Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Consumer services are distributed in a more regular pattern than business services (more specialized) Central Place Theory (Walter Christaller, 1930s) – Central place – market center for exchange of goods and services by people for surrounding area (located to maximize accessibility) – Central places compete with each other for customers (creates regular patterns) – Central place theory explains distribution and regular pattern of settlements in MDCs Assumes flat, featureless landscape Assumes evenly distributed population & resources; cities equidistant Assumes proportionate wealth & demand for goods/services Assumes customers always travel to nearest central place Services cluster in settlements Larger settlements are fewer and farther away from each other Smaller settlements are more numerous and closer Larger settlements have more services (quantity & diversity) Smaller settlements have fewer services

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Central Place Theory (Walter Christaller, 1930s) – Market Area of Service Market area (or hinterland) is the area surrounding a service that contains its customers A market area is a good example of a functional/nodal region Can be used for around individual services or around entire cities Closer to a node, the more likely to use the service Farther away, less likely to use the service and more likely to use other services (other nodes) Circles vs. squares vs. hexagons for market area representation – Circles cause geometric problem – create gaps or overlap – Squares have too much distance from node to corner – Hexagons minimize distance to corners, have no gap/overlap

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Central Place Theory (Walter Christaller, 1930s) – Size of Market Area Range – maximum distance most people are willing to travel (radius around central place or node) – The range is not the farthest anyone will travel (just most, 2/3 to 3/4 of people) – Everyday goods/services (low-order) – people willing to travel only shorter distances; services must be more numerous; (Examples: grocery, convenience store, fast food, gas station, etc.) – Higher-order goods/services – people are willing to travel longer distances (Examples: fine dining, concerts, pro sports) – Irregular shape of market area may be created by competition of similar services/businesses – Range can also be modified based on time of travel rather than distance (quality of roads, traffic, city streets vs. interstates)

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Central Place Theory (Walter Christaller, 1930s) – Size of Market Area Threshold - # of people needed to support the service; minimum number of customers to generate sales to turn a profit – Based on age, income, gender, product type, wealth, demand – Convenience store, fast food, grocery – everyone – Movie theaters – younger people, families – Chiropractors – older people – Thrift stores – lower-income – Upscale department stores, fine dining – wealthy – Amusement parks – families with children – Night clubs – singles

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Market Area Analysis – Study completed by service providers & retailers to determine suitability of a location (if market is suitable, then determine best location within market area) – Profitability of a Location Use surveys, census data, accounting data If competitors nearby, may need a larger area Example: – 15 minute range – $10,000 sales per week for profit – $2 per week average customer – Need 5,000 customers per week – If competitors nearby, must adjust size of market area or shape of area (will need more than 5,000 people in area)

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Market Area Analysis – Optimal Location within a Market Once profitability is determined, find best location to minimize distance to be traveled for the most customers possible Linear Settlement – Elongated community (like Miami, Atlantic City, etc.) – A few, long major N-S or E-W streets & many short streets in perpendicular direction – Best location is middle or median of series (½ to north, ½ to south) – What is different # of customers on each block? » Use gravity model for optimal location – directly related to population and inversely related to distance » Greater # of people gives greater potential for customers » Greater distance to travel, less potential for customers

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Market Area Analysis – Optimal Location within a Market Non-linear settlement – More complex, but still use gravity model ①Identify possible site ②Identify where potential customers live within market range ③Measure distance from possible site to every potential customer ④Divide each potential by distance to potential site ⑤Sum all results from step 4 ⑥Select 2 nd possible location & repeat steps 2-5 ⑦Compare results from step 5 for possible locations – highest sum/score has highest potential & is optimal site

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Hierarchy of Services & Settlements – Smaller settlements are limited to consumer services with small thresholds, ranges, & market areas – Larger settlements have greater # and variety of services – varies by neighborhood within large settlements – People usually travel shortest distance for services May travel farther for lower prices, unavailable services, unavailable/different items – Nesting of Services & Settlements MDCs have many small settlements & fewer large settlements 4 market area levels (smallest to largest): – Hamlet (average of 800 people, 17 sq. mile market area, 4.4 miles between) – Village – Town – City (wide range of sizes) Regular pattern of distances between settlements

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Hierarchy of Services & Settlements – Rank-Size Distribution of Settlements Regular pattern of ranking settlements by population Rank-size rule – states that nth largest settlement is 1/n the population of the largest settlement in a country or province – 1 st – 1, 2 nd – ½, 3 rd – 1/3, 4 th – ¼, 5 th – 1/5, etc. – Largest city is 1 million; 2 nd = 500,000; 3 rd = 333,333; 4 th = 250,000; 5 th = 200,000; etc. – Generally plots as a straight line on a graph Pattern is found in U.S. and several other countries If it does not graph in a straight line or follow 1/n rule, it does not have rank-size (example: many European countries) – Sometimes the pattern may not work for larger settlements but will still work for smaller settlements (often true in Europe)

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Hierarchy of Services & Settlements – Rank-Size Distribution of Settlements Often countries that do not follow the rank-size rule, follow the primate city rule Primate city – largest city in a country; over 2x the size of the next largest city; usually the center of power for gov’t, economy, culture, education, etc. for the country – Ex: Denmark – Copenhagen (1 million) vs. Arhus (200,000) – Ex: UK – London (8 million) vs. Birmingham (2 million) Many LDCs follow primate city rule, but also fail rank-size rule at smaller settlements Importance of Rank-Size (Example of Romania) – Indicates regular hierarchy; society is sufficiently wealthy to provide goods/services throughout the country; proportionate wealth distribution – Absence of rank-size may indicate not enough wealth in country for many to have adequate goods/services; disproportionate wealth distribution – Romania – under communism WW2-1989; Ceaucescu (dictator) destroyed neighborhoods & rural settlements with gov’t planning; primate city of Bucharest (capital city); NOW, restrictions on Bucharest’s growth to encourage growth in other cities & rural settlements

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Examples of Primate Cities – London (UK) – Paris (France) – Athens (Greece) – Baghdad (Iraq) – Budapest (Hungary) – Bangkok (Thailand) – Cairo (Egypt) – Lima (Peru) – Lisbon (Portugal) – Manila (Philippines) – Mexico City (Mexico) – Seoul (South Korea) – Tehran (Iran) – Vienna (Austria) – Santiago (Chile) Examples of Countries with NO Primate City – U.S. – Brazil – China – Italy – Australia – India – South Africa – Germany – Japan – Israel – Netherlands – New Zealand – Poland – Russia (?) – Spain – Turkey – Switzerland – Saudi Arabia – Vietnam – Pakistan

Key Issue #2: Why Are Consumer Services Distributed in a Regular Pattern? Hierarchy of Services & Settlements – Rank-size & primate cities can occur on a regional or provincial level Atlanta, GA; Winnipeg, Manitoba; Perth, Western Australia are all provincial primate cities Periodic Markets – Set up on certain days/weeks/etc. in certain or different places in a town or city – Common in LDCs & rural MDC settlements – Generally near areas of sparse population and lower income that cannot support full-time retail – Mobile vendors – drive from farm to market & to different markets – Often sell food, handicrafts – Frequency various by culture Muslim countries – once a week in 6 cities, nothing on Friday (day of rest/prayer) China – 3 cities on a 10-day cycle (based on lunar month 29.5 days) Korea – 2 cities on 15 day cycles (based on lunar month 29.5 days) Africa – between 3- and 7-day cycles