Collaborative Consumption and Shifting Perceptions in Cities
What will the future hold for the sharing economy and how are cities responding to the current shifts taking place?
When I want something I don’t want to wait. I want it now and more often than not I share this thought with millions of other city dwellers. We are in luck, because with the tap of my smartphone a car is on its way or a room is rented halfway around the globe. Data is a key ingredient making this happen and cities make the sharing economy work.
The on-demand economy feeds our wants and needs and reacts to and has helped drive a fundamental shift in our culture. Early on, the disruptive and abrupt approach many rapidly growing sharing economy companies took as they entered cities created consternation and concern. Over time, the desires of people and the goals of cities have coalesced and become clearer and confrontation has moved more toward collaboration.
City leaders want to capitalize on the new opportunities and innovation the sharing economy can bring to cities. This isn’t to say for a minute that the challenges have disappeared, and in fact there are still some significant issues to address. However, we are observing in our work that the sentiment of cities on the sharing economy is shifting.
We identified three key benefits and concerns that are at the top of the list for cities in our new research survey. This is the first national level analysis of local elected officials’ views on the sharing economy, and this data can help us all further the larger ongoing conversation on how this new economy is affecting cities.
Cities view improved services as the primary benefit, with 22% identifying this as important. The next most vital area is increased economic activity at 20%. Rounding out the top three benefits is increased entrepreneurial activity at 16%. These numbers are a reflection of the economic activity afoot in cities as a result of collaborative consumption.
When we examined the concerns that cities had with the sharing economy, the primary issue that rose to the fore is public safety, and specifically the lack of comparable insurance and general safety concerns, with 61% identifying this as the top priority. The numbers two and three concerns are protection of traditional service providers and industry participants at 10% and non-compliance with current standards at 9%.
These numbers reflect many conversations we have had with city officials. We have held in-depth interviews with city leaders in a dozen cities and performed a sentiment analysis on large cities throughout America. This research identified and reinforced the notion that there is no one way for cities to approach the sharing economy. One of the beautiful things about urban areas everywhere is the inventiveness and uniqueness of place.
That earlier research identified a clear need for quantitative data. This Survey on the Sharing Economy approaches the data question and allows for a clearer, macro-level understanding of what cities are experiencing and what they hope to see from the sharing economy.
There is no doubt that collaborative consumption thrives in cities and brings value to residents. And, of course no city leader wants to stand against the steady drumbeat of progress and innovation. But just as cities make the sharing economy work the sharing economy needs to work with cities.
The growth of the sharing economy has been enormous and quick. The current valuation of just Uber and AirBnB reaches over $50 billion. All of this has taken place startlingly fast. And, over half, or 55%, of cities in our sample reported some growth in the sharing economy with 16% reported experiencing rapid growth.
The sharing economy is expanding far beyond transportation and short-term rentals, with myriad companies taking on peer-to-peer business models. While ridesharing and homesharing represent just a segment of the sharing economy, these two types of services are top of mind in cities. This is reflected in our numbers, which show that 53% of cities reported growth in ridesharing and 46% saw growth in homesharing.
Cities are more open to ridesharing than homesharing. 66% of respondents indicated that their local government is supportive of ridesharing, while only 44% indicated that their local government is supportive of homesharing. However, when asked whether these local governments are supportive of rapid sharing economy growth more broadly, nearly 71% of city leaders responded that indeed they were.
At the end of the day sharing economy businesses are flourishing and sentiment is shifting for the simple fact that sharing represents value on the ground now. While challenges persist, the benefits are very real, and the pace of change continues to accelerate as we enter the sharing city of the future together.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Read more from the Meeting of the Minds Blog
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
MaaS has a lot to offer to public transit and it’s time to take a closer look at those benefits. Contrary to a common misconception, integration of third-party transit services into the wider public mobility offering doesn’t hurt transit, it actually encourages wider use of public transit, maintaining and even actively increasing ridership. Alternative transit services can address first/last mile problems as well as serve routes that are typically very costly and require a high level of government subsidy (e.g. paratransit), not only increasing revenues for transit agencies but also helping to direct funding and investment back to core transit services.
From June 26th to 28th 2018, urban transport and development practitioners, activists, and researchers from cities around the world convened in Dar es Salaam for the 3rd annual ITDP Mobilize summit. Themed “Making space for mobility in booming cities,” the event...
It is no surprise to those of us in the walking advocacy world that making bus stops accessible and linked to neighborhood sidewalks can increase bus ridership and reduce the number of para-transit trips that are called for. This is a logical outcome of thinking about how people make real life choices about how to get around. What this research demonstrates is an amazing win-win-win for walking and transit advocates. It shows how we can shift trips from autos to transit; give more people more independence by making it possible for them to use regular bus service rather than setting up special, scheduled para-transit trips (some of which require appointments to be made at least 24 hours in advance and only for specified purposes); and save money for transit systems over the long run.