Ride-Sharing Practices in Turkey: An Evaluation within the Context of Sustainable Tourism and the Sharing Economy

Abstract

This study aims to examine how ride-sharing applications are perceived in Turkey within the context of the sharing economy and sustainable tourism. The research reveals that car sharing via digital platforms has a multi-layered structure in terms of individual motivations, perception of trust, social norms, and sustainability values. Conducted using a qualitative research design, the study involved in-depth interviews with a total of 20 participants who used and did not use ride-sharing applications; the data obtained were evaluated using descriptive and thematic content analysis methods. The findings show that the sharing economy is embraced in Turkey, particularly in terms of economic savings, time management, and environmental awareness. While the majority of participants found the applications budget-friendly and practical, female participants in particular strongly expressed concerns about physical safety and privacy. The study reveals that the chain of “perceived benefit–perceived risk–trust–intention to use–sustainability” shapes sharing economy behavior. Furthermore, despite the sharing economy's potential to contribute to environmental sustainability, a clear gap between attitudes and behavior was identified. Consequently, it is recommended that security standards be strengthened, legal and governance regulations be developed, social awareness be increased, and local government–platform collaborations be supported in order for shared travel in Turkey to contribute to sustainable tourism goals. In this respect, the research provides a theoretical and practical framework regarding the transformative power of the sharing economy in tourism.

Keywords

• Ride-Sharing
• Sustainable Tourism
• Sharing Economy
• Turkey

Türkiye’de Paylaşımlı Yolculuk Uygulamaları: Sürdürülebilir Turizm ve Paylaşım Ekonomisi Bağlamında Bir Değerlendirme

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de paylaşımlı yolculuk uygulamalarının paylaşım ekonomisi ve sürdürülebilir turizm bağlamında nasıl algılandığını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışma, dijital platformlar aracılığıyla gerçekleşen araç paylaşımının bireysel motivasyonlar, güven algısı, toplumsal normlar ve sürdürülebilirlik değerleri açısından çok katmanlı bir yapıya sahip olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Nitel araştırma deseniyle yürütülen çalışmada, paylaşımlı yolculuk uygulamalarını kullanan ve kullanmayan toplam 20 katılımcıyla derinlemesine görüşmeler yapılmış, elde edilen veriler betimsel ve tematik içerik analizi yöntemiyle değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, paylaşım ekonomisinin Türkiye’de özellikle ekonomik tasarruf, zaman yönetimi ve çevresel duyarlılık ekseninde benimsendiğini göstermektedir. Katılımcıların büyük bölümü uygulamaları bütçe dostu ve pratik bulurken, özellikle kadın katılımcılar fiziksel güvenlik ve mahremiyet endişelerini güçlü biçimde dile getirmiştir. Çalışma, “algılanan fayda–algılanan risk – güven – kullanım niyeti – sürdürülebilirlik” zincirinin paylaşım ekonomisi davranışını şekillendirdiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca, paylaşım ekonomisinin çevresel sürdürülebilirliğe katkı sağlama potansiyeline karşın, tutum – davranış farkının belirgin olduğu saptanmıştır. Sonuç olarak, Türkiye’de paylaşımlı yolculuğun sürdürülebilir turizm hedeflerine katkı sağlayabilmesi için güvenlik standartlarının güçlendirilmesi, yasal ve yönetişimsel düzenlemelerin geliştirilmesi, toplumsal farkındalığın artırılması ve yerel yönetim – platform işbirliklerinin desteklenmesi önerilmektedir. Bu yönüyle araştırma, paylaşım ekonomisinin turizmdeki dönüşüm gücüne ilişkin kuramsal ve pratik bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Paylaşımlı Yolculuk
• Sürdürülebilir Turizm
• Paylaşım Ekonomisi
• Türkiye

References

1. Aguiléra, A., ve Pigalle, E. (2021). Carpooling users and practices in Europe. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 147, 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.03.010
2. Aydın, O. (2018). Nitel araştırmalarda yöntemsel yaklaşımlar. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
3. Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595–1600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001
4. BlaBlaCar. (2019). The BlaBlaCar 2019 Impact Report. Paris: Le BIPE BRO.
5. Botsman, R. (2010, Haziran). The case for collaborative consumption [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/rachel_botsman_the_case_for_collaborative_consumption
6. Botsman, R., ve Rogers, R. (2011). What’s mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. New York: HarperCollins.
7. Chan, N. D., ve Shaheen, S. A. (2011). Ridesharing in North America: Past, present, and future. Transport Reviews, 32(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2011.635972
8. Çalık, M., ve Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinde genel bir bakış ve uygulama örnekleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412

9. Dereli, A. B. (2023). MAXQDA: Yaratıcı veri analizi üzerine notlar. Karadeniz İletişim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.53495/e-kiad.1319405
10. Dillahunt, T. R., ve Malik, A. A. (2019). The promise of the sharing economy among disadvantaged communities. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359122
11. Fagnant, D. J., ve Kockelman, K. M. (2018). Dynamic ridesharing and sustainability. Journal of Transport Geography, 72, 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.08.014
12. Gleim, M. R., Smith, J. S., Andrews, D., ve Cronin, J. J. (2013). Against the green: A multi-method examination of the barriers to green consumption. Journal of Retailing, 89(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.10.001
13. Gössling, S., ve Cohen, S. A. (2014). Why sustainable transport policies will fail: Lessons from aviation. Journal of Transport Geography, 39, 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.07.010
14. Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., ve Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2047–2059. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23552
15. Hanchuk, A., Bondarenko, Y., Pakhomova, E., ve Varfolomyeyeva, A. (2023a). BlaBlaCar and sustainable mobility: New opportunities for green transport. Sustainability, 15(2), 1145. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021145
16. Hanchuk, O., Bondarenko, T., Pakhomova, V., ve Varfolomyeyeva, I. (2023b). The sharing economy and sustainable mobility: A case of BlaBlaCar. Journal of Tourism Studies, 25(3), 1–10.
17. Hancock, B., Ockleford, E., ve Windridge, K. (2007). An introduction to qualitative research. Nottingham: University of Nottingham Press.
18. Hawlitschek, F., Teubner, T., ve Gimpel, H. (2018). Consumer motives for peer-to-peer sharing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 204, 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.145
19. Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., ve Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316665344
20. Guest, G., Bunce, A., ve Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
21. Kaçar, Ş. H. (2025). Exploring influential factors in consumer adoption of short-term car rental services (Unpublished master’s thesis). Istanbul Technical University.
22. Klenke, K. (2016). Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Emerald Group Publishing.
23. Li, J., Chen, C., ve Zhang, Y. (2021). Ride-sharing, emissions and urban congestion: An empirical assessment. Energy Policy, 156, 112394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112394
24. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–525. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522
25. Martin, E., Shaheen, S. A., ve Lidicker, J. (2010). Impact of carsharing on household vehicle holdings. Transportation Research Record, 2143(1), 150–158. https://doi.org/10.3141/2143-19
26. Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), Article 8. https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1428
27. Miles, M. B., ve Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.
28. Mitropoulos, L., Tsapakis, I., ve Chrysostomou, K. (2021). Review of ridesharing adoption models. Transport Policy, 107, 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.04.009
29. Mordor Intelligence. (2023). Carpooling market – Growth, trends, COVID-19 impact, and forecasts (2024–2029). Mordor Intelligence LLP. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/carpooling-market
30. Mulgan, G. (2021). Social innovation: How societies find the power to change. Policy Press.
31. Namey, E., Guest, G., Thairu, L., ve Johnson, L. (2008). Data reduction techniques for large qualitative data sets. In G. Guest ve K. M. MacQueen (Ed.), Handbook for team-based qualitative research (ss. 137–161). Lanham, MD: Altamira Press.
32. OECD. (2019). Measuring the digital transformation: A roadmap for the future. OECD Publishing.
33. OECD. (2020). Digital economy outlook 2020. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/bb167041-en
34. Oppong, S. H. (2013). The problem of sampling in qualitative research. Asian Journal of Management Sciences and Education, 2(2), 202–210.
35. Özdemir, İ. (2023). Araç paylaşım modelinin haksız rekabet açısından değerlendirilmesi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi.
36. Reiter, B. (2017). Theory and methodology of exploratory social science research. International Journal of Science and Research Methodology, 5(4), 129–150.
37. Schor, J. (2014). Debating the sharing economy. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 4(3), 7–22.
38. Seven, V., ve Öksüzoğlu, H. T. (2020). BLABLACAR platformu aracılığıyla yapılan taşımaların hukuki niteliği (hatır taşımacılığı ve otostop karşılaştırması). Türk-Alman Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 25-76.
39. Shaheen, S. (2020). Shared mobility and the future of sustainable transport. Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports, 7(3), 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-020-00152-5
40. Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41. Sundararajan, A. (2016). The sharing economy: The end of employment and the rise of crowd-based capitalism. MIT Press.
42. Şimşek, Ş. E. (2024). Seyahat temalı mobil uygulamaların kullanıcıların seyahat sürecindeki kararlarına etkisi ve kullanıcı beklentileri (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Sakarya Üniversitesi.
43. Talandier, M. (2024). Spatial dynamics of collaborative mobility: Insights from European sharing platforms. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 127, 103897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.103897
44. Tezcan, H. O. (2016). Potential of carpooling among unfamiliar users: Case of undergraduate students at Istanbul Technical University. Journal of the Urban Planning and Development Division, ASCE, 142(1), Article 04015006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000283
45. Tirkeş, G., Yörükçü, E., Özbilen, B., Alkan, S., ve Akgül, C. (2022). GoToUni: A mobile application suggestion for carpooling. European Journal of Science and Technology (EJOSAT), 37, 76-80.
46. United Nations. (2022). Sustainable consumption and production patterns. New York: UN.
47. UNWTO. (2018). Tourism and the Sustainable Development Goals. World Tourism Organization.
48. UNWTO. (2022). Sustainable mobility and tourism: Policy guidelines for reducing emissions. World Tourism Organization.
49. Yeung, R. (2018). Ridesharing and resilience: Evidence from the 2018 French rail strikes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 118, 784–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.10.014
50. Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2000). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.