Bodo Lang

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore why and how sharing economy users switch from consumer (e.g. Airbnb guest) to provider (e.g. Airbnb host), and how this helps enrich self-determination theory.Design/methodology/approach: The authors conducted an exploratory study with users who had been consumers (i.e. Airbnb guests) and had switched to being providers (i.e. Airbnb hosts).Findings: Consumers switch to being providers across four phases: “catalysts”, “enablers”, “drivers” and “glue”. The authors identify various extrinsic and intrinsic motivations unique to the switch and map these against motivators postulated by self-determination theory.Research limitations/implications: The authors propose a four-phase process through which consumers become providers. The present study enriches self-determination theory by showing how users' psychosocial needs are addressed through a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that are unique to the role switch. The authors further show how the importance of the three key psychosocial self-determination needs varies through the switch process, thus providing a more nuanced understanding of users' drive for self-determination.Practical implications: This study offers several recommendations to help sharing economy platforms improve their processes and communication to encourage a greater number of consumers to switch roles and become providers. These recommendations address two aspects: (1) encouraging consumers to switch roles and become providers (i.e. acquisition) and following this (2) encouraging providers to continue to perform that role (i.e. retention).Originality/value: Much research has investigated why users become consumers (e.g. Airbnb guests) or providers (e.g. Airbnb hosts) in the sharing economy. However, research to date has not fully embraced the two-sided nature of the sharing economy. Therefore, this is the first paper to explore why and how consumers switch roles and become providers in the sharing economy, and how this helps enrich self-determination theory.

Objective: Intake of sugary drinks, especially soft drinks, carries increased risk for obesity and diabetes. This article reviews whether sugary drinks carry different risks for metabolic syndrome compared with foods that contain natural or added sugars.Methods: A narrative review was performed to evaluate differences between liquid and solid sugars in their ability to induce metabolic syndrome and to discuss potential mechanisms to account for the differences.Results: Epidemiological studies support liquid added sugars, such as soft drinks, as carrying greater risk for development of metabolic syndrome compared with solid sugar. Some studies suggest that fruit juice may also confer relatively higher risk for weight gain and insulin resistance compared with natural fruits. Experimental evidence suggests this may be due to differences in how fructose is metabolized. Fructose induces metabolic disease by reducing the energy levels in liver cells, mediated by the concentration of fructose to which the cells are exposed. The concentration relates to the quantity and speed at which fructose is ingested, absorbed, and metabolized.Conclusions: Although reduced intake of added sugars (sucrose and high‐fructose corn syrup) remains a general recommendation, there is evidence that sugary soft drinks may provide greater health risks relative to sugar‐containing foods.