Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
    Opinion
    Home / Opinion / Op-Ed Contributors

    Time sharing economy lived up to its name

    By Wang Yiqing | China Daily | Updated: 2018-01-09 07:09
    Share
    Share - WeChat

    Perhaps there is no term as popular, yet controversial, as "sharing economy" to be the buzzword for 2017 in China. Just as the first sentence in A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times", for the sharing economy in 2017.

    The sharing economy has gained widespread popularity not only because of the capital invested in its projects but also because of the support it has got from the authorities. According to State Information Center's China Sharing Economy Development Report 2017, the trade volume of the sharing economy reached 3.45 trillion yuan ($532 billion) in 2016; and it is expected to maintain a 40 percent growth rate in the coming few years. It was even written into the 2016 and 2017 Government Work Report.

    But the development trend of the sharing economy suddenly hit the brakes in the latter half of last year, even if temporarily. According to incomplete statistics, last year 27 sharing economy startups went out of business, including seven shared bicycle enterprises, seven shared power bank enterprises, four shared clothes enterprises, and three shared toy enterprises and three shared automobile enterprises. In addition, one-third of the failed sharing economy companies lasted less than one year, prompting the media to call it "the crematorium of startups", and many people to question the existing model of the sharing economy.

    Ideally the sharing economy should be about pareto improvement: a neoclassical economic concept, which means an action taken in an economy that harms no one and helps at least one person. In other words, it means people and enterprises sharing idle resources through information and communications technologies to increase the utilization efficiency and reduce costs of individuals as well as society as a whole.

    But the existing sharing economy business model deviated from this win-win principle. No wonder many question whether its existing business model can even be called "sharing". Take shared bikes, the most popular sharing economy business in China, as an example. Instead of using existing idle resources, shared bike companies produced and purchased huge numbers of new bicycles to put them into the market. Their business model is based on customers paying the lease for the bikes owned by the companies. Such a business model should be called "lease economy" rather than sharing economy, not least because it has created as many problems for society as the benefits it has offered.

    According to the SIC statistics, till July last year, about 16 million shared bicycles were in operation nationwide, which have caused many urban problems such as illegal parking and inappropriate scrap disposal, because more than the needed numbers of bicycles were introduced to cities. Many media reports said that hundreds of thousands of scrapped shared bikes had piled up in the suburbs, which they called the "graveyard of shared bikes".

    Although many major cities have required companies to stop launching new shared bikes, the companies ignored the regulations to introduce new bikes to compete with rival companies and grab a bigger share of the market.

    The pseudo-sharing economy failed to activate idle resources to increase efficiency, and instead caused social chaos and tremendous waste of resources. Their economic endeavors can hardly be described as sharing economy, which is supposed to improve social welfare. It is more like naked competition to acquire market monopoly.

    Worse, shared bike companies can embezzle customers' deposit. In September 2017, Kuqi, a shared bike company operating in more than 10 cities, pocketed several hundred million yuan of customers' deposit and unilaterally blocked the deposit refund channel online and offline. Such scandals undermine the development of the sharing economy.

    But despite the sharing economy facing great challenges, it still has great potential to develop into a successful, win-win business model. In fact, the current chaos offers a great opportunity to reshuffle the industry, and revert to the socially and economically beneficial-for-all business model of the sharing economy. Only by following a good business and sustainable development model can the sharing economy benefit society.

    The author is a writer with China Daily.

    Most Viewed in 24 Hours
    Top
    BACK TO THE TOP
    English
    Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
    License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

    Registration Number: 130349
    FOLLOW US
    一区二区三区人妻无码 | 2024最新热播日韩无码| 中文字幕精品一区影音先锋 | 无码午夜人妻一区二区三区不卡视频| 中文字幕亚洲综合小综合在线| 亚洲乱亚洲乱妇无码麻豆| 日本中文字幕在线2020| 久久精品无码一区二区三区免费| 国产成人无码免费看视频软件 | 东京热无码av一区二区| 无码精品A∨在线观看十八禁| 亚洲一区二区三区在线观看精品中文 | 国产成人精品无码片区在线观看| 日韩va中文字幕无码电影| 亚洲av综合avav中文| 乱人伦人妻中文字幕无码| 精品人妻系列无码天堂| 亚洲精品无码不卡在线播HE| 中文字幕在线无码一区二区三区| 大地资源中文在线观看免费版| 少妇无码太爽了不卡视频在线看| 精品无码一区在线观看| 亚洲va无码专区国产乱码| 精品人妻无码区在线视频| 中文字幕日韩精品在线| 亚洲美日韩Av中文字幕无码久久久妻妇| 在线天堂中文WWW官网| 中文无码喷潮在线播放| 在线精品自拍无码| 一级电影在线播放无码| 日韩亚洲欧美中文在线| 亚洲中文字幕在线乱码| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区 | 人妻中文字系列无码专区| 最新中文字幕av无码专区| 亚洲开心婷婷中文字幕| 久久亚洲精品中文字幕 | 一区二区三区人妻无码| 最新国产精品无码| 亚洲av激情无码专区在线播放 | 无码内射中文字幕岛国片|