The Influence of Consumer Preferences and Perceived Benefits in the Context of B2C Fashion Renting Intentions of Young Women

Abstract

Fashion consumption has continually increased in recent decades, leading to severe environmental problems. Apparel renting provides an opportunity to foster sustainable fashion consumption. However, fashion rentals are rarely used. Previous research identified participation drivers in fashion renting but neglected the potential influence of consumer preferences which were found to be essential drivers of decision-making in fashion shopping. Therefore, this study extends previous research by investigating the role of fundamental consumer preferences and existing intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in fashion renting. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the effects of fundamental consumer preferences, i.e., quality, brand, and novelty preference, and perceived economic and sustainability benefits on fashion renting intentions in a B2C context. The final dataset included 327 Generation Y and Z women in Germany. The results indicate that fashion renting relates positively to quality and novelty preference. Brand preference did not display a significant effect. Furthermore, economic benefits positively relate to fashion renting, indicating that financial motivations encourage commercial renting but might crowd out sustainability gains. Recommendations are provided to make fashion renting more attractive to consumers.

1. Introduction

Constantly changing fashion trends drive shopping behavior into unsustainable consumption. This behavior exacerbates the industry’s environmental problems, even though the fashion industry is already the second-largest polluter [1]. Between 2000 and 2011, annual collections doubled, leading to increased production and multiplication of products on the fashion market. This development resulted in a consumption increase of 40% between 1996 and 2012 in Europe [1]. However, the growing volume of clothing contributed to a reduction in the usage rate to 35% over the same period, revealing that consumers wear each garment eight times less before it becomes a waste product in landfills [1]. These numbers indicate that shoppers have expanded their wardrobes but underused their items. Despite widespread public awareness of the environmental consequences of excessive fashion consumption, the industry continues to grow in an unsustainable way [1].

In order to make individual consumption more sustainable, new consumption methods have emerged that circumvent traditional patterns for buying new products. One of these approaches is the sharing economy, in which users share underutilized resources instead of acquiring and owning them exclusively [2,3]. This approach can be distinguished as a peer-to-peer (P2P) or business-to-consumer (B2C)-driven concept [2,4,5,6]. Since commodities are shared instead of used individually, this consumption form saves resources by prolonging the use rate of a single garment and lowers textile waste to protect the environment [7,8]. Besides environmental benefits, the sharing economy offers economic benefits as it allows consumers to save money [1,3,6,7,9,10,11,12].

With these various positive effects and sharing options, the sharing economy has become an appealing alternative consumption form in recent years. Commercially driven concepts, in which commodities are rented for a limited period in exchange for a rental fee, such as in the mobility sector with Share Now and Uber or in the hospitality sector with Airbnb, have especially gained popularity [2]. However, corresponding fashion concepts are scarce and rarely used by consumers for everyday clothing. When comparing the usage rate of fashion sharing and traditional purchases, sharing is estimated to have accounted for only 0.002% of global fashion consumption in 2019 [13,14,15].

Previous research examined motivations for fashion renting, such as sharing attitudes and personality traits that are positively related to participation. These studies focused on the theory of planned behavior [4,9,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. However, although these factors reveal significant links with sharing intentions, actual renting activities are still rarely conducted. Given this disparity, it is apparent that previous research does not consider the role of consumer preferences, although they are essential to the retail industry, especially for everyday wear [24,26,27,28,29]. Consumer preferences reflect individual needs that affect consumer choice, thus narrowing the gap toward the actual use of fashion renting [24,26,27,28]. Further, the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations remains unclear, particularly for commercial B2C sharing, since previous analyses mainly focused on peer sharing activities [9,24]. Thus, an analysis in the specific B2C context is needed to increase understanding of the drivers that motivate consumers to participate in fashion renting. Furthermore, combining consumer preferences and perceived benefits assists commercial sharing providers in identifying the product features needed to make apparel sharing a more appealing consumption form.

This study focuses on the consumer segment of female shoppers from generations Y and Z for three reasons: first, gender and age influence decision-making and information processing, e.g., the perception of behavioral benefits [30,31,32,33,34,35,36]. Because this study analyzes these considerations, its focus is on consumer segments with homogenous characteristics to minimize the possible influence of confounding factors. Second, female consumers spent twice as much on clothing as did the male population and displayed higher shopping frequencies [30,37]. Female shoppers are hence the primary consumers of fashion [38]. Third, younger generations share many characteristics, especially generations Y and Z [36,39]. They tend to be more involved in fashion shopping than older generations [36,40,41,42]. Furthermore, both consume fashion for peer acceptance, enjoyment, and leisure [36]. They also display a higher ecological consciousness than previous generations [36,43]. Consequently, fashion renting as a sustainable form of consumption should be considered comparable within both groups. Due to these commonalities, females of both generations serve as subjects for research. The term young women thus refers to the female population from generations Y and Z, based on the established generation categorization employed by, for instance, Koksal (2019) and Berkup (2014). Accordingly, Generation Y comprises those born between 1980 and 1994, whereas Generation Z comprises those born after 1995 [34,44].

This study complements previous studies by reassessing perceived benefits in the context of B2C fashion renting and extends these findings by simultaneously accounting for the role of consumer preferences. We aim to answer the following questions: How do fundamental consumer preferences relate to young women’s fashion renting intentions? How do perceived benefits relate to young women’s fashion renting intentions?

2. Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Development

2.1. The Sharing Economy in the Fashion Domain

2.1.1. Fashion Renting Definition

Despite the widespread discussion of the sharing economy, no consensus definition exists [3,45,46,47]. In general, the term sharing economy describes the co-owning, exchanging, and renting of underutilized resources within the scope of collaborative consumption [3,9,24,48,49]. Sharing can occur between family members, friends, and unfamiliar people as a whole community. Since these distribution processes appear in diverse forms within the sharing economy, the conceptualization of B2C sharing relies on the triadic approach of Benoit et al. (2017) to distinguish commercial renting from peer sharing [5]. The framework delineates exchange forms according to: (1) the type of actors involved, (2) the nature of exchange, and (3) the directedness of exchange. First, commercial fashion renting classifies the type of actors involved as renting providers and renting consumers, revealing a dyadic relationship [5]. Second, commercial fashion renting constitutes a model whereby a company intends to generate profit by providing access to tangible resources for a rental fee [5]. Third, commercial fashion renting defines an access-based exchange form in which tangible goods must be returned after a specified renting period [5]. Consequently, the present study conceptualizes fashion renting as a commercial exchange in which customers pay a rental fee to gain temporary access to a company’s fashion products, characterized as a B2C form.

2.1.2. Examples and Statistical Figures of B2C Fashion Renting in Germany

The renting of everyday fashion in the context of B2C can be found nationwide in Germany. Metropolitan areas such as Cologne and Berlin have retail concepts that make it possible to rent everyday fashion locally. On the other hand, online concepts make it possible to rent clothing irrespective of location. These offers emphasize premium brands, (e.g., myonbelle.de, accessed on 26 June 2022) and sustainable fashion (e.g., fairnica.com, accessed on 26 June 2022). An overview of six established providers in Germany can be found in

Table A1. Overview of established B2C providers offering everyday wear in Germany.

Provider	Website
Fairnica	fairnica.com accessed on 26 June 2022
Kleiderei	kleiderei.com accessed on 26 June 2022
Modami	modami.de accessed on 26 June 2022
MUD Jeans	mudjeans.de accessed on 26 June 2022
Myonbelle	myonbelle.de accessed on 26 June 2022
Unown	unown-fashion.com accessed on 26 June 2022

in Appendix A. Previous research on behalf of the Federation of German Consumer Organizations (vzbv) indicated that forms of collaborative consumption services in fashion are widely known in Germany. Data from this representative research (n = 1009) indicate that 79% of respondents were aware of collaborative consumption in fashion, while 26% would consider sharing fashion [50,51]. However, Bodenheimer et al. (2022) showed in an empirical analysis of a fashion renting company for everyday wear in Germany that the actual conversion rates of visitors transforming into fashion renters are between 0.3–0.5% [52]. These values are thus consistent with global usage figures.

2.2. Driving Factors to Participate in the Sharing Economy

Previous studies examined fashion sharing using the theory of planned behavior [25]. It was found that behavioral attitudes positively influence the intention to participate in the sharing economy [16,25,53]. This theoretical model has been extended in several ways, in particular by factors such as cultural differences [20,21,22], familiarity with environmental behavior [18,23,53], value-based antecedents [4,17,20,23,42,54], and behavior-related perceptions [6,9,21,24].

Table A2. Overview of determining factors for fashion sharing.

Focus of Related Studies	Determining Factor	Concept	References
Cultural differences	⋅ Cross-national ⋅ Cross-cultural	B2C	[20,21,22]
Familiarity	⋅ Past environmental behavior ⋅ Past sustainable behavior ⋅ Collaborative consumption experience	B2C/P2P	[20,23,53]
Value-based antecedents	⋅ Fashion leadership ⋅ Personal innovativeness ⋅ Fashion orientation ⋅ Status consumption ⋅ Interpersonal influence ⋅ Fashion involvement ⋅ Need of uniqueness	B2C/P2P	[4,17,20,23,42,54]
Behavior-related perceptions	⋅ Perceived enjoyment ⋅ Style conformity ⋅ Product variety ⋅ Perceived risks ⋅ Financial risks	B2C/P2P	[6,9,21,24]

in Appendix A provides an overview of the focus of related studies.

Although these studies used the theory of planned behavior to explain sharing behavior, only behavioral attitudes were measured [4,9,17,23,46,53]. However, positive attitudes do not necessarily translate into behavior [55,56], especially with consumer behavior [57,58,59]. Thus, these models analyze the consideration of sharing activities, but not consumer preferences that influence actual consumption [28,57]. This dearth results in behavioral gaps because consumers will not rent fashion if it does not meet their consumption preferences, despite positive attitudes toward fashion renting [60]. For example, a brand-conscious consumer would not rent a product if it did not show a label, even if this consumer displayed positive attitudes towards fashion renting. In addition, the focus on value-based factors, such as social and emotional values, influences the formation of behavioral preferences [61,62,63]. However, these values are acquired through behavior, not products [64]. They are therefore less closely linked to the preferred product attributes. For example, the desire for social status is positively related to participation in the sharing economy; thus, consumers relate positively to sharing due to the acquired value from the behavior [17,65]. Other studies demonstrated that further antecedents, such as fashion involvement, status consumption, fashion leadership, and the need for uniqueness, are positively related to renting fashion [4,17,23,42,54]. However, although these factors form behavioral preferences, they do not provide information on preferences regarding the product attributes that individuals favor and thus want to consume. Moreover, these value-based factors display low predictive power for consumer behavior [63,65,66].

Other factors that negatively influence participation are hindering reasons. Lee et al. (2021) and Lang et al. (2019) revealed disincentives to participate in sharing economy activities, especially relating to concerns about potential financial losses [6,21]. In contrast, other studies showed motivational factors as behavioral incentives that increase sharing likelihood. For example, Hamari et al. (2016) demonstrated that economic benefits positively relate to sharing intentions in the P2P context [9]. These results were confirmed by Baek and Oh (2021) and Lang et al. (2020) for B2C fashion-sharing concepts [67,68]. In contrast, Bock et al. (2005) revealed that extrinsic rewards negatively impact intrinsic motivations towards knowledge sharing associated with self-worth in the P2P context [46], whereas Zhang et al. (2019) demonstrated that financial gains as extrinsic motivations and personal growth as intrinsic motivation are prevalent in P2P accommodation sharing [69]. Beak and Oh (2021) further revealed that the relationship between economic and green perception reverses when contamination perceptions change [68]. In addition, sustainability perceptions of the sharing economy did not significantly influence sharing intentions in the non-commercial P2P sharing context [9,17,70]. However, these results contradict prior research from different fields and contexts. For example, Armstrong et al. (2015) showed that environmental benefits positively relate to sustainable product-service systems such as fashion renting in the B2C context [71]. Lou et al. (2021) demonstrated that economic benefits and the desire to increase community welfare coexist in the B2C mobility sector [72]. Böcker and Meelen (2017) revealed the importance of environmental benefits for ride-sharing and economic benefits of car, tool, and accommodation sharing in the P2P context [11], while Becker-Leifhold (2018) revealed that consumers’ focus on environmental and cost benefits do relate to P2P fashion renting [17].

Based on the research models and findings of previous studies, three research gaps are evident in the sharing economy for fashion renting:

• Previous studies lack consideration of decision-making processes regarding consumer preferences linked to preferred product attributes;
• Previous research displayed contradictory effects of sustainability and economic benefits that result from sharing participation within different industries and business contexts;
• The effect of economic and sustainability benefits of fashion renting was previously examined only in the P2P fashion context and not for B2C fashion renting.

Therefore, to address these research gaps, this study analyzes the impact of consumers’ product preferences, and perceived sustainability and economic benefits, on fashion renting in the B2C context.

2.3. The Role of Consumer Preferences and Perceived Benefits in the Sharing Economy

Shopping and renting are comparable forms of consumption. Therefore, to close the first research gap, fashion shopping as a commonly accepted form of consumption is used to identify consumer preferences. Both buying and renting aim to provide access to fashion products. Access is granted for monetary exchange through the purchase price or rental fee, and both forms operate as commercial businesses. Furthermore, fashion products are offered to the consumer who chooses an item based on product attributes that match individual consumer preferences [5]. Ultimately, fashion sharing is not a prevalent form of consumption. Therefore, applying fundamental consumer preferences to renting will yield comprehensive insights to understand which preferences relate to fashion sharing and which product attributes are needed to make fashion renting more appealing to the general fashion consumer.

In fashion shopping, three fundamental selection criteria exist that have been proven to influence consumer choice and hence apparel purchase [26,57,59,73]: product quality attributes, brand attributes, and fashion novelty attributes [26,57]. These attributes are present to varying degrees in each product; however, despite the overlap, the preference for one attribute comes to the fore, thus driving consumer behavior [26,28,57]. Preferences help consumers evaluate product alternatives and ultimately make a purchase decision [28]. Since consumers satisfy different needs by wearing clothes, their preferences are based on distinct product attributes [57].

Quality attributes demonstrate the physical aspects of an item [57]. This preference is reflected in consumers’ high degree of quality consciousness, with scant attention paid to the appearance of an item [26]. Quality aspects must, therefore, primarily fulfill functional needs, such as keeping warm [30]. Thus, consumers who display quality preferences evaluate products predominantly based on these physical attributes and select the product that best suits this need [26]. On the other hand, brand and novelty attributes emphasize aspects of a product’s appearance, evident in brand names or fashion trends [26,30,74]. These preferences are reflected in consumers’ high degree of brand or novelty preference, neglecting a product’s physical characteristics [26]. Brand-conscious consumers evaluate products mainly according to brand labels and choose the product which best corresponds to this symbolic preference [26,74,75]. In comparison, novelty-conscious consumers evaluate products based on recent trends [26,57]. Consequently, novelty-conscious consumers assess products based on fashion attributes and choose a product that best matches these visual preferences [26]. Although these three criteria are re-evaluated case by case, consumers inherit a fundamental preference that remains constant over time for making consumer decisions in the fashion domain [26]. Consequently, these consumer preferences reflect universal selection criteria for fashion shopping that offer the greatest potential for gaining insights into consumer needs related to fashion renting.

Perceived benefits are motivations that arise from a specific behavior [76]. Thus, these motivations are incentives that influence the willingness to execute a particular behavior [9,76]. Therefore, to close the second and third research gap, the effect of perceived benefits must be clarified for commercial fashion renting. Sharing is regarded as an economically and environmentally beneficial consumption form [9,11,24]. According to self-determination theory, these benefits are classified as intrinsic and extrinsic motivations [76]. Intrinsic motivation is held to produce inherent satisfaction and inner contentment, while extrinsic motivation seeks to meet external goals such as rewards and recognition [76]. Based on previous studies, perceived monetary gain, defined as economic benefit, is classified as extrinsic motivation, while perceived sustainability impact is classified as sustainability benefit [6,9,24].

Consequently, this study combines consumer preferences and perceived benefits to analyze rental acceptance for B2C fashion renting. To construct this model, five variables are used: quality preference, brand preference, novelty preference as consumer preferences, sustainability benefits, and economic benefits as perceived benefits of fashion renting.

2.4. Hypothesis Development

2.4.1. Consumer Preferences

Consumer preferences reflect critical factors that affect purchase behavior within fashion shopping. For example, previous research has shown that consumer preferences that consider product attributes drive purchasing behavior directly, as products are selected based on these preferences [26,57,59,73]. However, these preferences have not been analyzed previously in the context of fashion renting, even though they represent crucial characteristics that translate positive attitudes into actual consumption. Therefore, it is critical to understand the impact of basic consumer preferences in the context of B2C fashion renting. This knowledge allows conclusions to be drawn and recommendations to be offered to rental providers based on consumer needs, thereby increasing the attractiveness of fashion rentals to general fashion buyers [24].

2.4.2. Quality Preferences

Consumers’ quality preferences emphasize product attributes based on physical characteristics. Based on such preferences, consumers select items displaying the highest quality [26]. Thus, this consumer preference guides product selection and consumer behavior [77,78]. High quality is determined by product information and compositional features that reflect performance properties, fabrics, and craftsmanship [57]. Accordingly, consumers who inherit this preference prioritize long-lasting clothing that fulfills their functional utility through physical properties [78]. However, a high price does not necessarily equate to superior quality for quality-conscious consumers [57,78].

Previous research showed that consumers’ quality preferences positively relate to fashion purchases [30,58]. Furthermore, Sondhi and Singhvi (2006) revealed that women displaying quality preferences focus on rating fashion quality by assessing the garment’s touch and feel [30]. González, et al. (2021) showed that online purchase behavior is positively influenced by displaying a product’s quality attributes. However, women reveal lower preferences than men for quality attributes during the purchase decision in online shopping [33]. These findings match Klerk and Lubbe’s (2008) exploratory analysis in which women tend to consider aesthetic aspects during the purchase process. However, fabrics and craftsmanship were also regarded as significant selection preferences in purchasing fashion [79]. Griffin et al. (1992) revealed in a qualitative study that fabric quality is among the most considered factors in buying a fashion item [80]. Further, Connor-Crabb and Rigby showed that quality preferences for apparel could be related to sustainability behavior [81].

Consumers’ quality preferences thus influence consumer behavior, directing the consumer to purchase fashion items [26,57,58]. Therefore, since quality preference positively relates to purchasing high-quality apparel, this logic can be transferred to fashion renting since fashion buying and renting are comparable consumption models. Following this logic, consumers’ quality preferences positively relate to the intention to rent everyday wear in the B2C sector. Thus, the following hypothesis is advanced:

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

Consumers’ quality preference towards fashion items positively relates to the intention to rent fashion.

2.4.3. Brand Preferences

Consumers’ brand preferences focus on products from well-known and popular labels [26]. These components allow consumers to identify with the brand they are wearing and increase self-perception and self-esteem [74,82,83,84]. Since brand preference emphasizes a product’s external appearance, this consumer preference is symbolically oriented. Brands usually have a particular brand image and hold a higher prominence and reputation than unbranded products. Brands thus reflect a specific brand claim that allows individuals to identify with the message [30,57,78]. Furthermore, brand-conscious consumers link a higher price to better quality and thus better products than they do to lower-priced products [57].

Sharda and Bhat (2019) revealed that brand preference positively influences purchase decisions for products with famous brands and a high price [85]. Further studies revealed that brand preferences significantly impact behavioral intentions to purchase luxury apparel [86,87]. Furthermore, consumers’ brand preference is displayed in loyalty toward a particular brand name for fashion items regardless of an item’s appearance and quality attributes [30]. Yan et al. (2012) demonstrated in an experimental analysis that brand names impact behavioral intentions to buy eco-fashion brands due to their marketing claims and brand mission [88]. Rahman et al. (2021) supported these statements in an empirical analysis by revealing that brand-conscious millennials significantly relate to buying intentions [89]. Further research revealed that brand preference relates significantly more to online shopping than quality preference [33].

Accordingly, consumers’ brand preferences impact consumer behavior, leading to fashion product acquisition of branded fashion [26,57,58]. Since there is a positive relationship between brand preference to buying branded fashion, a similar rationale can be applied to fashion renting, as buying and renting are comparable consumption practices. Therefore, consumers’ brand preferences positively relate to the intention to rent everyday clothing in the B2C sector, with the following hypothesis formed:

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

Consumers’ brand preference towards fashion items positively relates to the intention to rent fashion.

2.4.4. Novelty Preferences

Consumers’ novelty preferences direct their choice based on fashion trends [26]. To select the newest fashion products, novelty-conscious consumers inherit a deep knowledge of fashion trends by knowing the most up-to-date colors, patterns, and cuts. Consumers with this product preference are considered more self-confident in fashion-related topics and adopt new styles relatively earlier than their peers [26,57,90,91]. This approach is also classified by the urge to seek variety and the constant need for change in fashion items. In addition, following the latest styles is a form of self-expression. Thus, novelty preference is also linked to self-identity and has a representative role [57,74]. Accordingly, novelty-conscious consumers analyze a product’s external appearance to select a product, revealing the symbolic needs of the wearer [77].

Considering the symbolic use of a product by following the newest trends, Hirschman (1980) demonstrated the relationship of an individual’s novelty preference to the intention to acquire new products [91]. Goldsmith (2001) also confirmed that individuals who display high innovativeness levels accept the newest trends in a specific domain of interest faster than peers and strive to swap products more often than peers by investing significantly more money and effort into changing trends [92]. In fashion, consumers’ novelty preferences have been shown to significantly impact purchase intentions at retail and online stores, and to have a similar effect on the patronage of pop-up stores [93,94,95]. Furthermore, this consumer preference was revealed by Evans et al. (2022) as significantly related to second-hand shopping as pro-environmental behavior [96]. Cho et al. (2015) revealed that focusing on owning the newest styles is a predictor of purchasing environmentally friendly apparel and apparel divestment, which indicates passing on used fashion items to family, friends, consignment, and second-hand stores [97].

Consumers’ novelty preferences thus influence consumer behavior, directing novelty-conscious consumers to purchase fashion items [26,57,58]. The preference to acquire the newest fashion styles can be transferred to fashion renting. Since fashion buying and renting are comparable consumption models, this consumer preference can also be transferred to fashion renting. Hence, consumers’ novelty preferences positively relate to the intention to rent everyday fashion within commercial renting.

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

Consumers’ novelty preference towards fashion items positively relates to the intention to rent fashion.

2.4.5. Perceived Benefits

Perceived benefits influence specific behaviors by rewarding an individual’s action or contribution [45]. However, these motivations may adversely affect behavioral goals. For example, Gneezy et al. revealed that extrinsic benefits could crowd out intrinsic motivations [98]. Similar results were found by Eisenberg and Cameron (1996), who revealed that the perception of extrinsic rewards reduces intrinsic motivations [99]. For the field of the sharing economy, two primary benefits were defined as sustainability benefit and economic benefit. However, these motivations have shown contradictory results in regard to behavioral intentions across different domains for tangible and intangible goods and sharing concepts as B2C and P2P models, indicating that crowding effects might exist in this research field.

2.4.6. Perceived Sustainability Benefits

The sharing economy is a sustainable form of consumption since resources are shared within the community rather than individually [3,12]. Previous studies have shown that participation in sharing concepts is perceived as an environmentally sustaining activity and supports sustainable development, especially in the fashion segment [7,68,70,100,101]. Sustainability as a perceived benefit represents norm principles and thus intrinsic motivation [9]. However, in previous research, intrinsic benefits revealed insignificant effects on the intention for fashion sharing. For example, Hamari et al. (2016) showed a positive effect on the attitude of P2P fashion models if the consumption was perceived to be sustainable. However, this relationship was not significant in a direct relationship to behavioral intentions [9]. Becker-Leifhold (2018) also demonstrated that biospheric values such as environmental consciousness insignificantly relate to the intention to rent fashion [70]. In contrast, Baek and Oh (2021) revealed green values to be significantly related to fashion renting attitudes when contamination perceptions were high. However, the direct relationship on renting intentions was not measured [68]. In addition, research on consumer behavior considering environmental concern and sustainability revealed the presence of positive relationships toward sustainable fashion consumption [102,103]. For example, Lou et al. (2021) found that in commercial bike-sharing, intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, such as altruism and economic rewards, coexist significantly without crowding effects [72]. Similar results were obtained by Böcker and Meelen (2017), who presented different motivations for tool, ride accommodation, car, and meal sharing. They showed a positive perception of sustainability benefits, especially for the female user, and economic motivations for younger consumer groups [11]. By taking these aspects into account, it is assumed that renting fashion as a sustainable form of fashion consumption is perceived as a sustainability benefit, which is positively related to renting fashion in the B2C context.

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

Consumers’ perceived sustainability benefit from fashion renting positively relates to the intention to rent fashion.

2.4.7. Perceived Economic Benefits

Although the sharing economy encompasses various concepts, they all have the common aim to share resources within a group of individuals, resulting in shared costs and thus cost savings since these resources are not purchased and used exclusively by each individual [5,104,105]. Therefore, the sharing economy in the realm of apparel renting offers users a cost advantage since the rental fee of the items is only a fraction of the original purchase price. Additionally, apparel can be exchanged as frequently as desired, resulting in a diversely changing wardrobe with lower expenditures than the linear consumption cost [5]. Although Becker-Leifhold (2018) revealed that consumers’ focus on low prices does not significantly relate to the intention to share fashion [70], Hamari et al. (2016) confirmed the positive relationship between economic incentives and behavioral intentions to participate within the P2P concept [9], while Lang et al. (2020) demonstrated positive relationships for B2C fashion-sharing concepts [67]. Furthermore, Roos and Hahn (2019) indicated that cost savings positively relate to sharing attitudes and intentions [106]. Since price consciousness does not consider perceptional aspects of fashion renting, it is assumed that this positive effect is also visible in fashion renting. Following Hamari et al. (2016), a significant relationship of economic benefits toward fashion sharing is assumed [9].

Hypothesis 5 (H5).

Consumers’ perceived economic benefit from fashion renting positively relates to the intention to rent fashion.

Based on the five hypothesized relationships, the research model, as seen in Figure 1, is proposed to investigate the renting intention within the fashion domain and the B2C context.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Measures

The survey was divided into three parts, and all constructs queried were reused from previously validated ones. First, quality preference, brand preference, and novelty preference were measured using the operationalized items for the fashion context by Sproles and Kendall (1986) [26]. In the second section, the concept of B2C fashion renting was explained by a case adopting a definition by Hamari et al. (2016) and Benoit et al. (2017) to clarify the research context of B2C fashion renting [5,9]. The third segment included questions concerning fashion sharing. The construct rental intention was measured using Madden et al.’s (1992) three-item scale, which included a six-month time horizon for the intention to rent fashion [107]. Sustainability benefit was measured using four items that Hamari et al. (2016) applied in the P2P-fashion-sharing context. Economic benefit was measured using three operationalized items by Bock et al. (2005), which was also applied by Hamari et al. (2016) in the sharing context [9,46]. All measures were assessed using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The survey items were translated from English into German by a native German speaker and reviewed by a bilingual person. Five German scholars then reviewed the questionnaire to validate the translation and check its comprehensibility within the pretest phase. During data collection, survey items were randomized to lessen the risk of common method bias. Demographic data were measured using one-item scales due to these concrete and singular constructs [108]. The survey items and their respective sources are listed in

Table A3. Items and corresponding sources.

Item		Source
Quality Preference
Quali3	Getting a very good quality of fashion apparel is very important to me	Sproles and Kendall (1986) [26]
Quali2	In general, I usually try to buy the best overall quality of fashion apparel
Quali1	I make a special effort to choose the very best quality fashion apparel
Brand Preference
Brand3	More expensive fashion brands are usually my favorites when I go shopping for clothes	Sproles and Kendall (1986) [26]
Brand2	The higher the price of the fashion apparel, the better the brand
Brand1	I prefer buying the more expensive and well-known fashion brands
Novelty Preference
Novel3	In general, I am among the first in my circle of friends to buy apparel following the newest trends	Sproles and Kendall (1986) [26]
Novel2	In general, I am more interested in fashionable clothes than most other people
Novel1	I always try to keep my wardrobe up to date with changing fashion trends
Sustainability Benefit
SusBen4	Renting fashion apparel helps to save natural resources	Hamari et al. (2016) [9]
SusBen3	Renting fashion apparel is a sustainable model of consumption
SusBen2	Renting fashion apparel is efficient in terms of reducing waste
SusBen1	Renting fashion apparel is environmentally friendly
Economic Benefit
EcoBen3	I can save money if I rent fashion apparel	Bock et al. (2005) [46]
EcoBen2	My participation in renting fashion apparel benefits me financially
EcoBen1	Renting fashion apparel can improve my economic situation
Renting Intention
RI3	I intend to rent apparel in the next 6 months	Madden et al. (1992) [107]
RI2	I will try to rent apparel in the next 6 months
RI1	I will make an effort to rent apparel in the next 6 months

in Appendix A.

3.2. Data Collection

Data collection took place in March 2021, targeting a random sub-group with a structured online survey. In order to reach a large number of Generation Y and Z participants while minimizing intentional and systematic sample bias, this questionnaire was distributed via Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube without directly contacting respondents. This procedure targeted a representative and random sample of general fashion shoppers to increase the validity and reliability of the results. The survey was anonymous, with respondents not obliged to provide personal information. However, respondents who did not identify as female were screened out. By following this process, the survey yielded a total sample size (N) of 375 respondents. In addition, to ensure that respondents comprehended the context of B2C fashion renting, they were required to answer two screening questions regarding renting transactions and the involved parties. Thus, respondents were excluded from further analysis if they (1) answered one or both screening questions incorrectly, (2) did not belong to the target age groups, or (3) were identified as speeders who completed the survey faster than one standard deviation (SD) from the mean completion time [109]. This procedure yielded a final dataset of 327 observations.

3.3. Data Analysis

The underlying analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 28.0.1.0; Armonk, NY, USA) and JASP (Version 0.16.1.0; Amsterdam, The Netherlands), an R-based statistical program developed by the University of Amsterdam. JASP is suited for multivariate analysis with complex combinations of parameters, as the computation is a cross-platform based on the lavaan model syntax of R (Version 0.6-5; Ghent, Belgium) [110,111]. In addition, JASP applies covariance-based structural equation modeling. This approach uses confirmatory factor analysis utilizing reflective measurements to calculate hypothesized construct relations, thus being a more appropriate tool for theory testing than partial least squares calculation tools [112,113].

All scales were first checked with exploratory factor analysis in SPSS and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in JASP to ensure the construct validity [112]. The hypothesized relations were then computed by employing a structural equation model (SEM) in JASP using the lavaan syntax mode. The SEM approach is appropriate for simultaneously analyzing different relationships among multiple latent constructs. It can thus be demonstrated that the hypothesized relationships are not spurious [112]. Moreover, estimates suggest both minor and major impacts on the dependent variable [112]. Since the final dataset exceeds the minimum requirement of 220 observations for six variables, the computation allows reliable statistical analyses in a SEM [112,114,115,116].

In addition, the statistically significant differences between the two age groups, Y and Z, were examined for each variable in a multivariate testing procedure. Since the variance and covariance matrices of the two groups were equal, an independent t-test was performed in JASP to detect significant differences and the overall significance of both generations [112].

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics of Survey Participants

According to the characteristics of respondents presented in

Table 1. Sample characteristics.

Category	Characteristic	N	Percentage
Gender	Female	327	100%
Age	Generation Z (16–26 years)	198	61%
	Generation Y (27–41 years)	129	39%
Education	Secondary school leaving certificate	28	8%
	High school diploma	97	30%
	Completed vocational training	47	14%
	Bachelor’s degree	103	32%
	Master’s degree	43	13%
	Doctorate	1	<1%
	Other	8	2%
Occupation	Pupil	29	9%
	Trainee	22	7%
	Student	127	39%
	Employee	113	34%
	Other	36	11%

and

Table A4. Sociodemographic characteristics.

Category	Characteristic	n	Percentage
Apparel Shopping before COVID-19	Less than once a month	147	45%
	At least once a month	180	55%
Apparel Shopping during COVID-19 (2021)	Less than once a month	234	72%
	At least once a month	93	28%
Second-Hand Familiarity: Buying	No	100	31%
	Yes	223	68%
	Doesn’t know	4	1%
Second-Hand Familiarity: Wearing	No	64	20%
	Yes	254	77%
	Doesn’t know	9	3%
Second-Hand Familiarity: Selling	No	117	36%
	Yes	201	61%
	Doesn’t know	9	3%

Note: Second-Hand Familiarity with fashion items.

in Appendix A, 61% of participants belonged to Generation Z, and 39% belonged to Generation Y, with an overall mean age of 26 years. In terms of occupation, 55% were students, pupils, or trainees, while 35% were employed. A high school diploma was held by 39%, a bachelor’s degree by 32%, and a master’s degree by 13%. Before the COVID-19 pandemic began, 55% of respondents shopped at least once a month; during the COVID-19 pandemic, that figure dropped to 28%. Concerning familiarity with second-hand clothing, 68% had previously bought second-hand clothes, 78% had previously worn second-hand clothes, and 62% had previously sold their fashion items to second-hand providers.

4.2. Results of the Structural Equation Modelling

Based on the measured values, factor analysis was performed in SPSS using the maximum likelihood method and varimax rotation to confirm the validity of the translated constructs. The anti-image correlations exceeded the 0.50 threshold for measure extraction, displaying values between 0.822 and 0.935. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin criterion (KMO) and Bartlett’s test (BT) also confirmed the constructs’ validity, with a KMO measure of sampling adequacy value of 0.871 exceeding the required threshold of 0.50, representing a meritorious result. The BT, as a test of sphericity, indicated a significant result (p-value ≤ 0.001) [112]. Furthermore, the conditions for the absence of multicollinearity were also met. The variance inflation factors (VIF) for each independent variable were below the threshold of 3, and no correlation exceeded the threshold of 0.8 in the intercorrelation matrix [112]. In addition, Harman’s single factor test revealed no evidence of common method bias, as one factor encompassing all items explained 39% of the variance, which is below the 50% threshold [117]. Based on the measurement items, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed in JASP to check each construct’s convergent validity and discriminant validity. The average variance extracted (AVE) exceeded the threshold of 0.5 for all constructs, as did composite reliability (CR) with values above 0.7. In addition, to confirm the reliability of each scale, Cronbach’s α was computed, confirming internal consistency with all values greater than 0.885 [112]. The results of the CFA are shown in

Table 2. Results of the CFA.

Item	Loading	Cronbach’s α	CR	AVE	VIF
Quality Preference		0.914	0.915	0.782	1.467
Quali3	0.877
Quali2	0.874
Quali1	0.901
Brand Preference		0.900	0.905	0.763	2.019
Brand3	0.921
Brand2	0.749
Brand1	0.938
Novelty Preference		0.900	0.903	0.757	1.642
Novel3	0.945
Novel2	0.805
Novel1	0.855
Sustainability Benefit		0.885	0.889	0.667	1.376
SusBen4	0.839
SusBen3	0.846
SusBen2	0.754
SusBen1	0.824
Economic Benefit		0.914	0.918	0.789	1.515
EcoBen3	0.918
EcoBen2	0.940
EcoBen1	0.800
Renting Intention		0.975	0.975	0.929
RI3	0.959
RI2	0.970
RI1	0.963

and

Table A5. Factor analysis.

Item	1	2	3	4	5	6
Quali3			0.827
Quali2			0.851
Quali1			0.845
Brand3						0.797
Brand2						0.596
Brand1						0.814
Novel3					0.880
Novel2					0.707
Novel1					0.758
SusBen4	0.822
SusBen3	0.853
SusBen2	0.703
SusBen1	0.770
EcoBen3				0.819
EcoBen2				0.875
EcoBen1				0.679
RI3		0.856
RI2		0.880
RI1		0.854

Note: Extraction method: maximum likelihood and varimax rotation.

,

Table A6. Anti-image correlation.

Item	Anti-Image Correlation
Quality Preference
Quali3	0.873
Quali2	0.822
Quali1	0.830
Brand Preference
Brand3	0.852
Brand2	0.931
Brand1	0.846
Novelty Preference
Novel3	0.848
Novel2	0.918
Novel1	0.883
Sustainability Benefit
SusBen4	0.868
SusBen3	0.828
SusBen2	0.886
SusBen1	0.871
Economic Benefit
EcoBen3	0.843
EcoBen2	0.830
EcoBen1	0.935
Renting Intention
RI3	0.911
RI2	0.873
RI1	0.895
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin		0.871
Bartlett’s test		0.000

and

Table A7. Total variance explained.

Components	Total	Variance	Total	% Variance Explained
1	7.442	39.167	7.442	39.167
2	3.546	18.665
3	1.747	9.193
4	1.331	7.005
5	1.199	6.311
6	0.817	4.302
7	0.428	2.253
8	0.374	1.967
9	0.358	1.885
10	0.335	1.761
11	0.261	1.375
12	0.250	1.313
13	0.220	1.156
14	0.188	0.990
15	0.144	0.758
16	0.119	0.625
17	0.111	0.585
18	0.073	0.385
19	0.058	0.306

in Appendix A.

The hypothesized relationships were assessed using a SEM. The model accounted for 45% of the total variance in renting intention. The normed chi-square χ²/df ratio showed a satisfactory model fit with 1.86, which is below the threshold of 2 [118]. The absolute fit indices exhibited values lower than the cut-off criterion of 0.07 for SRMR (0.037) and RMSEA (0.051) with a non-significant p-value (0.401), indicating a good model fit [112]. Furthermore, the incremental fit measures TLI (0.974) and CFI (0.979) revealed an adequately specified model with values above the threshold of 0.95 [112].

The path analysis showed a significant positive relationship between renting intention and quality preference, novelty preference, and economic benefit, confirming hypotheses 1,3, and 5, respectively. Economic benefit displayed the largest effect with β = 0.356 (p-value ≤ 0.001), followed by novelty preference with β = 0.293 (p-value ≤ 0.001), while quality preference showed the lowest effect size of β = 0.140 (p-value ≤ 0.05). The results of the SEM are presented in

Table 3. Regression coefficients of the SEM.

Construct	Estimate	Standard Error	z-Value	p-Value	β
Quality Preference	0.162 *	0.069	2.350	0.019	0.140
Brand Preference	0.060	0.093	0.647	0.518	0.047
Novelty Preference	0.290 ***	0.061	4.721	≤0.001	0.293
Sustainability Benefit	0.180	0.102	1.755	0.079	0.100
Economic Benefit	0.483 ***	0.082	5.907	≤0.001	0.356

Note: Dependent variable: renting intention; β = standardized estimate; *** p ≤ 0.001, * p ≤ 0.05, N = 327.

.

4.3. Results of the Independent T-Test

In order to identify statistically significant differences between generations Y and Z, each variable was tested using independent sample t-tests [112]. The analysis indicated that quality and brand preferences differ significantly between age groups. Generation Y displayed larger mean values for quality and brand preference, with the largest value for quality preference. Conversely, Generation Z displayed a lower mean value, the lowest value being for brand preference. The remaining variables did not indicate significant variances due to generation differences, as displayed in

Table 4. Independent sample t-tests for generations Y and Z.

Construct	Generation Y	Generation Z	t-Value	p-Value
Quality Preference	4.7519	4.3098	−2.618	0.009
Brand Preference	3.1085	2.5320	−2.894	0.004
Novelty Preference	3.0310	2.8098	−1.123	0.262
Sustainability Benefit	5.8275	5.9571	1.059	0.291
Economic Benefit	4.6537	4.9242	1.574	0.116
Renting Intention	2.9638	2.7593	−0.976	0.330

Note: n Generation Y = 129; n Generation Z = 198; 2-tailed test. Equal variances are assumed in Levene’s F-test.

.

5. Discussion

5.1. Interpretation of Results

The findings contribute to the literature with a new perspective on fashion renting in a B2C context focusing on female shoppers from generations Y and Z. By including fundamental consumer preferences, this study adds a unique perspective to understanding consumer needs for fashion renting. Since these links have not been analyzed in previous studies, this research explored new relationships in regard to the intention of a large and homogenous consumer group to rent fashion. Furthermore, the analysis of perceived benefits clarifies the impact of sustainability and of economic benefits on fashion renting and extends previous research in the B2C context [24]. Taken together, this research closes three research gaps that had existed in the field of fashion renting. These results further assist renting providers. By implementing these findings, suppliers can align clothing offerings to consumer preferences and highlight relevant renting benefits to positively influence consumers’ willingness to rent fashion. Beyond that, the results suggest a new pathway for uncovering significant effects of product-related consumer preferences on sharing intentions for other sectors.

First, significant relationships between two consumer preferences and the intention to rent fashion were identified. Consumers’ novelty preferences displayed a larger effect size than did quality preferences. This result indicates that people who have a deep knowledge of fashion trends and who evaluate apparel based on these trends are more likely to rent apparel. Therefore, people who select their clothing based on the newest styles in fashion shopping are more likely to rent fashion items than those who do not follow fashion trends. This result confirms previous research by showing that novelty preference as a symbolic need is related to the acquisition of fashion products [91,94,96,97]. For example, Mohamed and Wee (2020) showed that consumers who transmit their fashion knowledge to purchase decisions are more likely to buy fashion online than those who do not consider these aspects in their selection [95]. Similar findings were shown by Kautish and Sharma (2018), demonstrating that consumers’ preferences for the newest styles positively relate to online purchases [86]. Furthermore, Kim et al. (2010) revealed that novelty preferences for fashion are positively related to the intention to use pop-up stores [93]. Thus, this study confirmed and transferred these relationships to the B2C renting context. Moreover, the results show a new pathway: this consumer segment is not only willing to buy second-hand apparel or to sell fashion items to thrift or consignment stores, but is also willing to use fashion renting [96,97]. Consequently, this research extends previous findings by showing that consumers’ novelty preferences also relate to behavioral intentions to share fashion through renting.

Second, consumers’ quality preference is also positively related to the intention to rent fashion. Therefore, individuals who assess fashion products based on fabrics and craftsmanship are more likely to rent apparel than people who do not consider these attributes in product choice. This finding is in line with previous research supporting the assumption that quality preferences increase the willingness to acquire fashion products [30,33,58]. Comparing renting and buying in the fashion domain, it is apparent that quality preferences have a stronger effect on the intention to rent than on the intention to buy [30,33,79]. Hence, this consumer preference indicates differing tendencies compared to conventional fashion consumption. These findings were supplemented by the independent sample t-test providing evidence of differences in quality preference, with Generation Y tending to have higher levels of quality preference than Generation Z. The difference could be due to the experience advantage of the older generation. This experience could contribute to the fact that members of Generation Y can better judge products according to quality criteria such as the quality of the incorporated materials and fabrics or the durability of the product, and thus tend to have a higher quality preference than younger consumers. However, both generations indicate equal tendencies toward fashion renting if they display quality preferences.

Brand preference, as the second symbolic preference, did not display a significant relationship to renting intention. Therefore, consumers who assess products based on brand names by focusing on well-known and popular brands do not consider fashion renting to be an appealing consumption form. Again, these results contrast with fashion shopping, where brand preference is relevant to young women’s purchase intentions, revealing highly significant relationships [30,33,86,88,89]. Therefore, even though eco-friendly products are more likely to be purchased, the sharing economy as a sustainable consumption form does not relate positively to brand preference. The discrepancy could be explained by considering the associated construct of materialism [119]. Since materialism reflects high-status items, it links to an individual’s brand preference, as these status symbols are expressed in a brand’s image. This assumption is further supported by Liao and Wang (2009), who showed that brand preference is an attitude influenced by materialism. Thus, materialism as a value-based attitude and brand awareness as a consumer preference are interrelated and could lead to similar results [120]. Previous studies revealed that materialism significantly relates to non-generosity by egoism and possessiveness [119], which negatively affects pro-environmental behavior [121,122]. Traditional buying behavior does not contradict these factors because items are solely possessed, and environmental behavior is not displayed. Therefore, brand preference positively relates to fashion shopping. However, renting is based on the principle of sharing [5,9]. Thus, this principle contradicts the materialistic attitudes that are displayed in an individual’s egoism and possessiveness and can prevent the acceptance of renting. Roos and Hahn (2019) confirmed this assumption by showing that egoistic value orientations do not significantly relate to sharing attitudes and sharing intentions [106]. Accordingly, the present results align with previous studies that have shown an insignificant or negative effect of materialism on fashion sharing as a form of shared consumption [4,23,53]. Furthermore, the underlying results support the assumption that materialism does not positively relate to sustainable behavior [121,122]. Consequently, sharing as a sustainable form of consumption is not significantly related to consumers’ brand preference, whereas buying and thus owning eco-friendly fashion products occurs because materialistic elements are satisfied [88].

The positive perception of sustainability benefits as intrinsic motivations remains insignificant toward renting intention. Therefore, people who perceive fashion renting as a sustainable form of consumption that saves natural resources and decreases waste do not exhibit a greater willingness to rent fashion. Thus, these results confirm general findings by Roos and Hahn (2019) that environmental protection does not significantly relate to sharing intentions [106], as well as the specific results of Hamari et al. (2016) for the P2P fashion-sharing domain [9]. Moreover, the present results confirm Camacho-Otero et al.’s (2019) explanatory investigation for fashion sharing. They showed through the analysis of user reviews that environmental values are not mentioned regarding fashion sharing, suggesting that this factor may not influence sharing acceptance and adoption [123]. Therefore, sustainability perceptions of the sharing activity have no direct impact on renting intention [9]. Economic benefits as extrinsic motivation indicate a significant relationship with fashion renting. As a result, people who perceive fashion renting in the B2C context as an economically beneficial way to save money are more likely to rent clothing than those who view renting as an economically unviable option. This result is consistent with the findings of Hamari et al. (2016), revealing that economic benefits directly relate to behavioral intentions for peer fashion sharing, as well as generalized assumptions by Belk (2010) and Lamberton (2012) that saving money affects participation intentions positively [3,9,105]. Consequently, these results align with previous findings from the P2P domain. The present results may also indicate crowding effects for fashion sharing in the B2C sector, whereby extrinsic motivations thus counteract intrinsic motivations. Since there is a significant correlation between sustainability benefits and intention to rent, as seen in

Table A8. Pearson’s correlation matrix.

	Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6
1	Quality Preference	4.484	1.506	0.884
2	Brand Preference	2.759	1.780	0.552 **	0.874
3	Novelty Preference	2.897	1.742	0.368 **	0.583 **	0.870
4	Sustainable Benefit	5.906	1.082	0.072	0.048	0.223 **	0.817
5	Economic Benefit	4.818	1.522	0.118 *	0.306 **	0.355 **	0.489 **	0.888
6	Renting Intention	2.840	1.853	0.321 **	0.436 **	0.514 **	0.345 **	0.536 **	0.964

Note: M = mean; SD = standard deviation. Pearson correlation—significance level of 0.05, two-tailed test. Bolded numbers = square root of the average variance extracted ** p ≤ 0.01, * p ≤ 0.05, n = 327.

in Appendix A, economic benefits might suppress this relationship in the multivariate analysis. Therefore, the positive relationship of sustainability benefits from ride-sharing cannot be transferred to fashion renting [11]. Consequently, the positive impact of the sustainability benefit is not dependent on the business model but rather on the industry to which it applies. This research thus extends previous findings by analyzing fashion renting in the B2C context.

Beyond the scope of this study, this research may also represent a new avenue for discovering the influence of consumer preferences on sharing intentions for other sectors. Since consumer preferences differ across industries and thus products, these results could be extended by adjusting for sector-specific consumer preferences [26,28]. Aligning with findings by Böcker and Meelen (2017) and Muñoz and Cohen (2017), motivations to participate in the sharing economy differ across sectors [11,124]. Accordingly, driving factors to participate in sharing activities differ for car-sharing, ride-sharing, accommodation-sharing, tool-sharing, object-sharing, media-sharing, knowledge-sharing, and meal-sharing for B2C and P2P concepts [11,124]. Thus, the effect of consumer preferences might also differ across sectors. For example, while quality preferences for sharing meals might be more relevant to a consumer, other sectors might show significant relationships with other preferences, e.g., novelty preferences for sharing movies [125,126]. In addition, further product-related preferences need to be identified that fundamentally guide decision-making processes; for example, preferences for sharing fashion may differ from preferences for sharing cars, where safety preferences may dominate users’ choice, although they have an insignificant role in the sharing of clothing [127,128]. Thus, examining fundamental preferences for other areas of the sharing economy would lead to a better understanding of consumer decision-making processes [24]. This would further help sharing providers to improve their offerings based on users’ needs that positively relate to participation intentions.

5.2. Managerial Implications

Several recommendations arise from these results for sharing providers to make their offerings more attractive for young women. First, two homogenous consumer groups based on product-related preferences positively relate to the sharing economy. To address these groups and encourage them to rent fashion items, products must display corresponding attributes. Since quality-conscious consumers relate to fashion renting significantly, sharing providers must offer high-quality items. In doing so, they should focus on offering high-quality items with notable fabrics and superior craftsmanship rather than popular brands [26]. Ways to emphasize superior quality include displaying the advanced durability of a product compared to low-quality products [57]. Furthermore, quality perceptions are also related to apparel fit, which is seen as an indication of the outstanding functionality of apparel [57]. Further high-quality indicators are the origin countries of fabrics and manufacturing places of the products, such as silk from China and craftsmanship in Italy or France [57,129]. These quality attributes should thus be highlighted to attract this consumer group and thus encourage fashion renting.

On the other hand, consumers who prefer the newest fashion seek items following the latest trends [26]. Therefore, to address this consumer group, sharing providers should keep their offer up to date and highlight its trendiness to attract this group and encourage fashion renting. Since fashion trends constantly change, sharing providers should focus on appearance factors connected to fashion novelty. The most critical factors of fashion trends are the fabrics’ colors, fashion cuts, and design patterns. Consumers who prefer the newest styles will thus first evaluate these criteria within their consideration set [57]. Consequently, renting providers should highlight these fashion attributes and permanently strive to include the latest trends in their product portfolio.

Brand-conscious shoppers, however, do not display significant relationships towards the intention to participate in the sharing economy within the fashion domain. Thus, sharing providers can focus on high-quality brands that offer the newest trends rather than popular brands without quality or novelty attributes. The same applies to the perception of sustainability benefits. Since no significant relationship was identified in combination with economic benefits, providers can show this benefit, but it will not significantly increase fashion rentals. However, to promote sustainable consumption, this positive effect is worth mentioning.

Finally, since the perception of economic benefits has proven to be highly relevant to participation in the sharing economy, providers should also demonstrate aspects of money-saving. The central tenet of fashion sharing is to rent fashion rather than purchase it; thus, less money is spent, as rental fees comprise a fraction of the original apparel price [9]. Based on this concept, renting providers should advertise that fashion renting helps save money, benefits users financially, and improves the economic situation of the renters [46]. Thus, displaying original prices compared to renting prices could help providers to achieve better resulting benefits from fashion renting. Consequently, when suppliers offer branded clothing, the emphasis should be on the resulting financial benefit rather than the brand itself. Additionally, economic principles could be used to demonstrate the benefits of renting. For example, the maximum principle displays the maximum quantity of clothing items available at a fixed rental price. Alternatively, the minimum principle could display a fixed amount of clothing items and the resulting minimum price [130]. The economic principle can be further supported by demonstrating the costs per fashion item. This approach can facilitate the positive perception of monetary benefits gained through fashion renting.

By combining these aspects, fashion renting appeals to users who accept the sharing economy as a viable consumption form based on consumer preferences and beneficial perceptions. Thus, although overall acceptance is low compared to general fashion shopping, providers should focus on consumer segments that are more likely to use the sharing economy and tailor the apparel offer accordingly.

5.3. Limitations and Further Research

This research has some limitations that should be addressed by future research. First, this study focused on female consumers of generations Y and Z. Further analysis should be conducted to validate and extend these results using cross-sectional data to identify determinants for other homogenous segments such as male consumers and additional generations. Second, this study employed two types of benefits to analyze their relationship to renting intention. Future research could extend these benefits by exploring relationships of other types of perceived benefits through renting, including space saving in the wardrobe or having a fashionable outfit for the right occasion [6]. Third, the survey considers fundamental consumer preferences based on product attributes that lead the renting behavior. Additional attributes, such as the split of quality aspects into fabric and craftmanship, could be included in future analyses to provide a more detailed profile of consumers who accept sharing. Lastly, since this study focuses on consumer preferences in B2C fashion sharing, future research should transfer the results to other sectors to uncover the significant effects of product-related consumer preferences on sharing intentions.

6. Conclusions

The sharing economy offers an opportunity to shift fashion consumption in a more sustainable direction, provided that traditional fashion consumers accept the concept. While previous research focused on cultural differences [20,21,22,23], familiarity with sustainable behavior [18,23], value-based antecedents [4,17,23,53], and behavior-related perceptions [6,9,21,24], fundamental shopping preferences have remained unnoticed. Therefore, this research aimed to identify a broader context between renting intention, fundamental consumer preferences, and perceived benefits for young women. This segmentation increases the accuracy of the analysis, thereby producing coherent results [131] and increasing the likelihood that consumers exhibit the analyzed consumer behavior [34,35,132]. For this purpose, primary data were generated, comprising a final sample of 327 participants. The SEM results indicated that consumers’ quality and novelty preferences significantly relate to fashion renting, whereas consumers’ brand preferences do not affect the fashion renting intention of young women. Furthermore, it was found that the perception of economic benefits encourages consumers to participate in the sharing economy but may crowd out sustainability gains, hence clarifying the implications for commercial fashion renting. The results also showed equal tendencies of preferences for generations Y and Z, revealing that young women tend to display homogenous characteristics in the variable’s mean scores. This study thus contributed to the literature by closing three research gaps in the sharing economy for fashion. Furthermore, by focusing on everyday fashion, these results are particularly relevant from a sustainability perspective. In conclusion, this research enhanced the understanding of factors positively related to commercial fashion renting and formed the foundation for further research to improve the attractiveness of the sharing economy and change traditional consumption into a more sustainable form.