A case study is presented of the ways in which income differences between two outlying residential areas of Leeds affect the quantity and quality of shopping facilities found within them. Cursory appraisal of the stores in each area suggests their functional range of provisions and mode of business are highly similar; but more detailed classifications show important distinctions. Although there are slightly fewer establishments in the low income area than in the high income area, a much greater variety of goods and services are actually offered since the stores are less specialised in any particular trade. Broad differences in threshold values between the stores in each area are therefore perceived and varying patterns of consumer behaviour inferred. Implications for the central place farmework of a hierarchy of shopping centres are also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
For annotated references, see B.J.L. Berry and A. Pred, Central Place Studies -A Bibliography (Philadelphia: Regional Science Research Institute, Bibliography Series, No. i, 1965); W.L. Garrison, B.J.L. Berry, et al., Studies of Highway Development and Geographic Change (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1959).
2.
As in such studies as: John E. Brush, 'The Hierarchy of Central Places in South-western Wisconsin', Geographical Review , 43 (1953), 380-402; H.E. Bracey, 'Towns as Rural Service Centres', Institute of British Geographers, Transactions and Papers, 19 (1953), 95-105 ; A.E. Smailes, 'The Urban Hierarchy in England and Wales', Geography, 29 (1944), 41-51.
3.
W.L. Garrison, B.J.L. Berry, et al., op. cit
4.
B.J.L. Berry, Commercial Structure and Commercial Blight (Chicago : University of Chicago, Dept. of Geography, Research Paper No. 85, 1963); B.J. Garner, The Theory of Tertiary Activity and the Internal Structure of Retail Nucleations (Northwestern University Press, 1967).
5.
Though less work has been done within the central place concept on the internal business structures of British cities, there are several studies available: e.g. A.E. Smailes and G. Hartley, 'Shopping Centres in the Greater London Area', Institute of British Geographers, Transactions and Papers, 29 (1961), 201-13; I.G. Weekley, 'Service Centres in Nottingham, A Concept in Urban Analysis', East Midland Geographer, 6 (1956), 41-46; W.I. Carruthers, 'Social and Economic Groupings as Indicated by a Study of Service Centres and Areas', Report of the Royal Commission on Local Government in Greater London (London: H.M.S.O., 1960 ).
6.
W.L. Garrison, B.J.L. Berry, et al., op. cit
7.
F. Leeming, 'An Experimental Survey of Retail Shopping and Service Facilities in Part of North Leeds', Institute of British Geographers, Transactions and Papers, 26 (1959), 133-52.
8.
C. Zwick has shown that age-structures of consumers affect purchasing behaviour in stores to a greater extent than any other social or demographic characteristic. C. Zwick, 'Demographic Variation: Its Impact on Consumer Behaviour', Review of Economics and Statistics, 39 (1957), 451-6.
9.
Whereas Middleton is known by this name as a distinct community area, the name of Street Lane is only directly relevant to the northern part of the area so designated. Presumably, because of its greater sprawl and piecemeal development, several local district names qualify other parts. The Street Lane area as a whole, however, is highly interrelated, especially through the facilities of the shopping centres found. Population figures for both areas were determined from the Register of Electors; their area size from map reductions.
10.
The shopping facilities in Middleton and Street Lane shown on Figure 2 are: Middleton
11.
A sample survey was taken of age structures, income-levels, and also consumer movements within the two areas, the full results of which are to appear in an alternative article. Initially, a stratified random sample of 150 households in each area was selected from the distribution of rateable values: and then these reduced to 100 households according to incomplete data for certain returns. Full information for all members of the households was collected from extended interviews, and especially in regard to the complex details of income sources. For further details of the sampling method and response to the survey, see: R.L. Davies, 'A Case Study of the Effects of Areal Differences in Income Levels on the Business Structures of Small Shopping Centres and Customer Movements Made to them in Leeds' (unpubl. thesis, Leeds University, 1965).
12.
From the sample of 100 households in Street Lane, only twelve were Jewish, and not all of these practised their religion.
13.
These three kinds of consumer income units accord to those described and utilised in the Oxford Survey of Personal Incomes and Savings, which was the first national sample survey of incomes and also savings in Britain. H.F. Lydall, British Incomes and Savings (Oxford: University Institute of Statistics Monograph No. 5, 1955 ).
14.
An 'item' describes a particular kind or line of goods or services on sale in an establishment, e.g. sweets or tobacco within a grocery store. F. Leeming, op. cit
15.
This definition of 'functional units' accords to that in: E.N. Thomas, Some Comments on the Functional Bases For Small Iowa Towns', Iowa Business Digest, 31 ( 1960), 10-14; H.A. Stafford, 'The Functional Bases of Small Towns', Economic Geography , 39 (1963), 165-76.
16.
Threshold values, by definition, refer to the minimum amounts of purchasing power, or minimum numbers of consumers, required to support any business activity. Thus convenience kinds of business activities, such as the provision of groceries or meat require only relatively small amounts of purchasing power or few consumers for their support, and hence are assigned low threshold values. More specialised kinds of business activities, on the other hand, such as the provision of jewellery or furs, require very much larger amounts of purchasing power or many consumers for their support, and hence are assigned much higher threshold values.
17.
These six factors contributing to quality differences between shops were determined from the same sample of consumers whose ages and incomes had been solicited in the survey referred to previously. The sample considered that the prices of goods and quality of goods provided by establishments were most indicative of an overall quality image, but that these factors were not important alone, and that the range of goods displayed (i.e. within any one commodity such as canned foods or fruits in a grocery shop), the arrangement of a window display, the general appearance to a shop (i.e. in terms of cleanliness, its fittings and fixtures), and its degree of specialisation (i.e. within a single activity or function) were also considered highly significant when taken together.
