On Issue of the Relationship of Sharing Economy and Precarization

Publication type Article
Status Published
Occupation: post-graduate student, Sociological Faculty of the Russian State University for the Humanities; Junior Researcher, Institute for Demographic Research of FCTAS RAS
Russian State University for the Humanities
Institute for Demographic Research of FCTAS RAS
Address: Moscow, Russia
Journal nameSotsiologicheskie issledovaniya
EditionIssue 12

During the fourth industrial revolution, profound changes in the field of employment are taking place, new forms of it are emerging, including those presented in the sharing economy. The sharing economy includes both the labor sector and niches related to trade and services. At the same time, the specifics of this phenomenon is the Internet, which performs an intermediary function between participants in the sharing economy. The purpose of the article is to analyze the role of the sharing economy in the precarization of employment. An analysis of the literature showed the existence of two points of view regarding the sharing economy: 1) a positive view points to an increase in the effectiveness of the use of goods, the birth of "non-market" practices and the solidarity of citizens, 2) a negative view signals attempts to camouflage old forms of exploitation under the guise of a new one socio-economic phenomenon. In this regard, the article analyzes the positive features of the sharing economy (the additional use of goods, the optimization of work processes, the emergence of new sources of labor income, the employment potential for pensioners, etc.) and the precarious features (inconstancy of employment, insecurity of income, overexploitation, etc.). As a result, a conclusion is made about the ambiguity of the role of the sharing economy: in itself, it expands the forms of precarization, but at the same time it mitigates the consequences of precarization (in other words, it performs a positive function). The scientific novelty of the study lies in a comprehensive view of the sharing economy (including the consideration of consumption and labor aspects), as an important factor in the study of the precarization of labor and, as a result, of life.

Keywordssharing-economy, non-standard employment, precarization, self-employment, agency work, outsourcing, outstaffing, gig-economy, labour market, pensioner
AcknowledgmentThe article was supported by Russian Science Foundation (project No. 18-18-00024).
Publication date27.12.2022
Number of characters19982
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 1, views: 384

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Bardhi F., Eckhardt G. (2012) Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 39. Iss. 4: 881–898. DOI: 10.1086/666376.

2. Belk R. (2014) You Are What You Can Access: Sharing and Collaborative Consumption Online. Journal of Business Research. Vol. 67. No. 8: 1595–1600. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001.

3. Bobkov V.N. (2019) Precarious employment in the Russian Federation: the state and directions of reduction. Narodonaselenie [Population]. No. 2. P. 91–104, DOI: 10.24411/1561-7785-2019-00018. (In Russ.)

4. Botsman R., Rogers R. (2010) What's Mine Is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption. New York: Harper Business.

5. Lapidus L. V., Polyakova Yu. M. (2018) Hygonomics as a New Socio-Economic Model: the Development of Freelancing and Crowdsourcing. Vestnik Instituta ekonomiki RAN [The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of RAS]. No. 6. P. 73–89. (In Russ.)

6. Malhotra, A., Van Alstyne, M.W. (2014). The dark side of the sharing economy … and how to lighten it. Communications of the ACM. 57: 24–27.

7. Markeeva A. V. (2017) Sharing Economy: Problems and Development Prospects. Innovacii [Innovations]. No. 8: 73–80. (In Russ.)

8. Scaraboto D. (2015) Selling, Sharing, and Everything In Between: The Hybrid Economies of Collaborative Networks. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 42, Iss. 1: 152–176. DOI: 10.1093/jcr/ucv004.

9. Schor J. B., Attwood-Charles W., Cansoy M. et al., eds. (2020). After the Gig: How the Sharing Economy Got Hijacked and How to Win It Back (1st ed.). University of California Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctv125jrwn.

10. Shabanova M.A. (2020) New Consumer Practices In the Context Of Civil Society Digitalization: Theoretical And Methodological Aspects (Paper 1). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 11: 16–26. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250010204-7. (In Russ.)

11. Shatkin M.A., Yakovlev L.S. (2020) Transformation of Ownership and Authority in Sharing Economy. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 1: 31–41. (In Russ.)

12. Shevchenko I.O., Shevchenko P.V. (2020) From employment precarization to life precarization? Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2022. No 7. P. 63–75. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250018913-7. (In Russ.)

13. Shevchenko I.O. (2020) Agency work: meanings and risks. In: Toshchenko Zh. T. (ed.) Precariat: the formation of a new class (collective monograph). Moscow: TsSP i M: 217–228. (In Russ.)

14. Standing G. (2014). The New Dangerous Class. Moscow: Ad Marginem. (In Russ.)

15. Strebkov D.O., Shevchuk A.V. (2019) The trap of flexible work schedule: how unusual working patterns influence the work-life balance of freelancers. Monitoring Obshchestvennogo Mneniya [Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes]. No. 3: 86—102. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2019.3.06. (In Russ.)

16. Toshchenko Zh.T., Anisimov R.I. (2019) Precarious work in Russia: status and trends. Ekonomicheskoe vozrozhdenie Rossii [The Economic Revival of Russia]. No. 2: 93–103. (In Russ.)

17. Toshchenko Zh. T., ed. (2020) Precariat: the emergence of a new class (collective monograph). Moscow: TsSP i M. (In Russ.)

18. Toshchenko Zh.T. (2022). A new socio-economic phenomenon: precariat. Noonomika i nooobshchestvo. Al'manakh trudov INIR im. S.Yu. Vitte [Noonomy and Noosociety. Almanac of works of the INIВ named after S.Y. Witte]. Vol. 1. No. 1: 146–161. DOI: 10.37930/2782-618X-2022-1-1-146-161. (In Russ.)

19. Vallas S., Schor J. (2020) What Do Platforms Do? Understanding the Gig Economy. Annual Review of Sociology. 2020. Vol. 46: 16.1–16.22. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857.

20. de Waal M., Arets M. (2022). From a Sharing Economy to a Platform Economy: Public Values in Shared Mobility and Gig Work in the Netherlands. In: Česnuitytė, V., Klimczuk, A., Miguel, C., Avram, G. (eds) The Sharing Economy in Europe. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86897-0_11.

21. Zapesotsky A. S. (2021) New realities of the social-labor sphere. Social'no-gumanitarnye znaniya [Social and humanitarian knowledge]. No. 4: 26–45. DOI 10.34823/SGZ.2021.4.51627. (In Russ.)

(Список_корректив.docx, 19 Kb) [Download]

(Шеринг_и_прекаризация.docx, 61 Kb) [Download]

Система Orphus