Linda Pilvinen Exploring consumer motivation and decision- making in accommodation rentals through peer- to-peer digital platforms Vaasa 2023 School of Marketing and Communication Master’s thesis Master’s Programme in International Business 2 UNIVERSITY OF VAASA School of Marketing and Communication Author: Linda Pilvinen Title of the Thesis: Exploring consumer motivation and decision-making in accommodation rentals through peer-to-peer digital platforms Degree: Master of Science in Economics and Business Administration Programme: International Business Supervisor: Arto Ojala Year: 2023 Pages: 92 ABSTRACT: The sharing economy has been growing at an unprecedented rate in recent years. Digital peer- to-peer platforms have facilitated this growth and the ease of use and accessibility of these platforms have led to their increased adoption. Peer-to-peer platforms have expanded their services to new countries which has enabled consumers to participate in various sharing economy services globally. With the increasing popularity of the sharing economy, there is a growing need to understand why and how consumers participate in these platforms. The aim of the study is to explore the factors that motivate consumers to rent an accommodation via peer-to-peer digital platform and examine the extent to which cultural factors, and travel destination influence their decision-making process. The study was conducted as qualitative research and the data was collected through semi-structured interviews. A total of 10 interviews were conducted amongst young Finnish consumers who had prior experience with accommodation rentals through the accommodation sharing platform Airbnb. The study was further supported by a literature review, which provides the theoretical framework for the study. The literature review focuses on the extant research on sharing economy, motivation theories, generation Z and cultural values as well as the relationship between these topics. The findings of the study show that cost benefits were found to be the most prominent factor guiding purchase decisions, followed closely by convenience whereas social and sustainability factors were considered less influential in the decision-making process. Authenticity and uniqueness of the accommodation were also found to be important factors for some participants. Additionally, the study found that trust was a crucial factor and reviews played a vital role in building trust. The impact of travel destination on sharing economy participation was found to be influenced by cultural differences and safety concerns in cases where the travel destination was perceived to be culturally highly distinct or located far away. KEYWORDS: sharing economy, peer-to-peer platform, accommodation rental, Airbnb, consumer motivation 3 VAASAN YLIOPISTO Markkinoinnin ja viestinnän yksikkö Tekijä: Linda Pilvinen Tutkielman nimi: Exploring consumer motivation and decision-making in accommodation rentals through peer-to-peer digital platforms Tutkinto: Master of Science in Economics and Business Administration Ohjelma: International Business Ohjaaja: Arto Ojala Vuosi: 2023 Sivumäärä: 92 TIIVISTELMÄ: Jakamistalous on kasvanut viime vuosina ennennäkemätöntä vauhtia. Digitaaliset vertaisverkkoalustat ovat toimineet kasvun tukena ja muun muassa alustojen helppokäyttöisyys ja saavutettavuus on nähty alustojen käytön yleistymiseen vaikuttavina tekijöinä. Vertaisverkkoalustat ovat laajentaneet palvelujaan uusiin maihin, mikä on mahdollistanut sen, että kuluttajat voivat hyödyntää jakamistalouden alustoja ja palveluita maailmanlaajuisesti. Jakamistalouden suosion kasvaessa tarve ymmärtää, miksi ja miten kuluttajat käyttävät vertaisverkkoalustoja lisääntyy. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena on tutkia tekijöitä, jotka motivoivat kuluttajia vuokraamaan majoituksen digitaalisen vertaisverkkoalustan kautta sekä selvittää, missä määrin kulttuuriset tekijät ja matkakohde vaikuttavat kuluttajan päätöksentekoprosessiin. Tutkimus toteutettiin laadullisena tutkimuksena ja aineisto kerättiin puolistrukturoiduilla haastatteluilla. Haastatteluja toteutettiin yhteensä kymmenen ja haastateltavat koostuivat nuorista suomalaisista kuluttajista, joilla oli kokemusta majoitusvuokrauksesta Airbnb:n kautta. Tutkimuksen tukena käytettiin myös kirjallisuuskatsausta, joka muodostaa tutkimuksen teoreettisen viitekehyksen. Kirjallisuuskatsauksessa keskitytään jakamistaloutta, motivaatioteorioita, Z-sukupolvea ja kulttuurisia tekijöitä käsitteleviin aikaisempiin tutkimuksiin ja teorioihin. Tutkimuksen tulokset osoittavat, että kustannushyödyt ovat merkittävin ostopäätöstä ohjaava tekijä majoituspaikan valinnassa. Toisena tärkeänä tekijänä nähtiin kätevyyteen liittyvät tekijät, kun taas sosiaalisilla ja kestävään kehitykseen liittyvillä tekijöillä koettiin olevan vähemmän merkitystä päätöksentekoprosessissa. Myös majoituspaikan autenttisuus ja ainutlaatuisuus osoittautuivat tärkeiksi tekijöiksi joidenkin haastateltavien osalta. Lisäksi tutkimuksessa havaittiin, että luottamus on merkittävä tekijä majoituspaikan valinnassa ja arvosteluilla on huomattava rooli luottamuksen rakentamisessa. Kulttuurierot ja huoli turvallisuudesta olivat tutkimuksessa havaittuja kohdemaan vaikutukseen liittyviä tekijöitä, joita esiintyi erityisesti sellaisissa tapauksissa, joissa kohdemaan koettiin olevan maantieteellisesti etäällä tai kulttuurisesti kaukana omasta kotimaasta. AVAINSANAT: jakamistalous, vertaisverkkoalusta, majoituksen vuokraus, Airbnb, kuluttajan motivaatio 4 Contents 1 Introduction 7 1.1 Background of the study 7 1.2 Research gap 10 1.3 Research question and objectives of the study 12 1.4 Delimitations of the study 13 1.5 Structure of the thesis 13 2 Literature review 15 2.1 Sharing economy 15 2.1.1 Defining sharing economy 15 2.1.2 Accommodation sharing 19 2.2 Sharing economy participation 20 2.2.1 Motivation theories 21 2.2.2 Value-based drivers 22 2.3 Generation Z as a consumer segment 26 2.4 The effect of cultural values in peer-to-peer sharing 28 2.4.1 Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory and Finnish culture 29 2.4.2 Perception of foreign services 34 2.5 Theoretical framework 35 3 Methodology 40 3.1 Methodological approach and research philosophy 40 3.2 Data collection and analysis 41 3.3 Selection of interviewees 43 3.4 Reliability and validity 46 4 Findings 48 4.1 Meanings related to travel and accommodation 48 4.2 Experience with Airbnb and other sharing economy platforms 52 4.3 Motives for accommodation sharing 55 4.3.1 Utilitarian motives 55 4.3.2 Hedonic motives 58 4.3.3 Social motives 59 4.3.4 Sustainability motives 61 4.4 Perceptions of the safety and riskiness of peer-to-peer services 63 4.5 The effect of country of origin and travel destination 65 5 Discussion 68 5.1 Determining the motives for sharing economy participation 68 5.2 The role of trust in peer-to-peer sharing 71 5.3 The effect of cultural factors 72 5.4 The impact of travel destination on sharing economy participation 73 6 Conclusions 75 6.1 Managerial and practical implications 76 6.2 Limitations and future research 77 References 79 5 Appendices 91 Appendix 1. Interview guide 91 6 Figures Figure 1. Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Graph for Finland. (Hofstede Insights, 2021). 31 Figure 2. Motives and factors influencing Sharing Economy Participation. 38 Tables Table 1. Details of the interviewees. 45 Table 2. Description of interviewees’ prior experience with Airbnb. 53 7 1 Introduction The aim of this chapter is to introduce the topic of the thesis. First, the background of the study is discussed in the light of existing literature. Next, the research gap is identified, in order to better understand the purpose of the thesis. Followed by that, the purpose, objective and research questions of the study are presented. Finally, the delimitations and structure of the thesis are discussed. 1.1 Background of the study Belk (1988) has argued that “You are what you own” referring to the concept of extended self which suggests that our possessions extend our identity beyond our mind and body. However, in today’s economy Belk’s argument does not sound that unambiguous anymore. In recent years attitudes toward consumption have shifted, raising concerns about ecological, social, and developmental consequences (Hamari, Sjöklint & Ukkonen, 2016). As a result, we have been introduced to various alternatives for traditional consumption modes such as secondhand, access-based and collaborative consumption. These alternative modes of consumption have risen alongside traditional ownership, and even managed to challenge it (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012). Consequently, Belk (2014) has argued that we are now entering the so-called post-ownership economy where what was previously known as “you are what you own” is beginning to shift towards “you are what you share”. Sharing as such is not a novel phenomenon. However, the recent shifts in consumer attitudes have enabled the emergence of new business models and modes of consumption built around the sharing of resources. Due to the advance in information technologies and growing popularity of web 2.0, there are now available online platforms that support user-generated content, sharing, and collaboration (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Thanks to the rise of peer-to-peer platforms people can now collaborate to make use of underutilized assets through fee-based sharing (Zervas, Proserpio & Byers, 2017). Some prominent examples of peer-to-peer sharing platforms 8 include Airbnb, Omago, GreenMobility, RentMyWardrobe and Funding Circle. Peer-to- peer markets, collectively referred to as the sharing economy, have developed as alternative providers of products and services that were previously only offered by long- established industries (Zervas et al., 2017). As the world slowly begins to shift from handling the COVID-19 crisis to recovery and economic reopening, it is evident that the period of lockdown has had a profound impact on people's lives and the way they live. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced consumers to rethink their international travel habits. Now that international travel is expected to gradually recover from the pandemic (UNWTO, 2022), it is timely to examine consumer behavior related to international travel. A recent study on how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted consumers’ attitudes and behavior in Finland reveals that young travellers appear to be particularly keen on finding ways to make their travel more sustainable (Sitra, 2020). By advocating the usage and redistribution of underutilized products and services, the sharing economy has been promoted as a propitious shift towards consumption that is more sustainable (Cherry & Pidgeon, 2017). The sharing economy as we perceive it today began to take off in the 1990s, driven by technological as well as demographic and societal factors (Kozlenkova, Lee, Xiang & Palmatier, 2021). The phenomenon is growing rapidly, and it is estimated that the global revenues for the five key sharing economy sectors will increase from $15 billion in 2014 to $335 billion by 2025 (PwC, 2014). Sharing platform business models are praised not only by users, but also investors who have confidence in their profit potential, leading to valuations that often meet or even surpass those of more established traditional competitors (Wirtz, So, Mody, Liu, Chun, 2019). Fueling this fast-paced growth, companies operating in the sharing economy undertake rigorous strategies for global expansion, aiming to gain market share and obtain the advantages of being first (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Aside from its economic growth potential, some also consider the sharing economy as a positive force, that empowers individuals by providing new types of opportunities for employment, income and social interaction (Cherry & 9 Pidgeon, 2018). Pronouncements like this indicate that sharing economy is more than a passing fad and is in fact here to stay. Therefore, it should be taken seriously as it does not only provide a great alternative mode of consumption but also has the ability to impact the economy and society at large. Sharing economy has also piqued interest among researchers. As a relatively new and rapidly growing phenomenon, the sharing economy poses many interesting research questions and challenges. One of the fundamental questions is what motivates the consumer to participate in it, as this is a prerequisite for its existence. Some of the most prominent approaches used to explain motivational factors regarding sharing economy participation include the social exchange theory (Guttentag, Smith, Potwarka & Havitz, 2018; Kim, Yoon & Zo, 2015; Kozlenkova et al., 2021; Tussyadiah, 2016) and self- determination theory (Hamari et al., 2016; Kozlenkova et al., 2021; Tussyadiah, 2016). Kozlenkova et al. (2021) have further extended the research by adopting an international marketing perspective and identifying four value-based drivers of sharing economy participation. As their research is based on a meta-analysis merging the findings of existing studies, Kozlenkova et al. (2021) state the necessity to identify some of the mediating mechanisms via which value-based drivers affect sharing economy participation. Furthermore, Kozlenkova et al. (2021) suggest that future research should explore the influence of cultural norms of countries. Lee, Erdogan and Hong (2021) use Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory to examine the influence of cultural factors on a consumer’s participation in the sharing economy. As their study only used a sample from Unites States, Lee et al. (2021) suggest that future research should include a sample from a different culture. Moreover, Lee et al. (2021) underline that their study did not question in detail those participants who had past experience with Airbnb. They emphasize that a positive experience may lead to a positive impact on the intention to adopt, while a negative experience may lead to a negative impact on future usage intentions. Additionally, little is understood about how generational differences and country of destination affect an individual’s use of sharing 10 economy platforms. Martínez-González, Parra-López and Barrientos-Báez (2021) have studied what influences young consumers’ intention to participate in the sharing economy in tourism. However, their study is limited to the students at a single university and therefore, Martínez-González et al. (2021) suggest that the global nature of the findings within a specific age cohort is not fully conclusive, especially in the case of tourism and the topic should therefore be further studied. Furthermore, they propose that selecting a specific sharing economy platform operating in the tourism industry would provide a more in-depth understanding of the sector. To conclude, the topic of this study contributes to existing theory by aiming to gain a deeper understanding of the mediating mechanisms via which value-based drivers affect sharing economy participation. Moreover, the study focuses on researching a specific digital peer-to-peer platform by interviewing participants who represent generation Z and have past experience with the accommodation sharing platform Airbnb. Furthermore, the influence of cultural factors is examined in relation to Finnish culture. 1.2 Research gap The sharing economy has been studied to some extent, but as with any new concept or increasingly widespread phenomenon its explicit definition remains ambiguous (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Prior research on sharing economy participation has been largely focused on studying the sharing economy as a whole (Hamari et al., 2016; Hawlitschek, Teubner & Gimpel, 2018; Kozlenkova et al., 2021; Luri Minami, Ramos & Bruscato Bortoluzzo, 2021) rather than focusing on a specific sector or platform. However, each sector, let alone platform, has unique features and characteristics that differ significantly from each other, and may therefore influence the motives for participation. Sands, Ferraro, Campbell, Kietzmann and Andonopoulos (2020) argue that although there is a definite demand for the sharing economy, yet little is known about 11 the diverseness of consumer preferences and the differing demand for sharing experiences across various consumption categories. Even though the sharing economy has piqued the interest of academics and practitioners due to its remarkable growth and potential, it is, still however not entirely certain which factors motivate and discourage people to participate in peer-to-peer exchanges, and which determinants hinder its more prevalent adoption (Matzner, Chasin & Todenhöfer, 2015). Therefore, there is a clear demand for empirical research regarding users’ motives for participating in sharing economy platforms as well as the strength with which such motivating factors take impact (Hawlitschek et al., 2016). When selecting the platform to be examined in this study, the peer-to-peer accommodation sharing platform Airbnb was selected, since it is a well-established platform that has been on the market for some time, and is becoming highly relevant yet again as travel slowly picks up. In prior research regarding Airbnb users and their participation in the sharing economy, the focus has been on identifying antecedents and determinants for participation behavior by quantitative measures rather than gaining a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and the underlying motives (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Previous studies have also not specified whether the phenomenon is studied specifically in the context of international travel or whether domestic travel is also considered. There seems to be strong consensus among researchers regarding the fact that young consumers often share similar attitudes, beliefs, values, and behavior (Mulyani, Aryanto & Chang, 2019) Even though research on generation Z’s participation in the sharing economy is limited, this demographic segment possess optimal characteristics due to their tech-savvy and diginative nature (Martínez‐gonzález et al., 2021; Mulyani et al., 2019). Therefore, this study focuses on generations Z which can be defined depending on the chosen author as a group of people born between mid 1990s and early 2010s (Scholz & Rennig, 2019; Barhate & Dirani, 2022). 12 These arguments, along with the findings and suggestions found in prior studies present a definite need for further research. To fill certain gaps in the current research, this thesis investigates young consumers’ motives to participate in short-term accommodation sharing while travelling abroad and thus contributes to the theoretical and empirical research in this field. Exploring the phenomenon from a less-studied point of view serves as an intriguing research topic that can provide valuable insights to the field of study. 1.3 Research question and objectives of the study The aim of this study is to explore the factors that motivate young Finnish consumers to participate in the sharing economy and examine the extent to which cultural factors, and travel destination influence their decision-making process. Specifically, the study will investigate the motives for choosing short-term accommodations through Airbnb while travelling abroad. The main research question of this study is: RQ1. What motivates consumers to rent an accommodation via peer-to-peer digital platform? Three sub-questions were determined to support the research objective: 1. What are the motives that guide travellers´ accommodation choice? 2. How does cultural background impact consumers' decision to participate in the sharing economy? 3. To what extent do the consumers’ perceptions of the travel destination influence their decision? 13 1.4 Delimitations of the study The study includes certain delimitations that limit its scope and provide boundaries for the study, as stated in earlier sub-chapters. The first delimitation of the thesis relates to the scope of the study. The empirical study will not explore sharing economy as a whole due to inherent and significant differences between various sectors and platforms. For instance, peer-to-peer finance, car sharing, and peer-to-peer accommodation sharing all have their own unique characteristics, that should be taken into account. Consequently, this study focuses specifically on peer-to-peer sharing in the context of short-term accommodation sharing and thus excludes other categories of consumption. Furthermore, Airbnb and its users are selected as the platform and user base in which the consumer participation will be examined. As the purpose of the study is to explore the various motives for young consumers participation in peer-to-peer accommodation sharing in the context of international travel, the research is limited to the visitor perspective explicitly. This study focuses specifically on the motivations for Airbnb visitor participation and hence excludes provider and host behavior, which has already been studied in several studies (Fischer, Pahus & Bager, 2019; von Richthofen & von Wangenheim, 2021; Wang, Asaad & Filieri, 2020). In addition to the fact that the topic is limited to a specific sector, platform and solely on the visitor perspective, the research is focused on a specific demographic cohort being the generation Z. Moreover, motives for accommodation sharing participation will be examined explicitly in the context of international travel excluding visitor experiences with Airbnb in domestic travel. 1.5 Structure of the thesis This thesis is divided into six main chapters. The first chapter introduces the topic of the thesis, discusses the background and research gap of the study and presents the 14 purpose, objective and questions as well as the delimitations of the research. The second chapter provides an overview of the prior research related to the topic and presents the theoretical framework of the study. In the third chapter the methodology of the research is discussed in terms of the methodological approach and research philosophy, data collection and analysis, selection of interviewees as well as the assessment of the reliability and validity aspects of the study. The fourth chapter presents the findings from the data with quotes of the interviews and the fifth chapter discusses the findings in relation to the theoretical background. The final chapter will draw conclusions from the research and present the limitations of the study, managerial implications, and suggestions for future research. 15 2 Literature review This chapter will introduce the concept of sharing economy and discuss the various motivations consumers may have for selecting this alternative consumption mode. Furthermore, this chapter examines generation Z as a consumer segment and the cultural perspective on sharing. The literature review is divided into five sections and begins by an overview of the origin and definitions of sharing economy and peer-to-peer accommodation. Following this, prior research on the motives for sharing economy participation are reviewed. Next, the characteristics of generation Z, as a consumer segment, are analyzed. Finally, the last section focuses on effect of culture on sharing. The chapter is concluded with a theoretical framework drawn up on the basis of the literature review. 2.1 Sharing economy Even though sharing itself is nearly as old as humankind, the sharing economy facilitated by the rapid development of information and communication technologies, is a 21st- century phenomenon (Hawlitschek, Teubner & Weinhardt, 2016). In recent years, the concept of sharing economy has been used in literature to define how individuals interact via digital platforms to rent, share, and exchange products and services (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Botsman & Rogers, 2010; Hamari et al., 2016). Hawlitschek et al. (2016) argue that the rise of sharing economy is influencing the consumption patterns of millions of people around the globe. In the following subchapter, various sharing economy definitions will be discussed in more detail and finally, the definition used as the basis for this study will be introduced. 2.1.1 Defining sharing economy The vast growth of sharing economy practices has been followed by numerous publications. As already discussed in the introduction, up to this date, the academia lacks 16 a common agreement when it comes to conceptually defining the sharing economy. This is largely due to it being a relatively new and rapidly spreading phenomenon (Cherry and Pidgeon, 2018; Hawlitschek, Teubner, Adam, Borchers, Moehlmann & Weinhardt, 2016; Kozlenkova et al., 2021) which has been researched in various scientific fields and schools of thoughts. However, there are several points of universal agreement that can be identified from the various definitions of the sharing economy. This subchapter aims to shed light on the conceptualisation of the sharing economy and provide some clarity to the conceptual confusion around the topic. One of the aforementioned universally agreed principles is that the sharing economy entails interaction between individuals (Barnes & Mattsson, 2016; Hou, 2018; Ma, Gu, Hampson & Wang, 2020). Another common defining factor of the concept is the emphasis on the need for the utilization of idle resources (Cherry & Pidgeon, 2018; Hamari et al., 2016). This enables society as a whole to utilize assets more efficiently thanks to citizens giving one another access to already existing resources (Cherry & Pidgeon, 2018). General consensus also holds for the fact that the sharing economy is enabled by technology and mostly takes place on IT-enabled platforms (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Most sharing economy definitions acknowledge its accessibility solely on the internet and that its ‘‘activities are mediated by various information systems’’ (Hamari et al., 2016). Sharing that takes place without the interference of an online platform is not regarded as part of the sharing economy (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). For example, borrowing household appliances from a friend, family member or neighbor in person does not fit the criteria for the sharing economy. Most researchers also agree that at the heart of the phenomenon is the possibility to gain temporary access to a resource rather than its ownership (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Therefore, platforms such as Amazon and Facebook Marketplace are not considered to be part of the sharing economy since no sharing takes place once the product's ownership is fully transferred to a new owner. Next, the conceptual elements of the sharing economy which have undergone more debate among researchers will be discussed. One of these elements is financial 17 compensation. While other academics clearly indicate that a monetary transaction is required, others do not take a stand on this in their definitions (Cheng, 2016; Eckhardt, Houston, Jiang, Lamberton, Rindfleisch, & Zervas, 2019) and some even allow for both (Prayag & Ozanne, 2018). An example of the former is Kumar, Lahiri, and Dogan (2018) who define sharing economy as ‘‘monetization of underutilized assets that are owned by service providers (firms or individuals) through short-term rental’’. Another element for which there is no consensus on among researchers is whether the sharing economy solely applies to peer-to-peer platforms or if some business-to-consumer platforms can also be considered to be part of it. Regarding the unambiguous conceptual definition of sharing economy, academics only agree on some of the factors, which increases the risk of them not researching the same phenomenon. However, a study conducted by Kozlenkova et al. (2021) reveals that, possibly as a result of the availability of data, sharing economy’s operationalizations are much more coherent in practice. They found that 96% of the empirical studies under their examination explored companies where providers received financial compensation in exchange for the sharing of their underutilized assets. Another finding was that 95% of these studies examined online platforms. Finally, as a result of the literature analysis, Kozlenkova et al. (2021) found that 82% of these studies featured firms that operate on a peer-to-peer basis. Thus, this thesis defines sharing economy based on both extant theories and definitions as well as empirical data which has been reviewed in prior studies as consumers allowing others to have temporary access to their idle assets against monetary compensation intermediated by an online platform. While examining the sharing economy and its taxonomy, it is essential to also consider some of the closely related terms and concepts. Such terms include peer-to-peer economy, access-based consumption, and collaborative consumption (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Barnes & Mattsson, 2016; Ma et al., 2020). Many of these terms are used interchangeably and for example the term known as collaborative consumption may be seen as either a subcategory (Belk, 2014; Hamari et al., 2016) or a synonym of 18 sharing economy (Martin, Upham & Klapper, 2017). This demonstrates how the terminology used to characterize the sharing economy is ambiguous as are the connections between the subsets and concepts involved. While sharing economy is often praised for its potential to promote sustainability and social matters, it has also faced significant critique. There have been some concerns raised about the proper classification of what should be considered part of the sharing economy. One defining factor of the concept is known to be that it enables the utilization of underutilized resources (Cherry & Pidgeon, 2018; Hamari et al., 2016). However, Price and Belk (2016) argue that “In some of the theory and research surrounding ‘the sharing economy,’ sharing is so blurred with traditional marketplace exchanges as to be indistinguishable. Or more accurately, the concepts often remain distinct, but a ‘sharewashing’ effort is made to blur them to the extent that marketplace exchange is touted as sharing.”. Frenken and Schor (2017) use Airbnb, the accommodation sharing platform, as an example to demonstrate this by highlighting that when a homeowner is away on vacation or on business, or when a spare room happens to be available, the property is not being utilized and can therefore be classified as temporarily idle capacity. However, buying a second house or apartment and renting it out to visitors on a long-term basis is considered operating as a commercial accommodation establishment, and therefore is fully equivalent to a hotel or bed and breakfast. The phenomenon described above has even been labelled as sharewashing, which refers to the deliberate misrepresentation of social and ecological principles by a platform to consumers even when those principles are not necessarily central to the platform's business model (Hawlitschek, Stofberg, Teubner, Tu & Weinhardt, 2018). Secondly, concerns have been raised about the exploitation of the “workers” who participate in sharing economy in the role of service providers. This stems from the fact that according to the law, individuals working in the sharing economy are considered to be self-employed contractors rather than regular employees (Ahsan, 2020). Therefore, the sharing economy faces critique concerning uncertainty and lack of protection for workers (Schor, 2016). Ahsan (2020) argues that the sharing economy reflects the rise 19 of a trend that exploits the idea of entrepreneurship to justify certain types of employment practices. Also, closely related to this, the sharing economy has also been criticized for its overall variation and lack of regulation that is present in the platform economy (Schor, 2016; Uzunca & Borlenghi, 2019). Additionally, sharing economy has faced criticism for disrupting traditional industries such as transport and tourism (Cramer & Krueger, 2016; Zervas et al., 2017). Also, the inequality aspect of the sharing economy has been criticized in a sense that it enables those that already own resources to use them to gain further economic benefit (Törnberg, 2022). Moreover, Törnberg (2022) found that for example the Airbnb markets have gradually shifted towards only a small number of hosts receiving the majority of market revenue. 2.1.2 Accommodation sharing Accommodation sharing is a new type of lodging industry within the sharing economy, in which hosts temporarily rent out private residences via digital platforms (Chi, Pan & Huang, 2021). Peer-to-peer (P2P) accommodation markets have vastly expanded during the past 10 years (Dogru, Zhang, Suess, Mody, Bulut & Sirakaya-Turk, 2020; Ert & Fleischer, 2019; Liang, Schuckert, Law & Chen, 2017). The fundamental component of the peer-to-peer accommodation business model is the service provider (platform), which serves as a mediator between the host, who is the supplier, and the consumer paying for the underutilized properties (Kumar et al., 2018). Chi et al., (2021) highlight that many travelers, millennials in particular, are starting to prefer peer-to-peer (P2P) accommodation over traditional hotel accommodation to attain more personalized accommodation experiences. P2P accommodations have also been argued to enable “connections between people with significant dissimilarities (i.e., weak ties), e.g., in terms of beliefs and background” (Sánchez‐Franco & Rey‐Moreno, 2022; Yoganathan, Osburg & Bartikowski, 2021). Some of the other arguments in favor 20 of this alternative form of accommodation include its ability to provide both economic value and functional, pleasant, and social experiences (Ikkala & Lampinen, 2014). 2.1.2.1 Airbnb Airbnb is a globally operating online marketplace where homeowners who wish to rent out their apartments may connect with travelers searching for short-term accommodation in their travel destinations. The most recent statistics from Airbnb shows that it has over six million listings, which span more than 100,000 cities and towns and more than 220 countries worldwide (Investopedia, 2022). Airbnb was established when two hosts opened their San Francisco home to three visitors in 2007. Since then, it has expanded to over 4 million hosts and more than 1 billion guest stays in nearly every country around the world (Airbnb, 2022). 2.2 Sharing economy participation To understand why individuals participate in the sharing economy, it is necessary to first understand what motivates them to do so. Extant consumer behavior research implies that individuals make purchase decisions regarding products and services to satisfy a variety of needs (Tussyadiah, 2016). It is crucial to comprehend the motivations behind consumption for various reasons. For instance, by aligning advertisements with these motivations, using experiential or functional appeals can enhance the effectiveness of advertising campaigns. (Volz & Volgger, 2022). Some of the most notable approaches used to explain motivational aspects regarding sharing economy participation include the social exchange theory (Guttentag et al., 2018; Kim, Yoon & Zo, 2015; Kozlenkova et al., 2021; Tussyadiah, 2016) and self- determination theory (Hamari et al., 2016; Kozlenkova et al., 2021; Tussyadiah, 2016). In the following subchapter the above theories and extant literature regarding them will be reviewed. 21 2.2.1 Motivation theories Motivation is a valuable measure used to understand and explain decision-making as well as to why individuals display certain behaviors (Hawkins & Mothersbaugh, 2010; Pearce & Lee, 2005; Petrick, Backman, Bixler, & Norman, 2001). Two well- established frameworks, the self-determination theory, and the social exchange theory, lay the foundation for identifying the antecedents for sharing economy participation (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Next, these two theories will be further discussed in the context of sharing economy. 2.2.1.1 Self-determination theory According to self-determination theory, people’s behavior is governed by intrinsic or extrinsic motives and thereby individuals with intrinsic motivation undertake an activity for its inherent fulfillment, but those with extrinsic motivation do so to accomplish goals that are motivated by external factors such as reputation or monetary gain (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Extrinsically motivated individuals act in order to obtain instrumental value, while intrinsically motivated individuals act in order to enjoy the task itself (Ryan and Deci, 2000). For example, an athlete might be motivated to play a sport for internal reasons such as enjoyment and the opportunities for learning and skill improvement or external rewards such as trophies and scholarships. The degree of motivation may be similar in both scenarios, even though the motivation’s orientation varies. 2.2.1.2 Social exchange theory Social exchange theory suggests that individuals engage in the exchange of social and material resources when they expect there to be a favorable outcome and value returned to them upon these exhanges (Emerson, 1976). Motivation research based on the social exchange theory indicates that individuals have an inherent need for trust, 22 making it a crucial aspect of their motivation (Turner, 1987). Both users and providers of the sharing economy have to trust that the other party will reciprocate, since there is no guarantee for the satisfaction and end result of these exchanges (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Trust plays a vital role in social interactions and is often examined in sharing economy related research (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005; Ert, Fleischer, & Magen, 2016). Mähönen, Tuunanen, Ojala and Kruse (2023) have studied the user’s perspective of a sharing economy platform’s trustworthiness and their findings suggest that the trustworthiness of such digital platform is perceived through how trustworthy the technology, other users and the company are seen as. 2.2.2 Value-based drivers Prior research suggests that typically consumers evaluate whether or not to take part in the sharing economy based on their perception of the value they can get from it (Perren & Kozinets, 2018) and this value may be associated with utilitarian, social, hedonic, or sustainability motivations (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). In this thesis these four value-based drivers will be investigated in relation to sharing economy participation. Value-based drivers, which include utilitarian, social, hedonic, and sustainability values, reflect peoples’ internal decision-making criteria that drives them to participate in the sharing economy (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Therefore, it is essential to note that individuals may participate in the sharing economy for various reasons depeding on whether their behavior is governed by intrinsic or extrinsic motives such as saving time or money, accessing a high quality service, acting more sustainable or enabling meaningful relationships with other individuals rather than brands (Botsman & Rogers, 2010, p.70). From a self-determination theory perspective, consumers seek utilitarian values to serve their extrinsic motivations whereas social, hedonic, and sustainability values are sought in order to meet their intrinsic motivations (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). 23 2.2.2.1 Utilitarian value Voss, Spangenberg & Grohmann (2003) propose a two-dimensional conceptualization of consumer motivations with a utilitarian dimension derived from the functional benefits of a product/service and a hedonic dimension consisting of the sensations obtained from the experience of utilizing a product/service. In extant literature the most prominent motive for sharing in relation to utilitarian considerations is cost benefits (Hamari et al., 2016; Liang, Choi & Joppe, 2018; Möhlmann, 2015; Tussyadiah, 2016). In most cases sharing economy platforms offer lower cost options compared to market alternatives (Leung, Xue & Wen, 2019; Schor, 2016). Peer-to-peer platforms in particular enable value to be redistributed throughout the supply chain to providers and users bringing it further away from “middlemen,” partially due to providers’ costs being lower (Schor, 2016). Saving money may provide gratification that outweighs the possible psychological hurdles (e.g. the risk factor, variance in service quality and concerns about safety) to engaging in the sharing economy, especially for price-sensitive individuals (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). For instance, if customers discern that Airbnb offers more affordable accommodations than conventional hotels and service providers, they might be more inclined to explore the sharing economy alternative. Accordingly, sharing economy participation may be considered utility maximizing and logically justifiable behavior in which the customer replaces exclusive ownership with more affordable alternative consumption modes available through a collaborative consumption service (Hamari et al., 2016). Other utilitarian benefits of the sharing economy stem from its convenience (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). For example, using the Omago car sharing service you can access a car only when you need one and it best suits you while avoiding the hassle with common car ownership related inconveniences such as insurance paperwork, car storage, vehicle inspection and maintenance. According to Moeller and Wittkowski (2010) sharing may be seen as a convenient way of consuming. Their research implies that convenience orientation positively impacts the preference for non-ownership and thus supports the 24 notion that people who value convenience are more likely to participate in the sharing economy. Convenience orientation, in the context of sharing economy, refers to the wish to save time and effort as consuming and participating in the sharing economy is often perceived quite convenient since it allows access to resources without the burden of ownership (Moeller & Wittkowski, 2010). 2.2.2.2 Hedonic value Hedonic value, in contrast to utilitarian value, emphasizes affective motivation and emotional pleasure instead of practicality and cognitive motivation (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). With regard to consumer experience, the hedonic value refers to the evaluation of factors such as the uniqueness of the product or service and the degree to which it evokes pleasant emotions in the consumer (Overby & Lee, 2006). Due to their substantial impact on consumer attitudes and behavioral patterns, consumers’ evaluations of hedonic and utilitarian attributes have been widely researched (Lee & Kim, 2018). Existing research proposes that the hedonic value received from authentic, pleasurable experiences may result in increased sharing economy participation (Lang, 2018; Wu, Zeng & Xie, 2017). For example, if people perceive carpooling via BlaBlaCar when travelling from one city to another or staying at an Airbnb in their travel destination to be more exciting and unique than public transport or a hotel accommodation, they may be more likely to explore these sharing economy alternatives. Perceived enjoyment has been discovered to influence both attitudes and behavioral intentions toward taking part in the sharing economy (Hamari et al., 2016). 2.2.2.3 Social value Social factors have also been proposed as a motive for participating in the sharing economy (Belk, 2014; Botsman & Rogers, 2010). Schor (2016) suggests the desire to 25 broaden one's social network to be a common motivation for participation. Sharing economy has the potential to offer meaningful encounters between users and providers and it may even allow friendships to form between like-minded participants (Kozlenkova et al., 2021). Some consumers may participate in collaborative consumption merely because they consider it to be fun and something that enables them to experience meaningful interactions with others in the community (Hamari et al., 2016). It is suggested that peer- to-peer sharing is a more social form of consumption than business-to-consumer sharing, since consumers feel more accountable for the community and its members when they communicate directly with one another (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012). 2.2.2.4 Sustainability value The world population is growing, which means that the usage of resources is continuing to rise. As a result, measures to promote a more sustainable way of living and conducting business are required. The sharing economy has been proposed as one answer to encouraging sustainable behavior. (Botsman & Rogers, 2011; Luchs, Naylor, Rose, Catlin, Gau, Kapitan, . . . Weaver, 2011; Raisanen, Ojala & Tuovinen, 2021). In addition to weighing the utilitarian, social, and hedonic benefits of a certain consumption decision, many people also consider the environmental impact of their actions. Many sharing economy platforms promote themselves as environmentally friendly and propose sharing as a means to decrease carbon footprints. It is a well- known argument among sharing economy participants that sharing requires fewer resources than the prevalent methods of obtaining goods and services due to the aforementioned reduced demand for new goods or facilities (Schor, 2016). This declaration is in line with prior research which validates that some people use sharing economy platforms to limit their consumption for sustainability related matters (Seegebarth, Peyer, Balderjahn & Wiedmann, 2016). 26 Hamari et al. (2016) suggest that participating in the sharing economy is often perceived as a sustainable alternative and sustainability as a motive is associated with an individuals’ ideology and norms. These arguments are consistent with other researchers’ findings which suggest that some individuals like to present their choice of consumption mode with the purpose of advocating their ideological interests (Bardhi & Eckhart, 2012). A notable aspect of these findings is that participation and sustainability cannot be proven to be directly linked to one another unless the consumer has a positive attitude towards collaborative consumption in general (Hamari et al., 2016). In contrast to most other studies, a study by Möhlmann (2015) found no effect between sustainability and either customer satisfaction regarding a sharing service or the probability of them selecting a sharing economy alternative again. In addition to the general motivational factors and drivers for sharing economy participation there are various other factors that may have significant influence on consumer behavior and should thus be considered. These aforementioned factors include demographics such as age, gender, and culture. Next, the generational age cohort and cultural factors that are the focus of this study are discussed in more detail. 2.3 Generation Z as a consumer segment Generation refers to a detectable group of people who were born around the same time, go through similar life events and face alike experiences and environments while growing up (Krbová & Pavelek, 2015; Kupperschmidt, 2000; Seemiller & Grace, 2016). Generation Z, also referred to as “Gen Z” and “Zoomers”, is defined as individuals with birth years from mid-nineties to early-tens, with lack of agreement concerning the exact time frame for the birth years, some suggesting them as 1995-2009 (mcCrindle 2010, p. 66), while others stating years 1995–2010 (Bencsik Juhász & Horváth-Csikós, 2016; Seemiller & Grace, 2016) and others simply declaring the years “after 1997” (Bresman & Rao 2017). In this thesis, generation Z is defined as people who were born in between 27 the years 1995–2010 (Francis & Hoefel, 2022) and who, although not being a homogeneous group, differ greatly from earlier generations (Fratrièová & Kirchmayer 2018; Tienari & Piekkari 2011, p. 100). Individuals that are part of the same generation often share a lot more than just their birth years. Yet, the research on generational differences has faced a lot of criticism, particularly because of the debate on the definitions of the generational cohorts and their precise measurements (Weeks & Schaffert 2019). As every generation grows up facing such similar occurrences and life events, they often develop alike worldviews, values and personality traits that vary from those held by foregoing and subsequent generations. This generational gap is also considered to affect knowledge, abilities, and the way of communicating as well as other aspects of life including social interaction and purchase behaviors (Srinivasan, 2012). Although every individual is unique, it can be argued that the majority of Gen Zers possess a few integrative traits and characteristics. For instance, due to their young age, they are still relatively new to working life and known to value and strive for a diverse community. People that belong to generation Z are often alluded to as “digital natives” and the “internet generation”, which stresses the fact that technology has been an integral part of their life since they were little children (Fratrièová, & Kirchmayer 2018; Tienari & Piekkari 2011, p. 100). Generation Z has also only ever experienced a world that is very globalized, which has influenced their personality and outlook on the world (Magano, Silva, Figueiredo, Vitória, Nogueira, & Dinis, 2020). Being the first truly global generation, they have been able to benefit from the free movement and shared currency inside the EU (Scholz & Rennig 2019). Not only are Gen Zers a generation considered to be more educated than ever before, but they also share a higher level of complexity and are under more strain than ever before (Scholz & Rennig 2019). When it comes to generation Z as consumers, they are considered to have more ethical consumption styles as well as increased freedom of expression and open-mindedness 28 towards understanding different types of people (Francis & Hoefel, 2022). Thangavel, Pathak & Chandra (2022) have studied the consumer decision-making style of generation Z and their empirical findings indicate that value consciousness and convenience driven are the prevalent buying orientations that influence generation Z consumers. Generation Z consumers have also found to be the most prone to compare and evaluate the available options in the online platforms prior to making their final purchase decision (Thangavel et al., 2022). Thangavel et al. (2022) highlight that this supports the idea that Generation Z is less brand loyal than prior generations, which is also confirmed by their study. To conclude, Thangavel et al. (2022) suggest that the buying preferences of Generation Z differ significantly from those of previous generations, and that marketing techniques aimed at Gen Z consumers must be tailored. Moreover, other recent studies also reveal that Gen Z has distinct consumer values, preferences, and beliefs than previous generations; hence, understanding Gen Z consumption habits is necessary (Desai & Lele, 2017; Puiu, 2016). 2.4 The effect of cultural values in peer-to-peer sharing Not only intragenerational differences can be detected in consumer behavior, but most of the consumer behavior aspects are also culture-specific at least to some extent (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2011). Defined as ‘‘the collective programing of the mind’’ (Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov, 2010), culture serves as a foundation for interaction and shared understanding among members of a group (Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952; Wallerstein, 1990) and establishes societal norms and expectations, thereby influencing individual and organizational behavior (Hofstede et al., 2010). While peer-to-peer exchanges continue to increase around the globe, business researchers have only recently begun to recognize the need of examining cultural variations in order to better comprehend the sharing economy (Gupta, Esmaeilzadeh, 29 Uz & Tennant, 2019). It is crucial to integrate a cultural lens into this field of study because people from different countries hold distinct cultural values (Hofstede et al., 2010), beliefs (Belk, 2010) and norms (Minkov, Blagoev, & Hofstede, 2013; Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) when it comes to sharing. Since the sharing economy necessitates encounters with strangers, cultural aspects also tend to play a role in determining what behaviors are expected and considered acceptable (Wu & Shen, 2018). Next, Hofstede's cultural dimensions will be discussed in more detail and Finnish culture will be examined in relation to them. Furthermore, extant research and literature on the relationship between culture and sharing economy participation will be reviewed. 2.4.1 Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory and Finnish culture The Hofstede dimensional model of national culture has been utilized in many of the studies regarding cross-cultural consumer behavior. Numerous studies in several fields of studies have long validated the findings of Hofstede's research (Beugelsdijk, Kostova & Roth, 2017). Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory is a framework that can be used to understand the cultural variations across countries. Despite the fact that the country scores were first introduced in the early 1970s, multiple replications of Hofstede's research on various samples have shown that the country rankings based on his research are still relevant (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2011). Although Hofstede's cultural dimensions have been widely used to understand cultural differences in various fields, there have also been critiques towards their use. Taras, Kirkman, and Steel (2010) conducted a review of Hofstede's cultural value dimensions and argued that they are too broad and therefore do not capture the complexity of cultural differences. They also suggest that Hofstede's cultural dimensions are based on a Western-centric view of culture and do not account for cultural differences in non- Western countries. The theory has also been criticized for its lack of attention to individual differences (Van Ness, Seifert Franko & Buff, 2005). In conclusion, some studies have found Hofstede’s cultural dimensions to be very useful while others have 30 presented critiques towards them. Thus, it is important to acknowledge these limitations and to consider alternative cultural frameworks in future research. The five dimensions of national culture found by Hofstede include Power Distance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Long- /Short-Term Orientation. (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2011). Based on a systematic review of the world value surveys conducted in 2007–2008, Minkov (2007, 2011) proposed a new cultural dimension, which he referred to as indulgence vs. restraint. Subsequently, Hofstede et al. (2010) incorporated it as the sixth dimension to the cultural dimensions framework since it covered a new facet of culture. This thesis focuses on five of these dimensions, excluding the dimension of power distance. These five dimensions include uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity, indulgence, and longterm orientation. The study is limited to only five of Hofstede’s dimension, because each of these five is anticipated to play a role in consumers’ decisions about whether or not to participate in the sharing economy. Previous studies revealed insufficient evidence to substantiate the influence of power distance on individuals attitudes (Lee et al., 2021). Furthermore, while power distance primarily impacts people at work or in settings where they are aware of social classes, it is less significant in a setting where a customer develops attitudes toward utilizing an Airbnb or other sharing economy service (Lee et al., 2021). 31 Figure 1. Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Graph for Finland. (Hofstede Insights, 2021). 2.4.1.1 Uncertainty avoidance The uncertainty avoidance dimension in Hofstede’s framework refers to the degree to which members of a society tolerate ambiguity and are risk-avoidant (Gupta et al., 2019; Hofstede et al., 2010). Lee et al. (2021) found in their study that uncertainty avoidance had a negative effect on the attitude towards peer-to-peer accommodation. Furthermore, Hofstede's uncertainty avoidance score for Finland has been found to be 59, as shown in the figure, which indicates a relatively high preference to avoid uncertainty (Hofstede Insights, 2021). This implies that the unknown attributes associated with accommodation sharing could be considered as a threat by Finnish consumers. Considering that participation to peer-to-peer accommodation requires interaction with strangers, it necessitates a sufficient level of trust (Lee et al., 2021). Raisanen, Ojala and Tuovinen (2021) conclude based on their systematic literature review on how trust is built in the sharing economy that there appears to be consensus among scholars that trust is at the heart of the sharing economy, because there is no sharing without trust. Moreover, there has been found evidence that a platform user’s trust in a platform may affect the likeliness of them trusting the other users of the platform (Teubner, 32 Hawlitschek & Adam, 2019). Although consumers may trust other individuals and alternative service providers, they still might have a strong aversion to not having control over their stay (Kozlenkova et al. 2021). 2.4.1.2 Individualism-Collectivism The Individualism-Collectivism dimension refers to the degree to which individuals prioritize the wellbeing of a group before their own and are expected to be self-sufficient and independent from others rather than mutually dependent and have close ties with one another (Samaha, Beck, & Palmatier, 2014; Gupta et al., 2019). Moreover, Hofstede's individualism score for Finland has been found to be 63 and thus is considered to be an individualist society (Hofstede Insights, 2021). Gupta et al. (2019) have studied the effects of cultural values on peer-to-peer sharing economy participation and their findings suggests that collectivism has a significant positive effect on consumer willingness to participate in peer-to-peer sharing. However, this finding concerns sharing economy in a broad sense and does not take into account any specific sharing activity or platform. Lee et al. (2021) found in their research that individualism had a negative effect on the attitude towards peer-to-peer accommodation. 2.4.1.3 Masculinity-Feminity Masculinism refers to the degree to which individuals from a certain culture are assertive, goal-oriented, and ambitious (Gupta et al., 2019). Individuals from a feminine culture, on the other hand, place high value on quality of life, nurturing, and caring (Gupta et al., 2019). A comparative study revealed that Italian consumers, from a masculine society, were found to be opposed to and have a more negative attitude toward participation in the sharing economy compared to Spanish consumers, from a feminine society (Perfili, Parente, Grimaldi & Morales-Alonso, 2019). Gupta et al. (2019), 33 on the other hand, discovered a positive correlation between masculinism and peer consumer propensity meaning that masculinism positively influences people’s intention to rent and rent out assets. Contradictory to the other research, the study by Lee et al. (2021) found that the only cultural dimension that showed no substantial effect on attitude was masculinity Moreover, Hofstede's score for Finland has been found to be 26 which is considered a rather low score and indicates that Finland should be regarded as a feminine society (Hofstede Insights, 2021). Given the conflicting results of previous studies, it is difficult to say what conclusions can be drawn from them regarding Finland and the Finnish culture. 2.4.1.4 Indulgence–Restraint The indulgence–restraint dimension refers to the degree to which individuals try to control their urges and impulses as a result of their upbringing (Lee et al., 2021). Hofstede's indulgence–restraint dimension is particularly important and influential in consumer behavior since it is centered around people's attitudes about happiness and enjoyment as well as the significance of fun, leisure, and entertainment in their lives, which all have an impact on people's decision-making (Hofstede et al., 2010; Minkov, 2007). Hofstede's indulgence score for Finland has been found to be 57 which is considered a relatively high score and suggests that Finland is an indulgent country (Hofstede Insights, 2021). Indulgence was found to positively affect the attitude toward Airbnb (Lee et al., 2021). In support of this finding, examining the issue from a slightly different angle, Wallace, Cao and Wang (2022) found that indulgence affects the hedonic value of sharing, and therefore, the indirect link between indulgence and intent to participate in sharing economy through hedonic value of sharing was considerable. 34 2.4.1.5 Long-term orientation The long-term vs. short-term orientation dimension refers to the extent to which societies encourage individuals to postpone gratification of monetary, social, and emotional demands (Hofstede, 2011). Hofstede's long-term orientation score for Finland has been found to be 38 which is considered a relatively low score and therefore indicates that Finland should be classified as a normative society (Hofstede Insights, 2021). Long-term orientation has been found to positively affect attitudes toward sharing economy participation within the Airbnb platform (Lee et al., 2021). Accordingly, Wallace et al. (2022) discovered in their research that long-term orientation has a positive effect on the intention to participate in the sharing economy. The considerable positive influence of long-term orientation may be associated with the finding that long- term orientation fosters trust building (Ryu & Moon, 2011) and trust is a necessary prerequisite for sharing economy participation (Lee et al., 2021; Raisanen et al., 2021). 2.4.2 Perception of foreign services As this research focuses on consumers sharing economy participation while travelling abroad, it is also essential to understand how the country of origin and travel destination may affect consumers’ perceptions of sharing economy services. 2.4.2.1 Country-of-origin image International business and marketing literature have revealed that consumers' overall views of a country's image, known as the country-of-origin image (COI), may affect individuals' assessments and buying intentions of certain products and services (Nadeau, Heslop, O’Reilly & Luk, 2008). According to the COI effect, individuals evaluate the quality of things created in a certain country based on their overall perceptions of the nation (Laroche, Papadopoulos, Heslop, & Mourali, 2005). Furthermore, products and services produced in foreign country may be seen as risky by some consumers https://www-tandfonline-com.proxy.uwasa.fi/reader/content/1833ba490c0/10.1080/21568316.2022.2083221/format/epub/EPUB/xhtml/index.xhtml#CIT0050 35 (Elliott & Cameron, 1994). Moreover, some consumers prefer purchasing goods from countries that share similarities with their own rather than from such countries that are culturally highly distinct or located far away (Khan, Bamber & Quazi, 2012; Zafer Erdogan & Uzkurt, 2010). In accommodation sharing, this is reflected in the fact that although Airbnb is a global and well-known operator, the hosts represent the population of the destination country. Moreover, the destination country can indirectly be thought to influence the choice of accommodation. For instance, many travel destinations have well-established hotel chains offering accommodation and these hotel chains may be familiar to the travelers from their home country or some of their previous trips. Other closely related concepts that consider the effects of foreign countries in international business include country of origin (COO), animosity and ethnocentrism. However, these are excluded from this study because they are considered to either potentially influence the choice of destination rather than the choice of accommodation or to be better suited to studying a product rather than a service. 2.5 Theoretical framework The theoretical framework of this research seeks to conceptually define sharing economy and determine motives for consumers to engage in sharing economy practices and accommodation sharing. The theoretical framework further explores generation Z as a consumer segment, and finally examines the effect of cultural values and perception of foreign services. The literature review of the study is divided into four segments: 1) sharing economy, 2) sharing economy participation, 3) generation Z as a consumer segment, and 4) the effect of cultural values in peer-to-peer sharing. In order to understand sharing economy and provide some clarity to the conceptual confusion around the topic various definitions 36 are introduced to identify the main points of debate and general consensus on the characteristics. The concept is defined through the studies of Bardhi & Eckhardt (2012), Botsman & Roger (2010), Hamari et al. (2016) and Kumar et al. (2018). The chapter defining sharing economy also explores some of the universally agreed principles and characteristics of the phenomenon. These are illustrated with examples, drawing on the studies of Barnes & Mattsson (2016), Hou (2018), Ma et al. (2020) Gu, Hampson & Wang (2020), Cherry & Pidgeon (2018), Hamari et al. (2016) and Kozlenkova et al. (2021). In addition, the chapter includes the studies of Cheng (2016), Eckhardt et al. (2019), Prayag & Ozanne (2018) and Kumar et al. (2018) to recognize some of the conceptual elements which have undergone more debate. Finally, the definition by Kozlenkova et al. (2021) was chosen to be used for the purpose of this study because it not only takes into account the existing conceptual definitions but also the operationalizations of the sharing economy. The literature review in terms of sharing economy participation focuses on three main concepts: the self-determination theory by Ryan and Deci (2000), the social exchange theory through the studies of Emerson (1976) and Turner (1987) combined with the value-based drivers identified in a study by Kozlenkova et al. (2021). Additionally, when studying consumer behavior, it is essential to consider the demographic characteristics of the group being studied. These factors are explored through a generational approach through the studies of Fratrièová and Kirchmayer (2018), Tienari and Piekkari (2011), Magano et al. (2020), Scholz and Rennig (2019), Francis and Hoefel (2022) and Thangavel et al. (2022) to recognize some of the integrative traits and characteristics of generation Z consumers. The final chapter of the literature review focuses on the theoretical background on the relationship between culture and sharing economy participation. The literature review of the effect of cultural values in peer-to-peer sharing examines Hofstede’s cultural dimensions as described by Hofstede et al. (2010), de Mooij & Hofstede (2011) and 37 Minkov (2011) in relation to the extant research on the effects of cultural values in sharing economy participation including the studies of Gupta et al. (2019), Lee et al. (2021) and Wallace et al. (2022). The chapter also includes the studies of Nadeau et al. (2008), Laroche et al. (2005), Elliott and Cameron (1994), Khan et al. (2012) and Erdogan and Uzkurt (2010) to recognize how the perception of foreign services and country-of- origin image (COI) may affect individuals' assessments and buying intentions. On the basis of the research objective and the findings of the literature review, the author created Figure 2 to illustrate the relationships between various factors influencing sharing economy participation. As presented in the figure, intrinsic and extrinsic motives guide the consumers decision through the expected value they receive which may be associated with utilitarian, social, hedonic, and sustainability motivations. The sharing economy requires both users and providers to trust that the other party will reciprocate and thus plays a crucial role in the participants motivation. Other factors such as demographic and cultural factors also play a moderating role in consumer behavior, sharing economy participation and the choice of consumption mode. 38 Figure 2. Motives and factors influencing Sharing Economy Participation. Researching the motives behind young consumers' use of sharing economy services and especially accommodation sharing in the international travel context is crucial for several reasons. The sharing economy has revolutionized the way people consume and travel by providing more affordable and sustainable options. Generation Z has grown up in a digital era and is considered a significant demographic when it comes to digital platforms and services. These young consumers are also gradually entering the workforce and gaining more purchasing power which results in them having a significant impact on the economy and the potential to shape the future of various industries. Sharing economy services are also gaining popularity among consumers during their travels abroad. Yet the consideration of factors such as cultural aspects and the impact of the destination country in existing sharing economy literature is scarce. The extant literature cannot provide an answer to the research question due to several gaps. Firstly, previous research focuses on the sharing economy as a whole, instead of differentiating between the various forms of sharing. Secondly, there is limited focus on individuals with actual Airbnb experience, which is essential to understand their actual motivations and experiences. Thirdly, there is a lack of qualitative research in exploring 39 Airbnb participation motives, which can provide a more in-depth understanding of the experiences of Airbnb users. Fourthly, there is limited research on individuals who use sharing economy services while traveling abroad. Lastly, the literature does not provide specific factors that motivate young consumers to use sharing economy services. Therefore, there is a need for more qualitative research on the subjective experiences and motives of Airbnb users to provide a better understanding of the factors that act as drivers for renting accommodation via a peer-to-peer platforms. 40 3 Methodology The methodological choices of this thesis are presented and justified in this section. In the following subchapters the chosen methodological approach and research philosophy will be introduced. Next, the author presents how the research will be conducted and finally assesses the reliability and validity aspects of the thesis. 3.1 Methodological approach and research philosophy For empirical research, there are two common methodological approaches which are quantitative and qualitative research. The selected methodology is determined by the research problem and the objectives of the study considering that quantitative and qualitative approaches both emphasize very different areas and outcomes and are therefore suitable for certain types of research. The aim of a qualitative approach is to identify subjective meanings rather than obtaining data on objective facts, which is often the primary objective of quantitative research (Barbour, 2007, p. 11). The objective of this thesis is to gain a deeper understanding on what drives young consumers to participate in the sharing economy and for selecting this alternative consumption mode in their accommodation choice. Since the nature of these questions necessitates exploring consumers’ attitudes and motives, a qualitative research method is considered the most appropriate approach. The research philosophy in this study is interpretative since it focuses on finding meaning for consumer behavior in the context of the sharing economy phenomenon. Interpretivism focuses on understanding and explaining human interactions, meanings and processes that occur in a real-world setting (Gephart, 2004, p. 455). Since interpretive research philosophy aims to gain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon, it is typically enabled by qualitative research and a relatively small sample (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2007, p. 168). 41 The study will be approached in a deductive manner. First, a theoretical framework will be developed based on an in-depth analysis of prior research and academic literature. Next, the thesis will aim to explore the phenomenon through empirical research and thus extend the existing research. Finally, the theoretical and empirical research will be analyzed in order to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon and to detect any similarities or contradictions. 3.2 Data collection and analysis The research method selected for this study is qualitative research and the data will be collected by conducting semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews are considered appropriate for this study as they allow interviewees to share their thoughts freely with some guidance from the researcher and therefore are flexible in nature (Denscombe, 2014). The interviews will follow an interview guide that has been prepared prior to the interviews, since this allows the interviewer to clarify questions and keep the discussion on the topic. The interview guide can be found in the Appendix of this thesis. The empirical data collected from the interviews is considered primary data as it is collected specifically for the purpose of this thesis (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008). The semi-structured interviews are conducted as individual interviews. The reason for selecting individual interviews rather than focus groups is that when studying consumers' motives and attitudes, it is important that their responses are not influenced by the opinions and ideas of others (Mariampolski, 2001). In order to analyze the data collected through the interview method, the interviewer must be able to collect the information that emerges during the interviews. Various ways to log interview discussions include voice recordings, video recordings and written notes taken a separate observer or moderator (Mariampolski, 2001). Considering that in the interview setting only the interviewee and interviewer will be present, the option 42 of taking notes is ruled out as following the interview guide and discussion requires the interviewer’s full attention. Of the remaining two methods, the voice recording is considered the most appropriate considering the purpose of this study. An interview can only be recorded with the consent of the interviewee, so all interviewees were asked for permission to record their interview before conducting one. Interview recordings in audio format are often transcribed into written form, to notes or transcripts (Mariampolski, 2001). The analysis of the data in this thesis began with listening to the recordings and transcribing them into transcripts. Following that, the answers were further analyzed and grouped by themes. Finally, the results were discussed in relation to the theoretical framework of the study. The author used thematic analysis to analyze the data. Thematic analysis refers to the process in which patterns or themes are identified from qualitative data (Maguire & Delahunt, 2017). Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis method consists of six steps: (1) becoming familiar with the data, (2) generating codes, (3) identifying themes, (4) reviewing themes, (5) defining and naming themes, and (6) producing a report. The first step in this study consisted of transcribing the interviews and reading them through to gain a general idea of their content. Following this, the interview data was coded based on a pre-existing coding framework to provide analysis of the specific aspects of the data the study was most interested in exploring. These initial codes were formed deductively based on the interview guide and concepts from literature. Furthermore, these codes were identified from the transcripts by utilizing the highlighting feature of the text editor to highlight the most relevant passages. The third step consisted of reviewing the codes in order to search for themes that emerge from the data. After identifying these themes, the fourth step was to make sure that the themes match with the data and the purpose of the study. Following the reviewing of the themes, the fifth step was all about naming the themes and ensuring that they reflect accordingly with the codes and their categorizations. The sixth, and final step, consists of producing a 43 detailed and organized summary of these themes along with appropriate quotes from the interview transcripts to support and illustrate the identified themes. An example of the deductive approach can be seen in how the data has been presented in relation to the value-based drivers identified in the literature. For more detailed coding of the motives related to consumers renting an accommodation via peer-to-peer digital platform the author followed the conceptual framework by Kozlenkova et al. (2021), which identifies the following four value-based drivers: 1) utilitarian, 2) hedonic, 3) social, and 4) sustainability. Thus, when an interviewee stated, “They are quite affordable in my opinion, or at least there are more options in terms of prices”, this was coded as utilitarian value. In contrast, when an interviewee said, “Authenticity is the main thing for me… and I often consider even more important than the price”, the author coded this as hedonic value. Moreover, when an interview mentioned that “I haven't thought much about it… I'm not aware of the figures, how much more sustainable it is to stay in an Airbnb compared to a hotel", it was coded as sustainability value. 3.3 Selection of interviewees Interviewees had to meet certain criteria in order to be eligible to take part in the study. The main criterion was that the interviewees must have prior experience of participating in the sharing economy and Airbnb accommodation in particular when travelling abroad. Other criteria were that the participants were young Finnish consumers. The study exclusively recruited Finns as interviewees to gain a focused perspective on sharing economy participation within a single culture. The aim was also to find interviewees from both genders and experience from various types of travel destinations to enhance validity of the data. The interviews were conducted in March and April 2023. Interviewees were selected based on their consumer behavior, so that they would be able to provide insight on 44 what motivates them to participate in sharing economy and accommodation sharing. 12 individuals were invited to take part in the interviews. One of them was excluded because they did not fully match the criteria and the other interview was cancelled due to some scheduling constraints. The final number of interviews that were conducted was 10. All interviewees were Finnish citizens from four different cities in Finland. Two of the interviewees live abroad because they study in Amsterdam and Copenhagen. There were in total 10 interviews with six females and four males interviewed. The majority of the interviewees were employed at the time of the interviews. The interviews lasted between 25 to 39 minutes, with the average of 31 minutes. The table below presents the background information of the interviewees as well as the duration of the interviews. 45 Table 1. Details of the interviewees. Interviewee Age Gender Residence Occupation Interview duration (min) A 25 Female Tampere Student, part- time employed :39 B 26 Female Espoo Employed :32 C 25 Female Amsterdam Student, part- time employed :26 D 26 Male Espoo Employed :35 E 25 Male Copenhagen Student :25 F 25 Female Espoo Employed :30 G 26 Female Helsinki Employed :26 H 26 Male Helsinki Student, part- time employed :33 I 25 Female Espoo Employed :34 J 27 Male Helsinki/Turku Employed :27 46 3.4 Reliability and validity In academic research, the foundation of a study is typically based on past research in the same field and/or similar topic, or at the very least referencing prior research. Thus, it is critical that all studies are carried out in a way that ensures that their conclusions are reliable, so that they can be used as a basis for future studies. This should be taken into account in the research process by considering the reliability and validity aspects of the study. Reliability of a study signifies the consistency of the findings, indicating that the research should be repeatable and should produce comparable findings (Weathington, Cunningham & Pittenger, 2012, p. 57). Compared to quantitative research, the process of data collection and analysis in qualitative research may be more challenging to replicate consistently (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2015). Due to the qualitative nature of this study the interactions in an interview setting cannot be repeated in the exact same way from one interview to another and the data collection and analysis involves subjective interpretation of data. However, the reliability of this research was improved by creating an interview guide prior to the interviews and following the same interview guide in all interviews. In the interview setting, the researcher adopted a neutral stance to avoid influencing the interviewees and their answers. In terms of reliability, it is crucial to have an adequate number of interviewees who meet the established criteria for the target group (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2015, p. 305). For this study, ten interviews were conducted, and all nine interviewees met the criteria set for them based on age, nationality and their previous consumption behavior regarding the sharing economy and Airbnb. Although this is a sufficient number of interviews to provide data for the analysis, increasing the number of interviews would have provided more reliable results. Nonetheless, due to limitations in time and resources related to the scope of a master’s thesis, there were no more interviews conducted. 47 Although there are conflicting views on whether the term validity should be used in qualitative research, it is typically used to imply that the "report or description is correct." (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2015, p. 305). In other words, the conclusions drawn from the study should clearly outline the relationship between the concepts and findings of the study. To ensure validity in this study, questions were formulated in a manner that interviewees could understand them accurately, allowing for relevant answers to be obtained. Furthermore, using the same interview questions throughout all interviews allows the comparison of the interviewees' answers in order to draw valid conclusions. To enhance the validity of the study, some questions were refined after the first interview and the order of the questions was adjusted slightly to create a more coherent interview guide. The responses from the first interview were incorporated into the analysis, since no major changes were made to the guide, and the subsequent 9 interviews followed the same guide to ensure consistency. 48 4 Findings This chapter presents the key findings of the research based on the qualitative interviews. In the following sub-chapters, the findings of the interviews are presented by themes. The first sub-chapter determines what meanings young Finnish consumers associate with travelling and accommodation. In the following sub-chapter, the participants’ previous experiences of Airbnb and sharing economy platforms are discussed. The third sub-chapter presents the findings regarding the motives for accommodation sharing in regard to utilitarian, social, hedonic, and sustainability considerations. The following sub-chapter focuses on describing how interviewees perceive the safety and risk factor of peer-to-peer sharing and the final sub-chapter the impact of the travel destination on the choice of consumption mode. 4.1 Meanings related to travel and accommodation As international travel is at the heart of this study determining what meanings are associated with travelling and what young consumers consider to be important when selecting accommodation while travelling abroad helps to understand what motivates consumers to select an Airbnb accommodation and participate in the sharing economy. At the beginning of the interview, interviewees were asked to describe their travel habits and what travelling means to them. The opportunity to discover new cultures, meet new people and learn new things was one of the meanings that emerged in the majority of the interviewees' responses. “I love seeing new places and meeting new people and above all either seeing or experiencing all kinds of new things such as different cultures and food.” (Interviewee I) "I like to learn about new places, people and cultures by seeing the local way of living and getting to know new people there [in the travel destination] and that is probably one of the reasons solo travel is so close to my heart." (Interviewee A) 49 “It means a sense of freedom and in a way an opportunity to get to know people from other countries with different cultures, outlooks and ways of doing things." (Interviewee B) The sense of freedom expressed in one of the previous answers was also evident in some of the other responses when interviewees were asked what travelling means to them. "Freedom, experiences and joy of the soul." (Interviewee H) “The first thing that comes to mind, if I had to sum it up in one word or a couple of words maybe, it would be something like freedom and possibilities.” (Interviewee A) Some interviewees also mentioned travelling to be mind-opening. “It [travelling] enables you to broaden your view of the world a bit, so you're not just in your own bubble” (Interviewee C) "It broadens your mind and gives you a perspective on things that are different in different parts of the world and so on, so I think it's interesting." (Interviewee I) In addition to the above-mentioned meanings, some interviewees also mentioned that they associate travelling with getting away from their responsibilities and everyday lives. "It [travelling] also means relaxing and taking a break from everyday life" (Interviewee C) "I also like to travel because no matter what kind of holiday it is, it's nice to get away from my everyday life by going somewhere else." (Interviewee B) "It's a break from everyday life for me. We don't have a cottage in Finland, so travelling abroad offers a break from everyday life and 50 enables me to really get away from work, routines and obligations." (Interviewee G) Next, the questions guided the discussion towards the process of selecting accommodation and the features and attributes of an accommodation interviewees consider the most important, regardless of the type of accommodation they choose. The answers to this question were rather dispersed and interviewees approached the question from various angles. Some interviewees approached the question of the accommodation selection process with a specific provider, app, or site in mind. “I must admit that I always check Airbnb first, but if I don't find anything that I would like right away, or even if I would, just to see all the options, I also check hotels, booking.com, etc.” (Interviewee C) “So far it has followed a somewhat familiar pattern where I usually start the process by looking up local hostels through the Hostelword app.” (Interviewee A) “I usually check a few different platforms like Airbnb and hotels.com, maybe TripAdvisor, booking.com and then choose the best one from there.” (Interviewee E) Others approached the question primarily through the purpose of their travel and its impact on the type of accommodation, rather than a specific site or search engine. “It depends on the purpose of the trip. If I just want to go on a relaxing vacation, for example to enjoy some warm weather, I'll start looking at hotels, but if I want to see more of the local culture, I might start looking at Airbnbs.” (Interviewee G) “Generally speaking, my process starts with choosing the travel destination and by basically choosing whether to go on a city holiday or a so-called beach holiday. If I end up going on a city holiday, I've just started to search where to find the cheapest flights and what is the cheapest accommodation or the otherwise the best, not always the cheapest. Then again, If I’ve decided to go on a beach holiday, so then I’ve most often gone to those TUI, 51 Aurinkomatkat and Tjäreborg websites to find the best holiday package deals.” (Interviewee I) The factors influencing the choice of accommodation that were brought up the most during the interviews included price, location, and reviews. A few of the interviewees referred to their current life situation when justifying the importance of the price of the accommodation. “…at this point in life [recent graduate], the price level is still a significant factor when deciding which option to choose.” (Interviewee F) “In this life situation [student and part-time employee] the price is a very important factor.” (Interviewee H) Other price-related factors that emerged from the interviews were cost- effectiveness, value for money as well as the influence of their travel companion has on the budget. “…depends quite a lot on the budget, but in general, of course, the best possible value for money.” (Interviewee E) “I'm usually going on a trip with someone, so it [accommodation] has to fit into the budget, so of course the price will impact the decision in that sense.“ (Interviewee I) “It [accommodation] should be as cost-effective as possible, because usually the accommodation serves mainly as a place to sleep, and I prefer to spend money on experiences in other things while travelling.” (Interviewee G) Location was one of the attributes that came up in one way or another in most of the interviews. Several interviewees wanted the location of their accommodation to be within walking distance of the main attractions and services if possible. In some cases, interviewees were willing to compromise on a central location if the available transport options were considered to be easily accessible. 52 “The location is really important, including the safety of the location as well as accessibility. For example, I like to walk a lot and I like that the accommodation is at such a distance that you can walk to most places.” (Interviewee G) “I like to be able to walk to places, especially if the holiday takes place in a city. Then again if I’m thinking about a longer trip, the location should be either close by or within easy reach of the central locations.” (Interviewee B) Reviews were also seen as an important factor influencing the choice of accommodation by several interviewees. Reviews are perceived as more reliable than the accommodation's own descriptions and they also make it easier to compare alternatives. “Another thing is that I read a lot of reviews” (Interviewee B) “Reviews are quite important, because they give you a pretty realistic idea of the accommodation, at least in my opinion. The accommodation's own descriptions can be a bit embellished, but reviews are usually pretty honest and that's why I read quite a lot of them.” (Interviewee I) Other attributes mentioned by interviewees included privacy, general cleanliness and safety, but these factors were individual experiences rather than views expressed by a larger number of interviewees. This section of the findings focused on the process and factors that lead to the choice of accommodation regardless of the type of accommodation they choose. In a subsequent chapter of the findings the factors and motivations that influence specifically the choice of Airbnb will be reviewed. 4.2 Experience with Airbnb and other sharing economy platforms In the second interview theme, the aim was to guide the discussion from a more general perspective to travelling, accommodation and travel related consumer behavior towards sharing economy and Airbnb. The interviews revealed that not many of the consumers interviewed were actually familiar with the concept of the 53 sharing economy, although all interviewees had experience of at least one sharing economy site or platform. Four of the interviewees said they were familiar with the term, four of them said they had heard of it but wished to know more and the remaining two said they were not familiar with the term at all. Interviewees were asked to describe their previous experience of using Airbnb. When selecting the interviewees, the aim was to find interviewees with experience of different types of travel destinations where they have stayed at an Airbnb. A list of travel destinations where interviewees had used Airbnb for accommodation is shown in the table below. Table 2. Description of interviewees’ prior experience with Airbnb. Interviewee Airbnb activity (times used) Countries where Airbnb was used A 3 Australia, Spain, Austria B 3 Netherlands, Sri Lanka, Sweden C 3 Belgium, France, Croatia D 7 Hungary, Croatia, Montenegro, Portugal, Amsterdam, Greece E 2 USA, Slovakia F 3 France, Finland G 4 Portugal, Estonia, USA, Norway H 2 Spain, Netherlands I 2 Denmark, Greece J 4 Germany, Hongkong, USA, Czech Republic The experiences of the interviewees had been mostly good, with only a few exceptions. "My experiences have been super good, everything has worked out just as agreed and the host has been easy to contact and the apartments have been just as they were in the photos so there hasn't been any scams, so I have nothing but good things to say." (Interviewee I) 54 "Good experience, we got a really nice apartment in the city center at a good price. It was very convenient with many people staying at the same accommodation and cleaning was also included.” (Interviewee H) In contrast to the majority of positive experiences, the negative experiences were associated with the host's behavior in some way or another. "I've had nothing but good experiences, except once when I was in Belgium the Airbnb host sent me quite a few messages afterwards. First in the Airbnb app and then on WhatsApp, asking me how I was doing and stuff like that, so eventually I had to block them.” (Interviewee C) "This one time there were some problems with the Airbnb, so it was quite annoying. We had bought the early check in and the previous guests had bought the late check out. We couldn't get there at the time of the early check in even though this had been agreed in advance and the extra service was already paid for.” (Interviewee A) Interviewees were also asked if they had experience with any other sharing economy services. Uber was by far the platform that appeared most often in these discussions. Some other examples also came up in the interviewees’ answers. "Yes, I have experience, for example, here in Copenhagen they use quite a lot of SHARE NOW that is basically cars in the city and you can just book it and travel where you want to go, it's quite widely used here." (Interviewee E) “I have been a passenger in one of those shared cars, but I have never used it myself. I've always been like wow, I'll have to remember that for future reference.” (Interviewee B) "One thing that came to mind now is these rental platforms, similiarly to renting apartments on Vuokraovi, there's this website called Nettivuokraus or something, where you can rent, for example, big lawn mowers for a day or two.” (Interviewee H) Moreover, two interviewees mentioned that they had tried couchsurfing. However, according to the definition used in this thesis, it is not directly classified as part of the 55 sharing economy, as there is no monetary exchange taking place. On the other hand, some definitions also include forms of sharing such as couchsurfing, where there is no financial compensation involved. 4.3 Motives for accommodation sharing In the literature review, the motives for sharing economy participation were categorized into four value-based drivers which include utilitarian, social, hedonic, and sustainability values. From a self-determination theory perspective, consumers seek utilitarian values to serve their extrinsic motivations where