How a French Food Delivery Platform is Upending Global Platform Capitalism?

Foodthink says

Beyond mere criticism, however, can we envision an alternative platform model? What would such a platform look like? Who would truly own it? How would its algorithms be designed and governed? Would riders still be subject to algorithmic surveillance? Would they be guaranteed a minimum wage? Would they be entitled to paid leave?

On 24 November, four government departments in China jointly launched the “Clear and Bright” special campaign to address typical algorithmic issues on online platforms. The initiative targets key problems such as the blind pursuit of profit at the expense of workers’ rights in new forms of employment, algorithmic price discrimination against loyal customers, and a lack of ethical algorithmic design that infringes upon consumers’ legitimate rights.

Foodthink hopes that by introducing CoopCycle—a French delivery platform operating on anti-platform-capitalist principles—we can inspire readers to envision a more equitable information society.

This article was originally published in tripleC, an international journal of critical communication, under the title “The Transformative Potential of Platform Cooperativism: A Case Study of CoopCycle”. Foodthink has secured the author’s permission for translation. The following is an abridged version.

I. Platform Capitalism vs Platform Cooperativism

Platform cooperativism, in particular, operates on a logic diametrically opposed to that of platform capitalism. It merges the principles of traditional cooperatives with algorithmic management, establishes collective ownership of the means of production, and functions democratically on a ‘one member, one vote’ basis.

II.“You Only Make Money on a Bicycle”

The founding team comprises a group of activists dedicated to opposing the economic and organisational models of food-tech platforms such as Deliveroo. These profit-driven platforms leverage venture capital and algorithmic management to maximise shareholder returns through practices such as data monetisation and shifting unemployment risks onto workers. In 2017, as mainstream delivery platforms like Take Eat Easy and Deliveroo either collapsed or abruptly exited local markets, CoopCycle was founded in direct response to these developments.

The initial concept for building CoopCycle came from a programmer who cloned the proprietary software of existing food-tech platforms. By repurposing this technology, he created a digital commons specifically designed for cooperative deployment, aiming to circumvent the high costs typically associated with developing a delivery application from scratch.

The CoopCycle software is deliberately designed around an anti-capitalist framework, founded on the collective ownership of the means of production, democratic decision-making, and the equitable sharing of value among workers. Workers within the cooperative network are paid by the hour and benefit from secure employment conditions, including a minimum wage, unemployment benefits, paid leave, sick pay, pensions, and health insurance. As they put it: “Money should not breed money; all profits should flow to the workers. You only earn by pedalling.”

III. We Prefer Dialogue with Riders

CoopCycle provides management training to help new cooperative members across different countries familiarise themselves with the software’s features and day-to-day operations. Software manuals and business plans assist riders in navigating the challenges and conflicts that can arise from collective ownership. As one interviewee noted: “The software is our flagship product; we invite cooperatives to use it. But we also provide management training to help them develop business models, secure new restaurants and customers. It’s a complete service package.”

Cooperatives respect and support local economic and cultural practices, standing in contrast to the parasitic nature of platform capitalism. By adopting a horizontal organisational model, they afford riders care and dignity, which fosters warmer interactions with customers. Unlike platforms such as Deliveroo, riders can decline tasks without it affecting their earnings or contract status.

The CoopCycle software neither implements dynamic pricing nor employs gamification or habit-forming design. Geolocation tracking is not used for worker surveillance or algorithmic management. CoopCycle also avoids rating systems, with cooperatives preferring internal, qualitative processes to evaluate rider performance. As one manager put it: “We prefer to have more open discussions with the riders. What do you consider good work? What are your strengths? Why do you think you excel at them? Where do you struggle? How might we improve on that?”

Furthermore, many cooperative members are staunch opponents of electric bikes or motorbikes. By opting for bicycles, CoopCycle advocates a more ecologically sound approach to reducing carbon emissions. Yet, this anti-capitalist mission seems at odds with partnering with profit-driven enterprises such as supermarkets, retailers, and restaurants. Indeed, some companies routinely exploit bicycle delivery services for ‘greenwashing’. Nevertheless, legislation increasingly compels them to adhere to sustainability criteria, including the reduction of carbon emissions alongside traffic and noise pollution. In the meantime, CoopCycle members actively seek partnerships with businesses that share their commitment to fairness and sustainability. These range from eco-conscious enterprises and zero-waste restaurants to family-run social enterprises, community associations, hospitals, and schools, collectively forging a coalition for the local economy.

CoopCycle’s future vision is to further develop its software and focus on political lobbying to foster the cooperative economy across France and beyond. They are under no illusion that the hegemony of food-tech giants can be overturned overnight. Instead, they envision carving out a long-term, sustainable socio-economic niche that would ultimately challenge the foundations of platform capitalism.

IV. Decentralised Governance Model

Through its federation model, CoopCycle strikes a balance between centralisation and decentralisation. Centralisation drives the development of enterprise-grade software (the backend), IT support, management and skills training, collective bargaining, large-scale commercial contracts, API integrations, and political lobbying. Decentralisation, conversely, empowers each member cooperative to self-organise, customise the software, and independently determine its own marketing and pricing strategies.

Unlike Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Wolt, which maintain centralised control over user data, CoopCycle’s decentralised software architecture means there is no central entity. Instead, local cooperatives host and manage the application on their own servers or infrastructure. Consequently, there is no algorithmic surveillance dictating how local cooperatives organise work, nor is there monitoring of the riders themselves.

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

Democratic decision-making encompasses both centralised and decentralised governance. The cooperative principle of ‘one member, one vote’ applies to the federation’s annual general assembly (where each cooperative holds a single vote regardless of its size or turnover) as well as to the monthly meetings of each member cooperative. At the annual federation assembly, cooperative members debate major decisions and plans concerning software development and institutional matters, such as organisational structure and finance. During each cooperative’s monthly meetings, members discuss task allocation, shift scheduling, business models, resource distribution, points of conflict, and the balance between paid and unpaid work.

However, CoopCycle’s expansion into other countries has affected its democratisation process. As one interviewee noted: “We’ve grown too large to be fully democratic. Too many cities, too many projects, and not enough time left for people.” To address this, the alliance introduced an additional administrative tier: a board representing member cooperatives, elected by the general assembly. Board members manage the day-to-day operational workflows at the alliance level.

V. Seeking Survival in Competition

Half of CoopCycle’s revenue comes from annual contributions paid by member cooperatives to the alliance, representing roughly 2–2.5% of each cooperative’s value added, with a minimum of €500 per year (approximately ¥3,802). After debating various proposals at the annual general meeting, the alliance settled on the figure and put it to a vote. The modest contribution rate reflects the alliance’s political aim: to ensure cooperatives can establish themselves first.

Fierce competition, rock-bottom prices, and squeezed margins are hallmarks of the food delivery sector. Yet during the pandemic, CoopCycle completed 100,000 deliveries and generated €3.5 million in turnover (approximately ¥26.61 million). Some restaurants prefer to work with CoopCycle because, unlike the 30% commission typical of platform capitalism, CoopCycle’s rate is lower (around 20%). These reduced fees lower costs for both restaurants and customers, laying the groundwork for a democratised pricing model.

They also face unfair competition: profit-driven platforms can keep charges extremely low by relying on gig labour to cut costs and tapping into investment capital. This enables them to hire more riders, capture greater market share, and completely crush rivals—a winner-takes-all strategy. By contrast, platform cooperatives bear substantially higher overheads, as they are required to pay taxes and fund worker benefits such as social security, insurance, and paid sick leave and annual leave. Moreover, amid inflationary pressures and a cost-of-living crisis, demand for food delivery is also slowing.

In response, CoopCycle has expanded into last-mile rapid delivery, a service increasingly outsourced to cooperatives by cities seeking to reduce their environmental footprint. CoopCycle can leverage the decentralised network of local businesses to attract new customers and cooperative members.

VI. Coopyleft – True Open Sharing

Although formally registered as an association in France, CoopCycle operates in practice as an alliance of cooperatives and collective enterprises scattered across the globe. Upon registration, each member signs an informal agreement that outlines the terms and conditions of membership. Membership is reserved for cooperatives that formally employ their workers, rather than classifying them as independent contractors, as is common under platform capitalism. Members gain access to CoopCycle’s full suite of services, including software, management training, and skills development.

To use the CoopCycle software code, one must obtain a Coopyleft licence – a restrictive variant of copyleft, a copyright alternative designed to be more open and communal. This licence restricts the commercial use of the software to cooperatives and other qualifying economic entities. The alliance acts as a gatekeeper for the licence, enabling member cooperatives to reduce costs by pooling technological and managerial resources, knowledge, and services such as platform software, mobile apps, training materials, marketing, and legal support.

The alliance structure of CoopCycle has both advantages and drawbacks. On the one hand, it builds collective bargaining power and expands the reach of the platform cooperativism model, thereby securing the social and economic sustainability of the alliance. On the other hand, it can sometimes exclude potential members who are unable to adhere to the alliance’s principles or adapt flexibly to them. Recently, the alliance had to broker compromises between European cooperatives that primarily use bicycles and their South American counterparts that rely on motorbikes.

In sum, across its value proposition, governance model, economic policies, and 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 an alliance, leveraging political lobbying, an international legal toolkit, and global coordination. The establishment of Latin American cooperatives in 2021, alongside the connections forged during this process with non-governmental organisations, trade unions, financial institutions, local authorities, and other socio-economic actors, marks a significant milestone in charting a global anti-capitalist, anti-hegemonic roadmap.

Looking ahead, CoopCycle could evolve into a cooperative incubator, expanding beyond the food delivery sector into cross-sector supply chains to foster a broader platform cooperative ecosystem. Interestingly, we are already witnessing CoopCycle gradually moving in this direction by exploring partnerships with like-minded organisations in France.

About the Authors  

Vangelis Papadimitropoulos | Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Patras, Athens, with extensive publications on democratic political theory, political economy, platform cooperativism, and the commons.

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

Translated by: Yuyang

Edited by: Tianle