Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

 

Search Results

Dominique Roux, Russell Belk (2025). "Turning private possessions into assets: A calculative-based approach to platform versus proximity rentals", Journal of Business Research, 193, 115353.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract
While previous research has examined economic motivations for renting personal possessions, the calculative processes owners use remain understudied. We explored how consumers calculate and repurpose their possessions as assets. Through a qualitative analysis of interviews with seven Airbnb hosts and 37 owners renting various possessions, plus 154 Facebook posts from ‘Airbnb propriétaires France,’ we identified four key calculative operations: extraction, qualification, computation, and protection. Our findings reveal a dual pathway—platforms and closed circles—through which mundane possessions become profitable, despite owners’ suboptimal calculations. By including the protection and selective exclusion of possessions, we extend the sociological theory of calculation and improve our understanding of proximity rentals. Overall, calculation generates three benefits: economically, as owners always consider rental revenues significant; ecologically, as even small compensation motivates owners to circulate private goods; and socially, as mutual exchanges between strangers and acquaintances escape gift economy constraints and debt obligations.

Belk, R. (2014). "You Are What You Can Access: Sharing and Collaborative Consumption Online", Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595-1600.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract Sharing is a phenomenon as old as humankind, while collaborative consumption and the “sharing economy” are phenomena born of the Internet age. This paper compares sharing and collaborative consumption and finds that both are growing in popularity today. Examples are given and an assessment is made of the reasons for the current growth in these practices and their implications for businesses still using traditional models of sales and ownership. The old wisdom that we are what we own, may need modifying to consider forms of possession and uses that do not involve ownership.

Belk, R. (2014). "Sharing Versus Pseudo-Sharing in Web 2.0", The Anthropologist, 18(1), 50.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract The Internet has opened up a new era in sharing. There has also been an explosion of studies and writings about sharing via the Internet. This includes a series of books, articles, and web discussions on the topic. However, many of these apparent cases of sharing are better characterized as pseudo-sharing — commodity exchanges wrapped in a vocabulary of sharing. The present paper reviews subsequent research and theorizing as well as controversies that have emerged surrounding sharing and what is best regarded as pseudo-sharing — a wolf-insheep’s-clothing phenomenon whereby commodity exchange and potential exploitation of consumer co-creators present themselves in the guise of sharing. The paper begins with a pair of vignettes that highlight some of the contested meanings of sharing. By detailing four types of pseudo-sharing and four types of sharing that are specifically enabled or enhanced by Internet technologies, the paper argues that pseudo-sharing is distinguished by the presence of profit motives, the absence of feelings of community, and expectations of reciprocity. It concludes with a discussion of theoretical, practical, and ethical implications of pseudo-sharing and offer suggestions for future research.