Uber Korea Isn’t Part of the Sharing Economy
I hate to distract from the uproar by the expat community on the news that Uber in Korea is being banned. But, I have a “philosophical” annoyance that I would like to address. I keep hearing it over-and-over. Can we acknowledge that Uber isn’t meaningfully part of what anyone would understand of a “sharing-economy” in South Korea, or anywhere else for that matter.
The sharing-economy is a genuine movement to broker between either non-ownable resources and consumers, or between asymmetric consumption and the “sharability” of resources. In other words, it’s one way of letting people share things. “Share” is the operative word here. In no respect would I look at Uber Korea and say that this is a sharing service. So, when Calvin Kang of Uber Seoul insisted that “Seoul is in danger of remaining trapped in the past and getting left behind by the global “sharing economy” movement.,” I sort of chuckled.
Ultimately, if one were to concentrate the very definition of “sharing” as it applies to the urban economy, there are probably two prerequisites that need to be met to differentiate it from simply “renting” or “leasing” as is commonly done in a market economy : One, resources should be idle or simply have excess capacity; two, those resources should be deployed **post** a private or public capacity. In other words, actual resources are in-all-sense-of-the-word “idle,” and are not part of the larger economy.
When Uber Korea brokers between existent limousine and taxi drivers as a transactional middle-man, this isn’t sharing. This is creating opportunities within the market and addressing information asymmetries in the taxi business (which is one area where I do see potential).But it’s not sharing and its not part of the “sharing-economy.” It’s just part making taxi drivers more efficient. So Calvin Kang can probably stop saying that it is.
If you look at other areas of Korea’s “sharing-economy,” you can see other native Korean platforms that blur the line between sharing on the one hand; and simply creating more business in a conventional manner on the other.
For instance, kozaza.com is a wonderful space where individuals can look for unique listings of traditional Korean housing, single rooms, and some great Gangnam duplex spaces. If you live in a 4-bedroom home, and you’ve found that there is a single-room that’s effectively idle, and therefore list this room on Kozaza.com, you’re part of the sharing-economy, in that you’re marketing idle space for rent — post private consumption and use.
However, if you have a business, where you place your entire house up for rent throughout the year in conjunction with a new app or online platform, since this is a house that generates additional rental-income for you, then you’re simply a landlord with a penchant for new media technologies and who is probably seeking a stable supply of tenants throughout the year. This is effectively what Uber Korea does, and it’s not “sharing” in any co-operative meaning as it pertains to economy.
I think this is a difference worth noting.
