IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p6207-d819610.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Psychological Ownership Based Design Tool to Close the Resource Loop in Product Service Systems: A Bike Sharing Case

Author

Listed:
  • Dirk Ploos van Amstel

    (Research Group Co-Design, Research Centre for Learning and Innovation, HU University of Applied Sciences, Padualaan 97, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands
    Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Groeneloper 3, 5612 AZ Eindhoven, The Netherlands)

  • Lenneke Kuijer

    (Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Groeneloper 3, 5612 AZ Eindhoven, The Netherlands)

  • Remko van der Lugt

    (Research Group Co-Design, Research Centre for Learning and Innovation, HU University of Applied Sciences, Padualaan 97, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands)

  • Berry Eggen

    (Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Groeneloper 3, 5612 AZ Eindhoven, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Closing the loop of products and materials in Product Service Systems (PSS) can be approached by designers in several ways. One promising strategy is to invoke a greater sense of ownership of the products and materials that are used within a PSS. To develop and evaluate a design tool in the context of PSS, our case study focused on a bicycle sharing service. The central question was whether and how designers can be supported with a design tool, based on psychological ownership, to involve users in closing the loop activities. We developed a PSS design tool based on psychological ownership literature and implemented it in a range of design iterations. This resulted in ten design proposals and two implemented design interventions. To evaluate the design tool, 42 project members were interviewed about their design process. The design interventions were evaluated through site visits, an interview with the bicycle repairer responsible, and nine users of the bicycle service. We conclude that a psychological ownership-based design tool shows potential to contribute to closing the resource loop by allowing end users and service provider of PSS to collaborate on repair and maintenance activities. Our evaluation resulted in suggestions for revising the psychological ownership design tool, including adding ‘Giving Feedback’ to the list of affordances, prioritizing ‘Enabling’ and ‘Simplification’ over others and recognize a reciprocal relationship between service provider and service user when closing the loop activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Dirk Ploos van Amstel & Lenneke Kuijer & Remko van der Lugt & Berry Eggen, 2022. "A Psychological Ownership Based Design Tool to Close the Resource Loop in Product Service Systems: A Bike Sharing Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6207-:d:819610
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6207/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6207/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fleura Bardhi & Giana M. Eckhardt, 2012. "Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(4), pages 881-898.
    2. Michael Martin & David Lazarevic & Charlie Gullström, 2019. "Assessing the Environmental Potential of Collaborative Consumption: Peer-to-Peer Product Sharing in Hammarby Sjöstad, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Danijela Tuljak-Suban & Patricija Bajec, 2022. "A Hybrid DEA Approach for the Upgrade of an Existing Bike-Sharing System with Electric Bikes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-23, October.

    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. Mohammed Alraeeini & Qiuyan Zhong & Elena Antarciuc, 2019. "Analysing Drivers and Barriers of Accommodation Sharing in Dubai Using the Grey-DEMATEL Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-24, October.
    2. Küper, Inken & Edinger-Schons, Laura Marie, 2020. "Is sharing up for sale? Monetary exchanges in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 223-234.
    3. Alessandro Avenali & Yuri Maria Chianese & Graziano Ciucciarelli & Giorgio Grani & Laura Palagi, 2019. "Profit optimization in one-way free float car sharing services: a user based relocation strategy relying on price differentiation and Urban Area Values," DIAG Technical Reports 2019-04, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    4. Emmanuelle Reuter, 2022. "Hybrid business models in the sharing economy: The role of business model design for managing the environmental paradox," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 603-618, February.
    5. Isabel Miralles & Domenico Dentoni & Stefano Pascucci, 2017. "Understanding the organization of sharing economy in agri-food systems: evidence from alternative food networks in Valencia," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 833-854, December.
    6. Lutz, Christoph & Newlands, Gemma, 2018. "Consumer segmentation within the sharing economy: The case of Airbnb," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 187-196.
    7. Valeria Andreoni, 2020. "The Trap of Success: A Paradox of Scale for Sharing Economy and Degrowth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Lucia Rotaris, 2021. "Carsharing Services in Italy: Trends and Innovations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    9. Daisy Bertrand & Pierre-Yves Léo & Jean Philippe, 2019. "The New Go-Between Services: Peer-To-Peer Sharing Platforms In Hospitality Services," Post-Print hal-02299130, HAL.
    10. Yue Guo & Fu Xin & Xiaotong Li, 2020. "The market impacts of sharing economy entrants: evidence from USA and China," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 629-649, September.
    11. Agam Gupta & Biswatosh Saha & Parthasarathi Banerjee, 2018. "Pricing decisions of car aggregation platforms in sharing economy: a developing economy perspective," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(5), pages 341-355, October.
    12. Hartl, Barbara & Hofmann, Eva & Kirchler, Erich, 2016. "Do we need rules for “what's mine is yours”? Governance in collaborative consumption communities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2756-2763.
    13. Manuel Sánchez-Pérez & Nuria Rueda-López & María Belén Marín-Carrillo & Eduardo Terán-Yépez, 2021. "Theoretical dilemmas, conceptual review and perspectives disclosure of the sharing economy: a qualitative analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1849-1883, October.
    14. Park, Hyejune & Joyner Armstrong, Cosette M., 2019. "Is money the biggest driver? Uncovering motives for engaging in online collaborative consumption retail models for apparel," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 42-50.
    15. Esben Rahbek Gjerdrum Pedersen & Wencke Gwozdz & Kerli Kant Hvass, 2018. "Exploring the Relationship Between Business Model Innovation, Corporate Sustainability, and Organisational Values within the Fashion Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 267-284, May.
    16. Möhlmann, Mareike, 2021. "Unjustified trust beliefs: Trust conflation on sharing economy platforms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    17. Anila BEJKO (GJIKA) & Vezir MUHARREMAJ & Laura GABRIELLI, 2017. "Planning and Financing Services in the City Through Land Value Capture Instruments the Case of Tirana New Bazar," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 3, September.
    18. Swati Sharma, 2021. "Towards an Understanding of the Indian Tourist Buying Airbnb Services," International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), IGI Global, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, July.
    19. 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.
    20. Northey, Gavin & Brodie, Rod, 2020. "Leveraging the power of the sharing economy," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1-3.

    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:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6207-:d:819610. 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.