Convenience at What Cost? The Hidden Price of Quick Commerce

Quick commerce is a rapidly growing force in the modern world. A few taps on a phone, and groceries arrive at your doorstep in minutes. For many urban consumers, this feels like a small miracle of modern technology. An accelerated form of e-commerce focused on near-instant delivery, quick commerce has quietly reshaped daily routines in many cities around the world. It promises efficiency, convenience, and the luxury of reclaiming time.

We are living in a moment of unprecedented access to and demand for conveniences of all kinds. Convenience, it seems, has become so infrastructural to contemporary life that we barely pause to notice it. In many places the expectation of immediacy now shapes how meals are planned, time management, and even response to minor discomforts like running out of stuff. Consumption becomes less deliberate and more impulsive when the cost of waiting is almost entirely removed.

Yet beneath this frictionless experience lies a more uncomfortable reality. The speed we celebrate is not neutral. It is enabled by digital systems, labour practices, and economic inequalities that deserve closer scrutiny. Just as importantly, it subtly conditions consumers to value speed and ease over sustainability and ethical concern. This article argues that quick commerce, while technologically impressive, exposes deeper tensions between digital innovation, consumer behaviour, social justice, and sustainability, especially in emerging economies like India.

Quick Commerce and the Normalisation of Speed

Ordering groceries through an app has become routine in many cities. What once required a trip to a local shop can now be completed while sitting on your couch. For many, this convenience is deeply appealing. Time saved on errands can be reinvested in work, family, or rest.

Yet this efficiency also changes the social texture of everyday life. In places where open markets remain central, buying food is rarely a solitary or silent task. It involves brief conversations, familiar faces, bargaining, and small rituals of exchange. These interactions, however fleeting, anchor shopping in a web of human contact. By contrast, supermarkets already reduce this to a quick transaction with a cashier, and app-based delivery removes even that. Each step toward convenience strips away another layer of social engagement, raising the question of what is lost when ease replaces encounter.

However, convenience is not the same as necessity. Eliminating the time spent shopping is different from demanding that everyday goods arrive within ten minutes. The latter reflects a cultural shift: speed has become an expectation rather than a bonus. Digital platforms are not merely responding to consumer needs, they are actively shaping them ¹.

Quick commerce apps reinforce this expectation by framing ultra-fast delivery as normal, desirable, and harmless. Over time, users become accustomed to immediacy, rarely questioning the conditions required to sustain it.

Indian Context: Growth and Its Contradictions

India, now the world’s fourth-largest economy ², offers a revealing case study. The country has become a major hub for quick commerce, with leading platforms promising delivery within ten minutes. Failure to meet this target may negatively affect a delivery worker’s performance rating, regardless of circumstances such as traffic, weather, or order size.

Crucially, there is often no limit on the number of items a customer can order within that ten-minute window. A single order may include many products, yet the time pressure remains unchanged. The consequences of delay are not borne by the platform or the consumer, but by the delivery partner. Algorithmic rankings determine future work or order  opportunities, embedding constant pressure into the job ³.

A study by NITI Aayog ⁴ on platform-based work highlights the high income volatility faced by gig workers. While earnings may appear stable during periods of high demand, actual take-home income fluctuates once fuel costs, vehicle rentals, unpaid waiting time, and constantly shifting incentive structures are taken into account.

The report also cautions that without guaranteed wages or predictable working hours, gig work remains especially vulnerable to economic shocks, placing the burden of instability squarely on workers rather than platforms.

Research cited by labour and transport experts indicates that delivery riders face an elevated risk of road accidents, partly due to time-based incentives and compressed delivery deadlines ⁵.

That said, workers’ unions have raised serious concerns, organising nationwide strikes and protests demanding the withdrawal of the ten-minute delivery model and improved working conditions ⁶. While these acts of resistance have generated visible support on social media, they have not translated into reduced usage of quick-commerce platforms. On the contrary, demand often remains steady or even spikes during peak moments such as New Year’s Eve ⁷.

This disconnect points to a broader apathy toward the labour that enables consumer convenience. Ten-minute grocery delivery is not a necessity. Yet when offered the choice to stay home and receive almost anything on demand, most people opt in, provided they can afford it. The question, then, is not whether such services are essential, but how platforms deliberately limit consumer awareness, allowing convenience to be consumed without reflection on the labour and risk it demands.

In many ways, the answer is already clear. Convenience, more often than not, is chosen over empathy.

The promise of ten-minute delivery reshapes how consumers engage with buying itself. By design, quick-commerce apps reduce waiting, deliberation, and awareness, turning purchasing into a near-automatic action. As speed becomes the default expectation, the labour conditions, safety risks, and environmental costs that sustain it are pushed out of view. As a result, these platforms make it easy to enjoy convenience without having to confront what it depends on.

This dynamic reflects a broader economic paradox. India’s rapid technological growth and appeal to investors coexist with persistently low labour costs, especially in blue-collar and gig work ⁸. Similar tensions between platform growth, investor appeal, and worker precarity have been documented in other gig economies, from food delivery in Europe to ride-hailing in North America.

Delivery partners, who sustain the promise of instant convenience, remain among the most underpaid. While legislation has acknowledged the need for social protection for gig workers, its implementation remains uneven and difficult to enforce ⁹.

Mounting worker protests have also drawn the attention of the state. The Indian government asked quick-commerce platforms to drop the “ten-minute delivery” promise amid concerns over rider safety, following talks with the labour ministry and company officials after a nationwide strike. While this signals official acknowledgment of the risks embedded in ultra-fast delivery models, it stops short of regulating the incentive structures and algorithmic pressures that continue to drive unsafe conditions on the ground ¹⁰.

The Invisible Worker Behind the App

From the consumer’s perspective, the app interface is clean and efficient. The human labour behind it is largely invisible. Delivery partners operate under tight deadlines, minimal job security, and limited bargaining power. Speed becomes a metric of worth, enforced not by a manager but by an algorithm. Similar patterns are visible across many countries where labour is cheap and jobs are scarce. Delivery workers, frequently immigrants, work under highly precarious conditions, with platforms routinely bypassing labour protections through subcontracting and nominal self-employment arrangements.

This creates a subtle form of apathy. Consumers may not actively endorse exploitation, but the system or the app allows them to benefit from it without confrontation. Ordering a single item, something easily bought at a nearby shop, feels harmless. Repeating this behaviour multiple times a day feels normal.

Yet these micro-decisions accumulate. They help normalise work arrangements where speed matters more than dignity, and flexibility comes at the cost of security. What looks like convenience from above is experienced as precarity below, reinforcing class divides in which the benefits flow upward while the costs are borne by those with the least power.

In reality, these convenience platforms do more than save time. They quietly reshape how we see or fail to see the world around us.

Convenience consistently emerges as the strongest driver of consumer preference in quick commerce. The ability to place orders anytime, from anywhere, with just a few taps makes these platforms hard to resist.. While it may not always be the primary reason users download or choose a platform, the promise of near-instant fulfilment aligns closely with fast-paced urban lifestyles ¹¹. 

Over time, this expectation of speed increases satisfaction and normalises repeat use. What ultimately sustains these platforms is repetition. Positive early experiences lead to frequent reordering, gradually turning convenience into habit. As usage becomes routine, consumption requires less thought, reinforcing dependence on the platform and deepening long-term engagement ¹².

The platforms built on speed and ease deliberately push labour, risk, and environmental cost out of sight. The interfaces we interact with are clean and frictionless; the work that sustains them is anything but. By design, these systems outsource social and reproductive labour to precarious workers, while shielding consumers from the physical strain, time pressure, and insecurity that make ten-minute delivery possible ¹³.

This invisibility matters. When harm is hidden from view, it slowly slips from moral consideration. Convenience becomes normal, even expected, while the conditions enabling it fade into the background. Over time, consumers are not choosing exploitation; they are just moving through systems that never ask them to look twice. Attention stays on the delivery, while the labour that enables it fades into the background ¹⁴.

In parallel, these systems also reorganize consumer experience itself, shifting planning, choice, and time management away from individuals and into automated processes. As a result, everyday consumption becomes more efficient but also more detached, less embedded in social interaction or deliberate decision-making.

In this sense, quick commerce does more than speed up shopping. It slowly changes what we pay attention to, making speed feel normal and the human cost easier to ignore.

Environmental Costs of Instant Gratification

The social costs of quick commerce are matched by environmental ones. Ultra-fast delivery relies on dense logistics networks, frequent trips, and excessive packaging. Multiple short-distance deliveries generate emissions that far exceed those of a single, consolidated shopping trip ¹⁵. This happens because orders are often split across different stores, wrapped in multiple layers of packaging, delivered by separate partners, and sometimes shipped again for returns or replacements, resulting in repeated vehicle trips and higher fuel consumption.

The apps does not show the carbon footprint of a ten-minute delivery, nor the waste generated by packaging small orders. As with labour, environmental harm is externalised, pushed out of sight and out of mind ^{16 17}.

For societies already grappling with climate stress, this model raises difficult questions about sustainability and responsibility.

Slowing Down to Move Forward

While technology can make everyday life easier, and often does, problems arise when speed is treated as an unquestioned good rather than a choice with consequences. In such cases the push for ever-faster service primarily serves the profit motives of the providers themselves, rather than broader social interests.

Ten-minute delivery may save time, but it depends on labour conditions and environmental trade-offs that consumers rarely see. These costs are not accidental. They are built into platforms that prioritise efficiency while keeping its impacts out of view.

Design choices such as delivery guarantees, ratings, and algorithmic incentives shape who carries the pressure and who is protected from it. Consumers are not fully detached from this system. Each decision to prioritise speed over reflection helps normalise a model of convenience that values immediacy over responsibility.

Slowing down does not mean rejecting technology. It means recognising that convenience is never free, and asking what kind of systems we are willing to support in exchange for it.

References

1. Singh, R. (2024, August). The Impact of Quick Commerce on Consumer Behavior and Economic Trends in India: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 09(08), 2859-2874. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383726478_The_Impact_of_Quick_Commerce_on_Consumer_Behavior_and_Economic_Trends_in_India_A_Systematic_Review
2. The Hindu. (2025, December 30). India is now fourth largest economy, says govt. The Hindu. Retrieved January 4, 2026, from https://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/india-is-now-fourth-largest-economy-says-govt/article70454619.ece
3. Kumar, O., & Narayanan, K. (2025, September). The Algorithmic-Human Manager: AI, Apps and Workers in the Indian Gig Economy. https://cerai.iitm.ac.in/docs/Gig-Economy-Report-Final.pdf 
4. NITI Aayog. (2022). India’s Booming Gig and Platform Economy Perspectives and Recommendations on the Future of Work. https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2023-06/Policy_Brief_India%27s_Booming_Gig_and_Platform_Economy_27062022.pdf 
   
5. ILO. (2024). Expansion of the gig and platform economy in India: Opportunities for Employer and Business Member Organizations. https://www.ilo.org/publications/expansion-gig-and-platform-economy-india-opportunities-employer-and 
6. Outlook. (2025, December 31). Consumers, Riders Say ‘Ban 10-Minute Delivery’ As Gig Workers Go On nationwide strike by delivery riders India. Outlook India. Retrieved January 4, 2026, from https://www.outlookindia.com/national/consumers-riders-say-ban-10-minute-delivery-as-gig-workers-go-on-strike
7. Business Standard. (2025, December 31). Consumers drive quick commerce, food delivery sales on New Year’s Eve. Business Standard. Retrieved January 4, 2026, from https://www.business-standard.com/economy/news/new-years-eve-quick-commerce-sales-spike-grapes-swiggy-instamart-zepto-125123101088_1.html
8. Tan, T. T., Kiet, L. H., Binh, N. T., Co, N. D., & Hiep, T. X. (2024, September). Main Factors Helping India Become the “Wind Eagle” to Attract FDI Amid the Trend of Production Shift from China. Richtmann Publishing, 13(5). https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/ajis/article/view/14009
9. Chattopadhyay, S. (n.d.). THE GIG ECONOMY IN INDIA: LEGISLATIVE APPROACHES FOR URGENT SOCIAL SECURITY REFORMS. Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, IV(VI). https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/THE-GIG-ECONOMY-IN-INDIA-LEGISLATIVE-APPROACHES-FOR-URGENT-SOCIAL-SECURITY-REFORMS.pdf
10. BBC. (2026, January 14). BlinkIt, Swiggy: India pushes companies to remove 10-min delivery deadlines. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8pkvl78pmo 
11. Andhare, D. R., Gala, D., & Padhye, A. (2025). 10 Minute Temptation: Exploring Quick Commerce’s Influence on Consumer Decision Making. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 5(2).  https://jier.org/index.php/journal/article/view/2676/2185
12. Andhare, D. R., Gala, D., & Padhye, A. (2025). 10 Minute Temptation: Exploring Quick Commerce’s Influence on Consumer Decision Making. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 5(2).  https://jier.org/index.php/journal/article/view/2676/2185
13. Steinberg, M. (2024). In/Convenience: Inhabiting the Logistical Surround (J. Neves, Ed.). INSTITUTE OF NETWORK CULTURES, (54). https://networkcultures.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/In-Convenience_INC2024_TOD54.pdf
14. Doctorow, C. (2025). Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
15. Mathews, S. B., & Gowda, A. B. (2025). A Sustainable Operations Framework for Quick-Commerce Sector focused on Last Mile Delivery Cost. https://www.sdmimd.ac.in/conferenceproceedings/iec2025papers/IEC2562.pdf
16. Du, Y. (2023). Harm of Delivery Packaging on Environment and Improvements. Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology, 69. https://drpress.org/ojs/index.php/HSET/article/view/12129/11813
17. Joshi, T. (2025). Convenience at All Costs: Can India’s Delivery Apps Go Green? https://esgfoundation.org/convenience-at-all-costs-can-indias-delivery-apps-go-green