Neighbourhood Retailing : Policy, People and Partnerships 9781845442088, 9781845440442

Citation preview

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32, Number 11, 2004

ISSN 0959-0552

Neighbourhood retailing: policy, people and partnerships Guest Editor: David Bennison

Contents 506 Access this journal online 507 Abstracts & keywords 509 Guest editorial 511 Inequalities in retail choice: exploring consumer experiences in suburban neighbourhoods Malcolm Kirkup, Ronan De Kervenoael, Alan Hallsworth, Ian Clarke, Peter Jackson and Rossana Perez del Aguila

545 People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes 557 Market towns ± victims of market forces? Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

523 Rethinking consumer disadvantage: the importance of qualitative research Lucy Woodliffe 532 Community pharmacies as good neighbours? A comparative study of Germany and the UK Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Access this journal electronically The current and past volumes of this journal are available at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm You can also search over 100 additional Emerald journals in Emerald Fulltext:

www.emeraldinsight.com/ft See page following contents for full details of what your access includes.

survey) and qualitative (semi-structured interviews) methods. The diary survey data were used to measure grocery retailing accessibility for each participant, while the semi-structured interviews captured participants’ attitudes, preferences and expectations with regard to grocery shopping, which were then used to construct a context for the accessibility findings. The findings suggest a way in which consumer disadvantage can be conceptualised, recommend the use of qualitative methods when researching this area, and highlight issues of interest (such as identifying whether an individual shops through choice or constraint) which could be considered by future research designs.

Abstracts & keywords

Community pharmacies as good neighbours? A comparative study of Germany and the UK Inequalities in retail choice: exploring consumer experiences in suburban neighbourhoods

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt Keywords Pharmaceuticals industry, Chemists, Germany, United Kingdom, National Health Service, Retailing,

Malcolm Kirkup, Ronan De Kervenoael, Alan Hallsworth, Ian Clarke, Peter Jackson and Rossana Perez del Aguila

Located as intermediaries between patients/ customers and national health systems, community pharmacies have to negotiate increasing government demands for free advice, pressure on their earnings and an increasingly deregulated market. A comparative assessment of the German and UK markets highlights the tensions pharmacists face as healthcare providers and retailers, assessing the ways in which each group copes with growing competitive challenges. Based on a grounded theory study of community pharmacies in Berlin/Brandenburg and the Greater Manchester area the role of pharmacies within their local neighbourhoods is discussed and the potential for the transfer of marketing intelligence between the two countries evaluated.

Keywords Consumer behaviour, Retailing, Residential areas, Urban areas, Convenience stores, United Kingdom Focuses on deprived neighbourhoods where instances of “food deserts” have been found and explores, through focus groups, consumer experiences of food store choices. Focusing on suburban neighbourhoods in Portsmouth, identifies significant differences in experiences of choice both between and within neighbourhoods. In some localities, the research also finds dissatisfaction with the (supposedly-coveted) “small local store”. Shows that choice is very different from provision, and conceptualises how consumers’ circumstances, situation and individual characteristics can significantly reduce a broad theoretical provision of food stores to a limited set of perceived real choices.

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Rethinking consumer disadvantage: the importance of qualitative research Lucy Woodliffe Keywords Consumers, Customer surveys, Retailing, United Kingdom This paper provides insight into the behaviour and attitudes of an under-researched group of consumers, and identifies some useful pointers for future research on consumer disadvantage. More specifically, the paper explores the relationships between the potential causes of consumer disadvantage, forms of consumer disadvantage and accessibility. The exploratory study consisted of a combination of quantitative (diary

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · Abstracts & keywords q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552

Keywords Marketing, Urban areas, Retailing, Partnership, Governance, United Kingdom This article investigates the interaction between urban place marketing actors with specific reference to marketing urban areas as shopping destinations – town centre managers, shopping centre managers, local authority economic development managers and marketing managers and tourism promotion managers. It reports the results of a survey of these actors in the top 173 urban shopping destinations in the UK. It identifies those actors with prime responsibility for marketing urban retail provision (i.e. town centre managers and shopping centre managers), the nature of their collaboration (via formal, informal, and initiative-specific interaction), and the factors impelling interaction (i.e. recognition of the linkages between the activities of different organisations, ensuring wider representation of organisational interests and the financial imperative).

507

Abstracts & keywords

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 507-508

With the recent publication of Draft PPS6 and its increased focus on the strategic development of smaller centres, the implications for the marketing/ promotion of such centres are addressed in detail.

Market towns – victims of market forces? Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith Keywords Markets, Rural economies, Local government finance, Balanced scorecard, England The importance of the role played by market towns in the vitality of rural England has become increasingly

recognised in recent years, and has attracted considerable attention from government development agencies in support of major public policy initiatives. The example of the East of England Development Agency’s Market Town Initiative is used to review recent approaches to market town partnerships and their links with retailing activity within the context of town centre management. The paper concludes by suggesting possible mechanisms to support market town partnership initiatives in achieving sustainability once the public funding stream ends – as the potential basis for a future research agenda in this area.

508

Guest editorial

About the Guest Editor David Bennison is the Research Co-ordinator for Retail Management in the Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, and Director of the Research and Policy Unit of the Retail Enterprise Network. He has a long-standing interest in retail planning and development, locational strategies, and retail change in southern Europe (with particular reference to Greece).

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · pp. 509-510 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552

These joint special issues of the International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management bring together a number of the papers that were originally presented at the CIRM Conference held in Manchester in September 2003. The theme of the conference was “Neighbourhood retailing: policy, people and partnerships”, and it supplemented the event of the previous year which had a similar focus on issues of retail provision at the local level (IJRDM, 31, issues 8 and 9). As in 2002, the papers have been allocated between two issues: this one (Number 11) contains five of the more academic oriented ones, while Number 12 (Retail Insights) has four contributions with a greater practitioner orientation. Research into local shopping per se,and into the independent retailer, the main supplier of local provision, has developed considerable momentum since 2000. Once long neglected areas of study, they have come to the fore as various government policy agendas ranging from social exclusion to sector competitiveness have all recognised that good shopping provision accessible to all parts of the population is a key factor in the social, economic and physical health of communities. In the UK, the publication of draft Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS 6) in the past year has placed further emphasis on the vitality and viability of retailing in centres lower down the urban hierarchy. Many such places appear to have stagnated or even declined relative to the largest centres where retail investment has become concentrated. Meanwhile, the independent retailer is under ever increasing threat from the large multiples such as Tesco and Sainsbury, who are now opening small formats in local centres to complement their off-centre and out-of-town superstores. This can bring both benefits and disbenefits. While competition should arguably provide lower prices and better service, it runs the serious risk of ultimately diminishing choice and replicating the homogeneous appearance of our multiple dominated high streets in local parades. The disappearance of the independent trader also takes away an important source of retail innovation, and a potential place of employment for groups who may be otherwise marginalised in the workforce. Neither should the social role played by such retailers be disregarded: as a focal point for interaction, they are often embedded within local social networks forming part of the invisible glue that binds communities together. There is no one easy solution to what is a complex set of issues. For example, small retailers will often identify multiples as the main source of their problems, yet there are numerous examples The Guest Editor is grateful to the Retail Enterprise Network for its support of the CIRM 2004 conference.

509

Guest editorial

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 509-510

of independents trading well where there is a strong multiple presence. Rather more critical is the skills and knowledge base of the small retailer, and their ability to identify and exploit market segments which the large company cannot do. Amongst other elements, business support, land use planning, and competition policy are all important factors that need to come together, tailored in whatever combination is appropriate to the needs of individual localities. However, this is not to imply that top down approaches are the panacea for the problems of neighbourhood shopping and the independent trader. Critical to the success of more integrated and holistic approaches is the need for retailers to cooperate and work together with themselves, other community stakeholders, and local and national government. “Independent” retailers can gain much by becoming inter-dependent ones: policy, people and partnerships need to operate both synergistically and symbiotically. The papers in these two issues examine a number of dimensions of neighbourhood shopping, and show how the development of approaches to maintaining the vitality and viability of local retail provision requires a variety of factors to be taken in to account. The first of these is the nature of local shopping behaviour and the issue of choice. The desirability for people to have a variety of shops to choose from is almost a sine qua non of modern consumer society, but as Malcolm Kirkup and his colleagues argue, the nature of choice involves more than having two or three shops within easy travelling distance. Through their focus group research in suburban neighbourhoods in Portsmouth, they demonstrate how individuals’ circumstances and characteristics can significantly reduce a broad theoretical provision of food stores to a limited set of perceived real choices, which is what policy makers need to take into account. The value of undertaking qualitative research to understand more fully the complex nature of consumer disadvantage is further underlined in the paper by Lucy Woodliffe, which reports her exploratory research into a group of consumers in Southampton. These two papers are complemented by that of Cliff Guy in the Retail Insights section who examines the availability and prices of healthy food in socially deprived areas of Cardiff. He concludes that neighbourhood food stores play only a limited role in making such foodstuffs available locally, and argues for improved access to larger supermarkets. While much of the current research on local retailing deals with food provision, the paper by Elke Pioch and Ruth Schmidt considers the pressures being faced by pharmacies in the UK and Germany in increasingly deregulated markets, and the role that they play in local communities. They discuss the inherent tension between the roles of pharmacies as retailers and as healthcare

providers, and the need for pharmacists to develop their business skills as much as their professional ones to remain competitive. Indeed, the topic of training and support for the independent retail sector is one that has developed considerably in recent years, and the paper by Salim Jiwa and his colleagues in the Insights issue presents an example of this. E-business can provide potential growth opportunities for small scale retailers, particularly if they are of a specialist type, but there remain considerable barriers to their fulfilment, one of which is the lack of awareness of what is required to succeed in this channel. The “Netrepreneur” simulation game described in the paper can be used as a teaching aid, and makes available a range of activities and functions that closely resemble actual e-business operations. The final major theme relates to planning policy and the management of centres. The new emphasis that the UK government appears to be placing on places lower down the hierarchy raises the question of how far the experiences of planning and managing larger places can be drawn on to develop best practice for smaller ones. The paper by Gary Warnaby et al.examines how place marketing activities are planned and implemented in town centres, and examines the implications for local ones. The importance of developing effective partnership arrangements between public and private sectors is emphasised, a lesson that also emerges in the paper by Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith in their study of the adoption of a partnership approach in market towns. The value of working together is also made clear in the paper by Stephen Doyle in the Insights issue on the regeneration of Harlem, New York. He describes how the people of the area became actively involved in the regeneration of their neighbourhood and developed community gardens where residents grow their own produce and sell it in their own form of farmers’ market. Finally, the article by Greg Lawrence, also in the Insights issue, addresses the vital issue of retail crime reduction. He shows that a thoughtful and considered approach to the design of stores and their immediate environments can do much to deter potential criminals, an important consideration given the displacement of crime from city centres to local ones as a consequence of the widespread use of CCTV and other measures in the former. Theft and robbery can quickly undermine an area’s retail provision as insurance becomes prohibitive and owners close down rather than face intimidating behaviour. Again, this points to the need for close collaboration and cooperation between retailers themselves, and between them and public sector bodies for effective measures to be implemented. David Bennison Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, Manchester, UK

510

Inequalities in retail choice: exploring consumer experiences in suburban neighbourhoods Malcolm Kirkup Ronan De Kervenoael Alan Hallsworth Ian Clarke Peter Jackson and Rossana Perez del Aguila The authors Malcolm Kirkup is Senior Lecturer in Marketing at the Birmingham Business School, Birmingham, UK. Ronan De Kervenoael is an ESRC Researcher and Ian Clarke is a Fellow, both at Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster, UK. Alan Hallsworth is a Professor of Retailing at Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK. Peter Jackson is a Profesor of Human Geography and Rossana Perez del Aguila is an ESRC Researcher, both at the University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Keywords Consumer behaviour, Retailing, Residential areas, Urban areas, Convenience stores, United Kingdom

Abstract Focuses on deprived neighbourhoods where instances of “food deserts” have been found and explores, through focus groups, consumer experiences of food store choices. Focusing on suburban neighbourhoods in Portsmouth, identifies significant differences in experiences of choice both between and within neighbourhoods. In some localities, the research also finds dissatisfaction with the (supposedly-coveted) “small local store”. Shows that choice is very different from provision, and conceptualises how consumers’ circumstances, situation and individual characteristics can significantly reduce a broad theoretical provision of food stores to a limited set of perceived real choices.

Electronic access The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · pp. 511-522 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552 DOI 10.1108/09590550410564746

Introduction The issue of relative consumer choice has become increasingly prominent in debates on food retailing, particularly in the UK (National Consumer Council, 1992; Bromley, 1995; Wrigley, 2002) and the USA (Nayga and Weinberg, 1999). In spite of substantial retail development in recent years, concerns have been expressed by retail planners, competition regulators and consumer groups that the vast growth in out-of-town food superstores has been to the detriment of town centres and smaller independent outlets, leading to geographical inequalities in choice, access, quality and price (Davies, 1999). Food superstores have a highly uneven distribution and, while they may considerably improve shopping convenience and choice for car-borne suburban consumers, strong disparities in income and mobility result in a “a marked inequality in consumer opportunities” (Westlake, 1993, p. 172). A particular concern has been the reduction in access, for low-income consumers and/or consumers with impaired mobility, to quality supermarket facilities or other sources of competitively-priced healthy foods (Wrigley, 2002). An additional concern has been the concentration of food retail trade among a small number of powerful multiple retailers, threatening to lead to local monopolies which might further restrict choice in some areas (Raven et al., 1995; Competition Commission, 2003). In the UK, the changing geography of food retailing and competition and the consequences for local consumer choice have been the focus of lengthy studies by the Government Cabinet Office (Social Exclusion Unit, 2000) and the Competition Commission (Competition Commission, 2000, 2003). Academic research on relative retail choice and disadvantage has also grown considerably, with recent contributions from Williams and Hubbard (2001), Piacentini et al. (2001), Wrigley (2002), Cummins and Macintyre (2002), Guy et al. (2004), Wrigley et al. The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) for the three-year research project on which this paper is based (Grant Reference No. R000239531; “Retail competition and consumer choice: long-term change and household dynamics”). Ian Clarke would also like to acknowledge the additional support of the ESRC/EPSRC Advanced Institute of Management Research (Grant Reference No. RES-331-25-0017) for supplementary support provided in the last year of the project through his AIM Fellowship. The authors would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers of an earlier draft of this paper for their helpful comments.

511

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

(2004), Wilson et al. (2004) and Clarke et al. (2004). A particular focus of recent research has been on the store choice problems experienced by consumers in areas of existing socio-economic disadvantage, where instances of “food deserts” have been found (e.g. Donkin et al., 2000; Wrigley et al., 2002, 2004; Cummins and Sparks, 2004). This spatial focus is important – particularly when it reveals concentrations of retail exclusion where solutions can be readily targeted – but it does tend to imply that consumers in all but the most deprived areas have adequate access to food store choices. More systematic studies of food access across wider urban areas are emerging (see Cummins and Macintyre, 2002; Clarke et al., 2002; Guy et al., 2004) but their focus is largely on quantitative indicators of provision rather than consumers’ direct experiences of choice. In short, few studies have been conducted which combine a broader perspective of variations in choice across a wide spectrum of area types together with an exploration of consumers’ direct experiences of the perceived choices available. We believe such research would be valuable in developing a more balanced perspective on retail choice, to explore the possibility of pockets of disadvantage elsewhere, and to move towards an understanding of where, and under what conditions, choice might be deemed to be adequate or inadequate. Indeed, the policy implications of such research would be far reaching, since definitions within policy documents are, arguably, replete with an overlyrestricted conception of consumer welfare to disadvantaged groups. Such research will also need to overcome a definition of “access” which, in our view, tends to over-inflate the importance of physical distance (Competition Commission, 2000; Social Exclusion Unit, 2000) at the expense of social and cultural constraints on access. To redress the narrow conception of retail choice that is used in practice, we report on some of the initial results of a major study designed to provide a more balanced appraisal of the nuances of choice available to different groups of consumers within a particular geographical area. In the larger study as a whole, we examine how consumers’ experiences and perceptions of choice of grocery stores vary geographically, socially and culturally (Clarke et al., 2004). The overall project is a longitudinal research study and examines the impact of twenty years of retail change in Portsmouth, making use of a combination of large-scale store-based and at-home surveys, focus groups and ethnographic-style research to provide richer insights into retail choice at the intra-neighbourhood level. However, in this paper we focus on interpreting the exploratory results

that emerged from the focus group stage of the project.

Research objectives and methodology This paper presents the results of an exploratory phase of our investigation of consumer experiences, perceptions and attitudes towards grocery shopping choices that was conducted in 2003. The objective was to explore if, and to what extent, views of choice varied within and between neighbourhoods, and why. We wanted to understand the notion of choice more explicitly as expressed through the everyday language of consumers, in order to contribute to the conceptualisation of choice as a construct that we would unpack more fully in the later survey-based and in-depth qualitative components of our research project. We hypothesised that we would find substantial differences in choice between and within neighbourhoods, and designed our early qualitative inquiry to explore this proposition by conducting our research in a broad spectrum of neighbourhoods. Geographically the study focused on the northern suburbs of Portsmouth. In aggregate terms the area might be described as typically white, “middle-England” suburbia, but such a description masks significant variations in socioeconomic profile between neighbourhoods and even between particular streets. We conducted our research in four adjacent neighbourhoods – Paulsgrove, Drayton, Stakes and Cowplain. The location and socio-economic characteristics of these neighbourhoods are shown in Figure 1 and Table I. Paulsgrove is the poorest neighbourhood – a predominantly council-owned estate with 4.3 per cent unemployment. Drayton is considerably more affluent but with a relatively elderly age profile – 11 per cent of the population being over 75 years of age. Cowplain is the most affluent neighbourhood with very high levels of mobility (44 per cent of the population with two or more cars). The study area has seen major retail changes over the past two decades. The Portsmouth/ Havant area features two hypermarkets (AsdaWalmart, 98,796 sq. ft; and Tesco Extra, 50,700 sq. ft). Superstore provision includes Asda (Waterlooville, Havant, Fareham and Portsmouth), Safeway (Portsmouth and Horndean), Sainsbury (Portsmouth, Farlington and Fareham), Somerfield (Fareham), Tesco (Havant, Fareham, Portsmouth and Cosham) and Waitrose (Havant and Waterlooville). It has additional high street supermarkets (including Aldi, Iceland, Kwik Save and Lidl) and 26 Co-op

512

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

Figure 1 Study area

Community Stores (IGD, 2003). Market data from the Competition Commission (2000) for the wider Portsmouth postcode region show Tesco to be by far the dominant retailer (with 28 per cent market share) followed by Sainsbury (19 per cent), ASDA (18 per cent) and Safeway (18 per cent). In terms of relative market concentration, the Herfindahl-Hirschmann Index for the postcode region is 1,845. This index is calculated as the sum of the squares of the market share of the major retail parties in a catchment area, and for Portsmouth suggests slightly less trade concentration than the UK weighted postcode region average of 2,135 (Competition Commission, 2000). Theoretically, residents in the study area now have access to some of the

largest and most modern multiple food superstores in the country, and our study sought to explore how this level of provision translated into perceptions of, and satisfaction with, the potential choices now available. In this exploratory research, consumer attitudes and perceptions were investigated through focus groups – a technique applied extensively in shopping behaviour research (e.g. Holbrook and Jackson, 1996). The group discussions were held in community-based venues – the community centre and the infants’ school in Paulsgrove, the church halls in Stakes and Drayton, and the golf club in Cowplain. Five groups were held, representing 31 households in total, with participants recruited from the heart of each neighbourhood. Each group included at least two sub-groups of participants who lived in the same street, as well as representation from those with and without access to private transport. The characteristics of focus group participants are shown in Tables II and III. Within the focus group discussions a number of broad dimensions of choice were explored. First, we focused on how consumers perceive the choices they have available – what it means to them. Second, we encouraged discussion on if, and how, their views on choice had changed as a result of retail changes in the area (e.g. in terms of dimensions including choice of cheap food, healthy foods, treats, pack sizes and shopping environment) and whether these changes were regarded as positive or disadvantageous for their neighbourhood and themselves. Third, we explored their awareness of the food store choices available, and why they chose to adopt or reject Table II Focus groups Group

Neighbourhood

1 2 3 4 5

Paulsgrove (younger) Paulsgrove (older) Drayton Stakes/Purbrook Cowplain

Participants 9 4 6 7 5

Table I Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of sample neighbourhoods

Paulsgrove Stakes Drayton Cowplain

Rank of index of multiple deprivation (2000)a

Population over 75 years of age (2001)b (%)

Population with two or more cars or vans (2001)b (%)

Population (2001)b

Unemployment (2001)b (%)

956 2,554 7,077 7,346

6.5 5.3 11.2 7.2

21.3 33.5 39.7 43.7

14,177 10,065 12,302 9,215

4.3c 3.1d 1.4c 1.6d

Notes: a Rank 1=most deprived ward in England. Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions; b 2001 Census, Office of National Statistics; c Portsmouth unemployment 3.1 per cent; d Stakes and Cowplain wards are within Havant. Havant unemployment 2.7 per cent

513

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

Table III Profile of focus group participants Age range 16-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Number 2 10 10 8

Working status Working household (£30k+) Working household (,£30k) Unemployed Retired

particular alternatives. This aspect was explored through group-based projective “mental mapping” techniques as well as individual questionnaires. Finally, the groups explored how attitudes and perceptions varied between individuals within the same neighbourhood. The format for the discussion groups, and the mental mapping technique, were first tested and refined through a pilot experimental group. Each subsequent discussion group lasted approximately two hours, and followed a series of structured research questions. The discussions were recorded on video and audiotape to produce detailed transcripts. Participants’ verbatim contributions were categorised in relation to the research questions, and then independently reviewed by the researchers with a view to reaching a general consensus on the key points arising from the discussions. This paper begins with a review of the main findings of the focus groups in terms of consumer perspectives on choice and the perceived impact of recent retail development on householder experiences within each neighbourhood. We then use these observations to develop an initial conceptual framework highlighting the main determinants of retail choice sets. Such a framework could have important policy implications and prove useful for understanding the relationship between theoretical choices (stores which are accessible in principle) and real choices (stores which are perceived to be accessible in practice) at the local level.

Choice is valued but is relative and perceived Our findings show, without exception, that all participants in all neighbourhoods stressed the importance of having a “good” choice of food outlets. None felt that one single store, however large and however accessible, could possibly meet all of their needs. Having “choice” was deemed important for all groups, for a number of reasons. For many, choice afforded control over what and how they buy, and allowed them to feel they were not being dictated to. For consumers in Paulsgrove on a particularly tight budget, choice enabled them to feel they could gain from the

Number

Children in household

Number

8 8 7 8

0 1 2 3+

15 4 6 6

resulting competition – in a way to “win the best deal”. Shopping around revealed bargains and reduced the weekly food bill. As one Paulsgrove participant noted: It’s the deals I look for. Iceland may have a good deal one week and if I shop around I can get the best of the deals locally. If Tesco haven’t got a good deal on then I won’t buy it from there.

Another added: It’s a good thing to have a choice of different shops. It gives them the competition and forces them to keep prices down and then we can shop for the best deals.

She continued: If there is only one shop then it won’t be so cheap will it?

In the wealthier neighbourhoods, participants’ responses suggested that choice also presented an opportunity for self-expression – to be and do what they wanted, and to be seen to buy from certain stores – by exercising personal preferences. One Cowplain resident commented: I’d like to be able to say “I’ve got this from so-andso”.

Most of our participants rejected the notion that choice is simply about having a number of food stores within a physical geographic distance. They articulated a far more dynamic and demanding perspective on choice. Real choice seemed to be about having flexibility and options – being able to change behaviour according to circumstances and according to mood. Choice involved having the option to buy very low priced food if financial circumstances change; the option to buy luxury items and treats whenever they felt the urge; the option to buy healthily or try out a new diet or to buy ethically – if necessary, on a whim; the option to buy different pack sizes – not being forced to buy in packs of six but to be able to customise their requirements – the elderly, for example, being able to buy a single pork chop; the option to buy in bulk on one day to get the best deal, but to then top-up with forgotten items on another. It is clear from the discussions that consumer needs are not static – they change from week to week, from day to day and from situation to situation – and choice is about having the means to satisfy these needs on tap.

514

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

While there is a desire for a variety of stores in order to feel that sufficient real choice is available, some of our participants referred to choice in the context of variety within one (or a small number of) stores. For one Cowplain participant this was a self-imposed restriction (time-saving) but for others it was a real restriction imposed by lack of alternatives. Some commented that the food superstore had replaced the previous selection of local shops to the extent that choice is limited to whatever is available within the nearest large superstore. For these consumers, the “money saving” option is not to use an alternative discount store but to buy the superstore’s economy own brand, and the “special treat” is whatever branded goods or premium own brands are stocked. It is also clear from the discussions that choice is both relative and perceived. Satisfaction with current levels of choice in a neighbourhood depends on prior experience and also expectations. Consumers who have lived in an area for a long time and have adapted to local retail provision will know no different and accept relatively limited choice. A consumer moving from another area might, however, have a very different view. One focus group participant in Cowplain was surprised at the choice in Portsmouth relative to her previous neighbourhood:

wealth-scale, residents from Paulsgrove and Cowplain were equally critical of the local choice of gluten-free and nut-free products. The Cowplain resident noted: “shopping with mother who can’t have gluten or wheat . . . is impossible”.

In Tunbridge Wells, Sainsbury had a monopoly . . . but in this area I can find my way round by the supermarkets . . . I’ve been to them all . . . I think there is an amazing choice.

Another Cowplain resident benchmarked her relative dissatisfaction with choice against better personal experiences on holidays in France, Canada and the USA. Choice is also perceived, rather than real. Two people living next door to one another can have very different perceptions of the choice available depending on their circumstances, their support network and level of mobility. Possession of a car, a relative with a car, the resources to afford a taxi, a large family, a disabled mother and so on, can dramatically alter the number of stores that are perceived to be accessible. As a Paulsgrove resident noted: I have to shop where I can take my mother . . . some of the shops are too big and she can’t do it.

Perceptions of choice are polarised Attitudes towards perceived changes in Portsmouth that have taken place over the past 20 years appear to vary considerably. Many participants from Cowplain and Drayton with greater mobility and affluence perceived few physical or economic constraints in accessing what is seen as an extensive local choice of superstores. Wider ranges, facilities, opening hours and comfortable shopping environments were acknowledged as having considerably improved the shopping experience – although some (particularly the elderly) felt that the quality of personal service had declined. The most mobile consumers shopped mainly at these out-of-town stores and even used the same stores for top-up/ emergency shopping (sometimes because of a lack of more convenient local options but mostly out of choice). Residents from Cowplain were the only participants mentioning Internet-purchasing options. Some had experimented (and may return when speed of ordering improves) but none were currently ordering food on-line. However, even among a relatively homogeneous group of Cowplain consumers, satisfaction with current levels of choice were markedly different. Some felt there was too much choice: I don’t think you need all that choice. There is a limit to what you need. Variety, yes, but do you need that much there?

Another observed: There is perfectly adequate choice . . . I’m quite happy.

Another even suggested that the local Safeway was surplus to requirements and would provide a far more valuable function as a “kids leisure park”. Within the very same neighbourhood, however, one participant observed: [Choice in Cowplain] is terrible. It doesn’t exist really . . . dreadful . . . especially for older people . . . it’s got worse because you have to have a car.. there’s no place really to walk to.

Choice is also relative to a consumer’s shopping objectives. One Cowplain resident felt: I don’t feel I have much choice . . . I loathe shopping . . . I just want to get there quickly and get home... I’ve either got to go all the way to Waterlooville which I find a drag, or I have to use Safeway . . . I don’t feel for a weekly bulk shop there are that many convenient options.

Dietary constraints can equally impact on perceptions of choice. At both extremes of the

Of greater concern to a majority of the better-off residents was a perceived reduction in the quality of fresh fruit and vegetables, the number of specialist food stores, seasonal produce and locally produced food. One Cowplain resident complained:

515

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

Your only choice is the supermarket.. the quality is terrible . . . you buy a bag of potatoes and half of them are rubbish.

Another observed: You don’t get as much fresh stuff these days. A lot more is pre-packed. If I want fresh fish I have to go three miles.

The older, the less mobile and low-income young mothers clearly feel more disadvantaged by recent supermarket developments and the closure of small stores, and they were very critical of the limited offer remaining in the high street. A Drayton resident noted:

evidence of complex coping mechanisms being deployed where choice and mobility were constrained – primarily among the poorer consumers in Paulsgrove and the elderly in Drayton and Stakes. One Drayton resident pointed out: If my son is going out then I can go with him but I don’t know when that will be – I grab the opportunity if he goes out.

Another noted: I have no car so I grab whatever lifts I can.

Similarly, in Paulsgrove: I can’t carry everything and if my daughter-in-law didn’t take me I’d have to go on the bus and get a taxi back.

[Choice is] far, far worse . . . extremely bad. We’ve got a reptile shop instead of a One-Stop shop . . . a lamp shop instead of the Lipton’s grocery shop . . . an antique shop instead of a hardware shop.

A Stakes resident was similarly critical of her local high street: Waterlooville is full of charity shops and cafes. If you took those out, and the banks and building societies, there’s nothing there.

Another commented: There used to be a delicatessen . . . to feel you’ve had something nice in your diet . . . whereas now if you buy something [from a superstore] you’ve got to eat it for a week.

The greatest negative impact of superstores seemed felt by those without access to a car or convenient bus service: A Paulsgrove resident complained: I wish we had smaller more local shops . . . I walk to the Co-op from where I live and it takes half an hour – it doesn’t look far but it takes ages – my house is at the top. I hate it there – it’s one of the worse places to live without a car.

Many are aware of low-price stores available in the area (for example, the “cheap Aldi at North End”, and the “vast ASDA on the motorway”) but feel excluded from these options due to perceived restrictions on access. A young Paulsgrove mother observed: The only reason I don’t go further on the bus is because they don’t have the local link to Paulsgrove. You have to walk to Cosham to get the bus. Or if they have got a bus you have to think about the buggy. When you go with your buggy you have to think how much you are going to be carrying back.

The relative isolation felt by some residents in Paulsgrove was very evident: “they forget us up here”. Even in Drayton (a neighbourhood with abundant theoretical store choices within a given physical distance) it was clear that elderly residents experienced significant access problems. Reflecting the observations of Whelan et al. (2002) and Wrigley et al. (2004), there was clear

Dissatisfaction with the quality of the “small local store” Recent government policy (in relation to competition, retail planning and social exclusion) laments the decline of the small local store and advocates their replacement as a key solution to retail inequalities. Certainly, as noted above, our respondents have been affected by the loss of small stores but we also found surprising dissatisfaction in some localities with the small stores that remain. Wrigley et al. (2004) note negative attitudes to the expensiveness of small stores, but we also found dissatisfaction with perceived quality. In Paulsgrove, the only local grocery store – far from being the saviour to residents in the area – was often avoided: “It is so expensive”, noted one, “There’s hardly anything in there. It’s OK for crisps and stuff ”. Another commented: “It’s dirty and doesn’t look good at all. They haven’t got any veg or anything . . . we use it because we have to”. A further resident noted: “It’s poorly staffed. There’s normally only one person serving and you can be waiting for half an hour”. Even in Drayton, where elderly residents depended on the local food store, it was not cherished as one might expect: It’s horrendous. There is one very helpful assistant, but if she goes it will fall to pieces. The frozen vegetables are hopeless. If the Post Office wasn’t in there people wouldn’t go there. The only reason I go there is because it is handy.

Choice in Drayton appeared to be on a “knife edge” for some, noting: If that store were to go there would be a real problem – we wouldn’t have anything at all.

Store alienation has been noted by Wrigley et al. (2004) in the context of superstores, but we found evidence that the same issue can also apply to small stores. Some residents felt that recent retail

516

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

changes had excluded “locals” from their “own” neighbourhood shops: Where they [the local shop] would normally have had a much bigger stock for “us”, they’ve now got quite a lot given over to newspapers, sandwiches and snacks . . .. So “we” miss out. The people who try to use it regularly to buy everyday goods and the people who haven’t got cars who like to go down and get the pension or post a letter and pop in and do a bit of shopping, there’s absolutely nothing for them.

Referring to the changes in Drayton High Street, one resident noted: We now call it the Drayton drive-through takeaway.

Marked variations in perceived access to choice Our research explored consumers’ awareness of the extent of theoretical choices in their neighbourhood and how actual choice sets compared. Group-based projective mentalmapping techniques were utilised together with individual questionnaires. Participants were divided into sub-groups (those with and those without access to a car) and asked to consider the scenario of a new neighbour moving into their street. They were asked to identify all food stores in the area that might be available to this neighbour when buying food (initially for a weekly shop and then for a top-up shop), and to draw the locations on a map. A map was developed by each sub-group (i.e. from a neighbourhood perspective) – effectively pooling ideas from neighbours and benefiting from one another’s stimulation and ideas. The sub-groups were given a starting point (marking the main roads on a blank sheet of A0 paper). Following the mapping exercise, participants were asked to complete (individually) a questionnaire identifying their actual choice sets for weekly and top-up shopping. The “new neighbour” exercise revealed that residents are clearly aware of many potential food store options within their area but there are marked variations between and within neighbourhoods. The smallest awareness sets (averaging 13 stores) were observed in Paulsgrove, reflecting fewer theoretical choices as well as perceived access and mobility constraints. The largest awareness sets were observed among residents from Cowplain (23 stores), reflecting greater theoretical choice as well as fewer economic and physical constraints. Figure 2 visually presents examples of these awareness sets compiled by five groups of “neighbours” in Paulsgrove, Stakes and Cowplain – distinguishing between major multiple stores and smaller stores,

and highlighting physical distances. Substantial differences in the number and geographical extent of awareness sets are evident between neighbourhoods, but also between sub-groups within each neighbourhood depending on car ownership. In the case of Cowplain, some residents perceive stores 13 km away in Petersfield to be realistically accessible options for food shopping – “Waitrose in Petersfield has a huge car park and is only 50p for two hours”. While extreme, one resident travelled even further afield: “I go to Yorkshire once a month and buy stuff from Morrisons that they don’t have round here”. While neighbours’ awareness sets often exceed 15 stores, we found that only a small proportion of these stores find their way into residents’ active usage sets. The average usage set for a weekly shop was four stores for Paulsgrove residents, four in Stakes, six in Drayton and five in Cowplain. For top-up shopping, usage sets were two in Paulsgrove and three in all other neighbourhoods. The size of the real choice set for each household did not vary that greatly between neighbourhoods or households – but the identity of retailers and the distances travelled did. Those with greater mobility appeared more able to select retailers that closely matched their requirements – even if they had to travel further to access them. As one Cowplain resident noted: “I buy from an organic shop – Adsdean Farm – it is a bit of a drive but the food is lovely”. The maps in Figure 3 show examples of choice sets for four specific participants. Within a relatively small neighbourhood with similar demographic characteristics, there can be a wide variation in the nature of choice sets used. It is clear, therefore, that just living in a better-off area does not mean that everyone perceives they have access to a wide choice – the elderly and the less-mobile particularly have much more restricted horizons. Conceivably, a consumer without a car in a relatively affluent area could perceive themselves to be worse off in terms of retail choices than a consumer without a car in a relatively poor area.

The critical importance of convenience The focus groups explored the reasons why residents include certain stores in their usage set and rejected others. In terms of general store choice criteria there were no major surprises – factors which might be summarised loosely as convenience, price, food quality and range being the most frequent attractions (or deterrents) for particular stores. Requirements varied both between and within neighbourhoods, however, depending particularly on the circumstances of the

517

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

Figure 2 Awareness sets

Figure 3 Choice sets within neighbourhoods

shopper. Low-income single-mothers and the elderly placed particular emphasis on ease of access by foot or bus and pack-sizes; better-off families stressed the ease of car parking, bulk deals and food quality; while affluent working couples placed emphasis on speed of shopping and car parking (to suit busier lifestyles), alongside product quality and ambience. A consistent issue among all groups was the paramount importance of convenience, supporting recent observations by

Wrigley et al. (2004), who found store switching was often prompted by improvements in accessibility and convenience. In Paulsgrove, convenience in terms of access was considered critical, although not always at the complete expense of “decent quality” food and presentation – a reasonably accessible Kwik Save being rejected by one respondent because “the stuff’s always in boxes . . . you don’t get bags . . . they don’t have a wide range . . . it hasn’t got a good

518

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

taste”. Interestingly, ease of access did not necessarily equate to the shortest physical distance – as evidenced in the surprising rejection by some residents of the new Tesco Extra hypermarket less than a kilometre away. The reasons for rejection focused on a perception of more convenient options elsewhere and micro-access obstacles. As one mother noted: I have four little kids, and I’m not taking them over that road, no way. I’d prefer to take them to Cosham. If there was a bridge going over the main road I would go there, but the bridge only goes over the railway track.

will cut the [cheese or meat] if you need it . . . help you take your shopping out to your car . . . it’s got subdued lighting . . . I always come out and think it is so pleasant in there.

A Cowplain resident rejected Safeway because: “it’s run by children . . . you have to watch your till receipts”. Referring to her rejection of ASDA, a better-off resident in Drayton commented: “I don’t like the ambience... it’s noisy, crowded, too hot or too cold . . . and stuffy”.

Abrogation and self-exclusion

Another observed: I certainly wouldn’t walk there. The traffic lights are also bad anyway because they take ages to change, and they don’t flash properly and they don’t make a noise – so lads don’t know when to cross – it’s a very dangerous road.

Other reasons for rejecting the hypermarket included the perceived convenience of being able to link-shop and hunt for deals in an existing high street (2.5 km away) rather than buying everything in one store: We go to Tesco in Cosham High Street and get a trolley, put £1 in and go to Kwik Save, then pop in to Iceland, then back to Tesco.

Another participant added: In Cosham you’ve got Kwik Save, Iceland, Superdrug, Boots, all that on hand and the banks as well. So you have everything on tap . . . It’s easy to get a taxi from.

Some residents perceived stores further away to actually be more convenient because of access facilitators: ASDA has a free bus service . . . more room . . . children’s trolleys . . . it’s huge . . . more selection . . . more tills . . . wider tills – so you don’t have to squeeze through . . . a cafe´ as well . . . huge trolleys.

For better-off residents convenience was also critical but for different reasons – usually associated with a need for quick and easy shopping. A Cowplain working mother stressed the importance of speed: “I’ve always shopped at Waitrose. It’s quick to get round”. Another noted that the difficulty of parking was the very reason why she rejected Waitrose: “it’s a chore to get in and out . . . the congestion puts me off”. For betteroff residents the reasons for choosing and rejecting stores were also often based on quite subtle differences – service, atmosphere, lack of crowding and spaciousness. A better-off resident from Stakes noted: “They all sell much the same and their prices really aren’t that much different”. Another volunteered: I mean [Waitrose] its just painless, its not noisy, you don’t have lots of screaming children running round . . . the assistants couldn’t be better . . . they

We found evidence that the mere provision of stores in an area does not necessarily mean they will automatically appear in a consumer’s choice set. In the more affluent neighbourhoods where mobility was not a constraint and theoretical provision was extensive, our research found evidence of regular abrogation of potential choices. For some, abrogation resulted from habit, for some it resulted from a strong preference for particular stores, while for others it stemmed from indifference and a desire for the easiest option. Some of the working mothers rejected choices where it might involve wasting time hunting for products. One Cowplain resident commented: “To go somewhere like a hypermarket is torture . . . I can’t cope with it”. The abundance of choice for some residents was clear, as one Cowplain resident noted: “I forget some stores are there really”. There is strong overlap with Wrigley et al.’s (2004) findings relating to alienation and temptation. For some residents particular stores were rejected if they felt the store did not cater for their situation or circumstances – in effect a form of self-exclusion or a feeling of alienation. The largest format superstores (particularly the ASDA hypermarket and Tesco Extra) were excluded from the choice sets of some elderly consumers because of the effort and physical walking distances involved. The issue of temptation was also evident, as one Drayton resident noted that superstores are “too tempting to spend loads of money”. Some elderly residents, those living alone and singlemothers, felt that supermarkets “don’t cater for us”. These groups wish to buy small or single pack sizes, and resent the fact that “others” are in a better position to get the best bargains from supermarkets because they can buy bulk-packs. A single-mother from Paulsgrove observed: There is only me and my boy, so if I buy a big packet it will go off really quick. My Nana is always grumbling that she can’t just buy one roll. She has to pay twice as much just to get less!

An elderly resident in Drayton noted:

519

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

I’m on my own – I can’t buy in a large quantity. I only want one or two vegetables – I’ve just had to throw a carrot away and it really annoyed me.

Some participants reflected a feeling of intimidation. A Paulsgrove participant complained: “They [Sainsbury] don’t like kids in there . . . It’s full of posh people – stuck-up people”. At the other end of the scale, a Cowplain participant reflected similar self-exclusion but for very different reasons: “We have this new very low rate supermarket [Lidl] which I won’t go in... that sounds snobby but it’s true”.

Retail provision does not equal perceived real choice From our discussions with residents in Portsmouth it is clear that the set of stores provided in an area does not equate with the perceived real choice. The perception of real choice depended not simply on numbers of stores and actual physical distances, but also circumstances, situational factors, individual characteristics and perceptions of access. A theoretical set of food stores existing in real space may not be perceived to offer real choice –a lack of mobility, lack of income, dependent relative or dietary constraint could act as a significant constraint on the perception of choices available. Furthermore, real choices were not seen as static but rather choices at a particular point in time given current circumstances. We conclude that choice needs to be articulated as a dynamic concept, and is as much to do with having flexibility and options available than the extent of choice per se. Based on the insights from our exploratory research, Figure 4 puts forward a means of conceptualising food store choice sets to take into

account the differences between retail provision (theoretical choice set) and the real choice sets that residents have alluded to in our discussions. Figure 4 suggests a range of factors that might work to limit or expand choice sets for an individual. Social factors might include lifestyle, financial resources, and expectations derived from past experiences. Situational factors reflect the dynamic nature of choice and the impact of a dependent relative or time available on the realistic choices perceived to be available. Motivational factors might include an individual’s view on the enjoyment or otherwise of shopping per se and the level of involvement they are willing to invest to educate themselves on choices available. The spatial and competitive context reflects differences in real retail provision within an area and the extent to which infrastructure makes more or fewer choices accessible. Figure 4 also suggests that real choice sets will be considerably smaller than the choice sets that are theoretically available. Not all consumers will be aware of all store options, and a lack of direct knowledge or experience of others may lead to further stores excluded from consideration. An individual’s perception of the accessibility of particular stores (whether in terms of transport, time or economic access) may further reduce the choice set and some consumers may further exclude themselves from certain retail brands. Even stores that a consumer is aware of might be ignored if they are content with alternative choices available. It is conceivable, of course, that consumers may (by virtue of limited mobility or availability) be limited to only one choice of store (as was the case for a number of residents in Paulsgrove) and for such cases we should add Hobson’s choice to the vocabulary on retail choice. For some consumers, choice sets will not be limited to those available within the locality –

Figure 4 Choice set determinants and theoretical vs real choice sets

520

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

stores outside of the area may be visited (en route to other destinations, family trips etc.) and the Internet may provide a further opportunity to extend real choices. Choice is a dynamic concept and consumers may proactively seek to expand their choices (through positive variety seeking behaviour or coping strategies), or simplify them, depending on circumstances and occasion. Equally, uncontrollable factors may serve to constrain individual choice sets.

to the extent that some local residents have developed coping mechanisms to travel further afield for better options. Clearly, beyond a convenient location and emergency-offer, residents want retailers that will provide a real choice for the immediate community. Our research suggests that satisfaction with local food store choices could also be increased by facilitating access to store options already theoretically available. For example, in some neighbourhoods (e.g. Paulsgrove) perceived access constraints can be a significant inhibitor of real choice for some consumer groups and could be readily addressed. Our research contributes to understanding how consumers perceive and describe retail choice in several ways. First, the impact of recent retail change on consumer choice is clearly not simply confined to changes in the physical distribution of superstores or small store closures. Some consumer groups feel the growth in superstores has been accompanied by, for example, less flexibility in pack-sizes (with the elderly and single-parents feeling excluded or alienated from superstores and from bargains by their inability to buy in bulk), a poorer standard of fresh fruit and vegetables, and a much-reduced level of personal service. Second, our research demonstrates that choice depends on perceptions and is socially differentiated. A consumer’s circumstances (for example, possession of a car, a disabled mother, or a dietary restriction), situational factors, individual characteristics and perceptions of personal mobility, can dramatically alter the perceived level of choice available. As a result, there may be a wide gulf between the range of stores that are theoretically available in a neighbourhood (accessible in principle), and the consumer’s perception of choice (perceived to be accessible in practice). The influence of circumstances, situation and individual factors effectively reduce the theoretical choice of stores to a far smaller real choice set on which consumers base their judgements of satisfaction with (or access to adequate) choice. Clearly, therefore, there is a considerable difference between retail provision and consumers’ perceived choice. Our conceptualisation of retail choice suggests that a broader range of factors need to be taken into account by planners and regulators when assessing whether or not a community is experiencing adequate choice. Beyond store numbers, physical distances and the presence or absence of named retailers, an understanding is needed of how consumers perceive the alternatives available and, more critically, how they perceive accessibility. Further, given that relative disadvantage is not necessarily spatially defined, planners should look beyond

Conclusions and implications Given the scale of retail development over the past 30 years it is hard to conceive of many neighbourhoods or individual consumers without adequate food store choices within a short distance of their home. However, this research has revealed that even in a relatively average and small suburban area it is possible to find significant differences in consumer experiences of choice (and the size and extent of choice sets) – both between adjacent neighbourhoods and within particular neighbourhoods. Choice in some areas (e.g. Cowplain) is clearly in abundance, to the extent that consumers (with the mobility and resources to exploit the choices available) are using quite subtle criteria when deciding where they might shop on a particular occasion. At the other extreme, this paper also supports earlier research that spatial concentrations of limited choice exist (e.g. Paulsgrove). However, the research also reveals inequalities in choice between these extremes. Consumers are experiencing the impact of retail change in different ways, depending on their particular neighbourhood or individual circumstances, and as a result pockets of disadvantage are revealed within neighbourhoods that might on the surface appear relatively advantaged. Groups such as the elderly in Drayton (and there are considerable numbers of them) are forced to develop coping strategies to access choices they feel they need. Our research shows there is merit in taking a more micro-scale perspective when examining inequalities in retail provision to look beyond easily identifiable expanses of existing disadvantage to consider conditions and circumstances at the neighbourhood level. Ideally, the level of analysis should be at the smallest unit of geography available. An obvious solution to poor food access, and a solution trumpeted throughout government policy, is to encourage more small local stores. However, we have seen in Paulsgrove and Drayton dissatisfaction with the range, facilities, price and service provided by so-called community stores –

521

Inequalities in retail choice

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Malcolm Kirkup et al.

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 511-522

spatial differences in access, to consider also social and cultural differences in perceptions of choice and access both between and within neighbourhoods. This exploratory research also sheds more light on the factors influencing consumers’ decisions on where to shop. There is a need for future research to revisit traditional, often over-simplified, store choice criteria. In our view, considerable changes in local store provision, alongside changes in consumer lifestyles, demographics and demand over recent years, have affected the parameters of choice and choice criteria. Use of simplistic terms such as “convenience” on their own do not tend to reflect the everyday language of consumers and how they understand and experience such issues. This research highlights the importance of very specific issues such as pack-sizes, bulk-deals, cost of parking, free buses, wide tills, the quality of fresh fruit and vegetables, speed of locating products in store, lack of crowds, spaciousness, noise and congestion. Such factors appear to be significant attractors and deterrents to some consumer groups. As the supply and demand dimensions of consumer choice continue to change, our research underlines the need for further research to unpack the social construction of choice and to consider the implications for retailers, planners and regulators.

Cummins, S. and Sparks, L. (2004), “Reducing geographical inequalities in diet: does watering the ‘food desert’ work?”, paper presented at the Association of American Geographers Centennial Conference, Special Session on Unpacking Retail: Globalisation, Competition and Local Consumption, Philadelphia, PA, 18 March. Davies, R. (1999), “Social equalisation in shopping”, European Regional Review, Vol. 21, pp. 39-40. Donkin, S.J.M., Dowler, E.A., Stevenson, S.J. and Turner, S.A. (2000), “Mapping access to food in a deprived area: the development of price and availability indices”, Public Health Nutrition, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 31-8. Guy, C., Clarke, G. and Eyre, H. (2004), “Food retail change and the growth of food deserts: a case study of Cardiff”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 72-88. Holbrook, B. and Jackson, P. (1996), “Shopping around: focus group research in North London”, Area, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 136-42. IGD (2003), Grocery Stores Database, Institute of Grocery Distribution, Watford. National Consumer Council (1992), Your Food: Whose Choice?, HMSO, London. Nayga, R.M. and Weinberg, Z. (1999), “Supermarket access in the inner cities”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 141-5. Piacentini, M., Hibbert, S. and Al-Dajani, H. (2001), “Diversity in deprivation: exploring the grocery shopping behaviour of disadvantaged consumers”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 141-58. Raven, H., Lang, T. and Dumonteil, C. (1995), “Off our trolleys? Food retailing and the hypermarket economy”, Institute for Public Policy Research, London. Social Exclusion Unit (2000), National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal: Policy Action Team Report, The Cabinet Office, London. Westlake, T. (1993), “The disadvantaged consumer: problems and policies”, in Bromley, R. and Thomas, C.J. (Eds), Retail Change: Contemporary Issues, UCL Press, London. Whelan, A.M., Wrigley, N., Warm, D.L. and Cannings, E. (2002), “Life in a ‘food desert’”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 11, pp. 2081-100. Williams, P. and Hubbard, P. (2001), “Who is disadvantaged? Retail change and social exclusion”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 267-86. Wilson, L., Alexander, A. and Lumbers, M. (2004), “Food access and dietary variety among older people”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 109-22. Wrigley, N. (2002), “Food deserts in British cities: policies, contexts and research priorities”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 11, pp. 2029-40. Wrigley, N., Warm, D. and Margetts, B. (2002), “Deprivation, diet and food retail access: findings from the Leeds ‘food deserts’ study”, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 35, pp. 151-88. Wrigley, N., Warm, D., Margetts, B. and Lowe, M. (2004), “The Leeds ‘food deserts’ intervention study: what the focus groups reveal”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 123-36.

References Bromley, R.D.F. (1995), “Small town shopping decline: dependence and inconvenience for the disadvantaged”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 433-56. Clarke, G.P., Eyre, H. and Guy, C.M. (2002), “Deriving indicators of access to food retail provision in British cities: studies of Cardiff, Leeds and Bradford”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 11, pp. 2041-60. Clarke, I., Hallsworth, A., Jackson, P., de Kervenoael, R., Kirkup, M. and Perez del Aguila, R. (2004), “Retail competition and consumer choice: contextualising the ‘food deserts’ debate”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 89-99. Competition Commission (2000), Supermarkets: A Report on the Supply of Groceries from Multiple Stores in the United Kingdom: Volume 1 (Summary and Conclusions), The Stationery Office, London. Competition Commission (2003), Safeway plc and ASDA Group Ltd; Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc; J Sainsbury plc; and Tesco plc: A Report on the Mergers in Contemplation, Cm 5950, The Stationery Office, London. Cummins, S. and Macintyre, S. (2002), “A systematic study of an urban foodscape: the price and availability of food in greater Glasgow”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 11, pp. 2115-30.

522

Introduction

Rethinking consumer disadvantage: the importance of qualitative research Lucy Woodliffe

The author Lucy Woodliffe is Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.

Keywords Consumers, Customer surveys, Retailing, United Kingdom

Abstract This paper provides insight into the behaviour and attitudes of an under-researched group of consumers, and identifies some useful pointers for future research on consumer disadvantage. More specifically, the paper explores the relationships between the potential causes of consumer disadvantage, forms of consumer disadvantage and accessibility. The exploratory study consisted of a combination of quantitative (diary survey) and qualitative (semi-structured interviews) methods. The diary survey data were used to measure grocery retailing accessibility for each participant, while the semi-structured interviews captured participants’ attitudes, preferences and expectations with regard to grocery shopping, which were then used to construct a context for the accessibility findings. The findings suggest a way in which consumer disadvantage can be conceptualised, recommend the use of qualitative methods when researching this area, and highlight issues of interest (such as identifying whether an individual shops through choice or constraint) which could be considered by future research designs.

Electronic access The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · pp. 523-531 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552 DOI 10.1108/09590550410564755

The start of the twenty-first century has witnessed increased interest in the topic of consumer disadvantage, from academics, practitioners and other retail stakeholders. That is not to say, however, that this topic is a new one as some of the earliest work on the topic began over 30 years ago (see, for example, Caplovitz, 1967; Andreasen, 1975). Throughout this time period, academic interest in consumer disadvantage has waxed and waned, resulting in a partially developed body of knowledge where definitions, conceptualisations and empirical measurement have not had the opportunity to fully develop and evolve. To contribute to the development of the topic, this paper highlights areas of potential interest for future research, based on findings from an exploratory study of disadvantaged consumers in Southampton, UK. It is generally accepted within the existing, albeit sparse, literature that the notion of consumer disadvantage hinges on inequality – certain consumers are unequal in the market place as they belong to socially disadvantaged groups such as the elderly, the disabled or low income households – which then impacts on their shopping experiences. There are numerous contexts in which consumer disadvantage may exist, and to provide focus for this research, the grocery retailing sector was selected. Grocery retailing was chosen primarily because the UK grocery retailing sector has undergone radical restructuring over the past 50 years, and has become highly concentrated. The benefits of this “new retail geography” (Wrigley and Lowe, 1996) have been welldocumented for mobile, affluent consumers, but some authors have expressed concern that disadvantaged consumer groups have not benefited to the same degree, and that there is now a marked dichotomy between old and new retail facilities (Bowlby, 1985; Rees, 1988; Bromley and Thomas, 1993; Williams and Hubbard, 2001). This paper reports on findings from an exploratory study designed to focus on the relationships between social disadvantage, consumer disadvantage and accessibility to shopping provision. While the results have limited generalisability due to the small sample size (ten disadvantaged consumers), they do identify some interesting issues which merit further investigation and research. The paper also demonstrates the value of using qualitative research to interpret behavioural data when researching the topic of consumer disadvantage. Much of the previous work on this topic has tended to avoid talking to the individual about their shopping experiences, presenting a purely quantitative and contextually

523

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

bereft view of the phenomenon. As this paper reveals, without qualitative insight, an incomplete view of the phenomenon may be formed.

distinction between the two, focussing on socially disadvantaged individuals and labelling them as disadvantaged consumers before assessing their shopping experiences. Little is known, therefore, about the manifestations of consumer disadvantage encountered by consumers, or the relationship between potential causes and manifestations. Potential causes of consumer disadvantage consist of social disadvantage and poor mobility. Social disadvantage can be described as disadvantage which also exists outside a retail context, being closely linked to the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of consumers. The disabled, households without a car, the elderly and low-income earners are presented as examples of socially disadvantaged groups (RTPI, 1988). It can be more helpful, however, to conceptualise social disadvantage using a set of key defining variables, rather than using membership of social groups. For example, being elderly (usually defined as state retirement age and above) per se does not necessarily mean that the individual is socially disadvantaged. Rather, the likelihood of receiving a low household income, not owning a car or suffering with health or disability problems is increased among the elderly (see for example, Stitt et al., 1995; Manandhar, 1995). It is therefore low income, poor mobility and poor health/ disability which represent potential causes of consumer disadvantage, with some groups more vulnerable to facing these variables than others. Turning to mobility, Bowlby (1979) distinguishes between two types of personal mobility – potential and actual. Potential mobility is the ability to make journeys should a person wish to do so, and actual mobility is the movement actually undertaken on shopping trips, normally measured by the number of trips made. Potential mobility is not only about availability of personal transport, but also about physical health and strength, responsibility for young children, time available and income, making it interrelated with social disadvantage. Closely associated with mobility is the concept of accessibility, a function of both personal mobility and household location relative to shopping provision. Accessibility is defined by Bowlby (1979) as being the degree of ease or difficulty with which shops can be reached. Various approaches can be taken when measuring accessibility. Rather than discussing this here, the approach taken by this study is described in the methodology section. Bromley and Thomas (1993) identify three key manifestations of consumer disadvantage: lack of access (to the widest choice and cheapest prices), lack of flexibility (frequency of shop) and inconvenience when undertaking the shopping trip. Shopping by bus, for example, can be

The consumer disadvantage literature A review of the marketing and retail geography literatures reveals a weakly developed and fragmented picture of consumer disadvantage. Few authors have attempted to define or conceptualise the phenomenon, perhaps deterred by its complex and multi-dimensional nature. The large number of phenomena included in the concept of the disadvantaged consumer and their complex interrelationships have presented difficulties to theorise and analyse the concept in an all-inclusive manner (Bromley and Thomas, 1993, p. 225).

Indeed, many authors have set out to investigate one specific group of disadvantaged consumers, rather than taking a more holistic view of disadvantage. For example, the disabled (Kaufman, 1995), women (Bowlby, 1988; Pickup, 1988), the elderly (Abrams, 1985; Leighton and Seaman, 1997; Miller et al., 1998; Hare et al., 1999; Hare, 2003) ethnic minorities (National Consumer Council, 1982; Opacic and Potter, 1986) and the unemployed (Guy, 1985; Elliott, 1996) have all been studied in such a way. It was considered useful here, however, to take an all-inclusive approach so as to seek out commonalities, as well as differences in shopping behaviour and attitudes across the various groups. This could help to establish agendas for future research, and to identify the dimensions of consumer disadvantage, aiding its definition and conceptualisation. Care was taken, therefore, to ensure that a broad range of groups was represented in the sample. When starting to disentangle and structure the various facets of consumer disadvantage, a useful starting point is provided by Bromley and Thomas’s (1993) study of disadvantaged consumers in Swansea. These authors consider consumer disadvantage to emerge from two interrelated dimensions; social disadvantage and poor personal mobility. Taking their ideas a step further, the phenomenon can be viewed as consisting of potential causes and manifestations. Potential causes of consumer disadvantage are linked to membership of social disadvantage groups, and help to identify who is likely to be disadvantaged as a consumer. Manifestations are concerned with the forms that disadvantage may take in a retail context, for example paying higher prices, lack of variety and selection and poorer quality (Market Behaviour Ltd, 1983). Past studies on this topic have tended not to make the

524

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

problematic when travelling with bags of shopping or accompanied by children (Hine and Mitchell, 2001). There are also manifestations which may be encountered inside the store by consumers, and a study by Hare et al. (1999) on elderly consumers’ satisfaction with grocery shopping helps to identify these in the form of “internal factors” such as range of merchandise, store facilities and stock management. An important question to arise from the literature is whether a potentially disadvantaged consumer perceives that they are exercising choice in their shopping behaviour and therefore shops in their store of preference, or whether they are constrained, and unable to shop in the store of their choice (Bromley and Thomas, 1993). There is conflicting evidence on this issue in the literature. Bromley and Thomas’s research shows that households without a car made limited use of the new, off-centre shopping facilities, but held positive views of the new facilities, which led the authors to tentatively conclude that shoppers without a car were patronising stores through constraint rather than choice. Conversely, Williams and Hubbard (2001) found that participants with limited shopping patterns in their Coventry-based study were broadly satisfied with the facilities they used, as they found them to be friendly and accessible, which implies a degree of choice. The literature review helped to focus the research in the form of three key research questions: (1) What are the relationships between potential causes of disadvantage, consumer disadvantage and accessibility? (2) What, if any, are the problems encountered by potentially disadvantaged consumers when shopping for groceries? (3) Do such consumers shop through choice or constraint?

survey and interview findings are considered together, in an integrated way. Accessibility was measured using straight line distances (or “air-line” distances) from participants’ homes to frequented stores. These were then used to calculate indices for each panellist using a Gaussian derived model, which is described in more detail below. The diary survey was used to collect the straight line distance data, by gathering a one month record of the participants’ grocery shopping journeys. Rather than completing a written diary, participants submitted all their grocery shopping itemised till receipts on a weekly basis. Using till receipts helped to eliminate any discrepancies between the panellists’ actual shopping behaviour and “recalled” behaviour, which can arise when recording events after they have occurred. To complement the data on the till receipt, participants also completed a short diary page for each trip, giving details of the mode of transport used to reach the store on that trip, the origin of the shopping trip, and the member of the household who conducted the shopping trip. The straight line distance approach to measuring store accessibility has been used by both Bowlby (1979) and Guy (1983). Although the approach has been criticised because it underestimates true travel distances, Guy (1983) argues that it is an unambiguous measure, suitable from a practical point of view for dealing with a large number of home-shop pairs (approximately 50 in this case). A gravity-based Gaussian measure was selected for this study first because it suited the data set available (actual, rather than potential journeys), and second because other authors (Hallsworth et al., 1986) had used this measure to study retail accessibility. The specific model used was that derived by Guy (1983, p. 222), developed from the work of Ingram (1971): X S exp½
1=2ðd ij =dÞ2  Ai ¼ j j

Methodology The research questions called for an approach which measured shoppers’ accessibility, and also gathered attitudinal data. Consequently, two methods were used: a four week diary survey to measure accessibility quantitatively, and semistructured interviews to collect qualitative data relating to an individual’s attitudes and expectations. This mixed methodology approach, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches, is in keeping with some of the more recent research on disadvantage (see, for example, Shucksmith et al., 1996; Williams and Hubbard, 2001). However, rather than analysing the phases of research in isolation of one another, the diary

Where: Ai = a measure of access to shopping opportunities for home i; Sj = the size of store j in thousands of square feet; dij = straight-line distance from i to opportunity j; d* = distance from home i where accessibility is deemed to decline at the highest rate. This model is, in essence, a measure of grocery shopping opportunity which uses a trade-off between attraction (represented by store size), and travel impedance (represented by distance). The origin assumption (all shopping trips commence from home) was upheld in this study.

525

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

The value of d*, the distance at which access is deemed to decline at the highest rate, is arbitrary and normally reflects a distance at which access to shops becomes inconvenient. For example, in his study of Reading, Guy (1983) runs analyses using upper and lower limits to d* of 0.38 and 0.94 miles respectively. Hallsworth et al. (1986, p. 293) also use a figure of 0.94 miles in their study of Portsmouth, but comment that “this figure will clearly vary among sub-groups of the population”. To address this point, median distances travelled from home to store during the accessibility survey were calculated for each mode of transport, making it possible to vary the value of d* for each panellist according to the mode of transport they used. Participants were recruited from a database of households in the study area who had responded to an earlier research project on consumer disadvantage. The target population for the project were all households in Shirley. Ten consumers, selected non-randomly to represent the potential causes of disadvantage groups, participated in the research. This sample size was considered acceptable in view of the exploratory nature of the research. The various forms of social disadvantage were operationalised, for the purposes of this study, in the following ways. Low income was defined using a poverty line figure. The usual approach taken to define the poverty line, used by the UK government, is 50 per cent of mean gross weekly household income, or 60 per cent of median household income where international comparisons are to be made. Here, the 50 per cent of mean income approach was taken, using equivalised figures to reflect household size and composition. Disability can exist at different levels, between the extremes of ambulatory and non-ambulatory disability. Ambulatory disability may refer to, for example, elderly consumers who are frail and unable to walk long distances. Non-ambulatory groups include those who are house-bound and those who are wheelchair-bound. In this paper, those who are noted as disabled or in ill health could belong to either of these categories. Potential mobility was assessed by the mode of transport used to reach stores, and household car availability. Those without access to a household car for grocery shopping were considered to face poor potential mobility. The semi-structured interviews took place after the diary survey, their role being to gather participant commentaries on their shopping behaviour recorded during the diary period. A semi-structured approach to interviewing was chosen to ensure that some consistency in questioning was achieved, and to explore specific

issues raised by findings from the diary survey. The interviews lasted between 20 and 40 minutes and were recorded and transcribed. The questioning route for the interviews covered general attitudes towards grocery shopping, attitudes towards accessibility and attitudes towards the stores frequented by the participants.

The study area A study area with a district centre was decided on, as it enables “relative” disadvantage to be studied. Relative disadvantage occurs where access to the newest (and arguably the best) types of store is more difficult for some consumers than others (Hallsworth, 1988). “Absolute” disadvantage, occurring in areas poorly served by retailers – also referred to as food deserts – has formed the basis of many of the more recent studies on consumer disadvantage in the context of grocery retailing (see, for example, Wrigley et al., 2002; Petticrew et al., 2002). Much less is known about relative disadvantage, which this paper aims to redress. It was important to focus on a local study area to reflect the close relationship between local populations and the development and use of retail provision (Clarke, 2000). Southampton was chosen as the broader study area for the research, as it is broadly similar in residential profile to Great Britain as a whole. To make the study more manageable, it was decided to focus on one subarea of Southampton. This allowed the study to take place inside a geographically defined area where all shoppers are likely to face the same set of potential shopping opportunities. Wards were chosen as a convenient ready-made way of defining the smaller study area. The ward of Shirley was selected, which has a population of approximately 12,000. Shirley was chosen because it is similar in demographic profile (car ownership, household socio-economic group composition, age, disability) to Great Britain. Classified as a district centre, Shirley is well-served with retail opportunities, containing a mix of food and nonfood retailing. At the time of the study, Shirley High Street contained a supermarket (J. Sainsbury), a baker, two greengrocers, a health food shop, a convenience store and a discounter (Lidl). Wrigley (1998) suggests that the presence of discounters on the high street may have improved the situation for disadvantaged consumers, so it was considered important to include a discounter in the chosen study area, to explore whether this is the case. A Tesco superstore and a J. Sainsbury superstore are situated slightly further afield.

526

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

Findings The composition of the sample is summarised in Table I, with reference to potential causes of consumer disadvantage, the mode of transport used, the type of store most frequently used and their accessibility index. Participants are identified using the first three letters of their surname, to preserve anonymity. Four participants can also be noted as being over 65 (Far, Har, Ken, Pea), which may mean they also face tiredness and difficulties with walking (Abrams, 1985). There are four participants who face multiple causes of consumer disadvantage (Bro, Far, Ken, Pen). The accessibility indices were calculated using a program based on the Gaussian model, the values for which were then P standardised to make comparisons easier ( Ai ¼ 100Þ). The standardised values therefore represent percentages. Where two or more stores were visited on one trip, the store which incurred the most expenditure was the one recorded. In Table I, a low accessibility index figure (Ai) indicates that a panellist has to travel a relatively long distance to a small store. A high index figure reveals that a panellist travels a relatively short distance to a large store, therefore experiencing better levels of accessibility. Unsurprisingly, those participants who shopped for groceries by personal transport (Ola, Whi, Pea) have the best levels of accessibility, and those who shop on foot (All, Ken, Pen) have some of the worst accessibility indices of the sample. The interview data reveal, however, that a low accessibility index does not necessarily mean a participant feels constrained into using the shops they use, or that they are unhappy with their shopping experiences. Findings from Table I and the semi-structured interviews will now be presented together. Discussion is structured around the three research

questions identified earlier. The reader is reminded of the exploratory nature of this paper, and the small sample size. The discussion does not therefore seek to present conclusive results, rather to highlight issues which may merit further investigation and confirmation. Choice or constraint? A participant who shops through choice is defined as a shopper who purchases grocery items from their preferred store. Conversely, a participant who shops through constraint is unable to shop in their preferred store and shops in an alternative store instead. The interviews reveal that although some potentially disadvantaged consumers are constrained, others would seem to shop through choice, which makes the notion of consumer disadvantage more difficult to sustain in their case. The former group are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their shopping experiences, while the latter group, although conscious of certain limitations and problems with their shopping experiences, do not perceive them to be problematic and tend to talk about grocery shopping in a positive way. There are three participants who are constrained and would rather shop elsewhere if they were able (Far, Ken, Pen). These participants can also be noted for their low accessibility indices. Far, who at the time of the interview was on a waiting list for a new knee and describes shopping as being “quite awkward”, is reliant on lifts to a grocery store. She has no real choices available to her, and has to go where she is taken: I have to go there [Asda], because the lady that takes me, it’s her choice. . .I only go to Asda by circumstance really...I’ve always been a Sainsbury’s girl myself.

Ken, like Far also has problems linked to physical mobility (arthritis). Her son used to take her to her

Table I Participant characteristics and accessibility indices

Participant 1. All 2. Bro 3. Far 4. Har 5. Ken 6. Ola 7. Pea 8. Pen 9. Rob 10. Whi

Potential causes of consumer disadvantage No household car Below average income, no household car Disabled, no household car, dependent on lifts to store Below average income Below average income, disabled, no household car, unable to use bus due to disability Shops with young child Household car, but no driving licence, dependent on lifts from husband Below average income, no household car, shops with young children Below average income Shops with young children

527

Mode of transport used to reach grocery stores

Store type used most frequently

Accessibility index standardised P Ai( Ai5100)

Foot Bicycle Car (lift) Lift/foot/bus Foot

Supermarket Superstore Superstore Superstore Supermarket

4.7 7.1 3.2 13.1

Car Foot/bus/car

Superstore Superstore

Foot

Supermarket

Car/bicycle Car

Discounter Superstore

2.8 19.8 13.6 8.9 9.7 17.1

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

preferred store, but since he moved away, she has to walk to the local shops as she is unable to use the bus with her disability:

If the social aspect of shopping is important to an individual, and grocery shopping is viewed as an enjoyable task, then this seems to offset other potential areas of dissatisfaction. Social benefits can also be gained from lift provision, as illustrated by Har above. This was also found to be the case with Far. Although she does not shop in the store of her choice, she expresses satisfaction with her shopping experiences, possibly because she enjoys the shopping occasion:

If I had a car, I would like to shop there [Sainsbury superstore], like I used to. . .There’s a better variety of things there.

As other authors note (Leighton and Seaman, 1997; Hare et al., 1999; Piacentini et al., 2001), elderly shoppers are often dependent on an informal network of support such as lift provision, which, if withdrawn, may have a significant effect on shopping behaviour. Pen lives in a low income household without a car and shops with baby twins in a pram. She finds that shopping with the twins constrains the distance she can comfortably travel on foot to a grocery store. Although she occasionally walks to her preferred store (Tesco superstore), she usually shops on Shirley High Street: . . .the Tesco [superstore] is another 20 minutes walk. It’s quite a long way when you’ve got kids in a double pram. . .It’d have to be a specially planned trip, if I’ve got the time and if it’s nice weather.

Although it would seem that low accessibility indices are linked to shopping through constraint, there are some participants with relatively low indices (All, Bro, Rob) who report that they shop in the store of their choice. This suggests that the choice or constraint issue cannot necessarily be predicted from accessibility alone. Various factors can be identified which help to explain why these participants report that they shop in their store of choice. First, habit shapes shopping behaviour and attitudes. All is quite happy to shop for groceries on foot, and enjoys using the local shopping provision on Shirley High Street: I’m a woman of habit I’m afraid. . .I’ve shopped this way for over 30 years and I don’t think I’m going to change now.

She is also reluctant to use the new Tesco superstore “because I don’t know where anything is”. Although she is conscious that a superstore offers a greater choice, she is content to use smaller high street stores: There’s not much I can’t find that I want in Shirley itself

Second, shopping is not just an economic, transactional activity, it also plays an important social role, particularly in the lives of older panellists: I quite enjoy it, and usually meet somebody I know and have a chat (All). I do like it when I go with my friend, who takes me. We make it into a fun day, we’re jolly good company to each other and we enjoy it (Har).

I like the trip because it gets me out the house. . .It’s something I really look forward to.

Third, the costs associated with shopping for groceries may influence the mode of transport used for purchasing groceries. Rob, who lives in a low income household, has access to a car for grocery shopping, but prefers to shop by bicycle at nearby high street stores, as it saves on fuel costs: I can reach the local high street stores with a bicycle. If you go to the others, you’ve got to use the car and you’ve got to add petrol on.

Unlike the panellists described above, who are constrained into using smaller stores, Rob has chosen to use this type of store, for reasons of economy. If consulted in isolation of qualitative data, her relatively low accessibility index could misleadingly indicate that she has poor mobility, when in reality she has chosen to shop in this way. The findings would appear to indicate that there is a dichotomy between participants who shop by choice and those who shop by constraint, regardless of the type of store format frequented.

Manifestations of consumer disadvantage Three key forms of consumer disadvantage emerged from the interviews, expressed as areas of dissatisfaction by participants who are constrained in their shopping behaviour. It is interesting to note that the manifestations emerged from users of the smaller, supermarket format stores. The manifestations take the form of limited space and crowding in the store, limited choice and range of items and a lack of store facilities. Prices paid did not emerge as problematic from the interview data. This was surprising, as paying higher prices is often assumed to be a key manifestation of consumer disadvantage by other authors on the topic, and some studies on consumer disadvantage have focussed solely on price (Piachaud and Webb, 1996; Sooman and Macintyre, 1993). This finding is likely to reflect the focus of the paper on relative disadvantage. Had an absolute disadvantage study area been chosen, price may have emerged as problematic. The lack of space inside smaller stores (supermarkets) on Shirley High Street can make the shopping experience stressful, particularly for

528

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

a problem, rather as a potential area for improvement:

those who shop with small children in a pram or push chair:

You get busy times [inside the stores] such as Thursday pay day for the old pensioners, but other than that it’s pretty good. . . There are no facilities in the stores in Shirley, but that’s not a problem as I only live five minutes away (All).

It’s quite claustrophobic in the small Sainsburys, the gangway’s so tight, and it’s so busy and half the time I don’t get what I want because I can’t get to it. . . I’ve got a double pram and the doors aren’t wide enough... I’ve had people [other shoppers in the store] telling me to tie up my kids outside the shop as if they were dogs. I feel like I’m discriminated against because I’ve got twins. There’s just not the room (Pen).

Space inside superstores is praised by participants who shop by choice (“beautiful, wide aisles”, Pea), so this factor is clearly important to participants. Space and crowding are often cited as reasons why the more mobile panellists use superstores, rather than supermarkets on the High Street, which are usually nearer in distance terms: I find in a shop, one of the most annoying things is if it is crowded – you have to queue for hours and you have problems pushing the trolley round. . .So if that’s the case, as it is in smaller supermarkets, I find it a nuisance (Bro).

A lack of store facilities such as toilets in the smaller stores is particularly problematic for shoppers in charge of young children: I don’t think I like the facilities in the Shirley precinct. Store toilets might be a bit cleaner (Pen).

Overall, the smaller stores were perceived as providing a more limited range of goods than the larger stores, but this only seemed to pose an issue for shoppers with specific dietary requirements: Shirley [Sainsbury] hasn’t quite got the range that the bigger Sainsburys has, but I can usually find what I want (Ken). Because I’m a vegetarian, I eat a lot of the Quorn stuff – Sainsburys in Shirley have got nothing at all. If I want Quorn, I have to walk to Lordshill [superstore] (Pen).

Not all the participants who are constrained in their shopping behaviour express dissatisfaction with their shopping experiences, however. For example, Ken reports that she likes the store environment of the smaller supermarkets as she knows where everything is, which helps to speed up the shopping trip: I rather like it [store environment], I suppose I’ve got used to it. . .I can make straight for what I want. When your legs are aching, this is what you want.

Far, who would rather shop in a Sainsburys store, is still positive about her experiences in Asda: It’s been refurbished recently, so it’s quite nice. . . They really do have a good selection of products.

Participants who shop by choice were generally content with their shopping experiences. Even where they are aware of limitations associated with the stores they used, these are not considered to be problematic, and the limitation is not expressed as

It would be nicer if Lidl had a larger range (Rob).

Relationships between the potential causes of disadvantage, accessibility and consumer disadvantage This section draws on the discussion above and comments on the links between causes and manifestations of disadvantage, and levels of accessibility. All the participants are potentially disadvantaged as consumers, belonging to one or more of the identified causes groups. It can be argued that Ola and Whi who shop alone with small children (identified by Bowlby (1979) as impacting on potential mobility), are the least likely to be disadvantaged as consumers. They do not appear to face consumer disadvantage, as they are able to shop in the store of their choice, which is designed to cater for mothers with young children, and generally express satisfaction with their shopping experiences. At the other end of the spectrum, four participants (Far, Ken, Pen and Bro) belong to multiple potential causes groups. All four can be noted for their lack of personal transport when shopping for groceries. It appears to be the combination of poor personal mobility with other factors such as disability (e.g. Ken) or shopping with young children (e.g. Pen) which results in participants feeling constrained into using the stores they frequent (although this is not the case for Bro who shops by bicycle in a superstore, the store of his choice). Additionally, a lack of personal transport, as might be expected, results in low accessibility indices. Indeed Far and Ken demonstrate the lowest indices in the sample. It is interesting to note, however, that although Far reaches her store by car through lift-taking, her accessibility index is low because she only visits one store, which is relatively small and far away. The relationship between potential causes of disadvantage and consumer disadvantage is influenced by the choice or constraint issue. Those who shop in their store of choice, whether this is a supermarket or superstore, are generally satisfied with their experiences in those stores. Those who feel constrained into frequenting a store are more likely to express dissatisfaction than those who shop in the store of their choice. The relationship also seems to be affected by the type of store visited. The participants who feel constrained and

529

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

shop in the smaller high street supermarket (Ken, Pen) are more critical of their experiences than Far who shops in a superstore. However, shopping in a supermarket is not always viewed negatively, as All reports that she uses the high street supermarket through choice, and is generally positive about her experiences. The relationship between accessibility and consumer disadvantage is therefore difficult to predict from the accessibility index alone, as there are some participants with small indices (Far, Bro) who are able to visit superstores (reflecting the relative nature of the study) and who report that they are happy with their shopping experiences.

complacency among retail stakeholders. Although participants may state that they are content with their shopping experiences, there may be influences on their attitude and expectation formation, such as cognitive dissonance reduction (a form of rationalisation or self-deception where attitudes are revised to fit with current circumstances to reduce any mental discomfort), which obscure the real picture and underplay consumer disadvantage. All the participants were potentially disadvantaged as consumers, but only two identified problems with their shopping experiences (manifestations of disadvantage) which, using the conceptualisation adopted by this paper, classifies them as disadvantaged consumers. In addition to a lack of personal transport, these two faced other causes of disadvantage, felt constrained into using stores and shopped in a supermarket, rather than a superstore. This finding suggests that it may be the combination of causes faced by an individual, their impact on shopping behaviour and the individual’s perception of their shopping behaviour which determine whether a consumer can be labelled disadvantaged. Finally, the findings suggest that although accessibility indices are useful for comparing and summarising grocery shopping journeys, the approach has limited use as a predictor of consumer disadvantage. If real advances in knowledge about consumer disadvantage are to be achieved, then further research is urgently recommended. This needs to take place in different retail environments, and focus on relative as well as absolute forms of consumer disadvantage. It is interesting to note that even in a relative disadvantage study, wellserved by grocery retailing, consumer disadvantage is present for some participants. Because the paper is concerned with all the various potential causes of disadvantage, the sample includes a diverse range of participants. It may be useful to conduct future studies in a more piecemeal fashion. Separate, qualitative phases of research could take place as part of a consumer disadvantage project, where specific groups such as disabled consumers, consumers without personal transport and elderly consumers are focussed on individually. This would help to acknowledge the specific problems and issues facing each group, but would also enable analysis to cut across the groups to identify commonalities and universal themes. This paper provides some support for using qualitative methods when researching consumer disadvantage, particularly during the early stages of its academic development. It is also recommended that projective and enabling

Conclusions In light of the renewed interest in consumer disadvantage, it is imperative that progress is made on conceptualising the phenomenon, and on identifying and understanding its various dimensions. This exploratory paper presents some preliminary findings and recommendations for future research. Although the sample size is small, and the study area tightly defined, some interesting findings have emerged which are worthy of further investigation and empirical confirmation. First, the paper distinguishes between potential causes of consumer disadvantage (linked to social disadvantage) and manifestations of consumer disadvantage. The findings suggest that a consumer who lives in a low income household, is disabled or in ill health, or does not have access to personal transport for grocery shopping does not necessarily face consumer disadvantage. Using interviews to collect data allows participants to describe their shopping experiences in their own words, based on their own preferences, expectations and values. This prevents a consumer who appears to be disadvantaged from an objective view point from being classified as a disadvantaged consumer by the researcher. Clearly, it could be misleading to label a consumer as disadvantaged when they report that they choose to shop in a particular store and are positive about their shopping experiences. The choice or constraint issue appears to influence whether an individual belonging to the potential causes group experiences manifestations of disadvantage, as it has an important influence on an individual’s perception of their shopping experiences. The finding that some potentially disadvantaged participants shop in the store of their choice, despite demonstrating low accessibility indices or frequenting a supermarket, should not dilute the importance of acknowledging and addressing consumer disadvantage, or cause

530

Rethinking consumer disadvantage

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Lucy Woodliffe

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 523-531

techniques are used during data collection to address the potential problem posed by cognitive dissonance reduction. As has been discussed, consumer disadvantage is a complex phenomenon, and talking directly to the consumer is essential to understanding the detail and subtleties behind grocery shopping behaviour.

Leighton, C. and Seaman, C. (1997), “The elderly food consumer: disadvantaged?”, Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 363-70. Manandhar, M.C. (1995), “Functional ability and nutritional status of free-living elderly people”, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 54, pp. 677-91. Market Behaviour Ltd. (1983), “Inner city shopping: a qualitative study of the shopping needs of inner city consumers”, summary report prepared for the National Consumer Council, London. Miller, D., Jackson, P., Thrift, N., Holbrook, B. and Rowlands, M. (1998), Shopping, Place and Identity, Routledge, London. National Consumer Council (1982), Minorities in the Market Place: a Study of South Asian and West Indian Shoppers in Bradford, National Consumer Council, London. Opacic, S. and Potter, R.B. (1986), “Grocery store cognitions of disadvantaged consumer groups: a Reading case study”, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Vol. 77 No. 4, pp. 288-98. Petticrew, M., Cummins, S. and Sparks, L. (2002), Reducing Inequalities in Health and Diet: The Impact of Food Retail Development – A Pilot Study, MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow. Piacentini, M., Hibbert, S. and Al-Dajani, H. (2001), “Diversity in deprivation: exploring the grocery shopping behaviour of disadvantaged consumers”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 141-58. Piachaud, D. and Webb, J. (1996), The Price of Food: Missing Out on Mass Consumption, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Discplines (STICERD), London. Pickup, L. (1988), “Hard to get around: a study of women’s travel mobility”, in Little, J., Peal, L. and Richardson, P. (Eds), Women and Cities: Gender and the Urban Environment, Macmillan, London, pp. 88-116. Rees, J. (1988), “Social polarisation in shopping patterns: an example from Swansea”, Planning Practice and Research, Vol. 6, Winter, pp. 5-12. RTPI (1988), Planning for Shopping in the 21st Century: The Report of the Retail Planning Working Party, Royal Town Planning Institute, London. Shucksmith, M., Chapman, P. and Clark, G.M. (1996), Life in Rural Scotland Today: The Best of Both Worlds, Avebury, London. Sooman, A. and Macintyre, S. (1993), “Scotland’s health – a more difficult challenge for some? The price and availability of healthy foods in socially contrasting localities in the West of Scotland”, Health Bulletin, Vol. 51 No. 5, pp. 276-84. Stitt, S., O’Connell, C. and Grant, D. (1995), “Old and malnourished”, Nutrition and Health, Vol. 10, pp. 135-54. Williams, P. and Hubbard, P. (2001), “Who is disadvantaged? Retail change and social exclusion”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 267-86. Wrigley, N. (1998), “PPG6 and the contemporary UK food store development dynamic”, British Food Journal, Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 154-61. Wrigley, N. and Lowe, M. Eds. (1996), Retailing, Consumption and Capital: The New Retail Geography, Longman, Harlow. Wrigley, N., Warm, D., Margetts, B. and Whelan, A. (2002), “Assessing the impact of improved retail access on diet in a ‘food desert’: a preliminary report”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 11, pp. 2061-82.

References Abrams, M. (1985), A Survey of the Elderly Shopper, Age Concern, Surrey. Andreasen, A.R. (1975), The Disadvantaged Consumer, The Free Press, New York, NY. Bowlby, S.R. (1979), “Accessibility, mobility and shopping provision”, in Goodall, B and Kirby, A. (Eds), Resources and Planning, Pergamon, Oxford, pp. 293-323. Bowlby, S.R. (1985), “Don’t forget the old and carless”, Town and Country Planning, July/August, pp. 219-21. Bowlby, S.R. (1988), “From corner shop to hypermarket: women and food retailing”, in Little, J., Peake, L. and Richardson, P. (Eds), Women in Cities, Gender and the Urban Environment, Macmillan, London, pp. 61-83. Bromley, R.D.F. and Thomas, C.J. (1993), “The retail revolution, the carless shopper and disadvantage”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 222-36. Caplovitz, D. (1967), The Poor Pay More, The Free Press, New York, NY. Clarke, I. (2000), “Retail power, competition and local consumer choice in the UK grocery sector”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 975-1002. Elliott, R. (1996), “How do the unemployed maintain their identity in a culture of consumption?”, European Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 2, pp. 273-6. Guy, C.M. (1983), “The assessment of access to local shopping opportunities: a comparison of accessibility measures”, Environment & Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 10, pp. 219-38. Guy, C.M. (1985), “The food and grocery shopping behaviour of disadvantaged consumers: some results from the Cardiff consumer panel”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 10, pp. 181-90. Hallsworth, A.G. (1988), The Human Impact of Hypermarkets and Superstores, Avebury, Aldershot. Hallsworth, A.G., Wood, A. and Lewington, T. (1986), “Welfare and retail accessibility”, Area, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 291-8. Hare, C. (2003), “The food-shopping experience: a satisfaction survey of older Scottish consumers”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 244-55. Hare, C., Kirk, D. and Lang, T. (1999), “Identifying the expectations of older food consumers: more than just a ‘shopping list’ of wants”, Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, Vol. 5 No. 6/7/8, pp. 213-32. Hine, J. and Mitchell, F. (2001), “Better for everyone? Travel experiences and travel exclusion”, Urban Studies, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 319-32. Ingram, D.R. (1971), “The concept of accessibility: a search for an operational form”, Regional Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 101-7. Kaufman, C.F. (1995), “Shop ‘til you drop: tales from a physically challenged shopper”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 39-55.

531

Introduction

Community pharmacies as good neighbours? A comparative study of Germany and the UK Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

The authors Elke A. Pioch is a Senior Lecturer and Ruth A. Schmidt is a Principal Lecturer, both at Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, Retail Management Subject Group, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Keywords Pharmaceuticals industry, Chemists, Germany, UK, National Health Service, Retailing,

Abstract Located as intermediaries between patients/customers and national health systems, community pharmacies have to negotiate increasing government demands for free advice, pressure on their earnings and an increasingly deregulated market. A comparative assessment of the German and UK markets highlights the tensions pharmacists face as healthcare providers and retailers, assessing the ways in which each group copes with growing competitive challenges. Based on a grounded theory study of community pharmacies in Berlin/ Brandenburg and the Greater Manchester area the role of pharmacies within their local neighbourhoods is discussed and the potential for the transfer of marketing intelligence between the two countries evaluated.

Electronic access The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm

“The independent small shop has been the numerically dominant retail form in many countries for a very long time. These small shops have provided a sense of location and locale and have often been identified with ‘ways of life’ and social and community infrastructures” (Smith and Sparks, 2000, p. 205). Issues of social cohesion, inclusion and vitality in local neighbourhoods have been informing UK planning and social policies at least since New Labour’s 1997election (Bennison and Hines, 2003). While much of the discussion centred on food provision (e.g. Wrigley et al., 2002; Wrigley et al., 2003), issues of access to local health care via local pharmacies are now also stressed by the UK Government: “Community pharmacies play a vital role, particularly in rural and poorer areas” (DoH, 2003, p. 3). Likewise in Germany – which represents the up-to-recently dominant organization of pharmacies in the EU – chemists are seen as providing a trust relationship between the pharmacist as health care provider and patients/customers (ABDA, 2003). Despite this “vital role”, comparative retail research on community pharmacies has been sparse, probably because being embedded in national health systems, providing (emergency) medication, expert advice and specialist health care services, they have enjoyed protective measures reflecting their special status, sheltering them to differing degrees from free market competition. Recently, financial pressure on the health systems in both countries has resulted in legislative changes that threaten this special status. Consequently, community pharmacies are under pressure to exercise commercial reasoning and behaviour. Resulting closures of independent local pharmacies are a loss to neighbourhoods – not only of health care providers, but also of a vital hub for social exchange. Based on a comparative study of German and UK pharmacies, carried out between 1999 and 2002, the following aims to evaluate similarities and differences of independent chemists in contrasting legislative environments, their approach to increasing competitive challenges and standing in local communities.

Community pharmacy research in context International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · pp. 532-544 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552 DOI 10.1108/09590550410564764

Bennison and Hines (2003) comment that the last major study of UK small-scale retailing was undertaken 25 years ago by Dawson and Kirby (1979). The recent growth in the number of

532

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

publications investigating the independent retail sector represents, is, inter alia, a response to the shifting political agenda. Some concentrate on rural areas (e.g. Broadbridge and Calderwood, 2002; Byrom et al., 2003; Megicks, 2001; Pioch and Byrom, 2004), others on urban/inner city areas (e.g. Guy and Duckett, 2003 on Cardiff; Williams and Hubbard, 2001 on Coventry) or survey a mix of locations (e.g. Baron et al., 2001; Smith and Sparks, 2000). Although only two of those studies explicitly concentrate on food retailing (Baron et al., 2001; Broadbridge and Calderwood, 2002) apart from Smith and Sparks (2000) none mention community pharmacies, despite their critical role in local provision[1]. The current research builds on the few publications which have dealt particularly with research related to retail pharmacies (Ottewill et al., 2000; Pioch et al., 1992; Pioch and Schmidt, 2001; Schmidt and Pioch, 2001, 2003; Tann et al., 2001). In the following the term “neighbourhood” is used in line with what Whitehead (2003, p. 278) describes as the “convenient synonym” for the concepts “place” or “locality”, implying the traditional interpretation of neighbourhood as social area or communal living space. This definition also encapsulates what will later be referred to as “Kietze” in the German context.

.

.

lack of understanding of consumers and shifting consumption patterns, linked to; low priority of market research.

Reluctance to engage in IT development can be added (Schmidt and Pioch, 2003). Attempts to (re)gain competitive advantage vis-a`-vis large scale retailers include inter alia the improvement of the servicescape, the broadening and adaptation of the merchandise mix and importantly, the enhancement of customer service. While research suggests that many retailers at least partially adapt their tactical and operational activities to suit their environment (see Byrom et al., 2003), and have been identified as falling into four strategic clusters (with a fifth one denominating those that have no strategy (Megicks, 2001)), activities largely depend on the preferences of the owner-manager (Megicks, 2001; Spence and Rutherford, 2001). Although the research cited above does not include community pharmacies, most of the issues highlighted also relate in equal measure to chemists in the UK (Schmidt, 2004) and in Germany (Pioch and Schmidt, 2001; Schmidt and Pioch, 2001, 2003). However, the legal frameworks within which pharmacies in the EU operate restrict strategic possibilities and create specific dilemmas.

Industry background Independents as good neighbours The functions of small retailers in their local community have been summarized by Smith and Sparks (2000) and echoed by others (e.g. Clarke, 2000; Monbiot, 2000) as: . Providing consumers with goods and services. . Offering diversity, colour and choice. . Instilling dynamism and stimulating local adaptation. . Building economic linkages with other (local) businesses. . Generating and maintaining employment in their area. The function of creating social cohesion has also been widely advocated (see summaries in Baron et al., 2001; Broadbridge and Calderwood, 2002), linking in with the concepts of neighbourhoods as a social area. Against this ideal, independents face numerous problems, stated by Baron et al. (2001) for the food sector as encompassing: . high operating costs and other financial issues; . inadequate management;

Legal contexts The European Union only sets a general legislative background for community pharmacies (see European Retail, 2003; Pioch et al., 1992), with national legislation determining the different market structures as summarized in Table I. Using elements of the marketing mix, this comparison shows some significant differences in the way the sectors are regulated nationally and highlights barriers to competitiveness. While in the general retail market, multiple retailers’ growing vertical and horizontal power is having a detrimental effect on small independents (Clarke, 2000), in the pharmacy sector, the pressures have originated largely in respective governments’ health service cost saving measures. These measures are squeezing small operators out of the German market (where multiple formation is still prohibited) and leading to concentration in the UK. Two waves of health reforms in Germany, seen as disproportionally affecting community pharmacists (Hilbig, 2002), are now followed by a third, which aims to lift restrictions on mail order

533

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Table I The legal context Marketing mix elements Germany Product

Price

Place Promotion

People

Regulation UK

Most medicinal products, incl. OTCs can only be distributed through pharmacies’ dispensaries Strict regulations apply as to which additional merchandise can be sold in pharmacies All drug prices are fixed nation wide Prescriptions are reimbursed through health insurers

Pharmacists can only own and run one pharmacy No restrictions on where pharmacies can locate Marketing activities are strictly regulated and must be discreet and in line with professional image Free samples may only be given in relation to consultations A qualified pharmacist must be present for dispensing prescription drugs

Larger number of OTCs are available outside pharmacies, incl. analgesics and various drugs with reduced potencies or smaller pack sizes No limitations on additional merchandise Prescription drug prices are negotiated between manufacturers and the NHS and fixed nationwide through pharmaceutical price regulation scheme Prescriptions are reimbursed through NHS RPM for OTCs ended in 2001 Multiple ownership for pharmacy contractors is legal Location of pharmacies regulated by regional health authority No specific regulations 2 for 1 promotions for OTCs and other merchandise permitted Same

Sources: Various, including respondents, trade press, market reports and professional bodies’ literature

of drugs, to partially deregulate drug prices, to open up hospital pharmacies as a community resource and most importantly, to permit the formation of pharmacy chains (ABDA, 2003), hence setting the sector on an equal footing with the rest of the retail market. In the UK, a NHS restructuring programme that also addresses the distribution chain for drugs (NHS, 2000) intends to re-shape care around the patient, guaranteeing access to advice and medicines at a time and place of their choosing, with community pharmacists increasing their advice function and persuading patients to consult their local outlet, rather than their general practitioner (GP) for initial support. Potentially, this places pharmacists clearly at the heart of the neighbourhood, but at the risk of relocating this function to superstore’s in-house pharmacies with their extended opening time. By 2004, changes to be implemented include increased availability of OTCs, use of IT, such as electronic prescribing[2], e-pharmacies, and the incorporation of pharmacies into one-stop primary care centres. Pharmacy chains such as Moss, Lloydspharmacy and Boots The Chemist are already making increased use of IT, providing access to health advice and ordering of medication through their corporate Websites. Independents are not yet tuned in to these developments. The Office of Fair Trading’s request for further deregulation and supported by supermarket groups, especially ASDA (European Retail, 2002), is only applied to pharmacies wishing to locate in shopping developments over 15,000 square

meters, those who aim to open more than a stipulated number of hours per week, and those being part of one-stop-primary care centers, as the Government acknowledges that “pharmacists are trained clinicians and not simply shopkeepers” (DoH, 2003, p. 3). Overall, national legislative changes in both Germany and the UK push pharmacies further into the commercial domain for which the majority of small independents seem to be ill equipped. Despite the UK Government’s stated aim to avoid the closure of significant numbers of community pharmacies and a less equitable distribution of community pharmacies “dictated by commercial markets rather than the need of patients” (DoH, 2003, p. 6), the demise of many small local outlets seems likely. Market structures and economic performance Given the different legislative environments, market structures vary in the comparison countries. In 2002, all of Germany’s 21,465 community pharmacies were owned by individual pharmacists, who are owner-managers or employ one or more pharmacists to conduct the day-today business. Pharmacies are supplied by a variety of wholesalers, who have no direct influence on the affairs of each pharmacy. In the UK, multiple ownership leads to comparatively more complex structures, pictured in a snapshot simplified way in Figure 1. Noticeable is the link between pharmaceutical wholesalers and pharmacies, which can either own

534

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Figure 1 Distribution structure for medicinal products in the UK

a chain outright or support buying groups. Given restrictions on multiple formation in the rest of Europe, not surprisingly German, French/Italian wholesalers have entered the British market, steadily expanding their presence in retailing. In 2002, more than 50 per cent of the approximately 11,300 UK pharmacies operated as

small independents (one to five outlets). The National Pharmaceutical Association (NPA), trade body of community pharmacists, suggests that this figure has dropped from 68 per cent in 1998 (NPA, 2003). The number of pharmacies has increased by around 450 over the last decade, but is now fairly stable (Mintel, 2000).

535

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Both countries have seen declining economic performance of pharmacies. Approximately 80 per cent of income is derived from prescriptions, the rest from a diminishing amount of OTC sales on the general sales list and additional merchandise. In the UK, the number of prescriptions per head has been steadily rising from 6.9 per head in 1985 to 10.7 in 2000 (Euromonitor, 2003). Table II shows the breakdown of income for German pharmacies during the time of field work and three years later. Similar information is difficult to obtain for the UK, with its complicated market structure and wide range of products on offer. Tables III and IV show the choice of outlet for OTC and prescription purchases, demonstrating the reliance of small independents on the dispensary. While in the UK one fifth of retail chemists are on the brink of business failure, with heavy debts,

sliding profits and zero growth being responsible (Chemist and Druggist, 2003), in Germany twothirds of pharmacies show below average turnover and 40 per cent are sustaining a loss (Pioch and Schmidt, 2001). UK pharmacies had to absorb a fall in dispensing income of 33 per cent since 1987/ 88 (Mintel, 2000, p. 31), and a decrease in OTC sales due to price competition, particularly from supermarkets. However, the severe discounting feared after the abolition of RPM has tailed off and independents claim only marginal or no impact of the deregulation on their income (Wilkes, 2001; UK field work data).

Table II Income of German pharmacies Products

1999 (%)

2002 (%)

POM

65

70

OTC Pharmacy only, of which – prescribed – self-medication General sales list Health care products Additional merchandise

27.0 14.0 13.0 1.5 3.5 3.0

21.2 9.3 11.9 2.3 3.5 3.0

Source: ABDA (1999, 2002)

Table III Percentagea of adultsb purchasing OTCs/UK 2000 Outlet Pharmacy and drugstore chains Local independent pharmacies Supermarkets Other

Purchasing sometimes

Main source of purchase

119 24 68 17

60 15 20 4

Note: a More than 100 per cent possible as original table broken down into all major outlets; b refers to 15 years and over Source: Adapted from Mintel, 2000, figure 53

Table IV Source of made-up prescriptions/UK 2000a (%)b Outlet Pharmacy chains and dispensing drugstores Independent local pharmacies Supermarkets Other

Using sometimes

Main source

55 35 11 9

48 38 5 8

Notes: a Relating to 15 years and over; b could add to more than 100% as original table broken down into all major outletsM Source: Adapted from Mintel (2000), Figure 57

Research design The changing political/legislative environment and the concomitant effects on market structures are the backdrop against which the study of independent community pharmacies was conducted in Germany and the UK. These countries were chosen as they represent the two main retail pharmacy market structures in the EU. Research was undertaken in two phases: in 1999 in Berlin and Brandenburg (the federal state surrounding the capital), and during 2001/2002 in Greater Manchester/Cheshire/Derbyshire, both locations giving access to pharmacies in a variety of urban and rural settings. As in Baron et al.’s (2001) study, general issues were identified from academic literature on independent retailers and particularly from previous research of independent pharmacies. This was complemented by electronic searches of popular and trade press coverage, plus government and professional body sources before, during and after field work, thus ensuring regular updating of the German data. Field work was of a qualitative nature, with the first phase following the principles of grounded theory (GT) (Goulding, 2002; Strauss and Corbin, 1990), which has the theoretical sensitivity of the researchers – gained through knowledge of the broad study area and/or previous research – as starting point. Subsequent immersion into the life world of respondents consisted of 13 semistructured interviews with pharmacists and industry representatives (see Tables V and VI). Initial entry into the field was facilitated via personal introductions from long-standing users of a number of pharmacies. Following the principles of GT’s progressive focusing, information gleaned from early interviews was used to select further pharmacy types to ensure that the sample represented the variety of outlets in the area.

536

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Table V German pharmacy sample characteristics Location Berlin (former West Berlin 5; former East Berlin 4)

No. 9

a

Size 4 small 5 medium

Kreis Brandenburg

2

2 large

Respondents 3 owners 1 employed pharmacist 3 owners 1 manager 1 employed pharmacist 2 owners

a

Note: As per respondents own assessment

Table VI Industry representatives UK and Germany UK Local pharmaceutical committee representative National pharmaceutical association representative

Germany Berlin pharmacists’ chamber representative Berlin pharmacists’ association representative

Entry into the UK field was again gained via introduction by long-standing pharmacy customers in Stockport (Greater Manchester). This was followed by cold calling all independent pharmacies in the Stockport area. The target sample was a spread of different independent pharmacy types, including single and multiple outlet contractors, members of symbol groups and at least one essential small pharmacy[3]. As is common in research with SMEs, willingness to participate was limited so that via a snowballing approach, respondents from Manchester, Cheshire and Derbyshire completed a sample of 12 (see Table VII). With commercial data on independents unavailable, respondents’ own assessment of their businesses was used. While such self-reporting creates classification problems, it is common in

small business research (Smith and Sparks, 2000). For the German sample it is assumed that small refers to an annual turnover of EUR750,000, medium EUR750,000 – 1.5m and large over EUR3m. For the UK sample it is assumed that the majority of pharmacies fall in the £300,000 to £1m turnover range (see Brown (2003) for turnover of independent pharmacies and OFT figures at www.oft.gov.uk), with the smaller outlets at the lower and the medium sized ones at the higher end. Independents were defined in line with NPA and national statistics as having one to five outlets. The data from one respondent who worked as manager in a chain of eight shops were included as representing the 1.5 per cent of pharmacies with between six and ten outlets. Pharmacists were interviewed on their premises, usually while they were working in the dispensary, allowing observations of pharmacist/customer interactions. Four key informants from professional bodies in both countries (see Table VII) were consulted to gain insight into macrolevel trends and issues. This enhanced reliability and validity as the representatives’ expertise aids the evaluation of the permissibility of generalisations from a small sample. Interviews were tape-recorded and supplementary notes taken. German transcriptions were subjected to open and axial coding (Goulding, 2002; Strauss and Corbin, 1990). The emerging themes formed the initial basis for UK data analysis. Subsequently, the initial themes from both samples were interrogated mindful of the objectives of this paper, namely how pharmacists in contrasting legal environments meet the challenges to stay competitive and retain/

Table VII UK Pharmacy sample characteristics Location Stockport

Manchester

Cheshire/Derbyshire (rural areas)

No 6

3

3

Sizea 2 small Medium Medium Mixed portfolio 1 no info 1 no info Mixed portfolio

Single/multiple Both single outlets Single Single Multiple (5) Multiple (no further info) Multiple (2) Multiple (8)

Respondent Both owner Owner Manager Owner Locum Owner Manager

Above UK average 1 essential small

Multiple (3) Single

Owner Owner

1 small Medium

Single Single

Owner Owner

Note: a As per respondents own assessment

537

Part of symbol group

Numark Numark Pharmacy chain part of broader venture with wholesaling and manufacturing

Numark Vantage

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

regain their standing in local communities. Language and cultural problems often encountered in cross-cultural research were minimal, as the researchers are bi-lingual and familiar with both markets.

Community pharmacies and the neighbourhood Smith and Spark’s (2000) five functions of local retailers served as a guide to data presentation under three main headings (whereby their functions two and three as well as four and five were combined): (1) Providing goods and services. (2) Locally adapted diversity, colour and choice. (3) Developing economic linkages and local employment. A fourth heading – particularly considering pharmacies at the heart of the neighbourhood – was added to assess pharmacists’ role in relation to their customer base. In conclusion, pharmacies are compared to other small independent retailers together with thoughts on how professionals from the UK and Germany could exchange best practice and suggestions for further research.

Providing consumers with goods and superior professional services Linked to Smith and Spark’s (2000) first function of independent retailers, pharmacies are not only providing goods and professional services, they increasingly are challenged to do so in accordance with governments’ health policy emphasizing pharmaceutical care (see Figure 2). Figure 2 Pharmacy products

In both countries, the core products and main source of income are prescription medicines (see Table II, Mintel, 2000). Pharmacists can only achieve competitive advantage in this category through instant availability. In Germany this is particularly important as the high density of pharmacies in some locations creates competitive pressures, which are exacerbated by the relative lack of customer loyalty. With more than 250,000 products, a full assortment of medicinal products is unachievable. Hence, pharmacists familiarise themselves with the prescription practices of doctors in the vicinity, in order to retain regular customers, to attract business from new patients and from competitors. Larger outlets with more storage room and higher turnover named superior availability as key to their unique selling proposition (USP). In the UK, the Government aims to provide patients with medicines at a location and time of their convenience. Currently, customer loyalty seems comparatively higher and availability less crucial (Mintel, 2000), with patients willing to return to collect medication. Despite significantly smaller number of medicines and pack sizes than in Germany, lack of storage room often restricts stock levels. Plans to grant exemption for new pharmacy establishments in larger shopping developments may increase density and make availability a competitive issue, further damaging SME pharmacies. Supermarket in-store pharmacies, with more storage space for deep and wide assortment as well as the added bonus of customers doing their shopping while an out-ofstock drug is ordered, are posing an increasing threat. Five UK respondents acknowledged this as serious; only those at a fair distance from the nearest in-store dispensary feel unperturbed by such competition. Notably, home delivery services (including the collection of prescriptions), which are described by Broadbridge and Calderwood (2002) as increasing the potential for the use of small shops, are common-place in the UK, but less so among the German respondents (only four out of 11). Baron et al. (2001) stress the importance of friendly service for independents. For pharmacists, providing professional services is stipulated in national legislation forming the underpinning of the professional ethos: “We are essentially experts for medicines in general . . . we answer questions and offer advice rather than . . . just selling drugs . . .” (G/P4)[4] “We often represent the brakes and controls which are absolutely necessary where contraindication is concerned, or even in identifying the correct medicine . . .” (G/P10) The

538

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

same applies to the service provision in UK pharmacies and is echoed in government publications: “The role of community pharmacists is not limited to dispensing prescriptions, but extends into providing NHS patients with free advice on medication and self-treatment” (DoH, 2003, p. 6). Part of this advice is given during extended opening times to coincide with nearby surgery hours.

personal knowledge of the local market, offering photo processing (six respondents), photocopying (two pharmacies), and a dry cleaning service in a rural pharmacy to respond to perceived local demand. Chance wholesaler offers, special offers from a buying group (Numark) or planogram information is used in an ad hoc fashion to increase or tailor additional merchandise. Like other independent retailers, community pharmacists in both countries often fail to create a USP through those marketing mix elements less restricted by legislation. This disadvantages UK pharmacies vis-a`-vis multiples, drugstores and supermarkets and will increase the threat to German pharmacies in the light of planned deregulation. With choice in German pharmacies restricted by legislation, and only insufficiently adapted to local conditions in the UK, colour may be offered through the servicescape (Bittner, 1990) as suggested by Baron et al. (2001). Notably, only two UK respondents mentioned the importance of impressions and shop ambience unprompted. Often, the appearance of small pharmacies is incongruent with the high levels of professional service provided and a “poor relation” to a high street Boots or the majority of German pharmacy outlets. The corner shop impression and a forbidding shop front do little to entice entry. Despite support offered by the NPA and wholesaler/buying group schemes, primarily financial and time pressures prevent pharmacists from updating their internal and external servicescapes. Other considerations feature, too:

Locally adapted diversity, colour and choice As Figure 2 indicates, pharmacies offer OTCs, other merchandise, ancillary and complementary services. In accordance with the small business literature, these should be tailored to the community that is served, broadening the merchandise mix where possible or reducing stock levels as appropriate. In Germany, adherence to this advice is curtailed by legislation, which restricts the type of products and services offered to merchandise with medicinal qualities or for health and body care. However, German pharmacists do use the quasi brand character of Apotheken (see Pioch and Schmidt, 2001) to sell life style products: “I cannot see any reason why we wouldn’t aggressively market our [pharmacy exclusive] cosmetic products, because they are simply better than the rest” (G/P9). Product/ service decision drivers are the core customer profile, the types of doctors in the neighbourhood, size of outlet, ethical considerations and direct demand. For the majority of both UK and German respondents OTCs remain a small but important source of income. In the UK, other merchandise and services are more significant as a USP. These can be extensive depending on the size of the outlet, its location, customer base and preferences of pharmacists and counter staff. Confirming Baron et al.’s (2001) finding in the grocery sector, market research is rarely undertaken, thus decisions lack a strategic outlook. Consumer segments underrepresented in the customer profile, such as teenagers (who might be attracted via inexpensive cosmetics, UK/P2) or middle-aged customers (a potential niche market for complementary medicine, UK/P1,2,3,11) are rarely targeted, despite the fact that sales for the products they could be targeted with are growing (Mintel, 2003). Nevertheless, respondents in the UK sample were much more willing to stock complementary medicines than their German counterparts. In the UK only one respondent with multiple outlets increasingly uses EPOS data to determine additional ranges. Most pharmacists rely on

I think they [continental pharmacies] always look really good but they also look very expensive and that isn’t our customer base so I’ve got to try and get something in between the two for us, smart and looks clean but it’s functional and doesn’t put people off (UK/P11).

This highlights UK pharmacists’ lack of influence over their outlets’ location as health authorities regulate their positions. Arguably this makes the presentation of the servicescape even more important.

Developing economic linkages and local employment Monbiot (2000) and Smith and Sparks (2000) showed independent shops to provide important economic linkages and local employment. With regard to employment, there was strong evidence that pharmacy staff, and often the pharmacists themselves, were living in or close to the communities they served.

539

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Involvement in the wider business community did not feature in the interviews. However, German pharmacies had strong links to other health care providers. Through an extensive property portfolio, they often attract GPs and other health specialist into the neighbourhood, who can enhance the volume of prescriptions. Personal links as well professional co-operation with these network members are used to keep competitors at bay. Partially due to government imposed locational restrictions and differences in property ownership, UK pharmacists are less proactive in this field. Overall, actively attracting health professionals that guarantee prescription levels was uncommon. Likewise, active collaboration with GPs is rarely pursued, although nearly all respondents’ businesses are located either close to or within the wider catchment areas of surgeries and health centres. Networking does exist, but it is less deliberate than in Germany. Pharmacists stress the “professional” nature of the relationship, and getting too close or too friendly is regarded as a “slippery road” (UK/P8) potentially threatening the pharmacy’s much valued independence. Baron et al. (2001) found that small food retailers were more likely to survive if they were affiliated. Attitudes among pharmacists towards such business opportunities varied considerably. In the UK, market structures encourage pharmacists to join buying groups and wholesaler support schemes to benefit from a variety of services, although they are at times criticized for their lack of flexibility to adapt to local markets. German pharmacists have so far generally not come together in buying groups, and formal wholesaler/pharmacy systems do not exist. Collaboration was regarded as cumbersome and impinging on individuality and independence. Nevertheless, informal networks are in operation, often exercised through “pharmacy dynasties” where several members of a family own pharmacies and are situated close by, resulting in quasi monopoly positions for some locations (Pioch and Schmidt, 2001). Another networking mechanism was via friends who co-locate and form a strong buying collective, making use of increased buying power to achieve pharmaceutical manufacturer discounts and better wholesaler conditions for goods within the outer ring of Figure 2.

into the extent to which pharmacies are a core part of the mix of independent retailers that provide a neighbourhood with a sense of locale and support social cohesion. As is to be expected, the composition of customers per outlet largely depends on location and can include regular visits from drug addict methadone users or closely match a village’s population. The majority of UK and German respondents mention “regulars” as their core customers; only those pharmacies located in either a shopping precinct, in a supermarket or on main traffic arteries also attract significant casual car passing trade. Ten German pharmacists identified the immediate neighbourhood as their catchment areas, with four of them also serving customers on the periphery of this area. Only one claimed to have customers from further afield. Among the UK respondents, six reported trade from the immediate neighbourhood or village only, with the remaining six also attracting passing trade due to their location. Regular customers are in the majority, with people either living, working, shopping or visiting the doctor locally and making linked visits, thus tentatively supporting Smith and Spark’s (2000) notion of pharmacies as potential destination outlets. The customer demographics in both samples mirror national averages, with obvious local variations. The largest group are the elderly (60-70 per cent), followed by young families (around 20 per cent). Mintel (2000) research suggests that in the UK 44 per cent of over 65s use their local independent pharmacy as main source of their prescriptions, and those with children aged 5-9 particularly like to use local chemists. A recent German survey sees the over 60-year-olds as main customers, rating local pharmacy services very highly, with over 80 per cent visiting their local chemist at least once a month (Grosses Apotheken Votum, 2002). High levels of trust in the accuracy of dispensing and good advice attract customers to local pharmacies:

Pharmacies at the heart of the neighbourhood? An evaluation of the composition of customer segments served by sample outlets offers an insight

A lot of patients don’t like to speak to their doctors, they don’t ask their doctors questions, and they come and ask me the questions because they feel that I am more approachable than their doctor (UK/P10). . . . they seem to trust you with their life, don’t they, I think they do (UK/P6).

Unsurprisingly, four out of five adults are concerned about the deregulation of pharmacies.

540

This concern is especially acute among mothers with young children (88 per cent) and the aging (85 per cent) – the very customers who rely most

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

heavily on the accessibility, convenience and expertise provided by their local pharmacy (NPA, 2003, p. 1).

NPA research revealed that 53 per cent of their respondents have been regular customers of their local pharmacy for more than ten years, and 80 per cent regard them as the most convenient place to buy medicines, a “short walk away” for two-thirds of patients. Being able to reach the pharmacy by foot is particularly important for the less physically mobile, such as the elderly and the socially disadvantaged. This close relationship between customer and local independent in the UK is aided by the views of seven out of ten adults who perceive pharmacy staff as being caring and friendly, putting them “‘at the heart of their local community’ in a valued and trusted role as a family friend” (NPA, 2003, p. 1). Observations within pharmacies revealed the social character of the outlets, especially of the smaller and rural ones, with patients/customers spending time in the shop to chat and exchange news. Pharmacists see their outlets as part of the community, an “asset to the village, belongs to the village and is of the people of the village” (UK/ P12). Thus, support for and participation in local church or school activities is common. The question arises as to how far the partial deregulation of the sector will lead to closures of small pharmacies in less attractive locations as they become less viable and lose government funding, thus potentially creating “health care deserts”. With the establishment of pharmacy contracts still severely restricted, multiples will continue to buy up struggling independents in promising locations, like on main traffic arteries or in still vibrant local shopping centres. These multiples, which often employ frequently changing locums, may be unable to maintain the same sense of community current owners seem to instil. In Berlin/Brandenburg the social link between pharmacy and customer does not seem as strong as in the Greater Manchester area, but close personal knowledge of medical profiles can also play an important part, and is aided in Berlin by the existence of Kietze, distinct parts of the city with a quasi village character, where family members of different generations live in close proximity. Pharmacists are thus not only part of the local health care providers, but also of the community, and often familiar with the medical history of several generations of the same family. An assessment of the pharmacist as glue in the local community cannot ignore their own interpretation of their role. The majority of

German as well as UK respondents were torn between the seemingly conflicting demands of simultaneously being health professionals and business people. Overwhelmingly, they saw themselves as professionals first and retailers second, many of them, especially in Greater Manchester, only grudgingly accepting the latter role: “. . .unfortunately I am not very good at business” (UK/P6), “ I don’t class myself as a good business, I am not a theorist” (UK/P 11). Independence to offer unbiased advice is important, including suggestions contrary to their own business benefits, such as warnings against the proliferation of vitamins and slimming products. A German respondent’s view stands for many of his colleagues: I am rather glad that I can . . . say you would be better off spending your money on something else. I see this very much as part of my role – sure I would make some money if I sold it, but I also have an obligation to use my professional expertise to convince the customers that a product may be no good . . . (G/P5).

Nevertheless, in both markets, a sense of realism regarding the business aspects of community pharmacy comes to bear. In one pharmacy chain, a business manager has been appointed for “streamlining, efficiency and monitoring” (UK/ P10), another realizes that running an efficient SME is the only way to fulfil his dream of being a community pharmacist and serve local people (UK/P12). Another commented “I think . . . pharmacies . . . should stay in that section between the clinical and the distribution” (UK/P2), with others moving in that direction. German pharmacists, especially younger ones, seem to have embraced the entrepreneurial aspect more readily (Pioch and Schmidt, 2001), using the outer rings in Figure 2 to create USPs, together with whatever competitive advantage can be gleaned from the core aspects.

Conclusions – learning from each other? Although the principal tenets of organizing the provision of medicines and health care advice in the UK and German markets remain intact, dramatic challenges through governmental cost saving measures coupled with increased deregulation and developments in the technological environment have pushed community pharmacists more firmly from being health care providers to retailers. While this conflicts for most respondents with their professional ethos, the majority have accepted the

541

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

need to make their businesses more efficient in order to survive, although many are not yet ready to act on it. Congruent with much of the literature on independent retailers, individual idiosyncratic preferences often override business needs. For community pharmacists this is exacerbated by their professional training not supporting the business function. However, Tann et al.’s (2001) research on leading edge practitioners suggests that those willing to engage in continuous (professional) development tend to be more effective health practitioners – it could be assumed that similar results are achievable in the commercial arena. Furthermore, Ottewill et al. (2000, p. 249) distinguish between operational (as informed by code of ethics for pharmacists) and strategic competences, where “. . . operational competences . . .[are] a necessary, not a sufficient, condition for the commercial viability of a community pharmacy . . .[and] had to be complemented at the strategic level by competences which would secure the enterprise’s competitive position”. Such competences have been demonstrated – if in a patchy way – with community pharmacists frequently adopting new and innovative (business) solutions. In Germany there are voluntary collectives of pharmacists, who regularly exchange best business practice. It may be possible that German and UK pharmacists can also learn from one another. In the domain of providing goods and services, a number of German pharmacies are using availability of core products as a USP for goods that cannot otherwise be marketed. UK pharmacists could benefit from considering such an approach, especially when further deregulation establishes more pharmacies in shopping centres. Friendly and professional service was stressed as a key competitive tool by all respondents and featured in all observed interactions. With regard to locally adapted diversity, colour and choice, UK respondents made better (but by no means sufficient) use of complementary medicines to tap into new market segments and increase their potential for life style advice. German practitioners are far more reluctant in this area, but may be well advised not to lose sight of market developments. However, both groups could improve their additional and health related merchandise, ancillary as well as discretionary service offerings by engaging in market research and subsequent marketing (for a more detailed discussion see Schmidt and Pioch, 2004). Like SME food retailers (Baron et al., 2001), pharmacists neglect the marketing function at their

peril and thus ignore the strategic competences that Ottewill et al. (2000) suggest as a means to secure a competitive position. German pharmacists portray their professional image very well through their servicescapes, adding colour to neighbourhoods. Their UK counterparts are well advised to improve in this area taking into account the location and social make up in which they are established. In relation to economic linkages and local employment many independent UK pharmacists are well linked into buying groups, making use of wholesaler offers and support. Professionals in Germany should consider such collaboration seriously as a deregulation of the right to establishment will inevitably lead to similar competitive structures as in the UK market, and pharmacies already organized in groups have a better chance to stave off competition. British pharmacists, on the other hand, may do well to improve their networking with other health providers to guarantee a steady stream of income and attract new customers. Both groups add to local employment by recruiting staff from their neighbourhoods. This adds to their role as being at the heart of the local community. However, it appears that in Greater Manchester pharmacists are more embedded, thus instilling trust and loyalty. German pharmacists could learn from this more patient/customer centred approach to overcome customer fickleness. Overall, the research here, albeit limited to a small sample in two particular areas in Germany and the UK, suggests that the majority of pharmacies fulfil the functions that are ascribed to small independent retailers more generally, although there is room for improvement as shown above. Whether they can be described as “destination outlets” (Smith and Sparks, 2000), contributing to local (retail) vitality and providing the social glue for a particular locale requires further research. Such research could encompass nationwide surveys in Germany as a well as the UK, following the example of Baron et al. (2001) for the SME food sector and building on the themes developed here. This could be combined with consumer studies to contrast and compare their views with those of the service providers and national governments’ aspirations, following Broadbridge and Calderwood’s (2002) survey in the Scottish context. Only then, could the question of whether community pharmacists are good neighbours – in the UK, in Germany and potentially other EU countries – have a more definite answer.

542

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Notes 1 A detailed review of the small shop literature (as can be found in e.g. Baron et al., 2001; Broadbridge and Calderwood, 2002; Smith and Sparks, 2000) is beyond the scope of this paper, which concentrates on issues related to the neighbourhood theme of this special issue. 2 Electronic prescribing refers to the electronic transfer of prescription data between GPs, pharmacies and the Prescription Pricing Authority using the NHSNet. 3 Essential small pharmacies must be at least 1km from the nearest other pharmacy, usually in rural and residential areas; they receive an additional payment over and above other NHS remuneration. 4 In order for respondents to remain anonymous, they have been allocated numbers. G/P1 UK/P1 represent German and UK pharmacists respectively. Representatives of professional bodies are identified separately.

References ABDA (1999), Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Apothekerverbaende, Jahresbericht 98/99. ABDA (2002), “Zahlen, Daten, Fakten”, available at: www.abda.de/ABDA. ABDA (2003), “Entwurf eines “Gesundheitsmodernisierungsgesetzes (GMG)”. Zusammenfassung der Position der ABDA Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Apotheker Verbaende; available at: www.abda.de/ABDA/artikel.hmtl. Baron, S., Harris, K., Leaver, D. and Oldfield, B. (2001), “Beyond convenience: the future for independent food and grocery retailers in the UK”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 395-414. Bennison, D. and Hines, T. (2003), “Guest editorial: retailing for communities: issues of inclusion and exclusion”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 8, pp. 385-8. Bittner, M.J. (1990), “Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings and employee responses”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, April, pp. 69-82. Broadbridge, A. and Calderwood, A. (2002), “Rural grocery shoppers: do their attitudes reflect their actions?”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 394-406. Brown, N. (2003), “Buying a pharmacy: a guide for the first time buyer”, The Pharmaceutical Journal, Vol. 270 No. 7246, pp. 578-80. Byrom, J., Medway, D. and Warnaby, G. (2003), “Strategic alternatives for small retail businesses in rural areas”, Management Research News, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 33-49. Chemist and Druggist (2003), April 12. Clarke, I. (2000), “Retail power, competition and local consumer choice in the grocery sector”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 975-1002. Dawson, J.A. and Kirby, D.A. (1979), Small Scale Retailing in the UK, Saxon House, Farnborough. Department of Health (2003), Response to Health Select Committee 5th Report of the Session 2002-03 on the Control of Entry Regulations and Retail Pharmacy Services in the UK, Department of Health Publications, London. Euromonitor (2003), Major Retail Sectors: United Kingdom, Chemists, RTI report, available at: www.euromonitor.com.

European Retail (2002), “ASDA to demand more pharmacies”, European Retail, 11 March, p. 9. European Retail (2003), “Medicine manufacturers must continue”, European Retail, 6 January, p. 16. Goulding, C. (2002), Grounded Theory. A Practical Guide for Management, Business and Market Researchers, Sage, London. Grosses Apotheken Votum (2002), availalbe at: www.profriegl.de/ApoVotum/Thesen_1-7ApoVot.doc (accessed March 2004). Guy, C. and Duckett, M. (2003), “Small retailers in an inner city community: a case study of Adamstown, Cardiff”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Mangement, Vol. 31 No. 8, pp. 401-7. Hilbig/GesundheitsPro.de (2002), “Vielen Apotheken droht das endgueltige Aus” availalbe at: bs.cyty.com/gesundht/ beitragssatz-sicherungsgesetz.shmtl. Megicks, P. (2001), “Competitive strategy types in the UK independent retail sector”, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 9, pp. 315-28. Mintel (2000), OTC/Prescription Medicines Retailing – UK, Mintel International Group, London. Mintel (2003), Complementary Medicines – UK, April, Mintel International Group, London. Monbiot, G. (2000), Captive State. The Corporate Take-over of Britain, Macmillan, London. NHS (2000), “Pharmacy in the future – implementing the NHS plan”, available at: www.doh.gov.uk/pharmacyfuture/ index.htm. NPA (2003), Press release, National Pharmaceutical Association, St Albans. Ottewill, R., Jennings, P.L. and Magirr, P. (2000), “Management competence development for professional service SMEs: the case of community pharmacy”, Education + Training, Vol. 42 No. 4/5, pp. 246-55. Pioch, E. and Byrom, J. (2004), “Small independent retail firms and locational decision-making: outdoor leisure retailing by the crags”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development (forthcoming). Pioch, E. and Schmidt, R. (2001), “German retail pharmacies – regulation, professional identity and commercial differentiation”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 330-40. Pioch, E., Davies, B.J. and Bennison, D. (1992), “Pharmacies: the SEM and retail harmonization”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 29-35. Schmidt, R. (2004), “This pharmacy is special: developing a competitive toolkit for community pharmacies”, NPA Yearbook 2004, January, available at: http://npa.atalink. co.uk/articles/article/290.phtml Schmidt, R. and Pioch, E. (2001), “Ten years after: the impact of German unification on retail pharmacies”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 247-58. Schmidt, R. and Pioch, E. (2003), “Pills by post? German retail pharmacies and the Internet”, British Food Journal, Vol. 105 No. 9, pp. 618-33. Schmidt, R. and Pioch, E. (2004), “Community pharmacies under pressure – can branding help?”, paper presented at 8th International Conference on Retailing and Commercial Distribution, Teaching and Research Issues; 30 June-2 July, London Insitute, EAERCD. Smith, A. and Sparks, L. (2000), “The role and function of the independent small shop: the situation in Scotland”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 205-26.

543

Community pharmacies as good neighbours

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Elke A. Pioch and Ruth A. Schmidt

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 532-544

Spence, L.J. and Rutherford, R. (2001), “Social responsibility, profit maximisation and the small firm owner-manager”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 126-39. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research, Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, London. Tann, J., Blenkinsopp, A. and Platts, A. (2001), “Teaching and learning at the leading edge: leading edge practitioners in community pharmacy”, Management Learning, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 163-79. Whitehead, M. (2003), “Love thy neighbourhood – rethinking the politics of scale and Walsall’s struggle for neighbourhood democracy”, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 35, pp. 277-300.

Wilkes, D. (2001), “Loss of RPM leaves a stalemate in its wake”, OTC Bulletin Advertising Ideas Supplement, 31 October, pp. S14-S15. Williams, P. and Hubbard, P. (2001), “Who is disadvantaged? Retail change and social exclusion”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 267-86. Wrigley, N., Guy, C. and Lowe, M. (2002), “Urban regeneration, social inclusion and large store development: the Seacroft development in context”, Urban Studies, Vol. 39 No. 11, pp. 2101-14. Wrigley, N., Warm, D. and Margetts, B. (2003), “Deprivation, diet, and food-retail access: findings from the Leeds ‘food desert’ study”, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 35, pp. 151-88.

.

544

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing Gary Warnaby David Bennison Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes The authors Gary Warnaby is a Senior Lecturer in Marketing at the School of Management, University of Salford, Manchester, UK. David Bennison is the Research Coordinator for Retail Management and Howard Hughes is Professor in the Faculty of Food, Clothing & Hospitality Management, both at the Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, Manchester, UK. Barry J. Davies is Professor and Assistant Dean responsible for Research at the University of Gloucestershire Business School, Cheltenham, UK.

Keywords Marketing, Urban areas, Retailing, Partnership, Governance, United Kingdom

Abstract This article investigates the interaction between urban place marketing actors with specific reference to marketing urban areas as shopping destinations – town centre managers, shopping centre managers, local authority economic development managers and marketing managers and tourism promotion managers. It reports the results of a survey of these actors in the top 173 urban shopping destinations in the UK. It identifies those actors with prime responsibility for marketing urban retail provision (i.e. town centre managers and shopping centre managers), the nature of their collaboration (via formal, informal, and initiative-specific interaction), and the factors impelling interaction (i.e. recognition of the linkages between the activities of different organisations, ensuring wider representation of organisational interests and the financial imperative). With the recent publication of Draft PPS6 and its increased focus on the strategic development of smaller centres, the implications for the marketing/promotion of such centres are addressed in detail.

Electronic access The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · pp. 545-556 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552 DOI 10.1108/09590550410564773

Introduction Despite the growing importance of urban place marketing activity over that last 30 years (see Kotler et al., 1999; Millington et al., 1997; Ward, 1998; Ward and Gold, 1994), it has been argued that the explicit marketing and promotion of the urban retail provision has been unduly neglected. Urban stakeholders with traditional responsibility for place marketing, such as local authority economic development departments (Burgess, 1982), have tended to focus on the attraction of inward investment and tourism revenues (Williams, 1992, 1996), viewing consumer services, including retailing, as being of secondary importance. In contrast, various authors (e.g. Page, 1995; Shaw and Williams, 1992) have argued that retail provision is a prime attraction to urban places for many. Applied research studies (e.g. Association of Town Centre Management, 1994; English Historic Towns Forum, 1992) have attested to the importance of retailing to the urban economy. Indeed, the importance of retailing to urban economies, and their regeneration, should not be underestimated (Building Design Partnership, 2002; Hutton, 2002; Jones et al., 2003). Recent research (Warnaby et al., 2002) has identified a variety of urban actors with potential responsibility for marketing the retail provision of towns and cities. For some of these actors – urban regeneration agencies, local authority marketing and economic development departments, and local tourism promotion agencies – the promotion of retailing was, at best, only a secondary part of their remit. Prime responsibility for marketing the urban retail provision lay with town centre management schemes and managed shopping centres located in the traditional urban core. Given this diversity of actors, Warnaby et al. (2002) emphasise the importance of interaction and collaboration between them in order to optimise the planning and implementation of retail-oriented urban place marketing activities. This paper considers in more detail the nature of the partnerships existing between these various urban stakeholders. It argues that these interactions between place marketing actors at the wider town/city level can provide a context for strategies for retailing at the local, “neighbourhood” level – a factor that is assuming greater prominence given the recent publication of the consultation draft of Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2003).

545

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

The principle of partnership The need for towns and cities to be more competitive by embracing a more entrepreneurial ethos (see Hall and Hubbard, 1996, for a review) has impacted on the structure of urban political institutions. This is manifested in terms of a shift towards the concept of governance as opposed to government, and characterised by an increased emphasis on partnership between the public sector and various private sector actors (incorporating a range of non-elected organisations of the state and individual actors from outside the formal political arena, such as voluntary organisations, private businesses, the mass media, and supra-national institutions). Their interactions increasingly affect the character and fortunes of local areas, as the various interests and agendas represented through this constellation of different actors are hopefully reconciled via the development of strategies for individual urban places. However, because of the diversity of interests and perspectives the scope for conflict is, of course, ever present (see Boyle, 1997; Peck, 1995; Sadler, 1993). In recent years there has been substantial growth in the number of partnership agencies – Peck and Tickell (1994, p. 252) describe the partnership model as “fast becoming dominant across a whole range of policy spheres”. McQuaid (2002, p. 10) states that, “[t]he term ‘partnership’ covers greatly differing concepts and practices and is used to describe a wide variety of types of relationship in a myriad of circumstances and locations”. Despite this diversity, there are a number of underlying assumptions. The first is the potential for some form of synergy between the various actors. Second, partnership involves both development and delivery of a strategy or a set of projects or operations (achieved via cooperation between the actors, although individual actors may not be equally involved in all stages). Finally, in partnerships between public and private sector actors, there is an element of “social partnership” (thereby excluding purely commercial transactions) (McQuaid, 2002). The benefits that can accrue from a partnership approach include the ability to apply a greater level of resources to policy areas, increased effectiveness and efficiency (arising from the synergy arising from improved coordination between and within actors), and possibly greater legitimacy for initiatives and actions (McQuaid, 2002). Indeed, while the principles behind the development of partnership cannot be criticised – as Peck and Tickell state, “partnership, like apple pie, is undeniably a good thing” (Peck and Tickell, 1994, p. 251, original emphasis) – there have been a number of critical assessments (e.g. Bassett, 1993;

Hubbard and Hall, 1998; Peck, 1995; Peck and Tickell, 1994; Parkinson, 1996; Sadler, 1993; Wilkinson, 1992). In the specific context of the marketing of towns and cities, partnerships between public and private sector actors are a key planning and implementation mechanism. While there are inevitable differences between public and private sector traditions and perspectives, Ashworth and Voogd (1990a) argue that these differences do not constitute a clear dichotomy because of the prevalence of partnership working. More important, according to van den Berg and Braun (1999, p. 995), is “organising capacity”, which, they argue, enables an urban place, “adequately, and at the proper spatial-economic scale, to anticipate, respond to and cope with changing intra- and inter-metropolitan urban relations due to crucial internal and external processes of change”. They go on to define “organising capacity” as: . . .the ability to enlist all actors involved and, with their help, to generate new ideas and to develop and implement a policy designed to respond to fundamental developments and create conditions for sustainable development (van den Berg and Braun, 1999, p. 995).

van den Berg and Braun (1999) identify a number of factors that contribute to organising capacity. An effective formal institutional framework of the urban administrative structure is regarded as a necessary precondition for any successful urban strategy, particularly in terms of facilitating a cooperative environment, and appropriate managerial infrastructure. However, an effective local government alone is not enough, and they state that “strategic networks” involving both public and private sector actors acting in partnership, are equally important in developing “organising capacity”, particularly in determining a shared vision and objectives among urban stakeholders. Indeed, van den Berg and Braun (1999, p. 996) emphasise that interdependency of the various actors forms “the backbone of the network”. This paper investigates the concept of the “strategic network” in the specific context of marketing urban places as shopping destinations. It reports the results of a survey of key place marketing actors with potential responsibility for marketing urban retail provision in the top 173 urban shopping destinations in the UK. The survey investigated those actors perceived as having prime responsibility for marketing retailing, the extent of the interaction between them, the nature of this interaction and the factors impelling interaction. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of the findings for neighbourhood retailing.

546

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Research design

Table I Sample sizes and response rates

The research reported in this paper builds on initial qualitative research that is reported in more detail in Warnaby et al. (2002). This qualitative research in four urban places sought to ascertain: . the key actors in the process of marketing the urban places as shopping destinations; . the processes by which strategies for the marketing of the retail provision was developed; and . the factors influencing the process of strategy development. This research identified key themes for more general investigation in towns and cities across the UK. The research design for this study comprised a postal questionnaire administered to respondent types identified in the qualitative stage as having potential responsibility for the marketing of the urban retail provision (i.e. town centre managers, shopping centre managers, local authority economic development managers and marketing managers and tourism promotion managers) in urban shopping destinations classified as subregional and above in the Management Horizons Europe UK Shopping Index (MHI) 1998-1999[1] (MHE, 1998). In total, 173 appropriate shopping destinations were identified[2]. In all, 910 possible respondents were identified, to whom the questionnaire was administered, after it had been piloted with a small sample of the different respondent types. In the light of feedback from the pilot survey various elements of the questionnaire were modified to avoid ambiguity and increase relevance. The questionnaire focused on a range of issues relating to the marketing of towns and cities as shopping destinations. These included: respondents’ perceptions of the importance of retailing in wider urban place marketing activities; the process by which marketing/promotional activities were planned; the nature of the marketing activities undertaken; and the extent and nature of interaction between the various place marketing actors. This paper explicitly focuses on issues relating to interaction (full details of all results are given in Warnaby (2003)). Of the questionnaires, 274 were returned, constituting an overall 30 per cent response rate, a figure that Saunders et al. (2000) consider to be a “reasonable” response rate for a postal survey. Table I provides further details of the sample size and response rates for the different respondent types. The data were analysed using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) software, which allowed for descriptive statistics, cross-tabulations

Respondent type Economic development manager Tourism promotion manager Local authority marketing manager Town centre manager Shopping centre manager

Sample size

Number of respondents

Response rate (%)

173 132 168 155 282

41 31 31 53 118

24 24 18 34 42

and chi square analysis to be carried out. The results (relating to actor interaction) are reported below. For the majority of questions in the questionnaire, however, there were no significant differences between the different types of public sector respondents (where there were differences these could be explained by the differences in the remits of the different departments/agencies concerned). Consequently, for analysis and to facilitate comparison with shopping centre managers, the responses from the different types of public sector respondents were aggregated.

Results Motives for interaction The nature and extent of the interaction between the various actors will obviously be a function of the strength of their motivations for working in a partnership modus operandi. The earlier qualitative research (Warnaby et al., 2002) showed a strong commitment to interaction among actors in this specific context and identified a number of motives for interaction, which were investigated more generally here. A total of 84 per cent of public sector respondents and 83 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed/strongly agreed with the statement “Marketing activities of different organisations in the town/city are inter-linked and need to be co-ordinated to get better results”. However, two competing dynamics exist: the need for co-ordination, and the need for individual agencies to pursue their own remits by serving their target audiences in what they perceive to be the most effective way. Only 7 per cent of public sector respondents and 13 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed/strongly agreed with the statement “Collaboration with other organisations means that we lose focus on satisfying our target audiences”. Recognition that too much centralised co-ordination would stifle individual agencies and would probably result in unfocused and generic place marketing initiatives led to the belief that more informal or “loose” co-ordination was an appropriate course of action. This was evidenced

547

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

by the widespread use of informal networks and a pragmatic approach to individual agencies leading on some initiatives and following on others. The desire to ensure that particular views were expressed and considered in decision-making processes was a motivation identified by Medway et al. (2000), with specific reference to retailers’ involvement in town centre management schemes. This motive also applied to all actors in this research – 86 per cent of public sector respondents and 87 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed/strongly agreed with the statement “Interaction with other organisations ensures that our organisational interests are more widely represented in the town/city”. The prime motivation for interaction (at least from the public sector perspective) was the financial imperative. Indeed, there was a significant difference between public sector respondents and SCMs regarding the statement “Collaboration with others is essential in leveraging funding” (Pearson chi-square 27.734 DF 3 Sig. 0.000). Here, 89 per cent of public sector respondents agreed/strongly agreed, as compared to 73 per cent of shopping centre managers. It appears, therefore, that the financial imperative impelling interaction is more acute for public sector respondents who rely on funding regimes that require evidence of collaboration, especially with the private sector, as a precondition of obtaining resource to enable marketing initiatives. Tables II and III provide further detail on motives for interaction for public sector respondents and SCMs respectively.

organisations to plan and implement marketing/ promotional activities. There was a significant difference between public sector respondents and SCMs with regard to this (Pearson chi-square 5.044 DF 1 Sig. 0.025), emphasising the overriding importance of interaction to public sector respondents (although interaction is still very important to SCMs). The frequency of interaction with other urban stakeholders by public sector respondents in general and SCMs is given in Table IV. There were significant differences between SCMs and aggregate public sector respondents with regard to the level of interaction with all actor types. Unsurprisingly, the most frequent interactions for SCMs were with TCM schemes and retailers. Despite the diversity of public sector respondents, interaction with retail-oriented stakeholders was important, with interaction with retailers being the most frequent, and interaction with managed shopping centres being the third most frequent interaction. Public sector actors appear to interact with others more frequently to plan and implement marketing activity (although the interaction between the various types of public sector respondent is likely to vary). Table V gives the frequency of interaction of public sector respondent types. From this, the primary and secondary interactions for each of the different respondent types (including shopping centre managers) can be identified, as shown in Table VI. For different public sector respondent types, there are significant differences with regard to the level of interaction with the various urban stakeholders (see Table VII). There are no significant differences by respondent type with regard to interaction with local authority marketing managers, economic development departments, tourism promotion agencies and local urban regeneration agencies. One possible reason for this is the fact that all these

Extent of interaction Actor interaction was identified as an essential dimension of marketing activity. Thus, 98 per cent of public sector respondents and 90 per cent of shopping centre managers (SCMs) surveyed indicated that they interacted with other agencies/

Table II Public sector respondents” perceptions relating to motives for interaction

Statement

Strongly agree/agree

Marketing activities of different organisations in the town/city are interlinked and need to be co-ordinated to get better results (n 5 154) Interaction with other organisations ensures that our organisational interests are more widely represented in the town/city (n 5 154) Collaboration with others is essential in leveraging funding (n 5 153) Note: No significant difference by different type of respondent

548

Percentage of respondents Neither agree Disagree/strongly nor disagree disagree

84

10

6

86

10

4

89

9

3

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Table III Shopping centre managers’ perceptions relating to motives for interaction Percentage of respondents Neither agree Disagree/strongly nor disagree disagree

Strongly agree/agree

Statement Marketing activities of different organisations in the town/city are interlinked and need to be co-ordinated to get better results (n 5 107) Interaction with other organisations ensures that our organisational interests are more widely represented in the town/city (n 5 106) Collaboration with others is essential in leveraging funding (n 5 106)

83

13

4

87

11

2

73

19

8

Table IV Frequency of interaction between respondent types (number of respondents claiming to interact very often/often) Public sector respondents Number of respondents/rank

Urban stakeholders with whom interaction occurs Retailers Local tourism attractions Managed shopping centres Providers of entertainment facilities Local authority marketing department Economic development department Town centre management scheme Local tourism promotion agency Local urban regneration agency Other stakeholders

107 103 102 97 71 71 68 64 51 40

Shopping centre managers Number of respondents/rank

1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10

96 43 N/A 52 52 35 99 44 16 25

2 6 N/A 3 3 7 1 5 8 9

Notes: 14 public sector respondents identified “other” organisations with which they interact to plan and develop marketing/ promotional activities as follows: Accommodation providers (11 respondents); Regeneration partners (7 respondents); Chamber of Commerce (5 respondents); Local businesses (5 respondents); Education institutions (4 respondents); Transport providers (3 respondents); Local media (2 respondents); 14 shopping centre managers identified “other” organisations with which they interact to plan and develop marketing/promotional activities as follows: Chamber of Commerce/Trade (5 respondents); Other shopping centres/ property owners (2 respondents); Transport providers (2 respondents), Local charities (2 respondents); Local education providers (2 respondents)

Table V Frequency of interaction of public sector respondent types (percentage of public sector respondent types indicating interacting very often with listed urban stakeholders)

Economic development department Local authority marketing department Local tourism promotion agency Town centre management respondents Local urban regeneration agency Retailers Managed shopping centres Local tourism attractions Providers of entertainment facilities

Economic development respondents (%)

Local authority marketing respondents (%)

Tourism promotion respondents (%)

Town centre management respondents (%)

– 48 46 33 41 21 35 40 28

61 – 60 74 43 48 50 64 52

39 56 – 42 26 20 29 84 70

44 38 42 – 22 75 79 38 35

respondent types are linked through the local authority structure, thus facilitating interaction. Moreover, the wider regeneration remit of many urban regeneration agencies by its very nature has

the potential to span several urban place product elements, thereby impelling interaction. However, there are differences in interaction, and some indications as to the extent of this can be

549

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Table VI Primary and secondary interactions of different respondent types Interactions

Respondent types

Town centre management respondents Primary interactions Managed shopping centres Retailers Secondary interactions Economic development departments Tourism promotion agencies Local authority marketing departments Local tourism attractions Providers of entertainment facilities Tertiary interactions Local urban regeneration agencies Tourism promotion respondents Primary interactions Secondary interactions

Tertiary interactions

Local tourism attractions Providers of entertainment facilities Local authority marketing departments Town centre management schemes Economic development departments Managed shopping centres Retailers Local urban regeneration agencies

Local authority marketing respondents Primary interactions Town centre management schemes Secondary interactions Local tourism attractions Economic development departments Tourism promotion agencies Tertiary interactions Providers of entertainment facilities Managed shopping centres Retailers Local urban regeneration agencies Economic development respondents Primary interactions

Secondary interactions Tertiary interactions

Shopping centre managers Primary interactions Secondary interactions

Tertiary interactions

Local authority marketing department Tourism promotion agencies Local urban regeneration agencies Local tourism attractions Managed shopping centres Town centre management schemes Providers of entertainment facilities Retailers Town centre management schemes Retailers Local authority marketing departments Providers of entertainment facilities Tourism promotion agencies Local tourism attractions Economic development departments Local urban regeneration agencies

ascertained. Those urban stakeholders whose prime remit is retailing (TCM schemes, managed shopping centres and the retailers themselves) form an obvious group of frequent interactors. Unsurprisingly, the primary interactions for tourism promotion agencies are with local tourism attractions and providers of entertainment facilities. The primary interactions with economic development departments (who in general appear to interact less than other respondent types) seem

to be local authority oriented. The interaction between economic development departments and local tourism attractions can be explained by the fact that many urban areas are not overtly tourism oriented, the responsibility for tourism promotion lies with economic development departments[3]. The primary interaction for local authority marketing departments was with the TCM scheme, perhaps because of the need for these stakeholders to work together in developing marketing/promotional activities because of budgetary constraints and possible synergies in developing such activities as events and festivals in town and city centres. However, marketing departments were only secondary interactors for TCM schemes, whose prime orientation was to specific retail-related stakeholders. Indeed, the centrality of town centre managers in the promotion of the town/city as a shopping destination identified in earlier research (Warnaby et al., 2002) is corroborated here. The close interaction between TCMs and retailers and managed shopping centres is demonstrated by their primary interaction, and the fact that interaction with both retailers and managed shopping centres is only a secondary or tertiary interaction for other public sector respondent types. Nature of interaction Previous exploratory, qualitative research in this area (Warnaby et al., 2002) identified three types of interaction between urban place marketing actors: (1) Formal (or structural) interaction, which could occur at various spatial levels through membership of partnership agencies and steering groups etc. (2) Informal interaction, through participation in local networks and through information sharing with other agencies. (3) Initiative-specific interaction, where agencies came together to develop and implement a particular place marketing initiative and then disbanded. This research investigated the extent and perceived relative importance of each type of interaction through the use of Likert-type scales to ascertain the extent of agreement or disagreement with various statements relating to interaction. The importance of formal interaction is evidenced by the fact that 77 per cent of public sector respondents and 79 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed/strongly agreed with the statement “We interact more formally with other organisations through membership of steering groups/town centre forums etc.”. Public sector respondents were much more likely to agree/ strongly agree with the statement “Representatives

550

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Table VII Differences in frequency of interaction with various urban stakeholders by different public sector respondent types Organisation with whom interaction occurs

Pearson chi-square

Degrees of freedom

Significance

37.012 27.171 20.287 20.134 10.197 7.222 3.686 4.308 2.855

6 6 6 6 2 4 3 4 4

0.000 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.006 0.124 0.297 0.366 0.582

Retailers Managed shopping centres Providers of entertainment facilities Local tourism attractions Town centre management scheme Economic development departmenta Urban regeneration agencya Tourism promotion agencya Local authority marketing departmenta Note: a No significant difference by respondent type

from other organisations have an important input into our marketing planning process” (Pearson chi-square 40.552 DF 3 Sig. 0.000) than were shopping centre managers. This reflects the more inclusive nature of marketing/promotional planning processes among public sector respondents, where, for example, steering groups providing strategic direction to public sector and quasi-public sector stakeholders will have private sector representation, but this level of involvement does not appear to be reciprocated. A common trend was for cross-membership of steering groups by key individuals within a particular urban place. The importance of such individuals is evidenced by the fact that 72 per cent of public sector respondents and 74 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that there existed “a few ‘movers and shakers’ who facilitate the co-ordination of the activities of different organisations”. In the specific retail context, shopping centre managers were perceived to be among the “movers and shakers” (Warnaby et al., 2002). As important as the formal interaction was the informal interaction between actors. Indeed, 83 per cent of public sector respondents and 89 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed/strongly agreed with that statement that “Informal interaction between organisations is as important as formal interaction in achieving our objectives”. This was regarded as an effective way of ensuring there was no duplication in activities and also, crucially, that information was shared. Much urban place marketing activity is initiative-specific in the sense that an initiative is planned and implemented as a discrete activity, with one particular agency taking the lead in planning and implementing the activity, but with support from other agencies in a partnership modus operandi. Funding for marketing activities is frequently initiative-specific in the sense that funding contributions are “ring-fenced” for that particular activity. Indeed, the importance of this

initiative-specific approach is shown by the fact that 92 per cent of public sector respondents and 94 per cent of shopping centre managers agreed/ strongly agreed with the statement “My organisation will lead on some initiatives and support another organisation on other initiatives”. In the context of the promotion of the retail provision, seasonal festivals and events were a common element in the marketing mix, and these were normally organised through smaller working parties etc. Given the extent to which all these types of interaction occurred between respondents, the need for some measure of coordination is crucial. However, in the majority of locations surveyed it would appear that the mechanisms for coordination are informal. The fact that 66 per cent of public sector respondents and 64 per cent of shopping centre managers disagreed/strongly disagreed with the statement “In my town/city there is one organisation whose remit is to oversee and co-ordinate the marketing activity of all the others”, suggests that more formalised mechanisms for co-ordination do not exist. More informal co-ordination in the form of a negotiated arrangement between agencies relating to who will lead specific marketing initiatives appears much more prevalent. Table VIII and Table IX respectively provide further detail of responses of public sector respondents and shopping centre managers relating to their perceptions of the nature of interaction.

Discussion Retail-related interaction: hierarchical considerations? One of the key themes in the place marketing literature is the complex nature of the urban place product (Ashworth, 1993; Ashworth and Voogd, 1990a, 1990b, 1994; Paddison, 1993; van den Berg et al., 1990; van den Berg and Braun, 1999; Ward and Gold, 1994); van den Berg and Braun

551

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Table VIII Public sector respondents’ perceptions regarding the nature of the interaction between stakeholders Percentage of respondents Strongly Neither agree Disagree/strongly agree/agree nor disagree disagree

Statement Representatives from other organisations have an important input into our marketing planning process (n 5 153) In my town/city there is one organisation whose remit is to oversee and co-ordinate the marketing activities of all the others (n 5 153) Collaboration with other organisations means that we lose focus on satisfying our target audiences (n 5 153) My organisation will lead on some initiatives and support another organisation on other initiatives (n 5 153) There is a well-established informal network of members of marketing organisations in the town/city (n 5 153) There are a few “movers and shakers” who facilitate the co-ordination of activities of different organizations (n 5 153) We interact more formally with other organisations through membership of steering groups/town centre forums etc. (n 5 152) Informal interaction between organisations is as important as formal interaction in achieving our objectives (n 5 153) We only collaborate with other organisations to plan and implement specific initiatives on an irregular basis (n 5 152)

78

11

12

15

19

66

7

25

68

92

3

5

59

18

23

72

14

14

77

13

10

83

11

7

19

17

64

Note: There was no significant difference between public sector respondent types

Table IX Shopping centre managers’ perceptions regarding the nature of the interaction between stakeholders Percentage of respondents Strongly Neither agree Disagree/strongly agree/agree nor disagree disagree

Statement Representatives from other organisations have an important input into our marketing planning process (n 5 108) In my town/city there is one organisation whose remit is to oversee and co-ordinate the marketing activities of all the others (n 5 108) Collaboration with other organisations means that we lose focus on satisfying our target audiences (n 5 108) My centre will lead on some initiatives and support another organisation on other initiatives (n 5 108) There is a well-established informal network of members of marketing organisations in the town/city (n 5 108) There are a few “movers and shakers” who facilitate the co-ordination of activities of different organizations (n 5 108) We interact more formally with other organisations through membership of steering groups/town centre forums etc. (n 5 108) Informal interaction between organisations is as important as formal interaction in achieving our objectives (n 5 108) We only collaborate with other organisations to plan and implement specific initiatives on an irregular basis (n 5 106)

(1999) identify three levels of urban place marketing, relating to the nature of the urban place product, as follows: (1) The individual urban goods and services, where marketing is concerned with the marketing of one location, service, attraction etc.(which can be retail-related,

552

46

30

24

25

11

64

13

25

62

94

4

3

57

19

23

74

14

12

79

15

6

89

9

2

20

23

58

such as an individual shop or managed shopping centre). (2) The clusters of related services, such as urban tourism or port facilities (or, indeed, the overall retail provision). (3) The urban agglomeration as a whole, which (unlike the previous categories) is in itself not

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

a well-defined product and is, as a consequence, open to various interpretations. This third level is mainly concerned with identity and image building. The interrelationships within and between these different levels of the place product can facilitate the development of a more “holistic” urban place product (which is made up of various contributory elements and clusters of elements). This will impel interaction – formal, informal or initiative-specific – between all the various urban place marketing actors in order to develop effective marketing and promotional activities. However, as has been shown, not all actors will collaborate all the time and there are inevitably clusters of stakeholders (perhaps closely related to clusters of individual place product elements) who will interact more frequently. Thus, the research reported here has identified a group of retail-related urban stakeholders who will work closely together to develop retail-related marketing/promotional activities. These retail related actors will also interact (albeit less frequently and perhaps more loosely) with other urban stakeholders (such as economic development departments and tourism promotion agencies) for whom retailing is only a secondary element of their marketing remit. Table VI provided an indication of the primary and secondary interactions of the various actors, and this is represented pictorially in Figure 1. The research reported here has focused on the interaction of urban stakeholders to implement retail-related marketing/promotional activities at the aggregate town/city scale for urban shopping destinations ranked as “sub-regional” and above in the Management Horizons Europe UK Shopping Index MHE, 1998. Of course, there are many more destinations that are classified as “district” or “local” – 902 such destinations are classified by MHE (1998). Moreover, there may also be neighbourhoods not so classified that may have their own unique identities as ethnic or youthoriented retail “quarters” of the kind described by Brown (1991) in his non-hierarchical classification of retail locations. Such “district” and “local” destinations, and quarters, could be regarded as “clusters” within an holistic retail provision for the urban place as a whole (following van den Berg and Braun, 1999), which falls under the aegis of the public sector local authority actors who have been surveyed in this research. Indeed, the onus is being increasingly placed on local authorities to incorporate the strategic development of such centres in local level plans. The recent consultation on Draft Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 6 emphasises this issue:

Local planning authorities should adopt a positive and proactive approach to planning for the future of centres within their areas, whether planning for growth, consolidation or decline. Drawing on both the regional spatial strategy and their community strategies, local planning authorities should set out a vision and strategy for the pattern and hierarchy of centres, including local centres, within their area, setting out how the role of different centres will contribute to the overall vision for their area (ODPM, 2003, p. 11).

Indeed, Draft PPS6 highlights the importance of local centres: Larger centres have in the past been the focus for development and investment, but local planning authorities should ensure that a more balanced network of centres develops within their area. In particular, they should strengthen local centres by ensuring that there is a range of facilities in local centres, consistent with the scale and function of the centre, to meet people’s day-to-day needs and to promote social inclusion (ODPM, 2003, p. 16).

The importance placed on the issue of district and local centres is reinforced by the proposed publication of accompanying guidance to the Draft PPS 6 on “Strategies for Smaller Centres”. There are potentially significant implications for the promotion of such neighbourhood retailing by stakeholders at the local level. District and local centres (as well as retail “quarters”) fall within the explicit remit of many of the local authority stakeholders described above. Consequently, they will be a contributory element of the retail provision that is being marketed at a more aggregated, “holistic” level. Indeed, specific retail “quarters” having their own distinct and unique identity may be the subject of particular focus by these urban place marketing actors seeking to differentiate the overall retail provision for a town or city. The identification of such distinct quarters (especially within the context of the evening economy) is explicitly mentioned in Draft PPS6, as is the development of choice and diversity in the retail provision (for example, via street and covered markets). As a result, actors in these quarters may find leveraging resources for marketing and other improvement initiatives focusing on these aspects of the retail provision easier than they might have expected. Among public sector actors, prime responsibility for the promotion of the retail provision generally lies with the town centre manager. For many town centre managers (especially those employed by, or working under the aegis of, the local authority), the promotion of district and neighbourhood centres is already an explicit part of their remit in order to detract (possibly politically motivated) criticism that such outlying retail areas are being ignored. Thus, the types of interaction described above at an

553

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Figure 1 Actor interaction for urban place product elements with particular reference to retailing

aggregate town/city level may provide the context for possible initiatives at a neighbourhood level. Consequently, local level stakeholders seeking to implement marketing/promotional activities may find that they are pushing at an open door when trying to attract commitment from urban stakeholders (especially those from the public sector) who are operating at this wider spatial scale. Governance considerations? This research may also provide some guidance in terms of partnership formation and modus operandi at the neighbourhood level in this retail context. The importance of co-ordination between, and consensus among, urban stakeholders has been emphasised. This co-ordination can be achieved formally, via representation on various steering and working groups within the urban place. At an aggregate town/city level this formal interaction is encouraged through the establishment of an

appropriate infrastructure at an early stage in partnership development. Indeed, actors at the neighbourhood level seeking to interact with these place marketing actors with a wider spatial remit will most likely have to become part of these formal groups if their interests are to be effectively represented in these wider fora. Indeed Draft PPS6 explicitly emphasises the need for “involving the local community and retailers in drawing up local strategies to ensure that planned new facilities will genuinely meet local needs” (ODPM, 203, p. 16). However, the potential problems of the partnership modus operandi are various, as discussed above. Informal interaction can ameliorate these problems. The building of informal networks can be as effective as more formal interaction in ensuring that coordination does occur. Given the gaps between meetings of wider steering groups, informal interaction is very important for the day-to-day management of the

554

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

marketing/promotional activities of urban places. This is especially so considering the need for flexibility and opportunism identified in this context (Warnaby et al., 2002). Indeed, at the neighbourhood level such informal interaction may be even more important as the scale of operations is narrower and the various actors concerned may meet and interact much more frequently because of their proximity to one another. Moreover, the presentation of a “united front” (via previous informal interaction and conflict resolution) by representatives at the local level may be more effective in achieving results and/or resource in more formal partnership fora at the wider spatial scales. Given the importance of initiative-specific interaction to develop marketing activities in this context, the process of developing an interaction infrastructure (if it does not exist, or is ineffective) may begin with periodic ad hoc interaction aimed at achieving more limited promotional initiatives. Success in this could then lead to the development of ongoing interaction mechanisms to develop more extensive and effective, more strategicallyoriented marketing initiatives over time in an incremental way. A more inclusive approach is, therefore, gradually adopted. A key element in this will be the development of what can be called “internal” marketing to those individuals, agencies and organisations from both public and private sectors within the urban place who are potential funders and supporters. The focus of this activity will be to keep these stakeholders informed of activities and successes in order to ensure continuing and increased participation. Again, proximity of individual actors at the neighbourhood level may facilitate this process and allow for a more informal approach than would otherwise be the case.

specific – are relevant. However, given the proximity of actors at this level, there may be greater scope for a more overtly informal approach which may serve to overcome some of the problems of the partnership modus operandi that exist at wider spatial scales.

Conclusion In conclusion, the potential benefits of partnership – increased resources, increased effectiveness and efficiency, and greater legitimacy (McQuaid, 2002) – can all be equally applicable at the neighbourhood level. Many of the results of this research into interaction to promote retail provision at the aggregate town/city level are of equal relevance for neighbourhoods. Indeed, following the publication of the Draft PPS6, wider town/city oriented marketing/promotional initiatives will in the future increasingly provide a context within which the promotion of retailing for specific neighbourhoods may be nested. At the neighbourhood level all the different types of interaction – formal, informal and initiative-

Notes 1 The Management Horizons Europe Shopping Index rates towns and major shopping centres using a weighted scoring system which takes into account each location’s provision of non-food multiple retailers and anchor store strength. 2 The MHE Shopping Index lists 192 destinations within these four categories. However, various destinations were excluded for the purposes of this study: some destinations were either specific streets/districts in London (e.g. Oxford Street, Kings Road, Covent Garden etc.) or were regional shopping centres. 3 For 25 of the 173 destinations in the research, the same person was listed as being responsible for both economic development and tourism promotion in the sample frames used from the Municipal Directory. The same factor emerged to a lesser extent in relation to local authority marketing departments, where in four destinations the same person was listed in the Municipal Directory as having responsibility for both promotion of the area for tourism and marketing for the local authority. None of these four destinations was particularly tourism-oriented.

References Ashworth, G. (1993), “Marketing of places: what are we doing?”, in Ave, G. and Corsico, F. (Eds), Urban Marketing in Europe, Torino Incontra, Turin, pp. 643-9. Ashworth, G. and Voogd, H. (1990a), Selling the City, Belhaven, London. Ashworth, G.J. and Voogd, H. (1990b), “Can places be sold for tourism?”, in Ashworth, G. and Goodall, B. (Eds), Marketing Tourism Places, Routledge, London, pp. 1-16. Ashworth, G.J. and Voogd, H. (1994), “Marketing and place promotion”, in Gold, J.R. and Ward, S.V. (Eds), Place Promotion: The Use of Publicity and Marketing to Sell Towns and Regions, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, pp. 39-52. Association of Town Centre Management (1994), The Effectiveness of Town Centre Management, Association of Town Centre Management, London. Bassett, K. (1993), “Urban cultural strategies and urban regeneration: a case study and critique”, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 25, pp. 1775-88. Boyle, M. (1997), “Civic boosterism and the politics of local economic development – ‘institutional positions’ and ‘strategic orientations’ in the consumption of hallmark events”, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 29, pp. 1975-97. Brown, S. (1991), “Retail location: the post-hierarchical challenge”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 267-81.

555

People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Gary Warnaby, David Bennison, Barry J. Davies and Howard Hughes

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 545-556

Building Design Partnership (2002), Building Design Partnership Urban Design for Retail Environments, British Council of Shopping Centres, London. Burgess, J. (1982), “Selling places: environmental images for the executive”, Regional Studies, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 1-17. English Historic Towns Forum (1992), Retailing in Historic Towns – Research Study 1992, English Historic Towns Forum, Canterbury. Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (1996), “The entrepreneurial city: new urban politics, new urban geographies?”, Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 153-74. Hubbard, P. and Hall, T. (1998), “The entrepreneurial city and the ‘new urban politics’”, in Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (Eds), The Entrepreneurial City: Geographies of Politics, Regimes and Representations, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 1-23. Hutton, W. (2002), “Put the cities in charge”, The Observer, 7 July, Special feature on Urban Regeneration, p. 1. Jones, P., Hillier, D. and Comfort, D. (2003), “The heart of the matter”, Town and Country Planning, Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 20-2. Kotler, P., Asplund, C., Rein, I. and Haider, D. (1999), Marketing Places Europe: Attracting Investments, Industries, and Visitors to European Cities, Communities, Regions and Nations, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, Harlow. McQuaid, R.W. (2002), “The theory of partnership. Why have partnerships?”, in Osborne, S.P. (Ed.), Public-Private Partnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective, Routledge, London, pp. 9-35. Management Horizons Europe (1998), Management Horizons Europe UK Shopping Index 1998-1999, Management Horizons Europe, Woodford Green. Medway, D., Warnaby, G., Bennison, D. and Alexander, A. (2000), “Reasons for retailers’ involvement in town centre management”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 368-78. Millington, S., Young, C. and Lever, J. (1997), “A bibliography of city marketing”, The Journal of Regional and Local Studies, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 16-42. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2003), Consultation on Draft Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres, available at: http://odpm.gov.uk/stellnet/groups/ odpm_planning/documents/page/odpm_plan026232. hcsp. Paddison, R. (1993), “City marketing, image reconstruction and urban regeneration”, Urban Studies, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 339-50. Page, S. (1995), Urban Tourism, Routledge, London. Parkinson, M. (1996), “Twenty-five years of urban policy in Britain – partnership, entrepreneurialism or competition?”, Public Money & Management, July-September, pp. 7-14.

Peck, J. (1995), “Moving and shaking: business elites, state localism and urban privatism”, Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 16-46. Peck, J. and Tickell, A. (1994), “Too many partners . . . the future for regeneration partnerships”, Local Economy, Vol. 9, pp. 251-65. Sadler, D. (1993), “Place marketing, competitive places and the construction of hegemony in Britain in the 1980s”, in Kearns, G. and Philo, C. (Eds), Selling Places: The City as Cultural Capital Past and Present, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 175-92. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2000), Research Methods for Business Students, 2nd ed., Financial Times/ Prentice Hall, Harlow. Shaw, G. and Williams, A. (1992), “Tourism, development and the environment: the eternal triangle”, in Cooper, C.P. and Lockwood, A. (Eds), Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality Management, Vol. 4, Belhaven, London, pp. 47-59. van den Berg, L. and Braun, E. (1999), “Urban competitiveness, marketing and the need for organising capacity”, Urban Studies, Vol. 36 No. 5-6, pp. 987-99. van den Berg, L., Klaassen, L.H. and van der Meer, J. (1990), Marketing Metropolitan Regions, European Institute for Comparative Urban Research, Rotterdam. Ward, S.V. (1998), Selling Places: The Marketing and Promotion of Towns and Cities 1850-2000, E. & F.N. Spon, London. Ward, S.V. and Gold, J.R. (1994), “Introduction”, in Gold, J.R. and Ward, S.V. (Eds), Place Promotion: The Use of Publicity and Marketing to Sell Towns and Regions, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 1-17. Warnaby, G. (2003), “The marketing of urban places with specific reference to retailing”, unpublished PhD thesis, Retail Management, Subject Group, The Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester. Warnaby, G., Bennison, D., Davies, B.J. and Hughes, H. (2002), “Marketing UK towns and cities as shopping destinations”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 18 No. 9-10, pp. 877-904. Wilkinson, S. (1992), “Towards a new city? A case study of image-improvement initiatives in Newcastle Upon Tyne”, in Healey, P., Davoudi, S., O’Toole, M., Tavsangolu, S. and Usher, D. (Eds), Rebuilding the City: Property-Led Urban Regeneration, E. & F.N. Spon, London, pp. 174-211. Williams, C.C. (1992), “The contribution of regional shopping centres to local economic development: threat or opportunity?”, Area, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 289-94. Williams, C.C. (1996), “Rethinking the role of retailing and consumer services in local economic development: a British perspective”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 53-7.

556

Introduction

Market towns – victims of market forces?

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm

Market towns in the UK have historically played a major role in shaping community-based retail activity, yet a commonly held view has developed that the dynamic drivers for retailing and economic growth generation have moved “onwards and upwards” to another level. Market forces, as typified by “bigger is better” superstores and out-of-town retail developments, have sometimes been perceived to be leaving market towns as sleepy backwaters with little to offer – either to the consumers in the local community or the more concentrated number of national retailers. Many small towns have also been facing pressure to maintain a role as centres for both the town’s residents and those in the smaller settlements of their hinterland, yet in practice they have often been experiencing comparative economic decline. Increasing numbers of people living in such towns and rural areas have chosen to “outshop” by travelling to larger scale, and more distant, shopping centres when shopping for food in bulk and seeking perceived benefits of wider choice, easy parking, lower prices and amenities offered by retail complexes (Guy, 1990). Although the relationships are complex, retailing plays an important part in the mix of socio-economic, legislative and geographical factors that drive the viability of market towns – as noted by the National Market Towns Advisory Forum (Action for Market Towns, 2002) in its advice to the Countryside Agency, stating that retailing: . contributes to the vitality and vibrancy of the town centre through shaping the focus of activity and physical appearance; . supports local employment; . acts as a catalyst for strengthening the sense of community; and . provides a range of added-value public and private sector services for those people who cannot easily shop further afield – counteracting the risk of “food deserts” or populated areas with little or no food retail provision (Wrigley et al., 2003; Cummins and Macintyre, 1999).

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · pp. 557-568 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0959-0552 DOI 10.1108/09590550410564782

The impact of retailing in this context has been further shaped by the spread of supermarkets to smaller market towns, driven by major operators responding to market saturation in larger centres. Although government planning regulations (such as PPG6) have favoured town and district centres for retail developments, the centres of market towns have often been seen as less suitable for their large-scale formats – and limited out-of-town development has occurred. However, despite some

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

The authors Mike Phillips is a Senior Lecturer and Chris Swaffin-Smith is a Director, both at the Centre for Business Transformation, Ashcroft International Business School, Chelmsford, UK.

Keywords Markets, Rural economies, Local government finance, Balanced scorecard, England

Abstract The importance of the role played by market towns in the vitality of rural England has become increasingly recognised in recent years, and has attracted considerable attention from government development agencies in support of major public policy initiatives. The example of the East of England Development Agency’s Market Town Initiative is used to review recent approaches to market town partnerships and their links with retailing activity within the context of town centre management. The paper concludes by suggesting possible mechanisms to support market town partnership initiatives in achieving sustainability once the public funding stream ends – as the potential basis for a future research agenda in this area.

Electronic access The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

557

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

criticisms, these planning rules have been significant in raising the profile of the issue of “vitality and viability” for existing town centres (Fernie, 1997; Guy and Bennison, 2002). This has been further reinforced for market towns (defined by the Countryside Agency (2003) as towns having a population between 2,000 and 20,000) with UK government initiatives in recent years recognising their central role in regenerating rural areas (Powe and Shaw, 2003). Notable among these government policy statements have been those deriving from the Rural White Paper Our Countryside: The Future (DETR, 2000) and an earlier DoE report on the impact of large foodstores (DETR, 1998). One of the outcomes has been the development of the Market Towns Initiative (MTI) by the Countryside Agency (2003), which has sought to equip market towns with the resources and methodologies to be more proactive in their own development. The MTI has adopted a partnership-based approach that sits within conventional definitions of town centre management (TCM) schemes (Warnaby et al., 1998; Healey and Baker, 1994), yet examples from the east of England indicate a broader community view that suggests a wider scope in practice. This paper seeks to explore some of the TCM research issues raised by Warnaby et al. (1998), in the context of MTI’s operating in the east of England since March 2001 – including issues of the impact of different stakeholder interests in partnership-based schemes, the involvement of retailers in the development of TCM structures and identifying areas for future research in market towns.

Specific research into the impact of the arrival of superstore developments into small town locations has tended to focus on work conducted in the USA (Arnold and Luthra, 2000; Brennan and Lundsten, 2000; Davidson and Rummel, 2000; Seinders et al., 2000). However, while these studies looked at the effect of new Wal-Mart stores in towns with population of under 25,000, the historical development and socio-economic context of the towns is completely different from that of UK market towns, especially those within the east of England. These US studies did, however, provide some pointers towards possible retailer action for towns to deal with the challenge of out-of-town stores – particularly the limitations of responses such as price-cutting or expanded product ranges (where the superstores have a stronger competitive position), compared to more effective service differentiation strategies. The marketing and promotion of towns and town centre shopping areas through different strategic approaches, in response to the aggressive expansion of large-scale retailers and out-of-town centres, has attracted more widespread attention through specific UK case studies. In their study of TCM schemes in the northwest of England and North Wales, Pal and Sanders (1997) noted that the reasons for towns adopting a TCM scheme were driven more by increased competition from neighbouring centres than from pressures of outof-town developments. Furthermore, within these competitive drivers for TCM schemes, there could also be subsets of defensive as well as offensive competitive orientation – as identified by Warnaby et al. (1998). Among more creative marketing approaches that have been tried are schemes to implement loyalty cards to create differentiation and minimise “leakage” of local shoppers through creation of a clear economic advantage to shop in the market town. Hallsworth and Worthington (2000) identified that although a number of such schemes had been implemented in market towns – including Leominster, Market Drayton, St Andrews and Ulverston – these had only limited long-term impact. Their detailed examination of the Leominster loyalty card scheme concluded that despite being retailer-led (and involving a low-cost/ low-technology approach), it was compromised by lacking differentiation from the schemes of national food retailers and it soon lost its novelty value in the eyes of the consumer. The Leominster case also illustrated one of the common issues facing such approaches – namely, that any response from a market town is dependent on gaining consensus and commitment from a number of independent retailers, who are probably

Background Research into the dynamics of change affecting town centres in the UK has been typified by a focus on the different approaches taken to TCM, with the development of typologies of TCM by Warnaby et al. (1998) and more recent work anticipating the forthcoming introduction of the Business Improvement District (BID) concept in the UK (Hogg et al., 2003). Literature on the application of TCM within the context of market towns had been relatively limited prior to the case study of Achmore (Paddison, 2003), which illustrated the formative stages of TCM development within a market town – including examples of the strategic business planning, infrastructure, funding, marketing and management issues faced in such situations.

558

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

not accustomed to working collectively – even if there is a “common enemy” to pull them together. Dennis et al. (2002) and Warnaby et al. (2002) have also looked at the marketing of UK towns as shopping destinations. Although not specifically looking at market towns, they identified that a “special type of marketing” is needed to cope with the mix of private and public sector interests, as well as the complex web of interlocking formal and informal relationships of stakeholders. With only limited human and financial resources available, market towns are also unlikely to develop sophisticated marketing activity for the town as a shopping destination without access to specialist expertise. Although the majority of TCM literature has not focused on market towns, it does provide a stimulus for research issues that are relevant for the context of market towns in the east of England: . The suggestion by the Association of Town Centre Management (cited by Warnaby et al., 1998) that such TCM schemes pass through four life-stages of “conception”, “infancy”, “growth” and “maturity” (characterised by a declining role for the public authority as partnerships become more formalised with private sector involvement). The question of the relative “life stage” (linking to the concept of a “product life cycle”) for the market town could also be seen in a broader context of the town’s life cycle relative to its competitive economic environment. . The temporal context of the market town’s development in response to external pressures – what has changed over time? Most studies have taken a “snapshot” or retrospective view – in practice a period of over two years may be needed to assess the full impact of a new outof-town store. . The effect of geographical context – the town’s hinterland catchment area can have significant influence (depending on the number of villages, their total population, concentration/spread, and communication links), and proximity of other nearby towns. . The mix of national brand versus local/ regional/family retailers operating in the market town and its impact on the town’s economy. Does this impact on co-ordinated action through partnership, versus that of individual retailers?

Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Suffolk and Norfolk. Some 247, out of a total 1,000 market towns in the whole of England (DETR 2000), lie within this region, yet there are no major cities acting as a counterbalance. Studies, such as those by Lockwood (1999), have noted that larger regional towns such as Cambridge (population 108,879 – Census, 2001), Chelmsford (157,053), Ipswich (117,074), Norwich (121,553) and Peterborough (156,060) act more as local hubs (Census, 2001). The issues identified within the Rural White Paper, and subsequent policy initiatives generated by the Countryside Agency, created a stimulus for the East of England Development Agency (EEDA), to introduce its own regional Market Town Initiative (MTI) in March 2001. A funding package of £5 million over a three-year period was established, for capital and revenue projects, and channeled towards the 20 towns listed in Table I. The MTI selection criteria for these towns was based on the town completing a “Healthcheck” questionnaire developed by the Countryside Agency (2002) from criteria identified in the Rural White Paper. This included a range of parameters, such as: diversity of the town’s economic base; attractiveness of the centres’ environment; security; retail and other business activity; accessibility; and community involvement. Each of the towns was required to organise its funding bid via an umbrella organisation providing a focal point for activity – some of which existed previously (including district council economic development officers), but most of which were established specifically for the purpose of the MTI application. These organisations became the precursors for what were to become MTI partnerships once the activity commenced.

East of England market town initiative Market towns have a particularly strong significance within the east of England region – encompassing the counties of Bedfordshire,

Research methodology The research study involved parallel activities of desk research alongside a series of interviews/ meetings with stakeholders in the market towns and funding bodies. In addition to a review of academic literature, desk research examined the latest delivery plan documents for each of the MTI towns covering the third year of the MTI (April 2003 – March 2004) that had been submitted to EEDA for approval. Although this approach had methodological limitations, in its focus on specific project funding applications, it provided some important insights to the individual MTI’s: . The structure of plans identified the involvement of stakeholders in the

559

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

Table I Towns participating in the EEDA market town initiative County

Town

Cambridgeshire

Chatteris Ely March Whittlesey Wisbech Brightlingsea Harwich Manningtree Walton-on-the-Naze Aylsham Diss Downham market East Dereham Harleston Watton Beccles Brandon Debenham Wickham market Woodbridge

Essex

Norfolk

Suffolk

Interview

Questionnaire response

Salaried TCM/ co-coordinator Ua

U

Ua Ua Ua

U U U U

U U U

U U

U U U

Ub Ub

U

U

Ub

U U

U U U

Ub

Notes: a MTI co-ordinator employed on a fixed-term contract by district council (responsible for two MTI towns each); U b MTI co-ordinator employed on a fixed-term contract (exp. April 2004) by district council

.

.

.

.

“partnership” organisation and their relative prioritisation of issues. The development of strategies for each town and the consistency of delivery plans with these over time. The history of specific projects already implemented in the towns. An indication of how the partnerships envisaged sustainability of their work on termination of direct EEDA funding in 2004. The existence of any retail-specific actions, together with promotional material published by the towns (for example, brochures, leaflets, Web sites, etc).

One-to-one interviews were also conducted with MTI co-ordinators for ten of the towns (see Table I for details of respondents) to gain a fuller understanding of the practical implications of their role. These interviews identified the respondents’ learning over the course of the MTI, best practice ideas and how these might be developed to add value to future sustainability. This was supported by a questionnaire survey sent to all MTI coordinators by e-mail and/or post – with a response from ten MTIs (see Table I for details of respondents). This focused on specific issues of partnership structure and retail activity profiling to establish more consistent baseline data for comparison purposes and address information gaps in the delivery plan documents, rather than for creating case study examples. However, the

twin track approach of interviews and questionnaire survey enabled the research to capture limited qualitative data on partnerships’ TCM experience, as well as quantitative information – although these benefits were offset by response rate and its “snapshot in time” nature constraining views of temporal change.

Findings From this research a range of issues have been identified concerning the development of MTIs in the east of England, which can be consolidated into four thematic areas: Partnerships and People (who); Vision and Strategy (what and when); MTI Process (how it developed); Sustainability (how the vision could be maintained). The possible relationship between these is shown in Figure 1.

1. Partnership and people – composition and structure The structure of the individual partnerships varied considerably, with differing levels of involvement from local government versus voluntary and commercial sectors – with the dynamics having a fundamental influence on the vibrancy and vision of the MTI partnership. The mix of stakeholder participants for the questionnaire sample set of MTI partnerships can be seen in Table II.

560

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

As might be expected, local government representatives (district, local and county councils) formed a significant element of the membership of most partnerships – with an average of 29 per cent of the partnership body, but as high as 47 per cent (although there was one MTI with no public sector representation). Given that local government authorities acted not only as the conduits for EEDA funding, but also as potential co-funders of projects, their proportionately large representation is not surprising. However, the largest stakeholder group on the MTI partnerships was the voluntary sector (for example, town associations, schools, and individuals), averaging 37 per cent of the partnerships – and in one case two thirds of the partnerships. This perhaps reflects a high degree of civic pride and sense of “ownership” felt by individuals within the towns that “something

should be done” to protect the character of the MTI towns. Interestingly, the level of participation from local/district councils was not necessarily viewed as having a positive impact. For some towns, the involvement of the district council was seen as having significant tangible benefits, such as funding for a full/part-time co-ordinator or access to economic development and planning skills (for example, in Aylsham). However, for others it was initially seen as being “more interference” by local bureaucracy, until potential benefits became clearer. In the case of Wisbech, this latter perception took over 12 months to reverse in order to involve stakeholders in more positive engagement and contribution. In terms of private sector involvement in MTI partnerships, retailers and business in general were less well represented (averaging 9 per cent representation) – and in three out of the nine towns returning information there was no retail sector representation on the partnership. This indicates a contradictory position for retailers and local businesses with a stake in enhancing the economic vitality of market towns, yet being unable to come to terms with collaborative activities of this nature. The competitive nature of such business communities can make it difficult to share a common vision, unless a more direct threat (such as a new out-of-town superstore) acts as a catalyst or common enemy. One of the recurrent issues across the interviews with MTI co-ordinators was that it was difficult to get retailers involved in MTI meetings and activities, and even more difficult to achieve consensus among them. Such group dynamics do not bode well for the potential introduction of business improvement districts (BIDs) in smaller market towns – where the principles of financial contributions could have a greater impact for both

Figure 1

Table II EEDA MTI towns partnership member profile

Aylsham Beccles Community Reach Debenham Stour Valley Walton-on-the-Naze Whittlesey Wickham Market Wisbech Woodbridge Average (No.) (%)

Town council (%)

District council (%)

County council (%)

Sub-total public (%)

Voluntary (%)

Retail (%)

Business (%)

Other (%)

Total (No.)

10 0 8 27 43 19 13 0 13

5 20 17 7 0 19 13 0 8

5 0 8 13 0 6 0 0 4

20 20 33 47 43 44 25 0 25

25 40 25 33 43 13 50 67 42

5 20 0 13 7 13 13 0 13

20 0 25 0 7 13 13 0 4

30 20 17 7 0 19 0 33 17

20 5 12 15 14 16 8 6 24

3 15

2 10

1 4

29

5 37

2 9

2 9

3 16

561

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

the individual retailer and BID initiative (Hogg et al., 2003). Furthermore, the relative lack of involvement from retailers could preclude opportunities to leverage benefits from the MTI. Not only is retail a key economic driver for towns, generating income and employment, but also physically shapes the persona and character of the town centre – which is at the core of many of the strategies and visions pursued by the MTIs. However, where efforts have been made by MTI co-ordinators to broaden and deepen the involvement of retailers through personal intervention, such as in Aylsham and Beccles, positive benefits have accrued in aspects such as reduced vacancy rates. The mix of partnership structures identified in the sample can be mapped onto the framework for TCM activity scope and organisational facility that was proposed by Warnaby et al. (1998). The resultant mapping, as shown in Figure 2, displays more hybrid characteristics than identified in the original typology with a skew towards the discretionary origin of funding reflecting the EEDA funds allocation. Although the “formal” partnership membership had a strong public sector bias, the day-to-day operational co-ordinator’s role was generally carried out by an individual with previous experience in retail management or as a town centre manager (in larger town centres). This created potential cultural conflict with local government operation style, yet facilitated empathy with retailers to offset this.

Consequently, the actual execution of projects fell on the shoulders of key individuals – MTI/ partnership co-ordinators, project managers, town centre managers, etc. – often with limited resources to support their activities. Thus, the perceived success and progress of an MTI can depend heavily on personal traits of the individual undertaking a “shaper” role requiring attributes including leadership, diplomacy, selling skills, planning, political intuition, commitment/ dedication, project management, vision, and persuasiveness. Those MTIs with strong individuals, or with depth of support, appear to have a much higher likelihood of achieving the goals they set out to achieve. Possessing the ability to disengage from immediate practical issues (such as who is responsible for watering the hanging baskets!) and taking a more holistic view to integrating activities, and engaging stakeholders with the central issues of strategy development and implementation, are important skills that a partnership requires. Equally, personality has an influence here, as the coordinator also needs to be a diplomat as well as having a feel for the vagaries of local history and politics. The experience of the EEDA MTI towns also reflected that of Leominster (Hallsworth and Worthington, 2000) with potential risks from overreliance on the contribution of one key individual. This issue was emphasised by funding constraints inherent with the EEDA MTIs, as the co-ordinator’s position was frequently part-time or combined with responsibilities – often with only two-three days per week available in practice for “full-time” issues. Although the commitment and dedication of individuals often meant that activity levels were “flexed” to achieve required tasks, this perhaps creates a pressure point weakness for the potential effectiveness of MTIs

2.Partnership and people – organisation style and role of individuals Clarity of leadership, with empathy for the town’s key issues (and politics, in the broadest sense), can also contribute significantly to the MTI outcomes. As with any collaborative project-based organisation, MTI partnership effectiveness is dependent on the dynamics of their membership, with a range of stakeholder backgrounds, perspectives, agendas, and perhaps vested interests. The mix of personalities also played a part, and it was clear that strong individuals could have a positive impact in the role of co-ordinator. In particular, shaping the MTI vision and turning this into a practical reality to effectively engage a broad cross-section of the town can be central to stimulating a vibrant market town, with good examples of this in Aylsham, Brightlingsea and Walton-on-the-Naze. In practice MTI partnerships tended to act more as steering groups rather than actual management teams with day-to-day responsibilities (due to the part-time or voluntary roles resulting from limited funding).

3.Vision and strategy The research found that definition and ownership of the vision and strategy created by MTIs was often constrained by limited prior experience in such activities, particularly in towns with less district council involvement or commercial sector exposure. Consequently, many towns struggled to create integrated and holistic strategies that could be translated into practical action plans. For some towns this was also connected to the original Healthcheck survey analysis carried out prior to involvement in the MTI scheme. Some MTI participants viewed this activity as a “tick box exercise” to obtain EEDA cash, rather than being a planning tool for future use. Other important issues identified through the research included:

562

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

Figure 2 Activity scope and organisational facility for EEDA MTI towns

.

Lack of clarity. The vision and strategy were often expressed in a “wordy” style that struggled to engage stakeholder involvement and commitment to the MTI. There was a tendency to incorporate every possible issue, leading to a bland message trying to be “all things to all people” despite positive intentions – for example:

the day or at night. It will offer a range of shops and services which reflect the character and people of the local area, and act as a social and economic focus for the local area. .

X will be an attractive, safe, lively and accessible place for all those wishing to live, shop, work, visit, or spend time there during

563

Strategic focus. Resulting from a diverse range of stakeholders, the MTI partnerships also displayed a lack of strategic focus, as a product of the “committee style” of partnerships. Adopting a narrower focus on the key issues that are unique for individual towns proved

.

.

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

beneficial – for towns such as Aylsham and Beccles. Integration with the hinterland. There was a potential risk with MTI strategies that the market town was viewed in a vacuum and that the surrounding hinterland settlements ignored them. On the other hand, some MTI strategies and delivery plans actively emphasised the role of the hinterland and its interaction with the market town “hub”. For example, Watton and Brightlingsea consciously adopted names that had a more embracing style (Wayland and Community Reach partnerships respectively). The latter, in particular, took more of a “big picture” approach with projects to deliberately integrate the hinterland villages with Brightlingsea rather than focusing on central activities. Practical application. The ability to effectively shape a vision and strategy into practical actions was seen to impact on the level of engagement from key stakeholders in the town. Commercial interests and the broader community became more intimately involved in the dynamics of the MTI partnership where the co-ordinator adopted a proactive role as lynchpin for communication (and often negotiation) for stakeholder involvement – with positive examples of this role seen in Aylsham and Beccles.

4.MTI process The research also looked at operational aspects of how the MTI used the Countryside Agency’s Healthcheck template (Countryside Agency, 2002), to select strategic issues at their “conception” life stage. It was noted that the retail aspects of the Healthcheck questionnaires were generally given less emphasis than other community or infrastructure based issues. Furthermore, there was little reference in the subsequent annual delivery plans to the original Healthcheck surveys – possibly because they were not seen as an integral part of the town’s ongoing development as the MTI progressed into “infancy” or “growth” life stages. There was no evidence of any regular formal review or benchmarking procedures to assess progress being made by the MTI towards strategic objectives. There are also important issues around the relative level of engagement in the MTI from national high street brands and local/regional retailers – which could form part of an agenda for further research on market towns. Influences on this may result from the dynamics of national retailer management (e.g. performance measurement systems, short-term tenure of

managers, and their cultural engagement with a local community) versus local business, which is often perceived as having a greater emotional engagement with the market town. However, this latter point may not necessarily be the case, for example, in the case of family-run businesses where ownership/succession issues have arisen, or the owners live in a neighbouring (or even “competing”) town. The organisation of specific events, ranging from regular farmers’ markets to annual festivals, was seen to have positive impact on the towns, although not necessarily a panacea. Besides practical issues of location, access and promotion, there were negative attitudes from some existing “conventional” retailers to overcome – presenting further challenges for the MTI partnerships – for example in Brightlingsea and in Aylsham, where the shops felt threatened. On balance, though, most towns’ experience has been that incumbent retailers’ sales have actually been enhanced as a consequence of such events attracting additional visitors to the town.

5.Sustainability The important question of sustainability of the MTI, as reviewed in the study by Danford (2002), is a central issue for all towns receiving funding. Given the termination of a central source of public finance in May 2004, the towns face the challenge of how the MTI partnerships will continue to function without dependency on this lifeline. This marks a potential step-change in their development “lifecycle” (Warnaby, 1998), as they are about to progress from “infancy” or “early growth” stage to one of stable growth and “maturity”. Such an enforced step-change not only represents a challenge to secure alternative funding – from other public or commercial sources – but also potential change in legal constitution. There is a range of “not-for-profit” organisational structures that could be adopted – including unincorporated association, charitable trust, development trusts, and company limited by guarantee. The choices made by the MTIs were not measured by the study, as most towns were undecided at the time about the most appropriate for their individual circumstances, but overall the charitable trust approach seemed the most common form being considered. However, it should be noted that one of the MTI towns, Brandon in Suffolk, has been selected as one of the pilots for the forthcoming introduction of BIDs – which may provide important case study evidence in response to questions raised about BIDs (Hogg et al., 2003).

564

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

Many of the MTI project co-ordinators and project managers faced uncertainty about whether they would retain their role (either full or parttime) once EEDA funding ceased. Although accepted as the nature of external funding-based contract employment, it still cast an uncertainty over the roles and the commitment of key individuals. In view of the potential positive contribution of such individuals, it seems surprising that there was little evidence of thorough succession planning or risk planning. Beyond the operations-based issues of sustainability, there are also some important considerations about the balance of retail activity in the MTI towns and the potential impact on the “health” of the high street (Parker and Byrom, 2000). The profile of retail use mix in the towns that completed a questionnaire is illustrated in Table III – showing relative stability and no major skew in the mix of shop types. Although the questionnaire identified that the towns had a wide range of different retail outlets without any clear dominant sub-sector, an interesting trend was the growth of services and niche retailing, for example beautician and tanning treatments, representing a movement away from “traditional” profiles of food shops. This could provide an interesting area for future study of retail profile for MTIs over a period of time – to track the impact of changing socio-economic dynamics of the towns and the influence on shop provision. From the questionnaire’s snapshot of changes in retail profile between 2001 and 2003 (see Table III), there appears to have been little change in the number of retail outlets in the MTI towns and they have relatively low levels of vacant retail premises. However, it is difficult to draw meaningful conclusions about the longevity of retail stability without further research to understand the trends in the economic performance of the outlets over time. Behind the overall breadth and depth of retailing that contributes to the vitality and

vibrancy of MTI market towns the questionnaire survey also revealed a surprisingly high dependence of MTIs on family-run retail businesses – which constitute an average 76 per cent of retail outlets in MTI towns surveyed (see Table III). However, while this could be seen as having benefits of retailer commitment to the town, such businesses face additional challenges, not least the question of succession – which will become an increasingly important issue as the UK population age profile rises. Combined with other socio-economic pressures on young people in rural economies (for example, housing availability and rising costs in rural areas as a consequence of increased demand), many family-run businesses may not be able to sustain their long-term economic existence. Subsequent generations in family-run businesses are facing higher lifestyle costs than the founders, and the businesses may not be capable of sustaining sufficient income levels to retain family members in the business, thus presenting problems for diversity and continuity of town centres. MTI partnerships need to be aware of these challenges and anticipate the need for contingency planning, rather than waiting until the family-run businesses reach crisis point, through development of support and advice, such as those being developed by family business “champions” within Business Links.

A future research agenda for market towns? The experience of the EEDA MTI towns identified through this study indicates that there are practical opportunities to enhance the effectiveness of town centre management for such market towns. The primary areas that offer such opportunities and constitute a forward agenda for market town research are:

Table III Retail mix in EEDA MTI towns

Aylsham Beccles Community Reach Debenham Stour Valley Walton-on-the-Naze Whittlesey Wickham market Wisbech Woodbridge Average

No. shops 2003

No. shops 2001

Change

Vacancy rate (%)

Family-run (%)

59 162 58 39 47 102 115 31

62 153 64 35 49

23 +9 26 +4 22

31

0

0 5.6 0 2.6 2.1 2.0 0 0

71 85 64 82 83 85 87 58

3.0 1.7

80 76

132 83

565

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

(1) Lifecycle stage of TCM partnerships. Longitudinal study of MTI partnership development over a longer period of time, to overcome any possible distortion through a “snapshot in time” perspective, which affected the current study. (2) Profile of retailer ownership. Profile of retailer ownership and management stability within the context of market towns – particularly the apparently high proportion of family-owned businesses. The difference in management styles and cultural characteristics could have an influence on the role played by retailers in the TCM partnership. (3) Mix of the retail business use. Mix of the retail business use – whether there are any significant shifts in the types of retail businesses operating in MTI towns. Analysis of any change from traditional retailing towards niche and service activity over time, and contribution of mix profile to stability and economic sustainability. (4) Effective economic measurement. To date there has been only limited use of quantified measurements of economic performance for day-to-day town centre management, or longterm strategic planning, in the EEDA MTI towns. Although discussed by academics and practitioners at a seminar organised by Action for Market Towns (2003), there has been limited progress towards implementing practical measurements to support MTI progress benchmarking. From the interviews with MTI stakeholders and work by Manchester Metropolitan University (Parker and Byrom, 2000) there are a number of measures that could be used to provide feedback to MTI partnerships in this context, through relatively simple customer surveys: . average value of customer spend in each shop; . total consumer spend for the town; . attendance at farmers’ markets; . car park usage; and . analysis of how people travel to the town centre shops (by car, on foot, public transport) and distance travelled. Additionally, these could be supplemented by regular update of elements from original Healthcheck surveys, to support monitoring and evaluation: . vacancy rate of retail premises; . rent levels on town centre premises; . town centre customer profiling; and . profiling of business mix. (5) MTI performance measurement. The MTI’s limited ongoing use of the Countryside

Agency’s Healthcheck could be due to a perception of it being a time-consuming exercise with limited direct benefits based on experience in the partnerships’ “infancy” life stage. However, now that MTIs are progressing to more mature partnership structures, they may be able to adopt more focused and selective use of measures. Through concentration on a more limited range, relating to the delivery of specific strategic goals, MTIs could harness a set of bespoke performance measures that support partnership management and strategy development. A mechanism with potential to facilitate this approach is the balanced scorecard (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1996), which could integrate a disparate range of Healthcheck data to engage the key stakeholders of the market town more effectively. A possible application of the balanced scorecard can be seen in Figure 3, based on four pathways that provide an integrated approach to illustrate how the MTI strategy for a town could be addressed through future testing in towns. By focussing on three or four measures per field, this approach could provide a straightforward integrative mechanism for individual towns to track their progress. In addition it could enable comparisons to be made between towns to enable shared learning between MTIs to support shared learning. However, it should be noted that the balanced scorecard was developed for application in commercial organisations and, although it has been applied in public bodies, its application to a market town partnership may not necessarily align town centre management with MTI strategic objectives. Furthermore, shortcomings have also been identified in the balanced scorecard approach by critical academic reviews, which raise questions over its potential – including Kanji (2001), Maltz et al. (2003), and Norreklit (2003), who have put forward alternative approaches of their own. A summary of the strengths and weaknesses for the use of the balanced scorecard that have been proposed are summarised in Table IV.

Conclusion The experience of MTI towns in the east of England observed in this study has indicated that the MTI partnership approach has provided a boost for smaller market towns. They have been

566

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

Figure 3 A balanced scorecard for market towns?

Table IV Strengths and weaknesses of the balanced scorecard Strengths Comprehensive performance summary Enables vision and strategy to be translated to tangible objectives and measures Holistic approach to performance measures Sense of interdependency among organisational activities Focus on customer and market factors Easy to use

Weaknesses Conceptual focus – difficult to translate to practical measurements Focus on customers fails to identify measures for other important stakeholders Lack of focus on human resource and supplier contribution Focus is primarily on top-down performance measurement Interactions between criteria are unclear Fails to monitor competition or wider environmental dynamics

able to assume greater local control, through the use of additional funding support, to facilitate their passage through the early life stages of town centre management. It has also highlighted some important learning points around the MTI process itself, the role of partnership structures and key

stakeholder participation, yet also leaves open some important questions around the use of performance measurement tools to support economic sustainability of market towns – forming an agenda for further research on the issues noted above.

567

Market towns – victims of market forces?

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management

Mike Phillips and Chris Swaffin-Smith

Volume 32 · Number 11 · 2004 · 557-568

References Action for Market Towns (2002), “Market towns and retail issues – summary from the National Market Towns Advisory Forum”, Action for Market Towns, Bury St. Edmunds. Action for Market Towns (2003), “Where does the money go? Understanding the economic base of market towns”, paper presented at the Action for Market Towns Seminar, Harwich, 9 July. Arnold, S.J. and Luthra, M.N. (2000), “Market entry effects of large format retailers: a stakeholder analysis”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 4/5, pp. 139-54. Brennan, D.P. and Lundsten, L. (2000), “Impacts of large discount stores on small US towns: reasons for shopping and retailer strategies”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 4/5, pp. 155-61. Census 2001 (2001), National Statistics Web site, available at: www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001. Countryside Agency (2002), Market Towns Healthcheck Handbook – Revised January 2002, HMSO, available at: www.countryside.gov.uk/market-towns, London. Countryside Agency (2003), “Market towns initiative: evaluating the first year”, Research Notes Issue CRN60, available at: www.coutryside.gov.uk. Cummins, S. and Macintyre, S. (1999), “The location of food stores in urban areas: a case study in Glasgow”, British Food Journal, Vol. 101 No. 7, pp. 545-53. Danford, A. (2002), Market Town Partnerships: What Happens Next?, Business in the Community, Newmarket. Davidson, S.M. and Rummel, A. (2000), “Retail changes associated with Wal-Mart’s entry into Maine”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 4/5, pp. 162-9. Dennis, C., Marsland, D. and Cockett, T. (2002), “Central place practice: shopping centre attractiveness measures, hinterland boundaries and the UK retail hierarchy”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 9, pp. 185-99. DETR (1998), The Impact of Large Foodstores on Market Towns and District Centres, DoE, London. DETR (2000), Our Countryside: The Future (A Fair Deal for Rural England), DETR, London. Fernie, J. (1997), “Retail change and retail logistics in the UK: past trends and future prospects”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 383-96. Guy, C. (1990), “Outshopping from small towns”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 3-14. Guy, C. and Bennison, D. (2002), “Retail planning policy, superstore development and retailer competition”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 30 No. 9, pp. 431-4. Hallsworth, A. and Worthington, S. (2000), “Local resistance to larger retailers: the example of market towns and the food superstore in the UK”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 207-16.

Healey, P. and Baker, C. (1994), The Effectiveness of Town Centre Management: Research Study 1994, ATCM, London. Hogg, S., Medway, D. and Warnaby, G. (2003), “Business improvement districts: an opportunity for SME retailing”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 9, pp. 466-9. Kanji, G.K. and Moura e Sa, P. (2001), “Kanji’s business scorecard”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 12 No. 7&8, pp. 898-905. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992), “The balanced scorecard – measures that drive performance”, Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp. 71-9. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996), The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Lockwood, J.I. (1999), The Lockwood Survey 1999 – Setting the Scene for the Next Century: How Effectively are Towns and Cities Being Managed?, Urban Management Initiatives, Huddersfield. Maltz, A.C., Shenhar, A.J. and Reilly, R.R. (2003), “Beyond the balanced scorecard: refining the search for organizational success measures”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 36, pp. 187-204. Norreklit, H. (2003), “The balanced scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the balanced scorecard”, Accounting, Organisations and Society, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 591-619. Paddison, A. (2003), “Town centre management (TCM): a case study of Achmore”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 12, pp. 618-27. Pal, J. and Sanders, E. (1997), “Measuring the effectiveness of town centre management schemes: an exploratory framework”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 70-7. Parker, C. and Byrom, J. (2000), “Towards a healthy high street – training the independent retailer”, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester. Powe, N. and Shaw, T. (2003), “Market towns: investigating the service role through visitor surveys”, Planning Practice & Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 37-50. Seiders, K., Simonides, C. and Tigert, D.J. (2000), “The impact of supercenters on traditional food retailers in four markets”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 4/5, pp. 181-93. Warnaby, G., Alexander, A. and Medway, D. (1998), “Town centre management in the UK: a review, synthesis and research agenda”, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 15-31. Warnaby, G., Bennison, D., Davies, B.J. and Hughes, H. (2002), “Marketing UK towns and cities as shopping destinations”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 18, pp. 877-904. Wrigley, N., Warm, D. and Margetts, B. (2003), “Deprivation, diet and food retail access: findings from the Leeds ‘food deserts’ study”, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 151-88.

568