As supermarkets have been constructed and extended, they quickly becomes strong competitors for small-scale businesses in the local area. It is considered by some people that locally opened stores would failed to maintain their positions and therefore eliminating communities in the neighbourhood. In this essay, I am going to argue why the assumption is not the case.
First of all, it is vital to understand what makes a stable community – uniqueness. Takes fast food restaurants as an example, when observed on a map, it is obvious that they have been dominating most parts of the world from America to Europe. However, a cultural distinctive country like Vietnam didn’t allow these types of business to take over their natural cuisine. This is because Vietnam is able to hold it’s very different and irreplaceable value that can only be offered by local businesses. The lesson here is when local businesses stay unique and unchangeable by other factors, they possess the capablities to co-exist with large-scale businesses and create profits. This is crucial in keeping a cultured group of people as who they are.
Second, taking down small businesses doesn’t necessarily equivalent to the removal of a community. To elaborate, supermarkets could only become competitive when they are a more convenient option in consumer’s views. Shops which sell general goods such as medicines, food, drinks, skin care products, e.t.c. are easily replaced by a concentrated shopping location since people will prefer having plenty buying choices rather than driving to multiple tiny stores in search of different goods: traditional foods or clothing can hardly ever be destroyed.
In the end, closure of small businesses shouldn’t be a mental burden since it wouldn’t cause the elimination of local communities as these businesses don’t contribute to the uniqueness of the area themselves. Other alike businesses that are irreplaceable will not be switched out by big supermarkets, keeping the cultures alive.