Unpacking Sharing in the Peer-to-Peer Economy: The Impact of Shared Needs and Backgrounds on Ride-Sharing

Abstract

In recent years, the peer-to-peer economy has grown exponentially, particularly in the ride-sharing sector. This growth has been accompanied by a muddying between the sharing and gig economy, and it has become unclear when an activity is sharing a resource vs. providing a service. To unpack this difference, we studied two successful carpooling groups (university students traveling home and commuting among professionals), which we contrast with previous literature on ride-hailing apps (e.g., Uber). The two communities that we studied differ in that: professionals, had more routine ride-sharing needs based on their commute; and students, arranged rides to return home for school breaks or long weekends. We detail how common needs and backgrounds impacted how carpoolers treated each other. Leveraging these findings, we outline design paths for both the sharing and gig economies to better realize the ideas of the sharing economy.

Exploring the factors that influence continued use of sharing economic platforms: Insights from idle fish

“…Shared goals are the collective objectives and aspirations among members of a collaborative network (Chow & Chan, 2008;Rong et al, 2021;Wenpintsai, 1998). When network members share a common goal of cooperation, it can enhance communication efficiency and mutual understanding, thereby fostering the sharing of ideas and resources within the network (Chow & Chan, 2008;Ma & Hanrahan, 2020). According to several studies, shared goals or visions mirror the shared values of network members in the collaborative process.…”

The ergonomics of shareable things: from a synthesis of historical sharing activities to a set of criteria for physical sharing experiences

“…Results Domains Jegou and Manzini (2008) The authors propose a series of guidelines pertaining to increasing services accessibility (e.g., 'enhance local visibility') and preserving relational qualities (e.g., 'keep the relational scale') collaborative services Kuikka and Swenne (2017) The authors propose 14 guidelines to help with the design of shared cars (e.g., 'the HMI should withstand high wear'; 'the HMI should minimize the risk of damage') car sharing Gruen (2017) The author proposes 4 key elements to design better shared products and services (meaning, uniformity, co-creation and personalisation) car sharing The authors propose 5 recommendations regarding the location of secondary controls in shared vehicles (e.g., 'the most frequently used secondary controls on the steering wheel may be optimally located on the right side in a sharing-friendly car') car sharing Fedosov et al (2019Fedosov et al ( , 2018b The authors devise a set of 24 design cards (e.g., 'approach state of and relationship with physical objects over time', 'develop the audience management tools to reach different circles') sharing facilitated by digital technology Ma and Hanrahan (2020) The authors outline 5 recommendations (e.g., 'recognize the common rhythms of exchange within a community') ridesharing…”