Modeling Discontinuous Change in the Spatial Pattern of Retail Outlets: A Methodology

Fotheringham, A. Stewart; Knudsen, Daniel C.

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-4430-5_14

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Spatial interaction models and various versions of the gravity models were explored in depth in a series of studies since the 1980 s. The literature on the subject is vast (Haynes and Fotheringham 1984;Fotheringham and Knudsen 1986). A number of alternate names have been attached to the basic concept of gravity that originated in Newtonian physics: Reilly's Law of Retail Gravitation, 1931;Huff's Model of Consumer Behavior, 1959;Dodd's Interactive Hypothesis Model, 1950;Zipf's Minimum Effort Model, 1949;Stouffer's Intervening Opportunity Model, 1960 andWilson's Entropy Model, 1967. The general form of the production-constrained competing destinations model is as follows:…”

Section: Spatial Interaction Model Of the Retail Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative issues in the organization of modern retailers in Israel

Marinov

Czamanski

2010

GeoJournal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper raises questions regarding the desirable sizes of retail facilities within an existing urban system. We address questions of efficiency by reference to a social welfare function and by reference to profit maximization by developers. To this end we utilize a gravity-type simulation model and apply it in the case of Haifa, Israel based on a unique data base. Based on simulations of a single developer who owns all the retail facilities the optimal locations yield large retail facilities away from residential areas and smaller ones in the locations closer to the buying power. In the case that each facility is owned separately, stepwise optimization yields optimal order of development, first at locations in close proximity to the buying power. In the early stages of the development of a retail system the revenues are expected to be high and the sizes of retailers moderate. The total amount of retail space supplied by the modern retailers in reality is significantly higher than the amount suggested by the optimization tests.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Interaction Model Of the Retail Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative issues in the organization of modern retailers in Israel

Marinov

Czamanski

2010

GeoJournal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a series of papers, Fotheringham (1985) and Fotheringham and Knudsen (1984, 1985, 1986 extended the framework to also investigate spatial dynamics through the use of Fotheringham's (1983Fotheringham's ( , 1984 competing destinations (CD) model. This model incorporates a variable quantifying the relative location of each outlet to all other outlets…”

Section: Modeling Structural Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We extend the framework developed by Harris and Wilson (1978) and enhanced by Fotheringham and Knudsen (1986) through the incorporation of a morē exible competing destinations model. In this variant we are able to encapsulate complementary and substitutable relationships between retail outlets (Lo 1991(Lo , 1992.…”

Section: Extending the Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An important distinction between these two procedures is that the former assumes what has been termed a constant backcloth (Fotheringham and Knudsen 1985), while the latter utilizes a changing backcloth. Under the constant backcloth assumption, changing values for one store (W, Z, V, or c i ) does not change those for the others.…”

Section: Extending the Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Just as was the case for W Ã , the maximum values Z Ã and V Ã can attain are ®xed through the parameters governing the cost structure of the outlet (d 2 and s 2 ) and the total amount of demand present in the system. This is an important recognition because it characterizes the problem as investigated by Harris and Wilson (1978) and Fotheringham and Knudsen (1984, 1985, 1986 as one in which size and locational behavior may be understood by investigating how W Ã , Z Ã , and V Ã approach their asymptotes. It also eliminates the need to numerically investigate the roles of the parameters in the cost equation because these merely act to set the asymptotes.…”

Section: Mathematical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Retail structural dynamics and the forces behind big-box retailing

Munroe¹

2001

The Annals of Regional Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent change on the American retail landscape warrants a revisit to the catastrophe framework originated by Harris and Wilson (1978). A retail revolution, centered around the growth of big-box retailing, is recreating metropolitan retail structure. Alterations to both the sizes and spatial distributions of retailers in nearly every sector have resulted. This research presents a theoretical inquiry into the forces behind this change through an adoption and extension of the catastrophe theory framework. Results suggest that changes in retail structure, though they have altered consumer behavior, are more attributable to changes in the cost structures of ®rms than to changes in the preferences of consumers.JEL classi®cation: R12, L81, C61, D21

show abstract