Redistribution Through Local Competition

  • Frederick Guy
Conference paper


We have developed a model with two kinds of shops (local and out-of-town) and two kinds of consumer (mobile and immobile). We assume that local shops operate in monopolistic competition, while the market structure for out-of-town shops is a stable oligopoly among large retail chains. We show that policies which raise the net cost (price plus consumer travel costs) of shopping out of town may cause a discontinuous drop in the price level in local shops. The price drop is accompanied by both the entry of new local shops and a reduction of excess capacity in local shops. We draw the following conclusions from the model. To the extent that local shops serve a poorer clientele, a rise in prices at out-of-town shops will have a progressive distributive effect if it results in the local price reduction predicted here. Moreover, the same measures have the potential to improve allocative efficiency through a combination of reductions in local excess capacity and the internalization of social and environmental costs of automobile use.


Travel Cost Demand Curve Excess Capacity Local Competition Positive Shock 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alonso W (1964) Location and land use. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Atzema O, Rietveld D, Shefer D (2005) Regions, land consumption, and sustainable growth. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  3. Dixit A, Stiglitz J (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. Am Econ Rev 67:297–308Google Scholar
  4. Evans AW (1999) The land market and government intervention. In: Cheshire P, Mills ES (eds) Handbook of regional and urban economics. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  5. Green DL, Jones DW, Delucci MA (1977) The full costs and benefits of transportation. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  6. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, UK (1999) Policy Planning Guidance 6Google Scholar
  7. Quinet E, Vickerman RW (2004) Principles of transport economics. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  8. Ruth M (2006) Smart growth and climate change. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frederick Guy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Management, BirkbeckUniversity of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations