The Sharing Economy租生活：分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)在流行

James+Surowiecki

For most of the past century， Americans have been the worlds greatest consumers. And usually consumption has meant ownership： just before the Great Recession， the average American household owned 2.28 cars， and had more television sets than people. But these days a host of new companies are trying to disrupt1） the paradigm—offering the benefits of consuming without the costs of ownership. Ride-sharing companies such as Lyft， Sidecar， and， in some cities， UberX2）， own no cars themselves. Instead， they sign up ordinary car owners： when you need a ride， you can use their apps to find a driver near you and ask to be picked up. Many other companies are trying to cash in on3） whats often called “the sharing economy.” Airbnb4） now features more than three hundred thousand listings from people making their apartments and homes available for short-term rentals. RelayRides and Getaround let you rent cars from their owners. Boatbound offers boat rentals， Desktime office space， ParkatmyHouse parking spaces. SnapGoods makes it possible for people to borrow consumer goods from other people in their neighborhood or social network. It may not be too long before youre able to pay to sit in a strangers living room and “share” his home theatre.

Just a couple of weeks ago， Uber disclosed that it had raised more than a quarter of a billion dollars in venture-capital funding， most of it from Google. The flood of new money into all these new businesses feels like a mini-bubble in the making. But beneath all the hype5） is a sensible idea： there are a lot of slack6） resources in the economy. Assets sit idle—the average car is driven just an hour a day—and workers have time and skills that go unused. If you can connect the people who have the assets to people who are willing to pay to rent them， you reduce waste and end up with a more efficient system.

In the past， this was hard to pull off7）， because the transaction costs involved in borrowing and lending were high： there was no easy way to find someone who had what you were looking for and no easy way to know if someone was trustworthy. So if you borrowed a lawnmower it was typically from your neighbor. But digital technology has made it much easier for buyers and sellers to find each other quickly， and to evaluate the people theyre trading with. The effect has been to make sharing a much more plausible business model. “We now have hundreds of millions of consumers who are carrying in their pockets powerful computers that are always connected to high-speed networks，” Arun Sundararajan， a professor at N.Y.U.s Stern School of Business and an expert on the sharing economy said. “That makes it possible for people to rethink the way they consume.”

Sharing has also had a boost from the weak economy. People are leery8） of making big up-front9） purchases， and many have had to scramble for10） ways to monetize their time and their assets. More important， there are signs that the ties between consumption and ownership are loosening， particularly among younger people. Studies suggest that Millennials are less interested in owning cars than previous generations have been， and the success of sites such as Netflix11） and Spotify12） show that， at least with some goods， renting can trump ownership. For one thing， people get access to a much wider range of products than they could ever own. “Theres a mind-set that consumers are doing this just to save money，” Sundararajan said. “But I think that whats really compelling about the sharing economy is the variety and expansion of choices that it offers. Instead of being tied to owning one car， I can drive twenty different ones. So I expect this will expand consumption， rather than shrink it.”

Before that happens， though， there are serious hurdles that the sharing economy has to get over. The most obvious of these is regulation. Cities typically have elaborate rules for cabs and limos13） that control drivers， vehicles， fares， and so on. These rules in part reflect the desire of vested14） interests （like cab companies） to protect their businesses and in part consumer concerns about safety and liability. Sharing companies circumvent15） some of those rules， arguing that if you choose to pay someone to give you a ride to the airport—or rent you an apartment—the state shouldnt stop you. Thats an appealing position， but the companies are actually piggybacking16） on the trust that consumers feel in what is typically a highly regulated economy. If these companies become more established， theyll have to reach some kind of accommodation with regulators， perhaps along the lines of17） rules that Californias Public Utilities Commission recently proposed， which would let Sidecar， Lyft， and Uber operate if they implement certain safety and driver regulations.

It isnt just companies and regulators who will have to be flexible， though. Workers will， too， since the sharing economy requires people to function as micro-entrepreneurs. Uber is just a broker， and the drivers arent anyones employees， any more than the landlords in Airbnbs system are. They are all independent contractors， working for themselves and giving the companies a cut18） of the action. This has certain attractions： no boss， the ability to set your own hours， control over working conditions. It also means no benefits， no steady paycheck， and the need to always be hustling； in that sense， it fits all too19） well with the free-agent nation were increasingly becoming. Sharing， it turns out， is often a hell of a lot of work.

在上個世紀(jì)的大多數(shù)時間里，美國是世界最大的消費市場，而消費通常意味著所有權(quán)：就在大衰退之前，平均每個美國家庭擁有的汽車數(shù)量為2.28輛，擁有電視機(jī)的數(shù)量比家庭成員的數(shù)量還要多。但現(xiàn)如今，許多新公司都正試圖打破這種范式——消費者無需花錢取得所有權(quán)便可獲取消費的利益。比如像Lyft、Sidecar以及某些城市的UberX這樣的汽車共享公司并沒有自己的汽車，而是與普通車主簽約：當(dāng)你需要乘車出行時，你可以使用這些公司的應(yīng)用找到附近的司機(jī)，請求搭載。其他許多公司也都試圖靠這種人們常稱的“分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)”來分得一杯羹。房屋租賃社區(qū)Airbnb網(wǎng)站現(xiàn)在推出了30多萬套房源，這些房源都出自個人，他們將自己的公寓或住房用于短期出租。點對點的汽車租賃服務(wù)網(wǎng)站RelayRides和Getaround使你能夠從車主手中租車。船舶共享租賃網(wǎng)站Boatbound提供小艇租賃服務(wù)，辦公空間租賃服務(wù)網(wǎng)站Desktime提供辦公空間租賃服務(wù)，私家停車位租賃服務(wù)網(wǎng)站ParkatmyHouse提供停車位租賃服務(wù)。社區(qū)物品租賃服務(wù)網(wǎng)站SnapGoods讓人們有可能從自己的鄰居或社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)的網(wǎng)友處借用消費品。也許用不了多久，你就能在付費之后坐在一個陌生人的客廳里“分享”他的家庭影院了。

就在幾個星期前，Uber公司透露，它已籌得超過2.5億美元的風(fēng)險投資資金，其中大部分來自谷歌。新資金涌入這些新企業(yè)，似乎正在形成一個小型泡沫。但在所有炒作背后是一個明智的想法：經(jīng)濟(jì)體系中有很多閑置資源。固定資產(chǎn)處于閑置狀態(tài)中——每輛汽車平均每天只開一小時，勞動者也有未得到利用的時間和技能。如果你可以把擁有資產(chǎn)的人與愿意付費租用資產(chǎn)的人聯(lián)系起來，就減少了浪費，最終得到一個更高效的系統(tǒng)。

在過去，這很難實現(xiàn)，因為借入與借出所涉及的交易成本很高：要找到擁有你想要的東西的人不容易，要了解此人是否值得信賴也不簡單。所以，在過去，如果你要借一臺割草機(jī)，那通常是從鄰居那里借的。但數(shù)字技術(shù)讓買家和賣家能夠更方便地迅速找到對方，也更容易評估正在和自己做交易的人。其結(jié)果是分享成了一種更可行的商業(yè)模式。“我們現(xiàn)在有數(shù)以億計的消費者，他們的口袋里裝著始終連接著高速網(wǎng)絡(luò)的強(qiáng)大計算機(jī)，”紐約大學(xué)斯特恩商學(xué)院教授、分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)專家阿倫·孫達(dá)拉拉詹說，“這使得人們有可能重新考慮自己的消費方式。”

經(jīng)濟(jì)的低迷也助推了分享的發(fā)展。人們開始對大額預(yù)付款購買行為持謹(jǐn)慎態(tài)度，許多人不得不想方設(shè)法用他們的時間和資產(chǎn)來掙錢。更重要的是，有跡象表明，消費與所有權(quán)之間的關(guān)系正在松動，在年輕人中間表現(xiàn)尤甚。研究表明，與前幾代人相比，千禧一代對擁有汽車并不是那么感興趣，而在線影片租賃網(wǎng)站Netflix和在線音樂租賃網(wǎng)站Spotify等站點的成功表明，至少對于某些商品，租用可以勝過所有權(quán)。其中一個原因是，人們能使用的產(chǎn)品范圍遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出了其所能擁有的產(chǎn)品范圍。“人們有一種思維定式，認(rèn)為消費者這么做只是為了省錢，”孫達(dá)拉拉詹說，“但我認(rèn)為，分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)真正引人關(guān)注的地方在于它使選擇更加多樣化，也使選擇的范圍更加廣泛。我不必受限于只能擁有一輛汽車，相反，我可以駕駛20輛不同的汽車。因此，我預(yù)計這將擴(kuò)大消費，而非減少消費。”

不過，要想實現(xiàn)這一點，分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)必須首先克服一些嚴(yán)重障礙，其中最明顯的就是監(jiān)管。各個城市通常為出租車和豪華轎車制定了詳盡的規(guī)則，對司機(jī)、車輛、費用等進(jìn)行管理。這些規(guī)則在一定程度上反映了既得利益者（如出租車公司）保護(hù)其業(yè)務(wù)的愿望，也在一定程度上反映了消費者對安全和責(zé)任的關(guān)切。分享型企業(yè)規(guī)避了其中的某些規(guī)則，它們聲稱，如果你選擇花錢找人送你到機(jī)場——或租給你公寓——州政府就不應(yīng)該阻止你。這是一個頗能打動人的態(tài)度，但這些公司實際上是利用了消費者在通常具有高度約束力的經(jīng)濟(jì)體系中才會產(chǎn)生的信任感。如果這些公司變得更加穩(wěn)定，它們將不得不與監(jiān)管部門達(dá)成和解，或許可以采取與加州公用事業(yè)委員會最近提出的規(guī)則類似的方式。加州的規(guī)則規(guī)定，如果Sidecar、Lyft和Uber這幾家汽車共享公司執(zhí)行特定的安全與駕駛員規(guī)章，它們就可以運營。

然而，并非只有企業(yè)和監(jiān)管部門需要靈活應(yīng)變。勞動者亦應(yīng)如此，因為分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)要求人人都發(fā)揮微型企業(yè)家的功能。Uber公司只是一個經(jīng)紀(jì)人，而司機(jī)不是任何人的員工，至多就像是Airbnb系統(tǒng)中的房東。他們都是獨立的承包商，為自己工作，然后分給分享型公司一定的交易份額。這有一定的吸引力：沒有老板，能夠自主安排自己的時間，工作的條件由自己掌控。這也意味著沒有福利津貼，沒有穩(wěn)定的工資收入，而且總是需要匆匆忙忙。從這個意義上說，分享型經(jīng)濟(jì)非常適合我們這個正在日益形成的自由工作者的國家。結(jié)果表明，分享往往意味著需要大量的工作。

1. disrupt [d?s?r?pt] vt. 使中斷；擾亂

2. UberX：由交通網(wǎng)絡(luò)公司Uber開發(fā)的針對低端市場的打車服務(wù)項目。Uber公司總部位于美國洛杉磯，創(chuàng)立于2009年，推出的打車應(yīng)用Uber和UberX讓乘客能夠?qū)崟r預(yù)訂出租車和私家車。目前Uber已進(jìn)入中國市場，中文譯名為“優(yōu)步”。上文提到的Lyft和Sidecar也都是目前廣泛使用的打車服務(wù)商。

3. cash in on：靠……賺錢，利用

4. Airbnb：一家聯(lián)系旅游人士和家有空房出租的房主的服務(wù)型網(wǎng)絡(luò)社區(qū)，用戶可通過網(wǎng)絡(luò)或手機(jī)應(yīng)用程序發(fā)布、搜索度假房屋租賃信息并完成線上預(yù)訂程序，中文通常譯為“空中食宿”。

5. hype [ha?p] n. 天花亂墜的廣告宣傳；炒作

6. slack [sl?k] adj. 閑散的

7. pull off：努力實現(xiàn)

8. leery [?l??ri] adj. 警惕的；懷有戒心的，戒備的

9. up-front：預(yù)付的，先期的

10. scramble for：爭奪

11. Netflix：世界最大的在線影片租賃服務(wù)商，中文通常譯為“網(wǎng)飛”。

12. Spotify：全球最大的流媒體音樂服務(wù)軟件之一，實現(xiàn)了P2P這一技術(shù)的合法化，中文通常譯為“聲破天”。

13. limo [?l?m??] n. 豪華高級轎車

14. vested [vestid] adj. 既定的；既得的；絕對的

15. circumvent [?s??k?m?vent] vt. 規(guī)避，逃避

16. piggyback [?p?ɡib?k] vi. 利用；借助

17. along the lines of：這一類的，類似的

18. cut [k?t] n. （尤指金錢的）份額

19. all too：極，甚