[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]共享經(jīng)濟(jì)外文翻譯—透視共享經(jīng)濟(jì)（全文）

1、字?jǐn)?shù)：英文 字?jǐn)?shù)：英文 5919 5919 單詞， 單詞，31978 31978 字符；中文 字符；中文 10371 10371 漢字 漢字出處： 出處：Koen Koen Frenken, Frenken, Juliet Juliet Schor. Schor. Putting Putting the the sharing sharing economy economy into into perspective[

2、J] perspective[J] Environmental Environmental Innovation Innovation and and Societal Societal Transitions.2017,23:3-10 Transitions.2017,23:3-10外文文獻(xiàn)： 外文文獻(xiàn)： Putting the sharing economy into perspectiveAbstract We develop

3、a conceptual framework that allows us to define the sharing economy and its close cousins and we understand its sudden rise from an economic-historic perspective. We then assess the sharing economy platforms in terms of

4、the economic, social and environmental impacts. We end with reflections on current regulations and future alternatives, and suggest a number of future research questions.Keywords: Sharing; Platform; Sustainability; Rever

5、se technology assessment; Regulation1.IntroductionIn the Spring of 2014, the sharing economy held an unusual gathering in San Francisco, a sort of “coming out” party. Entitled “SHARE,” the conference included not only fo

6、unders, funders and fans of the sharing economy, but also harsh critics. Politically progressive insiders and outsiders raised questions about access, exclusion and the distribution of value in the sector. They discussed

7、 their vision of a fairer, lower-carbon, more transparent, participatory and socially-connected economy, and whether those goals are consistent with the actions of the large, moneyed players—the successful platforms and

8、the venture capitalists who are backing them with vast sums “sharing economy” among academics and the public alike. One reason is due to a common misconception about the sharing economy: its novelty. Participants in the

9、sharing economy employ a discourse of trendiness, technological sophistication, progress and innovation. However, this characterization betrays both class and race myopia, as well as what historians call “presentism,” or

10、 blindness to the past. Humans have always shared. Sharing reproduces social relations and solidifies cultural practices (Belk, 2009). Furthermore, sharing is not just a relic of pre-modern societies. Carol Stack’s class

11、ic ethnography of the dense relations of reciprocity and interdependence among poor black urbanites in the U.S. showed how important sharing was to survival even a few decades ago (Stack, 1974). By contrast, Hochschild’s

12、 (2012) recent work on the growth of outsourced services among middle class whites suggests lower and declining levels of sharing. Thus, the claim that sharing is new ignores the higher levels of sharing that the working

13、 class, poor and communities of color have historically practiced and have partially maintained in the face of the growth of markets.However, there is something new about the sharing economy, which one of us has called “

14、stranger sharing” (Schor, 2014). Historically, although there are some exceptions, people tended not to share with strangers or those outside their social networks. Sharing was confined to trusted individuals such as fam

15、ily, friends and neighbours. Today’s sharing platforms facilitate sharing among people who do not know each other, and who lack friends or connections in common. Stranger sharing consequently entails a higher degree of r

16、isk, and for many of these platforms the situations are quite intimate—sharing one’s home or car, or eating food prepared by unknown cooks. The digital platforms are able to make stranger sharing less risky and more appe

17、aling because they source information on users via the use of ratings and reputations. Although there is a growing body of evidence that ratings are generally inflated and not very accurate (Overgoor et al., 2012; Zervas