Assessing Resources Management for Sharing Economy in Urban Logistics
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Resources Management in Urban Areas
- The resource itself (resource scarcity and availability of waste);
- Actions of government (regulations and standards and financial support);
- Economy (economic benefit, financial payback and new business opportunities);
- Organization of social characteristics (short mental distance, trust, security and awareness);
- Technology (especially issues related to innovation);
- Society (social organization or support system).
- Material (e.g., raw materials, tools, machines etc.);
- Human;
- Capital (money);
- Information.
2.2. Sharing Economy in Cities
- Frequency of service—if the service is provided on a regularly it is more likely to be treated as professional;
- Reason for service providing—if the primary purpose is to earn, the provider is more likely to be seen as a professional;
- Level of income—the higher is the income, the more likely the service will be classified as professional.
3. Methods
3.1. Research Framework
- Step 1.
- Defining the research problem for the literature review;
- Step 2.
- Defining the scope of searches (search engines: DOAJ, EBSCOhost, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Springer, additionally: Mendeley online);
- Step 3.
- Defining keywords and search logic (see Section 3.2);
- Step 4.
- Conducting search, creating a literature database (see Section 3.2);
- Step 5.
- Literature analysis (see Section 3.3);
- Step 6.
- Preparation of the study report (see Section 4).
3.2. Literature Search
- “Resource*” in abstract (The asterisk mean different possible word endings appearing togehter with the core of the word, e.g., for “resource*” they can be “resources”, “resource-based”, “resource-related” etc.),
- AND “urban” OR “city” OR “town” OR “cities” in abstract,
- AND “sharing economy” in text,
- Only full-text records,
- Sources published in 2010 or later (because of the topicality of their research results),
- English-language sources,
- Only sources indicated as scientific (if the search engines provided such an opportunity).
3.3. Literature Analysis
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Rai, H.B.; Verlinde, S.; Macharis, C. Shipping outside the box. Environmental impact and stakeholder analysis of a crowd logistics platform in Belgium. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 202, 806–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zajdel, M. Wybrane teorie rozwoju regionalnego oraz lokalnego a rynek pracy. Stud. Prawno-Ekonomiczne 2011, 83, 397–421. [Google Scholar]
- Schumpeter, J.A. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle; Transaction Publishers: New Brunswick, London, UK, 1983; ISBN 9780878556984. [Google Scholar]
- Schlaile, M.P.; Müller, M.; Schramm, M.; Pyka, A. Evolutionary Economics, Responsible Innovation and Demand: Making a Case for the Role of Consumers. Philos. Manag. 2017, 17, 7–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Parra, L.; Sendra, S.; Lloret, J.; Bosch, I. Development of a Conductivity Sensor for Monitoring Groundwater Resources to Optimize Water Management in Smart City Environments. Sensors 2015, 15, 20990–21015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Pargman, D.; Eriksson, E.; Friday, A. Limits to the sharing economy. ACM Int. Conf. Proc. Ser. 2016, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schor, J. Debating the Sharing Economy. J. Self-Gov. Manag. Econ. 2014, 4, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Sung, E.; Kim, H.; Lee, D. Why Do People Consume and Provide Sharing Economy Accommodation?—A Sustainability Perspective. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schneider, P.; Folkens, L.; Meyer, A.; Fauk, T. Sustainability and Dimensions of a Nexus Approach in a Sharing Economy. Sustainability 2019, 11, 909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fossheim, K.; Andersen, J. Plan for sustainable urban logistics—Comparing between Scandinavian and UK practices. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2017, 9, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cohen, B.; Kietzmann, J. Ride On! Mobility Business Models for the Sharing Economy. Organ. Environ. 2014, 27, 279–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giles-Corti, B.; Vernez-Moudon, A.; Reis, R.; Turrell, G.; Dannenberg, A.L.; Badland, H.M.; Foster, S.; Lowe, M.; Sallis, J.F.; Stevenson, M.R.; et al. City planning and population health: A global challenge. Lancet 2016, 388, 2912–2924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suchanek, M.; Pawłowska, J. Effects of Transport Behaviour on Public Health: A Study on the Students in the Tricity Area. In New Research Trends in Transport Sustainability and Innovation. TranSopot Conference; Suchanek, M., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 28–36. [Google Scholar]
- Malamis, S.; Katsou, E.; Inglezakis, V.J.; Kershaw, S.; Venetis, D.; Folini, S. Urban Environment. In Environment and Development: Basic Principles, Human Activities, and Environmental Implications; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; ISBN 9780444627339. [Google Scholar]
- Nowakowski, P.; Mrówczyńska, B. Towards sustainable WEEE collection and transportation methods in circular economy—Comparative study for rural and urban settlements. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 135, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murray, A.; Skene, K.R.; Haynes, K. The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context. J. Bus. Ethic 2015, 140, 369–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moraga, G.; Huysveld, S.; Mathieux, F.; Blengini, G.A.; Alaerts, L.; Van Acker, K.; De Meester, S.; Dewulf, J. Circular economy indicators: What do they measure? Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 146, 452–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belaire, J.A.; Dribin, A.K.; Johnston, D.P.; Lynch, D.J.; Minor, E.S. Mapping stewardship networks in urban ecosystems. Conserv. Lett. 2011, 4, 464–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Packialakshmi, S.; Ambujam, N.K.; Nelliyat, P. Groundwater market and its implications on water resources and agriculture in the southern peri-urban interface, Chennai, India. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2010, 13, 423–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szmelter-Jarosz, A.; Rześny-Cieplińska, J. Priorities of Urban Transport System Stakeholders According to Crowd Logistics Solutions in City Areas. A Sustainability Perspective. Sustainability 2019, 12, 317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Petrisor, A.I.; Petre, R.; Meiţă, V. Difficulties in achieving social sustainability in a biosphere reserve. Int. J. Conserv. Sci. 2016, 7, 123–136. [Google Scholar]
- Mańkowski, C. Architectures of Logistics Processes. Transp. Econ. Logist. 2017, 68, 25–38. [Google Scholar]
- Affairs, U.N.D. of E. and S. Does the Sharing Economy Share or Concentrate; Frontier Technology Quarterly. 2020. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/publication/FTQ_Feb2020.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2020).
- Basselier, R.; Langenus, G.; Walravens, L. The rise of the sharing economy. Econ. Rev. 2018, iii, 57–78. Available online: https://www.nbb.be/doc/oc/repec/ecrart/ecoreviii2018_h3.pdf (accessed on 20 June 2020).
- Puschmann, T.; Alt, R. Sharing economy. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2016, 58, 93–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanusch, H.; Pyka, A.; Davis, J.B. Principles of Neo-Schumpeterian Economics. Camb. J. Econ. 2006, 31, 275–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rong, K.; Xiao, F.; Wang, Y. Redundancy in the sharing economy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 151, 104455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campbell, L.K.; Svendsen, E.S.; Sonti, N.F.; Johnson, M.L. A social assessment of urban parkland: Analyzing park use and meaning to inform management and resilience planning. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 62, 34–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perren, R.; Grauerholz, L. Collaborative Consumption. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; ISBN 9780080970875. [Google Scholar]
- Stahel, W.R. The circular economy. Nature 2016, 531, 435–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geissdoerfer, M.; Savaget, P.; Bocken, N.M.P.; Hultink, E.J. The Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 143, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sundararajan, A. Peer-to-Peer Businesses and the Sharing (Collaborative) Economy. In Power Connection Peer-to-Peer Businesses; U.S. Government Publishing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Koopman, C.; Mitchell, M.D.; Thierer, A.D. The Sharing Economy and Consumer Protection Regulation: The Case for Policy Change. SSRN Electron. J. 2014, 8, 529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Möhlmann, M. Collaborative consumption: Determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again. J. Consum. Behav. 2015, 14, 193–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finck, M.; Ranchordás, S. Sharing and the City. SSRN Electron. J. 2016, 49, 1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pickett, S.T.A.; Cadenasso, M.L. Linking ecological and built components of urban mosaics: An open cycle of ecological design. J. Ecol. 2007, 96, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, B.; Muñoz, P. Sharing cities and sustainable consumption and production: Towards an integrated framework. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 87–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ganapati, S.; Reddick, C.G. Prospects and challenges of sharing economy for the public sector. Gov. Inf. Q. 2018, 35, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melo, S.; Macedo, J.; Baptista, P.C. Capacity-sharing in logistics solutions: A new pathway towards sustainability. Transp. Policy 2019, 73, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, Z.; Zhao, P.; Ai, S. Efficiency Evaluation of Beijing Intelligent Traffic Management System Based on super-DEA. J. Transp. Syst. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2012, 12, 19–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakıcı, T.; Almirall, E.; Wareham, J. A Smart City Initiative: The Case of Barcelona. J. Knowl. Econ. 2012, 4, 135–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, Y.; Lan, J.; Thornton, T.; Mangalagiu, D.; Zhu, D. Challenges of collaborative governance in the sharing economy: The case of free-floating bike sharing in Shanghai. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 197, 356–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunawansa, A. Contractual and policy challenges to developing ecocities. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 19, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLaren, D.; Agyeman, J. The Sharing City: Understanding and Acting on the Sharing Paradigm. In Sharing Cities: A Case for Truly Smart and Sustainable Cities; MIT Press: London, UK, 2015; pp. 252–310. [Google Scholar]
- Petropoulos, G. An Economic Review of the Collaborative Economy. Bruegel Policy Contribution Issue n˚5. 2017. Available online: http://bruegel.org/2017/02/an-economic-review-of-the-collaborative-economy/%0Ahttp://aei.pitt.edu/85013/%0Ahttp://aei.pitt.edu/85013/1/PC-05-2017.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2020).
- Zhang, S. Public participation in the Geoweb era: Defining a typology for geo-participation in local governments. Cities 2019, 85, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Middle, I.; Dzidic, P.; Buckley, A.; Bennett, D.; Tye, M.; Jones, R. Integrating community gardens into public parks: An innovative approach for providing ecosystem services in urban areas. Urban For. Urban Green. 2014, 13, 638–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dong, Y.; Wang, S.; Li, L.; Zhang, Z. An empirical study on travel patterns of internet based ride-sharing. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2018, 86, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Štiglic, M.; Agatz, N.; Savelsbergh, M.W.; Gradisar, M. Enhancing urban mobility: Integrating ride-sharing and public transit. Comput. Oper. Res. 2018, 90, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- United Nations. World Population Prospects 2019. No. ST/ESA/SER.A/423; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2019; ISBN 9789211483161. [Google Scholar]
- Long, J.C.; Tan, W.; Szeto, W.; Li, Y. Ride-sharing with travel time uncertainty. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2018, 118, 143–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kooti, F.; Djuric, N.; Grbovic, M.; Radosavljevic, V.; Aiello, L.M.; Lerman, K. Analyzing uber’s ride-sharing economy. In Proceedings of the 26th International World Wide Web Conference 2017, WWW 2017 Companion, Perth, Australia, 3–7 April 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Hirshon, L.; Jones, M.; Levin, D.; McCarthy, K.; Morano, B.; Simon, S. Cities, the Sharing Economy and What’s Next. 2014. Available online: http://www.nlc.org/Documents/FindCitySolutions/City-Solutions-and-Applied-Research/Report-CitiestheSharingEconomyandWhatsNextfinal.pdf (accessed on 23 June 2020).
- Ke, J.; Yang, H.; Li, X.; Wang, H.; Ye, J. Pricing and equilibrium in on-demand ride-pooling markets. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2020, 139, 411–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Souza Silva, L.A.; de Andrade, M.O.; Alves Maia, M.L. How does the ride-hailing systems demand affect individual transport regulation? Res. Transp. Econ. 2018, 69, 600–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moody, J.; Middleton, S.; Zhao, J. Rider-to-rider discriminatory attitudes and ridesharing behavior. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2019, 62, 258–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, J.; Li, X.; Zhou, F.; Hao, W. Designing optimal autonomous vehicle sharing and reservation systems: A linear programming approach. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 84, 124–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, L.; Mak, H.-Y.; Rong, Y.; Shen, Z.-J.M. Service Region Design for Urban Electric Vehicle Sharing Systems. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 2017, 19, 309–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shaheen, S.A.; Mallery, M.A.; Kingsley, K.J. Personal vehicle sharing services in North America. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2012, 3, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Putriya, A.R.; Hermawan, P.; Novani, S.; Putro, U.S. Peer-to-Peer Accomodation Service Process: A Framework of Service Blueprint. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Business and Management Research (ICBMR 2018), Bali, Indonesia, 7–8 November 2019; Atlantis Press: Pairs, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Morgan, T.P. Airbnb shares the keys to its infrastructure. Next Platf. 2018, 1–5. Available online: https://www.nextplatform.com/2015/09/10/airbnb-shares-the-keys-to-its-infrastructure/ (accessed on 17 June 2020).
- Robertson, D.; Oliver, C.; Nost, E. Short-term rentals as digitally-mediated tourism gentrification: Impacts on housing in New Orleans. Tour. Geogr. 2020, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, C.; Zhu, F.; McDonald, R. HomeAway: Organizing the Vacation Rental Industry. Harvard Bus. Sch. Cases 2014, 615–636, 1–19. Available online: https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/pages/item.aspx?num=48271 (accessed on 12 June 2020).
- Tussyadiah, I.; Pesonen, J. Impacts of Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Use on Travel Patterns. J. Travel Res. 2016, 55, 1022–1040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soerjoatmodjo, G.W.L.; Bagasworo, D.W.; Joshua, G.; Kalesaran, T.; Van Den Broek, K.F. Sharing workspace, sharing knowledge: Knowledge sharing amongst entrepreneurs in Jakarta co-working spaces. In International Conference on Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management and Organisational Learning, ICICKM; Academic Conferences International Limited: Reading, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Glusac, E. Cooler, Farther and Less Crowded: The Rise of ‘Undertourism’. 2019. Available online: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/29/travel/colorado-overtourism.html (accessed on 20 May 2020).
- Jiang, X.; Chew, E.P.; Lee, L.H.; Tan, K.C. Short-term space allocation for storage yard management in a transshipment hub port. OR Spectr. 2014, 36, 879–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, X.; Park, K.T.; Kim, K.H. Storage space sharing among container handling companies. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2019, 127, 111–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Psaras, I.; Saino, L.; Pavlou, G. Revisiting resource pooling: The case for in-network resource sharing. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks, HotNets 2014, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 27–28 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Madir, J.; Chapman, P. CROWDFUNDING. In FinTech; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Belleflamme, P.M.; Lambert, T.; Schwienbacher, A. Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. J. Bus. Ventur. 2014, 29, 585–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Quesada, C.E. de Crowdfunding in Europe. In European Contract Law in the Digital Age; Intersentia: Cambridge, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ambrus, A.; Mobius, M.; Szeidl, A. Consumption Risk-Sharing in Social Networks. Am. Econ. Rev. 2014, 104, 149–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, H.; Ge, Y.; Liu, Q.; Wang, G.; Chen, E.; Zhang, H. P2P lending survey: Platforms, recent advances and prospects. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 2017, 8, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suryono, R.R.; Purwandari, B.; Budi, I. Peer to Peer (P2P) Lending Problems and Potential Solutions: A Systematic Literature Review. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 161, 204–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeh, Y.-C.; Yeh, Y.-L.; Chen, Y.-H. From knowledge sharing to knowledge creation: A blended knowledge-management model for improving university students’ creativity. Think. Ski. Creat. 2012, 7, 245–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alowayr, A.; Badii, A. Review of Monitoring Tools for E-Learning Platforms. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. 2014, 6, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montero-Fleta, B.; Pérez-Sabater, C. Knowledge construction and knowledge sharing: A wiki-based approach. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 28, 622–627. [Google Scholar]
- Dontcheva, M.; Morris, R.; Brandt, J.; Gerber, E.M. Combining crowdsourcing and learning to improve engagement and performance. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, 26 April–1 May 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Hagiu, A.; Wright, J. The status of workers and platforms in the sharing economy. J. Econ. Manag. Strat. 2019, 28, 97–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sumra, K.B.; Bing, W. Crowdsourcing in Local Public Administration: Importance of Online Platforms. Int. J. Public Adm. Digit. Age 2016, 3, 28–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gattellari, M.; Butow, P.; Tattersall, M.H. Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc. Sci. Med. 2001, 52, 1865–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blasimme, A.; Fadda, M.; Schneider, M.; Vayena, E. Data Sharing For Precision Medicine: Policy Lessons and Future Directions. Health Aff. 2018, 37, 702–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rowe, E.A. Sharing data. Iowa Law Rev. 2018, 104, 287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belk, R. You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 1595–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longo, D.L.; Drazen, J.M. Data Sharing. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 374, 276–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Den Eynden, A.V.; Corti, L.; Bishop, L.; Horton, L. Managing and Sharing Data; UK Data Archive, University of Essex: Colchester, UK, 2011; ISBN 1904059783. [Google Scholar]
- Zafar, R.; Mahmood, A.; Razzaq, S.; Ali, W.; Naeem, U.; Shehzad, K. Prosumer based energy management and sharing in smart grid. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 1675–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, W.; Wu, W.; Wang, H.-M.; Cheng, X.-Q.; Chen, H.-J.; Zhou, Z.-H.; Ding, R. Crowd intelligence in AI 2.0 era. Front. Inf. Technol. Electron. Eng. 2017, 18, 15–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nwosu, J.C. Empirical Assessment of E-Commerce Use through Smart Phones among Babcock University Undergraduate Students in Ogun State, Nigeria. KIU J. Soc. Sci. 2017, 3, 297–305. [Google Scholar]
- Aswathy, R.; Malavika, G. Customer Perception towards Internet Selling Platforms through Opinion Mining. Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2020, 9, 861–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piscicelli, L.; Ludden, G.D.; Cooper, T. What makes a sustainable business model successful? An empirical comparison of two peer-to-peer goods-sharing platforms. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 4580–4591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, E.; McLachlan, R.; Naaman, M. TAMIES: A Study and Model of Adoption in P2P Resource Sharing and Indirect Exchange Systems. In CSCW ‘17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 2385–2396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fedorowicz, J.; Gogan, J.L.; Culnan, M.J. Barriers to Interorganizational Information Sharing in e-Government: A Stakeholder Analysis. Inf. Soc. 2010, 26, 315–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hobson, S.F.; Anand, R.; Yang, J.; Lee, J. towards Interoperability in Municipal Government: A Study of Information Sharing Practices. In Proceedings of the Haptics: Science, Technology, Applications; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; Volume 6946, pp. 233–247. [Google Scholar]
- Qiu, X.; Luo, H.; Xu, G.; Zhong, R.Y.; Huang, G.Q. Physical assets and service sharing for IoT-enabled Supply Hub in Industrial Park (SHIP). Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2015, 159, 4–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siren, A.; Haustein, S. Baby boomers’ mobility patterns and preferences: What are the implications for future transport? Transp. Policy 2013, 29, 136–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tavares, A.F.; Feiock, R.C. Intermunicipal Cooperation and Regional Governance in Europe: An Institutional Collective Action Framework. In Proceedings of the Annual Meetings of the European Consortium for Political Research, Glasgow, Scotland, 3–6 September 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Agrawal, R.; Mishra, S.; Mishra, A.; Chand, G.; Agarwal, G.; Agarwal, A.; Verma, A.K. Role of Telemedicine Technology in Endocrine Surgery Knowledge Sharing. Telemed. e-Health 2014, 20, 868–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Purdy, E.; Thoma, B.; Bednarczyk, J.; Migneault, D.; Sherbino, J. The use of free online educational resources by Canadian emergency medicine residents and program directors. CJEM 2015, 17, 101–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armitage, A.; Keeble-Allen, D. Undertaking a structured literature review or structuring a literature review: Tales from the field. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods 2008, 6, 103–114. [Google Scholar]
- Rowley, J.; Slack, F. Conducting a Literature Review. Manag. Res. News 2004, 27, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez, J.C.; Carrillo, M.H.; Montoya-Torres, J.R. Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport systems: A literature review. Ann. Oper. Res. 2014, 226, 69–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehmann, J.; Frehe, V.; Teuteberg, F. Crowd Logistics—A Lit erature Review and Maturity Model; epubli GmbH: Berlin, Germany, 2015; ISBN 9783737540599. [Google Scholar]
- Hunter, G.W.; Sagoe, G.; Vettorato, D.; Jiayu, D. Sustainability of Low Carbon City Initiatives in China: A Comprehensive Literature Review. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pereira, G.V.; Parycek, P.; Falco, E.; Kleinhans, R. Smart governance in the context of smart cities: A literature review. Inf. Polity 2018, 23, 143–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, W.; Dong, J.; Hwang, B.-G.; Ren, R.; Chen, Z. A Scientometrics Review on City Logistics Literature: Research Trends, Advanced Theory and Practice. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Durand, A.; Harms, L.; Hoogendoorn-lanser, S.; Zijlstra, T. Mobility-as-a-Service and Changes in Travel Preferences and Travel Behaviour: A Literature Review; KiM Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis: Hague, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Anand, N.; Quak, H.; Van Duin, R.; Tavasszy, L. City Logistics Modeling Efforts: Trends and Gaps—A Review. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 39, 101–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Snyder, H. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 104, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaberek-Karwacka, G. The New Urbanism Approach in City Logistics Planning and Development. Searching for Solutions on the Gothenburg and Gdansk Case Studies. Res. J. Univ. Gdańsk. Transp. Econ. Logist. 2017, 71, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giacomoni, M.H.; Kanta, L.; Zechman, E.M. Complex Adaptive Systems Approach to Simulate the Sustainability of Water Resources and Urbanization. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2013, 149, 554–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uziene, L. City’s Intellectual Capital Framework: The Performance Measurement Point of View. Econ. Manag. 2013, 18, 198–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vith, S.; Oberg, A.; Höllerer, M.A.; Meyer, R.E. Envisioning the ‘Sharing City’: Governance Strategies for the Sharing Economy. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 159, 1023–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Williams, R. Managing an Integrated, Financially Sustainable Parking District. In Parking Management for Smart Growth; Island Press: Columbia, WA, USA, 2015; pp. 97–136. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Q.; Song, D. How does environmental regulation break the resource curse: Theoretical and empirical study on China. Resour. Policy 2019, 64, 101480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Widener, M.N. Shared Spatial Regulating in Sharing-Economy Districts. SSRN Electron. J. 2015, 11, 111–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- An, X.; Xu, S.; Mu, Y.; Wang, W.; Bai, X.Y.; Dawson, A.; Han, H. Meta-synthetic support frameworks for reuse of government information resources on city travel and traffic: The case of Beijing. Program 2012, 46, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borowiak, C.; Ji, M. Taxi co-ops versus Uber: Struggles for workplace democracy in the sharing economy. J. Labor Soc. 2019, 22, 165–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dulal, H.B. Making cities resilient to climate change: Identifying “win–win” interventions. Local Environ. 2017, 22, 106–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erickson, K.; Sørensen, I. Regulating the sharing economy. Internet Policy Rev. 2016, 5, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, H.-Q.; Li, X.; Soh, C.K. An integrated strategy for sustainable development of the urban underground: From strategic, economic and societal aspects. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2016, 55, 67–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maes, M.J.; Jones, G.; Toledano, M.B.; Milligan, B. Mapping synergies and trade-offs between urban ecosystems and the sustainable development goals. Environ. Sci. Policy 2019, 93, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pasalar, C.; Dewey Hallowell, G. Sharing Economies, Technologies, and the Changing Nature of Urban Public Space in Medium-Sized Cities. Econ. Compart. Tecnol. Nat. Cambiante Espac. Público Urbano Ciudad. Medias. 2019, 13, 418–433. [Google Scholar]
- Serafimova, T. Covid-19: An Opportunity to Redesign Mobility towards Greater Sustainability and Resilience; European University Institute: Fiesole, Italy, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Mao, R.; Bao, Y.; Huang, Z.; Liu, Q.; Liu, G. High-Resolution Mapping of the Urban Built Environment Stocks in Beijing. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 5345–5355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Roh, T.H. The Sharing Economy: Business Cases of Social Enterprises Using Collaborative Networks. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2016, 91, 502–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Katrini, E. Sharing Culture: On definitions, values, and emergence. Sociol. Rev. 2018, 66, 425–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramachandra, T.V.; Setturu, B. Sustainable Management of Bannerghatta National Park, India, with the Insights in Land Cover Dynamics. FIIB Bus. Rev. 2019, 8, 118–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLaren, D.; Agyeman, J. Case Study: Seoul. In Sharing Cities: A Case for Truly Smart and Sustainable Cities; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015; pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, X.M.; Ho, C.H.; Xia, L.T. Analysis of image and molding of sharing bicycle frame in urban traffic efficiency based on fuzzy theory. Ekoloji 2018, 27, 1161–1166. [Google Scholar]
- Penz, E.; Hartl, B.; Hofmann, E. Collectively Building a Sustainable Sharing Economy Based on Trust and Regulation. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cappellaro, F.; Cutaia, L.; Innella, C.; Meloni, C.; Pentassuglia, R.; Porretto, V. Investigating circular economy urban practices in Centocelle, Rome district. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. 2019, 18, 2145–2153. [Google Scholar]
- Rönkkö, E.; Herneoja, A.; Oikarinen, E. Cybernetics and the 4D Smart City: Smartness as Awareness. Challenges 2018, 9, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ljungholm, D.P. Sharing economy, regulatory arbitrage, and urban governance: How city space shapes economic growth and innovation. Geopolit. Hist. Int. Relat. 2018, 10, 174–180. [Google Scholar]
- Pouri, M.J.; Hilty, L.M. Conceptualizing the Digital Sharing Economy in the Context of Sustainability. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rong, K.; Hu, J.; Ma, Y.; Lim, M.K.; Liu, Y.; Lu, C. The sharing economy and its implications for sustainable value chains. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 130, 188–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saberian, F. The Effect of Electronic Human Resources Management on Quality of Services Provided by Human Resources in the Insurance Industry (Case Study: Iran Insurance Company in Tehran city). Int. J. Sci. Manag. Dev. 2015, 3, 560–567. [Google Scholar]
- Tandé, A. Implementing a diversity policy through public incentives: Diversity Plans in companies of the Brussels-Capital Region. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 2017, 43, 1731–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vo, A.; Bartram, T. The adoption, character and impact of strategic human resource management: A case study of two large metropolitan Vietnamese public hospitals. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2012, 23, 3758–3775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oyoo, R.; Leemans, R.; Mol, A.P.J. Future projections of urban waste flows aand their impacts in African metropolises cities. Int. J. Environ. Res. 2011, 5, 705–724. [Google Scholar]
- Navickas, V.; Feiferytė, A.; Švažas, M. The concept of the circular economy as a competitiveness factor: Macro-economic aspect. Vadyb. J. Manag. 2015, 2, 63–72. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, J.; Qian, L.-X.; Shen, J. From value co-creation to value co-destruction? The case of dockless bike sharing in China. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2019, 71, 169–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prakash, G.; Pathak, P. Intention to buy eco-friendly packaged products among young consumers of India: A study on developing nation. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, S.P.; Deshmukh, S.S. Geo-Location Big Data Based Data Mining Architecture Using MongoDB For Collaborative E-Initiative Based Crowd-sourced Traffic Management System. Int. J. Adv. Res. Comput. Sci. 2013, 4, 148. [Google Scholar]
- Qu, Y.; Long, H. The economic and environmental effects of land use transitions under rapid urbanization and the implications for land use management. Habitat Int. 2018, 82, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bae, Y.; Joo, Y.M. Pathways to meet critical success factors for local PPPs: The cases of urban transport infrastructure in Korean cities. Cities 2016, 53, 35–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Lozano, J.J.; Martin-Guzman, M.; Martin-Avila, J.; García-Cerezo, A. A Wireless Sensor Network for Urban Traffic Characterization and Trend Monitoring. Sensors 2015, 15, 26143–26169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pournaras, E.; Yao, M.; Helbing, D. Self-regulating supply–demand systems. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2017, 76, 73–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Al-Smadi, A.M.; Alsmadi, M.K.; Baareh, A.K.; Almarashdeh, I.; Abouelmagd, H.; Ahmed, O.S.S. Emergent situations for smart cities: A survey. Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2019, 9, 4777–4787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, C.; Qu, Z.; Blumm, N.; Barabasi, A.-L. Limits of Predictability in Human Mobility. Science 2010, 327, 1018–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, T.-C.; Lin, C.-K.; Kan, Y.-W. An Advanced ICTVSS Model for Real-Time Vehicle Traffic Applications. Sensors 2019, 19, 4134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, X.; Bian, M.; Chen, L.; Gao, Z. A numerical-analysis-based optimization method for location selection for planning residential areas in grid transportation networks. Automatika 2017, 58, 460–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rotuna, C.; Gheorghita, A.; Zamfiroiu, A.; Smada, D.-M. Smart City Ecosystem Using Blockchain Technology. Inform. Econ. 2019, 23, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennati, S.; Dusparic, I.; Shinde, R.; Jonker, C.M. Volunteers in the Smart City: Comparison of Contribution Strategies on Human-Centered Measures. Sensors 2018, 18, 3707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Curtis, S.K.; Lehner, M. Defining the Sharing Economy for Sustainability. Sustainability 2019, 11, 567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bielinski, T.; Kwapisz, A.; Ważna, A. Bike-Sharing Systems in Poland. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tjandraatmadja, G.; Sharma, A.K.; Grant, T.; Pamminger, F. A Decision Support Methodology for Integrated Urban Water Management in Remote Settlements. Water Resour. Manag. 2012, 27, 433–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Escriva-Bou, A.; Lund, J.R.; Pulido-Velazquez, M.; Hui, R.; Medellín-Azuara, J. Developing a water-energy-GHG emissions modeling framework: Insights from an application to California’s water system. Environ. Model. Softw. 2018, 109, 54–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lane, R.; Bettini, Y.; McCallum, T.; Head, B.W. The interaction of risk allocation and governance arrangements in innovative urban stormwater and recycling projects. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 164, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ravalde, T.; Keirstead, J. A Database to Facilitate a Process-Oriented Approach to Urban Metabolism. J. Ind. Ecol. 2017, 21, 282–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vicuña, S.; Ricalde, I.; Melo, O.; Tomlison, J.; Harou, J.J.; Characklis, G. Climate change adaptation in regulated water utilities. Geophys. Res. Abstr. 2019, 21, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Boulomytis, V.T.G.; Imteaz, M.A.; Zuffo, A.C.; Alves, C.D. Analysis of the Urbanisation Effects on the Increase of Flood Susceptibility in Coastal Areas. Theor. Empir. Res. Urban Manag. 2016, 11, 30–45. [Google Scholar]
- Somvanshi, S.S.; Bhalla, O.; Kunwar, P.; Singh, M.; Singh, P. Monitoring spatial LULC changes and its growth prediction based on statistical models and earth observation datasets of Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, India. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 22, 1073–1091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rutkowska-Gurak, A.; Adamska, A. Sharing economy and the city. Int. J. Manag. Econ. 2019, 55, 346–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moon, M.J. Government-driven Sharing Economy: Lessons from the Sharing City Initiative of the Seoul Metropolitan Government. J. Dev. Soc. 2017, 33, 223–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLaren, D.; Agyeman, J. Sharing Cities: A Case for Truly Smart and Sustainable Cities; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015; ISBN 9780262329705. [Google Scholar]
- Hasan, R.; Birgach, M. Critical success factors behind the sustainability of the Sharing Economy. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/ACIS 14th International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications, SERA 2016, Towson, MD, USA, 8–10 June 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Scavarda, A.; Daú, G.; Scavarda, L.F.; Azevedo, B.D.; Korzenowski, A.L. Social and ecological approaches in urban interfaces: A sharing economy management framework. Sci. Total. Environ. 2020, 713, 134407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huefner, R.J. The sharing economy: Implications for revenue management. J. Revenue Pricing Manag. 2015, 14, 296–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teubner, T.; Berlin, T.; Flath, C.M. University of Würzburg Privacy in the Sharing Economy. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2019, 20, 213–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taranic, I.; Behrens, A.; Topi, C. Understanding the Circular Economy in Europe, from Resource Efficiency to Sharing Platforms: The CEPS Framework. 2016. Available online: https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/understanding-circular-economy-europe-resource-efficiency-sharing-platforms-ceps/ (accessed on 28 June 2020).
No. | Group | Solution | Characteristics | Practice | Sources | Resources Managed [25] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | MOBILITY | Ride-sharing | Matching drivers of private vehicles to those seeking local transportation services Resources(R): private vehicle, Smartphone Application Support (SAS): yes | Blablacar (France) | [49,50,51,52,53] | Information, human, material |
2 | Ride sourcing | Enabling traveler the request of real-time ride by part-time riders R: own vehicle of driver; SAS: yes | Uber (US), Bolt (Estonia) | [54] | Information, material, human | |
3 | Ride splitting | Using the shared vehicle and splitting the fare R: shared vehicle; SAS: yes | Uberpool (US) | [55,56,57] | Information, material, money | |
4 | Vehicle sharing | Car rental where people rent cars for short periods of time R: vehicles owned by sharing company; SAS: yes | Traficar (Poland), MiiMove (Poland), zipcar (US) | [58,59,60] | Information, material | |
5 | SPACES | Accommodation | Peer-to-peer, ICT-enabled, short-term renting, R: private house/apartment SAS: no/yes | Airnbnb (US), HomeAway (US) | [61,62,63,64,65] | Information, material |
6 | Workspace | Workstations rented by remote employees, who may not have a central office R: space; SAS: no | WeWork (US), shareDesk (IS) | [66,67] | Information, material | |
7 | Storage space | Connecting people in need of storage space with people who have space to share R: unused storage space; SAS: mostly yes | MakeSpace (US), SpaceOut (US) | [68,69,70] | Information, material | |
9 | FINANCING | Crowdfunding | Funding a project or venture by raising small amounts of money from a large number of people, typically via the Internet. R: money; SAS: no | Gofundme (US), Kickstarter (US) | [71,72,73] | Information, money |
10 | Insurance | Allows members to increase and ensure each others’ deductible, thus lowering the premium paid for their individual auto insurance policy. R: money; SAS: yes (sometimes) | insPeer (France), friendsurance (Germany) | [74] | Information, money | |
11 | Money lending | Online credit marketplace at a lower cost than traditional lending programs, passing the savings on to borrowers in the form of lower rates R: money; SAS: mostly yes | lendingClub (US), Prosper (US) | [35,75,76] | Information, money | |
12 | LEARNING/SKILLS | Open courses | Creating a set of online tools that help educate people in various spheres by offering short lessons in the form of videos R: skills; SAS: no/yes | Udemy (US), Khanacademy (US) | [77,78] | Information |
13 | Peer-to-peer learning | Online learning community for people who want to learn from educational videos or from other by joining the learning circles R; skills; SAS: no/yes | P2PU (US), Skillshare (US) | [79,80] | Information, human | |
14 | Professional services | Online platforms that connect professionals to conduct business or to share experiences R: professional skills; SAS: no/yes | Upwork (US), crowdspring (US [39]) | [81,82] | Information, human | |
15 | HEALTH | Medical services | Provision of medical services online thus elimination of barriers that prevent people from traveling to appointments R: medical skills; SAS: yes | Dr. on demand (US), CrowdMed (US) | [39] | Information, human |
16 | Medical equipment | Reallocates medical equipment, so hospitals make the best use of assets they already own, decreasing redundant purchases and costly rentals R: medical equipment; SAS: no/yes | Cohealo (US) | [83,84] | Information, material | |
18 | UTILITIES | Telecommunication | Peer-to-peer mobile Internet connection sharing with faster and more efficient data transmissions by automatically and actively choosing and switching to the best available network without requiring users to manually sift through available networks to find the best one available R: data transmission; SAS: yes | Open Garden (US) | [85,86] | Information |
19 | Information | Developing, sharing and reusing the data of companies and public administrations R: data; SAS: yes | Opendatasoft (France) | [87,88] | Information | |
20 | Energy | Enabling using green energy produced by independent producers, sold with help of dedicated platforms to individuals and business customers R: Energy; SAS: yes | Vandebron (Netherlands), Gridmates (US) | [89,90] | Information, material | |
21 | GENERAL GOODS | Used/unused products | Reusing and recycling surplus redundant resources such as furniture, equipment, fixtures and fittings within your organization R: goods; SAS: no/yes | letgo (US), OLX (France) | [91,92] | Information, material |
22 | Loaner products | Online service that provides designer dress and accessory rentals. R: goods; SAS: yes | Rent the runway (US), peerby (Netherlands) | [93,94] | Information, material |
No. | Group | Solution | Characteristics | Practice | Sources | Resources Managed [25] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | ASSETS | Assets sharing | The initiative concerns city-owned machinery, equipment and vehicles that are shared among departments or with neighboring municipalities | Munirent | [95,96] | Material, information |
2. | Assets tracking | The solution is related to asset-tracking, rental and sale features to manage surplus equipment. It is used by the cities to create product subscription services. | myTurn | [97,98] | Information, material | |
3. | SPACES | Municipal spaces sharing | Civic spaces, such as gardens, subways, city-run schools, hospitals and libraries, and city recreational centers. Idle capacity in municipal spaces can be used for urban farming, pop-up shops, parking and start-up hubs, supporting local business and culture | NYC “This land is your land” initiative | [48] | Material, information |
4. | SERVICES | Municipal services sharing | Municipal authorities have collaborative agreements in many areas, to facilitate providing services to the citizens they serve and have been working together in this way since long before the sharing economy | Alberta, Canada: “Intermunicipal Collaboration Framework” | [99] | Information, human |
5. | SKILLS | Municipal residents’ skills sharing | Sharing of residents’ skills or professional experiences organized by the municipalities | “My Real Trip” Seoul | [100] | Human, information |
6. | Municipal time-banking | Residents give up their time for public tasks while having access to the public resources | “Programme of Time and Caring Economy” Barcelona | [101] | Human, information |
Area of Assessment | Criterion (Subarea) | Lit. Sources | Resources Management—Short Description | General Kind of Addressed Resources | Sharing Economy Solutions Group |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ADMINISTRATIVE | Constituting regulatory frames (regulating and licensing) | [19,23,45,46,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125] | Regulations should address most of the issues of resources management in sharing economy (most of the social elements of sharing economy are excluded), but in particular:
They should be constituted at local, national and macro levels (e.g., EU-level). Governance gap can occur (technology development faster than regulation). | All | All |
Development policies—public strategy | [45,115,116,119,120,123] | Creating a public development policy (strategy or sustainable urban mobility plan; by local authorities) organizing the life of the city. The most popular are promotion and regulation, usually used together. | All | All except financing | |
Environmental policies | [6,9,17,19,46,120,122,124,125,126,127,128] | Can be a part of development policy or a separate one. Include the regulations and recommendations about, for example, resilience for climate changes, limiting GHG emissions, use of energy, sharing of public resources. Access instead of ownership thus seems both sensible and resource efficient. | Information Material | Mobility, spaces, health, municipal goods | |
Co-governance | [6,22,25,26,27,40,41,43,44,51,52,54,55,56,57] | Deciding democratically about the investments and solutions while city authorities are leaders (public consultation). Close collaboration with local authorities—essential for the fair allocation of the generated benefits within local communities—also based on collaborative consumption. Discussions and bilateral agreements on a series of issues: city taxation, local employment, investment in infrastructure, sharing assets, improving living standards. Includes collaboration of resources management between different groups of stakeholders, excluding the public ones. | Human Money | Municipal goods | |
SOCIAL | Social structure and network | [8,14,18,23,45,115,116,117,119,122,129,130,131,132] | Usually, urban communities are very heterogeneous populations with a rich variety of relationship networks and governing mechanisms. The structure including different stakeholder groups and subgroups—e.g.,
| Human | All |
Social values | [6,45,116,129,130] | Social values perceived as the priorities, trust to other people, trust to local authorities and other stakeholders, attitude to the possession and use of things, social and property status, etc. The efforts of the social enterprises (also sharing economy enterprises) have fallen short against conflicts between private profit and social values; so-called “pseudo-sharing” can be distinguished, by for-profit orientation, and the absence of feelings of being a part of the community. In some way, sharing economy is based on solidarity, and does not aim for profit. Private sharing stimulates more prosocial behavior | Human | All | |
Social interaction/communication and information sharing | [6,8,28,45,115,116,119,122,123,126,130,133,134,135,136,137,138,139] | Can also be called social communication, information sharing, social experience, activity, cohesion, resilience. It is a set of relations between peers in a peer-to-peer network, not between groups of peers (like stakeholders) but individual ones. A base for those is mutual trust and the idea of “shaping a warm city in terms of people’s heart.” Its tools are, for example, co-workings, community areas (e.g., gardens). | Human | Municipal goods, learning/skills, utilities, general goods | |
Human resources management | [23,115,120,140,141,142] | Aimed at improving labor conditions, including talent management. It is especially important in developing countries where the informal economy is usually large, as are the structural inequalities and discrimination. Sharing economy seems to be accessible to all, but not where the digital exclusion is high. Most workers or “entrepreneurial consumers” have full-time jobs (also that are well-paying), but use the platforms to augment their income. Its tools can be, for example, e-learning, e-assessment, e-rewarding—eHRM. | Human | Learning/skills | |
Intellectual capital of city | [115] | Includes creating, sharing and using knowledge stimulating city’s renewal and growth. In urban communities, knowledge is often deeply anchored and affected by remote or recent history. In cities, change is typically a slow, gradual process determined by relationships between key stakeholders. There are four categories of city’s intellectual resources: processes, people, market and renewal, and development. In this field, cities can be characterized by the level of creativeness, culture, entertainment, innovation, intelligence, learning, science, service, technology (also being smart) and artistic and historical heritage, as well as the success of the city’s image strategy implementation Tools: active scientific, industrial and technology parks. In fact, it can be monetized, so can concern not only human and information resources but also money. | Human, information | Learning/skills | |
ECONOMIC | Economic framework | [8,17,115,117,119] | Competitive cities accumulate both intellectual and financial capital complementing each other, forming the “economic breakthrough conditions”. However, financial incentives and market success important for businesses are less relevant in motivating urban communities. For them, more important can be quality of life, level of participation, identity and vision. | Money, human | All, but mostly financing |
Cost savings | [17,23,119,137,143] | Cost savings for different groups of stakeholders. Usually, they are presented for the cost of ownership, the unused capacity of means of transport, effective waste management and reusing resources. Tools: spreadsheets for calculating costs, applications and platforms for cost controlling. | Money, material | All | |
Waste reduction | [15,17,122,128,135,143,144] | In sharing economy, it is possible to reduce different kinds of waste—e.g., the electrical and electronic equipment, end-of-life vehicles, their parts, or even usual municipal waste. Can be perceived partially as an environmental subarea. | Material | Mobility, general goods, municipal goods | |
Additional income | [8,45,117,119,122,137,145] | Generating additional income for peers being service providers. Enabling the development of a permanent class of small business owners/partners, being or not serial entrepreneurs. Diversity of business models produces different kinds of income mechanisms. | Money | All, but mostly financing, except municipal goods | |
Focus on local economy | [133,145,146,147,148] | Additional income for service providers should produce the tax income for local economy (depending on the taxation system in particular countries). If the practice includes monetary exchanges, they all directly benefit those involved so create a local economy. This means that the assets involved are highly specific to avoid opportunism by external stakeholders. | Money | All | |
Accessibility | [8,117,133,137,145] | The practice strives to be open to all, and its identity is redefined as people join. Additionally, very important are the constant access to solutions and flexible capacity. | Material, information | All | |
Financial resources | [119,122,149] | The access to financial resources and their structure build the business model together. One of the areas within this field is the careful management of PPPs and financial loans because of political interests; the need for strict regulations and mechanisms to share the risk—a lack of them is a barrier. | Money | All, but mostly financing | |
Use of capacity | [6,28,117,124,126,131,137,140] | Using the capacity of resources (their productivity), both physical and non-physical resources, coordinated and non-coordinated, in the ground and in the underground urbanization. An example can be using the capacity of spaces, such as park spaces, parks, water resources; in fact, all of the resources shared within the city, both public and private. | Material, information | All | |
Insurance mechanisms | [46,119] | Insurance can be related to many issues in sharing economy: means of transport, drivers, whole companies, peers and investments. The barrier here is avoiding healthcare insurance by employers. Producers meet or exceed industry certification standards (including providing sufficient floor area to accommodate employees, ample parking, delivery vehicle access points, fire and plumbing safety and sanitation of internal operations, proper insurance coverage of building and other insurance. | Money, information | All, but mostly financing | |
INFRASTRUCTURAL/TECHNOLOGICAL | V-2-X communication | [147,150,151] | Preparing the system for communication between different objects, especially between vehicles and others, but also, for example, between apartments and houses with mobile devices (when flat-sharing systems) | Material, information | Mobility, spaces, health |
Real-time information sharing on IoT smart city platforms | [23,117,119,120,122,123,126,129,130,136,138,139,145,147,150,151,152,153,154,155,156] | The city (especially local authorities) should focus on building smart environments (with free wireless internet, online parking systems, online trip planning systems for planning routes and the use of means of transport, traffic control, commercial sharing platforms and public platforms. blockchain etc.) Additionally, tools for measuring the traffic can be, for example, congestion indices. Very important is avoiding information asymmetry. | Information | All except learning/skills and spaces | |
Data acquisition and processing | [23,45,46,117,119,124,127,137,138,140,147,152,157,158] | In this group the following practices and tools should be checked: mapping software tools to show online, real-time traffic updates, traffic flow damaged roads, accidents, SMS services for traffic updates. Those tools can help in maintaining road light and the signaling system and implementing policies to modernize the current traffic management, Various IT and software programming with flexible architecture (modular) for data acquisition from dispersed sources (cameras, phones, intelligent transport systems, drones, quad-copters, social networks, GIS and sensor networks, also for environmental monitoring). The IT should be made as a control tower, similarly to those ideas used in supply chain management (centralized data storage, processing and mining). | Information | All | |
Green infrastructure | [6,8,28,45,118,119,128,131,134,135,148,159] | Planning, building and maintaining green infrastructure in order to enhance the sustainable production of ecosystem services, but also all the services within the urban area. This group includes both the elements of technical nature: systems of green gardens, bike-sharing systems and other vehicle-sharing systems. Can be perceived as partially environmental. | Material | Mobility, spaces, municipal goods | |
ENVIRONMENTAL | Water-related | [5,9,19,21,114,160,161,162,163,164,165] | The most popular in the resources management literature concerning urban areas. Includes practices such as: water recycling and reuse, water conservation, drinking water management, promoting modest water consumption among residents and other city users, stormwater storage, outdoor water-use restrictions, efficient irrigation. It can depend on climate, impact on agriculture. | Material | Municipal goods |
Land-related | [9,17,19,114,117,119,124,134,148,162,163,165,166] | Land-use is very linked to water management, air management and law restrictions. It can be divided into residential, commercial and industrial ones, with different specifics and potential kinds of pollution. It influences underground urbanization and agriculture; of course also forests. Positive phenomena can be afforestation or reforestation; negative ones—urbanization, deforestation, desertification, floods and abandonment of agricultural land. More technologically and non-environmentally, it can concern integrated parking management programs, encouraging alternative transportation (park and ride solutions), improvement of non-districts, get the right people to the right parking space, and support and enhance economic activity. Additionally, it can include on-street strategies (parking space management programs) as follows:
| Material | Municipal goods, spaces | |
Energy-related | [9,124,161,163] | Renewable and non-renewable, especially fossils, the energy efficiency of buildings and infrastructure, photovoltaics, the use of wind energy and underground (geothermal) energy. | Material | Municipal goods, utilities | |
Air-related | [9,131,163] | Air quality testing system, air quality management policy, monitoring with use of sensors, avoiding of air pollution by reducing traffic—e.g., bike-sharing systems, climate changes, reduction in GHG emissions influencing the buildings on the temperature in cities. | Information | Municipal goods, utilities |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Szmelter-Jarosz, A.; Rześny-Cieplińska, J.; Jezierski, A. Assessing Resources Management for Sharing Economy in Urban Logistics. Resources 2020, 9, 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9090113
Szmelter-Jarosz A, Rześny-Cieplińska J, Jezierski A. Assessing Resources Management for Sharing Economy in Urban Logistics. Resources. 2020; 9(9):113. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9090113
Chicago/Turabian StyleSzmelter-Jarosz, Agnieszka, Jagienka Rześny-Cieplińska, and Andrzej Jezierski. 2020. "Assessing Resources Management for Sharing Economy in Urban Logistics" Resources 9, no. 9: 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9090113