Anti-Utilitarian Market Approach: An Essay on Collaborative Consumption

Felipe Gerhard; Ana Augusta Ferreira de Freitas; Raoul Graf

doi:10.5585/remark.v21i2.18074

Autores/as

Felipe Gerhard State University of Ceará https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1117-5960
Ana Augusta Ferreira de Freitas State University of Ceará https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2741-6968
Raoul Graf University of Quebec in Montreal http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6577-8284

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v21i2.18074

Palabras clave:

Anti-utilitarianism, Utilitarianism, Market, Collaborative consumption, Consumer Behaviour

Resumen

Purpose: The belief in an individualist consumer that behaves with a truly competitive, acquisitive, and selfish attitude on an inflexible market is one of the main ontological creeds of marketing. However, current empirical phenomena, such as collaborative consumption, may encourage the emergence of new theoretical efforts toward a higher market comprehension. To further these efforts, this theoretical essay aims to analyse the anti-utilitarian aspects of collaborative consumption that transcend the ontological foundations of economic utilitarianism.

Design/methodology/approach: This essay evaluates the main differences between utilitarian and anti-utilitarian theories, regarding exchange relations, consumers’ actions, and market concept itself. For such purpose, the analysis is based on an intersubjective, theoretical perspective.

Findings: Far from being configured as a revolution of benevolence or altruism, collaborative consumption can reorganize the system of production and circulation of goods and services because it is based on concepts absent in utilitarian theories, such as alterity, reciprocity, and the achievement of relational benefits. Confronting important utilitarian premises, such as the perspective of a natural market or the immanence of the figure of Homo Economicus, collaborative consumption deviates from the essentially individualistic theorizations about human behaviour. Drawing on an anti-utilitarian perspective, these findings broaden some conceptual boundaries within the field of consumer behaviour.

Originality/value: Based on an anti-utilitarian proposition, we present concepts that subvert traditional perspectives of consumer actions, exchange relations, and the market itself, debating the boundaries of the consumer behaviour field.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Felipe Gerhard, State University of Ceará

Ph.D. in Administration

Ana Augusta Ferreira de Freitas, State University of Ceará

Ph.D. in Production Engineering

Raoul Graf, University of Quebec in Montreal

Ph.D. in Administration

Citas

Arnould, E., & Rose, A. (2016). Mutuality: Critique and substitute for Belk’s “sharing”. Marketing Theory, 16(1), 75-99.

Bachelard, G. (1967). La formation de l'esprit scientifique. Contribution à une psychanalyse de la connaissance objective. Paris : Librairie philosophique J. VRIN.

Bagozzi, R. (1975). Marketing as exchange. The Journal of Marketing, 39, 32-39.

Baldwin, M. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 461-484.

Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of consumer research, 39(4), 881-898.

Bastiat, F. (1964). Selected Essays on Political Economy. Princeton: Van Nostrand.

Bauman, Z. (2013). Identity: Coversations With Benedetto Vecchi. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Belk, R. (2007). Why not share rather than own? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 611(1), 126-140.

Belk, R. (2010). Sharing. Journal of consumer research, 36(5), 715-734.

Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595-1600.

Bentham, J. (1996). An Introduction of the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2011). What's Mine Is Yours: How Collaborative Consumption Is Changing the Way We Live. London: Collins.

Caillé, A. (2001). O princípio de razão, o utilitarismo e o antiutilitarismo. Sociedade e Estado, 16(1-2), 26-56.

Clark, M., & Taraban, C. (1991). Reactions to and willingness to express emotion in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27 (4), 324-336.

Corciolani, M., & Dalli, D. (2014). Gift-giving, sharing and commodity exchange at Bookcrossing.com: new insights from a qualitative analysis. Management Decision, 52(4), 755-776.

Cova, B. (1997). Community and consumption: Towards a definition of the “linking value” of product or services. European journal of marketing, 31(3/4), 297-316.

Cova, B., & Cova, V. (2001). Tribal aspects of postmodern consumption research: the case of French in‐line roller skaters. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 1(1), 67-76.

Eckhardt, G., & Bardhi, F. (2015). The sharing economy isn’t about sharing at all. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/01/the-sharing-economy-isnt-about-sharing-at-all.

Eckhardt, G., & Bardhi, F. (2016). The relationship between access practices and economic systems. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 1(2), 210-225.

Ertz, M., Durif, F., & Arcand, M. (2016). Collaborative Consumption: Conceptual

Snapshot at a Buzzword. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 19(2), 1-23.

Ertz, M., Durif, F., & Arcand, M. (2017). An analysis of the origins of collaborative consumption and its implications for marketing. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 21(1), 1-17.

Felson, M., & Spaeth, J. (1978). Community structure and collaborative consumption: A Routine Activity Approach. The American Behavioral Scientist, 21(4), 614-624.

Firat, A., & Dholakia, N. (2006). Theoretical and philosophical implications of postmodern debates: some challenges to modern marketing. Marketing Theory, 6(2), 123-162.

Fiske, A. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99(4), 689-723.

Folkes, V. (2002). Presidential Address: Is Consumer Behavior Different? Advances in Consumer Research, 29, 1-4.

Galbraith, J. K. (2001). The Myth of Consumer Sovereignty. In J. K. Galbraith. The Essential Galbraith (pp. 32-39). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Gerhard, F., Silva Júnior, J. T., & Câmara, S. F. (2019). Typifying Sharing Economy and Access Economy. Organizações & Sociedade, 26(91), 795-814.

Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2015). The sharing economy: Why people

participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for

Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2047-2059.

Hobbes, T. (2013). Leviathan - or the matter, form, & power of a common-wealth ecclesiastical and civil. Hamilton ON: McMaster University.

Holt, D. (1997). Poststructuralist lifestyle analysis: Conceptualizing the social patterning of consumption in postmodernity. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(4), 326-350.

Houston, F., & Gassenheimer, J. (1987). Marketing and exchange. The Journal of Marketing, 51, 3-18.

Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Laamanen, M., Wahlen, S., & Lorek, S. (2018). A moral householding perspective on the sharing economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 202, 1220-1227.

Laville, J. (2003). Avec Mauss et Polanyi, vers une théorie de l'économie plurielle. Revue du MAUSS, (1), 237-249.

Macinnis, D., & Folkes, V. (2010). The disciplinary status of consumer behavior: A sociology of science perspective on key controversies. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(6), 899-914.

Malinowski, B. (2005). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. London: Routledge.

Martins, P. (2008). De Lévi-Strauss a M.A.U.S.S. – Movimento antiutilitarista nas ciências sociais. Itinerários do dom. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 23(66), 105-130.

Mauss, M. (2002). The gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies. London: Routledge.

Mcdonald, C. (1962). Western Political Theory: The Modern Age. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovivi.

Mill, J. (2004). Utilitarianism. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.

Molz, J. (2013). Social networking technologies and the moral economy of alternative tourism: The case of couchsurfing.org. Annals of tourism research, 43, 210-230.

Olson, J. (1982). Presidential Address: Toward a Science of Consumer Behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 9, Association for Consumer Research, v-x.

Ozanne, L., & Ballantine, W. (2010). Sharing as a form of anti‐consumption? An examination of toy library users. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(6), 485-498.

Perren, R., & Kozinets, R. V. (2018). Lateral exchange markets: How social platforms operate in a networked economy. Journal of Marketing, 82(1), 20-36.

Polanyi, K. (1957). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. New York: Rinehart.

Pottinger, L. (2018). Growing, guarding and generous exchange in an analogue sharing economy. Geoforum, 96, 108-118.

Schor, J., Fitzmaurice, C., Carfagna, L., Attwood-Charles, W., & Poteat, E. (2016). Paradoxes of openness and distinction in the sharing economy. Poetics, 54, 66-81.

Sheth, J., Gardner, D., & Garrett, D. (1988). Marketing Theory: Evolution and Evaluation. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Sheth, J., & Uslay, C. (2007). Implications of the revised definition of marketing: from exchange to value creation. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 26(2), 302-307.

Simonson, I., Carmon, Z., Dhar, R., Drolet, A., & Nowlis, S. (2001). Consumer research: In search of identity. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 249-275.

Widlok, T. (2004). Sharing by default? Outline of an anthropology of virtue. Anthropological Theory, 4(1), 53-70.

Wittel, A. (2011). Qualities of sharing and their transformation in the digital age. International Review of Information Ethics, 15(9), 3-8.