system of funding which is used in human welfare of the society.
A few examples of crowdsourcing by various governments exist on record. For instance, New
Zealand government crowdsourced its Police Act; US Patent and Trademark office utilised it to
evaluate patents; Finland government used it to develop new laws, while Iceland employed it to
come up with its new constitution; US used crowdsourcing to create solutions to societal
problems (e.g. Next Stop Design and Challenge.gov sites); US National Archives Records
Administration crowdsourced the transcription of archived records documents to make them
available online to the public (Liu 2017; McNutt 2014); the ACT government used it to solicit
ideas to improve services; Victoria’s Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning
also crowdsourced to improve services as well (Liu 2012). So evidently, for about a decade the
public sector in different countries has been on the innovation train but calls continue to be
13

made for more studies to be conducted on this innovation. This is especially important because
crowdsourcing is now being done with money as the object of exchange, not just ideas.
There are three broad categories of crowdsourcing:
 Macrotasking – the use of internet to identify knowledgeable and skilled persons
to perform certain tasks (sourcing expertise), with no winner.
 Crowdcontests – inviting people, using the internet, to test a product or generate
a new idea; a winner is given monetary reward.
 Crowdfunding – using the internet to raise money for specific projects from
crowds of people,
In all cases, the internet is able to reach people across the globe who would
otherwise not have known about the project(s) (Dutil 2015).
2.3 Crowdfunding
The idea of raising money through the general public is not new in socio-economic systems
(Wadrop et.al. 2015). Many centuries past, concerts and new music compositions were funded
by public subscriptions; the base of the Statue of Liberty in New York was built from small
contributions of 160,000 backers in 1885 (Davies 2014). What is new is the use of the internet
and dedicated platforms over which projects can be publicised and investors can choose which
project to support. There are three actors in a crowdfunding model – project initiator motivates
for an idea, backers (can be individuals or groups) sponsor the idea and a moderating
organisation provides a ‘platform’ over which the two parties can carry out the plan (Bonami
& Tubio 2016). Crowdfunding platforms have increased significantly in number over years, so
has the volume of funding over the platforms (from around $53 million in 2010 to over $16
billion in 2014). Being a phenomenon that has come into academic attention just over a decade
ago, the academic literature on it is only emerging. Most of its peer reviewed research has been
from the business and management field, with specific attention on the role of crowdfunding in
financing small and medium enterprises to develop and grow, covering areas like motivation to
invest, incentives in crowdfunding, determinants of success of crowdfunded ventures
(Candelise 2016).
As the crowdfunding industry develops further, specialist sub-types that cater for various
interests have formed – as well as their platforms. Civic crowding is one of these sub-types.
2.3.1 Civic crowdfunding
14

Civic crowdfunding is described as the “crowdfunding for projects that produce community or
quasi-public assets”(pp. 343), and it produces goods that benefit the whole community,
whether somebody participates in the fundraising or not (Davies 2015). Since it came apart as
its own type, it has been appreciated for its aptitude to channel funds to particular projects,
thereby promoting community development specifically at a time when governments have
constrained budgets (Stiver et al. 2015). Although civic crowdfunding activities have been
found in ‘general’ reward-based platforms, their landscape is exemplified by four platforms,
being spacehive, ioby, neighbour.ly and citizinvestor. These platforms were designed
specifically for civic initiatives, and they complement the more general crowdfunding sites e.g.
Indiegogo and Kickstarter. As such, they will be the primary focus of this study so as to make
appropriately directed reflections, conclusions and commendations (Stiver et al. 2015).
** I have just realised that I would do well to discuss each one of them here, so I will include
them.
Following up on Martin (2016)’s call to ‘innovate for well-being’ rather than for ‘wealth’ as
was the case in the 20th century and prior, a need exists to explore how civic crowdfunding
platforms contribute to users’ well-being. As citizens enjoy the use of these platforms, how do
they improve their psychological empowerment even, so as to participate better to improve
services.
2.4 Psychological citizen empowerment
Empowerment is defined as ‘the process of increasing the capacity of individuals or groups to
make choices and to transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes’ (Baba et al.
2017, p. 1621), and it occurs at the personal/psychological level and community level. At the
personal level, an individual who is empowered feels and has a greater sense of control over
their lives; there is behaviour change, improved self-esteem, increased knowledge and
awareness and a sense of community. Because this empowerment is within the individual,
psychological empowerment is likely to differ between individuals and contexts. On the other
hand, community empowerment espouses the ideal of community working together and having
control over decisions that influence their lives through a shift in power relations. Individuals
who are empowered actually contribute to making up a community that is empowered
(Woodall et al. 2010).
Empowerment is built by developing relationships, engaging with others and surroundings. For
that reason, an individual’s psychological empowerment may also be affected by the quality of
the environment they live in and their relative social position (Baba et al. 2017). Usually, the
15

need for empowerment comes about because there is ‘powerlessness’ and lack of control over
one’s circumstances. Consequently, citizens need to be ‘empowered’ to feel in control enough
to participate in an uncommon activity like using civic technologies (Baba et al. 2017; Woodall
et al. 2010). In their study of a citizen housing program in Glasgow, Baba et al. (2017)
concluded that when one is empowered, they have improved well-being. In a different study,
Hill, Betts & Gardner (2015) found that the older adults they investigated acknowledged
computer use as empowering and enriching their well-being. While in yet another study
Pradhan, Hati & Kumar (2017) established that wellbeing was associated positively with
empowerment among IT employees in India. So the contribution of technology to
empowerment is acknowledged, although that of civic crowdsourcing technology is still
evasive.
2.5 Psychological well-being of citizens
Well-being is described as positive evaluation of one’s life and encompasses feelings of
satisfaction, positive emotion, meaning and engagement that promote one’s quality of life
(Diener & Seligman 2004). It is an important variable because all life outcomes depend on it.
That is, desirable work outcomes, economical outputs, social relations all depend on well-
being. Positive well-being increases life longevity, hence Diener & Seligman (2004) posit that
it ought to be the ultimate aim around which health, social and economic policies are built.
Consequently, they advocate for it to be an imperative policy issue, at the organizational,
corporate, and governmental levels.
Daraei (2013) categorised well-being into spiritual, physical, psychological, economic and
social, and the interest of this work is on psychological well-being because the state of mind
determines one’s wellness. Consequently therefore, psychological well-being is defined as a
state of feeling good and being effective in the way you function (Huppert 2009). When one
feels good, they show interest and engage, are confident and show affection; whereas when
they function effectively they have a sense of purpose and some control over their life.
Along the same line of thought, Ryff (1989) as quoted by Daraei (2013) describes six
dimensions that define psychological well-being. These are positive relations with others which
means one’s ability to form fulfilling relationships with other people; self-acceptance, meaning
possession of a positive mind-set towards one-self; environmental mastery, which is having the
right competencies to use opportunities in your environ for your benefit; autonomy means the
16

ability to evaluate oneself against personal standards and withstand social pressures; personal
growth deals with being open to new experiences so as to develop yourself further; purpose in
life deals with having a focus that gives your life meaning and a sense of direction. When one
is in control of their life, even if they experience painful emotions, their ability to control and
not allow the emotions to overcome them, is necessary for lasting well-being (Huppert 2009).
Studies on psychological well-being have been done across different fields to investigate e.g.
employee well-being on psychological empowerment for better output (Pradhan, Hati &
Kumar 2017); the effect of social media use on the psychological well-being of students (Guo,
Li & Ito 2014; Park, Song & Lee 2014); the effect of social change on the psychological well-
being of individuals (Liu et al. 2014); social media use on the psychological well-being of
cancer patients (Erfani, Abedin & Blount 2017); the influence of social factors on the
psychological well-being of students (Daraei 2013); internet use and well-being (Castellacci &
Tveito 2018). The widespread interest in exploring the effects of some social computing
technologies on well-being is evidence to the fact that they are pervasive in our daily lives so
we cannot ignore them. That said, there are possibly other relevant ways through which other
technologies contribute to well-being, and civic crowdfunding is one such, especially as an
emerging technology.
2.6 Design of civic technology
Like all technologies, the design of civic crowdfunding platforms can determine their usability
or lack of, and their considerable differences is likely to make it impossible to gauge them with
some standard criteria. Notwithstanding, Nam (2012) proposes three categories of assessing
civic technology platforms – design evaluation, process evaluation and process evaluation.
Design evaluation covers the socio-technical, procedural and functional requirements of
design; process evaluation means the act of communication and participation that the platform
supports; outcome evaluation has to do with impact and effectiveness (does the initiative
produce the needed results?). When designing these platforms, May & Ross (2018) caution
against overlooking the ‘human component’ of the system and focusing only on data, while
Foth, Agudelo & Palleis (2013) call for creation of “better tools for connection, exchange and
dialogue” between users. Baruch, May & Yu (2016) also joined the array by soliciting for
inclusion of transparency within a platform, where everyone can see what others are doing;
more interaction between campaign/platform coordinators and volunteers. the ability of
17

contributors to talk to others; creating a feeling of teamwork between backers; giving
contributors control over what they do and distribution of results with concrete outputs.
2.7 Socio-technical Theory
Technology has played crucial role in providing benefit to the business organisations. In
mid 90s, main use of technology was done for increasing profit or the companies. It could be
done by enhancing revenue or lowering down cost of business operations. But there is no hard
and fast rule that technology can only be utilised for businesses, it can also be used for social
well-being. In the words of Belleflamme, Omrani and Peitz (2015) Socio-technical theory is
the connection between technology and individuals which is present at a workplace. In every
organisation, there are some subsystems which contain various tools and techniques. They help
an organisation increasing their economic performance. Developing a crowd-funding platform
involves lot of technical resources. By using technology, one can raise money from middle
public. People want to do charity but they always have issues regarding ''how their money will
be used''. This lack of trust is one problems which society is facing from a long period of time.
This trouble can get resolve by using crowd-funding platforms. People who are doing money
can track their charity, this provide them confidence for investing more funds in well-being of
society.
According to Wheat and et. al. (2013), many crowd-funding platform are running by
using the concepts of socio-technical theory. This model talks about interaction between
technology and human being. Spacehive is a crowd-funding platform which has some unique
features. They try to collect money for development of local area. If a person feel that certain
kind of development is needed to be done by then they can pledge money for it. If the project
get demanded amount of funding then it will come to ground and it will get developed. This is
a great concept because it focuses on optimum utilisation of resources instead of identification
of more resources.
But Danmayr (2013) argues that this kind of thinking and features of crowd-funding is
not good for society because it will result in increment between the development of different
regions. Their are many regions in this world who desperately need money for fulfilling their
basic needs, if people will start funding by development of local areas and well-being of their
own regions then many needy society in different parts of Africa and Asia will not get charity
which they are currently getting. One cannot say that this thought is wrong but focusing only
on positive side is not a correct approach. Socio-technical theory is about connection between
people and technology and how new techniques of working can be used for fulfilling goals of
an organisation. It contain both systems, economic and social. If few regions or local areas are
18

spending money on own welfare then there is nothing wrong in it (Vismara, 2016). This
thinking should be promoted in different part of this world as it will make people self
dependant and their dependency on other regarding funding, will also end.
2.8 Diffusion of innovation Theory – not sure about it……
Innovation theory is considered as an important social science theory. Concepts on this
approach is related to the how and why new technology is spreading. It also talk about speed of
expansion of an idea. Two step flow theory only concentrate of increment and decrement in the
likelihood of innovation or new idea, which people are adopting. On the other hand, multi-step
diffusion is about opinion leader, intermediaries and audience. Second one is considered as
change agent, inter-mediator play crucial role in convincing audience about accepting or
rejecting innovation. Although one cannot ignore influence of leader on behaviour of
individuals. In the word of Greenberg, Hui and Gerber (2013), people take time to trust and use
innovation and new technology. Crowd-funding platforms are new concept and they may
cannot be considered as best option for well-being of society. One can say that this model of
funding is rapidly getting popular but still, it is unknown in most part of the world. On the
other hand Valanciene and Jegeleviciute (2013), argues that even if crowd-funding platforms
are making small changes in this society then there is nothing wrong in it. Many people are
solving various economic problems through civic crowd-funding. This idea is disrupting and in
developing regions like India public is using this innovation for welfare of society.
Bannerman (2013) explained that why this idea is getting so popular. The main reason
behind its fast acceptance is that internet connectivity is continuously improving and people are
ready to donate amount because they do not have to go to a particular place for doing charity.
Another reason is related to trust issue. Before evolution of civic crowd-funding, people did not
have faith in many charitable organisation because of the scams and misuse of money. This
innovation get attention of public as the probability of wrong use of funds is very low.
According to Parker (2014) the argument of ''less chances of fraud'' is inappropriate because
most of the cases of stealing money and fraud is not happening on internet. Issues relating to
privacy has increase and complains regarding hacking of data is continuously increasing with a
high rate. This can be considered as one of the key barrier in growth of civic crowd-funding
platform and people may stop using this mode for doing charity or assuring well-being of
society.
A large number of people are using this source for psychological empowerment but it is
facing serious threats because of hackers and scam organisers. Stiver and et. al. (2015) raised a
valid point regarding use of civic crowd-funding platform that there is a significant amount of
19

part of this this world who do not have proper internet connectivity. This innovation is useless
in these regions. Another points is related to amount of funding. For developing a building or
some other small work, crowd-funding can be opted but it cannot be used for bring major
changes in society as it involves huge capital. Crowd-funding platform has both positive and
negative sides, it is all about perception of an individual.
2.9 Features and use of civic crowd-funding platform
Their are various types of platforms for crowd-funding. Some of them focuses on local
areas while others are present at global level. Neighbor.ly is a platform who try to involve
regional government, civic ventures and other civic organisation in development of local areas.
This platform convince people to invest money for their own welfare, they also seek support
from government in order to accomplish natural projects. Their is no doubt that this concept
can be used for well being but every platform has a limited reach and this is their prime
weakness. Their are some platforms who are working in across the nation. They do not take
any assistance from government bodies or any civic venture. Their main aim is to find a
project which is related to welfare of public. If they find appropriate idea then try to find
funding from it. If they get needed amount then they construct particular project like
developing a park etc. Working in collaboration is always a good idea. An important viewpoint
relating crowd-funding, which is ignored by many people, is that it does not focus on removing
poverty. Most of people are using it for own welfare instead of fulfilling needs of needy
community (Antonenko, Lee and Kleinheksel, 2014). If someone is saying the crowd-funding
platform have done remarkable work in term of well-being then it is not wrong but if they
argue that it is has play crucial role in decreasing poverty then it is not appropriate.
Designing of Civic crowd-funding platform is also important along with its features. In
case of local well-being, focus should be kept of convincing local people to pledge their money
for a particular cause. Public from foreign nations will never contribute to for well-being of a
community about which they do not have any idea. Many people have given their views about
various benefits of crowd-funding but empowering is advantage which is ignored from a long
term of time. This innovative trend has started a new culture where people solve their
economic problem by using technology (Hildebrand, Puri and Rocholl, 2016). Scarcity of
money is not a big issue, the trouble is related to managing it.
Their is general perception that crowd-funding is a new concept, it is not. The only
features which is added to this ''new concept'' is technology i.e. internet. People use to invest
money development of public property. ''Statue of Liberty'' in New-York was made by taking
funds from public. Civil crowd-funding is very useful in terms of infrastructural development,
there are regions in European and American continent who are using this concept for speeding
20

up their infrastructural growth. Government also support it because it reduces their work and
assist them in attaining their ultimate goal i.e. well being of society. Besides these features,
there are some other significant characteristics of crowd-funding platforms.
First of all, it operates at small scale. Their is not a single platform who gets funding
from all over the world or across the nation (Lawton, Marom and Marom, 2013). But this does
not means that it is not successful. Their are many infrastructural and other development done
for well-being of society by raising money through civic crowd-funding. This concept was
started as a hobby by an NGO but now there are many big organisation who are activity using
this idea for psychological empowerment. Civic crowd-funding mainly focus on cities. As
mentioned earlier, it does not concentrate on whole country or world. But this does not means
that this concept can be used in every city. If platforms are not available in any region that this
idea cannot be used for raising funds. Pre-internet, crowd-funding was a difficult task but now
technology has removed many problem in acquiring fund. Although it has generated new
troubles like, issues regrading privacy, government regulations, hacking, online frauds etc.
Their are some questions which is raised by many people. Some thinkers often argue that civic
crowd-funding do not encourage pubic investment (Belleflamme, Lambert and Schwienbacher,
2014). Standing on own feat is good thing but if people will solve most of their problem by
using own resource then what will government do. They may start ignoring crucial concept i.e.
''well being'' of public. People who do not support civic crowd-funding always raise this point.
It is a genuine issue but nowadays, there are many platforms who are are asking government
for their support. If government start working with them then it reduces this controversy.
Another problem with civic crowd-funding is that some people are claiming that it has
widen wealth gap. Some regions has seen remarkable growth because of this crowd-funding
while others fail to to grow with the same rate. Rich community do not shy to fund any project
in their region, but lower or middle class group cannot pledge money because of limited
income. Public investment and government are two areas which are creating many hindrance in
growth of civic crowd-funding.
2.9.1 Barriers in increasing empowerment and well-being of public relating to Civic crowd-
funding
Crowd-funding has attained success in past few years but this does not mean that it is
not creating hindrance welfare of society. According to Agrawal, Catalini and Goldfarb (2014)
, crowd-funding can assure fund for a project but what about maintenance. Most of the funds
are acquired for construction of park, education initiatives etc. People may show great
enthusiasm at the time of pledge funds for development of park but they never about how it
will be maintained. This is one negative point about civic crowd-funding which is not getting
21

attention of public. Most of the platforms are now trying to find a solution of this problems but
for a time specific this issue has created hindrance in working of psychological empowerment.
Another barrier is related to role of government. A significant number of people has
stopped funding various projects because they feel that if they will organise education events
and spend own money on any project like construction of educational institution then what will
be the work of government Greenberg and Gerber (2014) argued that this is not a valid point
because crowd-funding happen at small scale and most of the project are far from provisions of
public service. This is the reality of crowd-funding. Most of the time, it does not focus on key
issues. Internet has enhanced popularity of civic crowd-funding but now it is also becoming
barrier is well-being of society. People are concerned about their privacy and this is the prime
reason that they are not ready to pledge their money. Cases of stealing money through internet
banking is increasing and this has created challenges in empowerment because people are now
gradually stopped funding local projects.
Government regulations has forced platforms for making changes in some of their
policies. In many part of this world, various state and central government has restricted many
new civic crowd-funding platforms because they fail to provide detail about how they will take
money from public and how can this money be tracked by donator. Psychological
empowerment at the stakes of increasing number of fraud is not a good deal. Ahlers and et. al.
(2015) also argued the this type of crowd-funding has not done any major change in social
development of social. On the other hand it has created some serious problems like widen
wealth gap. Some people do not like to fund a project because they feel that it has no relation
with long term vision. This thinking is not wrong.
Pledging funds for a single project may go in vain if other project also fulfilling same
social goal. Psychological empowerment is not possible if people will feel that their money is
not used in proper way of it could be used in better way. Suppose a park is made by civic
crowd-funding and after sometime, because of no maintenance, it get destroyed then people
who pledge money will not feel empowered. An important things which should be noted at the
time of discussing barriers is about it securing personal data of people. Some people want to
contribute but they have fear about their privacy. This thought stop them from contribution to
well-being.
Besides these problems, one should not ignore the short term positive impact on
psychological empowerment. If a specific project is getting completed because of civic crowd-
funding then its maintenance can be done by government (Dushnitsky and Marom, 2013) . This
collaboration can result in huge success and social development. Although, most of the
22

government keep themselves apart from crowd-funding platforms but if they want to resolve
crucial problems specially related to infrastructure then they should focus on new ideas like
civic crowd-funding.
3. Research Design
Not yet here
References
Abedin, B. & Qahri-Saremi, H. 2018, 'Introduction to the special issue - Social computing and
service innovation: A framework for research', Journal of Organizational Computing
and Electronic Commerce, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1-8.
Aral, S., Dellarocas, C. & Godes, D. 2013, 'Introduction to the special issue—Social media and
business transformation: A framework for research', Information Systems Research,
vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 3-13.
Baba, C., Kearns, A., McIntosh, E., Tannahill, C. & Lewsey, J. 2017, 'Is empowerment a route to
improving mental health and wellbeing in an urban regeneration (UR) context?', Urban
Studies, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 1619-37.
Baruch, A., May, A. & Yu, D. 2016, 'The motivations, enablers and barriers for voluntary
participation in an online crowdsourcing platform', Computers in Human Behavior, vol.
64, pp. 923-31.
Binder, M. 2013, 'Innovativeness and subjective well-being', Social Indicators Research, vol.
111, no. 2, pp. 561-78.
Bonami, B. & Tubio, M.L. 2016, 'Digital Inclusion, Crowdfunding, and Crowdsourcing in Brazil',
in B. Passarelli, J. Straubhaar & A. Cuevas-Cerveró (eds), Handbook of Research on
Comparative Approaches to the Digital Age Revolution in Europe and the Americas, IGI
Publishing, pp. 77-100.
Calo, K.M., Cenci, K., Fillottrani, P. & Estevez, E. 2012, 'Information Sharing - Benefits', Journal
of Computer Science & Technology (JCS&T), vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 49-55.
Candelise, C. 2016, 'Smart financing and empowerment: The use of crowdfunding in the
energy sector', paper presented to the 57th Annual Conference for Italian Economics
Society,
<http://www.siecon.org/online/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/CANDELISE.pdf>.
Castellacci, F. & Tveito, V. 2018, 'Internet use and well-being: A survey and a theoretical
framework', Research Policy, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 308-25.
Charbit, C. & Desmoulins, G. 2017, Civic crowdfunding: A collective option for local public
goods, vol. 2017/02, OECD, Paris.
Coote, A. 2011, 'Big society and the new austerity', in M. Stott (ed.), The big society challenge,
vol. 82, Keystone Development Trust Publications, p. 14.
23

Daraei, M. 2013, 'Social Correlates of Psychological Well-Being Among Undergraduate
Students in Mysore City', Social Indicators Research, vol. 114, no. 2, pp. 567-90.
Davies, R. 2014, Civic crowdfunding as a marketplace for participation in urban development,
Center for Work, Technology and Orgnanizations, Stanford University.
Davies, R. 2015, 'Three provocations for civic crowdfunding', Information, Communication &
Society, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 342-55.
Diener, E. & Seligman, M.E.P. 2004, 'Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being',
Psychological Science in the Public Interest (Wiley-Blackwell), vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1-31.
Dutil, P. 2015, 'Crowdsourcing as a new instrument in the government's arsenal: Explorations
and considerations', Canadian Public Administration, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 363-83.
Erfani, S.S., Abedin, B. & Blount, Y. 2017, 'The effect of social network site use on the
psychological well-being of cancer patients', Journal of the Association for Information
Science and Technology, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 1308-22.
Foth, M., Agudelo, L.P. & Palleis, R. 2013, 'Digital soapboxes: towards an interaction design
agenda for situated civic innovation', paper presented to the Proceedings of the 2013
ACM conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publication, Zurich,
Switzerland.
Gil-Garcia, J.R., Chun, S.A. & Janssen, M. 2009, 'Government information sharing and
integration: Combining the social and the technical', Information Polity: The
International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age, vol. 14, no.
1/2, pp. 1-10.
Gil-Garcia, J.R. & Sayogo, D.S. 2016, 'Government inter-organizational information sharing
initiatives: Understanding the main determinants of success', Government Information
Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 572-82.
Guo, Y., Li, Y. & Ito, N. 2014, 'Exploring the predicted effect of social networking site use on
perceived social capital and psychological well-being of Chinese international students
in Japan', Cyberpsychology, Behavior And Social Networking, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 52-8.
Hill, R., Betts, L.R. & Gardner, S.E. 2015, 'Older adults’ experiences and perceptions of digital
technology: (Dis)empowerment, wellbeing, and inclusion', Computers in Human
Behavior, vol. 48, pp. 415-23.
Howe, J. 2008, Crowdsourcing : Why the power of the crowd is driving the future of business,
CrownBusiness, New York.
Huppert, F.A. 2009, 'Psychological well-being: Evidence regarding its causes and
consequences†', Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 137-64.
Jiao, Y., Jo, M.-S. & Sarigöllü, E. 2017, 'Social value and content value in social media: Two
paths to psychological well-being', Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic
Commerce, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 3-24.
Kankanhalli, A., Zuiderwijk, A. & Tayi, G.K. 2017, 'Open innovation in the public sector: A
research agenda', Government Information Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 84-9.
Li, M., Kankanhalli, A. & Kim, S.H. 2016, 'Which ideas are more likely to be implemented in
online user innovation communities? An empirical analysis', Decision Support Systems,
vol. 84, pp. 28-40.
Liu, H., Li, S., Xiao, Q. & Feldman, M.W. 2014, 'Social Support and Psychological Well-Being
Under Social Change in Urban and Rural China', Social Indicators Research, vol. 119,
no. 2, pp. 979-96.
Liu, H.K. 2012, 'Open source, crowdsourcing and public engagement', in E. Downey & M.A.
Jones (eds), Public service, Governance, and Web 2.0 Technologies: Future trends in
social media, IGI Global, pp. 181-99.
24

Liu, H.K. 2017, 'Crowdsourcing Government: Lessons from Multiple Disciplines', Public
Administration Review, vol. 77, no. 5, pp. 656-67.
Martin, B.R. 2016, 'Twenty challenges for innovation studies', Science and Public Policy, vol.
43, no. 3, pp. 432-50.
May, A. & Ross, T. 2018, 'The design of civic technology: factors that influence public
participation and impact', Ergonomics, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 214-25.
McNutt, K. 2014, 'Public engagement in the Web 2.0 era: Social collaborative technologies in a
public sector context', Canadian Public Administration, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 49-70.
Nam, T. 2012, 'Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0', Government
Information Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 12-20.
Park, N., Song, H. & Lee, K.M. 2014, 'Social networking sites and other media use,
acculturation stress, and psychological well-being among East Asian college students in
the United States', Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 36, pp. 138-46.
Pradhan, R.K., Hati, L. & Kumar, U. 2017, 'Impact of employee well-being on psychological
empowerment: Mediating role of happiness', International Journal of Manufacturing
Technology and Management vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 581-95.
Stiver, A., Barroca, L., Minocha, S., Richards, M. & Roberts, D. 2015, 'Civic crowdfunding
research: Challenges, opportunities, and future agenda', New Media & Society, vol. 17,
no. 2, pp. 249-71.
Wollmann, H. 2015, 'Institutional development of public and social services provision in
European countries: From government to governance?', Strategic Public Management
Journal, no. 1, pp. 1-23.
Woodall, J., Raine, G., South, J. & Warwick-Booth, L. 2010, Empowerment & health and well-
being, Leeds Metropolitan University.
Ye, H. & Kankanhalli, A. 2015, 'Investigating the antecedents of organizational task
crowdsourcing', Information & Management, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 98-110.
Agrawal, A., Catalini, C. and Goldfarb, A., 2014. Some simple economics of
crowdfunding. Innovation Policy and the Economy. 14(1). pp.63-97.
Ahlers, G. K. and et. al., 2015. Signaling in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice. 39(4). pp.955-980.
Antonenko, P. D., Lee, B. R. and Kleinheksel, A. J., 2014. Trends in the crowdfunding of
educational technology startups. TechTrends. 58(6). pp.36-41.
Bannerman, S., 2013. Crowdfunding culture. Journal of Mobile Media. 7(01). pp.1-30.
Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T. and Schwienbacher, A., 2014. Crowdfunding: Tapping the right
crowd. Journal of business venturing. 29(5). pp.585-609.
Belleflamme, P., Omrani, N. and Peitz, M., 2015. The economics of crowdfunding
platforms. Information Economics and Policy. 33. pp.11-28.
Danmayr, F., 2013. Archetypes of crowdfunding platforms: A multidimensional comparison.
Springer Science & Business Media.
Dushnitsky, G. and Marom, D., 2013. Crowd monogamy. Business Strategy Review. 24(4).
pp.24-26.
Greenberg, M. D. and Gerber, E. M., 2014, April. Learning to fail: experiencing public failure
online through crowdfunding. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human
factors in computing systems. pp. 581-590. ACM.
25

Greenberg, M. D., Hui, J. and Gerber, E., 2013, April. Crowdfunding: a resource exchange
perspective. In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
pp. 883-888. ACM.
Lawton, K., Marom, D. and Marom, D., 2013. The crowdfunding revolution: How to raise
venture capital using social media. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Parker, S. C., 2014. Crowdfunding, cascades and informed investors. Economics
Letters. 125(3). pp.432-435.
Stiver, A. and et. al., 2015. Civic crowdfunding research: Challenges, opportunities, and future
agenda. New Media & Society. 17(2). pp.249-271.
Valanciene, L. and Jegeleviciute, S., 2013. Valuation of crowdfunding: benefits and
drawbacks. Economics and Management. 18(1). pp.39-48.
Wheat, R. E. and et. al., 2013. Raising money for scientific research through
crowdfunding. Trends in ecology & evolution. 28(2). pp.71-72.
Hildebrand, T., Puri, M. and Rocholl, J., 2016. Adverse incentives in
crowdfunding. Management Science. 63(3). pp.587-608.
Vismara, S., 2016. Equity retention and social network theory in equity crowdfunding. Small
Business Economics. 46(4). pp.579-590.
Moritz, A. and Block, J. H., 2016. Crowdfunding: A literature review and research directions.
In Crowdfunding in Europe. pp. 25-53. Springer International Publishing.
Strausz, R., 2017. A theory of crowdfunding: A mechanism design approach with demand
uncertainty and moral hazard. American Economic Review. 107(6). pp.1430-76.
Chen, Q., Chen, T. and Wang, Y., 2016. How the expanded crowd-funding mechanism of some
southern rural areas in China affects cooperative behaviors in threshold public goods
game. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. 91. pp.649-655.
Gedda, D. and et. al., 2016. Crowdfunding: Finding the Optimal Platform for Funders and
Entrepreneurs. Technology Innovation Management Review. 6(3). pp.31-40.
Dushnitsky, G. and et. al., 2016. Crowdfunding in Europe: determinants of platform creation
across countries. California management review. 58(2). pp.44-71.
Xu, B. and et. al., 2016. Configurational paths to sponsor satisfaction in crowdfunding. Journal
of Business Research. 69(2). pp.915-927.
Hornuf, L. and Schwienbacher, A., 2017. Should securities regulation promote equity
crowdfunding?. Small Business Economics. 49(3). pp.579-593.
Li, Y., Rakesh, V. and Reddy, C. K., 2016, February. Project success prediction in
crowdfunding environments. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM International
Conference on Web Search and Data Mining . pp. 247-256. ACM.
Audretsch, D. B. and et. al., 2016. Entrepreneurial finance and technology transfer. The
Journal of Technology Transfer. 41(1). pp.1-9.
Davidson, R. and Poor, N., 2016. Factors for success in repeat crowdfunding: why sugar
daddies are only good for Bar-Mitzvahs. Information, communication &
society.19(1). pp.127-139.
Ryu, S. and Kim, Y. G., 2016. A typology of crowdfunding sponsors: Birds of a feather flock
together?. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications. 16. pp.43-54.
Lam, P. T. and Law, A. O., 2016. Crowdfunding for renewable and sustainable energy
projects: An exploratory case study approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 60. pp.11-20.
Gierczak, M. M. and et. al., 2016. Crowdfunding: outlining the new era of
fundraising. Crowdfunding in Europe–state of the art in theory and practice. pp.7-23.
26