MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7104583761 · doi:10.60918/16242

Agglomeration economies and retail concentration as determinants of shopping center rents

2004· article· W7104583761 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomies of agglomerationEconomic rentIndex (typography)Economies of scaleUnit (ring theory)Consumption (sociology)Order (exchange)Economic base analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates whether, and to what extent, agglomeration economies and retail concentration within shopping centers affect rent levels. It is based primarily on physical and financial data obtained for eight super-regional, regional and community shopping centers in Quebec City, Canada; data refer to the 1998-2000 period. In this paper, a 1007 retail units data base (between 935 and 941 cases after filtering), representing some 4.4 million square feet of gross leasable area (GLA), is used to model unit base rent. In order to investigate the agglomeration economies and retail concentration issues, two indices are designed - namely the Agglomeration Index (AGGLINDX) and the Concentration Index (CONCINDX) - and integrated into a regression model of unit rents. Findings suggest that, by and large, agglomeration economies impact positively on base rents while retail concentration has the opposite effect, due to the higher bargaining power of dominant tenants. They also suggest that both phenomena impact differently on rents depending on the retail category or subcategory considered, which tends to corroborate Hardin et al.’s (2002) findings about the existence of distinct retail submarkets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207