ArticlePDF Available

THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE-OUTLINE OF THE PROBLEMS

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

This article aims, firstly, to introduce the concepts of sharing economy and collaborative finance, and secondly to characterize the emergent forms of collaborative finance. The research methodology is based on a literature review, using descriptive and qualitative methods. It must be underline that in a view of the complexity of the issues raised in this article and a limited volume of paper only chosen problem would be presented
Content may be subject to copyright.
Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach
THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE
FINANCE – OUTLINE OF THE PROBLEMS
Introduction
The revolutionary changes in information technology and the rise of the sig-
nicance of social networks, stimulate the emergence of the new economic mod-
el based rather on the cooperation than on the competition. The indication of these
changes is the vast development of co called sharing economy which is now con-
cerning more and more sector and activities – also nancial system and nance in
general. The sharing economy manifest itself also in nance through so called col-
laborative nance. The collaborative nance means nance “made” by people
without the intermediation of nancial institutions. Participants of the collabo-
rative nance are convinced that by peer-to-peer nancial transactions they can
create more positive effects and that money becomes “human” again.
This article aims, rstly, to introduce the concepts of sharing economy and
collaborative nance, and secondly to characterize the emergent forms of collabo-
rative nance. The research methodology is based on a literature review, using de-
scriptive and qualitative methods.
It must be underline that in a view of the complexity of the issues raised in
this article and a limited volume of paper only chosen problem would be presented.
1. The concept of sharing economy and its scope
The sharing economy (the term was rst used in 2008 by Lawrence Lessig,
a professor at the Harvard Law School), called also a collaborative consumption,
is a new economical model, being based rather on the consumer cooperation than
14 Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
on the competition between producers. This model assumes rather a sharing of the
resources and the cooperation, than the priority typical for the market economy –
the possession of goods and the competition. In the sharing economy social value
is improved by sharing and not by ownership. So, “utilization” in this new model
is more important than “possession”1. Concept of sharing and the cooperation is
nothing new in the society, however at present is gaining the more structural form
and is characterized by rst for all – common (collective) thinking and the broad
participation in the realization of dened objectives. What more – sharing econo-
my gives people sense of independence of governments and corporations.
There are several factors which are contributing to the development of the
concept of sharing economy. The most important issue is that people nowadays
have great capacity to communicate and share thoughts, ideas but also goods. It is
possible because of the development of the social media – a group of Internet-
based applications which through employment of mobile and web-based technol-
ogies make people interconnected all over the world. The use of mobile devices
(for instance mobile phones, mobile computers, tablets, pagers, etc.) makes very
easy to locate individuals in time and space but also track and locate things (“track
and trace systems”)2. So, the sharing economy probably couldn’t emerge without
the development of “digital economy” which is based on digital technologies. To-
day’s networked world based on communication infrastructures allows an unprec-
edented degree of searching for information, communicating, interacting and col-
laboration within communities in trans border and global dimension.
An outburst of the nancial world-wide crisis and its effects are also an im-
portant catalyst of the development of the collaborative consumption. The society
started realizing that by joint organizing and acting it is possible to achieve delib-
erate objectives more effectively and counteract effects of the nancial and eco-
nomic crises. The global nancial crisis raised doubts about functioning of the
current structures of economy and triggered off as well the crisis of trust in the
corporation, nancial institutions, as well as governments3.
There are also several factors which make the sharing economy attractive to
consumers, among others are4:
1 See: P.S. Eun: Collaborative Consumption; Sharing Rather Than Buying, http://www.thegranite-
tower.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=318 (18 December 2012).
2 Based on the interview: L. Gansky: Three Factors Driving the Sharing Economy. http://www.
wobi.com/wbftv/lisa-gansky-three-factors-driving-sharing-economy (28 December 2012).
3 http://www.deskmag.com/en/the-nature-and-potential-of-the-collaborative-economy
(28 December 2012).
4 P.S. Eun: Collaborative Consumption…, op. cit.
15THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE…
sustainable development – consumers incline to avoid spending excessively,
they are more likely to use the resources more effectively – this induces the
change among manufacturers, who are more prone to discover the demands
of consumers before producing; they don’t overproduce leaving resources for
the next generations,
social stability – because the concept of sharing economy is based on coope-
ration, members of the community attach less signicance to ownership; it
can lessen the problem of social polarization and make society more harmo-
nious,
meeting the new demands sharing economy can meet the new demand of
consumers which existing economic system cannot afford.
The collaborative consumption in practice involves different activities like
sharing, lending, renting, trading, bartering, gifting and swapping various kinds
of assets (g. 1 shows the examples).
Fig. 1. Examples of different kind of assets involved in collaborative consumption
Source: Based on: http://www.collaborativenance.org/ (29 December 2012).
The sharing economy more and more universally manifest itself also in -
nance through so called collaborative nance.
16 Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
2. The collaborative nance and its forms
In last over twenty years the nancial industry went through very fast and
deep changes. Technological innovations revolutionized its activity and turned it
into one of the most modern business. However, the global nancial crisis caused
the fall of the condence in nancial system especially in banking sector and
people started to seek for an alternative manners of investing capital and nanc-
ing apart from the “traditional” nancial institutions. The global nancial crisis
was one of the principal catalyst for the collaborative nance (also “peer-to-peer
nance” or “person-to-person nance”). In general this term refers to nancial
transactions which are being conducted between relevant parties (which can be
well-known to oneself or completely anonymous) without the intermediation of
nancial institutions. The supporters of the collaborative nance perceive it as the
best answer for all shortcomings of the “traditional” nance. The development of
collaborative nance is possible nowadays because of the digital networking and
communication infrastructures which provide a platform for communicating and
cooperation. The “natural environment” for the collaborative nance is Internet,
and for its users the chances it creates seems to be limitless.
Collaborative nance is particularly attractive to individuals – low income
households, students, young couples, because it: facilitates very small savings,
has strong organizational structures, is not regulated by the central bank or any
other nancial authority, is non-prot motivated, has multiple proprietorship, has
specic borrowers identied, services are personalized and provides localized ser-
vices, has high repayment rates (above 95%), facilitates reciprocation of credit
disbursal, has close informational links and also encourages community partici-
pation in other elds of development5.
The participants of the collaborative nance nd it more “human” and are
satised that they don’t have to pay the nancial institutions. “No banks in the
middle” means higher returns for customers. Of course collaborative nance is
not free from problems and risks. One of the main issue is that this new “ap-
proach” to nance, and the sharing economy in general”, is based on trust. The
counterparty believes in good intentions of the other side. In such a situation is
therefore not difcult for misappropriation of funds. Other problems are: informa-
tion asymmetry and its consequence, i.e. negative selection. Of course the Inter-
net platforms take action against these dangers (e.g. collecting detailed informa-
tion about counterparties, using of credit scoring, collaterals, etc.). Bankruptcy of
5 http://www.collaborativenance.org/ (29 December 2012).
17THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE…
platforms offering the services of p2p nance can also be a threat. These above-
mentioned are only chosen problems of the collective nance.
There is no universally accepted and used typology of the collaborative -
nance – g. 2 shows only chosen examples of p2p nancial transactions.
Fig. 2. Chosen examples of p2p nancial transactions
3. P2p nancing – social lending and crowdfunding
One of the most important offer in the collaborative nance is possibility of
nancing. The main benets of p2p nancing are that lenders get quite high re-
turns and borrowers – low-cost loans. There are at least two main possibilities to
obtain funding without the participation of nancial institution:
1) social lending,
2) crowdfunding.
Social lending transactions take place on the principle of an auction, through
the Internet, most often on portals specialized in such services. It allows lenders
and borrowers, which different property and social status, to fast agree on condi-
tions of the transaction, and most importantly – on interest rate which suits them.
The participants of the p2p lending can be individuals, small and medium-sized
enterprises, however conditions vary according to the country and web portal.
Loans are mainly arranged for consumption, small business activity, studies, but
there are also offers for mortgage loans. The social lending services can be divid-
ed in three main categories6:
6 http://www.wiseclerk.com/group-news/services-p2p-lending-companies-by-loan-volume/
(2 January 2013).
18 Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
1. P2p lending marketplaces (e.g. Prosper, Zopa) – transactions held because of
economic motives.
2. Social lending services enabling micro nancing (e.g. Kiva, MyC4) – transac-
tions held because of social motives.
3. Others – for instance facilitating nancing families between friends and mem-
bers (e.g. family and friend lending which in the past was offered by Vir-
ginmoney).
Taking a p2p loan is very easy and takes only a few very simple steps: 1) nd-
ing and registering with the website that offers p2p lending (most sites require no
fee to sign up), 2) entering the personal and nancial information (it’s important
for verifying and checking customer credit score), 3) entering information con-
cerning the loan its purpose, size, time and the level of the interest rate which
the borrower is ready “to pay”, 4) waiting for the results of the auction, during
which offer of the potential borrower nds the ready to grant it lenders (if con-
ditions of the offer are competitive the costs of the loan could be lower), 5) deci-
sion – acceptance of the loan if the borrower approves or withdraw the listing if
does not (although some fees may apply if the potential borrower withdraws after
the bidding has ended), 6) making payments (usually at monthly basis)7. It is also
possible to nd platforms, where potential lenders offer their conditions and bor-
rowers chose the offers which suits them best. In case of p2p nancing a possibil-
ity exists that one lender lends money for one specic borrower, however due to
the diversication of the risk, lenders prefer the allocation of resources to the big-
ger number of borrowers with different credit scores. The p2p loans could be: se-
cured loans (require a collateral e.g. a car) and unsecured loans – in this case lend-
ers base mainly on the credit worthiness of the consumer8.
The biggest loan volumes are generated in the US market – the 2012 was the
best year ever for the US p2p lending industry: loan volume between Prosper and
Lending Club in December was 103.7 million USD and for the year the total was
871.1 million USD a 162% increase in one year9. Although the social lending
develop also in other highly developed (e.g. Great Britain, Germany, Spain) and
developing countries (e.g. China, India, South Africa). For instance in Great Brit-
ain 2p2 lending is predicted to exceed 300 million GBP in 201310. Fig. 3 shows
7 K. Lorette: How to nd a people to people lending loan, http://www.ehow.com/how_5554585_
people-people-lending-loan.html (29 December 2012).
8 See: K. Mitręga-Niestrój: Bankowość p2p jako alternatywa dla tradycyjnych banków detalicz-
nych. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, in press.
9 P. Renton: In 2012 U.S. P2P Lenders Issue $871 Million in New Loans. December 31, 2012,
http://www.lendacademy.com/2012-p2p-lenders-871-million/ (2 January 2013).
10 http://peertopeerlendingtree.com/ (29 December 2012).
19THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE…
new loans per month in selected p2p companies in millions of USD in march 2011
and march 2012.
P2p lending is also developing in Poland – Kokos.pl, or Finansowo.pl – are
the examples of web platforms offering such services.
Fig. 3. New loans per month in selected p2p companies in mln of USD in march 2011 and march
2012
Source: Based on: Updated: State of Selected P2P Lending Companies. March 15th, 2011, http://www.wiseclerk.
com/group-news/countries/germany-updated-state-of-selected-p2p-lending-companies/ and State of
Selected P2P Lending Companies. March 15th, 2012, http://www.wiseclerk.com/group-news/category/
p2p-banking-review/ (2 December 2012).
The main idea of the crowdfunding (the term was rst used on the blog by
Michael Sullivan in 2006) is that people through collective cooperation network
pool their resources together (usually via the Internet) in order to support vari-
ous efforts initiated by other people or organizations (e.g. including startup com-
pany funding, disaster relief, citizen journalism, support of artists by fans, politi-
cal campaigns, movie or free software development, and even scientic research).
The crowdfunding is intensively used by the non-prot community and philan-
thropy and can replace the need for specialized grant applications or other forms
of fundraising. The Internet allows quick and effective way for nding funds for
even sudden needs (e.g. disaster relief)11. The crowdfunding is a very good way
for nancing of creative projects if they nd people’s wide-web acceptance. And
is a very good example of self organization of people in virtual reality for real-
ization of special goals. There are a multitude of the crowdfunding platforms,
in many countries and very often they specialize in certain areas. There are four
types of crowdfunding platforms:
11 http://crowdfunding.pbworks.com/w/page/10402176/Crowdfunding (22 December 2012).
20 Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
lending-based crowdfunding – funders expect their money back plus a com-
mission after a set period of time,
equity-based crowdfunding – investors receive a stake in the company,
reward-based crowdfunding – funders receive non-monetary benets for the-
ir donation, a gift (e.g. material object or service),
donation-based crowdfunding – the motivation of funders is purely philanth-
ropic, for their personal satisfaction12.
According to Crowdfunding Industry Report almost 1.5 billion USD was
raised and more than 1 million successful campaigns were run by crowdfunding
platforms (CFPs) world-wide in 2011. As of April 2012 – 452 CFPs were operat-
ing globally. The Report also assumes that the total funding volume should dou-
ble in 2012 (g. 4)13.
Fig. 4. Crowdfunding – the total funding volume world-wide
Source: Crowdfunding Industry Report. Market Trends Composition and Crowdfunding Platforms. Research
Report, Abridged Version, May 2012, p. 15.
The crowdfunding is also present in Poland: siepomaga.pl, polakpotra.pl,
beesfund.com are examples of platforms offering such services14.
12 http://brickstarter.org/a-timely-global-survey-of-crowdfunding-platforms/ and http://blog.ideas-
cale.com/2012/05/18/future-of-the-crowdfunding-industry/ (20 December 2012).
13 Crowdfunding Industry Report. Market Trends, Composition and Crowdfunding Plat-
forms, Research Report. Abridged Version, http://www.crowdfunding.nl/wp-content/
uploads/2012/05/92834651-Massolution-abridged-Crowd-Funding-Industry-Report1.pdf, May
2012, (12 December 2012).
14 See: Crowdfunding w Polsce, http://crowdfunding.pl/crowdfunding-w-polsce/#.UOwNUazr0Xg
(2 January 2013).
21THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE…
4. Other examples of the collaborative nance
The next example of the collaborative nance are social savings which take
place on the Internet platforms. But the social savings platforms differ from the tra-
ditional online savings accounts because money is not just being “stored” but is
saved for a specic goal. According to Mike Ferrari co-founder of the US platform
SmartyPig people are saving mainly for: “saving to save”, travel, emergency fund
and home improvement. The goal is made public – because people want to be held
accountable and society (including friends and family) “donates” money (in prac-
tice by making a credit card payment) on a saving account. Opening, funding, and
redeeming a goal is free of charge, but there are limitation for savings goal (e.g. for
SmartyPig – the minimum requirement for a savings goal is 250 USD and the maxi-
mum – 250,000 USD). The social savings platforms usually use a third party to hold
the funds – e.g. in the US SmartyPig or Savingspoint funds are held at the member
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) partner bank and are insured by the
FDIC to the full legal amount. The partner bank also determines the interest rate
which is accrued daily and paid on savers account (monthly or quarterly)15.
The collective nance also concerns the issue of currencies, as the prob-
lem of monetary reform or transformation is one of the most interesting questions
for a part of modern society, which of course was reinforced by the experiences
of the global nancial crisis. There are society groups which are convinced that
they have the right to create currencies or even monetary system which will fulll
their expectations and needs contrary to the existing one16. The example of the so-
cial movement are so called complementary currencies (also called – “communi-
ty currencies” or “local currencies” or “common tenders”) which can be dened
as agreements within a community to accept something else than national curren-
cies as a means of payment. They “complement” another currency, usually a na-
tional one. It must be stated that the idea of the complementary currency is not
new, although nowadays is arouse interest all over the world. According to pro-
fessor Margrit Kennedy the most important feature of the complementary curren-
cies is that they are designed for specic purposes and may support the achieve-
ment of very important aims, among others: social, cultural or ecological17. Other
15 http://www.automaticnances.com/smartypig-social-saving-platform/and, http://banking.about.
com/b/2008/03/08/social-saving-with-smartypig.htm (18 December 2012).
16 Look: Synthetic overview of the collaborative economy. P2P Foundations, 2012, s. 241, http://
p2p.coop/les/reports/collaborative-economy-2012.pdf, (18 December 2012).
17 M. Kennedy: Complementary currencies. New Paths to Sustainable Abundance. August 15th
2006, p. 1, http://margritkennedy.de/media/art_en_complementary_currencies_54.pdf (28 De-
cember 2012).
22 Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
distinguished characteristics are that the issuance of these currencies is relative to
use and that they are based on underlying corresponding value18. There are differ-
ent classications of the complementary currencies one of them distinguishes
four types of complementary currencies19:
1) fully backed by the national currency – e.g. SOL in France, Lewes Pounds in
the UK, Eco-Pesa in Kenya, social currencies in Brazil and others,
2) backed by guarantees from members of the exchange system – e.g. Time Dol-
lars, some types of Local Exchange and Trade System (LETS),
3) backed by goods – e. g. Mendo Credits in the US or COMAL in Honduras –
backed by reserves of stored food, Mulligan Books (backed by inventory of
books), commercial vouchers (coupons) provided in promotional materials
etc.,
4) backed by services: frequent traveller programs in airlines, some types of Re-
giogeld in Germany.
These currencies very often have a local character and support the social and
economical development of the given community. One of the well known exam-
ples of the local currency is the Brixton Pound (B£) in the British town Brixton,
which exists in paper (since September 2009) and electronic format (2 years lat-
er). The pound sterling backing for all Brixton Pounds in circulation is held at
a local bank. The functioning of the B£ has many important local aims e.g.: de-
veloping a strong local economy, raise community awareness of the local Brix-
ton economy and protect jobs and livelihoods of community members20. There are
also examples of introducing local currencies is Poland but with different results.
Another important area of activity of collective nance within currencies is
p2p currency exchanges platforms which match people who want to exchange for-
eign currencies. Such peer-to-peer marketplace offers attractive exchange rates
because clients deal directly with each other and can negotiate a mutually bene-
cial rate and lower fees comparing to banks21 because the funds do not have
to “travel” internationally they are available where the client needs them. Ex-
changing currencies with p2p platforms is very simple, and in case of Currency-
Fair one of the most popular platforms operating in the UK, Ireland and Australia
18 http://www.quora.com/Are-complementary-currencies-a-likely-remedy-for-economic-problems/
answer/Stan-Stalnaker (18 December 2012).
19 Complementary Currencies, http://p2pfoundation.net/Complementary_Currencies (28 December
2012).
20 http://brixtonpound.org (3 January 2013).
21 Most banks charge the spread about 2.5% – CurrencyFair the participants decide on the rate. After
the transaction is completed, CurrencyFair charges 0.15% of its value and also a small fee for
sending the money to the recipient’s bank account. Over the sea and far away. „The Economist”,
May 19th 2012, http://www.economist.com/node/21554740 (3 January 2013).
23THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE…
is done in three easy steps: 1) a client has to make a deposit of the funds he or she
wants to exchange into segregated client bank account, 2) exchange the funds into
a chosen currency (there are now 17 currencies also Polish Zloty) and 3) send the
foreign currency the client has purchased to a bank account worldwide. The mar-
ket is open 24 hours a day, and soon there will be opportunity to exchange curren-
cies also at the weekends22.
The previous forms of collaborative nance are accompanied by develop-
ment of infrastructure for payments replacing traditional banking and nancial
services. P2P payments are person-to-person payments via a mobile phones or
email addresses allowing consumers send or receive money anytime for a low, or
no, fee. P2P payments aren’t something new because in 1999 it was PayPal which
offered people to exchange money digitally23. P2P payment include various pay-
ment activities, e.g.: me-to-me payments (money moves between accounts – ei-
ther on an ad-hoc or regular basis) or me-to-small-business or service provider)24.
Such payments are also part of the traditional banking offer.
The collaborative nance covers also other activities not mentioned before,
as for instance risk and wealth management, insurance or business banking. It is
developing very fast and it is not easy to predict future p2p transactions.
Conclusions
The sharing economy based on collective thinking and cooperation gives an
extraordinary opportunity also in the area of nance. The society is keen on using
all abilities which contemporary institutional changes and technological innova-
tions offer in nance. It turns out that nancial institutions aren’t already essential
for attractive investing or borrowing money. The collective nance is developing
fast and the areas of the p2p nancial transactions still emerge. Social lending and
savings, crowdfunding, complementary currencies, P2P payments are only exam-
ples of the wide, developing offer and describing the full picture of p2p nance
was beyond this study.
The collective nance for its participants seems to be the right answer for the
dangers of today’s globalized world, heavily touched by nancial and economic
22 http://www.currencyfair.com (3 January 2013).
23 P2P Payment Systems. http://www.collaborativenance.org/about/p2p-person-to-person-
payment-systems/ (4 January 2013).
24 Person-to-Person Payments. http://www.sglobal.com/products-epayment-
persontopersonpayments (4 January 2013).
24 Krystyna Mitręga-Niestrój
crisis. Although this new way of making nancial business is not free from dan-
gers and important questions. For instance – the functioning of p2p nance in de-
veloping countries or potential possibility of regulating such transactions. There-
fore the collective nance is a very challenging area for a future research.
Bibliography
Complementary Currencies, http://p2pfoundation.net/Complementary_Currencies
(28 December 2012).
Crowdfunding Industry Report. Market Trends, Composition and Crowdfunding Plat-
forms, Research Report. Abridged Version, May 2012,http://www.crowdfunding.
nl/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/92834651-Massolution-abridged-Crowd-Fun-
ding-Industry-Report1.pdf (12 December 2012).
Crowdfunding w Polsce, http://crowdfunding.pl/crowdfunding-w-polsce/#.UOwNU-
azr0Xg (2 January 2013).
Gansky L.: Three Factors Driving the Sharing Economy. http://www.wobi.com/wbftv/
lisa-gansky-three-factors-driving-sharing-economy (28 December 2012).
http://banking.about.com/b/2008/03/08/social-saving-with-smartypig.htm (18 December
2012).
http://blog.ideascale.com/2012/05/18/future-of-the-crowdfunding-industry/ (20 Decem-
ber 2012).
http://brickstarter.org/a-timely-global-survey-of-crowdfunding-platforms/.
http://brixtonpound.org (3 January 2013).
http://crowdfunding.pbworks.com/w/page/10402176/Crowdfunding (22 December 2012).
http://peertopeerlendingtree.com/ (29 December 2012).
http://www.automaticnances.com/smartypig-social-saving-platform/.
http://www.collaborativenance.org/ (29 December 2012).
http://www.deskmag.com/en/the-nature-and-potential-of-the-collaborative-economy
(28 December 2012).
http://www.quora.com/Are-complementary-currencies-a-likely-remedy-for-economic-
problems/answer/Stan-Stalnaker (18 December 2012).
http://www.wiseclerk.com/group-news/services-p2p-lending-companies-by-loan-volu-
me/ (2 January 2013).
Kennedy M.: Complementary currencies. New Paths to Sustainable Abundance. August
15th 2006. http://margritkennedy.de/media/art_en_complementary_currencies_54.
pdf (28 December 2012).
25THE SHARING ECONOMY AND COLLABORATIVE FINANCE…
Lorette K.: How to nd a people to people lending loan. http://www.ehow.com/
how_5554585_people-people-lending-loan.html (29 December 2012).
Mitręga-Niestrój K.: Bankowość p2p jako alternatywa dla tradycyjnych banków detalicz-
nych. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, in press.
Over the sea and far away. “The Economist”, May 19th 2012, http://www.economist.com/
node/21554740 (3 January 2013).
Park Sang Eun: Collaborative Consumption; Sharing Rather Than Buying, http://www.
thegranitetower.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=318 (18 December 2012).
Renton P.: In 2012 U.S. P2P Lenders Issue $871 Million in New Loans. December 31,
2012, http://www.lendacademy.com/2012-p2p-lenders-871-million/ (2 January
2013).
State of Selected P2P Lending Companies. March 15th, 2012, http://www.wiseclerk.com/
group-news/category/p2p-banking-review/ (2 December 2012).
Synthetic overview of the collaborative economy. P2P Foundations, 2012, http://p2p.
coop/les/reports/collaborative-economy-2012.pdf (18 December 2012).
Updated: State of Selected P2P Lending Companies. March 15th, 2011, http://www.wi-
seclerk.com/group-news/countries/germany-updated-state-of-selected-p2p-lending-
companies/ (18 December 2012).
EKONOMIA DZIELENIA SIĘ ORAZ WSPÓLNE
FINANSE – ZARYS PROBLEMÓW
Streszczenie
Ekonomia dzielenia się (sharing economy), nazywana również konsumpcją społecz-
nościową (collaborative consumption), to nowy model ekonomiczny, opierający się ra-
czej na konsumenckiej współpracy niż na konkurencji producentów. Model ten zakłada
raczej dzielenie się zasobami i współpracę, a nie typowy dla gospodarki rynkowej priory-
tet posiadania i konkurencji. Ekonomia dzielenia się coraz powszechniej dotyczy również
nansów, co przejawia się np. w rozwoju bankowości p2p czy społecznościowego ryn-
ku walutowego. Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie koncepcji ekonomii dzielenia się oraz
jej przejawów we współczesnych nansach – poprzez przybliżenie rodzajów tzw. wspól-
nych nansów.
... Dünyada 2008 yılındaki ekonomik kriz ve küresel olarak yaşanan sıkıntılar insanları tasarruf etme ve paylaşmaya yönelmiştir. Teknolojide yaşanan gelişmeler ve kolaylıklar ise bireyler arasında sosyal etkileşimleri artırarak birçok alanda paylaşım ekonomisine yönelik eğilime sebep olmuştur (Mitręga-Niestroj, 2013). Bununla birlikte, sürdürülebilir bir dünya için önlemler alınması açısından toplumun giderek bilinçlendiği görülmektedir. ...
... These disruptions and structural changes appear to be prevalent in the financial services industry where the global financial crisis triggered the collapse of confidence in traditional financial systems, causing customers to seek alternative means of investment (see Fig. 1). These developments have given rise to alternative financing mechanisms, including crowdfunding, cryptocurrencies, microcredit, mutual credit, social savings, and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) payments and lending, among others (Mitręga-Niestrój, 2013). Furthermore, the developments in the financial services sector seem to have massively improved customer experiences through creating new value propositions where borrowers, lenders and investors' requirements are frictionless, interest rates are lower and the processes are easier than those experienced with mainstream institutions (Gordon and McCarthy, 2014;Agyei-Boapeah et al., 2020). ...
Article
Business platform models often achieve industry disruption through the elimination of barriers such as time and space by implementing smart and sophisticated software that captures, analyzes, and exchanges huge volumes of data. Central to business platforms is their online participative infrastructure that facilitates interaction between many external producers and consumers where the exchange of goods, services or social currency enables value creation for all involved. This study adopts an exploratory approach to improve existing understanding about the strategies that financial platforms implement. In addition, we explore what incumbents are doing to ‘survive’ and if the measures they are taking are sufficient to achieve survival. Further, we examine whether customer-focused strategies, such as Experience-Based Offerings (EBOs), provide the best solution for financial service firms to gain competitive advantage. The findings show that strategies can be implemented successfully by integrating technology to improve, personalize, and customize customer experiences, while managers and employees can add quality to experiences. This study contributes to our understanding of business platforms by identifying how they are designed and managed, and how incumbents can learn from them to respond to the challenges presented by today’s rapidly changing consumer behavior. Based on our findings, we extend existing conceptual models that can be used to achieve platform-based financial service goals.
... Therefore, they find it very human and are satisfied. It is a win-win solution (Mitręga-Niestrój, 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
The successful emergence of sharing economy has received so many attentions from both organizations and customers. This recent model of business is said by many to come in the nature of disruptive, especially within the tourism industry. From small to big and popular hotels suffer loss ever since its appearance. Moreover, the sudden boom of on-demand ride hailing services such as Grab becomes a threat to many traditional taxi companies that are believed to have operated and been successful for years before the footprints of Grab is vividly seen. It turned out that the culprit behind the success of this sharing economy business model is the utilization of technology to powerfully connect providers and customers seamlessly. Especially, when the scale of internet penetration and technology development is crawling in a lightning speed. Also, not only that, many claimed sharing economy to be more affordable, convenient and sustainable to the environment. These three just pack the right combo to succeed in the market in no time. As interesting as it is, this study will research the three prominent factors in sharing economy including economic, social and environmental factor to see if they influence customers satisfaction or if the increase of customers in sharing economy is just a form of customers' curiosity towards a brand innovation.
... The sharing economy platforms rely on advanced technologies to connect individuals to the Rise of the sharing economy right work opportunities, thus increasing labor market efficiency in many aspects. Some gig workers can specialize in doing what they do best (Mitręga-Niestr oj, 2013). Therefore, one may suggest that, by increasing the workers' efficiency, the sharing economy may lead to the creation of more productive and satisfying jobs across the globe (Hamari et al., 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose This study aims to examine the various factors and conditions pertaining to the rise of the sharing economy. Design/methodology/approach After framing the sharing economy concept, the study adopts a multidisciplinary approach and relies on the extant literature to analyze and classify eight major groups of factors behind the rise of the sharing economy. Findings The analysis indicates that the sharing economy (1) represents a significant paradigm shift emphasizing utilization rather than possession and relying on mutual trust, collaboration and reciprocity; (2) benefits from fundamental transformations such as the world population growth, global urbanization, surge in the world middle class and the convergence of tastes and preferences; (3) relies on technological innovation but is affected by socio-cultural and psychological conditions; (4) is driven by emerging trends in consumption, marketing and working conditions; (5) benefits from lax or nonexistent regulation and taxation; and (6) is recognized as clean and environmentally friendly. Originality/value This paper's chief contribution resides in adopting a multidisciplinary perspective to offer an in-depth analysis of the various types of factors behind the rise of the sharing economy.
... Banking and finance transactions can be met without the need for a brokerage house and as a result, peer-to-peer transactions are rapidly becoming widespread. According to Mitrega-Niestroj (2013), collaborative finance is developing rapidly. This system, which is more humane, is attractive in that there is no obligation to pay to intermediary institutions (Mitrega-Niestroj, 2013: 16). ...
Chapter
Full-text available
Sharing is as old as humanity and has been a necessity for survival. The phenomenon of sharing since primitive social order has reached the potential to represent an alternative economy over time. The sharing system, which is based on social cooperation, contains the cores of the barter system which is an ancient tradition.
... This sharing economy began to spread widely by sharing unused resources between individuals. Startup companies including Uber and AirBnB not only provide technological platforms to facilitate transactions but also become real-world companies, with the same responsibilities as transportation companies under the sharing economy platforms [3,4]. The constituent factors of a sharing economy business model could be largely divided into eight factors for the business operations-value proposition; financial profit and loss; resources; process; target customers; exterior cooperation; and logistical flow [5]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The paper deals with a sharing economy system with various management factors by using a bulk input G/M/1 type queuing model. The effective management of operating costs is vital for controlling the sharing economy platform and this research builds the theoretical background to understand the sharing economy business model. Analytically, the techniques include a classical Markov process of the single channel queueing system, semi-Markov process and semi-regenerative process. It uses the stochastic congruent properties to find the probability distribution of the number of contractors in the sharing economy platform. The obtained explicit formulas demonstrate the usage of functional for the main stochastic characteristics including sharing expenses due to over contracted resources and optimization of their objective function.
Article
Full-text available
Na rynku usług turystycznych obserwuje się obecnie zmiany w sposobach i stylachzaspokajania potrzeb turystycznych. Prosumpcja na rynku turystycznym przejawia sięgłównie w formie aktywności dotyczącej samodzielnego poszukiwania informacji, ale równieżaktywnego jej kreowania i dzielenia się nią z innymi uczestnikami rynku. Celem artykułu jestocena wybranych zachowań prosumenckich wśród młodzieży akademickiej na rynku usług turystycznych.Przeprowadzono własne badania ankietowe wśród młodzieży akademickiej, którajest bardzo aktywna na polu usług prosumenckich. Ponad połowa respondentów preferujeorganizowanie wyjazdu turystycznego samodzielnie, bez pomocy biura podróży. Konsumencidecydują się na organizację wyjazdów turystycznych przede wszystkim ze względów ekonomicznych,dogodnego terminu wyjazdu, braku konieczności dostosowywania się do innych,podjęcia spontanicznej decyzji o wyjeździe.
Book
Paylaşım Ekonomisinin Gelişimi Volkan Yakın İpek Kazançoğlu Paylaşım Ekonomisi: Tanımı Ve Sınıflandırmaları Volkan Yakın Toplulukların Gücü: Paylaşımcı Markalar İdil Kacar Sürdürülebilirlik Ve Paylaşım Ekonomisi Canan Madran Volkan Yakın Paylaşım Ekonomisinin Üretim Ve Lojistik Boyutu Ayça Tümtürk Paylaşım Ekonomisinin Finansmanı Anıl Gacar Paylaşım Ekonomisiyle Değişen Tüketici Davranışları İpek Kazançoğlu Paylaşım Ekonomisinde Müşteri İlişkileri Yönetimi Aysun Kahraman Paylaşım Ekonomisinin Etik Boyutu Pınar Aytekin Aslı Diyadin İnternet Ve Sosyal Medyanın Paylaşım Ekonomisindeki Yeri Oya Eru Paylaşım Ekonomisine Hukuki Bir Bakış Begüm Taner Huntürk Paylaşım Ekonomisinin Geleceğini Neler Bekliyor? Murat Esen Sinan Nardalı
Article
Full-text available
Innovation permeates the financial sector by means of collaborative finance. Crowdfunding, as an activity based on peer-to-peer lending through a platform, is an innovative way to finance start-ups. A better understanding is needed of the motivational factors of backers to participate in crowdfunding campaigns. This study used the empirical data to investigate this issue, paying attention to the participation in four platform types (reward-based, lending-based, equity-based, and donation-based crowdfunding). Results indicate that the extrinsic and intrinsic motivators are constructs that drive actual behaviors. Extrinsic motivators are the prevalent driver of participants in crowdfunding, regardless of which platform type is used.
Presentation
Full-text available
Le capitalisme, système économique indiscutable depuis plusieurs décennies atteint ses limites. L'économie collaborative, poussée par des facteurs économiques, technologiques, sociaux et environnementaux est apparu comme une alternative fiable. Beaucoup d'entreprises comme Uber ou Airbnb on déjà profondément changé certains marchés mais soulèvent out de même des interrogations quand à leur système n'incluant pas vraiment toute la communauté. La blockchain, technologie régissant les cryptomonnaies comme le Bitcoin, est apparue comme une avancée permettant de pousser plus loin l'économie collaborative. En effet, celle-ci permet via un réseau internet, de pouvoir échanger sans intermédiaires de manière sécurisée. Le domaine de la finance déjà impacté par l'économie collaborative avec le financement participatif par exemple va se voir également transformée par la blockchain modifiant par ailleurs le marché de l'emploi. Cette technologie n'en est qu'à ses débuts et promet de belles perspectives futures. Capitalism which has been a powerful economic system since decades start to reach its limits. The sharing economy, driven by economical, technological, social and environmental factors gave the impression to be an interesting alternative. Several companies such as Uber or Airbnb, already disrupted several markets but has some bad points such as their system which not includes everyone in the community. The blockchain, the technology behind cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin appeared as a discovery allowing to push further the sharing economy. In fact, it allows, thanks to the internet, to exchange without third party in a secured way. The finance area has been already impacted by the sharing economy with the crowdfunding for example will be even more disrupted with the blockchain. This technology is only at its beginning but has bright prospects for the future.
After the transaction is completed, CurrencyFair charges 0.15% of its value and also a small fee for sending the money to the recipient's bank account. Over the sea and far away
Most banks charge the spread about 2.5% -CurrencyFair the participants decide on the rate. After the transaction is completed, CurrencyFair charges 0.15% of its value and also a small fee for sending the money to the recipient's bank account. Over the sea and far away. "The Economist", May 19th 2012, http://www.economist.com/node/21554740 (3 January 2013).
How to find a people to people lending loan
  • K Lorette
Lorette K.: How to find a people to people lending loan. http://www.ehow.com/ how_5554585_people-people-lending-loan.html (29 December 2012).
Over the sea and far away
  • K Mitręga-Niestrój
Mitręga-Niestrój K.: Bankowość p2p jako alternatywa dla tradycyjnych banków detalicznych. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, in press. Over the sea and far away. "The Economist", May 19th 2012, http://www.economist.com/ node/21554740 (3 January 2013).
P2P Lenders Issue $871 Million in New Loans
  • P Renton
Renton P.: In 2012 U.S. P2P Lenders Issue $871 Million in New Loans. December 31, 2012, http://www.lendacademy.com/2012-p2p-lenders-871-million/ (2 January 2013).