The consequences of imposing the revenue-capacity condition (which can be interpreted as profit maximization) to determine supply patterns in conjunction with the production-constrained spatial interaction model with a general attractiveness function are presented. Convergence of the quasi-balancing factor method is shown to be an insufficient condition for providing an equilibrium solution; three different sets of results are obtained for an illustrative retailing system. Two of these results are shown to be nonoptimal.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ClarkeM, 1981, “A note on the stability of equilibrium solutions of production-constrained spatial-interaction models”Environment and Planning A13601–604
2.
CoelhoJ DWilsonA G, 1976, “The optimum location and size of shopping centres”Regional Studies10413–421
3.
EilonSTilleyR P RFowkesT R, 1969, “Analysis of a gravity demand model”Regional Studies3115–122
HarrisB, 1964, “A model of locational equilibrium for retail trade” mimeo; Penn-Jersey Transportation Study, Philadelphia, PA
6.
HarrisBWilsonA G, 1978, “Equilibrium values and dynamics of attractiveness terms in production-constrained spatial-interaction models”Environment and Planning A10371–388
7.
HimmelblauD M, 1972Applied Non-linear Programming (McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, Berks)
8.
HuffD L, 1964, “Refining and estimating a trading area”Journal of Marketing2837–38
9.
LakshmananT RHansenW G, 1965, “A retail market potential model”Journal of the American Institute of Planners31134–143
10.
LeonardiG, 1977, “Analogie meccanico—statistiche dei modelli di interazione spaziale”Atti delle Giornate, Associazione Italiana di Ricerca Operativa, Parma pp 530–539
11.
LuenbergerD G, 1973Introduction to Linear and Non-linear Programming (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA)
12.
MurchlandJ D, 1966, “Some remarks on the gravity model of traffic distribution and an equivalent maximization formulation” LSE-TNT-38, Transport Network Theory Unit, London School of Economics, London
