The "sharing economy" has recently emerged as a major global phenomenon in practice and is consequently an important research topic. What, precisely, is meant by this term, "sharing economy"? The literature to date offers many, often incomplete and conflicting definitions. This makes it difficult for researchers to lead a coherent discourse, to compare findings and to select appropriate cases. Alternative terms (e.g., "collaborative consumption," "gig economy," and "access economy") are a further complication. To resolve this issue, our article develops a consolidated (based on all prior work) and systemic (relating to the phenomenon in its entire scope) definition of the sharing economy. The definition is based on the detailed analysis of definitions and explanations in 152 sources identified in a systematic literature review.We identify 36 original understandings of the term "sharing economy." Using semantic integration strategies, we consolidate 84 semantic facets in these definitions into 18 characteristics of the sharing economy. Resolving conflicts in the meaning and scope of these characteristics, we arrive at a consolidated, systemic definition.We evaluate the definition's appropriateness and applicability by applying it to cases claimed by the media to be examples of the sharing economy. This article's definition is useful for future research and discourse on the sharing economy.

This study analyses how Information Systems (IS) research is justified by authors. We assess how authors justify their research endeavors based on published IS research papers. We use justification theory [11], which along with later work, identifies seven different value systems (i.e., orders of worth) as co-existing in society, as a conceptual foundation. We qualitatively and quantitatively analyze the justifications in published IS research papers. We provide a breakdown of the justifications used in IS research. Our findings show that the importance and relevance of IS research is predominantly justified in reference to three orders of worth (market, industrial and civic values) at the neglect of the four other orders of worth (domestic, inspiration, fame, green) that equally exist in society. We provide suggestions to stimulate a broader consideration of research topics in relation to these other orders of worth and hence alternative sources of justification for authors.