unlikely locations: enclosed malls, small markets, and civic prestige david j. roelfs university of...

67
Unlikely Locations: Enclosed Malls, Small Markets, and Civic Prestige David J. Roelfs University of Louisville

Upload: marjorie-warner

Post on 02-Jan-2016

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Unlikely Locations:Enclosed Malls,Small Markets,

and Civic Prestige

David J. RoelfsUniversity of Louisville

Enclosed Mall Development: The Industry Perspective

• Ring Analysis: the feasibility of a proposed shopping center depends on the population size, consumer purchasing power, degree of retail competition, and site availability within the center’s prospective market/trade area

• On average, a sustainable mall will have 2.5 to 3.0 square feet GLA (gross leasable area) per capita

• Typology of shopping centers– Neighborhood centers: 0 to 99,999 sq. ft. GLA (3K – 40K population)– Community centers: 100,000 to 299,999 sq. ft. GLA (40K – 150K population)– Regional centers: 300,000 to 749,999 sq. ft. GLA (150K – 300K population)– Super regional centers: 750,000+ sq. ft. GLA (300K or more population)

Enclosed Mall Development: The Organizational Perspective

• Organizational Legitimacy: – the rate at which an organizational innovation spreads depends on the degree to

which the viability of the innovation is taken for granted (constitutive or cognitive legitimacy)

• Organizational Density: – there is a non-linear relationship between the number of adopters of an

organizational innovation and the likelihood that further adoptions will take place

– the non-linearity of this relationship reflects the oppositional effects of legitimacy and competition

Data and Methods• Statistical Method: Proportional Hazards (Cox) Regression for Repeated Events

– Event: opening of a new mall or addition of an enclosed mall to an existing shopping center

– Unit-of-analysis: county (proxy for the market area)– Setting: United States, including the District of Columbia, 1945-2009

• Focal Independent Variables– Population size and density– Per capita income and asset levels– Number of farms, manufacturers, wholesalers, service businesses– Number of retailers and retail sales– Number of existing malls and non-enclosed shopping centers– Shopping center legitimacy level

• Control Variables– Geographic region– Land area– Racial, urban/rural, age, and educational composition– National GDP– Federal Reserve Prime Interest Rate

Results

East Midwest South West0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Figure 1. Number of mall enclosures, by region (n=3977)

Region

N

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

Figure 2. Number of enclosed malls constructed, by year (n=3977); includes new construction and re-

modeling of existing centers)

Year

N

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5

Les

s th

an 1

3 to

3.9

6 to

6.9

9 to

9.9

12 to

12.

9

15 to

15.

9

18 to

18.

9

21 to

21.

9

24 to

24.

9

27 to

27.

9

30 to

30.

9

33 to

33.

9

36 to

36.

9

39 to

39.

9

42 to

42.

9

45 to

45.

9

48 to

48.

9

51 to

51.

9

54 to

54.

9

57 to

57.

9

60 to

60.

9

63 to

63.

90

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Figure 3. Distribution of survival times, county level(n=7112 periods, 3978 periods culminating in mall enclosure event and 3134 right-censored periods)*

Event Censored

Years elapsed since last mall enclosure in county

N

*2108 censored periods with survival time of 64 to 64.9 years (i.e., counties with 0 en-closed malls) not shown

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 K

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 KWhite population proportion 5% 100% 94% 88.0% 14.9%Urban population proportion 0% 100% 63% 57.8% 32.9%

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 KWhite population proportion 5% 100% 94% 88.0% 14.9%Urban population proportion 0% 100% 63% 57.8% 32.9%Median Age (years) 19 59 34 34.7 6.8High school graduation rate 20% 99% 75% 72.3% 16.4%

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 KWhite population proportion 5% 100% 94% 88.0% 14.9%Urban population proportion 0% 100% 63% 57.8% 32.9%Median Age (years) 19 59 34 34.7 6.8High school graduation rate 20% 99% 75% 72.3% 16.4%Bank deposits, per capita, inflation adjusted 0 6.5 K 127 159.7 81.2Median household income, inflation adjusted 9.5 K 118 K 49 K 51 K 13 K

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 KWhite population proportion 5% 100% 94% 88.0% 14.9%Urban population proportion 0% 100% 63% 57.8% 32.9%Median Age (years) 19 59 34 34.7 6.8High school graduation rate 20% 99% 75% 72.3% 16.4%Bank deposits, per capita, inflation adjusted 0 6.5 K 127 159.7 81.2Median household income, inflation adjusted 9.5 K 118 K 49 K 51 K 13 KNumber of farms 0 8 K 725 903.8 790.4Number of manufacturers 0 21 K 88 516.2 1711.6Number of wholesalers 0 24 K 90 605.8 1769.0Number of service businesses 0 140 K 523 2.7 K 7.7 K

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 KWhite population proportion 5% 100% 94% 88.0% 14.9%Urban population proportion 0% 100% 63% 57.8% 32.9%Median Age (years) 19 59 34 34.7 6.8High school graduation rate 20% 99% 75% 72.3% 16.4%Bank deposits, per capita, inflation adjusted 0 6.5 K 127 159.7 81.2Median household income, inflation adjusted 9.5 K 118 K 49 K 51 K 13 KNumber of farms 0 8 K 725 903.8 790.4Number of manufacturers 0 21 K 88 516.2 1711.6Number of wholesalers 0 24 K 90 605.8 1769.0Number of service businesses 0 140 K 523 2.7 K 7.7 KNumber of retailers 0 80 K 525 2.2 K 5.6 KRetail sales, per capita, inflation adjusted ($) 0 128 K 11 K 11 K 5 K

County-level models, without fixed effects

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Region (reference=West)   .161     .367   East .034           Midwest .004           South -.085          

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Region (reference=West)   .161     .367   East .034           Midwest .004           South -.085          

County Level Factors            Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -.069 .455     .916  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) .006 .016   .006 .003 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in population size (in 10% increments) .011 .081   .025 .009 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) .029 .016   .013 .009 1.01 (1.00, 1.02)

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Region (reference=West)   .161     .367   East .034           Midwest .004           South -.085          

County Level Factors            Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -.069 .455     .916  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) .006 .016   .006 .003 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in population size (in 10% increments) .011 .081   .025 .009 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) .029 .016   .013 .009 1.01 (1.00, 1.02)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.014 .436     .602   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.007 .884     .575  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .067 .000   .064 .000 1.07 (1.04, 1.09) Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) -.044 .136     .120  

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Region (reference=West)   .161     .367   East .034           Midwest .004           South -.085          

County Level Factors            Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -.069 .455     .916  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) .006 .016   .006 .003 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in population size (in 10% increments) .011 .081   .025 .009 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) .029 .016   .013 .009 1.01 (1.00, 1.02)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.014 .436     .602   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.007 .884     .575  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .067 .000   .064 .000 1.07 (1.04, 1.09) Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) -.044 .136     .120  Median age (years) -.010 .084   -.011 .025 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) Change in median age (years) -.004 .790     .493  High school graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.014 .647     .915   Change in graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.166 .019   -.193 .003 0.82 (0.73, 0.94)

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Region (reference=West)   .161     .367   East .034           Midwest .004           South -.085          

County Level Factors            Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -.069 .455     .916  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) .006 .016   .006 .003 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in population size (in 10% increments) .011 .081   .025 .009 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) .029 .016   .013 .009 1.01 (1.00, 1.02)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.014 .436     .602   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.007 .884     .575  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .067 .000   .064 .000 1.07 (1.04, 1.09) Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) -.044 .136     .120  Median age (years) -.010 .084   -.011 .025 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) Change in median age (years) -.004 .790     .493  High school graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.014 .647     .915   Change in graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.166 .019   -.193 .003 0.82 (0.73, 0.94)Bank deposits (in $1,000,000s per capita) -.174 .876     .918   Change in bank deposits (in 10% increments) -.002 .784     .714  Median household income (in $1,000s) .005 .039   .007 .000 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in median household income (in 10% increm.) .019 .301     .528  

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increm.) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.034 .030   -.026 .071 0.97 (0.95, 1.00) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) -.041 .001   -.051 .000 0.95 (0.93, 0.97)Retail sales (in $1,000s per capita) .007 .393     .368   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.002 .761     .770  

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.034 .030   -.026 .071 0.97 (0.95, 1.00) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) -.041 .001   -.051 .000 0.95 (0.93, 0.97)Retail sales (in $1,000s per capita) .007 .393     .368   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.002 .761     .770  Number of malls .218 .000   .217 .000 1.24 (1.23, 1.26) Number of malls, squared -.003 .000   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Figure 4. Relative mall risk by county-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in county

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.034 .030   -.026 .071 0.97 (0.95, 1.00) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) -.041 .001   -.051 .000 0.95 (0.93, 0.97)Retail sales (in $1,000s per capita) .007 .393     .368   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.002 .761     .770  Number of malls .218 .000   .217 .000 1.24 (1.23, 1.26) Number of malls, squared -.003 .000   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) -.059 .079   -.080 .000 0.92 (0.89, 0.96) Number of malls, squared .003 .000   .003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .171 .000   .178 .000 1.20 (1.14, 1.25) Number of shopping centers, squared -.004 .000   -.004 .000 1.00 (0.99, 1.00)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Figure 5. County-level relative mall risk by national-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in nation

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.034 .030   -.026 .071 0.97 (0.95, 1.00) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) -.041 .001   -.051 .000 0.95 (0.93, 0.97)Retail sales (in $1,000s per capita) .007 .393     .368   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.002 .761     .770  Number of malls .218 .000   .217 .000 1.24 (1.23, 1.26) Number of malls, squared -.003 .000   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) -.059 .079   -.080 .000 0.92 (0.89, 0.96) Number of malls, squared .003 .000   .003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .171 .000   .178 .000 1.20 (1.14, 1.25) Number of shopping centers, squared -.004 .000   -.004 .000 1.00 (0.99, 1.00)Shopping center legitimacy level (range: 0-1) -.184 .688     .883  

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.034 .030   -.026 .071 0.97 (0.95, 1.00) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) -.041 .001   -.051 .000 0.95 (0.93, 0.97)Retail sales (in $1,000s per capita) .007 .393     .368   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.002 .761     .770  Number of malls .218 .000   .217 .000 1.24 (1.23, 1.26) Number of malls, squared -.003 .000   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) -.059 .079   -.080 .000 0.92 (0.89, 0.96) Number of malls, squared .003 .000   .003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .171 .000   .178 .000 1.20 (1.14, 1.25) Number of shopping centers, squared -.004 .000   -.004 .000 1.00 (0.99, 1.00)Shopping center legitimacy level (range: 0-1) -.184 .688     .883  GDP (in $1 Trillions) -.485 .000   -.489 .000 0.61 (0.53, 0.71) GDP growth rate (in 10% increments) .221 .000   .231 .000 1.26 (1.17, 1.35)Federal Reserve Prime Rate (in 1% increments) -.004 .673     .524  

County-level models, with fixed effects

Table 3. Cox regression with fixed effects of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)County Level Factors            

Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -2.780 .532     .812  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) -.016 .290     .329   Change in population size (in 10% increments) .014 .565     .198  Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) -.113 .018   -.113 .022 0.89 (0.81, 0.98)

Table 3. Cox regression with fixed effects of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)County Level Factors            

Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -2.780 .532     .812  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) -.016 .290     .329   Change in population size (in 10% increments) .014 .565     .198  Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) -.113 .018   -.113 .022 0.89 (0.81, 0.98)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.089 .323     .265   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.026 .767     .511  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .008 .874     .931   Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) .030 .614     .690  

Table 3. Cox regression with fixed effects of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)County Level Factors            

Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -2.780 .532     .812  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) -.016 .290     .329   Change in population size (in 10% increments) .014 .565     .198  Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) -.113 .018   -.113 .022 0.89 (0.81, 0.98)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.089 .323     .265   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.026 .767     .511  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .008 .874     .931   Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) .030 .614     .690  Median age (years) -.027 .337     .132   Change in median age (years) -.027 .320     .288  High school graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.226 .071   -.206 .047 0.81 (0.66, 1.00) Change in graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.398 .005   -.301 .018 0.74 (0.58, 0.95)

Table 3. Cox regression with fixed effects of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)County Level Factors            

Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -2.780 .532     .812  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) -.016 .290     .329   Change in population size (in 10% increments) .014 .565     .198  Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) -.113 .018   -.113 .022 0.89 (0.81, 0.98)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.089 .323     .265   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.026 .767     .511  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .008 .874     .931   Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) .030 .614     .690  Median age (years) -.027 .337     .132   Change in median age (years) -.027 .320     .288  High school graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.226 .071   -.206 .047 0.81 (0.66, 1.00) Change in graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.398 .005   -.301 .018 0.74 (0.58, 0.95)Bank deposits (in $1000s per capita) 2.721 .577     .226   Change in bank deposits (in 10% increments) .005 .654     .383  Median household income (in $1,000s) .022 .008   .019 .007 1.02 (1.01, 1.03) Change in median household income (in 10% increments) -.030 .330     .856  

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.093 .044   -.102 .000 0.90 (0.85, 0.95) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) .001 .974     .591  Retail sales (in $1000s per capita) .029 .127     .362   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.003 .782     .400  

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.093 .044   -.102 .000 0.90 (0.85, 0.95) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) .001 .974     .591  Retail sales (in $1000s per capita) .029 .127     .362   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.003 .782     .400  Number of malls .159 .000   .151 .000 1.16 (1.13, 1.20) Number of malls, squared -.002 .000   -.002 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Figure 6. Relative mall risk by county-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects County-level model, with fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in county

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.093 .044   -.102 .000 0.90 (0.85, 0.95) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) .001 .974     .591  Retail sales (in $1000s per capita) .029 .127     .362   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.003 .782     .400  Number of malls .159 .000   .151 .000 1.16 (1.13, 1.20) Number of malls, squared -.002 .000   -.002 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) .018 .729   .039 .164 1.04 (0.98, 1.10) Number of malls, squared .001 .148   .001 .088 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .102 .013   .112 .001 1.12 (1.05, 1.19) Number of shopping centers, squared -.002 .012   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Figure 7. County-level relative mall risk by national-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects County-level model, with fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in nation

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Figure 8. State-level relative mall risk by national-level mall density

State-level model, with fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in nation

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.093 .044   -.102 .000 0.90 (0.85, 0.95) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) .001 .974     .591  Retail sales (in $1000s per capita) .029 .127     .362   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.003 .782     .400  Number of malls .159 .000   .151 .000 1.16 (1.13, 1.20) Number of malls, squared -.002 .000   -.002 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) .018 .729   .039 .164 1.04 (0.98, 1.10) Number of malls, squared .001 .148   .001 .088 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .102 .013   .112 .001 1.12 (1.05, 1.19) Number of shopping centers, squared -.002 .012   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Shopping center legitimacy level (range: 0-1) .455 .488     .731  

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.093 .044   -.102 .000 0.90 (0.85, 0.95) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) .001 .974     .591  Retail sales (in $1000s per capita) .029 .127     .362   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.003 .782     .400  Number of malls .159 .000   .151 .000 1.16 (1.13, 1.20) Number of malls, squared -.002 .000   -.002 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) .018 .729   .039 .164 1.04 (0.98, 1.10) Number of malls, squared .001 .148   .001 .088 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .102 .013   .112 .001 1.12 (1.05, 1.19) Number of shopping centers, squared -.002 .012   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Shopping center legitimacy level (range: 0-1) .455 .488     .731  GDP (in $1 Trillions) -.491 .000   -.486 .000 0.61 (0.51, 0.74) GDP growth rate (in 10% increments) .155 .004   .164 .001 1.18 (1.07, 1.30)Federal Reserve Prime Rate (in 1% increments) .007 .541     .549  

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

• Legitimacy trends have little impact at the local level mall development decision, though it has an important impact at the state level

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

• Legitimacy trends have little impact at the local level mall development decision, though it has an important impact at the state level

• Evidence suggests that density does not simultaneously reflect the opposing forces of legitimacy and competition

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

• Legitimacy trends have little impact at the local level mall development decision, though it has an important impact at the state level

• Evidence suggests that density does not simultaneously reflect the opposing forces of legitimacy and competition

• The evidence suggests mall development is affected by factors other than economic rationality

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

• Legitimacy trends have little impact at the local level mall development decision, though it has an important impact at the state level

• Evidence suggests that density does not simultaneously reflect the opposing forces of legitimacy and competition

• The evidence suggests mall development is affected by factors other than economic rationality– The industry factors thought to dominate the mall development decision had

little impact

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

• Legitimacy trends have little impact at the local level mall development decision, though it has an important impact at the state level

• Evidence suggests that density does not simultaneously reflect the opposing forces of legitimacy and competition

• The evidence suggests mall development is affected by factors other than economic rationality– The industry factors thought to dominate the mall development decision had

little impact• 9.3% of the 3,977 enclosed malls built in counties with 40,000 or fewer people• 12.4% built in counties with 50,000 or fewer people• 28.1% built in counties with 100,000 or fewer people• 37.5% of 3,977 enclosed malls built in counties with 150,00 or fewer people

Conclusions

• Competition operates locally while symbiosis (including legitimacy) operates supra-locally

• Legitimacy trends have little impact at the local level mall development decision, though it has an important impact at the state level

• Evidence suggests that density does not simultaneously reflect the opposing forces of legitimacy and competition

• The evidence suggests mall development is affected by factors other than economic rationality– The industry factors thought to dominate the mall development decision had

little impact• 9.3% of the 3,977 enclosed malls built in counties with 40,000 or fewer people• 12.4% built in counties with 50,000 or fewer people• 28.1% built in counties with 100,000 or fewer people• 37.5% of 3,977 enclosed malls built in counties with 150,00 or fewer people

– There is evidence of contagion at both the county and the state level

Thank You

Table 1. Descriptive statisticsVariable Min Max Median Mean SE

Number of enclosed malls in operation 0 64 1 3.4 6.5Year enclosed 1956 2009 1974 1975.2 10.3Survival Duration (years) .14 64 4 9.7 11.5Land Area (square miles) 1 136 K 648 1184.1 2856.2Population 45 9.8 M 76.8 K 318.5K 797.2 KPopulation Density (persons per square mile) .04 84 K 110 699.6 3 KWhite population proportion 5% 100% 94% 88.0% 14.9%Urban population proportion 0% 100% 63% 57.8% 32.9%Median Age (years) 19 59 34 34.7 6.8High school graduation rate 20% 99% 75% 72.3% 16.4%Bank deposits, per capita, inflation adjusted 0 6.5 K 127 159.7 81.2Median household income, inflation adjusted 9.5 K 118 K 49 K 51 K 13 KNumber of farms 0 8 K 725 903.8 790.4Number of manufacturers 0 21 K 88 516.2 1711.6Number of wholesalers 0 24 K 90 605.8 1769.0Number of service businesses 0 140 K 523 2.7 K 7.7 KNumber of retailers 0 80 K 525 2.2 K 5.6 KRetail sales, per capita, inflation adjusted ($) 0 128 K 11 K 11 K 5 K

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Region (reference=West)   .161     .367   East .034           Midwest .004           South -.085          

County Level Factors            Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -.069 .455     .916  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) .006 .016   .006 .003 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in population size (in 10% increments) .011 .081   .025 .009 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) .029 .016   .013 .009 1.01 (1.00, 1.02)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.014 .436     .602   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.007 .884     .575  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .067 .000   .064 .000 1.07 (1.04, 1.09) Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) -.044 .136     .120  Median age (years) -.010 .084   -.011 .025 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) Change in median age (years) -.004 .790     .493  High school graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.014 .647     .915   Change in graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.166 .019   -.193 .003 0.82 (0.73, 0.94)Bank deposits (in $1,000,000s per capita) -.174 .876     .918   Change in bank deposits (in 10% increments) -.002 .784     .714  Median household income (in $1,000s) .005 .039   .007 .000 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) Change in median household income (in 10% increments) .019 .301     .528  

Table 2. Cox regression of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level (continued)

Full Model   Parsimonious ModelVariable ln (HR) p   ln (HR) p HR (95% CI)

Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.012 .000   -.012 .000 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.005 .476     .359  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.085 .009   -.079 .007 0.92 (0.87, 0.98) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) -.011 .136   -.016 .020 0.98 (0.97, 1.00)Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) .014 .663     .904   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) -.005 .353     .247  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) .029 .014   .033 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .033 .000   .033 .000 1.03 (1.02, 1.05)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.034 .030   -.026 .071 0.97 (0.95, 1.00) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) -.041 .001   -.051 .000 0.95 (0.93, 0.97)Retail sales (in $1,000s per capita) .007 .393     .368   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.002 .761     .770  Number of malls .218 .000   .217 .000 1.24 (1.23, 1.26) Number of malls, squared -.003 .000   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) -.059 .079   -.080 .000 0.92 (0.89, 0.96) Number of malls, squared .003 .000   .003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .171 .000   .178 .000 1.20 (1.14, 1.25) Number of shopping centers, squared -.004 .000   -.004 .000 1.00 (0.99, 1.00)Shopping center legitimacy level (range: 0-1) -.184 .688     .883  GDP (in $1 Trillions) -.485 .000   -.489 .000 0.61 (0.53, 0.71) GDP growth rate (in 10% increments) .221 .000   .231 .000 1.26 (1.17, 1.35)Federal Reserve Prime Rate (in 1% increments) -.004 .673     .524  

Table 3. Cox regression with fixed effects of the time elapsed between mall enclosure events, county level

Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)County Level Factors            

Land area (unit: 10,000 sq. miles) -2.780 .532     .812  Population size (unit: 100,000 persons) -.016 .290     .329   Change in population size (in 10% increments) .014 .565     .198  Population density (unit: 1,000 persons per sq. mile) -.113 .018   -.113 .022 0.89 (0.81, 0.98)Percent population that is white (in 10% increments) -.089 .323     .265   Change in white population (in 10% increments) -.026 .767     .511  Urban population proportion (in 10% increments) .008 .874     .931   Change in urban proportion (in 10% increments) .030 .614     .690  Median age (years) -.027 .337     .132   Change in median age (years) -.027 .320     .288  High school graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.226 .071   -.206 .047 0.81 (0.66, 1.00) Change in graduation rate (in 10% increments) -.398 .005   -.301 .018 0.74 (0.58, 0.95)Bank deposits (in $1000s per capita) 2.721 .577     .226   Change in bank deposits (in 10% increments) .005 .654     .383  Median household income (in $1,000s) .022 .008   .019 .007 1.02 (1.01, 1.03) Change in median household income (in 10% increments) -.030 .330     .856  

Table 3. Multiple event history analyses with fixed effects (cont.)Full Model   Parsimonious Model

Variableln

(HR) p  ln

(HR) p HR (95% CI)Number of farms (per 1,000 persons) -.040 .000   -.047 .000 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) Change in number of farms (in 10% increments) -.021 .086     .121  Number of manufacturers (per 1,000 persons) -.715 .000   -.749 .000 0.47 (0.37, 0.60) Change in number of manufacturers (in 10% increments) .011 .453     .104  Number of wholesalers (per 1,000 persons) -.115 .278     .258   Change in number of wholesalers (in 10% increments) .013 .296     .233  Number of service businesses (per 1,000 persons) -.004 .878     .618   Change in number of service businesses (in 10% increments) .012 .307   .026 .001 1.03 (1.01, 1.04)Number of retailers (per 1,000 persons) -.093 .044   -.102 .000 0.90 (0.85, 0.95) Change in number of retailers (in 10% increments) .001 .974     .591  Retail sales (in $1000s per capita) .029 .127     .362   Change in retail sales (in 10% increments) -.003 .782     .400  Number of malls .159 .000   .151 .000 1.16 (1.13, 1.20) Number of malls, squared -.002 .000   -.002 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

National Level Factors            Number of malls (in increments of 100) .018 .729   .039 .164 1.04 (0.98, 1.10) Number of malls, squared .001 .148   .001 .088 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Number of shopping centers (in increments of 1,000) .102 .013   .112 .001 1.12 (1.05, 1.19) Number of shopping centers, squared -.002 .012   -.003 .000 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)Shopping center legitimacy level (range: 0-1) .455 .488     .731  GDP (in $1 Trillions) -.491 .000   -.486 .000 0.61 (0.51, 0.74) GDP growth rate (in 10% increments) .155 .004   .164 .001 1.18 (1.07, 1.30)Federal Reserve Prime Rate (in 1% increments) .007 .541     .549  

East Midwest South West0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Figure 1. Number of mall enclosures, by region (n=3977)

Region

N

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

Figure 2. Number of enclosed malls constructed, by year (n=3977); includes new construction and re-

modeling of existing centers)

Year

N

Les

s th

an 1

3 to

3.9

6 to

6.9

9 to

9.9

12 to

12.

9

15 to

15.

9

18 to

18.

9

21 to

21.

9

24 to

24.

9

27 to

27.

9

30 to

30.

9

33 to

33.

9

36 to

36.

9

39 to

39.

9

42 to

42.

9

45 to

45.

9

48 to

48.

9

51 to

51.

9

54 to

54.

9

57 to

57.

9

60 to

60.

9

63 to

63.

90

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Figure 3. Distribution of survival times, county level(n=7112 periods, 3978 periods culminating in mall enclosure event and 3134 right-censored periods)*

Event Censored

Years elapsed since last mall enclosure in county

N

*2108 censored periods with survival time of 64 to 64.9 years (i.e., counties with 0 en-closed malls) not shown

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Figure 4. Relative mall risk by county-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in county

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Figure 5. County-level relative mall risk by national-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in nation

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Figure 6. Relative mall risk by county-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects County-level model, with fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in county

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Figure 7. County-level relative mall risk by national-level mall density

County-level model, without fixed effects County-level model, with fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in nation

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Figure 8. State-level relative mall risk by national-level mall density

State-level model, with fixed effects

Number of enclosed malls in nation

Cal

cula

ted

rela

tive

mal

l ris

k