Sharing economy: International marketing strategies

Abstract

The sharing economy (SE) is growing rapidly around the globe, but SE firms often encounter challenges and even failures when entering some countries. The authors conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness of key strategic drivers of SE participation (utilitarian value, social value, hedonic value, sustainability value, and trust) and examine their relative effectiveness across global contingencies (economic/competitive, cultural, societal, technological, regulatory, and demographic factors). Results indicate that hedonic value generates the most cross-national benefits, whereas social and sustainability values provide the least. The results reveal a complex pattern of global contingencies that firms should consider when developing their entry strategies, designing governance mechanisms, and evaluating the most promising markets. Finally, the authors offer three tenets that establish an emerging perspective of global SE participation: (1) High levels of economic and social inequality between SE participants lessen the importance of hedonic benefits, but enhance the importance of utilitarian and social benefits; (2) consumers are most motivated by the benefits associated with the lowest level of their unsatisfied needs on the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs; and (3) consumers are more influenced by governance mechanisms that increase their trust in providers and platforms in markets with low levels of generalized trust.

Resume

L’économie du partage (EP) se développe rapidement dans le monde entier, mais les entreprises de l’EP sont souvent confrontées à des défis et même des échecs lors de leur entrée dans certains pays. Les auteurs mènent une méta-analyse pour étudier l’efficacité des principaux moteurs stratégiques de la participation à l’EP (valeur utilitaire, valeur sociale, valeur hédonique, valeur de durabilité et confiance) et examinent leur efficacité relative à travers les contingences mondiales (économique/compétitive, culturelle, sociétale, facteurs technologiques, réglementaires et démographiques). Les résultats indiquent que la valeur hédonique génère le plus d’avantages transnationaux, tandis que les valeurs sociales et de durabilité en fournissent le moins. Les résultats révèlent un modèle complexe de contingences mondiales que les entreprises devraient prendre en compte lors de l’élaboration de leurs stratégies d’entrée, de la conception de mécanismes de gouvernance et de l’évaluation des marchés les plus prometteurs. Enfin, les auteurs proposent trois principes qui établissent une perspective émergente de la participation mondiale à l’ EP : (1) Des niveaux élevés d’inégalités économiques et sociales entre les participants à l’ EP réduisent l’importance des avantages hédoniques, mais renforcent l’importance des avantages utilitaires et sociaux; (2) les consommateurs sont les plus motivés par les avantages associés au niveau le plus bas de leurs besoins insatisfaits dans la hiérarchie des besoins de Maslow; et (3) les consommateurs sont davantage influencés par les mécanismes de gouvernance qui augmentent leur confiance dans les fournisseurs et les plates-formes sur des marchés à faible niveau de confiance généralisée.

Resumen

La economía compartida (SE por sus iniciales en inglés) está creciendo rápidamente alrededor del mundo, pero las empresas de la economía compartida con frecuencia encuentran retos e incluso fracasos cuando entran a algunos países. Los autores realizaron un meta-análisis para investigar la efectividad de los impulsores estratégicos clave de la participación de la economía compartido (valor utilitario, valor social, valor hedónico, valor sostenible, y confianza) y examinaron su efectividad relativa a través de las contingencias globales (factores económicos/competitivos, culturales, sociales, tecnológicos, regulatorios, y demográficos). Los resultados indican que los valores hedónico general la mayoría de los beneficios transnacionales, mientras que los valores sociales y de sostenibilidad proporcionan los menores. Los resultados revelan un patrón complejo de las contingencias globales que las empresas deben considerar al desarrollar sus estrategias de entrada, desarrollar sus mecanismos de gobernanza, y al evaluar sus mercados más promisorios. Finalmente, los autores ofrecen tres principios que establecen una perspectiva emergente de la participación global de la economía compartida: (1) Los altos niveles de desigualdad económica y social entre los participantes de la economía compartida disminuyen la importancia de los beneficios hedónicos, pero aumentan la importancia de los beneficios utilitarios y sociales; (2) los consumidores están más motivados por los beneficios asociados con el nivel más bajo de sus necesidades insatisfechas sobre la jerarquía de necesidades de Maslow; y (3) los consumidores están más influenciados por los mecanismos del gobierno que aumentan su confianza en proveedores y plataformas en mercados con bajos niveles de confianza generalizada.

Resumo

A economia compartilhada (SE) está crescendo rapidamente em todo o mundo, mas empresas da SE frequentemente encontram desafios e até mesmo fracassos ao entrar em alguns países. Os autores realizam uma meta-análise para investigar a eficácia de principais direcionadores estratégicos da participação na SE (valor utilitário, valor social, valor hedônico, valor de sustentabilidade e confiança) e examinam sua eficácia relativa em contingências globais (fatores econômicos/competitivos, culturais, sociais, tecnológicos, regulatórios e demográficos). Resultados indicam que o valor hedônico gera os maiores benefícios transnacionais, enquanto os valores sociais e de sustentabilidade fornecem o mínimo. Resultados revelam um padrão complexo de contingências globais que empresas devem considerar ao desenvolver suas estratégias de entrada, projetar mecanismos de governança e avaliar os mercados mais promissores. Finalmente, os autores oferecem três princípios que estabelecem uma perspectiva emergente sobre a participação global na SE: (1) Altos níveis de desigualdade econômica e social entre os participantes da SE diminuem a importância de benefícios hedônicos, mas aumentam a importância de benefícios utilitários e sociais; (2) consumidores são mais motivados pelos benefícios associados ao nível mais baixo de suas necessidades não atendidas na hierarquia de necessidades de Maslow; e (3) consumidores são mais influenciados por mecanismos de governança que aumentam sua confiança em fornecedores e plataformas em mercados com baixos níveis de confiança generalizada.

摘要

共享经济(SE)在全球范围内发展迅速, 但是SE公司进入一些国家时经常遇到挑战甚至失败。作者进行了荟萃分析, 研究了SE参与的关键战略驱动力(功利价值、社会价值、享乐价值、可持续性价值和信任)的有效性, 并研究了其在全球突发事件(经济/竞争、文化、社会、技术、法规和人口因素)中的相对有效性。结果表明, 享乐价值产生了最多的跨国利益, 而社会和可持续性价值提供的却最少。结果揭示了企业在制定进入策略、设计治理机制、以及评估最有前途的市场时应考虑的全球突发事件的复杂模式。最后, 作者提出了确立了全球SE参与的新兴视角的三个原理: (1)SE参与者之间的经济和社会的高度不平等降低享乐利益的重要性, 但增加功利和社会利益的重要性;(2)消费者们最被与马斯洛(Maslow)需要等级结构中他们未能满足的最低等级需要相关的利益所激励;(3)消费者更受治理机制的影响, 这种治理机制增加他们对一般信任水平低的市场中的供应者和平台的信任。

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1

REFERENCES

  1. Airbnb. 2014. The bélo report: An infographic on the new Airbnb symbol. https://blog.atairbnb.com/belo-report-new-airbnb-symbol-infographic/. Accessed 8 April 2019.

  2. Akbar, P. 2019. Guiding empirical generalization in research on access-based services. Journal of Business Research, 100(7): 16–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Akbar, P., Mai, R., & Hoffmann, S. 2016. When do materialistic consumers join commercial sharing systems? Journal of Business Research, 69(10): 4215–4224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alter, A., Cobbaut, N., Gonzalez, B., Goris, R., & Winkel, J. 2016. Sharing economy, an opportunity for the poorest? An exploratory study. Brussels: King Baudouin Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Amirkiaee, S. Y., & Evangelopoulos, N. 2018. Why do people rideshare? An experimental study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 55(May): 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. 2012. Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4): 881–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bhavnani, A., Chiu, R. W.-W., Janakiram, S., Silarszky, P., & Bhatia, D. 2008. The role of mobile phones in sustainable rural poverty reduction. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/The_Role_of_Mobile_Phones_in_Sustainable_Rural_Poverty_Reduction_June_2008.pdf. Accessed 26 December 2019.

  8. Biswas, R., & Pahwa, A. 2015. The rise of the sharing economy—The Indian landscape. http://sharehub.kr/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/e1a7c1d73dfae19dcfa0.pdf. Accessed 29 June 2019.

  9. Blau, P. M. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Blau, P. M. 1994. Structural context of opportunities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boateng, H., Kosiba, J. P. B., & Okoe, A. F. 2019. Determinants of consumers’ participation in the sharing economy: A social exchange perspective within an emerging economy context. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(2): 718–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. 2010. What’s mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. New York: Harper-Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brandon, S. 2018. Try one of Australia’s most popular bike sharing services. https://www.finder.com.au/best-bike-sharing-services. Accessed 9 June 2019.

  14. Brown, N. 2018. The consumer psychology behind the sharing economy—What marketers must know. https://www.skyword.com/contentstandard/creativity/the-consumer-psychology-behind-the-sharing-economy-what-marketers-must-know/. Accessed 14 July, 2019.

  15. Bucher, E., Fieseler, C., & Lutz, C. 2016. What’s mine is yours (for a nominal fee)–Exploring the spectrum of utilitarian to altruistic motives for Internet-mediated sharing. Computers in Human Behavior, 62(September): 316–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Buchholz, K. 2019. Chinese on top of the sharing economy. https://www.statista.com/chart/18327/openness-to-sharing-economy-survey/. Accessed 4 November, 2019.

  17. Burkhard, D. 2014. Share this! 4 sharing economy services you should know. https://www.newlyswissed.com/4-sharing-economy-services-know-switzerland/. Accessed 13 July 2019.

  18. Burt, R. S. 2000. The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22: 345–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cantwell, J., Piepenbrink, A., & Shukla, P. 2014. Assessing the impact of JIBS as an interdisciplinary journal: A network approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(7): 787–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cao, Z., Li, Y., Jayaram, J., Liu, Y., & Lumineau, F. 2018. A meta-analysis of the exchange hazards–interfirm governance relationship: An informal institutions perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(3): 303–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. CB Insights. 2018. How Uber makes—And loses—Money. https://www.cbinsights.com/research/report/how-uber-makes-money/. Accessed 9 June 2019.

  22. Central Intelligence Agency. 2019. The World Facebook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-factbook/fields/341.html#XX. Accessed 1 April 2019.

  23. Chen, C. C., & Chang, Y. C. 2018. What drives purchase intention on Airbnb? Perspectives of consumer reviews, information quality, and media richness. Telematics and Informatics, 35(5): 1512–1523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chen, W., & Wellman, B. 2004. The global digital divide-within and between countries. IT & Society, 1(7): 39–45.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cheng, M. 2016. Sharing economy: A review and agenda for future research. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 57(August): 60–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Coviello, N., Kano, L., & Liesch, P. W. 2017. Adapting the Uppsala model to a modern world: Macro-context and microfoundations. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9): 1151–1164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. 2005. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6): 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Davidson, A., Habibi, M. R., & Laroche, M. 2018. Materialism and the sharing economy: A cross-cultural study of American and Indian consumers. Journal of Business Research, 82(10): 364–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Deloitte, 2015. Review of the collaborative economy in NSW. Kingston: Deloitte Access Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. 2006. Some uses of happiness data in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1): 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dimoutso. 2014. Lyft me, your friend with a car. https://consumervaluecreation.com/2014/01/22/lyft-me-your-friend-with-a-car/. Accessed 11 April 2019.

  32. Eckhardt, G. M., & Bardhi, F. 2015. The sharing economy isn’t about sharing at all. https://hbr.org/2015/01/the-sharing-economy-isnt-about-sharing-at-all. Accessed 8 April 2019.

  33. Eckhardt, G. M., Houston, M. B., Jiang, B., Lamberton, C., Rindfleisch, A., & Zervas, G. 2019. Marketing in the sharing economy. Journal of Marketing, 83(5): 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Edeling, A., & Himme, A. 2018. When does market share matter? New empirical generalizations from a meta-analysis of the market share–Performance relationship. Journal of Marketing, 82(3): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Edelman, B. 2017. Uber can’t be fixed—It’s time for regulators to shut it down. https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down. Accessed 8 July 2019.

  36. Ekeledo, I., & Sivakumar, K. 1998. Foreign market entry mode choice of service firms: A contingency perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(4): 274–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Emarketer. 2017. Uber, Airbnb lead the way as sharing economy expands. https://www.emarketer.com/Article/Uber-Airbnb-Lead-Way-Sharing-Economy-Expands/1016109. Accessed 15 June 2019.

  38. Ert, E., Fleischer, A., & Magen, N. 2016. Trust and reputation in the sharing economy: The role of personal photos in Airbnb. Tourism Management, 55(August): 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Fischer, R., & Mansell, A. 2009. Commitment across cultures: A meta-analytical approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(8): 1339–1358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Franke, R. H., Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. 1991. Cultural roots of economic performance: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S1): 165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Frenken, K., & Schor, J. 2017. Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23(June): 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Griffith, D. A., Cavusgil, S. T., & Xu, S. 2008. Emerging themes in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(7): 1220–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hagerty, M. R., & Veenhoven, R. 2003. Wealth and happiness revisited–growing national income does go with greater happiness. Social Indicators Research, 64(1): 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. 2016. The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9): 2047–2059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Haslehurst, R., & Lewis, A. 2016. We don’t need a whole new regulatory regime for platforms like Uber and Airbnb. https://hbr.org/2016/04/we-dont-need-a-whole-new-regulatory-regime-for-platforms-like-uber-and-airbnb. Accessed 10 June 2019.

  46. Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. D. 2018. World happiness report 2018. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hofstede, G. H. 2001. Behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hofstede, G. H., Hofstede, G. J., & Arrindell, W. A. 1998. Masculinity and femininity: The taboo dimension of national cultures. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hofstede, G. H., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. 2010. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. 2014. Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2): 149–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. 2004. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Internet Live Stats. 2016. Internet users by country. https://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users-by-country/. Accessed 12 January 2020.

  53. ITU, 2019. The ICT development index (IDI): Conceptual framework and methodology. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/publications/mis2017/methodology.aspx. Accessed 1 January 2019.

  54. Jacobo, J. 2019. Uber launches feature that lets female drivers in Saudi Arabia avoid taking male passengers. https://abcnews.go.com/International/uber-launches-feature-lets-female-drivers-saudi-arabia/story?id=62455985. Accessed 30 June 2019.

  55. John, A., & Lawton, T. C. 2018. International political risk management: Perspectives, approaches and emerging agendas. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(4): 847–879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Johnston, W. J., Le, A. N. H., & Cheng, J. M. S. 2018. A meta-analytic review of influence strategies in marketing channel relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(4): 674–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Jonsson, A., & Foss, N. J. 2011. International expansion through flexible replication: Learning from the internationalization experience of IKEA. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(9): 1079–1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Judge, W. Q., Fainshmidt, S., & Brown, J. L., III. 2014. Which model of capitalism best delivers both wealth and equality? Journal of International Business Studies, 45(4): 363–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Katsikeas, C. S., Skarmeas, D., & Bello, D. C. 2009. Developing successful trust-based international exchange relationships. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(1): 132–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Katwala, A. 2019. Uber’s new London rival has one huge advantage: it’s much cheaper. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/bolt-taxi-london-price-uber-app. Accessed 8 January 2020.

  61. Kerr, W. R. 2016. Harnessing the best of globalization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(1): 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Kim, Y. G., Woo, E., & Nam, J. 2018. Sharing economy perspective on an integrative framework of the NAM and TPB. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 72(June): 109–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Knoll, J., & Matthes, J. 2017. The effectiveness of celebrity endorsements: A meta-analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(1): 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Kumar, V., Lahiri, A., & Dogan, O. B. 2018. A strategic framework for a profitable business model in the sharing economy. Industrial Marketing Management, 69(February): 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Lam, S. K., Ahearne, M., & Schillewaert, N. 2012. A multinational examination of the symbolic–instrumental framework of consumer–brand identification. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(3): 306–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Lamberton, C. P., & Rose, R. L. 2012. When is ours better than mine? A framework for understanding and altering participation in commercial sharing systems. Journal of Marketing, 76(4): 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Lane, E. 2017. The young Japanese working themselves to death. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-39981997. Accessed 28 December 2019.

  68. Lang, C. 2018. Perceived risks and enjoyment of access-based consumption: Identifying barriers and motivations to fashion renting. Fashion and Textiles, 5(September): 23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Larmer, B. 2018. China’s revealing spin on the ‘sharing economy’. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/magazine/chinas-revealing-spin-on-the-sharing-economy.html. Accessed 27 October 2018.

  70. Layte, R. 2012. The association between income inequality and mental health: Testing status anxiety, social capital, and neo-materialist explanations. European Sociological Review, 28(4): 498–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Lee, Z. W., Chan, T. K., Balaji, M. S., & Chong, A. Y. L. 2018. Why people participate in the sharing economy: An empirical investigation of Uber. Internet Research, 28(3): 829–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Lee, S., & Kim, D. Y. 2018. The effect of hedonic and utilitarian values on satisfaction and loyalty of Airbnb users. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(3): 1332–1351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. 2018. A general theory of springboard MNEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(2): 129–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Lutz, C., & Newlands, G. 2018. Consumer segmentation within the sharing economy: The case of Airbnb. Journal of Business Research, 88(7): 187–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Mahadevan, R. 2018. Examination of motivations and attitudes of peer-to-peer users in the accommodation sharing economy. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(6): 679–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Mao, Z., & Lyu, J. 2017. Why travelers use Airbnb again? An integrative approach to understanding travelers’ repurchase intention. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(9): 2464–2482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Martin, K. D., & Hill, P. R. 2012. Life satisfaction, self-determination, and consumption adequacy at the bottom of the pyramid. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(6): 1155–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Martin, A., & Pfanner, E. 2016. Japan slowly opens door to sharing economy. https://www.wsj.com/articles/japan-slowly-opens-the-door-to-the-sharing-economy-1455008405. Accessed 2 October 2018.

  79. Maslow, A. H. 1968. Toward a psychology of being (2nd ed.). Oxford: D. Van Nostrand.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Maslow, A. H., & Frager, R. 1987. Motivation and personality (3rd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Milanova, V., & Maas, P. 2017. Sharing intangibles: Uncovering individual motives for engagement in a sharing service setting. Journal of Business Research, 75(6): 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Mittendorf, C. 2017. Create an Uber account? An investigation of trust and perceived risk in the sharing economy. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 16(3): 281–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Mody, M., Suess, C., & Lehto, X. 2019. Going back to its roots: Can hospitableness provide hotels competitive advantage over the sharing economy? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76(Part A, January): 286–298.

  84. Najar, N. 2015. Ex-Driver for Uber is convicted of raping passenger in New Delhi. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/21/world/asia/uber-driver-in-india-is-found-guilty-of-rape.html. Accessed 3 July 2019.

  85. OECD. 2019. Income inequality (indicator). https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm#indicator-chart. Accessed 20 May 2019.

  86. Oh, H., Jeong, M., & Baloglu, S. 2013. Tourists’ adoption of self-service technologies at resort hotels. Journal of Business Research, 66(6): 692–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Ola. 2020. https://www.olacabs.com/about.html. Accessed 1 June 2020.

  88. Our World in Data. 2014. Trust by Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser. https://ourworldindata.org/trust/. Accessed 7 July 2019.

  89. Oyedele, A., & Simpson, P. 2018. Emerging adulthood, sharing utilities and intention to use sharing services. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(2): 161–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Parente, R. C., Geleilate, J. M. G., & Rong, K. 2018. The sharing economy globalization phenomenon: A research agenda. Journal of International Management, 24(1): 52–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Perren, R., & Kozinets, R. V. 2018. Lateral exchange markets: How social platforms operate in a networked economy. Journal of Marketing, 82(1): 20–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Pick, D., & Eisend, M. 2014. Buyers’ perceived switching costs and switching: A meta-analytic assessment of their antecedents. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(2): 186–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Pickett, K., & Wilkinson, R. G. 2010. The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Prayag, G., & Ozanne, L. K. 2018. A systematic review of peer-to-peer (P2P) accommodation sharing research from 2010 to 2016: Progress and prospects from the multi-level perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(6): 649–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Purnell, N., & Venkat, P. R. 2018. Uber sells Southeast Asia business to rival grab. https://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-sells-southeast-asia-business-to-rival-grab-1522029863. Accessed 2 June 2019.

  96. PwC. 2015. The sharing economy. https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/consulting/library/consumer-intelligence-series/sharing-economy.html. Accessed 14 November 2018.

  97. Reuters. 2017. South Korea court says Uber violated transport law, latest setback for US firm. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-tech-southkorea-idUSKBN17S09F. Accessed 2 July 2019.

  98. Reuters. 2018. Brazil president signs rules for Uber, ride-hailing apps into law. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-brazil/brazil-president-signs-rules-for-uber-ride-hailing-apps-into-law-idUSKBN1H22MD. Accessed 27 December 2019.

  99. Richter, S. 2014. To succeed in Germany, Uber needs to grow up. https://hbr.org/2014/09/to-succeed-in-germany-uber-needs-to-grow-up. Accessed 14 December 2018.

  100. Riefler, P., Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. 2012. Cosmopolitan consumers as a target group for segmentation. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(3): 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Rinne, A. 2017. What exactly is the sharing economy? https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/12/when-is-sharing-not-really-sharing/. Accessed 15 June 2019.

  102. Rinne A. 2019. 4 big trends for the sharing economy in 2019. www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/01/sharing-economy/. Accessed 15 April 2019.

  103. Rochabrun, M. 2018. Uber opens Brazil center to improve driver, passenger safety. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-brazil/uber-opens-brazil-center-to-improve-driver-passenger-safety-idUSKBN1L209A. Accessed 8 July 2019.

  104. Roos, D. 2014. How the sharing economy works. https://money.howstuffworks.com/sharing-economy.html. Accessed 08 July 2019.

  105. Roos, D., & Hahn, R. 2019. Understanding collaborative consumption: An extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior with value-based personal norms. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(3): 679–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Roseman, A. 2019. How managers can best support a gig workforce. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/how-managers-can-best-support-a-gig-workforce/. Accessed 12 April 2019.

  107. Rubera, G., & Kirca, A. H. 2012. Firm innovativeness and its performance outcomes: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Marketing, 76(3): 130–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1): 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. 2011. A self-determination theory perspective on social, institutional, cultural, and economic supports for autonomy and their importance for well-being. In V. L. Chirkov, R. M. Ryan, & K. M. Sheldon (Eds.), Human autonomy in cross-cultural context (pp. 45–64). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Salomon, R. 2016. Why Uber couldn’t crack China. http://fortune.com/2016/08/07/uber-china-didi-chuxing/. Accessed 20 April 2019.

  111. Samaha, S. A., Beck, J. T., & Palmatier, R. W. 2014. The role of culture in international relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 78(5): 78–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Samiee, S., Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. 2005. Brand origin recognition accuracy: its antecedents and consumers’ cognitive limitations. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(4): 379–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Samuel, A. 2014. Established companies, get ready for the collaborative economy. https://hbr.org/2014/03/established-companies-get-ready-for-the-collaborative-economy. Accessed 28 January 2019.

  114. Schaefers, T., Wittkowski, K., Benoit, S., & Ferraro, R. 2016. Contagious effects of customer misbehavior in access-based services. Journal of Service Research, 19(1): 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Schechner, S., & Verbergt, M. 2015. Paris confronts Airbnb’s rapid growth: City of light brags about Airbnb but ramps up inspections of listings, as residents turn to tourist rentals. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB12147335600370333763904581058032330315292. Accessed 14 July 2019.

  116. Schor, J. B. 2017. Does the sharing economy increase inequality within the eighty percent? Findings from a qualitative study of platform providers. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 10(2): 263–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Schurr, P. H., & Ozanne, J. L. 1985. Influences on exchange processes: Buyers’ preconceptions of a seller’s trustworthiness and bargaining toughness. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(4): 939–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. So, K. K. F., Oh, H., & Min, S. 2018. Motivations and constraints of Airbnb consumers: Findings from a mixed-methods approach. Tourism Management, 67(August): 224–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Stiglitz, J. E., Fitoussi, J. P., & Durand, M. 2018. For good measure: Advancing research on well-being metrics beyond GDP. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Summers, J. 2019. How to use bike sharing in China|2019 Guide. https://www.travelchinacheaper.com/china-bike-share-travelers-guide. Accessed 8 June 2019.

  121. Sundararajan, A. 2016. The sharing economy: The end of employment and the rise of crowd-based capitalism. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Ta, H., Esper, T. L., & Hofer, A. R. 2018. Designing crowdsourced delivery systems: The effect of driver disclosure and ethnic similarity. Journal of Operations Management, 60(1): 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Tagiaroli, G. 2017. Brazil’s love affair with Uber has been ruined by kidnapping, robbery, and murder. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4x5kbm/brazils-love-affair-with-uber-has-been-ruined-by-kidnapping-robbery-and-murder. Accessed 8 July 2019.

  124. The Economist. 2018. Why Japan’s sharing economy is tiny. www.economist.com/business/2018/06/14/why-japans-sharing-economy-is-tiny. Accessed 15 April 2019.

  125. Turner, J. H. 1987. Toward a sociological theory of motivation. American Sociological Review, 52(1): 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Turrillo, H. 2017. The Nordics embrace the ‘sharing economy.’ Intelligent HQ. https://www.intelligenthq.com/the-nordics-embrace-the-sharing-economy/.com/the-nordics-embrace-the-sharing-economy/. Accessed 13 July 2019.

  127. Tussyadiah, I. P. 2016. Factors of satisfaction and intention to use peer-to-peer accommodation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 55(May): 70–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Tussyadiah, I. P., & Pesonen, J. 2018. Drivers and barriers of peer-to-peer accommodation stay—An exploratory study with American and Finnish travellers. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(6): 703–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Udo, V. E., & Jansson, P. M. 2009. Bridging the gaps for global sustainable development: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(12): 3700–3707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Ufford, S. 2015. The future of the sharing economy depends on trust. https://www.forbes.com/Sites/theyec/2015/02/10/the-future-of-the-sharing-economy-depends-on-trust/#688b3814717. Accessed 8 April 2019.

  131. UNDP. 2019. Human development reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/103706. Accessed 1 May 2019.

  132. United Nations. 2015. Concepts of inequality. Development issues, 1. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/publication/no-1-concepts-of-inequality/. Accessed 20 April 2019.

  133. Vanderschueren, F. 1996. From violence to justice and security in cities. Environment and Urbanization, 8(1): 93–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Verbeke, W., Dietz, B., & Verwaal, E. 2011. Drivers of sales performance: A contemporary meta-analysis. Have salespeople become knowledge brokers? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(3): 407–428.

  135. Wang, L. C., Baker, J., Wagner, J. A., & Wakefield, K. 2007. Can a retail web site be social? Journal of Marketing, 71(3): 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Wang, Y., Xiang, D., Yang, Z., & Ma, S. S. 2019. Unraveling customer sustainable consumption behaviors in sharing economy: A socio-economic approach based on social exchange theory. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208(January): 869–879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Winder, D. 2019. Uber confirms account takeover vulnerability found by Forbes 30 under 30 honoree. https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2019/09/12/uber-confirms-account-takeover-vulnerability-found-by-forbes-30-under-30-honoree/#7f4c55ed9b87. Accessed 8 January 2020.

  138. Wong-On-Wing, B., Guo, L., & Lui, G. 2010. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and participation in budgeting: Antecedents and consequences. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 22(2): 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. World Economic Forum. 2016. Understanding the sharing economy. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Understanding_the_Sharing_Economy_report_2016.pdf. Accessed 26 December 2019.

  140. World Happiness Report. 2020. https://happiness-report.s3.amazonaws.com/2020/WHR20.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2020.

  141. World Bank. 2015. Renewable energy consumption (% of total final energy consumption). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.FEC.RNEW.ZS?end=2015&start=2012. Accessed 11 May 2019.

  142. World Bank. 2018. GNI (current US$). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.MKTP.CD. Accessed 11 July 2019.

  143. World Bank. 2019. Trade (% of GDP). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS. Accessed 10 December 2019.

  144. World Bank. 2020. GDP growth (annual %). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP. KD.ZG. Accessed 11 April 2020.

  145. Worldwide Governance Indicators. 2019. Worldwide governance indicators. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/Home/Documents. Accessed 11 December 2019.

  146. Wu, X., & Shen, J. 2018. A study on Airbnb’s trust mechanism and the effects of cultural values—Based on a survey of Chinese consumers. Sustainability, 10(9): 3041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Wu, J., Zeng, M., & Xie, K. L. 2017. Chinese travelers’ behavioral intentions toward room-sharing platforms: The influence of motivations, perceived trust, and past experience. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(10): 2688–2707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Yang, S. B., Lee, K., Lee, H., & Koo, C. 2019. In Airbnb we trust: Understanding consumers’ trust-attachment building mechanisms in the sharing economy. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 83(October): 198–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Zhang, T. C., Gu, H., & Jahromi, M. F. 2019a. What makes the sharing economy successful? An empirical examination of competitive customer value propositions. Computers in Human Behavior, 95(June): 275–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. Zhang, Y., Phang, C. W., Gu, R., & Zhang, C. 2019b. Antecedents and role of individual sociability on participation in mobile collaborative consumption. Internet Research, 29(5): 1064–1089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Zook, C. 2017. Uber’s new CEO will have to win on two fronts simultaneously. https://hbr.org/2017/08/ubers-new-ceo-will-have-to-win-on-two-fronts-simultaneously. Accessed 18 April 2019.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diandian Xiang.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Accepted by Constantine Katsikeas, Area Editor, 10 October 2020. This article has been with the authors for three revisions.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 22 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kozlenkova, I.V., Lee, JY., Xiang, D. et al. Sharing economy: International marketing strategies. J Int Bus Stud (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00393-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • sharing economy
  • gig economy
  • peer-to-peer
  • crowdsourcing
  • collaborative consumption
  • Airbnb