Search results

The purpose of this study is to compare the spatial distribution of Airbnb and hotels in London and examine the relationship between demographic, socioeconomic and environmental factors and the supply of these two types of lodging supply.

Local information of Airbnb listings in London was collected through Insideairbnb.com. Gathered data were examined using geo-spatial auto-correlation analysis and spatial econometric models.

The results indicate that Airbnb predominates in the areas around popular tourist attractions and the peripheral areas of the city, while in the downtown area Airbnb and hotels are in the state of coexistence. The mono-centric model and the agglomeration model could be extended to the context of peer-to-peer accommodation. The location of Airbnb and traditional hotels capitalizes on different factors.

The study is based on secondary data due to data availability. And, it is based on the case of London, so the findings may not reflect the situation of small cities and rural destinations.

This study not only gives suggestions for local councils to regulate the location of hotels and Airbnb but also provides professional landlords with reference to choosing Airbnb location.

This study extends the hotel location theoretical models into the context of Airbnb and sheds lights on the distinction between these two business models in terms of location factors.

爱彼迎和酒店的位置：空间分布和关系

本研究旨在比较伦敦Airbnb和酒店的空间分布, 并探讨人口、社会经济和环境因素与这两类住宿供给的关系。

伦敦Airbnb房源信息通过Insideairbnb.com网站收集, 采用地理空间自相关分析和空间经济计量模型进行分析。

结果表明Airbnb主要集中在旅游景点周边和城市周边地区, 在市中心地区, Airbnb与酒店处于共存状态。单中心模型和聚集模型适用于共享住宿情境。Airbnb和传统酒店的空间分布影响因素的重要性存在差异。

本研究将酒店区位理论模型扩展到Airbnb情境下, 并揭示了这两种商业模式在区位因素方面的区别。

本研究采用二手数据。案例地为伦敦, 因此研究结果可能无法反映小城市和乡村旅游目的地的情况。

地方政府应更加重视专业公司的劳动力保障并限制旅游景点周边的短期租赁。

Ubicación de los hoteles y preferencias: distribución espacial y relaciones

El propósito de este estudio es comparar la distribución espacial de Airbnb y los hoteles en Londres y examinar la relación entre los factores demográficos, socioeconómicos y ambientales y la oferta de estos dos tipos de oferta de alojamiento.

La información local de los anuncios de Airbnb en Londres se recopiló a través de Insideairbnb.com. Los datos recopilados se examinaron mediante análisis de autocorrelación geoespacial y modelos econométricos espaciales.

Los resultados indican que Airbnb predomina en las zonas aledañas a los atractivos turísticos populares y las zonas periféricas de la ciudad, mientras que en la zona centro Airbnb y los hoteles se encuentran en estado de convivencia. El modelo monocéntrico y el modelo de aglomeración podrían extenderse al contexto de la acomodación entre pares. La ubicación de Airbnb y los hoteles tradicionales se basa en diferentes factores.

Este estudio amplía los modelos teóricos de ubicación de hoteles en el contexto de Airbnb y arroja luz sobre la distinción entre estos dos modelos comerciales en términos de factores de ubicación.

El estudio se basa en datos secundarios debido a la disponibilidad de datos. Y se basa en el caso de Londres, por lo que los hallazgos pueden no reflejar la situación de las ciudades pequeñas y los destinos rurales.

Los hallazgos sugieren que las autoridades locales deberían prestar más atención a la seguridad laboral de las empresas profesionales y restringir los alquileres a corto plazo alrededor de las atracciones turísticas.

This paper aims to contribute to the understanding of the three‐dimensional model of organizational commitment proposed by Meyer and Allen (e.g., 1991). It focuses on whether continuance commitment should be considered one‐dimensional or bidimensional (low alternatives; high sacrifices). Whether affective commitment should be divided into two components (affective commitment; future in common) or if it should remain as a one‐dimensional construct is also discussed. The paper also considers a “new” factor identified by Rego (2003), which he named “psychological absence”, but which we denominated here as accommodating commitment. Besides the confirmatory factor analysis, the paper shows how four dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational) explain organizational commitment. The sample comprises 366 individuals from 22 organizations operating in Portugal. The predictive value of the justice perceptions for both instrumental commitment components is quite weak, despite ranging from 25 per cent to 36 per cent for the other components. Procedural and interpersonal justice are the main predictors. The accommodating dimension improves the fit indices of the factorial model, but its meaning is not clear. It is also not clear whether one should consider it as a new component of commitment or whether its items should be removed from the measuring instruments. The findings suggest that some gains can be achieved in the partition of the affective and instrumental commitment, but further research is necessary to clarify the issue.