درک مصرف مشترک تست یک مدل نظری  Understanding collaborative consumption: Test of a theoretical model

1. Introduction Collaborative consumption enables the sharing of real-world assets and resources (Botsman and Rogers, 2011), typically through websites with peer-to-peer marketplaces where unused space, goods, skills, money, or services can be exchanged. Time magazine has proposed collaborative consumption as one of the “10 ideas that will change the world” (Walsh, 2011). However, there is currently little empirical evidence regarding the future growth of collaborative consumption and its likely economic impact on incumbent industries. The few available studies in the hotel sector have indicated a powerful wind of change. Zervas et al. (2015) demonstrated that AirBnB had claimed 8–10% of revenues in the hotel sector in Austin, Texas, and exerted downward pressure on prices. In support, a report by HVS found that in the year to July 2013, AirBnB had 416,000 guests staying in New York, equivalent to one million lost room nights for city hotels (Kurtz, 2014). Not surprisingly, there is now intense commercial interest regarding the impact of the sharing economy upon industry sectors—and whether it represents a disruptive shift (Christensen, 2003). In the car industry alone, traditional car rental services, manufacturers, distributors, dealers and suppliers are likely to experience significant impact from collaborative consumption, as are supporting services in car financing, insurance, taxation, servicing, cleaning, retailing of sundries, and petrol supply and retail. Belk (2014a) defines collaborative consumption as “people coordinating the acquisition or distribution of a resource for a fee or other compensation.” Access-based consumption refers to “transactions that can be market mediated but where no transfer of ownership takes place” (Bardhi and Eckhardt, 2012, p. 881); such consumption is sometimes considered as pseudo-sharing when there are profit motives, a lack of feelings of community, and expectations of reciprocity (Belk, 2014b). The rapid expansion of websites aimed at collaborative consumption has been said to be leading the way for a “sharing economy” (Buczynski, 2013; Gansky, 2010; Griffiths, 2013; Sacks, 2011) where individuals are mainly interested in access to rather than owning products (Bardhi and Eckhardt, 2012; Chen, 2009; Rifkin, 2000). Fremstad (2014) calculates that the average US household spends $9090 per annum on shareable goods, and that there is a positive inclination to share: 52% of Americans have rented, borrowed or leased items that are typically owned, whilst 83% would do so if this was stress-free (Wise, 2013). PwC (2015) predict that five key sharing sectors (car sharing, accommodation, finance, music video streaming, and staffing) will soar in global revenues from $15 billion in 2013 to $335 billion by 2025. The drivers for collaborative consumption websites are broad and wide-ranging, including those that are political, economic, environmental and social. As the global economy continues to reel after the effects of the financial crisis, many are beginning to question the prevailing Western political and economic models. These models appear to have created economic disparity and division in society, consumerism and excessive use of resources that have contributed to current and future environmental problems (Agyeman et al., 2013; Botsman and Rogers, 2011). Such a trajectory for development is not sustainable, especially as developing nations begin to prosper and emulate this pattern of economic activity (Johnson, 2008). This has led some to question whether it is actually necessary for consumers to buy and own so many assets, especially during a time of economic difficulty, or whether a new model in which people share what they have will contribute to better resource efficiency, social benefit and reduced environmental pollution. Thus, unifying these drivers, the concept of sustainable consumption has risen in perceived significance, defined as “consumption that simultaneously optimizes the environmental, social, and economic consequences of acquisition, use and disposition in order to meet the needs of both current and future generations” (Phipps et al., 2013: p. 1227).