Shared consumption and its determinants: A systematic literature review and future research agenda

Shared consumption is rapidly evolving as a potential alternative consumption paradigm and hence gaining increased scholarly attention. In the last 5 years, there has been an exponential increase in research focusing on the adoption of shared consumption. There is a pressing need to consolidate and reconcile the resultant insights, which calls for an appropriate review study. Accordingly, this study aims to systematically review the extant literature on the adoption of shared consumption, synthesize the body of knowledge and provide a comprehensive understanding of this emerging consumption mode. Following the SPAR-4-SLR review protocol, this systematic review draws upon the theoretical guidance provided by the theory of consumption values, innovation resistance theory and value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy to synthesize 331 research articles. Bibliometric analysis was employed to reveal the research trend, most prominent journals, authors, articles and countries of research. A thematic analysis was carried out to synthesize the knowledge of the literature corpus. The results suggest that while economic incentives commonly drive individuals to participate in shared consumption, social incentives significantly influence participation in a peer-to-peer setting. Perceived risks (physical, privacy, safety and security) deter participation, while trust plays a vital role in adoption. It has also unveiled some inconclusive relationships in the literature, such as the effect of environmental considerations and materialism on sharing intention. The analysis shows that the providers' perspective has received less attention than the consumers. Further, it is important to empirically validate the findings in domains that transcend the extant industry specificity of studies. The salient observations were structured in an integrated model capturing the drivers and inhibitors of the adoption of the phenomenon. Finally, based on the TCCM framework, pertinent future research directions have been elaborated.     

Market-implied ratings and their divergence from credit ratings

In this article, we investigate the divergence between credit ratings (CRs) and Moody's market-implied ratings (MIRs). Our evidence shows that rating gaps provide incremental information to the market regarding issuers' default risk over CRs alone in the short horizon and outperform CRs over extended horizons. The predictive ability of rating gaps is greater for more opaque and volatile issuers. Such predictability was more pronounced during the 2008 financial crisis but weakened in the post–Dodd–Frank Act period. This finding is consistent with credit rating agencies’ efforts to improve their performance when facing regulatory pressure. Moreover, our analysis identifies rating-gap signals that do (do not) lead to subsequent Moody's actions to place issuers on negative outlook and watchlists. We find that negative signals from MIR gaps have a real economic impact on issuers’ fundamentals such as profitability, leverage, investment, and default risk, thus supporting the recovery-efforts hypothesis.