Thesis advisor: Candace Jones / Thesis advisor: Richard P. Nielsen / The sharing economy has played an important role in transforming today's business landscape. The dissertation consists of two essays that examine different aspects of meanings illuminated by the sharing economy. In each essay, I draw on several theoretical lenses, including institutional logics, legitimacy, and categories, to build theories of how entrepreneurial firms strategically appropriate meanings as resources to shape the attention and the interpretation of their activities and how such cultural meanings emerge and transform. The first essay illustrates the case of Airbnb to examine how an entrepreneurial firm uses institutional logics for legitimacy in navigating multiple audiences with potentially contradictory criteria for legitimacy at different stages of development. The second essay looks at the sharing economy as a category to examine what is used as the central examples of a category by the category promoters (i.e., movement) versus the press, the differences in how the central examples are understood that lead to changes and differences in the category’s meanings, and ultimately affect the survival or decline of a category. I conclude with implications for theories around changes in meanings, the strategic uses of meanings, and their political and moral nature. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2021. / Submitted to: Boston College. Carroll School of Management. / Discipline: Management and Organization.

The sharing economy has become a widely known phenomena, however, the main focus has always been on sharing between consumers, with firms like Airbnb and Uber at the center of the conversation. There is plenty of material written on the sharing economy in a consumer context, however, there is a glaring gap in current literature when it comes to sharing between businesses. There is a need for an analysis of what drives sharing between businesses, in order to identify potential differences between the consumer and the business environment. This study aims to answer the following research question: Why and to what extent do the factors convenience, financial, sustainable and uncertainty entice or deter management participation in the B2B sharing economy? The factors investigated in the study is derived from current literature. From the literature a conceptual model was developed. To complement the secondary data interviews were held to get a better grasp of sharing in a business context. The results suggests that there is an importance hierarchy in between the factors from most to least important as follows; financial, uncertainty, convenience and sustainability. Finally, the study contributes with a revised conceptual model where data from the results are used to modify the model derived from previous literature. The revised conceptual model can guide business to business sharing platforms when developing marketing strategies for their platforms. In addition, the insights gained from the study can be used when developing a platform or business model by prioritizing the more important factors.

This thesis deals with a subject of collaboration economy and it aims at two of its representatives in particular, Airbnb and Uber. My focus targets at current status in terms of established or missing regulation and mapping of up to date trends for regulation to be developed or to be improved in contrast to what has already set. Simultaneously, there is described its functional system and familiarization with them for a potential user. At least but not last, one of the goals is to clarify why new representatives as Uber or Airbnb might be spotted controversial. It is observed that current legal status of collaborative economy does not reflect its ability to share a global market and its potential regulation from government point of view has become likely. However, politician opinions on how this regulation should look like vary. Nevertheless what may be found identical in those opinions is that there is no will collaborative economy to be repressed however, rules and limits should be clearly stated. Expansion of digital technologies and its relation to collaborative economy growth was hardly predictable. For traditional services, for instance, taxi drivers, rules and limits are very restrictive regardless modern social and technological situation does not require such a strict limits since modern...

The sharing economy is a new promising trend with many positive outcomes on society and the environment, as it provides potential for sustainable solutions due to the reduction of resource consumption and less waste. However, research and practice show that sharing comes with its own share of problems. People often act selfishly, and in worst-case scenarios try to take advantage of others without contributing to the shared good. To achieve the higher goal of sustainability, it is important that conflicts in the sharing economy are prevented, and a setting is achieved that allows people to easily behave in a cooperative and sustainable way. The present research examines which conflicts emerge in sharing communities (study 1) and community gardens in particular (study 2), and whether regulation can prevent conflicts in large groups. Two exploratory studies were conducted. First, a qualitative study with consumers and non-consumers of the sharing economy revealed that regulatory systems are perceived as important for preventing the exploitation of other community members, but also that cooperation should not be enforced with strict controls and punishment. Rather, problems should be discussed in a democratic group setting, rules and goals should be set up together, and trust should be built. Second, a questionnaire study with community gardeners in Austria confirmed these results, and showed that trust is related to less conflict in community gardens, while harsh forms of regulation are related to a potential for greater conflict. Additionally, the results indicate that soft forms of regulation are related to fewer relationship and task conflicts, better conflict resolutions, a high sense of community, and greater trust in the community. We then discuss how these findings can be used to regulate sharing economy activities and give limitations and directions for future studies.

The way we share is changing. Where we used to knock on a neighbour’s door to borrow a cup of sugar, we are now using apps to share cars with strangers around the world. Why do some people share, and why do others not? What is the role of the different players in the sharing economy, and how can sustainable growth be encouraged? The purpose of this research was to identify drivers and obstacles of engagement and paths to sustainable growth in the sharing economy. This thesis builds on previous research by expanding it to a Swedish context and by taking a broader look at the stakeholders. Interviews were conducted with five sharing economy experts in order to answer the research questions. The findings include the identification of drivers and obstacles of engagement in the sharing economy for the key stakeholder groups of users, firms (divided into established firms and startups) and the State. In total 30 factors were identified. Highlights of the discovered factors include the importance of convenience for driving participation among users, brand positioning for established firms, low barriers to entry for startups, and sustainability agendas for the State. Identified obstacles of engagement included lack of benefits for users, regulation and taxes for established firms, lack of demand for startups, and speed of change for the State. A model is developed to answer the questions of reaching critical mass and encouraging sustainability. The model describes the  players and the  playing field of the sharing economy and combines new and established theories for sustainable growth. Two of the highlighted concepts were the need for non-traditional business models and value-based investments, as exemplified by the platform cooperatives, which are user-owned sharing platforms.

Within the context of multiple crises and change, a range of practices discussed under the umbrella term of collaborative (or sharing) economy have been gaining considerable attention. Supporters build an idealistic vision of collaborative societies. Critics have been stripping the concept of its visionary potential, questioning its revolutionary nature. In the study, these debates are brought down to the local level in search for common perceptions among the co-creators of the concept in Vienna, Austria. Towards this aim a Q study is conducted, i.e. a mixed method enabling analyses of subjective perceptions on socially contested topics. Four voices are identified: True Believers, Market Optimists, Dedicated Critics, and Healthy Sceptics, each bringing their values, visions, and practical goals characteristic of different understanding of the collaborative economy. The study questions the need for building a globally-applicable definition of the concept, calls for more context-sensitivity, and the need for further exploratory approaches. (author's abstract) / Series: Ecological Economic Papers

No description available.

Individuals are motivated to consume brands that allow them to express their self-concept and signal a unique identity to others. However, consumers may not always be able to purchase these brands. Aspirational brands are currently unaffordable “dream brands” that an individual desires to purchase at some point in the future after reaching a higher status or income level. Through aspirational access, an emerging form of access-based consumption, consumers can now temporarily experience their ideal lifestyle for a membership fee. Researchers have begun to explore access-based consumption as an alternative to traditional ownership since consumers are increasingly choosing to access products and benefit from the use, rather than buying and owning them. Most research focuses on utilitarian access-based consumption, such as car sharing. Yet more consumers are using access-based services to facilitate an idealized lifestyle. In the past, these consumers would have to wait to acquire aspirational brands after saving up to purchase, but aspirational access now provides the benefits of these brands in the present allowing aspirational access-based consumers to forego the patience and work of saving long-term for the brand. Four studies are conducted to holistically explore the psychological consequences of aspirational access. Specifically, the following research questions are addressed by employing a multi-method approach in a series of four studies —What do owners of aspirational brands think about aspirational access-based services? How does aspirational access participation influence an accessor’s self- and brand-related perceptions? How can the outcomes of aspirational access be enhanced for accessors through brand curation? Can accessors temporarily using aspirational brands obtain the same level as self- and brand-related outcomes as owners? By exploring these questions, this research aims to understand the nature of aspirational brand consumption and the psychological consequences of accessing versus owning aspirational brands.

No description available.

Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit der Umsetzung der Saatgutbibliotheken in den Öf-fentlichen Bibliotheken Deutschlands. Weil es sich hierbei um einen unerforschten Bereich handelt, sollen die Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede der Saatgutbibliotheken anhand der Er-fassung grundlegender Daten über die Motivation, den Aufbau und die Finanzierung, die Aus-leihe, den Bestand, die Erschließung und Präsentation, die Zuständigkeit, die Veranstaltungs- und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit und die Evaluation erarbeitet werden.:Abbildungsverzeichnis 4 1 Einführung 6 2 Theoretische Einordnung 9 2.1 Begriff Saatgutbibliothek 9 2.2 Gründe für Saatgutbibliotheken 13 2.2.1 Kurze Geschichte der Saatgutproduktion 13 2.2.2 Samenfeste Sorten versus Hybridsorten 14 2.2.3 Ziele einer Saatgutbibliothek 15 2.3 Gründe für die Umsetzung einer Saatgutbibliothek in einer Öffentlichen Bibliothek . 17 2.3.1 Agenda 2030 17 2.3.2 Grüne Bibliothek 20 2.3.3 Sharing Economy 21 2.3.4 Bibliothek als Dritter Ort 23 2.4 Entwicklung der Saatgutbibliotheken in Bibliotheken 25 2.4.1 Saatgutbibliotheken außerhalb von Deutschland 25 2.4.2 Projekte und Beispiele in Deutschland 28 2.5 Was muss bei der Umsetzung einer Saatgutbibliothek beachtet werden? 30 3 Methode 34 3.1 Ermittlung der Befragungsteilnehmenden 34 3.2 Vor- und Nachteile der Methode 38 3.3 Erstellung des Fragebogens 39 3.4 Durchführung der Online-Befragung 40 3.5 Reflektion der Durchführung und des Fragebogens 41 4 Ergebnisse der Befragung 43 4.1 Allgemeines 43 4.2 Motivation 44 4.3 Aufbau 46 4.3.1 Partner 46 4.3.2 Finanzierung 46 4.4 Ausleihe 47 4.5 Bestand 50 4.6 Erschließung und Präsentation 53 4.7 Zuständigkeit 56 4.8 Veranstaltungs- und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit 57 4.9 Evaluation 59 4.10 Bemerkungen 62 5 Ergebnisdiskussion 63 6 Fazit 70 Literatur- und Quellenverzeichnis 72 Selbstständigkeitserklärung 82 Anhang 83