Retail City: The Relationship between Place Attractiveness and Accessibility to Shops

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may AbstractThis paper explores the role of retailers as an urban amenity. Using data for Swedish rural and city municipalities for 2002-2008, 'accessibility to shops' measures are constructed for the shops in the municipalities and in the hosting regions separately to examine the relationship between consumption possibilities and place attractiveness in a spatial continuum. Place attractiveness is proxied by a Q ratio for Swedish housing investment based on Tobin's Q. Access to stores within municipal market boundaries is found to be relevant for the place attractiveness of city municipalities, whereas no such relationship is evident for rural municipalities.

Place Innovative Synergies for City Center Attractiveness: A Matter of Experiencing Retail and Retailing Experiences

“…The maintenance of these identifying traits seems to require an innovative variance of services, activities, and facilities in Piteå's city center retail and tourism, reflecting the previously proven importance of mixed offers, variety of outlets, and products, as well as combined tangible and intangible elements for city center attractiveness in studies from e.g., Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, Sweden, the UK, and the US (cf. Hart et al, 2013;Karlsson & Nilsson, 2017;Lindberg et al, 2015Lindberg et al, , 2017Öner, 2017;Pazder, 2011;Teller & Elms, 2010Wahlberg, 2016;Weltevreden & Van Rietbergen, 2007;Zenker, 2011). Such a variance is actively promoted in Piteå through the ongoing city center reconstruction with new attractive apartments, a design hotel and court-house square renewal as well as the central location of both convenience, durable, and low-price goods retail, in combination with maintained vibrancy of the historic main shopping street, the maritime cultural heritage site Western Dock, and arrangement of city center events.…”

“…The exposure and accessibility of local stores are, for example, limited during the city festival, as they are hidden behind market stalls, in contrast to the demonstrated importance of accessibility for city center attractiveness in studies from Germany, Sweden, and the UK (cf. Monheim, 1998;Öner, 2017;Teale, 2013;Teller & Elms, 2010. Innovative potentials are consequently perceived in moving stores out in the streets during the events and locating event-related activities in stores.…”

“…The importance of mixed offers in the city centers is also demonstrated in studies from, e.g., the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, and the UK, including shops, services, activities, culture, entertainment, events, parks, architecture, housing, workplaces etc. (Hart et al, 2013;Karlsson & Nilsson, 2017;Öner, 2017;Pazder, 2011;Wahlberg, 2016;Weltevreden & Van Rietbergen, 2007). A distinction is made between a city's tangible elements of culture, nightlife, shopping, infrastructure, housing, business parks, etc., on the one hand, and intangible elements of perceived personality, emotions, and values on the other (Zenker, 2011).…”

“…The accessibility of the city center and its shops and services has been noted to further affect attractiveness in studies from Germany, Sweden, and the UK, highlighting the importance of car parks, public transports, walkingdistances, orientation, etc. (Monheim, 1998;Öner, 2017;Teale, 2013;Teller & Elms, 2010. Some studies from the UK and the US note the impact of co-located commercial and historic cores on city center attractiveness, albeit with a tricky balance act between commercial functions and cultural heritage preservation (Coca-Stefaniak & Carroll, 2015;Litvin, 2005).…”

Retail and Place Attractiveness: The Effects of Big‐Box Entry on Property Values

“…Whether retail trade may be considered an endogenous amenity is a controversial topic. While some researchers argue that access to retail trade has positive effects on place attractiveness (Öner 2014, 2017), opponents argue that large retail areas, in particular big‐box retailers, are associated with environmental and esthetic degradation, increased noise and light pollution, garbage accumulation, traffic congestion, and increase in local crime (Corlija, Siman, and Finke 2006; Pope and Pope 2015; Sale 2015). These negative externalities may decrease the willingness of residents to pay for location in the neighborhood of big‐box retailers, which means that it is not clear whether the total impact of increased access to retail trade on place attractiveness is positive.…”