See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315483205

How digital trust powers the sharing economy

Article · September 2016

DOI: 10.15581/002.ART-2887

CITATIONS READS

5 1,291

4 authors, including:

Mareike Möhlmann
The University of Warwick
21 PUBLICATIONS   213 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mareike Möhlmann on 22 March 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 DEEP
insight
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

THE DIGITIZATION OF TRUST

How Digital Trust

Powers the Sharing
Economy
By FRÉDÉRIC MAZZELLA, ARUN SUNDARARAJAN,
VERENA BUTT D’ESPOUS and MAREIKE MÖHLMANN

“D
on’t accept a ride from a finds that people who avail themselves of such
stranger!” Remember that services are becoming inclined to trust the per-
advice? Today, ride-sharing son giving them a ride not as “a stranger” but as
business models are turning a friend.
that advice on its head. A variety of peer-to-peer This article shares some findings from an on-
marketplaces are enabling human exchanges on going, independent, non-commercial research
a scale unimaginable before, unlocking a mas- collaboration between New York University
sive, untapped potential for collaboration. The and BlaBlaCar, the France-based platform avail-
key building block of society – interpersonal able on three continents that matches empty car
trust – is being transformed from a scarce re- seats with passengers looking for a long-distance
source into an abundant one. Most strikingly, ride. Based on the responses of 18,289 BlaBlaCar
our research into trust in the sharing economy members surveyed across 11 European countries

24 THIRD QUARTER 2016 ISSUE 30 https://dx.doi.org/10.15581/002.ART-2887 IESEinsight

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

(France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, intentions or are they looking to rob me? Third,
Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Ukraine and the it involves assessing expertise or quality. Is this
United Kingdom), we identify the mechanics person a good plumber? Are these people truth-
of online trust and the resulting levels of trust fully representing how interesting their neigh-
created. We show that, if given the right digital borhood is? Are they polite? Is that living room
tools, individuals are able to achieve significant as airy as it looks? Does the car have as much
levels of trust without ever having met in per- legroom as the photo indicates?
son. We believe this signals the start of an eco- For some interactions, verifying that a per-
nomic and social revolution, wherein strangers son is good at what he or she does might be a
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

become peers, moving the world toward a new primary consideration if, for example, you are
era of trust – friendlier, more personal, more hiring someone to paint your fence. For other
connected and, eventually, more empowering high-stakes interactions, like getting a ride from
to the individual. a stranger, intentions may matter more than ex-
pertise: you are probably more interested that
What Is Trust? the person isn’t a criminal. For still other higher
What exactly is trust? In many ways, the answer stakes interactions, like hiring a babysitter, you
depends on the context. Trust in a romantic would want to be satisfied with all three dimen-
relationship means something different from sions: some guarantee that the person is authen-
trust in a commercial transaction. A particular- tic and has good intentions, and that the person
ly useful definition in the context of the sharing actually knows what he or she is doing. If you
economy comes from sociologist James Cole- interact repeatedly with someone, you start to
man, who has defined trust as a “willingness learn about these aspects over time.
to commit to a collaborative effort before you In short, trust is the leap of faith without
know how the other person will behave.” which little human collaboration can exist. It
Establishing trust depends on a multiplicity has allowed mankind to overcome its limits
of dimensions. In a non-face-to-face (and some- and to cooperate with one another. It is at the
times face-to-face) setting, it first involves es- heart of any social system, whether families or
tablishing authenticity. Is this person real? Are businesses, and central to any social construct,
they who they say they are? Second, it involves from money and ownership to citizenship and
assessing intentions. Do these folks have good democracy. It is the glue that holds our world
together.
However, when you are trying to transact
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY with a semi-anonymous peer, and for the first
time, how do you verify identities, intentions
Over the centuries, each digital trust grid. and capabilities? Let’s look at the different ways
significant economic expan- This article shares the find- in which human beings have accomplished this
sion has been enabled by the ings of an ongoing research in the past.
accompanying creation of new collaboration between New
trust systems – from village- York University and BlaBlaCar. The Evolving History of Trust
based trade and informal The authors identify the me- Until recently, an individual’s network of trust
trader networks, through con- chanics of online trust and the was restricted. For thousands of years, trust was
tracts, government standards resulting level of trust created. limited to close circles of family and friends.
and financial institutions, to They show that, with the right One’s reputation in a community, typically a vil-
today’s corporate brands. digital tools, many of which lage, was the indicator people relied on to decide
Emerging digital platforms are are encapsulated in their whether or not to collaborate with each other.
catalyzing a new expansion DREAMS framework, indi- A fascinating study of medieval trade prac-
that will reintegrate into our viduals can achieve high levels tices by Stanford’s Avner Greif reveals how
economic interactions the so- of trust without ever having people used to establish trust when communi-
cial aspects of commerce that met in person. This signals a cation channels and systems were weak, limited
were marginalized by 20th radical move toward a friend- or absent. In the 11th century, it was more profit-
century capitalism, creating lier, more personal, more able for Mediterranean traders if they could ship
a new form of crowd-based connected, more empowered their goods without actually having to travel
capitalism powered by the world of trust. with them. But for this to work, they needed to

IESEinsight ISSUE 30 THIRD QUARTER 2016 25

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

establish a relationship with an overseas agent evolved. The property rights we take for granted
– someone they trusted enough to accept and in most modern economies today (and which
distribute the goods at the other end and not have their roots in English common law) are an
rip them off in the process. How did these early example. Trust was scaled by shifting it to gov-
merchants do it? ernments and other institutions that formalized
Greif suggests that a combination of repu- the rules of engagement and centralized some of
tation and self-interest created the trust provi- the systems needed to organize society. Regu-
sions that would govern the behavior of over- lations and contracting, supported by legal and
seas agents. First, the traders paid the agents a financial institutions, allowed people to trade
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

wage greater than any available elsewhere. This beyond their immediate circle of trust. The
“premium” served a purpose: shrewd agents re- emergence of banks eased economic exchanges
alized they would be better off in the long run between strangers who did not need to share
if they were honest, rather than risk the loss of any trust-facilitating social ties.
future profit by stealing for the sake of making All these factors expanded trade possibili-
a fast buck. Second, the merchants and agents ties and fostered economic growth, which, to-
formed coalitions whose members agreed not gether with the development of transport and
to employ anyone who had been caught stealing information technologies, led to the emergence
from other members. In other words, economic of corporations. Businesses moved from small-
advantages were created based on community scale shops with a well-known customer base to
trust and community enforcement. larger scale organizations catering to the needs
Within this medieval trading model we find of a much broader audience in a competitive
two ingredients relevant to today’s emerging marketplace.
sharing economy. First, trust was built by creat- By the end of the 20th century, trust had
ing a situation where one’s reputation mattered. scaled globally, not only through institutions
Second, trust was built by creating communities but also through brands. Today, a significant
of shared interest that connected reputation to amount of trust is facilitated by using the brand
economic self-interest. to convey values, qualitative attributes and,
As these two ingredients became better un- most important, the promise of current and fu-
derstood, other ways of regulating exchanges ture reliability.
Consider food safety: you might feel safer
drinking a Pepsi in a country whose food safety
ABOUT THE AUTHORS laws you aren’t clear about because you trust the
brand itself. Government regulation, combined
Frédéric Mazzella is Founder Verena Butt d’Espous spent with recognizable brands that comply with the
and CEO of BlaBlaCar. Before 10 years working in sustain- regulation in order to provide a consistently
that, he worked at NASA able finance before joining high-quality, safe experience for long-term
(USA) and NTT (Japan). He BlaBlaCar in 2014 to do Corpo- profit motives, is the foundation of trust in most
holds an MBA from INSEAD, a rate Communications. She Western economies today.
master’s in Computer Science holds an MBA from INSEAD
from Stanford and a master’s and a BSc in Government and Time to Change the Rules
in Physics from the École Nor- Economics from the London If these mechanisms have served us well thus
male Supérieure. School of Economics. far, why would we want to alter the rules of the
game? Well, changing the basis for trust expands
Arun Sundararajan is Profes- Mareike Möhlmann is a re- society’s possibilities in a variety of ways.
sor and Rosen Faculty Fel- search scientist at NYU Stern. For one thing, relying on contracts to build
low at New York University’s Her work at NYU is funded trust requires a reasonable level of scale for
Stern School of Business, and by the German Academic Ex- each transaction. Writing a contract is costly,
author of The Sharing Economy. change Service (DAAD) and even if it is a blockchain-based smart contract.
He has published over 50 the Fritz Thyssen Foundation. So is hiring a lawyer. This makes sense when
scientific papers, won numer- She holds a doctorate from you are a business buying millions of dollars’
ous Best Paper awards and ad- the University of Hamburg worth of parts. For accommodation related to
vises governments around the and an MSc from the London a two-night stay in Paris, it seems like exces-
world about digital policy. School of Economics. sive overhead.

26 THIRD QUARTER 2016 ISSUE 30 IESEinsight

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

The D.R.E.A.M.S. Framework by BlaBlaCar

Online trust on peer-to-peer platforms is created through a combination
of the following six pillars.

D| DECLARED. Declared infor-

mation is the foundation of E| ENGAGED. In order to feel com-
pletely comfortable transact-
party in a transaction – for example,
publishing the number of rides and
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

a trusted online profile. It is the ing with a fellow user of a sharing including statements such as, “Laura
information that is volunteered by service, you need to believe that the will aim to reply within three hours.”
the user, telling the community a other party is fully engaged and will
bit more about themselves. No one
trusts a complete stranger, so this
is the first essential step in moving
honor their commitment. Collabora-
tive platforms that allow members
to commit financially to a transac-
M| MODERATED. All informa-
tion transferred by users of a
sharing service must be third-party
away from anonymity toward online tion ahead of the experience, via a verified, whether this is the verifica-
trust. Members can declare their pre-payment service, create trust tion of contact or bank details or the
name, age, preferences and give a through engagement. This is the approval of user-generated content.
description of themselves in their sole parameter that is geared toward Users need to know that everything
own words. future interaction. It links past infor- they see online meets a required
mation to future commitment. level of goodwill and authenticity, as

R| RATED. Ratings allow for the

aggregation of feedback from
objective third parties. Ratings have A| ACTIVE. Members of a collab-
orative service depend on each
ensured by the third party providing
the sharing platform.

been largely democratized by online

services like eBay or TripAdvisor, but
collaborative platforms ask users to
other to provide the goods or service
to which the platform is dedicated.
That’s why it’s vital to enable a reac-
S| SOCIAL. Social networks allow
users to connect their identity
with their existing online identity, be
rate one another after having shared tive exchange between them, ensur- it socially via Facebook or profes-
higher-stakes, real-life, offline expe- ing that the transaction progresses sionally via LinkedIn. Connecting
riences. This enables people to build smoothly from initial interest to real- a profile with other existing social
valuable peer-reviewed reputations ization. To do this, information about networks will allow a person to lever-
and create interpersonal trust in a the level and frequency of a user’s age their existing online presence to
community. activity must be provided to the other create trust.

Moreover, government-led solutions were you are especially likely to buy from him or her
best suited for a slow-moving industrial era: again. A seller who consistently fails to deliver
zoning ensured that industrial plants didn’t products will get bad reviews. The same holds
disrupt residential neighborhoods; taxi meter- true for bidders who never actually complete
ing prevented cabbies from ripping passengers their transactions. When these experiences get
off. But in a post-industrial and information age, digitized and made publicly available through
the old institutional constraints are inadequate an online reputation system, your ability to trust
and, indeed, often no longer apply to the new people you don’t know is enhanced. Twenty
trust-exchange models that are emerging. years’ worth of experience of using feedback-
Digital infrastructures are reducing the need based reputation systems like eBay’s has given
for governments to intervene and police indi- us a fairly deep understanding of their potential,
vidual exchanges. The rating system that eBay and prepares us to trust other such platforms.
pioneered in the 1990s proved that customers Further evidence that virtual tools may do
could effectively police themselves. If you win a a better job at building trust than the old ones
bid on eBay and the product turns up as expect- is their ability to address the shortcomings and
ed, you are more likely to use eBay again. If you failures of “physical world” exchanges. For ex-
have a good experience with a specific provider, ample, if a taxi driver systematically refuses to

IESEinsight ISSUE 30 THIRD QUARTER 2016 27

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

With the spread of mobile connectivity, we are only

at the beginning of a profound behavioral shift. Our
potential to collaborate and create value has never
been so immense.
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

pick up passengers of a particular ethnicity, it is efficiency are opening up and creating a wealth
hard to identify and deal with that using tradi- of new enriching online and offline social inter-
tional means. However, if an Uber driver does actions. With 44 percent of the world’s popu-
the same, the ensuing data trail makes it easier lation connected to the internet and with the
to spot and correct. This affords new opportuni- spread of mobile connectivity, we are only at
ties to right old wrongs. In some ways, we may the beginning of a profound behavioral shift.
be returning to the community enforcement Our potential to collaborate and create value
methods that predated governmental interven- has never been so immense.
tion, more in line with the 11th century Mediter- As interpersonal trust is transformed into
ranean traders. an abundant resource, individuals are becom-
ing their own brands. They build profiles and
The Digitization of Trust accumulate feedback from multiple one-shot
Today, the sharing economy has us trusting interactions. When aggregated, summarized
each other at levels that are really quite sur- and made visible to others, this history be-
prising. As Jason Tanz wrote in his 2014 Wired comes part of their “trust capital.” Peers can
magazine cover story: “Many of these compa- instantly download information about each
nies have us engaging in behaviors that would other to form an opinion on whether or not to
have seemed unthinkably foolhardy as recently trust a specific individual.
as five years ago. We are hopping into strangers’ The implications of such “digital trust
cars (Lyft, Sidecar, Uber), welcoming them into grids” for interpersonal trust can be compared
our spare rooms (Airbnb), dropping our dogs to the breakthrough in communication when
off at their houses (DogVacay, Rover) and eat- the telephone was invented. The phone sud-
ing food in their dining rooms (Feastly).” denly enabled people to communicate with
This empowerment of individuals is creat- anyone instantly. Similarly, digital trust grids
ing a radical shift away from centralized insti- allow individuals to download anyone’s trust
tutions toward decentralized, more connected capital for immediate use. Trust is being dis-
peers. In other words, we are moving from a rupted both in its reach and immediacy.
“one-to-many” configuration to a world where As discussed, trust is built by verifying iden-
trusted interactions can occur on a “many-to- tities, intentions and capabilities. More specifi-
many” basis, changing relationships between cally, in semi-anonymous internet-based peer-
economic and social actors along the way, to-peer settings, trust stems from at least six
and creating a new “crowd-based” form of cues:
capitalism. from one’s own prior interaction;
Thanks to online trust, and freed from the through familiarity that comes from the na-
limits of the past, such as time and distance, ture of exchange being part of the “cultural
individuals are empowered to share, rent or dialogue”;
exchange goods, knowledge, money, skills, by learning from the explicit experiences of
networks and content on an unprecedented others;
scale, unleashing formidable untapped value. through brand certification;
Dormant capital can be put to more produc- by relying on digitized social capital;
tive use, generating a wide variety of new con- by relying on digitized forms of real-world
sumption experiences. We can now use assets identity, and more generally, validation from
belonging to others without the hassle and cost external institutions or entities, government
of ownership. Great opportunities for resource and non-government, digital and otherwise.

28 THIRD QUARTER 2016 ISSUE 30 IESEinsight

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

Prior interaction, feedback and brand certi- trust that eBay’s sellers had access to. But it is
fication had their place in the world of eBay, a prerequisite for participating in a large num-
but digitized social capital, digital identity and ber of today’s sharing economy platforms, and
robust digital conduits to external validation raises the stakes of online exchanges with semi-
are more recent developments. Think of social anonymous peers.
capital as an aggregation of the resources you Furthermore, trust comes from validation
might have access to on account of a network of by external institutions not connected to the
relationships (whether friendship, mutual ac- exchange. A government can certify that you
quaintance or recognition). Such ties give you are who you say you are by issuing an official ID.
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

access to a wide range of resources, now and Your possession of a mobile number tied to a
potentially in the future. If you share friends monthly subscription plan is indicative of au-
with someone, you can rely on them more, per- thenticity based on the screening process that
haps because you feel they are “closer” to you or issuing such accounts involves. A company that
because you know that the shared friendship is conducts a background check can verify that you
likely to deter bad behavior. don’t have a criminal record.
True, online social networking platforms Only recently have technologies emerged
like Facebook and LinkedIn have enhanced our that allow you to digitize such external forms
ability to build new social capital digitally, but of validation and make them available as part of
this is only a small part of their power in facili- your online profile. You can hold your driver’s
tating peer-to-peer exchanges online. What’s license or credit card up in front of your web-
most important is that these platforms contain cam, and in a matter of minutes, a service run
digitized representations of our real-world, by Jumio will validate your identity (Airbnb uses
physical-world social capital. Making this net- this service).
work of real-world social capital digitally avail- Once these real-world forms of valida-
able provides a powerful cue of authenticity, tion can be digitized, they add to the trust in-
intent and reliability. This was not a source of frastructure – but, again, by bringing online
the cues previously only available in the real
world. These trust infrastructures are, by and
High Level
EXHIBIT 1
large, isolated islands. A five-star rating on
of Trust Uber doesn’t help you get customers on Lyft
(although it might be a useful screening device
PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS WHO
for a competing platform). If you are a good
RANKED 4 OR 5 OUT OF 5 THEIR LEVEL OF
eBay seller, you can’t transfer that reputation
TRUST IN…
to Airbnb or Didi Chuxing; you have to rebuild
it starting from scratch. But this may be chang-
ing, as our research revealed.
94%
Family Raising Trust Capital
To understand the level of trust built within
92% the BlaBlaCar community, we conducted a Eu-
Friend rope-wide survey of BlaBlaCar users. Partici-
pants were asked what, in their view, was the
88%
main role of BlaBlaCar. Out of eight options
Member with full profile on BlaBlaCar
provided, the top three responses were “con-
necting people” (74 percent), “creating trust”
58%
(63 percent) and “communicating about ride-
Colleague
sharing” (57 percent). Indeed, “connecting
42% people” and “creating trust” are fundamental
elements in building a reliable environment
Neighbor
of collaboration, and are ultimately an online
16% platform’s main reason for being.
It is also significant that “communicating
Social Media Contact
about ride-sharing” appeared in the top three,

IESEinsight ISSUE 30 THIRD QUARTER 2016 29

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

Two ride-sharers who have never met end up trusting

each other more than colleagues who share the same
office and meet every day. This finding held true across
all countries surveyed.
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

because raising visibility breeds mainstream this trust spectrum, those with a full profile
usage and familiarity, which holds implica- ranked just behind friends and ahead of col-
tions for trust. The fact that there are grow- leagues and neighbors.
ing numbers of drivers and passengers on When measuring specifically who they
BlaBlaCar, with little variation across coun- trusted highly, a striking 88 percent said they
tries, likely contributed to 70 percent of re- highly trusted another BlaBlaCar member
spondents saying they felt more comfortable with a full profile. This was close to the 92
about ride-sharing in general. Just as in the percent who highly trusted their friends, and
real world, familiarity enhances trust in an significantly higher than the 58 percent who
online world. highly trusted their colleagues. This would in-
In order to assess the level of trust in the dicate that, when provided with the right set of
ride-sharing community, members were asked tools, users of online platforms are able to re-
to rank the trust they placed in a BlaBlaCar create a sense of trust almost comparable to
member with a full profile relative to the trust the level of trust in friends, and robust enough
they placed in other familiar types of people, to supersede the need to meet in person be-
ranging from family and friends to strangers. fore engaging in high-stakes exchanges. Two
As expected, family and friends were trusted ride-sharers who have never met end up trust-
most, followed by colleagues, neighbors, so- ing each other more than colleagues who share
cial network contacts and lastly strangers. the same office and meet every day. This find-
When a BlaBlaCar member was included in ing held true across all countries surveyed, re-
vealing the universality of this phenomenon.
See Exhibit 1.
We also examined brand effects. Interest-
More Trusting Since
EXHIBIT 2
ingly, respondents highly trusted ride-shar-
Ride-sharing ers with a full profile on
MILLENNIALS & NON-MILLENNIALS BlaBlaCar (88 percent)
more than ride-sharers
ALIKE ARE OPEN TO TRY OTHER TYPES OF Non-Millennials Millennials
COLLABORATIVE SERVICES. whose profiles included
the exact same informa-
tion but on another gener-
80% ic platform (67 percent).
This difference shows that
x1.3 brands still play an impor-
x1.5 x1.9 x1.3 tant role and remain an es-
x1.7
13% sential and powerful proxy
x1.5 17% 24% 11% for trust in today’s sharing
19%
economy. The broader
x1.8 x2.0 x1.9 x2.1 14% implication is that while
x2.5 x3.1 platforms are empower-
ing individuals to trust
8% 10% 8% 10%
9% 11% each other, they must also
create trust in their own
Peer-to-peer Crowdfunding Co-working Peer-to-peer Sharing Buying and selling ability to host and moder-
car rental house rentals skills of used goods ate interactions.

30 THIRD QUARTER 2016 ISSUE 30 IESEinsight

 How Digital Trust Powers the Sharing Economy

The Trust Mechanisms That Matter active on accommodation rental and skills-
Next, we stripped away brand to test the un- sharing platforms, and 39 percent were active on
derlying tools that are encapsulated in what used-goods marketplaces. Activity on peer-to-
BlaBlaCar calls the DREAMS framework (see peer car rental, crowdfunding and co-working
sidebar on page 27). Our analysis revealed that platforms, however, was relatively limited.
the factors related to the six dimensions of the When asked whether their participation in
framework were correlated with higher levels of ride-sharing had made them want to try other
trust and, as the experience level of a member on types of collaborative services, we found that
the platform grew, were more correlated with people were between one and three times
This document is an authorized copy for personal use of Ms. Möhlmann, 27/09/2016

bilateral trust. This indicates that members may more likely to try other forms of sharing econ-
start out by garnering their trust from a brand omy activities.
but, as they become more familiar with the tools These potential spillovers were higher for
over time, they shift the basis for their decisions Millennials. While this difference was not sur-
to the trust capital of the driver/passenger. prising, given this digitally connected genera-
Looking more specifically at which levers tion’s openness to new digital platforms, the gap
create trust, ratings remain a critical criterion between Millennials and non-Millennials was
affecting both drivers’ and passengers’ choice not as wide as expected, differing only by sin-
to travel with a peer, though notably more so gle-digit percentage points. See Exhibit 2. The
for passengers. The other criteria for choos- consistency of the results across age groups and
ing whom to travel with include profile photos, countries would suggest that the collaborative
speaking together on the phone prior to the trend is a social shift that is expanding across a
exchange and experience levels, as well as com- broad cross-section of society.
fort criteria such as whether an individual is a It is worth reflecting on how far we have
smoker and how many people will be in the car. come in less than a decade. Centuries-old so-
Comfort and civility go a long way toward creat- cial constructs have been superseded, organiza-
ing a trusted environment. tions are being disintermediated by connected
It is worth pointing out that the weight peers, ownership is being replaced by shared
of these mechanisms depends on the stakes usage, and even our ancestral apprehension of
involved in the exchange. Craigslist, for ex- strangers is changing. As we reinforce our faith
ample, favors a low-stakes, low-trust strategy, in each other through greater social and eco-
while eBay and Etsy use ratings but do limited nomic interactions with online peers, the over-
moderation themselves. Platforms such as all level of trust in society grows. When human
BlaBlaCar and Airbnb, on the other hand, offer beings trust each other more, a virtuous cycle
high-stakes offline experiences, so they have to of collaboration is set in motion. The possibili-
put more thought and effort into creating the ties become endless. We are at the dawn of an
highest possible level of trust between their incredibly promising era. Together, we are en-
users through ratings, moderation, verified tering the Trust Age.
IDs and insurance. This means they will have
to pay much more attention to the six pillars of
the DREAMS framework.

Positive Spillovers Across

the Sharing Economy
Close to half of BlaBlaCar members declared
that ride-sharing had made them more open to TO KNOW MORE
others. We tested whether this openness could
result in ride-sharers wanting to try other forms Mazzella, F. and A. Sundararajan. Entering the Trust
n

of sharing economy consumption and whether Age. BlaBlaCar and NYU Stern, 2016. Available at
familiarity with one collaborative service could http://blablacar.com/trust/
have positive spillovers on the usage of other
collaborative services. Sundararajan, A. The Sharing Economy: The End of
n

A quarter of BlaBlaCar members declared Employment and the Rise of Crowd-Based Capitalism
that, prior to ride-sharing, they were already MIT Press, 2016.

IESEinsight ISSUE 30 THIRD QUARTER 2016 31

View publication stats