Exploring emerging pathways for expanding research on platform labor is crucial. Photo: TUCHONG

In recent years, research on platform labor has gained increasing attention in academia. Based on the labor process, the “control-resistance” research trajectory has become increasingly refined, with scholars introducing different dimensions such as technology, organization, and culture to reinforce existing studies, presenting a trend of involution.  

In our fieldwork, we identified two promising directions for expanding this research. First, in terms of labor, the integration of highly-skilled workers into the digital economy presents new challenges for platform development. Second, in terms of space, the ways in which workers in county-level areas engage with platform-based work differ significantly from urban workers. These rural dynamics reflect a deeper, more complex social fabric that demands closer attention from researchers.

Complex labor 

An increasing number of skilled workers are joining the digital economy. According to statistics, China currently has over 200 million skilled workers, with over 60 million classified as highly skilled. Skilled workers engage in relatively complex labor, requiring greater levels of innovation and creativity. This type of labor is crucial for cultural prosperity and is an integral component of developing new quality productive forces. From the perspective of labor classification, this can be roughly categorized as “complex labor” to distinguish it from simple labor. The platform-based operation of complex labor exhibits distinct characteristics and is a growing area of academic discussions.

On one hand, the relationship between complex laborers and platforms differs from that of simple laborers. In major cities, leading commercial platforms have built employment systems that encompass nearly all simple laborers, such as delivery riders, who rely entirely on platforms to “download” work opportunities. These workers are part of a fast-moving, easily replaceable workforce, with no independent “islands” capable of operating outside the platform’s reach. In contrast, with complex labor, small professional circles of “shared knowledge” play a more critical role. This knowledge cannot be easily acquired through short-term transactions, and relying on these circles for job matching often reduces transaction costs. In such cases, platforms merely serve as a supplementary resource rather than the primary source of opportunities. The unique skills of complex laborers are, to some extent, non-substitutable, granting them more bargaining power and freedom of choice. While the “hidden exploitation” of platforms exists, it is more likely to take the form of “supplementary empowerment.” Exploring win-win cooperation and trust mechanisms is a new aspect of the relationship between complex laborers and platforms.

On the other hand, the issue of protecting creativity in complex labor is particularly unique. Simple laborers mainly engage in manual labor, which, while requiring certain social skills to establish good relationships with customers, still falls under the category of “general skills.” This contrasts with the creative skills required by complex laborers, who must contribute ideas and infuse their work with creativity in order to complete tasks and generate profits. However, when creative content becomes part of platform operations, it undergoes a process of standardization and digitization. Platforms often promise customers that content delivery will be targeted, data will be retained, machine review will be applied, and content will be reusable, implying that creative work is stored in databases and is subject to standardized procedures for retrieval, review, and evaluation. Platforms aim to make “subscribing to creative content is as easy as ordering flowers.” 

The challenge arises when creative content becomes standardized—how can the uniqueness of  that creativity be preserved? When the work of creative laborers becomes as interchangeable as machine parts, how can the individual’s creative agency be reflected? These concerns connect to broader discussions around automation and “machines replacing humans.” That is to say, when introducing the creative dimension of complex labor, researchers must not only examine whether laborers’ livelihoods are being controlled by algorithms, but also consider whether their thoughts and creativity are being “standardized.” This opens up wider debates that address core concerns in the intelligent era.

Stability of laborers in county-level areas

In our observations of platform laborers in county-level regions, we found that some of the experiences accumulated in large cities do not apply. Due to the constraints of limited space, population, and the influence of unique “local knowledge,” platform labor in these regions presents a distinct social landscape.

Within the limited spatial range of counties, platform laborers tend to be relatively stable. In contrast, rapid turnover is a defining feature of platform-based employment in large cities, where platforms are constantly recruiting new workers. The smaller, more stable workforce in counties reflects different dynamics, with less reliance on continuous hiring. 

County-level laborers also have a unique understanding of platform technologies, shaped by the limited population in these regions. On short video platforms, popular content creators in large cities often work through Multi-Channel Network (MCN) agencies that help them navigate platform rules and plan content release strategies. However, county-level laborers tend to bypass such agencies, relying instead on their intuitive grasp of platform algorithms and attempting to evolve in sync with platform technology on their own.

Social relationships among platform laborers in counties are also more pronounced. Delivery riders in large cities typically rush through specific zones, engaging in “fleeting interactions” as part of their daily routine.

Given this social context, we need to rethink several assumptions. Issues identified in previous studies, such as the loose connections and increased atomization among the new employment groups, do not appear to apply to county-level workers. Instead, these workers gain fragmented employment opportunities through the flexible employment systems created by platforms, thereby strengthening social connections and enhancing a shared sense of community. This enhanced social cohesion provides a foundation for social action.

Therefore, in terms of social governance, the initiatives explored in large cities, such as Party building, delivery stations, community services, and online communities for new employment groups, may be more effective if adapted to serve county laborers. Furthermore, considering the work rhythms and daily lives of county laborers, there is significant potential for developing refined public services tailored to their needs, which could become a new area of research.

Liu Xiuxiu is an associate research fellow at the Beijing Administration Institute. 

Edited by ZHAO YUAN