How the Internet, the Sharing Economy, and Reputational Feedback Mechanisms Solve the 'Lemons Problem'
Abstract
This paper argues that the sharing economy — through the use of the Internet and real time reputational feedback mechanisms — is providing a solution to the “lemons problem” that many regulations, and regulators, have spent decades attempting to overcome. Section I provides an overview of the sharing economy and traces its rapid growth. Section II revisits “lemons problem” theory as well as the various regulatory solutions proposed to deal with the problem of asymmetric information, and provides some responses. Section III discusses the relationship between reputation and trust and analyzes how reputational incentives have been used historically in commercial interactions. Section IV discusses how information asymmetries were addressed in the pre-Internet era. Section V surveys how the evolution of the Internet and information systems (especially sharing economy reputational feedback mechanisms) addresses the “lemons problem” concern. Section VI explains how these new realities affect public policy and concludes that asymmetric information is not a legitimate rationale for policy intervention in light of technological changes. We also argue continued use of this rationale to regulate in the name of consumer protection might, in fact, make consumers worse off. This has ramifications for the current debate over regulation of the sharing economy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reputation is often regarded as the panacea for establishing trust.
“Furthermore, reputation is often regarded as the panacea for establishing trust (e.g.Schlegel, 2014;Thierer et al., 2015), and much research is devoted to comprehending the working of this mechanism.”
From Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as Thierer et al., 2015
Cites
Digital Discrimination: The Case of Airbnb.com
Edelman, B. G., & Luca, M. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2377353 · Cited by 471 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review
ter Huurne, M., Ronteltap, A., Corten, R., & Buskens, V. (2017) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.1667 · Cited by 456 · see citing works
Building trust in the sharing economy: Current approaches and future considerations
Räisänen, J., Ojala, A., & Tuovinen, T. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123724 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
- Authors
- Thierer, A. D., Koopman, C., Hobson, A., & Kuiper, C.
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 1
- Type
- Preprint
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review