A Geo-business Classification for London

  • Patrick WeberEmail author
  • Dave Chapman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC, volume 0)


This paper discusses the methodology and processes required to implement a geo-business classification to aid spatial decision making in the context of foreign direct investment promotion for London. This research is both timely and relevant since there is need for better decision support tools that will improve sub-regional location decision making ensuring London’s diverse business neighbourhoods are presented effectively to potential investors.

The research methodology presented in this paper adopts principals and practices common place in consumer marketing in the form of geodemographic classification. The five key data domains associated with companies, working property stock, general living environment and accessibility were used to gather a range of input variables. These variables were then used as the input to a principal components analysis which simplified the data into 9 dimensions describing and contrasting London’s diverse business neighbourhoods. These geo-business area profiles will form the basis for spatial decision support tools for business location decision making.


Foreign Direct Investment Spatial Database Town Centre Location Quotient Lower Super Output Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ackroyd, P., 2001. London: The Biography New edition., Vintage.Google Scholar
  2. Bacharach, S.B., 1989. Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 496-515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Charlton, M., Openshaw, S. & Wymer, C., 1985. Some new classifications of census enumeration districts in Britain: a poor man's ACORN. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 13(1), 69–96.Google Scholar
  4. Department of Communities and Local Government, 2009. Indices of Deprivation 2007. Indices of Deprivation 2007. Available at: [Accessed July 21, 2009].
  5. Experian, 2009. MOSAIC UK 2009. Available at: [Accessed July 20, 2009].
  6. Harris, R., Webber, R. & Sleight, P., 2005. Geodemographics, GIS and neighbourhood targeting, John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
  7. Harris, R.J. & Longley, P.A., 2002. Creating small area measures of urban deprivation. Environment and Planning A, 34(6), 1073 – 1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hebbert, M., 1998. London: More by Fortune than Design, London: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Jackson, D.A., 1993. Stopping Rules in Principal Components Analysis: A Comparison of Heuristical and Statistical Approaches. Ecology, 74(8), 2204-2214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Johnston, R.J., 2000. The dictionary of human geography, Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Kaiser, H.F., 1960. The Application of Electronic Computers to Factor Analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141-151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. LDA, 2003. Understanding London's Sectors, London: London Development Agency.Google Scholar
  13. Leigh, 1970. The use of location quotients in urban economic base studies. Land economics, 46(2), 202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lloyd, D., 2004. Uncertainty in Town Centre Definition. PhD Thesis. University College London.Google Scholar
  15. Longley, P. & Clarke, G., 1995. GIS for business and service planning, John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  16. Office of National Statistics, 2009. National Statistics 2001 Area Classification. Office of National Statistics Website. Available at: [Accessed July 20, 2009].
  17. Office of National Statistics, 2008. The IDBR Inter-Departmental Business Register; a key survey source. The IDBR Inter-Departmental Business Register; a key survey source. Available at: [Accessed July 21,2009].
  18. Pearson, K., 1901. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philosophical magazine, 2(6), 559–572.Google Scholar
  19. Porter, M.E., 2000. Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Robinson, G.M., 1998. Methods and techniques in human geography, London: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  21. Saxenian, A., 1991. The origins and dynamics of production networks in Silicon Valley. Research Policy, 20(5), 423-437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sleight, P., 1997. Targeting Customers: how to use geodemographic and lifestyle data in your business, NTC Publications Henley on Thames, UK.Google Scholar
  23. Thurstain, M. et al., 2001. Producing Boundaries and Statistics for Town Centres, CASA, Center for Advanced Spatial Analysis, London.Google Scholar
  24. Thurstain-Goodwin, M. & Unwin, D., 2000. Defining and Delineating the Central Areas of Towns for Statistical Monitoring Using Continuous Surface Representations. Transactions in GIS, 4(4), 305-317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. URBED, 2002. A City of Villages: Promotion a sustainable future for London's suburbs, London: Greater London Authority. Available at:
  26. Weber, P. & Chapman, D., 2009. Investing in geography: A GIS to support inward investment. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 33(1), 1-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Management Science and InnovationUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations