Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Preliminary Theory for Open-Source Ecosystem Microeconomics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Towards Engineering Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) Ecosystems for Impact and Sustainability

Abstract

While there has been substantial empirical work identifying factors that influence the contribution to, and use of open-source software, we have as yet little theory that identifies the key constructs and relationships that would allow us to explain and predict how open-source ecosystems function. The absence of ecosystem theory is particularly alarming as open-source software works its way more broadly and deeply into the economy. The problem facing policymakers is how to provide support and resources when needed, without distorting decision-making, demotivating volunteers, serving special interests at the expense of others, and maintaining the communities that take on and guide the work. What is needed is a clearly articulated and empirically validated theory of open-source ecosystems. This chapter provides a sketch of such a theory in the form of a set of propositions, which may form the foundation for future empirical work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed.

  2. 2.

    The literature on standards is very extensive and well beyond the scope of this chapter. We refer interested readers to Swann’s literature review [50].

  3. 3.

    What we mean is that a player offers a standard by developing a software, the other players can adopt and contribute to the development. This “unilateral” adoption is usually called “bandwagon” in the literature on standards (see, for instance Farrell et Saloner, 1985). See Bessen (2002) and Baldwin and Clark [2] for a theoretical analysis of the impact of OSS code architecture on the efficiency of libre development. The latter argues that FLOSS may be seen as a new development “institution” (p. 35 and later).

References

  1. P.J. Ågerfalk, B. Fitzgerald, outsourcing to an unknown workforce: exploring opensourcing as a global sourcing strategy. MIS Q. 32, 385–400 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  2. C.Y. Baldwin, K.B. Clark, The architecture of participation: does code architecture mitigate free riding in the open source development model? Manage. Sci. 52(7) 1116–1127 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. A. Barcomb, N. Jullien, P. Meyer, A.L. Olteanu, Integrating managerial preferences into the qualitative multi-criteria evaluation of team members, in Cases based on Multiple Criteria Decision Making/Aiding methods: Building and Solving Decision Models with Computer Implementations ed. by S Huber (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. Bessen, Open Source Software: Free Provision of Complex Public Goods. Rapport, Research on Innovation (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Bhattacharya, S. Guriev, Patents vs. trade secrets: knowledge licensing and spillover. J. Econ. Assoc. 4(6), 1112−1147 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Bonaccorsi, C. Rossi, Why open source software can succeed. Res. Policy 32(7), 1243–1258 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. A. Brandenburger, B. Nalebuff, Co-Opetition. (Currency Doubleday, 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  8. B. Butler, E. Joyce, J. Pike, Don’t look now, but we’ve created a bureaucracy: the nature and roles of policies and rules in Wikipedia, in Proceedings of The Twenty-Sixth Annual Sigchi Conference On Human Factors in Computing Systems (ACM, 2008), pp. 1101−1110

    Google Scholar 

  9. K. Carillo, S. Huff, B. Chawner, What makes a good contributor? Understanding contributor behavior within large Free/Open source software projects–a socialization perspective. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  10. E.J. Castilla, S. Benard, The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Admin. Sci. Q. 55(4), 543–676 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. S. Comino, F.M. Manenti, M.L. Parisi, From planning to mature: on the success of open source projects. Res. Policy 36, 1575–1586 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. J. Crémer, C. d’Aspremont, L.A. Gérard-Varet, Incentives and the existence of pareto-optimal revelation mechanisms. J. Econ. Theory 51(2), 233–254 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  13. L. Dahlander, M.G. Magnusson, Relationships between open source software companies and communities: observations from nordic firms. Res. Policy 34, 481–493 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. L. Dahlander, M.W. Wallin, A man on the inside: unlocking communities as complementary assets. Res. Policy 35(8), 1243−1259 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Dalle, N. Jullien, ‘Libre’ software: turning fads into institutions? Res. Policy 32(1), 1−11 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  16. P. David, A multi-dimensional view of the “sustainability” of free & open source software development, in OSS Watch Conference on Open Source and Sustainability (Saїd Business School, Oxford, 2006), pp. 10−12

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Dedrick, J. West, An exploratory study into open source platform adoption, in Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. N. Eghbal, Roads and Bridges: The Unseen Labor Behind Our Digital Infrastructure (2016). Accessed from https://www.fordfoundation.org

  19. J. Farrell, Standardization and intellectual property. Jurimetr. J. 30, 35 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  20. M. Germonprez, J.E. Kendall, K.E. Kendall, L. Mathiassen, B.W. Young, B. Warner, A theory of responsive design: a field study of corporate engagement with open source communities. Inf. Syst. Res. 28(1), 64–83 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. R. Guimera, B. Uzzi, J. Spiro, L.A.N. Amaral, Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance. Science 308(5722), 697–702 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. M.T. Hannan, J. Freeman, Structural inertia and organizational change, Am. Soc. Rev. 49(2), 149−164 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. D.D. Heckathorn, The dynamics and dilemmas of collective action. Am. Soc. Rev. 61(2), 278−307 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  24. C. Hess, E. Ostrom, Introduction: an overview of the knowledge commons, in Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice, ed. by C. Hess, E. Ostrom (MIT Press, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. A.O. Hirschman, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States, vol. 25 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1970)

    Google Scholar 

  26. C. Jensen, W. Scacchi, Role migration and advancement processes in ossd projects: a comparative case study, in 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’07), Minneapolis, MN, USA, pp. 364−374 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  27. N. Jullien, J.B. Zimmermann, FLOSS firms, users and communities: a viable match? J. Innov. Econ. Manag. 1, 31–53 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  28. N. Jullien, J.B. Zimmermann, FLOSS in an industrial economics perspective. Revue d’économie industrielle 136(4), 39–64 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Jullien, K. Roudaut, Can Open Source projects succeed when the producers are not users? Lessons from the data processing field. Manag. Int./Int. Manag./Gestiòn Int. 16, 113−127 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  30. J.E. Kendall, K.E. Kendall, M. Germonprez, Game theory and open source contribution: rationale behind corporate participation in open source software development. J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer. 26 (4), 323−343 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. Khondhu, A. Capiluppi, K.J. Stol, Is it all lost? A study of inactive open source projects, in Proceedings of IFIP International Conference on Open Source Systems (2013), pp. 61−79

    Google Scholar 

  32. S. Koch, Organisation of work in open source projects: expended effort and efficiency. Revue d'économie industrielle 136, 17–38 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  33. B. Kogut, A. Metiu, Open source software development and distributed innovation. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 17(2), 248–264 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. M.C. Lacity, S.A. Khan, L.P. Willcocks, A review of the IT outsourcing literature: Insights for practice. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 18(3), 130–146 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. K. Lakhani, R. Wolf, Why hackers do what they do: understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects, in Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software, ed. by J. Feller, B. Fitzgerald, S. Hissam, K.R. Lakhani (MIT Press, Cambridge, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  36. K. Lakhani, E. von Hippel, How open source software works: free user to user assistance. Res. Policy 32(6), 923−943 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  37. G. Marwell, P. Oliver, The Critical Mass in Collective Action (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993). Discusses user as producer involvement into a project (a collective action)

    Google Scholar 

  38. A. Mockus, R.T. Fielding, J. Herbsleb, A case study of open source software development: the Apache server, in Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ACM, 2000, June), pp. 263–272

    Google Scholar 

  39. L. Morgan, J. Feller, P. Finnegan, Exploring value networks: theorising the creation and capture of value with open source software. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 22, 569–588 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. D. Nafus, ‘Patches don’t have gender’: what is not open in open source software. New Media Soc. 14(4), 669–683 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. P.V. Norden, On the anatomy of development projects. IRE Trans. Eng. Manag. 7(1), 34–42 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. P. Oliver, G. Marwell, R. Teixeira, A theory of the critical mass. I. Interdependence, group heterogeneity, and the production of collective action. Am. J. Soc. 91(3), 522−556 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  43. E.S. Raymond, The Cathedral and the Bazaar (O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  44. J. Reagle, “Free as in sexist?” Free culture and the gender gap. First Monday 18(1) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  45. E.M. Rogers, New Product Adoption and Diffusion. J. Consum. Res. 2(4), 290–301 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. M. Schaarschmidt, K.J. Stol, Company soldiers and gone-natives: role conflict and career ambition among firm-employed open source developers, in Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Information Systems (San Francisco, USA)

    Google Scholar 

  47. M. Schaarschmidt, G. Walsh, H.F.O. von Kortzfleisch, How do firms influence open source software communities? A framework and empirical analysis of different governance modes. Inf. Organ. 25, 99–114 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. M. Shaikh, T. Cornford, ‘Letting go of control’ to embrace open source: implications for company and community, in Proceedings of IEEE Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  49. K.J. Stewart, S. Gosain, The impact of ideology on effectiveness in open source software development teams. MIS Q. 30(2), 291−314 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  50. G.P. Swann, The economics of standardization (University of Manchester, Manchester, 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  51. D.J. Teece, G. Pisano, A. Shuen, Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 509−533 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. F. Van der Linden, B. Lundell, P. Marttiin, Commodification of industrial software: a case for open source. IEEE Softw. 26(4), 77−83 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  53. E. von Hippel, G. von Krogh, Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: issues for organization science. Organ. Sci. 14(2), 209−223 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  54. G. Von Krogh, S. Spaeth, K.R. Lakhani, Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Res. Policy 32(7), 1217–1241 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  55. M. Zhou, A. Mockus, X. Ma, L. Zhang, M. Hong, Inflow and retention in oss communities with commercial involvement: a case study of three hybrid projects. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 25(2), 13 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported, in part, by Science Foundation Ireland grant 15/SIRG/3293 and 13/RC/2094 and co-funded under the European Regional Development Fund through the Southern and Eastern Regional Operational Programme to Lero—the Irish Software Research Centre (www.lero.ie).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LEGO-M@rsouin, IMT Atlantique, Brest, France

    Nicolas Jullien

  2. Lero—the Irish Software Research Centre, School of Computer Science and Information Technology, University College Cork, Cork, Republic of Ireland

    Klaas-Jan Stol

  3. Institute for Software Research, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    James D. Herbsleb

Authors
  1. Nicolas Jullien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Klaas-Jan Stol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James D. Herbsleb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Jullien .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    Brian Fitzgerald

  2. University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Knoxville, USA

    Audris Mockus

  3. Peking University, Beijing, China

    Minghui Zhou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Jullien, N., Stol, KJ., Herbsleb, J.D. (2019). A Preliminary Theory for Open-Source Ecosystem Microeconomics. In: Fitzgerald, B., Mockus, A., Zhou, M. (eds) Towards Engineering Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) Ecosystems for Impact and Sustainability. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7099-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7099-1_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-7098-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-7099-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation