The inefficiencies of Christmas

圣誕節(jié)的低效率

Should you forget presents and give cash?

你應(yīng)該忘記送禮物而送現(xiàn)金嗎？

‘Tis the season to be jolly—and to feign delight at disappointing Christmas presents. The average British adult splurged around ￡550 ($667) on gifts in 2021, according to one survey. But a back-of-the-envelope calculation by Ian Stewart of Deloitte, a consultancy, suggests that the volumes of unwanted stuff in effect destroyed around ￡3bn of the ￡25bn value. Though many see Christmas as a time of generosity and cheer, others see waste. A small number study its inefficiencies.

這是一個(gè)快樂(lè)的季節(jié)，也是一個(gè)假裝對(duì)令人失望的圣誕禮物表示喜歡的季節(jié)。根據(jù)一項(xiàng)調(diào)查，2021年英國(guó)成年人平均在禮物上花費(fèi)約550英鎊（667美元）。但咨詢公司德勤的伊恩·斯圖爾特的粗略計(jì)算表明，大量不需要的東西實(shí)際上浪費(fèi)了250億英鎊價(jià)值中的約30億英鎊。盡管許多人認(rèn)為圣誕節(jié)是慷慨和歡樂(lè)的時(shí)刻，但其他人認(rèn)為這是一種浪費(fèi)。少數(shù)人研究它的低效率。

In 1993 Joel Waldfogel of the University of Minnesota identified a “deadweight loss” when he studied the difference between the cost of seasonal gifts and how much their recipients valued them after they had accounted for exchanges and put sentimental value aside. Today he says that on average cash spent on another person yields around 85% of the benefit of cash they spend on themselves. Although gift-giving may make some people happy, it’s “a lousy way to allocate resources,” he says.

1993年，明尼蘇達(dá)大學(xué)的喬爾·瓦爾德福格爾發(fā)現(xiàn)了一種“無(wú)謂損失”，他研究了季節(jié)性禮物的成本與接受者在考慮交換和情感價(jià)值后對(duì)禮物的估價(jià)之間的差異。他說(shuō)，如今平均而言，花在別人身上的現(xiàn)金產(chǎn)生的收益約為他們花在自己身上的現(xiàn)金的85%。他說(shuō)，雖然送禮物可能會(huì)讓一些人開心，但這是“一種糟糕的資源分配方式”。

There are ways to reduce Christmas losses. One is the use of gift cards, which give recipients some choice. But Britons don’t seem to like them much. A survey of adults from Ipsos, a pollster, found that 43% of Americans, 40% of the French and only 29% of Britons were planning to give them for Christmas 2022. Making it easier to return unwanted gifts should help. Al Gerrie, chief executive officer of ZigZag, a returns platform, says that when a gift message or gift wrap is used in fashion retail (that is, for a present) return rates tend to be considerably higher.

但也有辦法減少圣誕節(jié)的損失。一個(gè)是使用禮品卡，給收禮者一些選擇。但是英國(guó)人似乎不太喜歡它們。民意調(diào)查機(jī)構(gòu)益普索對(duì)成年人的調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)，43%的美國(guó)人、40%的法國(guó)人和只有29%的英國(guó)人計(jì)劃在2022年圣誕節(jié)送禮物。更容易退回不想要的禮物應(yīng)該會(huì)有所幫助。退貨平臺(tái)ZigZag的首席執(zhí)行官艾爾·格里表示，當(dāng)禮品信息或禮品包裝用于時(shí)尚零售（即禮物）時(shí)，退貨率往往會(huì)高得多。

As e-commerce has expanded, so too have ways of sending stuff back. But returns are a headache for retailers. On average it costs between ￡5 and ￡10 to put a product back on the shelves, says Mr Gerrie, thanks to the shipping, inspecting and repackaging required. (In January, Father Christmas’s elves must conduct “sniff tests” to see if a garment has been worn.) Increasingly, retailers are charging shoppers to return goods. ZigZag’s data suggest the number of paid-for returns has more than doubled since last year, while the number of free returns has fallen. That, though, may mean more consumers are stuck with unwanted gifts.

隨著電子商務(wù)的發(fā)展，寄回東西的方式也在發(fā)展。但是退貨讓零售商頭疼。格里表示，由于需要運(yùn)輸、檢驗(yàn)和重新包裝，將一件產(chǎn)品重新放回貨架的平均成本在5至10英鎊之間。（一月份，圣誕老人的小精靈們必須進(jìn)行“嗅覺(jué)測(cè)試”，看看衣服是否被穿過(guò)。）零售商越來(lái)越多地向購(gòu)物者收取退貨費(fèi)用。ZigZag的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，自去年以來(lái)，付費(fèi)退貨的數(shù)量增加了一倍多，而免費(fèi)退貨的數(shù)量卻有所下降。然而，這可能意味著更多的消費(fèi)者被不想要的禮物所困。

Another Christmas inefficiency for retailers is the fact that it comes but once a year. Gary Grant of The Entertainer, which sells toys, jokes that he would love it if festive sales were spread throughout the year rather than being crammed into the final quarter. He is understaffed, he says, during the holiday season, when he expands his workforce by 50%, and then overstaffed the rest of the year. Shipping companies, warehouse operators and sorting centres must also organise themselves to meet peak demand; that can mean unused capacity at quieter times of the year. Data from Metapack, a logistics software company, suggest that in December the volume of posted parcels is more than double the level in September.

對(duì)零售商來(lái)說(shuō)，圣誕節(jié)的另一個(gè)低效率是一年只有一次。玩具銷售公司The Entertainer的加里·格蘭特開玩笑說(shuō)，如果節(jié)日銷售分散到全年，而不是擠在最后一個(gè)季度，他會(huì)很高興。他說(shuō)，在假期期間，他的員工人數(shù)不足，當(dāng)時(shí)他的員工人數(shù)增加了50% ，然后在今年剩下的時(shí)間里人員過(guò)剩。航運(yùn)公司、倉(cāng)庫(kù)運(yùn)營(yíng)商和分揀中心也必須組織起來(lái)，以滿足高峰需求；這可能意味著在一年中的淡季，會(huì)有閑置的產(chǎn)能。物流軟件公司Metapack的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，12月份郵寄的包裹量是9月份的兩倍多。

Over time, it does seem that consumers are spreading their spending a little more thinly across the year. In 1986 25% of the year’s spending on clothing was in November and December. In 2019 the share was 22%. Seasonality in retail spending, which includes restaurants, is also falling. Seasonal employment as a share of the total between October and December has been decreasing since 1997, according to the Office for National Statistics. A new study by Mr Waldfogel found that since 2000 growth in the American economy has been associated with a smaller seasonal bump in December’s retail sales.

隨著時(shí)間推移，消費(fèi)者似乎確實(shí)在一年中分散了他們的支出。1986年，一年中25%的服裝支出是在11月和12月。2019年，這一份額為22%。包括餐館在內(nèi)的零售支出的季節(jié)性也在下降。根據(jù)英國(guó)國(guó)家統(tǒng)計(jì)局的數(shù)據(jù)，自1997年以來(lái)，10月至12月的季節(jié)性就業(yè)占總就業(yè)人數(shù)的比例一直在下降。瓦爾德福格爾先生的一項(xiàng)新研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，自2000年以來(lái)，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)與12月份零售額較小的季節(jié)性增長(zhǎng)有關(guān)。

While some dream of?white Christmases, others may yearn for mandatory exchanges of cash, or even a mechanism to randomly allocate the celebrations evenly across months of the year. Much would be lost if such a system were adopted, not least the joy that can accompany the exchange of carefully (if badly) chosen presents. But creating a fresh batch of unintended consequences for economists to analyse might yield some happy returns.

雖然有些人夢(mèng)想白色圣誕節(jié)（即下雪的圣誕節(jié)），但其他人可能渴望強(qiáng)制性的現(xiàn)金交換，甚至是在一年中的幾個(gè)月隨機(jī)分配慶祝活動(dòng)的機(jī)制。如果采用這樣的制度，將會(huì)失去很多東西，尤其是交換精心挑選的禮物（如果不是糟糕的）所帶來(lái)的快樂(lè)。但創(chuàng)造一批新的意想不到的后果供經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家分析，可能會(huì)帶來(lái)一些令人滿意的回報(bào)。

練習(xí)題

1. 試將下列句子翻譯成英文

回收平臺(tái)ZigZag的數(shù)據(jù)顯示在1月份付費(fèi)回收的數(shù)量是免費(fèi)回收的兩倍多。

參考譯文：Data from ZigZag, a returns platform, suggest that in January the volume of paid-for returns is more than double the level of free returns.