Skip to main content
Log in

Isolating the geodemographic characterisation of retail format choice from the effects of spatial convenience

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The authors analyze the relationship between the geodemographic profile of consumers and retail format choice while accounting for the effects of spatial convenience. The proposed analytic model assumes that format choice is an implicit portion of store choice, such that a geodemographic profile functions as a determinant of format choice, and spatial convenience is a determinant of store choice. The results show that some geodemographic dimensions capture preferences for certain store formats and thereby facilitate retailers’ selection of geographic markets. The results also indicate that obviating the effect of spatial convenience may lead to biased estimations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Batey, P., & Brown, P. J. (1995). From human ecology to customer targeting: the evolution of geodemographics. In P. Longley, & G. P. Clarke (Eds.), GIS for business and service planning. Cambridge: Geoinformation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, J. R., & Inglis, K. (1989). Geodemographics in practice: developments in Britain and Europe. Environment & Planning, 21, 587–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. R., & Lattin, J. M. (1998). Shopping behavior and consumer preference for store price format: why ‘Large Basket’ shopper prefers EDLP. Marketing Science, 17(1), 66–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. R., Ho, T.-H., & Tang, C. S. (1998). Determining where to shop: fixed and variable costs of shopping. Journal of Marketing Research, 35, 352–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M., & Lerman, S. R. (1985). Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhatnagar, A., & Ratchford, B. T. (2004). A model of retail format competition for non-durable goods. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(1), 39–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkin, M. (1995). Customer targeting, geodemographics and lifestyle approaches. In P. Longley, & G. Clarke (Eds.), GIS for business and services planning. Cambridge: Geoinformation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucklin, L. P. (1967). The concept of mass in intra-urban shopping. Journal of Marketing, 31, 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flowerdew, R., & Goldstein, W. (1989). Geodemographics in practice: developments in North America. Environment and Planning A, 21, 605–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galata, G., Bucklin, R. E., & Hanssens, D. M. (2000). On the stability of store format choice. Working paper, UCLA Anderson School.

  • Ghosh, A. (1994). Retail management, 2nd edn. Orlando, FL: The Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, A., & McLafferty, S. L. (1987). Location strategies for retail and service firms. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Benito, O. (2002). Geodemographic and socioeconomic characterisation of retail attraction of leader hypermarket chains in Spain. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 12(1), 81–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Benito, O., & González-Benito, J. (2005). The role of geodemographic segmentation in retail location strategy. International Journal of Market Research, 47(3), 295–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Benito, O., Muñoz-Gallego, P. A., & Kopalle, P. K. (2005). Asymmetric competition in retail store formats: evaluating inter- and intra-format spatial effects. Journal of Retailing, 81(1), 65–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Benito, O., & Santos-Requejo, L. (2002). A comparison of approaches to exploit budget allocation data in cross-sectional maximum likelihood estimation of multi-attribute choice models. OMEGA, 30(5), 315–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goss, J. (1995). We know who you are and we know where you live: instrumental rationality of geodemographic systems. Economic Geography, 71(2), 171–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, S. J., Kim, B.-D., Montgomery, A. L., & Rossi, P. E. (1995). Determinants of store-level price elasticity. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(February), 17–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inman, J. J., Shankar, V., & Ferraro, R. (2004). The roles of channel-category associations and geodemographics in channel patronage. Journal of Marketing, 68(April), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., & Karande, K. (2000). The effect of retail store environment on retailer performance. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 167–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. (1978). Modelling the choice of residential location. In A. Karlquist, L. Lundqvist, F. Snickars, & J. W. Weibull (Eds.), Spatial interaction theory and residential location. vol. 3. (pp. 75–96). Studies in Regional Science and Urban Economics, Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messinger, P. R., & Narasimhan, C. (1997). A model of retail formats based on consumer's economizing on shopping time. Marketing Science, 16(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, V. W., & McGoldrick, P. J. (1994). The role of geodemographics in segmenting and targeting consumer markets: A delphi study. European Journal of Marketing, 28(5), 54–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, A. L. (1997). Creating micro-marketing pricing strategies using supermarket scanner data. Marketing Science, 16(4), 315–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, L., Patterson, M., & Evans, M. J. (1995). Retailing applications of geodemographics: a preliminary investigation. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 13(2), 29–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, L., Patterson, M., & Evans, M. J. (1997). Retailer use of geodemographic and other data sources: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 26(6), 188–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putler, D. S., Kalyanam, K., & Hodges, J. S. (1996). A bayesian approach for estimating target market potential with limited geodemographic information. Journal of Marketing Research, 33(May), 134–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffman, L. G. (1993). Consumer behaviour. London: Prentice Hall International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solgaard, H. S., & Hansen, T. (2003), A hierarchical bayes model of choice between supermarket formats. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10, 169–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the collaboration of Experian Marketing Services, Publicaciones Alimarket, and the Office of Statistics of the City Council of Salamanca (Spain) for the empirical portion of this study. This research was financed by the Regional Ministries of Education and Culture and Economy and Employment of Castile and Leon, Spain. The authors also thank two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on a previous version of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Óscar González-Benito.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

González-Benito, Ó., Bustos-Reyes, C.A. & Muñoz-Gallego, P.A. Isolating the geodemographic characterisation of retail format choice from the effects of spatial convenience. Market Lett 18, 45–59 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-006-9000-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-006-9000-z

Keywords

Navigation