Latest News
HomeColumnsArticlesThe double face of the sharing economy*

The double face of the sharing economy*

The Uberisation of human life.

The scale and scope of the sharing economy has increased so much affecting every aspect of our life: how we move (Uber, Ofo, Lyft), what and where we eat (Deliveroo, UberEats, Eatwith), how we holiday, what and with whom we do in our leisure time (Airbnb, ToursByLocals, travel2change, Meetup), where and how we work (Airtasker, Amazon Mechanical Turk), how we make friends and love (https://rentafriend.com, https://www.rentalocalfriend.com); whether we can live or share a luxury experience or even life. 

The sharing economy is seen as a solution to the hyper-consumption society supporting sharing instead of ownership and the consumption of authentic, human experiences. But is this true? Evidence coming from both providers and consumers may support that the promise of the sharing economy is an utopia or that is has become a dystopia.

The sought of a commercialization of authenticity and the authentification of professionalism
The sharing economy has fired serious debates about the real drivers and the ‘human’ facade of the motivating factors of its participants as well as its the dubious socio-economic impacts: people share without caring; sharing economy is business as usual, a new rental business model, a repackaging of the old barter or gifting economy; converted from a pathway to a sustainable and altruist way of life to a nightmarish form of a neoliberal capitalism or a crowd-based capitalism.
 
The reality of the sharing economy is shaped by and shapes both the providers and the consumers of shared services.

From a demand perspective, research demonstrates that people perceive, select and evaluate shared experiences in a similar way as they do when selecting select and evaluating a commercial offer. Shared and commercialized offers are considered as two equally substitutable offers judged and selected by similar criteria. For example, the top criteria for selecting Airbnb accommodation or Uber drivers are similar to the ones when selecting/evaluating commercial accommodation and transportation services (e.g. price, location, service quality, reputation, friendliness of hosts, comfort & equipment). Studies also confirm that the factors influencing satisfaction and the likelihood to re-book are the same for both the Airbnb and the traditional hospitality context such as: functionality; quality and utility of the accommodation services; trust to the host; economic value and considerations.

Suppliers develop solutions to accommodate the way demand selects sharing offers. Peer-to-peer-platforms use peer review systems and algorithms to calculate the quality scores and provide ‘quality’ recognition badges to their sharing providers to enable users select providers. Similar to TripAdvisor reviews, factors determining the selection of Airbnb hosts and the prices they can charge relate to the scorings of the Airbnb peer review system, the location and amenities/services provided by the host. Start-ups provide meta-search engines enabling people to search, evaluate and select amongst several commercial and sharing mobility options (e.g. public transportation, Uber, taxi, car rental, car pooling, bicycle sharing) based on the same multiple criteria: quality, cost, reliability, availability, traffic conditions, duration of trip. 

From a supply side, research shows that there is an increase of purpose-made micro-entrepreneurs (people quitting their full-time jobs, real estate agents and developers) who invest on assets (flats and fleets of cars) to ‘rent’ them. These providers rarely interact or get to meet their hosts, and their ‘shared’ services are provided by their paid employees. Instead of experiencing genuine feelings of hospitality, family and/or community membership, intimate social interactions, domesticity and home services, customers experience fleeting interactions and professional encounters. 

But the sharing micro-entrepreneurs are just the top of the iceberg. The sharing economy has fueled a huge sub-economy of entrepreneurs outsourcing services to the micro-entrepreneurs that lack the time or knowledge to behave as professional providers (e.g. start-ups outsourcing services like cleaning, pricing, marketing and booking, tax consulting and front door/reception services). By adapting and transferring traditional professional services from the commercialised to the shared economy, these entrepreneurs contribute to the commercialisation of the ‘authentic’ experiences. Frequently, their use cannot be avoided. Studies show that in relation to professional hosts (those owning and managing multiple listings), non-professional hosts face operational inefficiencies (lower occupancies, average rates). Airbnb also provides a pricing tip tool (operating similarly to a pricing tool used by professional hotels) to help hosts set competitive prices. Airbnb hosts apply self-presentation practices demonstrating professional features and competences in order to build their personal branding (similar to an hotel branding strategy) and ensure better performance. Success in Airbnb is determined by the consumption of a professionally elaborated authentic experience. To survive micro-entrepreneurs need to adopt a professional operational mindset and commercial management practices. 

Sharing economy, social, moral and ethical values: we are WHY (and not what) we share 
The sharing economy is considered as a solution to our hyper-consuming society and a way to express, adopt and support a better way of living by developing a mindset migration from ‘you are what you own’ to ‘you are what you share’.

If research shows that micro-entrepreneurs and customers do not discriminate in terms of with whom and how they will ‘share’ resources, then why minorities are found to ‘earn’ less in sharing plaftorms, and why platforms focusing on ‘niche’ markets like http://noirbnb.com and https://www.misterbandb.com are thriving? And if the sharing economy is supposed to increase environmental sustainability by reducing the ownership and production of bicycles and cars, how can a video such as this can provide evidence of the positive impact of the sharing economy on the environment? Peer-to-peer-marketplaces re-distributing and re-cycling food, industrial waste and other resources also create a huge burden on the logistics and transportation sector, that may offset any other socio-economic benefit of food sharing.

People use the sharing economy to afford a big car/house by financing its loan through its sharing/rental; the financial benefit (i.e. extra income or money savings) is the predominant motivation to participate in the sharing economy for both sides (the guests and the hosts). The sharing economy enables people to: consume during the economic crisis; and satisfy their materialist needs, values, priorities and lifestyles through ‘sharing’ and ‘access’ and not ‘ownership’. Materialism supports and reinforces materialism, because people see the practice of sharing resources as a hedonic experience that satisfies their materialistic needs of self-image, self-promotion, social appreciation and recognition. Equally, people with collectivist cultures, see the sharing economy as a way to show off and practice their community and social values. 

In China, dating and partner renting platforms have boomed as a result of the cultural values and stereotypes of the society and parents not to accept the gay preferences of their children or being still single in a young age. People do not seek to find and meet new friends, they seek to satisfy a social need and stereotype of being with an heterosexual someone. 

The sharing economy has not changed people’s mindsets, values, lifestyles, behaviors. People still wish to consume and they do consume for the same reasons but in a different way. The sharing economy disrupts the traditional economy, but it has not transformed it.

 

 

*The article has been published (in another version) on theconversation.com.
 

Professor - University of South Australia | + Posts

Dr. Mariana Sigala is Professor in Tourism and Director of the Centre of Tourism & Leisure Management (CTLM) at the University of South Australia Business School.

Professor Sigala has a PhD from the University of Surrey as well as a Certificate of Advanced Academic Studies from the University of Strathclyde and an MSc in Tourism Management from the University of Surrey.

Professor Sigala is a widely published authority in the area of Service Operations Management and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) applications in Tourism and Hospitality. She also has an interest in e-learning models and pedagogies, having published several research studies in these areas. Professor Sigala’s research is multi-award winning featuring several best paper awards in international conferences and academic journals, such as papers published in the International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management and the International Journal of Hospitality Management.

Professor Sigala is the current Chair of the ICHRIE Johnson and Wales Case Study Competition and Publication Series. She is also currently the co-editor of the international journal Journal of Service Theory and Practice, the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Management and the editor of the International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Cases.

Professor Sigala has also served on the Board of Directors of the International Federation of Information Technology, Tourism and Travel (IFITT) (as Membership Director); the International Council on Hospitality, Restaurant and Institutional Education (I-CHRIE) (as Research Director, 2008 - 2010); the Hellenic Association of Information Systems (HeAIS) (as Publicity Director); and the Executive Board of the European Council on Hospitality, Restaurant and Institutional Education (EuroCHRIE) (as President, 2004 - 2005).

Professor Sigala joined the UniSA Business School in 2015 and brings more than 13 years of international academic and teaching experience to the UniSA Business School and the School of Management.

29/03/2024
28/03/2024
27/03/2024
26/03/2024
25/03/2024
22/03/2024