Tourist identity and collaborative consumption: an analysis based on the discourse perceived by consumers on the Airbnb platform.

Abstract

Through digital platforms, collaborative consumption allows access to various products and services, taking on an essential role in the construction of identities. By expanding the participation of individuals in the choices of their travels and allowing direct contact between users, this form of consumption has managed to attract people searching for alternatives within the tourism market, and has given space for the anti-tourist discourse, aimed at consumers looking to distance themselves from traditional tourism, usually in mass. Understanding that consumers act in the propagation of discourses and images about a service or destination, as well as in the construction of their consumer identity, this study sought to understand how Airbnb users interpret the messages presented by the platform and relate them to their tourist (traditional) or traveler (anti-tourist) identity. The results of this study, of qualitative nature, obtained from the analysis of the data generated by semi-structured interviews, indicate that the interviewees identify themselves more with the proposal of the services offered by the platform than with the idea of being a tourist or a traveler. With similar interests, users reveal that they have consumption characteristics common to both consumer profiles, varying according to the type of trip that each one takes.

Keywords
Identity; Collaborative Consumption; Tourism; Anti-tourist discourse

Resumo

Por meio de plataformas digitais, o consumo colaborativo possibilita o acesso a diversos produtos e serviços, assumindo papel essencial na construção de identidades. Ao ampliar a participação dos indivíduos nas escolhas de suas viagens e permitir o contato direto entre os usuários, essa forma de consumo tem conseguido adesão de pessoas em busca de alternativas no mercado turístico, e dado espaço para o discurso anti-turista, direcionado para consumidores que procuram se distanciar do turismo tradicional, geralmente de massa. Compreendendo que os consumidores atuam na propagação de discursos e imagens sobre um serviço ou destino, bem como na construção de sua identidade de consumo, buscou-se entender como os usuários do Airbnb interpretam as mensagens apresentadas pela plataforma e as relacionam com a sua identidade de turista (tradicional) ou viajante (anti-turista). Os resultados deste estudo, de natureza qualitativa, obtidos a partir da análise dos dados gerados por entrevistas semiestruturadas, indicam que os respondentes se indetificam mais com a proposta dos serviços oferecidos pela plataforma do que com a ideia do ser turista ou viajante. Com interesses semelhantes, os usuários revelam possuir características de consumo comuns aos dois perfis de consumidores, variando conforme o tipo de viagem que cada um realiza.

Palavras-chave
Identidade; Consumo Colaborativo; Turismo; Discurso anti-turista

Resumen

A través de plataformas digitales, el consumo colaborativo permite el acceso a diversos productos y servicios, asumiendo un papel esencial en la construcción de identidades. Al expandir la participación de las personas en las opciones de sus viajes y permitir el contacto directo entre los usuarios, esta forma de consumo ha logrado atraer a las personas en busca de alternativas en el mercado turístico, y ha dado espacio para el discurso anti-turístico, dirigido para consumidores que buscan distanciarse del turismo tradicional, generalmente de masas. Entendiendo que los consumidores actúan en la propagación de discursos e imágenes sobre un servicio o destino, así como en la construcción de su identidad de consumidor, este estudio buscó comprender cómo los usuarios de Airbnb interpretan los mensajes presentados por la plataforma y los relacionan con sus identidad del turista (tradicional) o viajero (antiturista). Los resultados de este estudio, de carácter cualitativo, obtenidos del análisis de los datos generados por las entrevistas semiestructuradas, indican que los encuestados se identifican más con la propuesta de los servicios ofrecidos por la plataforma que con el mensaje o la identidad del turista o viajero. Con intereses similares, los usuarios revelan que tienen características de consumo comunes a ambos perfiles de consumidores, que varían según el tipo de viaje que realiza cada uno.

Palabras clave
Identidad; Consumo colaborativo; Turismo; Discurso anti-turístico

1 INTRODUCTION

The consumer society that emerged with modern capitalism led people to buy not only to meet their needs, but also for the symbolic value that goods and services can represent. By creating a basis for the individual in terms of behavior, social relationships, and self-perception, the consumption, which is not necessarily restricted to products, but includes symbols and images, becomes part of the consumer's own identity, leading him/her to seek more and more ways to build, maintain and express his/her identity (Baudrillard, 2019; Bauman, 1996; Gabriel & Lang, 2015; Vaquero & Calle, 2013). Similarly, tourism, as a practice of consumption and socio-cultural construction that provides not only the accumulation of experiences, but of reputation, status, and symbolic capital, is now consumed as a means of defining and communicating the social identity of those who travel (Wang, 2000, p. 204).

The advance in the means of communication and transportation in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, along with the increase in income and in the search for leisure during paid time off, favor the consumption of society’s cultural and natural heritage as a tourism product, boosting the establishment of the tourism sector as an economic and cultural activity (Richards, 2014; 2018). Thus, “being a tourist” and the idea of mass tourism translate one of modernity’s symbolic identities (Urry, 1988, 1990), since, when trying to escape the pressures of everyday life and reach immediate happiness, individuals expand their shopping habits to include tourist activities, encouraging the creation of new markets and consumers (Davison, 2005; Morin, 1986; Wang, 2000).

However, the massive expansion of tourism has resulted in social, cultural, and environmental problems for the receiving locations, leading visitors to be associated with negative issues such as inauthenticity and contamination (Cohen, 2010a; Munt, 1994; Week, 2012). The reductionist and one-dimensional production logic resulting from modern capitalism and reinforced by the neoliberal assumptions of the last decades, through the expansion of the free economic market, contributes to sustaining a culture of excessive consumption apparent in several social dimensions (Morin, 1986). In tourism, this excess results in contradictions for the sector itself, including the fact that some companies in the sector are now called travel agencies and no longer tourism agencies due to the negative connotation that the term tourist could cause, and people who travel start not wanting to be identified as such (Allis, 2014; Fussel, 1980; McCabe, 2005).

The postmodern social situation, marked by the globalization of markets, the commodification of socio-cultural practices, the widespread and standardized consumption, the social exclusion framework, and the unsustainable exploitation of individuals and of nature itself, also induces people to seek new consumption possibilities to express their own identities (Morin, 2007; 2011; Wang, 2000). Then, the need to create alternatives for the construction of a new reality comes up, based on a sociability paradigm and a plural economy that creates reflection paths to reduce the impacts caused so far (Morin, 2007; 2011). These factors, combined with financial crises, with discussions about sustainability and with the development of new technologies, favor the establishment of alternative forms of consumption, as is the case of collaborative consumption (Möhlmann, 2015).

Represented by digital platforms in a network format that promote access to goods and services in a shared and relational way, collaborative consumption involves business models that merge with ideas of collaboration and, in a way, are in opposition to the ideology of exacerbated consumption sustained during the twentieth century, seeking a new axis for contemporary social, economic, and political relations (Matos, Barbosa, & Matos, 2016; Forno & Garibaldi, 2015). In tourism, these platforms have changed the dynamics of the sector, expanding the possibilities of consumption, as is the case with shared accommodation, as well as facilitating the search by consumers to build a specific identity and hold authentic encounters with the local culture while traveling (Cohen, 2010b; Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Matos & Barbosa, 2018). Consequently, people are joining the collaborative platforms to consume travel services, either by the meanings related to tourism, such as the promise of authentic and distinct experiences, as well as for environmental and social matters, such as identification with the cause of sharing and the interest in having contact with the local community (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Vera & Gosling, 2018).

Among the messages released by the collaborative travel consumption platforms, it is worth noting that the image of the tourist, almost always represented by stereotypes, seems to continue to be reinforced in its texts (Allis, 2014; Arente & Kiiski, 2006; McWha, Frost, Laing, & Best, 2016). The Eat with a local platform displays messages on its website such as “be a traveler - don't be a tourist” (Eatwithalocal, 2017), while the Home-exchange platform proposes “get to know a culture without being a tourist” (Arente & Kiiski, 2006) and Couchsurfing presents a distinguishing moral discourse with indications about how people should travel, interact, and consume in their travels (Molz, 2013). As "being a tourist" can be characterized as a product of a discourse that is cultural and full of meanings (McCabe, 2005), these messages can have an impact on the construction of the touristic services consumer’s identity and on their consumption choices (McCabe, 2005; McWha et al., 2016; Molz, 2013).

The ideas propagated by organizations can be elements of encouragement and/or rejection for people, influencing their perceptions and attitudes towards places, services, and their own identity (Arente & Kiiski, 2006; Cohen, 2010c; Dobscha & Ozanne, 2001; Oskam & Boswijk, 2016; Russo, Lombardi, & Mangiagli, 2013; Trivett & Staff, 2013; Tussyadiah, 2015; Zekanovic-Korona & Grzunov, 2014). But individuals also participate in the production and reproduction of messages as an extension of their identity (Bezerra & Covaleski, 2013; FiF?rat & Dholakia, 2006; Navarro & Berrozpe, 2016). Thus, this study aims to understand the possible relationship which exists between the discourses presented by collaborative travel platforms and the identity of the individuals who consume these services. To this end, we sought to analyze how consumers perceive the messages presented by the Airbnb travel platform on their website and relate them to their identity as tourists or travelers.

2 IDENTITY AND COLLABORATIVE TRAVEL CONSUMPTION

The possessions of individuals reflect their identities; however, these possessions are formed not only by objects, but also by people, places, and their own bodies (Belk, 1988). Thus, tourism and the possibility of meeting with the “other” have been understood as opportunities for individuals to form and reshape their own personal identity (Cohen, 2010c; Desforges, 2000). As identity is always in the process of change, consumers see travel as a way to find their own space outside the contradictions faced throughout their lives (Davison, 2005, p. 36) and take these experiences as a way to build their own identity (Desforges, 2000; Noy, 2004; Neumann, 1992), expressing themselves by the consumption practices and cultural activities that they choose to carry out during their trips (Wang, 2000, p. 183).

With the businesses that arose from the advancement of technology and the transition from the industrial economy to the information and experience economy, people now have greater possibilities of building the Self, previously declared by the material purchases they made (Belk, 2013; 2014; Zekanovic-Korona & Grzunov, 2014). Through collaborative consumption platforms, people find more opportunities to express their identity as they can access various services and products without having to own the property (Arente & Kiiski, 2006; Belk, 2013; Bostman & Rogers, 2011), and at the same time, realizing benefits such as reduced costs, direct contact with the hosts, the access to information that does not come from traditional intermediaries and the possibility to experience personalized and shared experiences (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Vera & Gosling, 2018).

The motivations for using collaborative platforms can be both utilitarian, due to the cost benefit they represent, as well as because of the identification with the cause, for example, the anti-consumption, the ecologically sustainable consumption, and the expansion of the sense of community (Möhlmann, 2015). Others, in turn, are attracted by the trendiness or novelty of these businesses, but, in general, they are always motivated by economic, environmental and/or social issues, such as the interest in expanding personal connections and transforming society (Schor, 2014). Also, with regard to travel consumption, there are people who choose not to use collaborative services because they fear for their safety, they do not trust on transactions between people, they think they are not young enough, they want more convenience and privacy, they do not know the services on offer, they have never had the opportunity to use the platforms or even because they do not want to interact with other people (Farias, Silva, & Barbosa, 2019; Tussyadiah 2015; Vera & Gosling, 2018).

The relationship between collaborative and sharing consumption with symbolic issues that go beyond utilitarian interests may indicate that people who choose these networks are also seeking to constitute their own identity (Rohden, Durayski, Teixeira, Montelongo Flores, & Rossi, 2015). By simplifying production and consumption logistics, collaborative consumption platforms have enabled the multiplication of online interest groups and the diffusion of shared lifestyles since individuals who choose this type of consumption seem to have well-defined interests (Forno & Garibaldi, 2015). In a survey with users of the Home-exchange tourism platform, for example, it was found that the majority of consumers identify themselves with environmentally sustainable tourism, fair trade, the purchase of organic food and with the support for social causes (Forno & Garibaldi, 2015). Young people also seem to lead the consumption of collaborative services, perhaps because they have a greater proximity to online sharing (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Maurer, Figueiró, Campos, Silva, & Barcellos, 2012).

Arente and Kiiski (2006) also perceive that collaborative consumption plays an important role in building the identity of consumers, perhaps even expressing a manifestation against the image of the traditional tourist. Users of the Home-exchange platform do not want to be considered as traditional tourists, but rather as travelers, because they think that this nomenclature better reflects their goals of living the lives a local would live, cooking in their kitchen, and talking to their neighbors. So, as the traveler/tourist dichotomy has been persistent in travel texts (McWha et al., 2016) it is possible that anti-tourist discourse may be a part of the very identity of consumers who choose collaborative consumption. The negative view of mass tourism, the promotion of responsible tourism, as well as the search for unique experiences, and the encounter with others are examples of discourses related to the tourist versus traveler dilemma and to the promise of authentic experiences in contemporary travel (Matos & Barbosa, 2018; McWha et al., 2016).

To encourage consumption, travel texts tend to use positive adjectives to classify consumers and the experiences that they are offering. Thus, the term traveler usually represents courageous, adventurous, true, modern individuals, while organizations claim to provide “truly” authentic travel experiences for their consumers (Munt, 1994; Forno & Garibaldi, 2015). But also these individuals also, when building their own discourses based on the ideas of authenticity and anti-tourist identity, can create and reproduce the sense of authenticity in tourism as well as reinforce the dilemma of the traveler/tourist, since these discourses usually appear in relation to one another (McCabe, 2005). In this sense, the analysis of the consumers' perception in relation to the discourses presented by the organizations may help to understand the postmodern tourism practices, as well as the factors to which they are opposed (Krippendorf, 1987; Munt; 1994).

The identity of the traveler as opposed to the tourist has become a frequent topic in tourism studies in order to understand the difference between these consumers (Boorstin, 1964; Cohen, 1988; Cohen, 2010a; Dann, 1999; Galani-Moutafi, 2000; Jacobsen, 2000; McCannell, 1976; McWha et al., 2016; Shepherd, 2003). In this study, it is considered that the tourist is related to the profile of traditional travel consumption, in this case the mass consumer, of standardized travel packages, and the traveler to the one who positions himself/herself as a non-tourist consumer.

3 THE TOURIST (TRADITIONAL) AND THE TRAVELER (ANTI-TOURIST)

The growth of tourism as an industry in the late nineteenth century has allowed travel, which was previously almost exclusively available to the upper social classes, to become an accessible product for a larger number of people, generating massive growth in the sector. However, the negative impacts brought to the places, such as cultural and environmental depredation, started to characterize the activity and the figure of the tourist (Galani-Moutafi, 2000; Jacobsen, 2000; Week, 2012). To escape from this association, tourism companies and individuals that travel independently begin to strive to widen the existing differences between tourists and travelers through their discourses (Munt, 1994) and alternative ways of traveling, such as collaborative consumption platforms, emerge in the tourist market (Week, 2012).

In seeking to understand the differences between travel and tourism, tourist and traveler, the literature basically divided consumers into two categories: travelers (anti-tourists) and tourists (Shepherd, 2003). For Boorstin (1994), tourism as an organized activity has replaced the individual traveler, the one who used to travel to meet the other, usually on business (in reference to “discovery” and study trips of past centuries), giving way to the figure of the mass tourist, an individual protected from this contact through travel agencies, primarily looking for leisure (Boorstin, 1964; Cohen, 2010a; Urry, 1988). This tourist, who becomes part of the invented, prefabricated travel experiences, is considered as a passive being in search of comfort and pleasure, while the traveler is seen as an active being in search of people and adventures (Boorstin, 1964).

Although there is no unanimity on this dilemma (Cohen, 2010a), the traveler is generally regarded as a good independent travel practitioner, while the tourist is seen as dependent (Shepherd, 2003). The traveler can enter the space of the other, their habits and traditions, experiencing the authentic while the tourist is content with the staged, copied culture (Shepherd, 2003). But if on the one hand, tourists take the blame for destroying other people’s cultures, on the other, travelers seem only concerned with experiencing that culture before it is destroyed by tourism, refraining from any negative impact that they maybe could bring to a region (Shepherd, 2003; McWha et al., 2016). In an almost romanticized view of his/her experience, travelers believe they are involved in a travel practice that is superior to traditional mass tourism in terms of moral matters, as they do not cause the same problems (Cohen, 2010a; Week, 2012). However, such travelers seem to disregard that in some cases they end up taking tourist activity to areas not yet explored, changing their culture and social dynamics, just as tourists do (McWha et al., 2016; Week, 2012).

Although not every traveler considers himself/herself anti-tourist (Jacobsen, 2000), most of them seem to create their identity by opposing to the attitudes of others, identifying their travel experiences as unique and authentic, unlike the travels of tourists (Cohen, 2010a; McCabe, 2005). In her studies, Week (2012) points out that for people who identify themselves as travelers, the term better characterizes their identity because: they reject modernity, which means that they look for experiences and not just leisure as the tourists do; they seek authenticity, while tourists seek comfort, fun and relaxation; they are interested in non-touristic places, although not all travelers reject the traditional points of the places they visit; they seek to do what locals do, not participating in activities designed for tourists; they have a different relationship with photography, avoiding using it frequently; they respect the local culture in a way they believe is not possible for tourists; and are modest in their spending, as they consider themselves as having less financial resources than mass tourists. These characteristics are shown in Figure 1 (one):

Figure 1
Characteristics of tourists and travelers attributed by the participants.

Tourists	Travelers
Accept tourism as a part of modern life	Reject modernity
Seek comfort, fun, relaxation	Seek authenticity
Travel to destinations that offer these possibilities	Try to get out of the "common place"
Live in tourist enclaves	Immerse themselves in local life
Are ignorant of local culture	Try to respect the local culture
Use cameras to “capture” their destination	Avoid using camera ostentatiously
Spend lavishly	Spend frugally
Short “holidays”	Long trips

• Fonte: Adapted from Week (2012), p. 193.

It is visible, therefore, that the consumption characteristics of one are opposed to the other. Although the study participants did not mention the duration of their trips as a way to differentiate them from tourists, Week (2012) believes that travelers spend more time on their travel experiences, ranging from 3 months to 1 year. Dann (1999) also considers that tourists have less time available on their trips and Cohen (2010a) points out that the non-tourist trip has characteristics of a longer journey, which involves the interior of the individual. Another issue brought up by Week (2012) is that the difference between mass tourists and travelers can be marked by a class distinction. The act of traveling as described by the travelers in her research seems to be an activity possible for a particular social class that, in her perception, encompasses western citizens, educated, single, physically able, healthy, and of middle or upper class.

Jacobsen (2000) also realizes that travelers generally have financial limitations, preferring to travel outside the high season when there are fewer tourists and prices are lower. And Jacobsen (2000) as well as Galani-Moutafi (2000) note that people who have anti-tourist attitudes do not base their choices on commercials and tourist catalogs because they want to maintain their independence from the market, relying on reports from other travelers and literary texts. However, there are criticisms about this dichotomy. Galani-Moutafi (2000) questions whether there are real differences between tourists, travelers, and also ethnographers, as both are observers in search of their reflection in the other. For Fussell (1980) this anguish is an illusion that the anti-tourist feeds for himself/herself, because everyone continues to be tourists in some way and for Shepherd (2003) only one distinction is acceptable: that tourists understand that they are not travelers, even if intuitively, and that travelers perceive themselves as not being tourists.

The attempt to separate these two consumers is therefore full of difficulties (Cohen, 2010a). It may not be possible to accurately distinguish who is and who is not a tourist, because in terms of spatial dynamics, everyone involved in tourism is mixed, including residents (Allis, 2014; Mee, 2007; Shepherd, 2003). Furthermore, it is possible that the travel behavior of individuals may vary between the two extremes, that is, between being a traveler or tourist depending on the situation (McWha et al., 2016). Travelers may want to get out of the bubble that surrounds the mass tourist while still using some of the services offered by travel packages, such as more comfortable accommodation, similar to the type of explorer travelers brought by Cohen (1972). Travelers and tourists themselves do not form a single group (Cohen, 2010a; Nash, 2001), some may not want to be identified as backpackers and others may not see much difference between them and tourists (Oreilly, 2005; Welk, 2004).

Still, positioning yourself as a tourist seems morally unacceptable (McCabe, 2005). The discourses of the tourist/traveler and authenticity appear to be part of postmodern tourism, being stimulated by the market and by society itself (Cohen, 2010a; Dann, 1999; Week, 2012; McWha et al., 2016), resulting on collaborative travel consumption. As individuals participate in the production of value and meanings that reflect their identity and contribute to the understanding of what would be authentic or not in tourism along with the media, the market, science, and their personal experiences (Bezerra & Covaleski, 2013; FiF?rat & Dholakia, 2006; Jenkins, 2003), it is important to broaden the understanding of the discourses that involve the collaborative consumption of tourism.

4 METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES

In order to consider the individual’s perceptions, the meanings assigned by them, the context they experience and the social relationships they develop, the constructivist paradigm and the qualitative approach were adopted in the development of this research (Creswell, 2010; 2014; Flick, 2013). Data collection was carried out through semi-structured interviews with people who had used the Airbnb platform in the past three years. The 28 interviews achieved were carried out with the help of a script prepared based on the literature review presented about the consumption experience and the construction of identity (Belk, 2014; Cohen, 2010c; Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Silva, 2015, among others), as well as in the indications of Gill (2003) for formulating questions and the description of tourists and travelers brought by Week (2012).

The textual element that exemplifies part of the discourse of collaborative consumption in this study refers to the messages perceived by consumers when using the Airbnb website and the statements expressed by those interviewed during the interviews. The context that involved the consumption experience of individuals was also considered in order to understand how consumers interpret the messages on the platform and how they see themselves in relation to the identity of tourist and/or traveler (Arente & Kiiski, 2006; Cohen, 2010b; Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015; Gill, 2003; Silva, 2015; Week, 2012). During the interviews, the inquiries referred to the consumers' perception of the messages proposed by the platform's website and their consumer identity. Characteristics of two types of consumers were also presented - A and B, asking people to say with whom they identified. Consumer A represented tourists and consumer B travelers, as defined by Week (2012) in Figure 1, but the participants were not aware of these denominations, defining themselves only as consumer A or B.

The interviews were conducted between November and December 2017 in person and electronically, and the interviewees were intentionally selected from the researchers' contacts (Creswell, 2010). Then the snowball technique was used, in which the first participants indicated other people to participate in the research (Penrod, Preston, Cain, & Starks, 2003). The principle of data saturation which happens when the interviews do not bring new information (Gouveia et al., 2016) helped to reach the ideal number of interviewees. For the analysis of the corpus formed by the interviews, the transcription of the statements was made, followed by the discourse analysis. In more detail, after identifying the ideas and the subjects involved in the interviewees' statements, the information was coded, seeking the main contents and divergent opinions; followed by the analysis of the coded information, highlighting the variability and regularity of the data; and, finally, the elaboration of the results through a detailed writing and the inclusion of the context that involved the consumption experience (Chaves, 2016; Fairclough, 2003; Gill, 2003; Vaara, 2015).

To reach the quality criteria necessary for a qualitative research (Creswell, 2010; Flick, 2013; Godoy, 2005), pre-tests of the interviews were carried out, checking the information obtained with some of the interviewees, as well as the documentation of the entire research process and careful description of the results.

5 DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

To facilitate the result’s comprehension, this section is divided as follows: interpretation of the platform's discourse by consumers (5.1) and identification of consumers with the discourses presented by the platform and with the identity of tourist or traveler (5.2). Airbnb users who took part in the survey are mostly young people – the majority between 22 and 30 years old – which is consistent with the notion that young people lead the use of these platforms (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Belk, 2010). Most of them have good educational level – complete higher education and postgraduate studies, and have individual monthly income of R$ 1.000,00 to R$ 2.500,00. They are Brazilian, although many live abroad, and they travel frequently – at least twice a year.

A good part of the interviewees are students and only one had no occupation at the moment. They are also regular travel consumers and usually travel as a couple and/or in a group (only two people used the platform to stay when they were alone). Everyone had used the platform recently and most of them for more than once, indicating approval of the service. In general, they stayed in accommodation when they were abroad and the number of days they stayed ranged from 2 days (1 night) to 40 days, but most of them have used the accommodation between 2 and 7 days, which in this case can be considered a short period of time.

5.1 Interpretation of the platform's discourse by consumers

In order to understand the perception of consumers about the target audience of the platform, they were asked about to whom they believed the Airbnb messages were being directed to, as well as who would identify with the platform's proposal and who would not use its services. With regard to the first question, the interviewees reported that Airbnb directs its discourse to young people, mainly because they have greater facility in using digital tools, consistent with the literature (Belk, 2010; Bardhi & Eckhardhi, 2012; Maurer et al., 2012, p. 2). They also reported that the website was aimed at those who travel on their own, that is, independently, without travel agencies. This question was frequent in the research, corroborating the idea that consumers have been looking for digital platforms in search of greater autonomy to organize their trip, since these platforms reduce the role of the intermediary (Arente & Kiiski, 2006; Cánovas & Villanueva, 2015; Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015).

Other users also believe that Airbnb messages are aimed at people looking for the experience of being a local, immersing themselves in the local culture, and that prioritize experience more than comfort, in addition to seeking to save money and be open to new possibilities of consumption. They are, therefore, people who seek experiences (FiF?rat & Dholakia, 2006; Forno & Garibaldi, 2015), contact with the local community (Trivett & Staff, 2013; Oskam & Boswijk, 2016), and cost reduction (Villanova, 2015; Vaquero & Calle, 2013). It should be noted that in some comments, there was a certain distinction between Airbnb accommodation and that of hotels, as well as between the experiences achieved with the platform and those of a tourist, which denotes an anti-tourist stance by the interviewees. None of them even used the term tourist to describe the platform's target audience, but travelers.

In general, interviewees believe that the platform's speech is aimed at travel consumers looking for alternatives to traditional lodging facilities, seeking integration and cultural exchange, as well as security, cost benefit and sharing experiences. It would therefore be for people motivated by social aspects and identity with the cause of sharing (Trivett & Staff, 2013; Tussyadiah, 2015; Schor, 2014; Vera & Gosling, 2018), as well as for those who use the service only for utilitarian factors, such as economy and convenience (Möhlmann, 2015). There were those who understood that the messages were being directed to any type of consumer due to the diversity of accommodations and values available, however, these people highlighted the familiarity with technology as a requirement for those using collaborative services.

About the type of person who would identify with the service proposal presented by Airbnb on its website,users reaffirmed that they would be young people, looking for experience and giving up the comfort and convenience of a hotel in favor of the cost reduction. As well as people looking to meet new people, who are more sociable and who use the internet to book accommodation, that is, people that travel independently. People who seek cost benefit (quality and price), who want alternatives to traditional means of accommodation and who travel in groups would also be identified within the range of the service proposal. In this case, people motivated by economic and social aspects (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2015; Möhlmann, 2015; Villanova, 2015; Maurer et al., 2012), people who seek to escape the traditional means of accommodation, and possibly mass tourism (Cánovas & Villanueva, 2015; Molz, 2013). There were those who stated that all people could identify themselves with the service offered, reinforcing the idea of the platform's broad audience reach.

The characteristics mentioned by users about the target audience of the website's messages and about the people who would identify with the platform's service proposal are befitting, with consistency in the information. The characteristics also coincide with the profile of the postmodern travel consumer with regard to active and independent participation in travel processes (Arente & Kiiski, 2006), greater interest in experiences (FiF?rat & Dholakia, 2006), in the new things (Urry, 1988), in contact with local culture (Dredge & Gyimóthy, 2015), in social connections (Maurer et al., 2012; Vaquero & Calle, 2013; Vera & Gosling, 2018), and cost reduction (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2015; Möhlmann, 2015).

About the type of person who would not use the services proposed by the platform, users mentioned individuals who seek greater convenience and comfort (that is, they prefer traditional accommodation because they do not want to have to cook and clean, for example); who do not feel safe (with transactions over the internet, with the platform, with the fact of staying at the other people's homes) and who are conservative (prefer traditional accommodation, are afraid of collaborative services, do not want to stay in other people's homes). Some mentioned the elderly as a public that would not use Airbnb, either for reasons of insecurity, lack of information or because they are not familiar with current technologies, and others mentioned people who want greater impersonality, that is, less contact with people; as well as those that are part of the “class A”, for seeking status and not needing to save money; those who do not know the service and those who travel through agencies, either because they do not like to plan their own trip, or due to lack of time because the platform requires a period of research.

Distrust in people and p2p relationships (from person to person), lack of knowledge about the service and the way they work, as well as issues of convenience, privacy, and personal interaction were frequently mentioned in this topic as deterrents, consistent with the literature on the non-use of collaborative services (Farias et al., 2019; Tussyadiah, 2015; Vera & Gosling, 2018). There was also a denotation that there would be no profile of people who would not use the platform, due to the diversity of options and prices available.

5.2 Identification of consumers with the discourses perceived on the platform and with the identity of tourist or traveler

After understanding the interpretation of consumers about the target audience of the platform, we sought to know how they identified themselves with the messages presented and how they defined themselves in relation to the identity of tourist and traveler as consumers of travel. Regarding personal identification with the messages, it was noted that users identify themselves with the discourse perceived on the platform, mainly because they seek what the platform says they offer. More specifically, they identify with messages that match their economic (cost and quality), utilitarian (safety and ease of use), and social (hospitality) interests, motivating factors for collaborative consumption (Farias et al., 2019; Möhlmann, 2015; Schor, 2014; Villanova, 2015; Maurer et al., 2012).

Others also claimed to identify themselves with the messages of comfort, of feeling at home, of flexibility (payment, time, and location), cost-effective (quality and fair price), and personalized service, reinforcing both utilitarian and distinguishing aspects (different, alternative service) (Forno & Garibaldi, 2015; Cánovas & Villanueva, 2015). One person reported not identifying herself with the perceived idea of experiencing the place as a local because she recognized her role as a tourist when she travels, characteristic of the postmodern tourist according to Urry (1988). This person used the platform for the credibility and trust she obtained from the comments on the website, that is, for the utilitarian aspect. This was also the only person who used the term tourist to speak of herself, implying that her identity did not match the platform.

In fact, only two people said they identified with the message of experiencing the place as a local, a fact that indicates that this discourse has no direct influence on the individuals' consumption decision, unlike what Trivett and Staff (2013) have observed.

Regarding the service proposal presented by Airbnb, two people said they agree with what is proposed because they identify with the idea of sharing, in which all sides win. Another person stated that he did not agree with the proposal, which for him is collaborative tourism, saying he used the platform for the cost benefit found (convenience and economy). Another interviewee stated that he identified with the proposed p2p interaction and contact, but that was not a reason to choose Airbnb, reporting that he uses it because it is cheaper.

It is noticed that few people claimed to identify themselves with messages of belief in the common good and with the cause of sharing. Individuals reveal that they use the services both for utilitarian reasons, due to the perceived cost benefit, and because of their identification with collaborative consumption (Bostman & Rogers, 2011; Möhlmann, 2015), but in this case the identification is with the service format proposed by the organization in more so than the aspects related to the cause of sharing and collaboration. The price and cost benefit appear as significant factors for those who seek the service of the Airbnb, but at the same time, the aspect of the experience, the contact with people and the local community are issues that seem to match the identity of the individuals that choose the platform (Matos & Barbosa, 2018), although these factors are not unanimous nor determinant for the choice of consumption.

Regarding how the interviewees defined themselves as consumers of travel, all of them mentioned having characteristics of the two profiles presented in Figure 1, with the majority approaching the characteristics of consumer B (that is, the traveler) and a smaller part, consumer A (tourist). There were also some people who presented the same proportion of characteristics of the two types of consumers (A and B), that is, they identified themselves with both types equally. Such data indicate that there is not a single tourist or traveler identity among users, but rather a mixture of behaviors and characteristics, which strengthens the understanding that the distinction between the two types of consumers is not clear (Allis, 2014; Cohen, 2010a; McWha et al., 2016; Mee, 2007; Fussell, 1980) since consumption practices can vary between the two extremes (tourists and travelers) depending on the situation (McWha et al., 2016).

When looking at the data together, it is noted that users: accept tourism as part of modern life, seek leisure, but also seek experiences (characteristics listed for both tourists and travelers); seek comfort, fun and relaxation, but also seek authenticity (both tourists and travelers); travel to places that offer possibilities for leisure, comfort, and relaxation, but also try to leave the common place when traveling (tourists and travelers). In addition, they seek to immerse themselves in local life, seeking contact with the community (travelers); try to respect the local culture (travelers); use the camera constantly and/or avoid using it ostensibly (tourists and travelers); they spend sparingly (travelers) and make more short trips (tourists and travelers). They do not travel in tourist enclaves (travelers) and are aware of the local culture (travelers).

Thus, there is a greater identification of users with the characteristics of consumer B (traveler), particularly with regard to immersion in local life, respect for local culture, restrained spending, and traveling independently. The user’s search for leisure does not seem to cancel the search for experience, just as the search for comfort, relaxation and fun does not undo the interest in authenticity as suggested by the denominations. People indicate leaving the common place, seeking contact with the community, and not getting stuck on tourist routes. Regarding tourist routes, few people claim to travel in tourist enclaves, that is, closed packages, groups from agencies, pre-defined itineraries. Those who identify with this consumption characteristic explain that they buy packages, but not for all travel days, as they also like to be free to immerse themselves in local life.

Still on this point, a person stated that he does not buy closed packages at agencies, but follows his script and does not seek contact with the community or with activities common to locals. Therefore, even if he is not traveling as a tourist buying closed packages, his behavior is also not that of a traveler (according to Week, 2012), because he is not interested in contact with local people or activities outside the official itinerary, traveling in his own tourist bubble. Thus, it is possible that not everyone who uses collaborative travel consumption is looking for interaction, for living as a local, or fleeing traditional tourist spots, as suggested by the literature (Russo, Lombardi & Mangiagli, 2013; Trivett & Sraff, 2013; Farias et al., 2019; Forno & Garibaldi, 2015).

As for the few people who said they did not know the local culture, the explanation given was that they prefer to discover and explore the destination when they are in it, not researching much before traveling. Regarding the use of the camera (or cell phones with camera), people were divided in this regard. Some said they used it ostensibly (tourist behavior in this case), while others said they avoid using it while traveling (traveler's behavior). In a society guided by the intensive use of images and online social networks, this issue of photography can be contradictory, since the same person can constantly use their camera or avoid using it, depending on the occasion. Thus, once again, it is clear that individuals can vary their consumption behaviors according to the trip they take.

With regard to spending, few people claim to spend generously when traveling. Those who declare this type of behavior, claim to spend on other travel items and not necessarily on accommodation. In general, they prefer to save on accommodation and spend more on food and tours during the trip. The act of spending sparingly, which is related to the identity of the traveler, is consistent with the idea of savings and cost reduction that users have from the platform, which may indicate that consumers identify with the proposed range of prices and options. But the fact of saving on accommodation to spend on other items goes against the concept of reducing consumption related to collaborative platforms (Möhlmann, 2015; Vaquero & Calle, 2013).

The matter of changing consumption behavior according to the type of trip (McWha et al., 2016) was recurrent during the research, related to points such as the number of people with whom they travel and the available time they have at the destination. If people have more time in the place, they tend to seek greater contact with the community and experiences outside the tourist route. Regarding the duration of the trip, the interviewees show that they make more short trips (weekends and holidays) than long ones, which for them represents more than seven days in the locality. This data differs from what Week (2012) considers as a long trip for travelers, which would be from 3 months to a year. By the way, only five people have used the platform to stay for more than 10 days, of which only one used it for 40 days. The act of making short trips is generally related to the tourist consumer (Dann, 1999; Week, 2012) but we can see that the short trips are also held by consumers who have traveler characteristics.

The information obtained from the interviewees' speech leads us to believe that people may exhibit opposite consumption behaviors according to the trip they take and that their identity as a travel consumer may vary between what is understood as a traveler and a tourist. One could imagine a continuum between these two types of consumers (tourists and travelers) and that according to the trip (mainly the number of travel companions and the time available) people would behave more like one than the other, and sometimes they could act like both at the same time. There does not seem to be a clear, exact, and timeless distinction about these two types of consumers (Fussell, 1980; Shepherd, 2003; McWha et al., 2016; Mee, 2007), because even though there is greater identification with the characteristics of travelers, all users of the platform also have behaviors that are said to be tourist-like, such as the search for leisure and fun.

Thus, although consumers do not declare themselves as tourists, as only one person uses this term to describe herself while others use the term to distance themselves from this nomenclature, the separation of the identities of travelers/tourists may be illusory and irrelevant for the contemporary consumer, since all are part of the tourist activity even if they do not want to be perceived as such (Mee, 2007; Shepherd, 2003). It is possible, then, that travel consumers seek to navigate in different cultures, not getting stuck in any of them (FiF?rat & Dholakia, 2006), shaping their identity according to each moment experienced (Bauman, 2001).

In this sense, the tourist/traveler dichotomy does not seem to fully represent this consumer, since he/she is interested in enjoying all kinds of tourist experiences that interest him/her, controlling his/her moments (Arente & Kiiski, 2006; Sharpley, 2003). The difference seems to be that with digital platforms people can act more independently and gain access to different experiences and services in an easier and economic way.

6 CONCLUDING REMARKS

With the reflections on collaborative consumption in tourism, on the discourses brought by travel texts and the identity of people who consume shared hosting services, it is perceived that the messages presented by organizations can have different interpretations depending on the consumer because he/she is able to reinterpret and create new meanings based on his/her own knowledge and worldview. Even exposed to various types of messages and stimuli, people show considerable understanding about what type of service they are consuming and what are the possible benefits to be achieved, even when they realize that not everything that is presented is possible to be carried out in practice, or that they consume without identifying exactly with what is being said. Thus, the discourses disseminated by the collaborative consumption platforms can encourage people's consumption and influence the construction of their identity as consumers of travel, but they have a certain freedom to absorb or disregard such ideas, according to their interests and previous consumption experiences.

About the way consumers interpret the platform's discourse and relate it to their identity, there was consistency between the messages perceived on the website and the consumption profile of the interviewees, mostly young people, who travel independently, prioritize the economy, are familiar with technology, seek experiences, contact with people and the community, characteristics that are closer to the identity of the traveler than the tourist according to the categorizations adopted in the research. The characteristics of being young, traveling independently and being open to different experiences were frequent, indicating that consumers of collaborative travel services have similar lifestyles and interests, as indicated by the literature review.

Regarding the distinction of tourists and travelers proposed by Week (2012) it was observed that users of the platform have more characteristics of travelers, in particular due to restrained expenses, immersion in local life and contact with the community, but they could act as travelers and/or tourists, depending on the trip. The number of days available, travel companions, and personal interests are factors that usually modify the consumption behavior of users. On the other hand, it was noted that there is an implicit anti-tourist discourse on the part of consumers. By not using the term tourist to refer to themselves or the target audience of the platform, the interviewees reveal a certain aversion to this type of travel consumer, some of them consciously.

Some people even perceived an anti-tourist discourse expressed in the ideas presented by the platform about knowing the place visited as a local and not as a tourist. Thus, the anti-tourist discourse that promotes the image of the traveler and diminishes that of the tourist seems in fact stimulated in the market and in society, as indicated by the literature, but in a subtle way. Even though individuals perceive and reproduce this discourse, the distinction between the two types of consumers does not seem to exist in practice when it comes to consumer behavior.

The fact that all interviewees also have behaviors that are said to be of tourists and travelers attests to the perception that this separation can be illusory and, sometimes, contradictory. There is an implicit discourse, but the identity and the choices of consumption move between the two extremes according to the diverse possibilities of consumption and the interests of contemporary travel consumers. In this sense, the discourses propagated by the collaborative consumption of tourism from the travel platforms does not seem to contribute to the formation of a unique tourist or traveler identity, since it is difficult to separate individuals in these two categories of consumption. But still, these terms seem to have specific meanings for consumers of collaborative travel services as they prefer not to identify themselves as tourists.

Regarding the relationship between the identity of tourist/traveler and identification with the platform's discourse, there were no noticeable differences between the way the consumer (who identified himself/herself more as) traveler or tourist matched the platform's discourse, as cost-benefit issues were the most mentioned among them. In addition, few people identify more as a tourist than as a traveler, and there is no great distinction between the speeches of these consumers. Consumers identify with the discourse perceived on the platform's website, with greater emphasis on economic and utilitarian aspects (cost, facilities, security), with social aspects (hospitality, p2p contact, and different experiences) also mentioned. As for the sharing discourse, few people mentioned identifying themselves with this cause, as well as with the idea of knowing the place as a local.

Thus, the consumer identity of collaborative platforms seems more connected to the identification of people with messages (such as those of ease of use, economy, and hospitality) and with the platform's service proposal (like the p2p contact and being an alternative to traditional means of accommodation) than with the identity of being a tourist or traveler, and even with the cause of sharing and collaboration. The possibility to choose between different service and product options, to filter the information that interests them and to shape their trip according to the conditions of the moment are factors that seem to contribute to broaden the individual’s performance in the formation of their identities and thereby reformulating their consumer experiences.

By relating the identity and collaborative consumption constructs based on discourse analysis, the study contributes to the enrichment of scientific and business debates on new forms of consumption in tourism making it possible to understand part of the process of forming the identity of consumers in the face of the sharing economy, as it leads us to reflect on the role of marketing professionals and consumers in these dynamics, facilitating the market analysis of the tourism sector. It is believed that, due to the constant changes in the economic and social scenario, the continuous search for knowing the individual’s perception about the discourses disseminated by organizations and their relationship with the construction of their identity is necessary since it can reveal attitudes and meanings that involve consumption practices over the time.

In addition, the realization of studies that broaden the scope presented here and that deal with ideological issues, power relations, class differences and possibilities of emancipation in the context of collaborative consumption can collaborate with the advancement of knowledge about the construction of the “self” and the travel consumption behavior.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was carried out with the support of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazil (CAPES) - Financing Code 001.

• RECOGNITION

  This work is the result of a Master's Dissertation prepared by Luana Alexandre Silva, under the guidance of Maria de Lourdes de Azevedo Barbosa, for the Postgraduate Program in Management/PROPAD of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil.
• How to Cite: Silva, L. A.; Barbosa, M. L. A.; Farias, M. L. (2021). Tourist identity and collaborative consumption: an analysis based on the discourse perceived by consumers on the Airbnb platform. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo, São Paulo, 15 (2), e-1993, May./Aug. http://dx.doi.org/10.7784/rbtur.v15i2.1993

REFERÊNCIAS

• Allis, T. (2014). Viajantes, visitantes, turistas... Em busca de conceitos em um mundo urbano. Caderno Virtual de Turismo, 14(1), p. 23-38.
• Baudrillard, J. (2019). For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign Verso Books.
• Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of consumer research, 39(4), p. 881-898. https://doi.org/10.1086/666376
  » https://doi.org/10.1086/666376
• Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2015). The sharing economy isn’t about sharing at all. Harvard business review, 28(1), 2015.
• Bauman, Z. (2001). Modernidade Líquida Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.
• Bauman, Z. (1996). From pilgrim to tourist–or a short history of identity. Questions of cultural identity, Sage Publications, 18-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221907.n2
  » https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221907.n2
• Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of business research, 67(8), p. 1595-1600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001
• Belk, R. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of consumer research, 40(3), p. 477-500. https://doi.org/10.1086/671052
  » https://doi.org/10.1086/671052
• Belk, R. (2010). Sharing. Journal of consumer research, 36(5), p. 715-734. https://doi.org/10.1086/612649
  » https://doi.org/10.1086/612649
• Belk, R. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of consumer research, 15(2), p. 139-168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
  » https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
• Bezerra, B. B., & Covaleski, R. (2013). Estratégias de Comunicação na Cultura Digital: publicidade e entretenimento aliados. Revista GEMInIS, 4(2), p. 120-133.
• Boorstin, D. (1964). The Image: a guide to pseudo-events America 1961.
• Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2011). O que é meu é seu: como o consumo colaborativo vai mudar o nosso mundo Bookman Editora.
• Chaves, H. (2016). Operacionalização da Análise de Discurso na Investigação Social: um exemplo de percurso metodológico CIAIQ2016, 3.
• Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of tourism research, 15(3), p. 371-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(88)90028-X
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(88)90028-X
• Cohen, E. (1972). Toward a sociology of international tourism Social research, p. 164-182.
• Cohen, S. (2010a). Re-conceptualising lifestyle travellers: contemporary 'drifters'. In: Hannam, K.; Diekmann, A. (Eds.). Beyond Backpacker Tourism: Mobilities and Experiences Channel View Publications, Clevedon, pp. 64-84.
• Cohen, S. (2010b). Searching for escape, authenticity and identity: Experiences of lifestyle travellers. In: Morgan, M.; Lugosi, P.; Ritchie, J. R. B. (Eds.). The Tourism and Leisure Experience: Consumer and Managerial Perspectives Bristol: Channel View Publications, p. 27-42. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781845411503-005
  » https://doi.org/10.21832/9781845411503-005
• Cohen, S. (2010c). Personal identity (de)formation among lifestyle travellers: A double-edged sword? Leisure Studies, v. 29, p. 289-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360903434100
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360903434100
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Investigação Qualitativa e Projeto de Pesquisa-: Escolhendo entre Cinco Abordagens Penso Editora.
• Creswell, J. W. (2010). Projeto de pesquisa métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto
• Dann, G. (1999). Writing out the tourist in space and time. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(1), p. 159-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00076-0
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00076-0
• Davidson, K. (2005). Alternative India: transgressive spaces. Discourse, communication and tourism, p. 28-52.
• Desforges, L. (2000). Traveling the world: Identity and travel biography. Annals of tourism research, 27(4), p. 926-945. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00125-5
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00125-5
• Dredge, D., & Gyimóthy, S. (2015). The collaborative economy and tourism: Critical perspectives, questionable claims and silenced voices. Tourism recreation research, 40(3), p. 286-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2015.1086076
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2015.1086076
• Dobscha, S., & Ozanne, J. L. (2001). An ecofeminist analysis of environmentally sensitive women using qualitative methodology: The emancipatory potential of an ecological life. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 20(2), p. 201-214. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.20.2.201
  » https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.20.2.201
• Eatwithalocal. (2017). Recuperado em fev. 26, 2017 de http://www.eatwithalocal.socialgo.com/
  » http://www.eatwithalocal.socialgo.com/
• Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research Psychology Press.
• Farias, M. L., Silva, L. A., & de Azevedo Barbosa, M. D. L. (2019). Motivos del no uso de los servicios de hospedaje compartido ofrecidos por las plataformas Peer to Peer. Estudios y perspectivas en turismo, 28(4), p. 1104-1121.
• Flick, U. (2013). Uma introdução à pesquisa qualitativa—um guia para iniciantes Porto Alegre: Penso.
• F?rat, A. F., & Dholakia, N. (2006). Theoretical and philosophical implications of postmodern debates: some challenges to modern marketing. Marketing theory, 6(2), p. 123-162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593106063981
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593106063981
• Firat, A. F., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment of consumption. Journal of consumer research, 22(3), p. 239-267. https://doi.org/10.1086/209448
  » https://doi.org/10.1086/209448
• Forno, F., & Garibaldi, R. (2015). Sharing economy in travel and tourism: The case of home-swapping in Italy. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 16(2), p. 202-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2015.1013409
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2015.1013409
• Fussell, P. (1982). Abroad: British literary traveling between the wars Oxford University Press.
• Gabriel, Y., & Lang, T. (2015). The unmanageable consumer. Contemporary Consumption and its Fragmentation London: Sage.
• Galani-Moutafi, V. (2000). The self and the other: Traveler, ethnographer, tourist. Annals of tourism Research, 27(1), p. 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00066-3
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00066-3
• Gansky, L. (2010). The mesh: Why the future of business is sharing Penguin.
• Gill, R. (2003). Análise de discurso. IN: Bauer, M. W; Gaskell, G. Pesquisa Qualitativa com texto, imagem e som. Um manual prático 2 ed. Editora Vozes, cap. 10, pp. 244-270.
• Godoy, A. S. (2005). Refletindo sobre critérios de qualidade da pesquisa qualitativa. Revista Eletrônica de Gestão Organizacional, 3(2).
• Gouveia, T. M. et al. (2016). A análise de discurso na pesquisa acadêmica em estratégia. Revista Ibero Americana de Estratégia, 15(3), p. 6-19. https://doi.org/10.5585/riae.v15i3.2329
  » https://doi.org/10.5585/riae.v15i3.2329
• Jacobsen, J. K. S. (2000). Anti-tourist attitudes: Mediterranean charter tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(2), p. 284-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00069-9
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00069-9
• Jenkins, O. (2003). Photography and travel brochures: The circle of representation. Tourism geographies, 5(3), p. 305-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616680309715
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14616680309715
• Kiiski, V., & Arente, H. (2006). Tourist Identity Expression through Postmodern Consumption-A Focus on the Home-Exchange Phenomenon rapport nr.: Masters Thesis, (2005).
• Krippendorf, J. (1987). The Holiday Maker: Understanding the Impact of Leisure and Travel London: Heinemann.
• Matos, B. G., de Azevedo Barbosa, M. D. L., & de Andrade Matos, M. B. (2016). Consumo colaborativo e relacional no contexto do turismo: a proposição de um modelo entre a sociabilidade e a hospitalidade em rede. Revista Hospitalidade, 13(1), p. 218-241.
• Matos, M. B. D. A., & Barbosa, M. D. L. D. A. (2018). Autenticidade em Experiências de Turismo: proposição de um novo olhar baseado na Teoria da Complexidade de Edgar Morin. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Turismo, 12(3), p. 154-171. https://doi.org/10.7784/rbtur.v12i3.1457
  » https://doi.org/10.7784/rbtur.v12i3.1457
• Maurer, A. M., Figueiró, P. S., Campos, S. A. P. D., Silva, V. S. D., & Barcellos, M. D. D. (2015). Yes, we also can! O desenvolvimento de iniciativas de consumo colaborativo no Brasil. BASE: revista de administração e contabilidade da Unisinos= BASE: UNISINOS accounting and administration journal São Leopoldo, RS. v. 12(1), p. 68-80, jan./mar. https://doi.org/10.4013/base.2015.121.06
  » https://doi.org/10.4013/base.2015.121.06
• McCabe, S. (2005). ‘Who is a tourist?’ A critical review. Tourist studies, 5(1), p. 85-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797605062716
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797605062716
• MacCannell, D. (1976). The Tourist. A New Theory of the Leisure Class London: Macmillan.
• McWha, M. R., Frost, W., Laing, J., & Best, G. (2016). Writing for the anti-tourist? Imagining the contemporary travel magazine reader as an authentic experience seeker. Current Issues in Tourism, 19(1), p. 85-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2015.1013525
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2015.1013525
• Mee, C. (2007). ‘Che brutta invenzione il turismo!’: Tourism and Anti-tourism in Current French and Italian Travel Writing. Comparative Critical Studies, 4(2), p. 269-282.
• Möhlmann, M. (2015). Collaborative consumption: determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14(3), p. 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1512
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1512
• Molz, J. G. (2013). Social networking technologies and the moral economy of alternative tourism: The case of couchsurfing.org. Annals of tourism research, 43, p. 210-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2013.08.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2013.08.001
• Morin, E. (1986). Para sair do Século XX RJ: Nova Fronteira.
• Morin, E. (2007). Introdução ao pensamento complexo 3. ed. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
• Morin, E. (2011). A minha esquerda Porto Alegre: Sulina.
• Munt, I. (1994). The Other'postmodern tourism: culture, travel and the new middle classes. Theory, Culture & Society, 11(3), p. 101-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/026327694011003005
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/026327694011003005
• Nash, D. (2001). On travelers, ethnographers and tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(2), p. 493-496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(00)00053-0
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(00)00053-0
• Navarro, N. A. & Berrozpe, T. (2016). Acción pública y consumo colaborativo. Regulación de las viviendas de uso turístico en el contexto p2p. PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 14(3), p. 751-768. https://doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2016.14.049
  » https://doi.org/10.25145/j.pasos.2016.14.049
• Neumann, M. (1992). The trail through experience. Investigating subjectivity: Research online and experience, p. 176-201.
• Noy, C. (2004). This trip really changed me: Backpackers’ narratives of self-change. Annals of Tourism research, 31(1), p. 78-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2003.08.004
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2003.08.004
• Oskam, J. and Boswijk, A. (2016), "Airbnb: the future of networked hospitality businesses", Journal of Tourism Futures, 2(1), p. 22-42. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-11-2015-0048
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-11-2015-0048
• O’Reilly, C. C. (2005). Tourist or traveller? Narrating backpacker identity. Discourse, communication and tourism, p. 150-169.
• Penrod, J., Preston, D. B., Cain, R. E., & Starks, M. T. (2003). A discussion of chain referral as a method of sampling hard-to-reach populations. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 14(2), p. 100-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659602250614
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659602250614
• Richards, G. W. (2014). Cultural tourism 3.0. The future of urban tourism in Europe?. In Il turismo culturale europeo Città ri-visitate. Nuove idee e forme del turismo culturale (pp. 25-38).
• Richards, G. (2018). Cultural tourism: A review of recent research and trends. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 36, p. 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.03.005
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.03.005
• Rohden, S. F., Durayski, F., Teixeira, A. P. P., Montelongo Flores, A., & Rossi, C. A. V. (2015). Consumo colaborativo: economia, modismo ou revolução?. Desenvolve: revista de gestão do Unilasalle Canoas, RS, 4(2), p. 9-24, jul. http://dx.doi.org/10.18316/2316-5537.15.1
  » https://doi.org/10.18316/2316-5537.15.1
• Russo, G., Lombardi, R., & Mangiagli, S. (2013). The tourist model in the collaborative economy: A modern approach. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(7), 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v8n7p1
  » https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v8n7p1
• Schor, J. (2016). Debating the sharing economy. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 4(3), p. 7-22.
• Schor, J. (2015). Collaborating and Connecting: The emergence of the sharing economy. In: Reisch, L. & Thohersen, J. Handbook on research on sustainable consumption Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783471270.00039
  » https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783471270.00039
• Sharpley, R. (2003). Tourism, Tourists & Society (3 rd (revised) ed). Huntingdon: ELM.
• Shepherd, R. (2003). Fieldwork without remorse: Travel desires in a tourist world. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 6(2), p. 133-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/1025386032000109596
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/1025386032000109596
• Silva, M. J. D. B. (2015). A extensão do self na prática do consumo colaborativo: investigando a experiência de acesso dos usuários do sistema de compartilhamento de bicicletas de Pernambuco (Master's thesis, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco).
• Trivett, V., & Staff, S. (2013). What the sharing economy means to the future of travel (pp. 1-26). New York, NY: Skift.
• Tussyadiah, I. P. (2015). An exploratory study on drivers and deterrents of collaborative consumption in travel. In Information and communication technologies in tourism 2015 (pp. 817-830). Springer, Cham.
• Urry, J. (1988). Cultural change and contemporary holiday-making. Theory, culture & society, 5(1), p. 35-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/026327688005001003
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/026327688005001003
• Urry, J. (1990). The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies London: Sage.
• Vaquero, C., & Calle Calle, P. D. L. (2013). The collaborative consumption: a form of consumption adapted to modern times. Revista de Estudios Económicos y Empresariales
• Vaara, E. E. R. O. (2010). Critical discourse analysis as methodology in Strategy as Practice research Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice, p. 217-229.
• Vera, L. A. R., & de Sevilha Gosling, M. (2018). Comportamento do Consumidor na Economia Compartilhada no Turismo. Revista Turismo em Análise, 29(3), p. 447-467. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1984-4867.v29i3p447-467
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1984-4867.v29i3p447-467
• Villanova, A. L. I. (2015). Modelos de negócio na economia compartilhada: uma investigação multi-caso (Doctoral dissertation). Fundação Getúlio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro.
• Wang, N. (2000). Tourism and modernity: A sociological analysis. Pergamon.
• Week, L. (2012). I am not a tourist: Aims and implications of “traveling”. Tourist Studies, 12(2), p. 186-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797612454627
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797612454627
• Welk, P. (2004). The beaten track: anti-tourism as an element of backpacker identity construction The global nomad: Backpacker travel in theory and practice, p. 77-91.
• Zekanovic-Korona, L., & Grzunov, J. (2014, May). Evaluation of shared digital economy adoption: Case of Airbnb. In 2014 37th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO) (pp. 1574-1579). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6859816
  » https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6859816

Edited by

Editor: Glauber Eduardo de Oliveira Santos.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  30 Apr 2021
• Date of issue
  May-Aug 2021

History

• Received
  07 Apr 2020
• Accepted
  26 May 2020