IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i7p3028-d1370404.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Youth Perspectives on Collaborative Consumption: A Study on the Attitudes and Behaviors of the Romanian Generation Z

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Bulin

    (Faculty of Business and Tourism, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania
    Institute for World Economy, Romanian Academy, 010071 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Georgică Gheorghe

    (Faculty of Business and Tourism, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Adrian Lucian Kanovici

    (Faculty of Business and Tourism, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Adrian Bogdan Curteanu

    (Faculty of Theoretical & Applied Economics, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Oana-Diana Curteanu

    (Faculty of Business and Tourism, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Robert-Ionuţ Dobre

    (Institute for World Economy, Romanian Academy, 010071 Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

With the emergence of the sharing economy, a significant change in consumer behavior can be observed worldwide, which has a considerable impact on various industries. The rise of the sharing economy has changed the way people experience transport services, with ridesharing being a catalyst for change. In Romania, the debut of Uber in 2015 sparked controversy and led to legal regulations that were adapted to local specificities, highlighting the adaptability of ridesharing platforms to different legal frameworks. In the context of this development, the views and perceptions of Generation Z will be crucial in determining the direction in which this conflict between disruptive models and traditional players in the transport sector develops. The article deals with business models based on collaborative consumption, with a focus on ridesharing, and examines the attitudes, perceptions, and behavior of Romanian youths (aged 18–26) towards these models. The aim of the study is to determine the opinion of young Romanians on collaborative consumption in transport services—ridesharing (Uber case)—and their attitude towards the ethical controversies related to Uber’s business model. A quantitative research approach was chosen, and an exploratory study was conducted using a questionnaire, with the non-probabilistic sample consisting of relevant observation units aged 18–26 years. The results show that almost 90% of the young Romanians surveyed use Uber and are satisfied with the quality, convenience, and speed of the service. Despite the positive attitude, there is a paradoxical tendency among respondents to regulate ridesharing services in a similar way to traditional taxis. Ethical considerations show that respondents tend to neutralize perceptions and justify the emergence of new models as normal and beneficial for competition and consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Bulin & Georgică Gheorghe & Adrian Lucian Kanovici & Adrian Bogdan Curteanu & Oana-Diana Curteanu & Robert-Ionuţ Dobre, 2024. "Youth Perspectives on Collaborative Consumption: A Study on the Attitudes and Behaviors of the Romanian Generation Z," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:7:p:3028-:d:1370404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/3028/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/3028/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alina Petronela Pricope Vancia & Codruța Adina Băltescu & Gabriel Brătucu & Alina Simona Tecău & Ioana Bianca Chițu & Liliana Duguleană, 2023. "Examining the Disruptive Potential of Generation Z Tourists on the Travel Industry in the Digital Age," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Lindblom, Arto & Lindblom, Taru & Wechtler, Heidi, 2018. "Collaborative consumption as C2C trading: Analyzing the effects of materialism and price consciousness," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 244-252.
    3. Strutton, David & Vitell, Scott J. & Pelton, Lou E., 1994. "How consumers may justify inappropriate behavior in market settings: An application on the techniques of neutralization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 253-260, July.
    4. Karlsson, Logi & Dolnicar, Sara, 2016. "Someone’s been sleeping in my bed," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 159-162.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jiang Jiang & Rui Feng & Eldon Y. Li, 2021. "Uncovering the Providers’ Continuance Intention of Participation in the Sharing Economy: A Moderated Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, May.
    2. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & Pierre Picard, 2014. "Fraudulent Claims and Nitpicky Insurers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2900-2917, September.
    3. Casola, Luca & Kemp, Simon & Mackenzie, Alexander, 2009. "Consumer decisions in the black market for stolen or counterfeit goods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 162-171, April.
    4. Minjeong Kang & Taeshik Gong, 2019. "Dysfunctional customer behavior: conceptualization and empirical validation," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 13(4), pages 625-646, December.
    5. Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan, 2014. "Feelings that Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 117-134, September.
    6. Tedds, Lindsay M. & Cameron, Anna & Khanal, Mukesh & Crisan, Daria, 2021. "Why Existing Regulatory Frameworks Fail in the Short-term Rental Market: Exploring the Role of Regulatory Fractures," MPRA Paper 106712, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Iris Vermeir & Patrick Kenhove, 2008. "Gender Differences in Double Standards," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(2), pages 281-295, August.
    8. Pierre Picard, 2012. "Economic Analysis of Insurance Fraud," Working Papers hal-00725561, HAL.
    9. Bliss, Sam & Egler, Megan, 2020. "Ecological Economics Beyond Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    10. Karlsson, Logi & Kemperman, Astrid & Dolnicar, Sara, 2017. "May I sleep in your bed? Getting permission to book," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-12.
    11. S. Steenhaut & P. Van Kenhove, 2003. "Consumers’ Reactions to “Receiving Too Much Change at the Checkout”," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 03/186, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    12. Denni Arli & Fandy Tjiptono, 2014. "The End of Religion? Examining the Role of Religiousness, Materialism, and Long-Term Orientation on Consumer Ethics in Indonesia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 385-400, September.
    13. Shanahan, Kevin J. & Hyman, Michael R., 2010. "Motivators and enablers of SCOURing: A study of online piracy in the US and UK," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 1095-1102, September.
    14. Sirkeci Kübra & Arıkan Esra, 2021. "The Infinite Wardrobe: Female Consumers’ Value Perceptions Regarding Collaborative Consumption of Apparel," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 16(2), pages 150-170, December.
    15. Pamela Yeow & Alison Dean & Danielle Tucker, 2014. "Bags for Life: The Embedding of Ethical Consumerism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 87-99, November.
    16. Anne Bäro & Felix Toepler & Timo Meynhardt & Vivek K. Velamuri, 2022. "Participating in the sharing economy: The role of individual characteristics," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 3715-3735, December.
    17. Hajibaba, Homa & Dolnicar, Sara, 2017. "Substitutable by peer-to-peer accommodation networks?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 185-188.
    18. Kim, Eunjin & Yoon, Sungjun, 2021. "Social capital, user motivation, and collaborative consumption of online platform services," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    19. David Talbot & Olivier Boiral, 2018. "GHG Reporting and Impression Management: An Assessment of Sustainability Reports from the Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(2), pages 367-383, January.
    20. Mortimer, Gary & Fazal-e-Hasan, Syed Muhammad & Grimmer, Martin & Grimmer, Louise, 2020. "Explaining the impact of consumer religiosity, perceived risk and moral potency on purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:7:p:3028-:d:1370404. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.