Date post: | 13-Jan-2017 |
Category: |
Marketing |
Upload: | hugo-guyader |
View: | 1,027 times |
Download: | 4 times |
The“Sharing”EconomyLecture5ServiceManagementandMarketing
HugoGuyader,PhDCandidateinMarketingDepartmentofManagement&Engineering(IEI)
DivisionofBusinessAdministration(FEK)
2016-03-11
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
HugoGuyader• PhD student at LiU since 2013.
Board member of LiUPhD network since 2014. Co-organiser OuiShare Reserach Workshop 2016.
• Multi-method approach to research:experiments, surveys, interviews, (n)etnography..
• Focus on collaborative consumption and P2P exchange through online platforms.
• The recent growth of shared mobility services, such as ridesharing and private car rentals, is a fascinating phenomenon to investigate.
• Teaching in FundamentalMarketing, ConsumerBehavior, ServiceMarketing, AdvancedMarketing, Leadership&Strategy…
• I like to bring my research in class and involve students with relevant practical applications of theory.
• did you say Unicorns??
• collaborative… consumption/production/finance/learning/govenance
• the Sharing Economy
• “platform cooperativism”
• ridesharing in Sweden
Today
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Peopleshareeverythingtosaveormakemoney
P2P exchange of tangible resources (under-utilised high-value goods, i.e. car or “the power drill”) and intangible resources (excess money, skill, time, space, knowledge and information), in a global (online) or local contexts (grassroots communities).
➡ 68%of30.000USconsumersarewillingtosharewhattheyowninexchangeofafee
Nielsen2014
‣ potentialvalueofthesharingeconomysector$335billionby2025(+25%eachyear)
PWC2014
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Backtothebeginning…Living space (58%), Work space (57%), Food preparation/meal-sharing (57%), Household items (53%), Apparel (50%)
Gorenflo2010
Driversofsharing:Technology(85%)Community(78%) Environment(60%)CostSaving(67%)
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Trust#1barriertosharing
67% express trust concerns as the primary barrier to join a collaborative consumption service 30% fear that their goods will be stolen or broken 23% express a basic mistrust of strangers 14% express “privacy concerns”
CampbellMithun2012
Sharing platforms use peer-review and reputation-based trust systems to create trust and alleviate the problem of “free-riders” who do not contribute.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
…Andtoday
PWC2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
SocialDrivers
• PopulationDensity• MindsetofSustainability• LifestyleTrendamongYouth• AltruisticMindset• IndependentLifestyle
EconomicDrivers
• IncreaseinWorldPopulation• StrainedResources• EconomicDisparities• ExcessorIdleInventory• InaccessibleLuxury• InfluxofVCFunding
TechnologyDrivers
• SocialNetworkingTechnologies• MobileTechnologies• PaymentSystems
Whyit’sHappeningNow
Owyang2014
Collaborative Economy Honeycomb
A Day in the Life of the Collaborative Economy
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Whyweshare
CrowdCompanies2014
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Peopleswitchtosharingifawell-knownbrandsavesthem25%frombuyingcostsandaddsconvenience
• PRICE: More than half of North Americans will consider switching from buying to sharing if it lets them save 25 percent. Established brands often compete with sharing startups on price when they launch a marketplace of used goods or enable a marketplace of lower cost service workers.
• CONVENIENCE: the top driver of sharing transactions. A third of conventional purchasers will consider sharing if it offers a more convenient option. Companies can rent out durable goods, offer convenience-based services, or offering subscription models that deliver goods on a regular basis.
• BRAND: Sharers gravitate to well-known brands, whether those are traditional companies or trend-setting startups. The best way for companies to build their brand in their collaborative economy is to enable a platform that brings customers closer to the innovation process, and enable makers, crowdfunders, and others to co-innovate with your brand.
Owyang&Samuel2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
MotivationsandDrivers(anoverview)
Compare&Share2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Barriers(anoverview)
Compare&Share2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
• economic incentive • an urge to reduce the socio-
environmental impact of consumption and a belief in “the commons”
Tosumup:
• normative desires to satisfy altruistic needs and of community-belonging
• shift from ownership to access • ICT developments = convenience
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
The“Neo-Sharer”or“NOwner”
‣ mobile and connected (the “dot-com” generation)
‣ millennial
‣ mid-high income ‣ high level of education ‣ living in urban areas ‣ unique personality
‣ like to experiment new things
‣ innovative, playful and creative
Sharing is more a choice than a necessity. “homo cooperans” not “homo economicus”they cooperate for their emancipation, autonomy, social justice, knowledge sharing and open production.
Whatdoyouthink?
๏ Haveyouparticipatedincollaborativeconsumptionactivities?
๏ Whyso?
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
What’sMineisYours
TEDTalk 2010: The case for Collaborative Consumption. Consumers co-create value by sharing existing products that are only temporarily needed, rather than owning them. Consumers access to more resources, more convenience,and at lower costs.
RachelBotsman&RooRogers(2010)
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
✓ a critical mass of users ✓ idling or excess capacity of unused goods ✓ belief in the common good ✓ social trust
The P2P Foundation (Bauwens et al.) also identifies 2 main societal drivers: • community dynamics in conducting business and
the combined effect of digital reproduction • the increasingly 'socialized' production of value.
4principlesofcollaborativeconsumption
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
CollaborativeConsumptionSystems
Botsman&Rogers2010
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
(Outdated)AcademicDefinition• Acts of collaborative consumption can be defined as “events
in which one or more persons consume economic goods or services in the process of engaging in joint activities with one or more others”.
• Collaborative consumption may or may not involve direct physical contact between collaborators: – ‘direct-contact collaboration’ = same place at the
same time – ‘system-hookup collaboration’ = different places but
at the same time – ‘segregated collaboration’ = different times and places
Felson&Spaeth1978
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
(Outdated)AcademicDefinition• The term “The Share Economy” dates back to 1984
• In his book, economist Martin Weitzman argues that full employment and social welfare could be achieved if workers were paid a ‘share’ of the firm revenues.
• Companies would have an incentive to create jobs because more workers would be paid only in proportion to what they have brought in.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
The Economy
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Someclarification- Collaborative Economy: An economy built on decentralised networks
and marketplaces that unlocks the value of underused assets by matching needs and haves, in ways that bypass traditional middlemen and disrupt centralised institutions.
- production (Design, production, and distribution of goods through collaborative networks)
- finance (P2P banking and crowd-driven investment models that decentralise finance)
- education (Open education and person-to-person learning models that democratise education)
- consumption (Maximum assets utilisation through models of redistribution and shared access)
Botsman2010;2013;2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Someclarification- Collaborative Consumption: An economic model based on sharing/swapping/renting/consuming products & services, that enable access-based consumption over ownership, thanks to technology and the internet.
- Redistribution markets (Unwanted or underused goods are redistributed)
- Collaborative Lifestyles (Non-tangible assets such as space, skills and money are exchanged)
- Product Service Systems (Pay-to-access the benefit of a product instead of owning it)
- Sharing economy: An economic model based on sharing under-utilised products & services for monetary or non-monetary benefits among private individuals.
- Peer economy: Person-to-person marketplaces that facilitate the sharing and direct trade of assets built on peer trust (the pure P2P slice of the sharing economy)
Botsman2010;2013;2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5Jägerskog2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Is‘sharing’justafancywordfor‘rental’?• While some of these organisations are public initiatives or
small cooperatives, others develop platform business models capitalising on existing communities and enhancing their P2P matchmaking services in exchange of a transaction fixed fee or a commission.
• VCs and business angels have invested about $30 billion in tech-startups disrupting traditional businesses with sharing schemes.
Sharing Economy “unicorns”: ‣ Uber = $60+ billion ‣ Airbnb = $25 billion
• Rentals representing the greatest share of business models
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
We-Washing,Share-Washing,CollaborativeWashing➡ Online businesses claim to foster community sharing, whereas
they are mostly benefiting from enabling rental services rather than social exchange.
➡ The “true sharing” movement raises awareness of this loss of communities and criticises the profits of Big Sharing unicorns.
Two perspectives on the collaborative economy: -> one driven by convenience (i.e. ICT) and economic benefits; and -> one more authentic sharing philosophy, close to gift giving, not driven by monetary profits and strongly relying on the social aspect of communities.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
AuthenticityofasharingplatformBlablacar (FR) has been criticised of killing the original ridesharing ideology for changing its business model (2012: from free to fees) and “forcing” an online registration system. Direct contact between users (exchange of emails, phone numbers) became impossible and forbidden, and the price rose to take into consideration the driver’s car depreciation and the platform’s commission. The social aspect diminished (i.e. riders listen to music, sleep, claim reserved seats; direct communication is impossible before a reservation) and the economic aspect reversed (i.e. 12% commission, less flexibility with booking and pricing).
Users perceive that digital security became a hassle, trust between members faded, the original communal spirit vanished and monetary benefits became the norm.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Sharing
Belk (2007) definition of sharing: “voluntarylending,poolingandallocationofresources,andauthorizeduseofpublicproperty,butnotcontractualrenting,leasing,orunauthorizeduseofpropertybytheftortrespass”
=> the Sharing Economy is not true sharing (Belk 2014): -presenceofprofitmotives-absenceoffeelingsofcommunity-expectationsofreciprocity
True sharing is driven by altruistic motives, a sense of commonality, in-direct economic benefits, fame or reputation, utilitarianism, feeling of belonging to a community.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Sharing✓ True sharing involve caring and love, it is inalienable, interpersonal
and dependent, as well as communal as it creates trust and social bonds without contracts or legal requirements (Belk, 2010).
✓ Sharing out (vs. Sharing in) “involves giving to others outside the boundaries separating self and other, and is closer to gift giving and commodity exchange” (Belk 2010 p.725).
✓ “If we conceive of a continuum commodity exchange lies at one end and sharing at the other, with gift giving somewhere in the middle” (Belk, 2007, p.127).
commodityexchange
giftgiving
sharing
Other Relevant concepts: access-based consumption, mutuality or generalized reciprocal exchange, anti-consumption, pure opportunistic behavior.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
What’sYoursisMine✦ Unfulfilled promises of the Sharing Economy
openness, democratisation, equality, communitarian values, personal exchanges/interactions, trust between strangers, micro-entrepreneurship, less materialism with access over ownership, sustainability, etc.
✦ In reality: - creates new forms of commerce and new marketplaces, - not 100% safe and trustworthy - centralised control or mutual surveillance system, - money for investors but not the workers - deregulated free-market in private lives, etc. ✦ Conflicting languages:
Slee2016
community,collectiveaction,libertarian/progressivepolitics,
grassrootsactivism,socialchange
private/corporatefinancial/commercial
gains
VS
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Disruption?
‣ The most common model is to take a commission on transactions; something businesses have been doing for centuries.
‣ Technology has done many things, but to date it hasn't been able to completely do away with the middleman.
Nesta2016
‣ Sharing economy businesses, despite their power to disrupt incumbents and despite being radical in their own right, make use of some very traditional business models.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
SmarterregulationfortheSharingEconomy
Sharing Economy = consumers granting each other temporary access to under-utilised physical assets (“idle capacity”), possibly for money.
Frankenetal.2015
1. consumer-to-consumer (C2C) platforms — not renting or leasing a good from a B2C company (product-service economy)
2. providing each other temporary access — no transfer of ownership (2nd-hand economy)
3. more efficient use of physical assets — not private individuals delivering each other a service (on-demand economy)
Whatdoyouthink?
๏ Whatisdisruptive?๏ Isthisservice
innovation?
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Economy3.0• Economy 1.0
“post industrial society” (1960s-1980s), growth driven by consumer demand, product-based innovations decentralised (direct relationships between individuals) but disconnected, physical market presence
• Economy 2.0 “knowledge-based society” (1980s-2000s), new ICT enable better service delivery, process (back-office) innovations, e-services, etc. centralised and connected, market presence through intermediaries
• Economy 3.0 service economy, experience economy, sharing economy, on-demand economy… (2010s-?) decentralised (direct) but connected (online), network market presence- direct people-based (peer-to-peer) credit relationships between individuals, and - direct asset-based (peer-to-asset) credit relationships between individuals and productive assets
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
P2Pexchange• ICT enables people to get what they need from each other on-demand,
rather than from centralized institutions traditionally selling goods and services.
Theeconomyevolvedfromtraditionalmarketexchangebetweensellersandbuyers,tonetworkrelationshipsofsuppliersandusers. (Rifkin2000)
• Private individuals can connect to online platforms and share their slack resources (e.g. time, skills, space, goods) through P2P services, allowing them to unlock value from their underutilized possessions and enabling other platform users to access goods only when needed.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
FalsePromises?(1) Sharing economy sites are generally lower in cost than market alternatives. (2) Green? Presented as a way to reduce carbon footprints, less resource-intensive and reducing demand for new goods/facilities. (3) The desire to increase social connections. (4) Commitment to social transformation: emphasis on the ideological values of sharing and collaboration. Whilethefor-profitcompaniesmaybe“actingbadly,”thesenewtechnologiesofpeer-to-peereconomicactivityarepotentiallypowerfultoolsforbuildingasocialmovementcentredongenuinepracticesofsharingandcooperationintheproductionandconsumptionofgoodsandservices.Butachievingthatpotentialwillrequiredemocratisingtheownershipandgovernanceoftheplatforms.
Schor2014
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Sharingeconomyactivitiesarenothingnewrecirculation of goods (eBay, Craigslist) increased utilisation of durable assets (Couchsurfing) exchange of services (time banking) sharing of productive assets (cooperatives, flatshares)
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
PlatformCooperativism
• Sharing platforms that facilitate P2P service exchange should adopt a cooperative business structure with a “multi-stakeholder model that could include providers, customers, founders, investors, geographic communities, and nature”
Gorenflo2015
• “produser-owned platforms = users are producers” Scholz2016
• The rationale is that most P2P platforms rely on the supply side of the network for their revenue stream, so these users/providers should own and control the platforms.
Scholz(2014),Gansky(2014),Schneider(2014)
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
TheParticipationScale
Heimans&Timms2014
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Heimans&Timms2014
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
TheEuropeancollaborativeeconomy
1) High adoption level (Europe leads the Fab Lab scene) 2) Community-driven mindset (the commons) 3) Local governmental support 4) European Union support 5) Highly diverse (culture) 6) Less venture capital (more loan entrepreneurs) 7) Non-profit works (Skjutsgruppen) 8) Big brands are adapting (BMW DriveNow, DHL MyWays)
Wichmann2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
EuropeanCommission2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
InSweden• Public actors more involved, encouraging use of sharing ideas for public
spaces; while local actors reacted to global players (Airbnb) by developing digital platforms of their own.
• Challenges: specialised industries employing a large number of people are likely to be hit hard by increases in digitalisation and automation as well as by the Sharing Economy cutting out traditional middlemen. “oneareaofconcernisthedegreetowhichSharingEconomyfirmsavoidtransactioncostsandrisksbypushingsuchcostsandrisksontoprovidersandconsumers”
Drivers: (1) Increasing penetration of the Internet and smartphones, (2) Technological advancements (IT platforms and big data analytics), (3) Falling entry barriers, (4) Increased ease of financial transactions, (5) Increased transparency, (6) The financial crisis, (7) Declining consumption patterns.
Felländeretal.2015
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
• AudiUnite• AutoresursBilpool(Malmö)• Car2Go• Delebilen(Denmark)• Driveback• GöteborgsBilkoop
(MajornasBillkooperativ)• HertzFreerider• HertzBilPool(Norway)• MoveAbout• SamBil(coop1980-inactive)• StockholmBilPool• StudentBilen(Nissan)• SunFleet(Hertz)• UbiGo• Vivallabil(coop1983)
CarSharing• Flexidrive(SnappCar)• GoMore
P2PCarRentals
• ApParkingSpot
P2PParkingSpace
• Gofreel• MyWays• Urbit
Delivery
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
• Ants• Bilplats.se• GoMore• MobilSamåkning• Roadmate(Hertz FirstRentACar -inactive)
• Samåkning.se• Samlats.se(inactive)• Skjutsgruppen
RideSharing• Lundahoj(Lund)• Cykelköket(Gothenburg)• StockholmCityBikes• Styr&Ställ(Gothenburg)
BikeSharing
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
• Bjussa.se(rensavinden.nu)• Blocket.se• Bortskänkes• Bort.nu• FreecycleGBG(Gothenburg)
• Garaget(Malmö)• IlRecycling• Myrorna• off2off• SyndAttKasta
RedistributingGoods
• Klädbytardag• Klädbytardagar• Klädbyte• Klädbibliotek(Uppsala)• Klädoteket• Lånegarderoben• Sabinaandfriends(Stockholm)
• SecondLounge• SwopShop• TheWardrobe
Clothes-Swapping-Rental-Library
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
RentingGoods• Delbar• Grannkollen• GrannSaker• Rentl• SwingaBazaar• Tjikko• ToolPool(Malmö)
P2PHomeRentals• Airbnb• FriTiden.se• Hembyte• HomeLink• semesterbyte.com
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
On-DemandServices• Grannar.se• Helping• HinnerInteHinnerDu• TaskRunner• Vint:P2Pworkout• UberPoP(TNC)
P2PLending• CrowdCube• CrowdCulture• FundedByMe• Trustbuddy
FabLabs• OpenLab(Stockholm)• THINGS(Stockholm)• ToolPool(Malmö)
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
KnowledgeSharing• Digiref.se• DirectoryofOpenAccessJournals
• Fruktkartan:mapfreefruits• Fritidsbanken• Gapminder• MinFarm• TimeVillage• Tuva:Internetsharing
ProfessionalServices• Coompanion• eWork• Kompanjoner• PopUpMore• Re:Textile• SpaceTime• ToBorrow
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
CoWorkingSpaces• Café&Co(Stockholm)• CofficeCoop• D82(Stockholm)• EntreprenörKyrkan(Stockholm)
• Epicenter(Stockholm)• Hus24(Stockholm)• Hoffice• ImpactHub(Stockholm)
• Knäckeriet(Stockholm)
• Kolonien(Stockholm)• Start-UpPeopleofSweden(SUP46)
• StudioVerket• TheCastle(Stockholm)• ThePark(Stockholm)• THINGS(Stockholm)• UnitedSpace• WeHaveCo(Stockholm)
• WorkAround
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Focus:organizedridesharingLiftsharing (UK) or Carpooling (US) two-sided platforms e.g. Blablacar hitchhiking, slugging TNCs: Uber, Lyft, Sidecar
✦ Individual travellers share a vehicle for a trip and split travel costs with others that have similar itineraries and time schedules.
(Furuhata et al. 2013)
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Focus:organizedridesharingTwo-sided matching platforms facilitating ridesharing services by matching individual car drivers and passengers.
Ridesharing can include small detours, but it does not concern for-profit taxis and chauffeured vehicles in which drivers make a special trip to carry a passenger and enable them to make profits (e.g. the passenger pays more than the trip gas costs). Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber, Lyft or Sidecar provide such “ridesourcing service”.
Blablacar: largest platform in Europe with 20 million members in 18 markets, arranging 2 million rides per month (Dillet, 2015) and estimates to enable drivers yearly total savings of $320 million (Cowan, 2015). The average shared ride distance in Europe is 342 km. Blablacar claims to raise car occupancy from 1.7 to 2.8 passengers.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Focus:organizedridesharing✴ Main motivations and drivers for the sharing economy:
more convenience and efficiency (technology), economic benefits (affordability, cost-savings, monetisation of under-utilised assets; better value/quality), environmentally friendliness, strong community, access lifestyle, curiosity and fun.
In Denmark, a recent ridesharing study reports the user perceptions of the service as positive thanks to cost savings, greater comfort, flexibility and speed, and socialization with vehicle occupants; …but also negative because of a lack of ride availability and inconvenience in finding them, viewing ridesharing as unsafe or unsecure, and expectations of social awkwardness and exclusion (Nielsen et al., 2015).
➡Economic and social attributes seem to be the strongest choice determinants for adopting a ridesharing service.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Skjutsgruppen
• civil society movement participatory culture
• no commission • no peer-reviews
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
ridesharing · P2P car rentals · leasing
“Revolutionalizing the way people travel, and the overall infrastructure”
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Imported ridesharing from Germany to Denmark, seeing an opportunity in the Danes’ concern for the environment and their discontent with public transportation (prices, delays, cancellations). Organic growth (no marketing) as a non-profit platform for 6 years.
Enhanced the ridesharing platform with a new technology enabling online payment.
Begun to charge the drivers a 9% commission on their ride.
February – launch of P2P car rentals: Users could now borrow privately owned vehicles from other users, or rent out their own car. An insurance-deal covers the rental period. September – launch of leasing: when the car idles, it can be rented out to GoMore members. By renting out their leased car 8 days/month, the Leasers can make up the leasing cost, so the car can be used for free the rest of the month.
More than 300.000 users in Scandinavia.
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
GoMore—>For-ProfitBusinessModel
Skjutsgruppen—>Cooperativism
Monetary-drivenexchange
Peer-reviewscreatereputation
ProfessionalizationofP2Pservices
Rentingparadigm
VCfunding
WEwashing&sharewashing
Directreciprocity
Community-driven
Grassrootsmovement
Authenticridesharingphilosophy
Socio-environmentalfocus
Local,decentralized,flatorganization
Generalizedreciprocity
Altruisticvalues
CasesAnalysis
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Whatdoyouthink?
๏ Whatisthefutureofmobility?
๏ WhataretheparticularitiesoftheSwedishmarket?
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Whatcanbeshared?
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Whatcanbeshared?
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
Whydiditfail?
CollaborativeLab2014
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
10P2PTrendsfor20161. Poor-to-Poor, Peer-to-Peer: self-
organized mass migration and "trans-migrants"
2. The further maturation of post-corporate entrepreneurial coalitions or eco-systems that are creating livelihoods for productive communities and their commons
3. The Collaborative Technology Alliance, digital synergy, and the blockchain
4. From Urban Commons to The City as a Common
5. The launch of independent, commons-centric civic organisations
6. The Poc 21, OSCE Days and the blockchain-based open supply chains as important steps toward an Open Source Circular Economy
7. Platform Cooperativism, Commonfare, and the new mutuals for precarious labor.
8. The Emergence of Meta-Economic Networks for ethical value streams
9. The Cosmo-Localization of WikiHouse, and other seed forms for a new wave of open platforms for sustainable living and housing
10.The initiation of a legal tradition for the Commons
Bauwens2016
HugoGuyader—723G45Lecture5
10SharingEconomyPredictionsfor20161. Shared autonomous vehicle 2. Discourse of the commons is going
mainstream 3. New growth for the worker co-op
sector: workplace democracy 4. The sharing cities movement
reaches higher levels of visibility 5. Funding by VCs will continue to
increase, but slower rate 6. Funding will open up, franchises
will enter the market, explosive growth from the far east (i.e. China and India), and rural/surburban coworking or suburban coworking will grow
7. The Cosmo-Localization of Production: global open design communities combined with local production in microfactories
8. Growing conversation between companies, unions and non-profits about gig workers’ “flexicurity”.
9. Short-term rental regulations to balance opportunities for small-scale livelihood generation with the potential displacement of long-term and vulnerable residents
10. Growing movement for value distribution.
Shareable2016