Around the world, consumers’ behaviors are changing rapidly, with one key area being their shopping locations. More specifically, people’s default option is now large out-of-town stores rather than small town-center shops, limiting access of those without cars to the former and prompting more frequent car travel. While there are positives to this change, I believe the negatives are more significant.
The trend towards shopping outside urban areas may have some positives. Considering the demographics of towners without car ownership, they are likely to outsource delivery services more often to purchase from out-of-town units, which otherwise would be unreachable with their personal motorized vehicles. Concerning heavier automobile use, job vacancies in this industry would also proliferate as a result of the growing personnel demand for car manufacturing and upkeep.
However, I would argue that the monopoly of suburban shops is still on the whole an unwelcome development. Its resulting higher recruitment rates, although present, benefit only a few occupations. Meanwhile, significantly more people who are in-town customers would incur added shipping or transportation costs, potentially curtailing their budget for the purchased items. In the worst case scenario, these consumers’ safety would even be jeopardized, for the long-range delivery of products like pharmaceuticals in emergency situations could be overdue. Another existential threat to urbanites when retailers are off-center is the degraded air quality. To specify, as cars run more often, airborne fine particles, a product of traffic exhaust, would rise in concentration, causing respiratory diseases like lung cancers.
In conclusion, retail decentralization is clearly more consequential, for it is at the expense of downtown residents’ financial securities and wellness, notwithstanding the benefits in terms of boosting job openings.