Etude l Etude prospective sur la mise en oeuvre de l'économie de fonctionnalité

 Download the report here : http://www.institut-economie-circulaire.fr/attachment/656998/

Jeff Tennery: Is the Sharing Economy Creating Quality Jobs?

PSFK by Jeff Tennery, Moonlighting


With the rise of income marketplaces like Uber and Airbnb, people are trying to define what this part-time employment phenomenon should actually be called.  Some are calling it the “sharing economy” or the “on-demand economy,” all in an attempt to describe this seismic shift in employment.

But thanks to the millennial generation, this change in employment status has become hip and cool.  Hipsters from the latest generation have also coined it as the “gig economy” and are embracing the part-time status, rather than actively fighting it.
Back in 2008, when the market crashed and full-time jobs evaporated, millennials graduating from college were left with few secure employment opportunities.  This particular group had very little choice but to move into their parents’ basement and work entry-level jobs that did not match their degrees or interests.

Uber and the Negative Side of the On-Demand Economy

PSFK by Guardian


In February, Airbnb chief executive Brian Chesky compared his firm’s defiance of local housing ordinances with that of Gandhi’s passive resistance to British rule. Meanwhile, a tweeter compared Uber to Rosa Parks, defying unjust laws. Chesky quickly backed down after widespread mockery. Companies acting out of self-interest comparing themselves with the noble heroes of civil rights movements is as absurd as it is insulting.

But there is a better analogy from the US civil rights era for law-flouting firms of the on-demand economy. It’s just not the one corporate leaders claim. They are engaged in what we call “corporate nullification,” following in the footsteps of Southern governors and legislatures in the United States who declared themselves free to “nullify” federal law on the basis of strained and opportunistic constitutional interpretation.

The "Sharing Economy" Is Dead, And We Killed It

Five years ago, everybody was excited about the idea of using tech to borrow things like power drills. In practice, though, not so much. 

By Sarah Kessler

"How many of you own a power drill?" Rachel Botsman, the author of the book The Rise Of Collaborative Consumption, asked the audience at TedxSydney in 2010. Predictably, nearly everyone raised his or her hand. "That power drill will be used around 12 to 15 minutes in its entire lifetime," Botsman continued with mock exasperation. "It’s kind of ridiculous, isn’t it? Because what you need is the hole, not the drill."

After pausing for a moment as the audience chuckled, she provided the obvious solution.

"Why don’t you rent the drill? Or rent out your own drill to other people and make some money from it?"

Back then, this version of what Botsman called collaborative consumption, or what would become better known as "the sharing economy," seemed like a warm and fuzzy inevitability. American consumerism had been tamped by one of the worst recessions in history, concerns about the environment were growing, and new online networks provided a connective thread that could help us get by on less by sharing things with our neighbors. "We now live in a global village where we can mimic the ties that used to happen face to face, but on a scale and in a way that has never been possible before," Botsman explained, and these new systems allowed us "to engage in a humanness that got lost along the way." We were now, she said, experiencing "a seismic shift from individual getting and spending towards a rediscovery of collective good." Everything made sense except that nobody gives a shit. They go buy [a drill]. Or they just bang a screwdriver through the wall.

CIT BARTER : VERS L'ÉCONOMIE DE PARTAGE EN ENTREPRISE

LES CLÉS DE DEMAIN - 06 OCTOBRE 2015

Cette start-up veut faire de l'économie collaborative la norme en entreprise. Un objectif audacieux qui trouve ses origines dans les années 1930.

 

 

Et si l'économie collaborative ou économie de partage, notion du plus en plus en vogue auprès des particuliers, se développait dans le monde de l'entreprise ? C'est du moins l'ambition de la start-up française CIT BARTER, fondée il y a moins d'un an et qui a déjà su convaincre plus d'une vingtaine d'entreprises.

Cette plateforme, présentée par Pascal Berger son fondateur comme à mi-chemin entre le réseau social professionnel et la place de marché, s'adresse essentiellement aux entreprises du conseil et du numérique et leur permet d'échanger des compétences, sans avoir besoin de toucher à leur trésorerie. Juste naissante en France, bien que déjà davantage développée aux Etats-Unis, cette pratique porte un nom : le « bartering ». Elle a vu le jour outre-Atlantique dans les années 1930 et concernait à l'origine les secteurs de la radio et de la télévision, où le financement d'émissions s'échangeait contre de l'espace publicitaire. Le « bartering » a évolué au fil du temps pour se rapprocher davantage aujourd'hui de la notion de troc.

Social Good Currency

UNICEF Promises That Its Unicoin is the 'First Currency Dedicated to Do Good'

UNICEF recently unveiled the 'Unicoin,' a form of currency that aims to promote good in the world. The coin can only be possessed by exchanging a drawing online through the Unicoin website and it can only be spent by purchasing educational supplies for kids. For each drawing that is donated, H&M's Conscious Foundation also matches each Unicoin spent with a notebook and a pencil.

As an organization that is devoted to supporting children's rights around the world, this is a clever way to get on board with the growing cryptocurrency movement.

Now that Bitcoin is being regarded as legitimate legal tender, other alternate forms of currency are beginning to emerge. Like the Unicoin, some are committed to making changes that have to do with social good.

Here's how the 'self-management' system that Zappos is using actually works

Online retailer Zappos began a transition to "Holacracy" in 2013, deciding to ditch manager roles and job titles in favor of "self-management."

The alternative management system was created in 2007 by a software developer who says more than 300 companies worldwide have adopted it, including Twitter cofounder Ev Williams' company Medium and the cash automation company Arca.

Amazon-owned Zappos, which has more than 1,000 employees, is by far the largest company to try operating as a Holacracy.

But what exactly is it, and how does it work? Using the new book, "Holacracy: The New Management System for a Rapidly Changing World" by the system's creator, we break it down.

L'expédition ShaREvolution s'achève et livre ses pistes d'innovation !

L’expédition continue à publier ses pistes d’innovation sur InternetActu ! 

Visitez les liens suivants :

• Vers des objets conçus pour le partage
• Des Hubs de partage pour la consommation collaborative
• Consommation collaborative : l’enjeu du financement et de la gouvernance
• Consommation collaborative : (pour) de nouvelles réponses aux défis sociaux

La suite des pistes dans les prochains jours sur InternetActu.

VHX, le Netflix de Monsieur Tout-le-Monde

Une plate-forme pour les réalisateurs du dimanche désireux de monnayer leur réalisation, vous en rêviez ? Probablement pas. Pourtant elle existe et elle est plus que légitime.

California Labor Commission rules an Uber driver is an employee, which could clobber the $50 billion company

The California labor commission has ruled that an Uber driver is an employee, not a contractor, Reuters reports.

The decision was made after a San Francisco driver, Barbara Ann Berwick, filed a claim against the company.
The commission sided with her largely because it deemed Uber was "involved in every aspect of the operation."
It's potentially a huge blow to Uber's business model, at least in California. There's currently a class action suit going on in which drivers are suing Uber (and competitor Lyft) trying to get classified as employees rather than contractors.
Today's decision is not part of that suit, but it could lend some ammunition to it.
Uber is appealing the board's ruling.

In a statement, Uber said:
The California Labor Commission’s ruling is non-binding and applies to a single driver. Indeed it is contrary to a previous ruling by the same commission, which concluded in 2012 that the driver ‘performed services as an independent contractor, and not as a bona fide employee.’ Five other states have also come to the same conclusion.

By appealing the ruling in the California Superior Court, though, Uber could find itself establishing a precedent.
“If the decision gets affirmed, then it could be a broader precedent,” said Shannon Liss-Riordan, the attorney who is representing Uber drivers in a class-action suit against the company.
Even without the affirmation, Liss-Riordan said she can still use the decision to her advantage.
“I think it is significant that the California agency charged with upholding California labor laws determined this driveris an employee under the law,” Liss-Riordan said. “Courts often give some deference to a state agency."

Right now, Uber has hardly any costs other than its 3,000-plus employees in its San Francisco headquarters. Uber takes a percentage of every ride (20%-30%). It doesn't employ drivers; it merely connects supply (user requests on its app) with demand (independent contract drivers who are roaming and have agreed to partner with Uber).

If all drivers there were classified as employees, Uber wouldn't just be a logistics company printing money, at least in California.
The cost to run the business there would skyrocket. Uber would have to seriously consider downsizing the number of drivers it has as partners and provide benefits for them all.
Employees are expensive; companies have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for each employee among other things, according to the IRS. They don't have to do any of that for independent contractors.
Also, drivers have to cover a lot of their expenses — gas, car maintenance, insurance — though Uber has begun to offer perks to offset some of these costs.

Let's keep in mind that this ruling is only in California. Uber, which was last valued at about $50 billion, has more than 1 million drivers worldwide.
While California is Uber's largest market, the company operates in 311 cities and 58 countries, so this is a small percentage of Uber's global business.

By the way, this ruling isn't just a huge deal for Uber and Lyft. There have been a lot of "Uber for X" startups to follow in their wake: $1 billion startup Instacart, for example, has contract workers deliver groceries; $250 million startup Shyp has regular people mail things for customers.
If these companies, which are referred to as the "1099 economy," can no longer have independent contract workers, all of their business models are shot.
And if their business models are shot, that's pretty bad news for investors who have been pouring unprecedented amounts of money into private companies over the past few years.
Their investments have allowed startups to stay private longer and avoid going public or getting acquired. That means venture capitalists and startup employees haven't had much chance to gain liquidity.

So while Uber is a $50 billion company on paper and investors look like gods who will get crazy returns someday, many haven't actually gotten much cash back yet.
This concept — pouring lots of money into companies without seeing a cash return — is called a "dry bubble." And as Uber board member Bill Gurly recently tweeted:
"Wet bubbles (1999) are more fun than dry ones (2015)."
Below is a copy of the Uber ruling, from June 16.
Driverless cars are probably starting to look pretty good to Uber right about now.

Uber Filing