1. Investigating shopping choice preferences in Helsinki and Tampere urban regions Ari Hyvönen James Culley Simo Syrman

2. Aims of the research Investigating specialty shopping preferences The goal is to study the spatial dependencies of the choice orientation

3. Research outline Choice orientations –Principal component analysis (PCA) for questionnaire data Choice orientation and socio-economic variables –MANOVA to study the relationship Spatial dependency –PCA and cluster analysis to classify urban structure

4. Choice orientation - PCA Data from ”Shopping centers as a part of sustainable consumption and urban structure” –project –Total of 24 000 questionnaires were send out to a random sample of house holds in Helsinki metropolitan area (HMA) and Tampere region in 2009 Total response rate was 26,2 % (6294) –HMA 4582 and Tampere 1712 PCA for the 28 questions concerning choice orientation –7 orthogonally rotated components –Explains 64.7 % of the variance

5. The choice orientations 1.Entertainment & auxiliary services 2.Quality & selection 3.Price 4.Ease of access 5.Access by car 6.Shopping environment 7.Customer service

6. Dependency between socio-economic variables and the components MANOVA –Socio-economic variables: Age Family structure Education Sex Income –Results were statistically significant due to large sample size. –But the amount counted were small Partial eta squared around 0.05 Conclusion –Not a meaningful relationship between socio-economic situation of house holds and choice orientation

7. Price

9. Quality & Selection

10. Access by car

11. Urban segments Grid data (250 x 250 m) –Distance to nearest shopping center –Population density –Number of flats –Square meters per person –Number of workplaces PCA with Varimax -rotation –3 components Cluster analysis –CLARA –Silhouette value Result: 7 clusters

14. Depedency Discriminant analysis (DA) –Responders were classified by the basis of the urban segmentation grid –The aim of DA was to verify and study the classification of the responders –Results: The most significant component was the access by car –Price and Entertainment & auxiliary service were also significant But in practice not meaningful

15. Tampere region Same analysis as for HMA –Discovered choice orientations were slightly different Latent structure of the PCA –Most likely cause is the differences in public transportation network Discriminant analysis revealed only one statistically significant component –The public transportation component

16. Conclusion There is a dependency between choice orientation and urban structure in specialty shopping –The house holds which are located in densely populated areas households prefer accessibility by public transportation when choosing the area for specialty shopping. –And vice versa