In recent years, jurisdictions have struggled to address the emergence of “sharing” businesses, such as Uber. These businesses have used technology to avoid the regulations that usually apply to industries, such as taxis. By applying a historical institutionalist analysis, this article explains how authorities have responded to these companies. Through a detailed case study of Uber's presence in Baltimore, Maryland, in the United States, the article makes an empirical contribution by illustrating how regulatory regimes have responded to “disruptive” technology. Furthermore, by applying an exogenously induced and endogenously mitigated model of change the article addresses the bifurcation in historical institutionalist literature between exogenous and endogenous accounts of change. This helps develop historical institutionalism theoretically, responds to criticisms of agent-based approaches and advances a model that can be applied to the study of technological change more generally.

中文翻译：

---

历史制度主义和技术变革：优步的案例

近年来，司法管辖区一直在努力应对优步等“共享”业务的出现。这些企业使用技术来规避通常适用于出租车等行业的法规。通过应用历史制度主义分析，本文解释了当局如何应对这些公司。通过对优步在美国马里兰州巴尔的摩的详细案例研究，本文通过说明监管制度如何应对“颠覆性”技术做出了实证贡献。此外，通过应用外生诱导和内生缓解的变革模型，本文解决了历史制度主义文献中外生和内生变革说明之间的分歧。这有助于在理论上发展历史制度主义，