Cognitive mapping the topic of collaborative consumption

Cognitive mapping the topic of collaborative consumption

Joseph Kim-keung Ho

Independent Trainer

Hong Kong, China

Abstract: The topic of collaborative consumption in the subject of Business Management is complex. By making use of the cognitive mapping technique to conduct a brief literature review on the collaborative consumption topic, the writer renders a systemic image on the topic of collaborative consumption. The result of the study, in the form of a cognitive map on collaborative consumption, should be useful to those who are interested in the topics of cognitive mapping, literature review and collaborative consumption.

Key words: Collaborative consumption, cognitive mapping, literature review

Introduction

As a topic in Business Management, collaborative consumption is complex. It is thus useful to employ some learning tool to conduct its study, notably for literature review purpose. For a teacher in research methods, systems thinking and management, the writer is specifically interested in finding out how the cognitive mapping technique can be employed to go through a literature review on  collaborative consumption. This literature review exercise is taken up and reported in this article.

On the cognitive mapping exercise for literature review

Literature review is an important intellectual learning exercise, and not just for doing final year dissertation projects for tertiary education students. On these two topics of intellectual learning and literature review, the writer has compiled some e-learning resources. They are the Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page and the Literature on literature review Facebook page. Conducting literature review with the cognitive mapping technique is not novel in the cognitive mapping literature, see Eden and Simpson (1989), Eden, Jones and Sims (1983), Open University (n.d) and the Literature on cognitive mapping Facebook page. In this article, the specific steps involved in the cognitive mapping exercise are as follows:

Step 1: gather some main points from a number of academic journal articles on Collaborative consumption. This result in the production of a table (Table 1) with the main points and associated references.

Step 2: consolidate  the main points from Table 1 to come up with a table listing the cognitive map variables (re: Table 2).

Step 3: link up the cognitive  map variables in a plausible way to produce a cognitive map (re: Figure 1) on the topic under review.

The next section applies these three steps to produce a cognitive map on collaborative consumption.

Descriptions of cognitive map variables on the collaborative consumption topic

From the reading of some academic articles on Collaborative consumption, a number of main points (e.g., viewpoints, concepts and empirical findings) were gathered by the  writer. They are shown in Table 1 with explicit referencing on the points.

Table 1: Main points from the collaborative consumption literature and referencing

Main points from the collaborative consumption literature	Referencing
Point 1: "Collaborative Consumption (CC) is a new socioeconomic groundswell in which traditional sharing, bartering, lending, trading, renting, gifting, and swapping are redefined through technology and peer communities. It is characterized by access, instead of ownership, to products and services thereby benefiting people, profit and planet".	Van De Glind, P. 2013. "The consumer potential of collaborative consumption" Research MSc in Sustainable Development - Environmental Governance thesis report, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, the Netherlands, August [url address: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/280661].
Point 2: "There are three types of CC [collaborative consumption]: Product Service Systems, Redistribution Markets and Collaborative Lifestyles. Product Service Systems (PSS) imply the switch from an ownership mind-set towards a usage mind-set. ...... Redistribution Markets (RM) allow for the redistribution of goods from where they are not needed to any place or person where the goods are needed. ...... Collaborative Lifestyles (CL) include the sharing and exchanging of fewer tangible assets such as time, space, skills and money on the local level".	Van De Glind, P. 2013. "The consumer potential of collaborative consumption" Research MSc in Sustainable Development - Environmental Governance thesis report, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, the Netherlands, August [url address: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/280661].
Point 3: "The advancements of information technologies (IT) have led to a flurry of emerging consumption practices called collaborative consumption (Belk, 2010). Collaborative consumption refers to peer-to-peer-based activity of obtaining, giving, or sharing the access to goods and services ..... In collaborative consumption, consumers help each other and self-coordinate to attain mutual consumption benefits through sharing information and resources with each other".	Chen, H., C.W. Phang and C.H. Zhang. 2017. "Inviting Strangers to Participate in Collaborative Consumption through Mobile App" International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 33(6), Taylor & Francis: 523-535.
Point 4: "By facilitating connection and interaction among people, the Internet lowers communication cost and makes it easier to participate in collaborative consumption even when the participants do not know each other. Involving strangers in collaborative consumption (beyond close relational boundary) could greatly expand its scale and impact, making it an even more pervasive phenomenon and more profitable practice for firms".	Chen, H., C.W. Phang and C.H. Zhang. 2017. "Inviting Strangers to Participate in Collaborative Consumption through Mobile App" International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 33(6), Taylor & Francis: 523-535.
Point 5: "With further advancements in IT in particular the mobile technologies, the involvement of strangers in collaborative consumption can be extended from online to offline. For instance, a merchant can send mobile group discount coupon to its customers who appear near their shop, and ask them to invite others to enjoy the group discount together. Mobile technologies make this more feasible than before by allowing consumers to micro-coordinate their activities in real time and at the actual place of consumption".	Chen, H., C.W. Phang and C.H. Zhang. 2017. "Inviting Strangers to Participate in Collaborative Consumption through Mobile App" International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 33(6), Taylor & Francis: 523-535.
Point 6: "Past literature shows that people are turned away from ethical consumption because of economical and institutional reasons (Bray, Johns, & Kilburn, 2011; Eckhardt, Belk, & Devinney, 2010), yet with the development of new ways of consumption through the sharing economy, such as collaborative consumption (CC), these issues are addressed and potentially overcome".	Hamari, J., M. Sjöklint and A. Ukkonen. 2015. "The Sharing Economy: Why People Participate in Collaborative Consumption" Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology July: 1-13.
Point 7: "Despite a growing practical importance, there is a lack of quantitative studies on motivational factors that affect consumers’ attitudes and intentions towards CC [collaborative consumption]. The context is of especially great interest since participation in CC communities and services is generally characterized as driven by obligation to do good for other people and for the environment, such as sharing, helping others, and engaging in sustainable behavior (Prothero et al., 2011; Sacks, 2011). However, CC may also provide economic benefits (saving money, facilitating access to resources, and free-riding), which constitute more individualistic reasons for participating".	Hamari, J., M. Sjöklint and A. Ukkonen. 2015. "The Sharing Economy: Why People Participate in Collaborative Consumption" Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology July: 1-13.
Point 8: "We define the term CC [collaborative consumption] broadly as the peer-to-peer-based activity of obtaining, giving, or sharing access to goods and services, coordinated through community-based online services".	Hamari, J., M. Sjöklint and A. Ukkonen. 2015. "The Sharing Economy: Why People Participate in Collaborative Consumption" Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology July: 1-13.
Point 9: "Collaborative consumption enables the sharing of real-world assets and resources (Botsman and Rogers, 2011), typically through websites with peer-to-peer marketplaces where unused space, goods, skills, money, or services can be exchanged. Time magazine has proposed collaborative consumption as one of the “10 ideas that will change the world” (Walsh, 2011). However, there is currently little empirical evidence regarding the future growth of collaborative consumption and its likely economic impact on incumbent industries".	Barnes, S.J. and J. Mattsson. 2017. "Understanding collaborative consumption: Test of a theoretical model" Technological Forecasting & Social Change 118, Elsevier: 281-292.
Point 10: "Access-based consumption refers to “transactions that can be market mediated but where no transfer of ownership takes place” (Bardhi and Eckhardt, 2012, p. 881); such consumption is sometimes considered as pseudo-sharing when there are profit motives, a lack of feelings of community, and expectations of reciprocity".	Barnes, S.J. and J. Mattsson. 2017. "Understanding collaborative consumption: Test of a theoretical model" Technological Forecasting & Social Change 118, Elsevier: 281-292.
Point 11: "The drivers for collaborative consumption websites are broad and wide-ranging, including those that are political, economic, environmental and social. As the global economy continues to reel after the effects of the financial crisis, many are beginning to question the prevailing Western political and economic models. These models appear to have created economic disparity and division in society, consumerism and excessive use of resources that have contributed to current and future environmental problems".	Barnes, S.J. and J. Mattsson. 2017. "Understanding collaborative consumption: Test of a theoretical model" Technological Forecasting & Social Change 118, Elsevier: 281-292.
Point 12: "Ownership and possession practices have historically dominated the debate on consumer behavior and consumption (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Watkins, Denegri-Knott, & Molesworth, 2016). In fact, in many modern societies, the concept of ownership is still very well-rooted in people’s minds, and for many, ownership is something that they aim and work for. Ownership entitles consumers to use, control and convey what they possess (see e.g. Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Gaus, 2012; Moeller & Wittkowski, 2010). Belk (1985, 1988, 2007) has argued that possessions are major contributors to and reflections of our identities".	Lindblom, A. and T. Lindblom. 2017. "De-ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times" International Journal of Consumer Studies 41, Wiley: 431-438.
Point 13: "De-ownership orientation (DOO) reflects the importance that an individual places on sharing products and services rather than buying or owning them. In fact, de-ownership orientation can be seen as the direct opposite of the ownership orientation that emphasis the meaning of buying and owning. Whereas ownership orientated people aim and work for the ownership and absolute control over material goods, de-ownership oriented people prefer the sharing of resources between each other and they place more value on the access to resources rather than owning".	Lindblom, A. and T. Lindblom. 2017. "De-ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times" International Journal of Consumer Studies 41, Wiley: 431-438.
Point 14: "..... de-ownership orientation (DOO), attitudes towards collaborative consumption (CCA) and intentions to such behavior (CCI) are positively related concepts. In other words, consumers who can be regarded as de-ownership oriented are likely to perceive of collaborative consumption as favorable behavior, and they have also strong intentions to collaborative consumption".	Lindblom, A. and T. Lindblom. 2017. "De-ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times" International Journal of Consumer Studies 41, Wiley: 431-438.
Point 15: "In recent years, major newspapers and magazines have reported extensively on practices often referred to as Collaborative Consumption (CC), such as peer-to-peer (P2P) car renting, carpooling, P2P goods lending, bartering and reselling, P2Paccommodation, home exchange, cohousing, food sharing, community supported agriculture, and community gardening .... In parallel, these consumption forms have appeared on the agendas of some major cities(declaring themselves ‘sharing cities’, e.g. Seoul, San Francisco, Amsterdam (City of Amsterdam, 2016; McLaren and Agyeman,2015; Seoul Metropolitan Government, 2012)) and EU policy making (European Economic and Social Committee, 2013).1This strong public attention is reflected by a growing number of recent academic works dealing, for instance, with organisational/business models, the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of CC practices, as well as with value orientations/motivations and narratives underpinning them".	Huber, A. 2017. "Theorising the dynamics of collaborative consumption practices: A comparison of peer-to-peer accommodation and cohousing" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 53-69.
Point 16: "... due to its ‘versatility, commonality and wide applicability’, sharing may be a potential ‘solution to the world’s problems’ (Share the World’s Resources, 2014: 2), amongst them climate change and resource depletion. Botsman and Rogers (2011: 74) argue that CC may result in unintended positive environmental side effects − and hence free our societies to some extent from the burdensome work to reduce our environmental footprints: ‘Sustainability is often an unintended consequence of Collaborative Consumption. It is unintended in the sense that the initial or driving motivations (. . .) may not be about “being green”. (. . .) These positive unintended (. . .) consequences happen because sustainability and community are an inherent, inseparable part of Collaborative Consumption and not an after thought or add-on’. In addition, CC is also expected to have positive effects on social cohesion and community building".	Huber, A. 2017. "Theorising the dynamics of collaborative consumption practices: A comparison of peer-to-peer accommodation and cohousing" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 53-69.
Point 17: ".... ‘[c]ollaborative consumption is people coordinating the acquisition and distribution of a resource for a fee or other compensation. By including other compensation, the definition also encompasses bartering, trading, and swapping, which involve giving and receiving non-monetary compensation.’ (Belk, 2014: 1597) Two aspects deserve attention in this definition".	Huber, A. 2017. "Theorising the dynamics of collaborative consumption practices: A comparison of peer-to-peer accommodation and cohousing" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 53-69.
Point 18: "Collaborative consumption is an alternative way of doing business that can potentially reduce the environmental impacts of fashion, by prolonging the practical service life of clothes".	Zamani, B., G. Sandin and G.M. Peters. 2017. "Life cycle assessment of clothing libraries: can collaborative consumption reduce the environmental  impact of fast fashion?" Journal of Cleaner Production 162, Elsevier: 1368-1375.
Point 19: "In the fashion industry, an example of a collaborative consumption business model is the clothing library, in which a monthly membership fee allows members to borrow a specific number of clothing pieces in a set time, typically a few weeks. Successful small scale enterprises in Sweden demonstrate the business potential of clothing libraries, including Lånegarderoben (www.lanegarderoben.se) and Kl€adoteket (www.kladoteket.se)".	Zamani, B., G. Sandin and G.M. Peters. 2017. "Life cycle assessment of clothing libraries: can collaborative consumption reduce the environmental  impact of fast fashion?" Journal of Cleaner Production 162, Elsevier: 1368-1375.
Point 20: "Although still embryonic, collaborative consumption and the sharing economy have become social and economic phenomena in just a few short years, yet there is little consensus on how to define them. The current classificatory schema or typologies of platforms have some weaknesses. Sectoral classifications, technological functionality, and discursive modes of understanding sharing and collaborative economies all provide valuable insights, but when taken individually important gaps are evident, not least in their inter-system isolation, but most particularly when technology, such as platform architecture and user interfaces, is disassociated from wider social and economic conditions of possibility".	De Rivera, J., Ȧ. Gordo, P. Cassidy and A. Apesteguía. 2017. "A netnographic study of P2P collaborative consumption platforms' user interface and design" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 11-27.
Point 21: "Collaborative and sharing economy platforms offer a cultural antidote to individualism, through shared community values, and greater consumer empowerment, not only as purchasers in terms of choice and convenience, but most uniquely as prosumers,1; or micro-entrepreneurs (Torregosa, 2013). Through horizontal and participatory structures the sharing and collaborative model has proffered a paradigm shift that could “solve many of the complex challenges the world faces”..".	De Rivera, J., Ȧ. Gordo, P. Cassidy and A. Apesteguía. 2017. "A netnographic study of P2P collaborative consumption platforms' user interface and design" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 11-27.
Point 22: ".... the supposed benefits of a transition from ownership economies to access, collaboration and sharing haven’t convinced everyone (Eckhardt and Bardhi, 2015; Orsi and Doskow, 2009). The strongest criticism centres on whether collaboration and sharing isn’t just “capitalism on steroids” (Morovoz, 2013; para.10) extending its reach to previously informal parts of the economy, while diversifying economic risk to further destructured and precarious labour".	De Rivera, J., Ȧ. Gordo, P. Cassidy and A. Apesteguía. 2017. "A netnographic study of P2P collaborative consumption platforms' user interface and design" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 11-27.
Point 23: "Collaborative consumption, an economy system that reinvent traditional market behavior such as renting, lending, swapping, sharing, bartering, gifting through technology [1], is coming to Jakarta, a very crowded center of economy city with 9.9 million citizens (it increases to 11.5 million citizens at work hours)".	Santoso, A.S.and A.  Erdaka. 2015. "Customer Loyalty in Collaborative Consumption Model: Empirical Study of CRM for Product-Service System-Based e-Commerce in Indonesia" Procedia Computer Science 72, Elsevier: 543-551.
Point 24: "There was a finding that collaborative consumption has positive effects on lower-income consumers and may democratize access to a higher standard of living [7]. However, up until now, collaborative consumption research still lack of empirical study from developing country that has lower-income citizens such as Indonesia".	Santoso, A.S.and A.  Erdaka. 2015. "Customer Loyalty in Collaborative Consumption Model: Empirical Study of CRM for Product-Service System-Based e-Commerce in Indonesia" Procedia Computer Science 72, Elsevier: 543-551.

With a set of main points collected, the writer produces a set of cognitive map variables. These variables are informed by the set of main points from Table 1. These variables are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Cognitive map variables based on Table 1

Cognitive map variables	Literature review points
Variable 1: Drivers of interest in collaborative consumption	Point 3: "The advancements of information technologies (IT) have led to a flurry of emerging consumption practices called collaborative consumption (Belk, 2010). Collaborative consumption refers to peer-to-peer-based activity of obtaining, giving, or sharing the access to goods and services ..... In collaborative consumption, consumers help each other and self-coordinate to attain mutual consumption benefits through sharing information and resources with each other". Point 11: "The drivers for collaborative consumption websites are broad and wide-ranging, including those that are political, economic, environmental and social. As the global economy continues to reel after the effects of the financial crisis, many are beginning to question the prevailing Western political and economic models. These models appear to have created economic disparity and division in society, consumerism and excessive use of resources that have contributed to current and future environmental problems". Point 15: "In recent years, major newspapers and magazines have reported extensively on practices often referred to as Collaborative Consumption (CC), such as peer-to-peer (P2P) car renting, carpooling, P2P goods lending, bartering and reselling, P2Paccommodation, home exchange, cohousing, food sharing, community supported agriculture, and community gardening .... In parallel, these consumption forms have appeared on the agendas of some major cities(declaring themselves ‘sharing cities’, e.g. Seoul, San Francisco, Amsterdam (City of Amsterdam, 2016; McLaren and Agyeman,2015; Seoul Metropolitan Government, 2012)) and EU policy making (European Economic and Social Committee, 2013).1This strong public attention is reflected by a growing number of recent academic works dealing, for instance, with organisational/business models, the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of CC practices, as well as with value orientations/motivations and narratives underpinning them". Point 23: "Collaborative consumption, an economy system that reinvent traditional market behavior such as renting, lending, swapping, sharing, bartering, gifting through technology [1], is coming to Jakarta, a very crowded center of economy city with 9.9 million citizens (it increases to 11.5 million citizens at work hours)".
Variable 2: Improve intellectual understanding of collaborative consumption	Point 1: "Collaborative Consumption (CC) is a new socioeconomic groundswell in which traditional sharing, bartering, lending, trading, renting, gifting, and swapping are redefined through technology and peer communities. It is characterized by access, instead of ownership, to products and services thereby benefiting people, profit and planet". Point 2: "There are three types of CC [collaborative consumption]: Product Service Systems, Redistribution Markets and Collaborative Lifestyles. Product Service Systems (PSS) imply the switch from an ownership mind-set towards a usage mind-set. ...... Redistribution Markets (RM) allow for the redistribution of goods from where they are not needed to any place or person where the goods are needed. ...... Collaborative Lifestyles (CL) include the sharing and exchanging of fewer tangible assets such as time, space, skills and money on the local level". Point 8: "We define the term CC [collaborative consumption] broadly as the peer-to-peer-based activity of obtaining, giving, or sharing access to goods and services, coordinated through community-based online services". Point 10: "Access-based consumption refers to “transactions that can be market mediated but where no transfer of ownership takes place” (Bardhi and Eckhardt, 2012, p. 881); such consumption is sometimes considered as pseudo-sharing when there are profit motives, a lack of feelings of community, and expectations of reciprocity". Point 12: "Ownership and possession practices have historically dominated the debate on consumer behavior and consumption (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Watkins, Denegri-Knott, & Molesworth, 2016). In fact, in many modern societies, the concept of ownership is still very well-rooted in people’s minds, and for many, ownership is something that they aim and work for. Ownership entitles consumers to use, control and convey what they possess (see e.g. Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Gaus, 2012; Moeller & Wittkowski, 2010). Belk (1985, 1988, 2007) has argued that possessions are major contributors to and reflections of our identities". Point 13: "De-ownership orientation (DOO) reflects the importance that an individual places on sharing products and services rather than buying or owning them. In fact, de-ownership orientation can be seen as the direct opposite of the ownership orientation that emphasis the meaning of buying and owning. Whereas ownership orientated people aim and work for the ownership and absolute control over material goods, de-ownership oriented people prefer the sharing of resources between each other and they place more value on the access to resources rather than owning". Point 14: "..... de-ownership orientation (DOO), attitudes towards collaborative consumption (CCA) and intentions to such behavior (CCI) are positively related concepts. In other words, consumers who can be regarded as de-ownership oriented are likely to perceive of collaborative consumption as favorable behavior, and they have also strong intentions to collaborative consumption". Point 17: ".... ‘[c]ollaborative consumption is people coordinating the acquisition and distribution of a resource for a fee or other compensation. By including other compensation, the definition also encompasses bartering, trading, and swapping, which involve giving and receiving non-monetary compensation.’ (Belk, 2014: 1597) Two aspects deserve attention in this definition". Point 20: "Although still embryonic, collaborative consumption and the sharing economy have become social and economic phenomena in just a few short years, yet there is little consensus on how to define them. The current classificatory schema or typologies of platforms have some weaknesses. Sectoral classifications, technological functionality, and discursive modes of understanding sharing and collaborative economies all provide valuable insights, but when taken individually important gaps are evident, not least in their inter-system isolation, but most particularly when technology, such as platform architecture and user interfaces, is disassociated from wider social and economic conditions of possibility".
Variable 3: Effective collaborative consumption practices	Point 4: "By facilitating connection and interaction among people, the Internet lowers communication cost and makes it easier to participate in collaborative consumption even when the participants do not know each other. Involving strangers in collaborative consumption (beyond close relational boundary) could greatly expand its scale and impact, making it an even more pervasive phenomenon and more profitable practice for firms". Point 5: "With further advancements in IT in particular the mobile technologies, the involvement of strangers in collaborative consumption can be extended from online to offline. For instance, a merchant can send mobile group discount coupon to its customers who appear near their shop, and ask them to invite others to enjoy the group discount together. Mobile technologies make this more feasible than before by allowing consumers to micro-coordinate their activities in real time and at the actual place of consumption". Point 6: "Past literature shows that people are turned away from ethical consumption because of economical and institutional reasons (Bray, Johns, & Kilburn, 2011; Eckhardt, Belk, & Devinney, 2010), yet with the development of new ways of consumption through the sharing economy, such as collaborative consumption (CC), these issues are addressed and potentially overcome". Point 16: "... due to its ‘versatility, commonality and wide applicability’, sharing may be a potential ‘solution to the world’s problems’ (Share the World’s Resources, 2014: 2), amongst them climate change and resource depletion. Botsman and Rogers (2011: 74) argue that CC may result in unintended positive environmental side effects − and hence free our societies to some extent from the burdensome work to reduce our environmental footprints: ‘Sustainability is often an unintended consequence of Collaborative Consumption. It is unintended in the sense that the initial or driving motivations (. . .) may not be about “being green”. (. . .) These positive unintended (. . .) consequences happen because sustainability and community are an inherent, inseparable part of Collaborative Consumption and not an after thought or add-on’. In addition, CC is also expected to have positive effects on social cohesion and community building". Point 18: "Collaborative consumption is an alternative way of doing business that can potentially reduce the environmental impacts of fashion, by prolonging the practical service life of clothes". Point 19: "In the fashion industry, an example of a collaborative consumption business model is the clothing library, in which a monthly membership fee allows members to borrow a specific number of clothing pieces in a set time, typically a few weeks. Successful small scale enterprises in Sweden demonstrate the business potential of clothing libraries, including Lånegarderoben (www.lanegarderoben.se) and Kl€adoteket (www.kladoteket.se)". Point 21: "Collaborative and sharing economy platforms offer a cultural antidote to individualism, through shared community values, and greater consumer empowerment, not only as purchasers in terms of choice and convenience, but most uniquely as prosumers,1; or micro-entrepreneurs (Torregosa, 2013). Through horizontal and participatory structures the sharing and collaborative model has proffered a paradigm shift that could “solve many of the complex challenges the world faces”..".
Variable 4: Learn from collaborative consumption practices	Point 7: "Despite a growing practical importance, there is a lack of quantitative studies on motivational factors that affect consumers’ attitudes and intentions towards CC [collaborative consumption]. The context is of especially great interest since participation in CC communities and services is generally characterized as driven by obligation to do good for other people and for the environment, such as sharing, helping others, and engaging in sustainable behavior (Prothero et al., 2011; Sacks, 2011). However, CC may also provide economic benefits (saving money, facilitating access to resources, and free-riding), which constitute more individualistic reasons for participating". Point 9: "Collaborative consumption enables the sharing of real-world assets and resources (Botsman and Rogers, 2011), typically through websites with peer-to-peer marketplaces where unused space, goods, skills, money, or services can be exchanged. Time magazine has proposed collaborative consumption as one of the “10 ideas that will change the world” (Walsh, 2011). However, there is currently little empirical evidence regarding the future growth of collaborative consumption and its likely economic impact on incumbent industries". Point 22: ".... the supposed benefits of a transition from ownership economies to access, collaboration and sharing haven’t convinced everyone (Eckhardt and Bardhi, 2015; Orsi and Doskow, 2009). The strongest criticism centres on whether collaboration and sharing isn’t just “capitalism on steroids” (Morovoz, 2013; para.10) extending its reach to previously informal parts of the economy, while diversifying economic risk to further destructured and precarious labour". Point 24: "There was a finding that collaborative consumption has positive effects on lower-income consumers and may democratize access to a higher standard of living [7]. However, up until now, collaborative consumption research still lack of empirical study from developing country that has lower-income citizens such as Indonesia".

The next step is to relate the cognitive map variables to make up a cognitive map on collaborative consumption. The cognitive map and its explanation are presented in the next section.

A cognitive map on collaborative consumption and its interpretation

By relating the four variables identified in Table 2, the writer comes up with a cognitive map on collaborative consumption, as shown in Figure 1.

These cognitive  map variables, four of them altogether, are related to constitute a systemic image of collaborative consumption. The links in the cognitive map (re: Figure 1) indicate direction of influences between variables. The + sign shows that an increase in one variable leads to an increase in another variable while a -ve sign tells us that in increase in one variable leads to a decrease in another variable.  If there no signs shown on the arrows, that means the influences can be positive or negative.  For further information on collaborative consumption, readers are referred to the Literature on collaborative consumption Facebook page.

Concluding remarks

The cognitive mapping exercise captures in one diagram some of the main variables involved in collaborative consumption. The resultant cognitive map promotes an exploratory way to study collaborative consumption in a holistic tone. The experience of the cognitive mapping exercise is that it can be a quick, efficient and entertaining way to explore a complex topic such as collaborative consumption in Business Management. Finally, readers who are interested in cognitive mapping should also find the article informative on this mapping topic.

Bibliography

1.      Barnes, S.J. and J. Mattsson. 2017. "Understanding collaborative consumption: Test of a theoretical model" Technological Forecasting & Social Change 118, Elsevier: 281-292.

2.      Chen, H., C.W. Phang and C.H. Zhang. 2017. "Inviting Strangers to Participate in Collaborative Consumption through Mobile App" International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 33(6), Taylor & Francis: 523-535.

3.      De Rivera, J., Ȧ. Gordo, P. Cassidy and A. Apesteguía. 2017. "A netnographic study of P2P collaborative consumption platforms' user interface and design" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 11-27.

4.      Eden, C. and P. Simpson. 1989. "SODA and cognitive mapping in practice", pp. 43-70, in Rosenhead, J. (editor) Rational Analysis for a Problematic World, Wiley, Chichester.

5.      Eden, C., C. Jones and D. Sims. 1983. Messing about in Problems: An informal structured approach to their identification and management, Pergamon Press, Oxford.

6.      Hamari, J., M. Sjöklint and A. Ukkonen. 2015. "The Sharing Economy: Why People Participate in Collaborative Consumption" Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology July: 1-13.

7.      Huber, A. 2017. "Theorising the dynamics of collaborative consumption practices: A comparison of peer-to-peer accommodation and cohousing" Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 23, Elsevier: 53-69.

8.      Lindblom, A. and T. Lindblom. 2017. "De-ownership orientation and collaborative consumption during turbulent economic times" International Journal of Consumer Studies 41, Wiley: 431-438.

9.      Literature on cognitive mapping Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-cognitive-mapping-800894476751355/).

10. Literature on collaborative consumption Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-collaborative-consumption-221029331743568/).

11. Literature on literature review Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.literaturereview/).

12. Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/managerial.intellectual.learning/).

13. Open University. n.d. "Sign graph" Systems Thinking and Practice (T552): Diagramming, Open University, U.K. (url address: http://systems.open.ac.uk/materials/T552/) [visited at April 10, 2017].

14. Santoso, A.S.and A.  Erdaka. 2015. "Customer Loyalty in Collaborative Consumption Model: Empirical Study of CRM for Product-Service System-Based e-Commerce in Indonesia" Procedia Computer Science 72, Elsevier: 543-551.

15. Van De Glind, P. 2013. "The consumer potential of collaborative consumption" Research MSc in Sustainable Development - Environmental Governance thesis report, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, the Netherlands, August [url address: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/280661].

16. Zamani, B., G. Sandin and G.M. Peters. 2017. "Life cycle assessment of clothing libraries: can collaborative consumption reduce the environmental  impact of fast fashion?" Journal of Cleaner Production 162, Elsevier: 1368-1375.