How French food delivery platforms are overturning global platform capitalism

Foodthink says

However, beyond mere criticism, can we imagine an alternative platform model? What would such a model look like? Who would truly own the platform? How would algorithms be formulated and managed? Would riders still be under the surveillance of an algorithm? Would they have a minimum wage? Could they enjoy paid leave?

On 24 November, four Chinese government departments launched a joint special action titled “Clear and Bright: Governance of Typical Problems in Network Platform Algorithms”. This initiative aims to address key issues such as the infringement of rights for workers in new forms of employment caused by the blind pursuit of profit, the use of algorithms for “big data price discrimination”, and the lack of ethical algorithm services that infringe upon the legitimate rights of users.

By introducing CoopCycle, a French delivery platform rooted in anti-platform capitalism, Foodthink hopes to inspire everyone to imagine a more hopeful vision of our information society.

This article was first published in the international critical communication journal tripleC under the title “The Transformative Potential of Platform Cooperativism: The Case of CoopCycle”. Foodthink has been authorised by the author to translate this text; the following is a condensed version.

I. Platform Capitalism vs Platform Cooperativism

Platform cooperativism, in particular, adopts an operational logic that is the opposite of platform capitalism. It combines the principles of traditional cooperatives with algorithmic management, implementing collective ownership of the means of production and operating democratically on the principle of “one person, one vote”.

II.“You only make money if you ride your bike”

The founding team consisted of activists dedicated to opposing the economic and organisational models of food-tech platforms like Deliveroo. These profit-driven platforms utilise venture capital and algorithmic management to maximise shareholder interests through operations such as the monetisation of data and the shifting of unemployment risks onto the workers. CoopCycle was born in 2017 as a response to a situation where mainstream delivery platforms, such as Take Eat Easy and Deliveroo, were either collapsing or abruptly exiting local markets.

The original idea for CoopCycle came from a programmer who cloned the proprietary software of food-tech platforms and repurposed the technology to create a digital commons specifically for cooperatives. This was intended to solve the problem of the high costs associated with building a delivery application from scratch.

Based on the collective ownership of the means of production, democratic decision-making, and the sharing of value among workers, the CoopCycle software was designed as an anti-capitalist model. Workers within the cooperative alliance are paid hourly and enjoy the benefits of secure employment, including a minimum wage, unemployment benefits, paid leave, sick pay, pensions, and health insurance. As they put it: “Money should not breed money; all benefits should flow to the workers. You only make money if you ride your bike.”

III. Prioritising Dialogue with the Riders

CoopCycle provides management training services to help new cooperative members in various countries familiarise themselves with the software’s functions and day-to-day operations. Software manuals and business plans help riders overcome the obstacles and conflicts that can arise from collective ownership. As one interviewee put it: “The software is our flagship, and we invite cooperatives to use it. But beyond that, we provide management training to help them develop business models and find new restaurants and customers; it is a complete service package.”

Unlike the parasitic nature of platform capitalism, these cooperatives respect and support local economic and cultural customs. They employ a horizontal organisational model that affords riders care and dignity, leading to friendlier treatment from customers. Compared to platforms like Deliveroo, riders can refuse tasks without it affecting their income or contract status.

CoopCycle software employs neither dynamic pricing nor gamification or habit-forming design. Geographic tracking is not used for worker surveillance or algorithmic management. CoopCycle also eschews rating systems; cooperatives prefer to follow internal qualitative processes to evaluate rider performance. As one manager explained: “We prefer to have more discussions with the riders. What do you consider a ‘good’ job? What are you good at? Why do you think you perform so well in those areas? Where are you struggling? And how can we improve that?”

Furthermore, many cooperative members are staunch opponents of using e-bikes or motorbikes. CoopCycle chooses the bicycle as its primary mode of transport, advocating for a more ecological approach to reduce carbon emissions. However, CoopCycle’s anti-capitalist mission occasionally seems to clash with its partnerships with profit-driven enterprises such as supermarkets, retailers, and restaurants. Some companies frequently use bicycle delivery services for “greenwashing”. Nevertheless, the law compels these businesses to adhere to sustainability guidelines, such as reducing carbon emissions, traffic congestion, and noise pollution. Meanwhile, CoopCycle members seek partnerships with companies that share their values of fairness and sustainability, including eco-friendly firms, zero-waste restaurants, family-run social enterprises, associations, hospitals, and schools, thereby forming a local economic alliance.

CoopCycle’s future vision is to further develop its software and specialise in political lobbying to expand the cooperative economy in France and other regions. They do not believe the hegemony of food-tech giants can be overturned overnight. Instead, they envision occupying a long-term, sustainable socio-economic ecological niche, thereby posing a genuine threat to platform capitalism.

IV. Decentralised Governance Model

By operating as an alliance, CoopCycle balances centralisation and decentralisation. Centralisation drives the development of large-scale software (the backend), IT support, management and skills training, collective bargaining, major commercial contracts, API connectivity, and political lobbying. Decentralisation, meanwhile, encompasses the self-organisation of each member cooperative, software customisation, and the power to independently determine marketing and pricing strategies.

Unlike Deliveroo, UberEats, and Wolt, which centralise control over user data, the decentralised logic of CoopCycle software means there is no central entity; instead, local cooperatives run and manage the application on their own servers or infrastructure. Consequently, there is no algorithmic monitoring or control over how local cooperatives organise work, nor is there surveillance of the riders themselves.

Furthermore, this means that the data generated by platform operations is hosted on the local cooperative’s servers; the local cooperatives and riders jointly own both the platform they use to organise their work and the data produced in the process. This decentralised digital infrastructure is transparent and visible to its users.

Democratic decision-making rules include both centralised and distributed governance. The cooperative principle of “one person, one vote” applies to the alliance’s annual general meeting (where every cooperative has one vote, regardless of size or turnover) as well as to the monthly meetings of each member cooperative. At the alliance’s annual meeting, cooperative members discuss major decisions and plans regarding software development and institutional matters (such as organisational structure and finances). At each cooperative’s monthly meeting, members discuss task allocation, shift schedules, business models, fund allocation, points of conflict, and paid versus unpaid work.

However, CoopCycle’s expansion into other countries has already impacted the process of democratisation. As one interviewee put it: “We’ve become too big to be fully democratic. Too many cities, too many projects, and not enough time left for people.” To address this, the federation added an extra administrative layer—a board elected by the General Assembly to represent member cooperatives. Board members manage daily workflows at the federation level.

V. Striving for Survival Amidst Competition

Half of CoopCycle’s income comes from annual contributions paid by member cooperatives to the federation, approximately 2–2.5% of the added value created by each cooperative, and no less than €500 per year (roughly 3,802 RMB). This amount was decided and voted upon by the federation following discussions of various proposals at the General Assembly. The lower contribution rate reflects the federation’s political goal of helping cooperatives first become operational.

Fierce competition, low prices, and tightening margins are hallmarks of the food delivery industry; yet, during the pandemic, CoopCycle achieved 100,000 deliveries and a turnover of €3.5 million (approximately 26.6144 million RMB). Some restaurants prefer partnering with CoopCycle because its fees are lower (around 20%) compared to the 30% rate typical of platform capitalism. These lower fees reduce costs for both restaurants and customers, thereby laying the groundwork for a democratised pricing mechanism.

They also face unfair competition: profit-driven platforms, capable of reducing costs through gig work and accessing funding channels, can charge extremely low prices and hire more workers to seize larger market shares and stifle competition (a winner-takes-all strategy). In contrast, platform cooperatives bear many additional costs, as they pay taxes and worker benefits, such as social security, insurance, and paid sick leave and holidays. Furthermore, under inflationary pressure, people are facing a cost-of-living crisis, and demand for food delivery is slowing down.

To adapt to these conditions, CoopCycle has expanded into last-mile rapid delivery services, with many cities outsourcing such work to cooperatives for environmental reasons. This allows CoopCycle to leverage its decentralised network of local businesses to attract new customers and cooperative members.

VI. Coopyleft: True Open Sharing

Although formally registered as a French association, CoopCycle is effectively a federation whose members are cooperatives and collectives scattered across the globe. Upon registration, each member signs an informal agreement detailing the terms and conditions of membership. Membership is granted to cooperatives that formally employ their workers, rather than classifying them as independent contractors as is done in platform capitalism. Members have access to CoopCycle’s full suite of services, including software, management training, and skills training.

To use CoopCycle’s software code, a “Coopyleft” licence is required—a restricted version of copyleft (a more open and shared copyright agreement than traditional copyright), which limits the commercial use of the software to service cooperatives and other qualifying economies. The federation acts as the gatekeeper for the licence, allowing member cooperatives to reduce costs by pooling technical and managerial resources, knowledge, and services, such as platform software, mobile applications, educational materials, marketing, and legal support.

CoopCycle’s federated structure has both advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, it establishes collective bargaining power and expands the reach of platform cooperativism, thereby ensuring the federation’s social and economic sustainability. On the other hand, it can sometimes impose restrictions on potential members who are unable to adhere to the federation’s principles or adapt flexibly. Recently, the federation reached a compromise between the bicycle-centric cooperatives in Europe and the motorbike-centric ones in South America.

In summary, whether in terms of its value proposition, governance model, economic policies, or technical and legal frameworks, CoopCycle demonstrates a platform cooperative model with transformative potential. Unlike traditional cooperatives, which often struggle to scale, CoopCycle has successfully expanded internationally as a federation through political lobbying, international legal toolkits, and global coordination. The launch of cooperatives in Latin America in 2021, and the connections forged during this process with NGOs, trade unions, financial institutions, local governments, and other socio-economic actors, mark a significant milestone on the roadmap toward building a global anti-capitalist bloc and countering hegemony.

In the future, CoopCycle could potentially evolve into a cooperative incubator, expanding from the food delivery sector into cross-sector supply chains to form a broader platform cooperative ecosystem. Interestingly, we are witnessing CoopCycle gradually move in this direction by exploring partnerships with like-minded organisations in France.

About the Authors  

Vangelis Papadimitropoulos | Post-doctoral researcher at Pedeion University, Athens, who has written extensively on democratic political theory, political economy, platform cooperativism, and the commons.

Haris Malamdis | Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Athens, whose research interests focus on social movements, the commons, and the social and solidarity economy.

Translated by: Yuyang

Edited by: Tianle