Karel Alloh1
Josef Abrham- 1Department of Trade and Finance, Czech University of Life Science, Prague, Czechia
- 2Department of Economics, Czech University of Life Science, Prague, Czechia
Introduction: This study aims to provide a systematic literature review on the sustainability of shared economy in the food, agricultural, and hospitality sectors. We assess relationships between the sharing economy and sustainability in the examined industries. Furthermore, we identify gaps in knowledge and recommend possible research directions for future studies.
Methods: This study provides a systematic literature review on sustainable sharing economy in the hospitality and agri-food sectors. We applied the Procedure for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Based on the mentioned methodological procedure, we conducted a literature search through scientific databases Scopus and Web of Science. The research period is 2014–2023.
Results: Using the Procedure for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we extracted 2185 scientific articles from the Scopus and Web of Science databases published between 2014 and 2023. A total of 117 studies met the eligibility criteria. Based on the review, we identified the following frequently researched areas in the literature: sustainable housing sharing, urban and community sustainability, energy efficiency and carbon footprint, public sector regulation and sustainability, food sharing, exchanges and networks, food waste-reducing platforms, and food-based applications.
Conclusion: The studies reviewed confirmed growing research interest in the sustainability of the shared economy in agri-food and hospitality. The number of studies in the Web of Science and Scopus databases has increased over the last decade. Our systematic review indicates that shared accommodation and food sharing are dominant topics in the literature. The sustainability of shared accommodation has been examined in previous studies, mainly concerning the impacts on cities and communities. In food sharing, we identified relevant linkages between food waste and sharing platforms.
1 Introduction
The term sharing economy refers to a business model that uses information technology and marketing to facilitate sharing goods and services between individuals (Wirtz et al., 2019; Mody et al., 2021). These practices are usually mediated by online platforms and peer communities (Guyader and Piscicelli, 2019).
Shared models have significant environmental and social impacts (Ma et al., 2019; Hossain, 2020). The sharing economy fosters a new culture where customers prioritize access over ownership (Pouri and Hilty, 2018). Alternative sharing approaches have the potential for more efficient and sustainable use of resources (Hong and Yoo, 2020; Dabbous and Tarhini, 2021). The sustainability of the sharing economy model includes environmental, social, and economic aspects (Laukkanen and Tura, 2020). The social dimension focuses on increasing wellbeing and sustainable innovations (Martin et al., 2015; Lan et al., 2017). The economic dimension includes cost-effectiveness and customer attractiveness (Colapinto et al., 2020). Environmental benefits are associated with higher resource utilization and energy savings (Curtis and Lehner, 2019; Curtis and Mont, 2020).
Interest in sustainability research is growing worldwide. Despite the number of published research articles and literature reviews, a relatively large group of authors emphasize that the sustainability impacts of the sharing economy are ambiguous and not sufficiently explored in the contemporary literature (Demailly and Novel, 2014; Griffiths et al., 2019; Leung and Xue, 2019; Curto et al., 2022; Haqqani et al., 2022). Table 1 shows an overview of systematic literature reviews focusing on the sustainable sharing economy. Most published reviews analyzed only shared transport and accommodation platforms (Cheng, 2016; Martin, 2016; Boar et al., 2020; Curtis and Mont, 2020; Liu and Chen, 2020). Our systematic review enriches existing research, especially in food sharing. We identify new topics such as food waste, alternative food networks, carbon footprint, etc. We deepen and complement existing hospitality research in community impact and regulation. The methodological procedure is also original. A few pieces of research on the sharing economy use the PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis. This method enables better identification of gaps in research and future thematic opportunities. Our literature review only includes studies from the Web of Science and Scopus databases to ensure the quality of the articles. The last 10 years (2014–2023) make it possible to follow the scientific literature in years and the latest trends.
Table 1. Previous literature reviews and conceptual studies on the sustainable sharing economy.
This study provides a systematic literature review on sustainable sharing economy in the hospitality and agri-food sectors. More specifically, we established the following objectives: (1) to access the relationships that exist in the literature between the sharing economy in the examined sectors and sustainability; (2) to examine emerging topics on sustainability in the hospitality and agri-food sectors; (3) to identify gaps in knowledge and recommend possible research directions for future studies.
2 Literature review
The sharing economy, often called the collaborative economy or collaborative consumption, encompasses a broad category of business and consumption practices aimed at sharing underutilized resources such as goods, services, and space, either for free or for a fee. These practices are usually mediated by online platforms and peer communities (Guyader and Piscicelli, 2019). This phenomenon began to take shape in the early twentieth century in response to the growing importance of natural resource constraints and the development of information and communication technologies (Cheng, 2016). Since its inception, the sharing economy has experienced remarkable growth and has considerable potential for the future (Hamari et al., 2016). Although it is a subject of ongoing debate given its multifaceted nature and conceptual aspects (Martin et al., 2015), the sharing economy broadly refers to systems that facilitate collective access to and ownership of resources, commodities, and services for their joint use and consumption by multiple actors, which entails the dilution of individual ownership (Colapinto et al., 2020).
In recent years, the sharing economy has seen a significant rise, with projections indicating a substantial impact on the economy and society (Hamari et al., 2016). The concept revolves around the collaborative use of underutilized or idle assets, where individuals engage in various sharing practices such as renting, lending, trading, bartering, or exchanging goods and services (Heo, 2016). The sharing economy represents an alternative consumption paradigm and embodies a particular manifestation of social innovation (Soltysova and Modrak, 2020). This concept fits seamlessly with the basic principles of the social economy, emphasizing activities aimed at the common good, where the primary social outcome is social rather than profit maximization. It encompasses the essential components of social innovation, including novelty, efficiency, meeting societal needs, and increasing society's capacity to act together (Kumar Gupta et al., 2018). The concept of the sharing economy is gaining widespread popularity, helped by the convergence of technological advances, particularly in the field of information and communication technologies and the requirements of economic and environmental sustainability. This convergence has led to the spread of the sharing economy in various sectors (Schor et al., 2016; Griggio and Oxenswärdh, 2021). Various sharing economy initiatives have emerged worldwide, encompassing sectors such as accommodation, utilities, automobiles, and others (Martin, 2016; Hönig et al., 2020). The concept of sharing is familiar, as human exchange is a long-standing reflection of social relations and the consolidation of cultural traditions (Hati et al., 2021). At the same time, the risks associated with sharing are increasing, a challenge that online platforms address by implementing robust rating and reputation systems (Frenken and Schor, 2017; Lee and Kim, 2018).
An example of a broader definition of sustainability in the case of the sharing economy can be the inclusion of the influence of shared accommodation platforms on real estate prices in a given region. Although sharing economy platforms are primarily driven by financial motivation for customers, due to the nature of the business model, many sharing economy firms are committed to sustainability (Hossain, 2020). Some European cities are already promoting the usage of shared transport platforms, attempting to solve traffic problems in city centers. It is a fact that shared transport platforms simultaneously bring with them new issues to cities. Shared e-scooters, for example, endanger pedestrians in pedestrian zones, their inappropriate location on the street hinders blind residents, and so on. According to Lan et al. (2017), however, through a continuous learning process, these problems lead to social innovations that correct them over time. The sharing economy can also positively affect the development of regions and local communities (Abrham, 2017; Burda et al., 2017; Amore et al., 2022).
The sharing economy has also penetrated the agri-food sector through innovative concepts such as food exchanges (Schor et al., 2016), food sharing (Choi et al., 2019), and food networks (Martin, 2016). The food system encompasses all people and food-related activities, including agricultural cultivation, processing, packaging, distribution, marketing, consumption, and waste management (Miralles et al., 2017; Mazzucchelli et al., 2021). Food sharing combines elements of entrepreneurship, charity, the digital economy, and shared agriculture (Wang et al., 2020). However, some authors have highlighted the importance of food sharing and specific platforms, emphasizing the need for government regulations to be uniformly supported in these areas (Zurek, 2016). Food exchanges involve exchanging home-grown, home-raised, and home-harvested food between participants, but even this can be risky for some. In a broader sense, leftovers are often seen as food that has lost its original qualities and appeal. That highlights the complex interconnection between food waste and safety underscored by previous research (Garrone et al., 2014; Kera and Sulaiman, 2014).
Food sharing focuses on redistributing surplus edible items to those in need, thereby alleviating food waste (Schor et al., 2016). Several initiatives and practical measures, such as innovative packaging and alternative storage techniques, have recently emerged to alleviate food waste. These solutions also address household behavior through non-traditional consumption patterns (Fine et al., 2015; Lazell, 2016). A growing body of literature has examined this phenomenon from a different perspective. In recent years, food-sharing initiatives have proliferated in most developed societies, taking various forms, including internet food networks, clandestine eating facilities, community refrigerators, and individual efforts within unrelated households (Zurek, 2016). Food sharing can encompass various activities, including sales, donations, and barter arrangements (Hua et al., 2023).
The demand for food is global, and the aim is to prevent over-consumption, waste, and wastage and ultimately provide sustainable food solutions (Davies and Doyle, 2015; Maitah et al., 2019). Consumers and the media attach deep cultural significance to food and celebrate chefs as culinary masters of the kitchen. Food takes center stage in various forms, from television programs and films to sharing and displaying on social media (Harvey et al., 2020). Food's critical role in reducing waste is the subject of intense debate, especially regarding the social sustainability of our food systems (Mazzucchelli et al., 2021). Consumption has the potential to unite an online community that favors different solutions, especially in innovating new entertainment options (Privitera, 2016).
3 Materials and methods
We applied the Procedure for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) to thoroughly examine the relevant scientific literature. The PRISMA guidelines contain a set of standards for reporting literature reviews. The purpose is to provide more sophisticated and uniform procedures for systematic literature reviews (Page et al., 2021; Rethlefsen et al., 2021; Sarkis-Onofre et al., 2021; Swartz, 2021). In our article, we used the version published by Page et al. (2021). This article has more than 43433 citations in the literature (Google Scholar, 2023). Based on the mentioned methodological procedure, we conducted a literature search through important electronic databases, Scopus and Web of Science. The search strategy included a carefully selected set of keywords to include areas related to the specific objectives of our study. We analyzed the following keywords: sharing and economy and agriculture and food; sharing and economy and agri-food; sharing and economy and hospitality; sharing and economy and sustainability; food sharing and sustainability; shared economy and cities, food waste and sharing economy; Airbnb and sustainability; carbon footprint and shared economy.
Figure 1 shows the flow diagram of this systematic literature review. To refine the search results and ensure the relevance of the identified literature, we define inclusion criteria. We excluded articles in several steps for the following reasons: duplicate articles in both databases, inadequate targeting of titles, abstracts, and keywords, and unavailability of full texts of articles in databases (see Figure 1). Subsequently, we screened all of the articles' texts in detail. We excluded studies that did not meet the objectives of our review.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for systematic review. Source: Page et al. (2021), Scopus Preview (2023), and Web of Science (2023).
On the one hand, these articles did not appear relevant to the discussion on sustainability. Furthermore, we did not include in the research studies focused on non-relevant sectors of the shared economy (transportation, financial services, tool sharing, bike sharing, etc.). The criteria also included a specific time frame (2014–2023) and a language parameter (we included articles published in English).
4 Results
Using the Procedure for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we extracted 2185 scientific articles from the Scopus and Web of Science databases published between 2014 and 2023. A total of 117 studies met the criteria for further analysis. Figure 2 shows the growing number of publications in the 2014–2023 period and confirms the increasing research interest in the sustainability of the shared economy in the hospitality and agri-food industries.
Figure 2. Annual scientific production. Source: Own elaboration.
The distribution of articles across journals indicates (see Table 2) that the journals with the highest number of articles on the sustainable shared economy of the hospitality and agri-food sector were Sustainability (n = 15), Journal of Cleaner Production (n = 13), International Journal of Hospitality Management (n = 7), Current Issues in Tourism (n = 4) and British Food Journal (n = 4).
Table 2. Journals with the highest number of analyzed articles.
Table 3 shows that the ten most cited articles have over 500 citations. Hamari et al. (2016) had 4,914 citations, Guttentag (2015) 2,474 citations, Martin (2016) 1,828 citations, Frenken and Schor (2017) 1,765 citations, and Tussyadiah and Pesonen (2016) 1,004 citations (Google Scholar, 2023).
Table 3. Top 15 most cited documents.
Table 4 shows thematic clusters, areas, and examples of articles. We designed research clusters to access the main aims of our research. The first cluster includes the relationship between the sharing economy in hospitality and sustainability. The second cluster contains studies that examined the links between the sharing economy in the agri-food sector and sustainability. Thematic areas are the most researched topics in the literature. We identified the following seven research areas: (1) sustainable sharing accommodation, (2) urban and community sustainability, (3) energy efficiency and carbon footprint, (4) public sector regulation and sustainability, (5) food sharing, exchanges, networks, (6) food waste-reducing platforms, (7) food-based services, and applications.
Table 4. The most researched thematic areas in the literature.
The studies in our literature evaluate various theoretical concepts and methodological procedures. Authors of research articles have used social exchange theory (Wang et al., 2019; Akarsu et al., 2020), transaction cost theory (Akbar and Tracogna, 2018), a game theory (Aznar et al., 2019), disruptive innovation theory (Guttentag, 2015), customer repurchase intention theory (Huarng and Yu, 2019), gentrification theory (Katsinas, 2021; Mermet, 2022), theory of hypercapitalism (Nnajiofor, 2017), uses and gratification theory (Ray et al., 2019), theory of planned behavior (Tajeddini et al., 2021; Kirmani et al., 2023), Aristotle's rhetorical theory (Yang et al., 2018), convenience theory (Zhang and Chen, 2019), rent gap theory (Amore et al., 2022), theory of change (Michelini et al., 2020) and Weber's Theory of Rationality (Mody et al., 2023). The most common research methods were statistical data analyses (Asian et al., 2019; Dabbous and Tarhini, 2021), social media analysis (Geissinger et al., 2019; Harvey et al., 2020), quantitative surveys (Hashem et al., 2018; Ketter, 2019; Lho et al., 2022), case studies (Battino and Lampreu, 2019; Ciulli and Kolk, 2019; Guyader and Piscicelli, 2019), conceptual papers (Daunoriene et al., 2015; Martin et al., 2015; Acquier et al., 2019) and systematic literature reviews (Hofmann et al., 2019; De las Heras et al., 2021; Kuhzady et al., 2021; Puram and Gurumurthy, 2023).
5 Discussion and future research
The reviewed studies confirmed growing research interest in the sustainability of the shared economy in agri-food and hospitality. The number of studies in the Web of Science and Scopus databases has increased over the last decade. The relationships between the sharing economy and sustainability are complex. An intense debate in the scientific literature includes different perspectives and approaches. Proponents of the concept assume a positive potential for the sustainability of the shared economy (Acquier et al., 2019). The authors highlight a better use of resources and assets (Laurenti et al., 2019; Meshulam et al., 2023), the social ties creation, and community building (Akande et al., 2020). On the other hand, economic factors generally prevail over ecological interests (Tussyadiah and Pesonen, 2016; Frenken and Schor, 2017; Curtis and Mont, 2020). Some sharing economy practices can lead to price increases and depletion of available goods (e.g., housing). A series of recent studies have indicated that more agile regulation and support from the public administration is vital to use the sustainability potential of the sharing economy (O'Regan and Choe, 2017; Hofmann et al., 2019; Mont et al., 2020). Public authorities should provide economic and non-economic incentives to private operators who have undergone a full life cycle assessment that estimates environmental impacts (Mi and Coffman, 2019).
Our systematic review indicates that shared accommodation and food sharing are dominant topics in the literature. The sustainability of shared accommodation has been examined in previous studies, mainly concerning the impacts on cities and communities. In the food-sharing area, we identified relevant linkages between food waste and sharing platforms. As has been advocated in several research papers, digital shared platforms are essential for food waste management (Davies and Evans, 2019; Mu et al., 2019; Cane and Parra, 2020; Mullick et al., 2021). Shared platforms enable the connection between food supply and demand (Schanes and Stagl, 2019). Within the social dimension, food sharing enables lower-income consumers to access food at reduced prices (Secondi et al., 2019; De Almeida Oroski and da Silva, 2023; Stehrenberger and Schneider, 2023). Various forms of alternative food networks and markets have been mentioned in the literature as other forms of food sharing (Hashem et al., 2018). Organic farmers' markets tend to facilitate the sharing economy more than online stores because it helps them build value and trust (Baldi et al., 2019; Dangi and Narula, 2021). Despite the positive potential of shared platforms, many authors identified rebound effects when consumers spend the money they saved by consuming free food (Makov et al., 2020). In such a case, the environmental benefits of food sharing are questionable (Meshulam et al., 2023). Adopting food-sharing practices by households does not automatically translate into reducing food waste (Morone et al., 2018).
The operation of shared accommodation affects residential neighborhoods positively and negatively (Ioannides et al., 2019). Most authors agree that the shared accommodation business model has the potential to be more open, inclusive, and environmentally friendly than the traditional economy (Hong and Yoo, 2020). Shared accommodation creates communities and partnerships between providers and users. Sustainability is a fundamental prerequisite for consumer trust and loyalty to a P2P accommodation platform (Garrod et al., 2023). This prognostic presented mainly supporters of shared accommodation (Oskam and Boswijk, 2016). Shared service providers and platforms are also crucial in promoting sustainability and energy efficiency in the hospitality sector. Accommodation platforms can contribute to energy efficiency by mentoring and training hosts. An ecologically friendly stay includes the efficiency of water and energy management and the usage of sustainable household items (Mi and Coffman, 2019). An increased number of tourists can lead to an increase in income and an overload of monuments and cultural attractions (Gutiérrez et al., 2017; Jaremen et al., 2019). Opponents of sharing accommodation emphasize the negative social impacts on the functioning of cities and communities. Digital platforms enable more affordable access to services such as accommodation, which can increase demand for other goods and services and unsustainable consumption (Pouri and Hilty, 2018). The reviewed studies indicate that the growing number of Airbnb accommodations increases the price of real estate in particular city districts (Martin, 2016; Amore et al., 2022). That mirrors the characteristic called Airbnbifcation (Guttentag, 2015). Real estate inflation and growing flat rentals negatively influence communities' coherence (Mermet, 2022). Low-income sociological groups leave the downtown and residential city areas involuntarily. That's why shared accommodation evokes gentrification (Curtis and Mont, 2020; Katsinas, 2021). Travel industry management should promote the transfer of accommodation entities from the overwhelmed districts to less affected ones (Álvarez-Herranz and Macedo-Ruíz, 2021). City transformation as the result of Airbnb proved (Amore et al., 2022) for Athens, Lisbon, and Milano. Álvarez-Herranz and Macedo-Ruíz (2021) for Madrid, Ayouba et al. (2020) for Marseille, and Paris, Gutiérrez et al. (2017) for Barcelona. Therefore, many published studies have examined ways of regulating Airbnb in cities (Oskam and Boswijk, 2016; Nieuwland and van Melik, 2018).
This review has identified several limitations and directions for further research. Our literature review confirmed many opportunities for sustainable development in agriculture, the food industry, and hospitality. However, most studies examine potential and prognostic frameworks. Concrete empirical frameworks are often neglected (Palgan et al., 2017). There are still supply-side and demand-side factors that may limit the adoption of sustainable shared services.
Further research should focus on the specific providers' needs and consumers' preferences. An integral part of the proposed research is also understanding the barriers providers face in promoting ecologically and socially sustainable approaches. Possible obstacles could reduce the willingness of consumers and entrepreneurs to participate in the sustainable sharing of products and services. Understanding the interactions between the preferences of consumers and providers will enable the setting of the optimal format of sustainable services in agriculture, food, hospitality, and tourism. Explanation and comparison of instruments and policies in individual countries and cities can also be a topic of future research (Martin, 2016; Álvarez-Herranz and Macedo-Ruíz, 2021). Many destinations are just beginning to respond to peer-to-peer accommodation's social and environmental challenges. Issues of sustainability of shared accommodation are essential for a broad group of actors - visitors to the destination, businesses, residents, and public authorities (Guttentag, 2015). The importance of addressing negative impacts is growing in line with the worldwide expansion of sharing economy platforms. The effect of the shared economy on climate change is also a promising research topic (Morfeldt and Johansson, 2022; Vélez, 2023). The carbon footprint is related to agricultural production, food consumption, and the energy intensity of accommodation facilities. Except for a few case studies of comprehensive car-sharing research, there is still no empirical evidence on greenhouse gas emissions (Frenken and Schor, 2017; Jung and Koo, 2018; Cheng et al., 2020).
Author contributions
KA: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. JA: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. PS: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. MČ: Data curation, Formal analysis, Resources, Validation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. SP: Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. FS: Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This article was supported by the Czech University of Life Science (Faculty of Economics and Management) Internal Grant Agency, project number: 2023B0004.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Abrham, J. (2017). Project management and funding in the Euroregions. Polish J. Manage. Studies 16, 7–20. doi: 10.17512/pjms.2017.16.1.01
Acquier, A., Carbone, V., and Mass,é, D. (2019). How to create value (s) in the sharing economy: business models, scalability, and sustainability. Technol. Innov. Manage. Rev. 9, 1215. doi: 10.22215/timreview/1215
Akande, A., Cabral, P., and Casteleyn, S. (2020). Understanding the sharing economy and its implication on sustainability in smart cities. J. Clean. Prod. 277, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124077
Akarsu, T. N., Foroudi, P., and Melewar, T. C. (2020). What makes Airbnb likeable? Exploring the nexus between service attractiveness, country image, perceived authenticity and experience from a social exchange theory perspective within an emerging economy context. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 91, 102635. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102635
Akbar, Y. H., and Tracogna, A. (2018). The sharing economy and the future of the hotel industry: transaction cost theory and platform economics. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 71, 91–101. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.12.004
Álvarez-Herranz, A., and Macedo-Ruíz, E. (2021). An evaluation of the three pillars of sustainability in cities with high Airbnb presence: a case study of the city of Madrid. Sustainability 13, 3220. doi: 10.3390/su13063220
Amore, A., Bernardi, d. e., and Arvanitis, C. (2022). The impacts of Airbnb in Athens, Lisbon and Milan: a rent gap theory perspective. Current Issues in Tourism 25, 3329–3342. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2020.1742674
Asian, S., Hafezalkotob, A., and John, J. J. (2019). Sharing economy in organic food supply chains: a pathway to sustainable development. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 218, 322–338. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.06.010
Ayouba, K., Breuill,é, M. L., Grivault, C., and Le Gallo, J. (2020). Does Airbnb disrupt the private rental market? An empirical analysis for French cities. Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. 43, 76–104. doi: 10.1177/0160017618821428
Aznar, J., Maspera, J., and Quer, X. (2019). A game theory approach to airbnb and hotels competition. Eur. J. Tour. Res. 21, 119–123. doi: 10.54055/ejtr.v21i.362
Baldi, L., Bertoni, D., Migliore, G., and Peri, M. (2019). How alternative food networks work in a metropolitan area? An analysis of Solidarity Purchase Groups in Northern Italy. Agric. Food Econ. 7, 1–21. doi: 10.1186/s40100-019-0139-3
Battino, S., and Lampreu, S. (2019). The role of the sharing economy for a sustainable and innovative development of rural areas: a case study in Sardinia (Italy). Sustainability 11, 1–20. doi: 10.3390/su11113004
Boar, A., Bastida, R., and Marimon, F. (2020). A systematic literature review. Relationships between the sharing economy, sustainability and sustainable development goals. Sustainability 12. doi: 10.3390/su12176744
Burda, P., Abrham, J., and Horvathova, Z. (2017). Factors influencing online civic participation in mid-sized Czech towns. Transf. Bus. Econ. 16, 607–618.
Cane, M., and Parra, C. (2020). Digital platforms: mapping the territory of new technologies to fight food waste. Br. Food J. 122, 1647–1669. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-06-2019-0391
Cheng, M. (2016). Sharing economy: a review and agenda for future research. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 57, 60–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.06.003
Cheng, M., Chen, G., Wiedmann, T., Hadjikakou, M., Xu, L., Wang, Y., et al. (2020). The sharing economy and sustainability–assessing Airbnb's direct, indirect and induced carbon footprint in Sydney. J. Sust. Tour. 28, 1083–1099. doi: 10.1080/09669582.2020.1720698
Choi, T. M., Guo, S., Liu, N., and Shi, X. (2019). Values of food leftover sharing platforms in the sharing economy. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 213, 23–31. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.03.005
Ciulli, F., and Kolk, A. (2019). Incumbents and business model innovation for the sharing economy: implications for sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 214, 995–1010. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.295
Colapinto, C., Jayaraman, R., and Ben Abdelaziz, F. (2020). Environmental sustainability and multifaceted development: multi-criteria decision models with applications. Annal. Oper. Res. 293, 405–432. doi: 10.1007/s10479-019-03403-y
Curtis, S. K., and Lehner, M. (2019). Defining the sharing economy for sustainability. Sustainability 11, 1–25. doi: 10.3390/su11030567
Curtis, S. K., and Mont, O. (2020). Sharing economy business models for sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 266, 1–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121519
Curto, R. A., Rubino, I., and Verderosa, A. (2022). Investigating Airbnb evolution in an urban tourism context: the application of mathematical modelling and spatial analysis. Curr. Issues Tour. 25, 1666–1681. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2021.1932767
Dabbous, A., and Tarhini, A. (2021). Does sharing economy promote sustainable economic development and energy efficiency? Evidence from OECD countries. J. Innov. Knowledge 6, 58–68. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2020.11.001
Dangi, N., and Narula, S. A. (2021). Sharing economy approach for the development of the organic food market in India. Manage. Environ. Q. 32, 114–126. doi: 10.1108/MEQ-03-2020-0060
Daunoriene, A., Drakšaite, A., Snieška, V., and Valodkiene, G. (2015). Evaluating sustainability of sharing economy business models. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 213, 836–841. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.486
Davies, A., and Evans, D. (2019). Urban food sharing: emerging geographies of production, consumption and exchange. Geoforum 99, 154–159. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.11.015
Davies, A. R., and Doyle, R. (2015). Transforming household consumption: from backcasting to HomeLabs experiments. Annal. Assoc. Am. Geographers 105, 425–436. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2014.1000948
De Almeida Oroski, D., and da Silva, F. J. M. (2023). Understanding food waste-reducing platforms: a mini-review. Waste Manage. Res. 41, 816–827. doi: 10.1177/0734242X221135248
De las Heras, A., Relinque-Medina, F., Zamora-Polo, F., and Luque-Sendra, A. (2021). Analysis of the evolution of the sharing economy towards sustainability. Trends and transformations of the concept. J. Clean. Prod. 291, 1–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125227
Diekmann, L., and Germelmann, C. C. (2021). Leftover consumption as a means of food waste reduction in public space? Qualitative insights from online discussions. Sustainability 13, 1–30. doi: 10.3390/su132413564
Fine, F., Lucas, J. L., Chardigny, J. M., Redlingshöfer, B., and Renard, M. (2015). Food losses and waste in the French oilcrops sector. OCL J. 22, 1–14. doi: 10.1051/ocl/2015012
Frenken, K., and Schor, J. (2017). Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 23, 3–10. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2017.01.003
Gant, A. C. (2016). Holiday rentals: the new gentrification battlefront. Sociol. Res. Online 21, 112–120. doi: 10.5153/sro.4071
Garrod, B., Zhao, A. L., and Koenig-Lewis, N. (2023). A greener way to stay: the role of perceived sustainability in generating loyalty to Airbnb. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 110:103432. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2023.103432
Garrone, P., Melacini, M., and Perego, A. (2014). Opening the black box of food waste reduction. Food Policy 46, 129–139. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.03.014
Geissinger, A., Laurell, C., Öberg, C., and Sandström, C. (2019). How sustainable is the sharing economy? On the sustainability connotations of sharing economy platforms. J. Clean. Prod. 206, 419–429. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.196
Google Scholar (2023). Articles. Available online at: https://scholar.google.com/ (accessed December 22, 2023).
Griffiths, M. A., Perera, B. Y., and Albinsson, P. A. (2019). Contrived surplus and negative externalities in the sharing economy. J. Market. Theory Pract. 27, 445–463. doi: 10.1080/10696679.2019.1644957
Griggio, C., and Oxenswärdh, A. (2021). Human capital and sustainability challenges for Airbnb Bed and Breakfast lifestyle entrepreneurs. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour. 21, 286–312. doi: 10.1080/15022250.2021.1927828
Gu, J. (2022). Sharing economy, technological innovation and carbon emissions: evidence from Chinese cities. J. Innov. Know. 7, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100228
Gupta, P., and Chauhan, S. (2021). Mapping intellectual structure and sustainability claims of sharing economy research–A literature review. Sust. Prod. Consump. 25, 347–362. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.006
Gutiérrez, J., García-Palomares, J. C., Romanillos, G., and Salas-Olmedo, M. H. (2017). The eruption of Airbnb in tourist cities: comparing spatial patterns of hotels and peer-to-peer accommodation in Barcelona. Tour. Manage. 62, 278–291. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2017.05.003
Guttentag, D. (2015). Airbnb: disruptive innovation and the rise of an informal tourism accommodation sector. Curr. Issues Tour. 18, 1192–1217. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2013.827159
Guyader, H., and Piscicelli, L. (2019). Business model diversification in the Sharing economy: the case of GoMore. J. Cleaner Prod. 215, 1059–1069. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.114
Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., and Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: why people participate in collaborative consumption. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 67, 2047–2059. doi: 10.1002/asi.23552
Haqqani, A. A. H., Elomri, A., and Kerbache, L. (2022). Sharing economy: a systematic review of definitions, drivers, applications, industry status and business models. IFAC-PapersOnLine 55, 490–495. doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.441
Harvey, J., Smith, A., Goulding, J., and Branco Illodo, I. (2020). Food sharing, redistribution, and waste reduction via mobile applications: a social network analysis. Ind. Market. Manage. 88, 437–448. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.02.019
Hashem, S., Migliore, G., Schifani, G., Schimmenti, E., and Padel, S. (2018). Motives for buying local, organic food through English box schemes. Br. Food J. 120, 1600–1614. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-08-2017-0426
Hati, S. R. H., Balqiah, T. E., Hananto, A., and Yuliati, E. (2021). A decade of systematic literature review on Airbnb: the sharing economy from a multiple stakeholder perspective. Heliyon 7, e08222. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08222
Heo, Y. (2016). Sharing economy and prospects in tourism research. Ann. Tour. Res. 58, 166–170. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2016.02.002
Hofmann, S., Sæbø, Ø., Braccini, A. M., and Za, S. (2019). The public sector's roles in the sharing economy and the implications for public values. Gov. Inf. Q. 36, 101399. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2019.101399
Hong, I., and Yoo, C. (2020). Analyzing spatial variance of airbnb pricing determinants using multiscale GWR approach. Sustainability 12, 1–18. doi: 10.3390/su12114710
Hönig, V., Procházka, P., Obergruber, M., Kučerová, V., Mejstrík, P., Macku, J., et al. (2020). Determination of tractor engine oil change interval based on material properties. Materials 13, 1–26. doi: 10.3390/ma13235403
Hossain, M. (2020). Sharing economy: a comprehensive literature review. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 87, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102470
Hua, N., Shannon, R., Haider, M., and Moschis, G. P. (2023). Factors influencing purchase intention of food surplus through a food-sharing platform. Sustainability 15, 1–20. doi: 10.3390/su151713000
Huarng, K. H., and Yu, M. F. (2019). Customer satisfaction and repurchase intention theory for the online sharing economy. Rev. Manage. Sci. 13, 635–647. doi: 10.1007/s11846-018-0321-0
Ioannides, D., Röslmaier, M., and Van Der Zee, E. (2019). Airbnb as an instigator of 'tourism bubble'expansion in Utrecht's Lombok neighbourhood. Tour. Geograph. 21, 822–840. doi: 10.1080/14616688.2018.1454505
Jaremen, D. E., Nawrocka, E., and Żemła, M. (2019). Sharing the economy in tourism and sustainable city development in the light of agenda 2030. Economies 7, 1–15. 109. doi: 10.3390/economies7040109
Jung, J., and Koo, Y. (2018). Analyzing the effects of car sharing services on the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Sustainability 10, 1–17. doi: 10.3390/su10020539
Katsinas, P. (2021). Professionalisation of short-term rentals and emergent tourism gentrification in post-crisis Thessaloniki. Environ. Planning Econ. Space 53, 1652–1670. doi: 10.1177/0308518X21988940
Kera, D., and Sulaiman, N. L. (2014). FridgeMatch: design probe into the future of urban food commensality. Futures 62, 194–201. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2014.04.007
Ketter, E. (2019). Eating with EatWith: analysing tourism-sharing economy consumers. Curr. Issues Tour. 22, 1062–1075. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2017.1357682
Kirmani, M. D., Uddin, S. F., Sadiq, M. A., Ahmad, A., and Haque, M. A. (2023). Food-leftover sharing intentions of consumers: an extension of the theory of planned behavior. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 73, 103328. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103328
Kuhzady, S., Olya, H., Farmaki, A., and Ertaş, Ç. (2021). Sharing economy in hospitality and tourism: A review and the future pathways. J. Hosp. Market. Manage. 30, 549–570. doi: 10.1080/19368623.2021.1867281
Kumar Gupta, S., Gupta, S., and Gayathiri, S. (2018). Pollution prevention is the key to drive sustainability: Preliminary findings from a tannery unit in India. Manage. Environ. Q. 29, 416–426. doi: 10.1108/MEQ-10-2017-0124
Lan, J., Ma, Y., Mangalagiu, D., and Thornton, T. (2017). Enabling value co-creation in the sharing economy: the case of mobike. Sustainability 9, 1–20. doi: 10.3390/su9091504
Laukkanen, M., and Tura, N. (2020). The potential of sharing economy business models for sustainable value creation. J. Cleaner Prod. 253, 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120004
Laurenti, R., Singh, J., Cotrim, J. M., Toni, M., and Sinha, R. (2019). Characterizing the sharing economy state of the research: a systematic map. Sustainability 11, 1–21. doi: 10.3390/su11205729
Lazell, J. (2016). Consumer food waste behaviour in universities: sharing as a means of prevention. J. Consumer Behav. 15, 430–439. doi: 10.1002/cb.1581
Lee, S., and Kim, D. Y. (2018). The effect of hedonic and utilitarian values on satisfaction and loyalty of Airbnb users. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manage. 30, 1332–1351. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-09-2016-0504
Leung, X. Y., and Xue, L. (2019). Framing the sharing economy: toward a sustainable ecosystem. Tour. Manage. 71, 44–53. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2018.09.021
Lho, L. H., Quan, W., Yu, J., and Han, H. (2022). The sharing economy in the hospitality sector: The role of social interaction, social presence, and reciprocity in eliciting satisfaction and continuance behavior. Hum. Soc. Sci. Commun. 9, 1–12. doi: 10.1057/s41599-022-01379-y
Liu, X., and Chen, H. (2020). Sharing economy: promote its potential to sustainability by regulation. Sustainability 12, 1–13. doi: 10.3390/su12030919
Ma, Y., Rong, K., Luo, Y., Wang, Y., Mangalagiu, D., Thornton, T. F., et al. (2019). Value Co-creation for sustainable consumption and production in the sharing economy in China. J. Cleaner Prod. 208, 1148–1158. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.135
Maitah, M., Procházka, P., Smutka, L., Maitah, K., and Honig, V. (2019). Analysis of the impact of ethanol production on agricultural product prices in Brazil. Sugar Tech 21, 773–779. doi: 10.1007/s12355-019-00709-w
Makov, T., Shepon, A., Krones, J., Gupta, C., and Chertow, M. (2020). Social and environmental analysis of food waste abatement via the peer-to-peer sharing economy. Nat. Commun. 11, 1–8. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-14899-5
Martin, C. J. (2016). The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism?. Ecol. Econ. 121, 149–159. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.027
Martin, C. J., Upham, P., and Budd, L. (2015). Commercial orientation in grassroots social innovation: insights from the sharing economy. Ecol. Econ. 118, 240–251. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.08.001
Mazzucchelli, A., Gurioli, M., Graziano, D., Quacquarelli, B., and Aouina-Mejri, C. (2021). How to fight against food waste in the digital era: key factors for a successful food sharing platform. J. Bus. Res. 124, 47–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.055
Mermet, A. C. (2022). Can gentrification theory learn from Airbnb? Airbnbfication and the asset economy in Reykjavík. Environ. Plan. A Econ. Space 54, 1147–1164. doi: 10.1177/0308518X221094616
Meshulam, T., Font-Vivanco, D., Blass, V., and Makov, T. (2023). Sharing economy rebound: the case of peer-to-peer sharing of food waste. J. Ind. Ecol. 27, 882–895. doi: 10.1111/jiec.13319
Mi, Z., and Coffman, D. (2019). The sharing economy promotes sustainable societies. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–3. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09260-4
Micheels, E. T., and Boecker, A. (2017). Competitive strategies among Ontario farms marketing direct to consumers. Agric. Food Econ. 5, 1–23. doi: 10.1186/s40100-017-0079-8
Michelini, L., Grieco, C., Ciulli, F., and Di Leo, A. (2020). Uncovering the impact of food sharing platform business models: a theory of change approach. Br. Food J. 122, 1437–1462. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-06-2019-0422
Miralles, I., Dentoni, D., and Pascucci, S. (2017). Understanding the organization of sharing economy in agri-food systems: evidence from alternative food networks in Valencia. Agric. Hum. Values 34, 833–854. doi: 10.1007/s10460-017-9778-8
Mody, M., Woosnam, K. M., Suess, C., and Dogru, T. (2023). Hapless victims or empowered citizens? Understanding residents' attitudes towards Airbnb using Weber's Theory of Rationality and Foucauldian concepts. J. Sust. Tour. 31, 284–306. doi: 10.1080/09669582.2020.1834567
Mody, M. A., Hanks, L., and Cheng, M. (2021). Sharing economy research in hospitality and tourism: a critical review using bibliometric analysis, content analysis and a quantitative systematic literature review. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manage. 33, 1711–1745. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-12-2020-1457
Mont, O., Palgan, Y. V., Bradley, K., and Zvolska, L. (2020). A decade of the sharing economy: concepts, users, business and governance perspectives. J. Cleaner Prod. 269, 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122215
Morfeldt, J., and Johansson, D. J. (2022). Impacts of shared mobility on vehicle lifetimes and on the carbon footprint of electric vehicles. Nat. Commun. 13, 1–11. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-33666-2
Morone, P., Falcone, P. M., Imbert, E., and Morone, A. (2018). Does food sharing lead to food waste reduction? An experimental analysis to assess challenges and opportunities of a new consumption model. J. Cleaner Prod. 185, 749–760. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.208
Mu, W., Spaargaren, G., and Oude Lansink, A. (2019). Mobile apps for green food practices and the role for consumers: a case study on dining out practices with Chinese and Dutch young consumers. Sustainability 11, 1–19. doi: 10.3390/su11051275
Mullick, S., Raassens, N., Haans, H., and Nijssen, E. J. (2021). Reducing food waste through digital platforms: A quantification of cross-side network effects. Ind. Marketing Manage. 93, 533–544. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.09.021
Nieuwland, S., and van Melik, R. (2018). Regulating airbnb: how cities deal with perceived negative externalities of short-term rentals. Curr. Issues Tour. 23, 811–825. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2018.1504899
Nnajiofor, P. (2017). The New Sharing Economy: creation of a new serfdom?. Persp. Glob. Dev. Technol. 16, 297–314. doi: 10.1163/15691497-12341435
O'Regan, M., and Choe, J. (2017). Airbnb and cultural capitalism: enclosure and control within the sharing economy. Anatolia 28, 163–172. doi: 10.1080/13032917.2017.1283634
Oskam, J., and Boswijk, A. (2016). Airbnb: the future of networked hospitality businesses. J. Tour. Futures 2, 22–42. doi: 10.1108/JTF-11-2015-0048
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. 88, 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906
Palgan, Y. V., Zvolska, L., and Mont, O. (2017). Sustainability framings of accommodation sharing. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 23, 70–83. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2016.12.002
Pouri, M. J., and Hilty, L. M. (2018). Conceptualizing the digital sharing economy in the context of sustainability. Sustainability 10, 1–19. doi: 10.3390/su10124453
Privitera, D. (2016). Describing the collaborative economy: forms of food sharing initiatives. Econ. Sci. Rural Dev. Conf. Proc. 43, 92–98.
Puram, P., and Gurumurthy, A. (2023). Sharing economy in the food sector: a systematic literature review and future research agenda. J. Hosp. Tour. Manage. 56, 229–244. doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2023.06.027
Ray, A., Dhir, A., Bala, P. K., and Kaur, P. (2019). Why do people use food delivery apps (FDA)? A uses and gratification theory perspective. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 51, 221–230. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.025
Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., et al. (2021). PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 10, 1–19. doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
Richards, T. J., and Hamilton, S. F. (2018). Food waste in the sharing economy. Food Policy 75, 109–123. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.01.008
Rodrigues, T. C., Leitao, F. O., Thome, K. M., and Cappellesso, G. (2021). Sharing economy practices in agri-food settlements: integration of resources, interdependence and interdefinition. J. Clean. Prod. 294, 126357. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126357
Sarkis-Onofre, R., Catalá-López, F., Aromataris, E., and Lockwood, C. (2021). How to properly use the PRISMA Statement. Syst. Rev. 10, 1–3. doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01671-z
Schanes, K., and Stagl, S. (2019). Food waste fighters: What motivates people to engage in food sharing?. J. Cleaner Prod. 211, 1491–1501. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.162
Schor, J. B., Fitzmaurice, C., Carfagna, L. B., Attwood-Charles, W., and Poteat, E. D. (2016). Paradoxes of openness and distinction in the sharing economy. Poetics 54, 66–81. doi: 10.1016/j.poetic.2015.11.001
Scopus Preview (2023). Sources. Available online at: https://www.scopus.com/sources.uri?zone=TopNavBarandorigin= (accessed October 30, 2023).
Secondi, L., Principato, L., and Mattia, G. (2019). Can digital solutions help in the minimization of out-of-home waste? An analysis from the client and business perspective. Br. Food J. 122, 1341–1359. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-03-2019-0205
Soltysova, Z., and Modrak, V. (2020). Challenges of the sharing economy for SMEs: a literature review. Sustainability 12, 1–14. doi: 10.3390/su12166504
Stehrenberger, A., and Schneider, T. (2023). “At first, I was only a subscriber”: re-mediating food citizens' solidarity practices through digital technologies. Front. Sust. Food Syst. 7, 1–11. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2023.1214354
Swartz, M. K. (2021). PRISMA 2020: an update. J. Pediatric Health Care 35, 351. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2021.04.011
Tajeddini, K., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Gamage, T. C., and Martin, E. (2021). Exploring the visitors' decision-making process for Airbnb and hotel accommodations using value-attitude-behavior and theory of planned behavior. Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 96, 102950. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102950
Tussyadiah, I. P., and Pesonen, J. (2016). Impacts of peer-to-peer accommodation use on travel patterns. J. Travel Res. 55, 1022–1040. doi: 10.1177/0047287515608505
Vélez, A. M. A. (2023). Economic impacts, carbon footprint and rebound effects of car sharing: Scenario analysis assessing business-to-consumer and peer-to-peer car sharing. Sust. Prod. Consump. 35, 238–249. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2022.11.004
Wang, C., Huang, J., Liao, J., and Wan, X. (2020). Food sharing with choice: influence on social evaluation. Front. Psychol. 11, 1–8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02070
Wang, Y., Xiang, D., Yang, Z., and Ma, S. S. (2019). Unraveling customer sustainable consumption behaviors in sharing economy: A socio-economic approach based on social exchange theory. J. Cleaner Prod. 208, 869–879. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.139
Web of Science (2023). Documents. Available online at: https://www-webofscience-com.infozdroje.czu.cz/wos/woscc/smart-search (accessed October 28, 2023).
Wirtz, J., So, K. K. F., Mody, M. A., Liu, S. Q., and Chun, H. H. (2019). Platforms in the peer-to-peer sharing economy. J. Service Manage. 30, 452–483. doi: 10.1108/JOSM-11-2018-0369
Yang, S. B., Lee, H., Lee, K., and Koo, C. (2018). The application of Aristotle's rhetorical theory to the sharing economy: an empirical study of Airbnb. J. Travel Tour. Marketing 35, 938–957. doi: 10.1080/10548408.2018.1455622
Zhang, Z., and Chen, R. J. (2019). Assessing Airbnb logistics in cities: geographic information system and convenience theory. Sustainability 11, 1–11. doi: 10.3390/su11092462
Keywords: agriculture, food economy, sharing economy, sustainability, hospitality
Citation: Alloh K, Abrham J, Sanova P, Čermák M, Petrzilka S and Schilla F (2024) Sustainability of shared economy in the agri-food, tourism, and hospitality industries. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 8:1369089. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1369089
Received: 11 January 2024; Accepted: 06 February 2024;
Published: 21 February 2024.
Edited by:
Nino Adamashvili, University of Foggia, ItalyReviewed by:
Miroslav Vujicic, University of Novi Sad, SerbiaMichal Veber, Association of Czech Travel Agencies, Czechia
Radim Dušek, Institute of Technology and Business, Czechia
Copyright © 2024 Alloh, Abrham, Sanova, Čermák, Petrzilka and Schilla. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Josef Abrham, YWJyaGFtaiYjeDAwMDQwO2N6dS5jeg==