Examining temporary disposition and acquisition in peer-to-peer renting

Philip, Heather E.; Ozanne, Lucie K.; Ballantine, Paul W.

doi:10.1080/0267257x.2015.1013490

Cited by 119 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One good example of collaborative consumption is witnessed in peer‐to‐peer renting. Philip, Ozanne, and Ballantine () define peer‐to‐peer renting as form of consumption whereby one individual makes available his or her physical possessions temporarily to another individual for a fee in order to meet the temporary needs of the renter without a transfer of ownership (see also Bardhi & Eckhardt, ). Nowadays, there are several business ventures and startups that have boosted collaborative consumption to rapid growth by creating online‐based platforms or marketplaces.…”

Section: Introduction and Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

De‐ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times

Lindblom

2017

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we aim to increase understanding of which social factors are central when looking at de‐ownership orientation (DOO), collaborative consumption attitudes (CCA) and collaborative consumption intentions (CCI). In addition, we analyze how DOO, CCA and CCI are linked to each other. We scrutinize DOO, CCA and CCI in Finland during a period of economic crisis. Our results show that DOO is rather evenly spread across the socio‐demographic groups, and that CCA is at a much higher level than CCI among the respondents. CCA is less impacted by factors that originate from a consumer's social and economic conditions. The studied concepts are found to be closely associated: with the increase in DOO, the propensity for CCI and CCA to increase also grows. However, DOO has a stronger effect on CCA than on CCI. Of studied socio‐economic features, age clearly has the strongest effects on each studied factor. The younger age cohorts have more positive attitudes towards collaborative consumption than others. In terms of employment status the groups that are the most positive towards collaborative consumption are those staying at home on parental leave, whereas the retired, entrepreneurs (for CCI) and unemployed (for CCA) have the least inclination towards collaborative consumption. Thus, economic crisis can be seen as working against the development of the sharing economy and collaborative consumption, or at least it could create social divisions between groups who take part in it.

show abstract

Section: Introduction and Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

De‐ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times

Lindblom

2017

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They further distinguish between platform-regulated communities (e.g., GetAround, P2P car rental), and self-regulating communities (e.g., Majorna, cooperative carsharing; see Belk, 2014a). Most collaborative consumption practices are made easier by online platforms such as Airbnb facilitating accommodation rental (Bucher et al, 2016;Habibi et al, 2016;Huber, 2017;Zervas et al, 2017), or LeBonCoin facilitating goods rental and second-hand sales (Herbert and Collin-Lachaud, 2017;Parguel et al, 2017;Philip et al, 2015). The main activities of a dual-sided platform relate to optimizing the exchange organization between peers and their competitive objectives (i.e., two distinct but interdependent value propositions are formulated), designing a governance system, while creating trust and reducing the perceived risk of P2P exchanges de Rivera et al, 2017;Einav et al, 2016;Kumar et al, 2018;Muzellec et al, 2015;Perren and Kozinets, 2018;Rochet and Tirole, 2006).…”

Section: Collaborative Consumption Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

No one rides for free! Three styles of collaborative consumption

Guyader

2018

JSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -This paper focuses on collaborative consumption; that is, the peer-to-peer (P2P) exchange of goods and services facilitated by online platforms. Anchored in the access paradigm, collaborative consumption (e.g., accommodation rental, ridesharing services) differs from commercial services offered by firms (e.g., B2C carsharing). The aim of this study is to examine the nuanced styles of collaborative consumption in relation to market-mediated access practices and socially mediated sharing practices.Design/methodology/approach -Following the general research trend on mobility services, the context of long-distance ridesharing is chosen. Data collection was conducted using participant observation as peer service provider, 11 ethnographic interviews of consumers, and a netnographic study of digital artefacts.Findings -Using practice theory, 10 ridesharing activities were identified. These activities and the nuances in the procedures, understandings, and engagements in the ridesharing practice led to the distinction of three styles of collaborative consumption: (1) Communal collaborative consumption, which is when participants seek pro-social relationships in belonging to a community; (2) Consumerist collaborative consumption, performed by participants who seek status and convenience in the access lifestyle; and (3) Opportunistic collaborative consumption, when participants seek to achieve monetary gain or personal benefits from abusive activities.Originality/value -By taking a phenomenological approach on collaborative consumption, this study adds to the understanding of the sharing economy as embedded in both a utilitarian/commercial economic system, and a non-market/communal social system. The three styles of collaborative consumption propose a framework for future studies differentiating P2P exchanges from other practices (i.e., B2C access-based services, sharing).

show abstract

“…P2P exchanges are based on one individual making her physical possession temporarily available to meet someone else's temporary need in return of mainly economic utilities, without a transfer of ownership (Philip et al, 2015). As exchanges where ownership is not transferred are radically different than those that include transfer of ownership (Loveluck and Gummesson, 2004), P2P exchanges differ from other consumption practices.…”

Section: Collaborative Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of ridesharing, this holds true as the car already heading to a direction is an unlimited supply in the eyes of the driver, who prefers sharing this unexploited resource with a passenger. However, differently, temporary transfer of ownership happens in the case of Airbnb (Philip et al, 2015). As a result, level of ownership transfer could be considered as differentiating dimension between access based P2P exchange models.…”

Section: Level Of Ownership Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The owner sets the price and rents her place for a desired period to the renter. As examined by Philip et al (2015), economic utility is the primary consideration for P2P rental of properties. On the other hand, Airbnb users __________________________________________________________________________________ DOI:10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.648 721 PressAcademia Procedia commonly express their loyalty to the service.…”

Section: High Transfer Of Ownership / High Economic Nature Of Perceivmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A typology for P2P access based exchanges in marketplaces

Ulker¹,

Burnaz²

2017

Pressacademia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different business models, products and services that are introduced with the advances in digital technologies and Internet gave rise to alternative modes of consumption. Along with this shift from ownership-based to an access based consumption, a stream of scholarly research has focused on different aspects of alternative modes of consumption such as sharing, gift giving, collaborative consumption, etc. to explain the emerging phenomena. Although several conceptualizations can be found in the literature, there is still a gap in the academic knowledge about peer-to-peer (P2P) sharing and its content. Products and services subject to sharing may vary from a car that is shared for a ride by the owner with a passenger in return for an economic benefit -so called ridesharing-, or a house that is owned by an individual and made available for rental of other people -as in Airbnb-. As the notion of exchange differs significantly between various business models based on access based P2P exchanges, this creates new possibilities to redefine the concept. This study compares access based P2P exchanges with market-mediated access-based consumption (Bardhi and Eckhardt, 2012) and sharing (Belk, 2007), and offers a typology based on the level of transfer of ownership and economic nature of perceived value. Real life business models are presented based on this typology and further research directions are suggested to better understand the main motivations of consumers for choosing an access based P2P model rather than conventional options available in the market.

show abstract

Examining temporary disposition and acquisition in peer-to-peer renting

Cited by 119 publications

References 60 publications

De‐ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times

De‐ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times

No one rides for free! Three styles of collaborative consumption

A typology for P2P access based exchanges in marketplaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About