The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive

text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htm

IJRDM
33,11 Ethnography of an American
Main Street
Susie Pryor and Sanford Grossbart
806 University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Abstract
Purpose – This article seeks to demonstrate how sociological perspectives and ethnographic
methods provide insights into extraeconomic and suprafirm factors that may contribute to the
functioning and character of downtown business districts. The study is intended to suggest directions
for future research, rather than provide a definitive test of specific propositions.
Design/methodology/approach – A long-term field investigation of a Midwestern American Main
Street is presented in an extended case study format. Participant observation, depth and field
interviews, and secondary data collection are the primary methods employed.
Findings – The findings suggest three dialectics that reflect extraeconomic dimensions underlying
vital Main Streets. These include continua regarding the structure, function, and festive nature of
marketplace activities. In this study, relatively few marketplace activities were commercial functions.
Moreover, most were co-produced by consumers and marketers. The extent of co-production may
contribute to the functioning and character of this vibrant downtown business district.
Research limitations/implications – This study was designed foster future research regarding
the downtown business district as an historical sociocommercial entity. However, it does not test
specific hypotheses.
Practical implications – This article should interest retailers, rural economists, city planners, and
economic development agencies due to its focus on sociocommercial aspects of small city commercial
centers.
Originality/value – The article highlights the extraeconomic importance of downtown business
districts. It presents a case study of a successful Main Street, in contrast with studies that focus on the
geographic, economic, and competitive factors related to failed or failing Main Streets.
Keywords Ethnography, Commercial centres, Retailing, Zones (planning), Town planning,
United States of America
Paper type Case study

Downtown business districts in the USA, referred to as Main Streets, have

International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management
Vol. 33 No. 11, 2005
pp. 806-823
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0959-0552
DOI 10.1108/09590550510629400
dramatically changed in the past 40 years. In many ways, they once symbolized
communities’ economic health and quality-of-life (Presti, 2003). Before World War II,
they were commercial hubs and centers of social life where people met friends and
neighbors and dined, saw a show, strolled, and window shopped on Saturday nights.
Main Streets are now struggling for survival in the USA (Miller et al., 1999; Oldenburg,
1999; Shils, 1997; Stone, 1997; McCune, 1994) and Europe (National Home Center News,
1998; Rohwedder, 1993). Their demise or vitality has important social, cultural, and
economic implications for the communities in which they are located. The
de-socialization associated with their decline has been tied to neighborhood failure,
urban crime, drugs, gangs, and blight (Shils, 1997).
Conversely, evidence suggests that vibrant Main Streets can do more than increase
options for goods and services. They can make social, cultural, and economic,
contributions to the quality-of-life and development of communities. Main Streets
support specific social functions, provide important civic forums, and facilitate
pedestrian mobility and social interaction. In some cases, they may become tourist An American
attractions due to their architecture, location, unique product offerings, and civic, Main Street
social, and cultural events (Milchen, 2005; National Trust for Historic Preservation,
2004; SBA Office of Advocacy, 2004; Presti, 2003; Civic Economics, 2002; Lewis, 1994).
Vital Main Streets can also enhance employment, property values, and tax bases;
act as small businesses incubators for fledgling entrepreneurs; support stores that
carry locally produced goods and employ the services of other local businesses; and 807
reduce urban sprawl, by concentrating communities’ infrastructures and land uses. In
addition, local merchants are typically key actors on vibrant Main Streets. They
usually have more interests, ties, and understanding of local conditions than their
chain store counterparts. Consequently, compared to the potential benefits from the
successes of retail chains, the successes of local merchants on Main Street are more
likely to result in profits remaining in town; support for local families with
family-owned businesses; and ties that support community values and local economic
interests. Moreover, in contrast to chain store owners and managers, local business
owners are inclined be more concerned with the long-term changes and local prosperity
(Milchen, 2005; Civic Economics, 2004, 2002; National Trust for Historic Preservation,
2004; SBA Office of Advocacy, 2004; Presti, 2003).
Despite its historical and sociocommercial significance, the American Main Street
remains virtually unexplored by marketing scholars. This neglect continues, despite
pleas for work on factors that seem to be prominent facets of Main Streets. For
example, there are calls for research on marketplace interactions in settings with more
social complexity and richness than those that are typically studied (Wright, 2002) and
for attention to extraeconomic dimensions of consumer behavior that may be
underemphasized in the dominant logic of market capitalism (Sherry, 1990). Arguably,
marketing scholars’ neglect of Main Street is also reinforced by studies of downtown
districts in other fields, which focus on the extent and causes of their general pattern of
demise (e.g. competition from category killers, large discount stores, and regional
shopping centers; (Presti, 2003; University of Wisconsin Center for Economic
Development, 2002; Stone, 1997). Consequently, we have limited insight into the factors
that allow Main Streets to withstand these threats.
In contrast, this ethnographic case study of an American Main Street underscores
both the significance and complexity of a broad array of dialectical tensions as they
relate to the structure, function, and festive nature of marketplace activities. It also
highlights the interplay among marketplace actors as they negotiate social, cultural,
economic, and political meanings on Main Street. In investigating these issues, it
extends and complements enthnographic work in marketing that examines the
socio-commercial and sociocultural character and dynamics of other, less permanent
types of marketplace settings (e.g. swap meets, flea markets, and trade shows; cf.,
Peñaloza, 2000; Peñaloza and Gilly, 1999; Belk et al., 1988; Sherry, 1990).
The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how such an examination may provide
important insights into the extraeconomic and suprafirm factors that may contribute to
the functioning and character of Main Streets. We adopt the broad sociological concept
of social embeddedness, and Sherry’s (1990) model of marketplace structure and
function, to theorize about the operation of successful Main Streets. To demonstrate the
plausibility of such an approach, we draw upon qualitative data collected as part of
on-going ethnographic research conducted over the past three years. The material
IJRDM presented here is not intended to provide a definitive test of specific propositions, but
33,11 rather to offer direction for future research.

Theoretical assumptions
Some scholars reject conventional conceptions of marketplaces that are based on
economic (and largely asocial) models of exchange (Lichbach and Seligmann, 2000). A
808 notable example is Granovetter’s (1985) work on embeddedness. Granovetter argues
for increased attention to the interplay between social structures and economic activity,
because sociological factors are central, not peripheral, features of all market processes
(1985). He defines embeddedness as the contextualization of economic activity in
on-going patterns of social relations and refers to markets in which social relationships
alter activities as being embedded. Further, Granovetter asserts that the level of
embeddedness in modern markets is far greater than that allowed by economists. He
maintains that embeddedness represents more than a static social structure that
performs an economic function. It represents a system of social organization and social
relations that reflect historical properties and the promise of on going relations. He
notes that, “the behavior and institutions to be analyzed are so constrained by ongoing
social relations that to construe them as independent is a grievous misunderstanding”
(Granovetter, 1985, p. 482).
Although it has been proposed that economic activity is affected by varying forms
of embeddedness (cf, Zukin and DiMaggio’s (1990) work on cognitive, cultural,
structural and political embeddedness), much research in marketing and management
focuses on structural embeddeness which concerns “how the quality and network
architecture of material exchange relationships influence economic activity” (Uzzi,
1997, p. 36). This work deals with organizations as efficient solutions to problems of
coordination (Nee and Ingram, 1998) and with how organizational opportunities and
outcomes are related to regulatory structures, ties to political authorities, and
institutional patterns of political linkages (Baum and Oliver, 1992). In general terms,
work on organizational embeddedness attempts to strike a balance between behavioral
rationality and economic efficiency (Smelser and Swedberg, 1994), by incorporating
relational aspects of organizations (Marsden, 1981) into theories of organizational
efficiency. Yet, arguably, scholars who treat embeddedness in a narrow structural
manner take an unduly reductionist view. This approach strips the concept of
embeddedness of the sociological richness and synergistic properties highlighted by
Granovetter (1985).
Most marketing studies of embeddedness deal with relatively restricted contexts
and adhere to this structural viewpoint. These studies examine ties between actors in a
distribution channel (Wathne et al., 2001; Moorman et al., 1992); firms with
interorganizational links (Anderson et al., 1994), industrial buyers (Bonoma et al., 1978);
and firms in services and other business-to-business situations (Wathne et al., 2001;
Reve and Stern, 1986). (For exceptions, see Frenzen and Davis, 1990; Sherry, 1990.) By
contrast, work on embeddedness in other fields considers more than these structural
aspects and offers a broader perspective than is evident in most marketing studies. It
suggests that marketplace actions and market exchange are embedded in, and defined
by, social and cultural factors that have a rich and robust effect on the nature of
markets (Portes and Sensenbrenner, 1993; Zukin and DiMaggio, 1990; Granovetter,
1985; Polanyi, 1957; 1944; Schumpeter, 1950). These factors are larger in number and
more complex in their interplay than the factors that are examined by marketing An American
scholars. Main Street
This study adopts a more general social embeddedness perspective, to broaden our
understanding about the interplay of economic and social factors in the marketplace. It
does so by investigating more than the structural facets of embeddedness. It uses
Sherry’s (1990) model of marketplace structure and function to organize its inquiry into
marketplace activities. 809
Sherry (1990) proposes that much of the marketplace structure and function that
consumers experience exists along two dialectic dimensions. The structural dimension
is represented by a formal-informal continuum. Formal structure “is characterized as
official, controlled, highly rationalized, proactive, and institutional” (Sherry, 1990,
p. 16), whereas informal structure is less official, often clandestine, less controlled, less
rational, reactive and transient in nature. The functional dimension is represented by
an economic-festive continuum. A more economic marketplace is characterized by
rationality and utility, whereas more festive marketplace is hedonic and experiential in
nature. Based on an ethnographic study of an American flea market, Sherry indicates
that the flea market resides at the axes of these two continua as a result of inherent
tensions within the marketplace. He proposes that these and other dialectics are at play
in all marketplaces and provide bases for comparative studies of alternative and
conventional marketplaces. This study uses these two dimensions as the basis for
examining activities within the Main Street marketplace, which (arguably) is a more
complex social entity than a flea market.

Methodology
This study emerged from the desire to theorize about the extraeconomic and suprafirm
variables that could contribute to viable Main Streets. It was stimulated by the first
author’s ownership of two retail stores in the Midwestern American Main Street
studied. The data and interpretations derive primarily from a three-year study, but are
integrated by comparative insights developed over her ten-year period of store
ownership. The primary methods employed were participant observation, depth and
field interviews, and secondary data collection. This Main Street marketplace is
marked by both historic properties and the expectation of on-going social relations
(Granovetter, 1985). Thus, although this study shares some similarities with other
ethnographies in marketing, its context is less restrictive than short-term periodic
events, such as a single-day holiday (e.g. Thanksgiving; Wallendorf and Arnould,
1991); an annual trade show (e.g. Peñaloza, 2000); and a monthly flea market (e.g.
Sherry, 1990). In the following discussion, this long-term investigation is presented in
an extended case study format (Sherry, 1990).
From September 2001 through November 2004, on an approximately monthly basis,
the first author engaged in 240 hours of participant observation. She worked as a
retailer, shopped with consumers, and attended Main Street activities and events (e.g.
sidewalk sales, parades, and art shows). She conducted 60 field interviews, attended 32
unique events, and took hundreds of photographs. She collected audio-taped
interviews, field notes, and photographs and gathered secondary data from local
media, including news stories, photographs, and video clips. She also conducted two to
three hour depth interviews with 12 key retailer and consumer informants (McCracken,
1988), as bases for on-going exploration and member checks.
IJRDM Key retailer informants were initially selected on the basis of their experience with
33,11 the DRA, ownership of a DRA store for more than five years, or active involvement in
the downtown merchants association. Key consumer informants were initially selected
via retailers’ recommendations about those who shopped extensively in the DRA.
Findings in the early phase suggested that a more varied set of key informants should
be selected in the follow-up phase. For example, during initial interviews, key retailer
810 informants suggested that side street merchants and Main Street merchants may differ
in their experiences. In addition, key consumer informants suggested that consumers’
experiences may differ due to a variety of factors, including when they shop (e.g.
weekdays versus weekends), whether they live in or out of town, and the stores they
patronize. Fieldwork supported these reports.
Interviews were conducted in locations chosen by informants. Each informant was
also consulted, as needed, throughout the study for additional insights and clarification.
Interviews began with open-ended, grand-tour questions (McCracken, 1988). Informants
were asked about their general demographic characteristics (education, occupation, etc.)
and then about the nature and extent of their association with the downtown area.
Probes were used to learn about informants’ relationships with other actors (retailers and
consumers), social and commercial activities, and uses and views of the downtown.
Informants were encouraged to express personal perspectives and to elaborate on how
their behaviors, interactions, and what they had observed in the downtown.
Interpretation of the data for a fuller investigation is on-going. It involves a dialectic
tacking process (Kates, 2002), in which interviews and field notes are read several
times to develop a coherent sense of the whole body of data and generate as many
categories as possible. Next, emergent themes are clustered to provide an
understanding of shared meanings across subgroups of actors and actions (Strauss
and Corbin, 1998). Finally, these themes and the emerging theoretical framework are
related to literature as suggested by the data. To focus on the structural and functional
marketplace dimensions (Sherry, 1990) discussed in this article, the data were analyzed
using template analysis (Crabtree and Miller, 1992). As may occur with this form of
analysis, revision of the template was required (Marshall and Rossman, 1999) because
the data suggested an alternate framework.

A midwestern American Main Street: an overview

The following discussion begins with a description of the local setting. Then, it deals
with the structure, function, and nature of activities and the role of consumer
participation in this marketplace. Finally, it considers how consumers and retailers
view extraeconomic dimensions of Main Street. Pseudonyms are used to protect
informants’ and local businesses’ privacy.

Local setting: a midwestern American Main Street

The research setting is a downtown retail area in a midwestern American city with a
population of about 90,000. The downtown contains roughly 150 stores, restaurants,
theaters, art galleries, clubs, and other establishments. The area covers from about 6th
Street to 11th Street along Massachusetts Street (the original Main Street) and extends
both one block east and west. There are trees, benches, pedestrian walkways, and
permanent and annual sculpture installations along Massachusetts Street. At the north
end is Liberty Hall, in a former Opera House that was restored following a fire in 1911,
is an independent film theatre and performance venue. At the south end, in a restored An American
1888 bank building, is the Watkins Community Museum of History. Main Street
The historic nature of the downtown is a central theme in the community’s discourse
about the area. Founded by the New England Emigrant Aid Company in August, 1854,
the town was the site of important struggles between pro-slavery and anti-slavery
forces, immediately preceding and during the American Civil War.. During its
Territorial days, it was defended by John Brown in the 1855 Wakarusa War, and later 811
sacked by sheriff Sam Jones in 1856. The town served as the free state capital of the
Kansas Territory from 1857-1860. On August 20, 1863, William Quantrill’s pro-slavery
forces burned the downtown, killing 143 men and leaving only one building standing in
their wake. Much of the downtown was subsequently rebuilt and bronze plaques today
mark the most significant historic structures[1]. Exhibits from those pioneer years and
town’s free state heritage are on display at the Watkins Museum. In addition, remnants
remain in the form of historical names. For example, the Free State Brewery bears the
name of The Free State Hotel, which was destroyed by pro-slavery forces in 1856. Until
recently, there was a popular flea market called “Quantrill’s.” (It was renovated into
office and retail space.) In the past year, the city replaced green and white downtown
street signs with black and white street signs, which have a more “vintage” appearance
and include both current and historic street names.
The city’s vitality and cultural assets have drawn praise from a variety of
publications (e.g. Forbes Magazine, Expansion Management, and John Villani, author
of The 100 Best Small Arts Towns in America) and the National Trust for Historic
Preservation. The city/county’s nearly 3 percent annual population growth is the
largest in the region. In recent years, the city was ranked one of the nation’s: top 10
smaller metros regional economies; 50 hottest cities for business relocation and
expansion; top dozen most distinctive destinations; best-preserved and unique
communities; and top 15 best small arts towns[2]. Arguably, such recognition is
partially due to historic, cultural, and aesthetic nature of the downtown and its
adjacent neighborhoods.
Local sources refer to the downtown as “the retail, service and professional,
governmental, entertainment, and social center of our community”[3]. They stress its
mix of contemporary and traditional architecture and art; local and chain stores; and
cosmopolitan and local traditions, services, and events[4]. The city also portrays itself
as a cultural hub in the midwestern United States. The “City of the Arts” theme on
banners throughout the downtown is reinforced by the prominent placement of
sculptures along Main Street and an annual outdoor art show in South Park, at the
south end of the area. During this study, local artists’ works were displayed in
merchant windows as a part of a “Harvest of the Arts” campaign.
This setting offers advantages as a research site, because it is commercially vibrant
(Sherry, 1990) and its modest size and spatial distribution allow adequate opportunities
for participation in, and observation of, retailer and consumer activities. Moreover, the
first author has lived in the city for over 20 years and, as noted, is the co-owner of two
specialty retail stores on Main Street.

Findings
The Main Street marketplace has some of the same characteristics identified by Sherry
(1990) in his ethnography of an American flea market. Like the flea market, it embodies
IJRDM the tension inherent in the functional and structural continua. However, the data in this
33,11 study support a reconceptualization of the Sherry model.
Participation in and observation of 32 distinct marketplace events and activities
resulted in the emergence of at least three significant dialectics that may contribute to
an understanding the extraeconomic dimensions underlying vital Main Streets.
Analysis of these activities reveals a structural dimension that aligns with what Sherry
812 described as a formal/informal continuum. However, the functional dimension that
emerged is more usefully viewed as ranging from commercial to non-commercial in
nature. A festive dimension also appears in our data, but it is better understood as a
third dialectic which describes marketplace activities and ranges from less festive (i.e.
commonplace) to those that are highly festive in nature.
This Main Street is the site of a broad range of marketplace activities, which are
categorized along the three continua and summarized in Table I. Traditional
celebrations, which include events such as holiday parades to luncheon concerts, are
the most common form of activity. They are highly festive in nature, highly formal in
structure, and serve non-commercial functions. Commercial celebrations are the second
most commonly observed activity. Also highly festive and formal, they serve
commercial functions. The annual sidewalk sale is representative of commercial
celebrations. It is discussed more in later section. Personal celebrations are festive but
informal and non-commercial. An example of a personal celebration is the spontaneous
eruption of a mass party on Main Street following a major sports victory. Smaller scale
personal celebrations include entertainment by street musicians who routinely perform
on Main Street.
Personal pursuits refer to informal, non-commercial events and activities that are
less festive in nature. Examples include chess playing by individuals on street corners
and socializing activities of middle-school youths who meet downtown. Political

Categories of activities Characteristics Examples

Traditional celebrations (n ¼ 13) Highly festive, highly formal,
and non-commercial
Commercial celebrations (n ¼ 10) Highly festive, highly formal,
and commercial
Personal celebrations (n ¼ 3) Highly festive, informal, and
non-commercial
Personal pursuits (n ¼ 2) Less festive, informal, and
non-commercial
Political agendas (n ¼ 2) Less festive, moderate to low
formality, and non-commercial
or explicitly anti-commercial
Marketer-orchestrated activities Moderate to low festivity,
(n ¼ 2) moderate formality, and
Table I. commercial without commercial remote broadcasts
Main Street activities sales activity
Holiday parades, concerts
Sidewalk sale, Moonlight
Madness
Sports-related celebrations that
erupt following significant
victories, street musicians
Playing chess on street corners,
social gatherings among
middle-school youth
Rallies, protests, demonstrations
Chamber of Commerce after
hours socials, radio-station
agendas include rallies, protests and demonstrations. They are less festive, moderate to An American
low in formality, and non-commercial or, in some cases, explicitly anti-commercial in Main Street
nature. Finally, some activities are categorized as marketer-orchestrated events. These
are low to moderate to low in festivity, are commercially focused but normally do not
include commercial activity such as sales transactions, and are moderately formal in
structure. Examples include Chamber of Commerce After Hours socials and
radio-station remote broadcasts. 813
As might be expected, the bulk of these activities are fairly festive in nature and
roughly half are also fairly formal in structure. More surprisingly, relatively few events
are commercial functions. Only five of 32 events are explicitly designed to promote the
sale of goods. The other 27 events focus on extraeconomic goals, including those that
are social, cultural, or political in nature. Many of these activities also reflect multiple
and sometimes conflicting goals.
An example is the annual sidewalk sale, which is classified as a commercial
celebration. It typically draws about 20,000 visitors in a single day. Plates 1-3 contain
images of the range of political, social, cultural, and commercial activities that occur
during this single event. In Plate 1, consumers staff a table that is designed to draw
attention to the cause of an American Indian activist, who is in a US Federal Prison for
the murder of an FBI agent during a civil rights conflict in the 1970s. Other
participants at the sidewalk sale event campaigned for political office (e.g. for District
Attorney), gave citizens an opportunity to register to vote, and sought signatures for a
petition to repeal a recent city-wide non-smoking ban. In Plate 2, roughly half a dozen
social agencies are staffing similar booths at this ostensibly commercial event. Finally,
Plate 3 reveals the extent of the commercial activity that also takes place at the annual
sidewalk sale.

Plate 1.
Sidewalk sale as site of
political expression
IJRDM
33,11

814

Plate 2.
Sidewalk sale as site of
social participation

Plate 3.
Sidewalk sale as
commercial event

Both depth and field interviews regarding this single marketplace activity reveal the
breadth of meaning it holds for actors. Two retailers interviewed in the field focused on
social aspects of the sales event and the first, in particular, highlights the dialectical
tension between commercial and non-commercial (social) meanings:
 We have some good conversations. I really like for them to buy once in awhile but I don’t An American
really care if they buy. It’s just a fun day (Fieldnote, July 15, 2004, Dan, antiques dealer).
Main Street
It’s just an opportunity to have a wonderful time (Fieldnote, July 15, 2004, Rob, retailer).
In contrast, a third retailer, who viewed the event in more commercial terms, stressed
that he was happy to have an opportunity to: “unload” slow moving goods (secondary
data, Lawrence Journal-World new report, July 15, 2004). 815
The following excerpt from a consumer’s comments reflects dialectical tensions
about the event’s festive nature and its commercial and social functions:
I definitely think that there’s something about being that close to a bunch of people and kind
of you know it feels like a party or whatever and I think it’s easier to talk to people in that
kind of setting . . . [However,] I don’t usually [attend] because I just can’t. I personally don’t
like the insane crush of people. It’s just my nature that I don’t personally like that and it tends
to irritate me to have a bunch of people crammed together trying to fight over merchandise
. . . and yeah I think there’s a very cheerful sort of attitude about it so I don’t think it’d be that
bad but I just sort of don’t do it (Mere, customer).
Structurally, the sidewalk sale is classified as formal, due to the various civic entities
charged with its organization. For example, city permits are needed to close the
downtown to vehicle traffic and participants who are not downtown merchants’
association members must pay for booth space. However, the atmosphere is chaotic
and the formal structure is less obvious from consumers’ perspectives.
The sidewalk sale, like most of the other downtown activities, is highly festive in
nature. In addition to retailers, social agencies, political actors, and consumers play a
variety of significant roles in creating this commercial event (including providing
music and other entertainment; fieldnotes from the 2004 sidewalk sale list “two
guitarists, one young man with a harmonica, a clown, and a magician”). An
appreciation of consumers’ participation in jointly producing this and other
marketplace activities may be essential to understanding the character and function
of vibrant downtowns.
Marketers solely produced only six of the 32 events recorded in this study.
Marketers and consumers co-produced 11 events and consumers coordinated 15 events
with no significant marketer participation. (Events and producers are listed in Table II.)
These findings are consistent with work by other marketing scholars that depicts
marketing activity as a social and cultural phenomenon (Sherry, 1990) and the
marketplace as a “powerful social theater” (Peñaloza, 2000, p. 85; Peñaloza and Gilly,
1999) in which market stimuli act as “cultural mediations located between marketers
and consumers and produced in and through their joint activities” (Peñaloza, 2000,
p. 84).
The data suggest that consumer participation and co-production of activities may
affect the function, structure, and nature of the marketplace. Events that are solely or
largely the result of consumers’ contributions fall at the extreme ends of the
formal-informal structural dimension, while marketer-driven and co-produced
activities exhibit more moderate formal structures. Events that solely or largely
result from marketers’ efforts are largely commercial functions and are notably less
festive than other marketplace activities. The extent of consumer participation may
contribute to the disproportionate number of non-commercial marketplace activities in
this vibrant downtown business district.
IJRDM
Category of activity Producers
33,11
Traditional celebrations
St Patrick’s day parade Marketers and consumers
Christmas sleigh parade Marketers and consumers
Band day parade Consumers
816 Homecoming parade Consumers
Sesquicentennial parade Consumers
Artogeau parade Consumers
Cardboard boat parade Consumers
Concert in park Consumers
Trick or treating Marketers and consumers
Santa Claus lands downtown Marketers and consumers
Brown bag concerts Consumers
Sports events Consumers
Festival of Trees Marketers and consumers
Commercial celebrations
Queen’s jubilee Marketers and consumers
Sidewalk sale Marketers and consumers
Art in Park Marketers and consumers
Moonlight Madness Marketers
Mass St mosey Marketers and consumers
Holiday open house Marketers
Farmer’s market Marketers
Festival of poinsettias Marketers
Painting windows Marketers and consumers
Harvest of Arts Marketers and consumers
Personal celebrations
Red Hat Ladies march Consumers
Street musicians Consumers
Sports celebrations Consumers
Personal pursuits
Chess players Consumers
Junior high kids Consumers
Political agendas Consumers
Political rallies Consumers
Protests Consumers
Table II. Marketer-orchestrated activities
Producers of Main Street Chamber of Commerce after hours socials Marketers
activities by category Lazer block party Marketers

Main Street as the site of social, cultural, and political activities

The extraordinary level of consumer participation in the production of Main Street
marketplace activities is captured in the photographic evidence and informants’
comments about Main Street’s role in the community and the extent to which it reflects
broader community values. Plate 4 depicts the annual St Patrick’s Day Parade, which
is co-produced by marketers, consumers, and other ancillary actors. Each year,
proceeds are donated to varying community charities. These accounts and other
collected data offer insights about the role of extraeconomic functions of Main Street. In
 An American
Main Street

817

Plate 4.
St Patrick’s Day, a
traditional celebration,
co-produced by marketers,
consumers, and ancillary
actors

the following discussion, we briefly highlight how Main Street is perceived as a site of
social, cultural and political activities.
The importance of Main Street’s social functions was evident in all depth interviews
and during fieldwork. The following excerpts illustrate that consumers and retailers
view downtown as a physical and social space for family interactions and interactions
with other marketplace actors:
[My children] love to stroll around the streets and . . . my older son would bring his scooter
and he would scoot around down there and [my younger son] loves to ride the
merry-go-round in front of the antique mall and they love to go to The Sweet Shoppe [a local
candy shop]. They like to go to The Toy Moon to play downstairs (Patricia, customer).

My husband and his friend like to go down there because they like to look at people. There are
lots of attractive people to look at . . . It can be a good place to go to people watch, too (Mere,
customer).
Other consumers and retailers describe social activities on Main Street, which they
associate with a variety of experiences, including dining; window shopping; strolling
for relaxation; jogging for health reasons; pub crawls; wine tastings; book clubs;
language clubs; craft guilds; charity events; art events; parades; demonstrations; mass
celebrations following major sports victories; and meeting friends. Many informants
also refer to social interactions between and among retailers and consumers. The
following two excerpts describe typical customer-retailer and customer-customer
exchanges:
I think that the relationship you have with the retailer is totally different [than in other
settings]. I mean, you don’t go to Target and start chatting about “Oh and I went to high
school in Italy and I just love this cheese!” I mean you know you never have that kind of
IJRDM conversation with someone at Target or WalMart but like at The Common Market with
Rebecca [the owner] I was just thinking of that I went in there and I was able to sort of, you
33,11 know, reminisce with her and talk with her and she was interested in that (Mary, customer).
Informants also culturally differentiate downtown goods and retailers from discount
merchants and multinational corporations and the goods they offer. The following
example exemplifies this discourse:
818
And the local stuff has it’s own special thing . . . and it’s really distinctive, you know, a lot of
’em prepare it from scratch where places like Chili’s it’s that thing like you say “Can I have
mine like this?” and it’s “Oh, no, we get it in a package.” . . . You know, you go to Dillons and
get frozen stuff, and it’s “So what?” . . . and with Mamasitos you get something really
distinctive, wholesome food that’s freshly cooked (Nancy, customer).
In addition, it is evident that consumers’ behaviors are grounded in distinctions they
make between downtown merchants and big box retailers. In one case, a downtown
retailer suggested that a customer buy a video she did not have in stock from a big box
retailer outlet. Despite the fact it might not arrive prior to Christmas, the customer still
ordered the video from the downtown retailer (Fieldnote, November 11, 2001). There
are many related examples in field notes and informant interviews:
If I’m at Kohls and because I know they’re a multinational corporation and if I buy something
there and it’s substandard, I will not hesitate to complain. I feel perfectly justified in my
complaining . . . if I feel like they’ve advertised a sale and they’re not following through or if
particular prices aren’t marked down like they say they should be. I guess maybe I’m just
more aware of that when I’m at Kohls. When I’m downtown, I’m more inclined to give the
retailers the benefit of the doubt in terms of, you know, well, this is a mom and pop shop (Meg,
customer).

If I’m looking for a special gift I go downtown. I mean you just I wouldn’t even bother going
out to Kohl’s or you know Target or whatever (Oliva, customer).
These types of assumptions and cultural distinctions extend to other marketplace
actors. All informants in this study identify themselves as “downtown shoppers” or
downtown merchants and these designations clearly connote significant cultural
categories to them, as illustrated by the following examples:
She leaned over the counter and whispered to me, conspiratorially, “There’s a group of us, you
know, who support this downtown” (Fieldnote, October 20, 2001).

I believe that most of the people who are shopping downtown . . . appreciate the tree lined
streets, the old fashioned quaintness, the charm. I mean, I think we are all appreciating that
(Meg, customer).

And I know that other people shop here because they do like something different; they do like
being different and not being just part of the WalMart crowd (Lisa, Downtown business
owner).
However, it is also clear that both customers and retailers struggle to align their
cultural and economic values. For many individuals, the downtown district offers a
basis for cultural self-knowledge and expression, but tensions sometimes result
because they find it difficult to maintain their cultural categorizations:
 [A]t Thanksgiving with the family around the table, they’re all talking about Sam’s Club and An American
WalMart and where they shop and where they eat and they are just so different than I am. It’s
like they don’t even think of going to different stores or anything. It’s a whole separate Main Street
mentality and I think maybe our customers do have a different mentality. [Long pause.] But I
don’t think they don’t ever shop at WalMart because, you know, there’s a lot of things you
need from WalMart (Sara, Downtown Merchant).
I feel really guilty about going to WalMart because most of my friends are very staunch local 819
shoppers so I always feel incredibly guilty to say that I actually go to WalMart. [Laughter.]
But the reason I go to Wal-Mart is because I have this frame of reference that I’m really poor
and I don’t have much . . . [A]t WalMart . . . I know I’m getting usually the cheapest price I can
possibly get (Alex, customer).
Finally, our findings suggest that political expression may be an important component
of vibrant downtowns. Throughout this study, political expression was evident on
Main Street. Artwork and graffiti, which highlighted specific political views,
periodically appeared downtown (but in other areas of the city). In addition, there were
weekly Sunday demonstrations by hemp supporters (“Honk if you love hemp!”);
various protests about war, ecological damage, big box retailers, actions by individual
merchants, and other issues; political placards placed in store windows by merchants
and on children’s strollers by consumers; and booths to support candidates for local
office or specific issues at commercial and non-commercial events.

Discussion
This research offers theoretical perspectives on downtown business districts and the
role of consumer participation. It suggests dimensions that characterize activities in
Main Street marketplaces. These include their structural nature, ranging from informal
to formal; their functional nature, ranging from commercial to non-commercial; and
their festive character, that may vary from commonplace and routine to highly festive.
It also highlights cooperative activities among merchants, consumers, and ancillary
actors (e.g. political candidates) as important elements that contribute to a
marketplace’s operation and character.
This study also raises issues about tensions between governing market logic and
communal relations, which have broad implications for the discipline. Our findings
underscore considerable co-production of marketplace activities by consumers and
marketers, which contrasts with arguments that markets repress or operate on or
against consumers and “directly affect individual consumers by homogenizing them
and suppressing their self-expressive capabilities” (Kozinets, 2002, p. 22). The
co-production of activities and cooperative exchanges in this downtown suggest that
there is a need to reevaluate previous notions about consumer repression and
resistance. Evidence of co-production and consumer participation on this Main
Street also suggests that key consumer behaviors among actors in a marketplace are
broader in their scope and consequences than the behaviors discussed by Sherry (1900)
(searching, dickering, and socializing). In addition to their effects on on-going economic
and social relations, they seem to influence more macro-level outcomes that affect the
character, dynamics, and viability of Main Street.
Furthermore, this study challenges views about postmodernism and the declining
importance of communities of place. For example, interpretive consumer researchers
suggest that brands form the center for community and social interaction (cf. Muniz and
IJRDM O’Guinn, 2001) and further charge brands with destroying “authentic” human
33,11 communities (Muniz and O’Guinn 2001, p. 426). However, our findings suggest that a
Main Street may be a significant center of social interaction and both embody and
influence a sense of community among citizens. The differences in these respects
between our findings versus prior evidence may reflect, as Wright (2002, p. 680) alleges,
that consumer researchers often “settle for socially impoverished research settings.”
820 Due to challenges involved in investigating the extraeconomic and suprafirm
factors in this downtown setting, the research objectives in this study were exploratory
in nature. The American Main Street is virtually unexplored in prior research in
marketing. Moreover, Main Street itself is both socially rich and complex, due to its on
going (versus temporary or periodic) nature; its relatively permeable economic,
physical, and social boundaries; and the dynamic and varying nature of actors’
relationships. Thus, the scope of the inquiry and nature of the setting required a
longitudinal approach and qualitative methods. Although these challenges and the
method employed limit the immediate application and generalizability of our findings,
they have important implications for future research.

Directions for future research

Further investigations of complex, socially-embedded marketplaces, like downtown
business districts, may offer new insights in a number of areas of inquiry. For instance,
they may foster a broadened conceptualization of retailing that offers a more macro or
suprafirm view of retailer relationships and sources of competitiveness; a
reconceptualization of consumer participation; and a richer understanding of
cooperation among consumers and retailers and the interplay between extraeconomic
facets of the marketplace and the shopping, buying, consumption, merchandising, and
selling behaviors that are more typically examined in marketing studies.
Marketing research on retailing has an atomistic or dyadic bias (Grossbart and
Pryor, 2002). The retailing literature may be deficient due to its tendency to view
retailers as isolated competitors and to strip them from their social contexts. This bias
contributes to the depiction of retailers as rivals and underemphasizes the nature of
their collaborative efforts and joint contributions, made evident in this study. It also
neglects consumers’ roles as co-producers with retailers. In investigating more
complex relational ties between and among retailers and consumers, scholars may
develop a much richer understanding of the relevant qualities of relationships and the
antecedents and outcomes of cooperative behaviors in the marketplace.
Both retailers and consumers in this study demonstrated strongly held and shared
beliefs about the Main Street business district. Their views had important implications
in terms of customer loyalty and sympathetic treatment among consumers and
retailers. Future research may develop added insights about the positive and negative
consequences of consumer attachments to Main Street merchants and to functional and
dysfunctional consequences of bounded solidarity and cooperation among retailers.
More broadly, scholars may wish to explore the role of marketplaces as a social theatre
(Penaloza, 2000); Main Streets and other socially-embedded marketplaces as sites of
opposition to mass merchandisers and the perceived homogenization of consumers;
and macromarketing issues, such as Main Street’s role in representing and/ or shaping
broader community values as they relate to matters such as consumption, retail
competition, economic development, and broader cultural, social, and political agendas.
Notes An American
1. Downtown Lawrence, Inc., web site, http://downtownlawrence.com/aboutdli-aboutus.html Main Street
2. Lawrence, Kansas, Convention and Visitors Bureau web site, www.visitlawrence.com/
3. Downtown Lawrence, Inc., web site, http://downtownlawrence.com/aboutdli-aboutus.html
4. Lawrence, Kansas, Chamber of Commerce web site, www.lawrencechamber.com/
821
References
Anderson, J.C., Hakansson, H. and Johanson, J. (1994), “Dyadic business relationships within a
business network context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 1-15.
Baum, J. and Oliver, C. (1992), “Institutional embeddedness and organizational mortality”,
American Sociological Review, Vol. 57, pp. 540-59.
Belk, R.W., Sherry, J. Jr and Wallendorf, M. (1988), “A naturalistic inquiry into buyer and seller
behavior at a swap meet”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp. 449-70.
Bonoma, T., Bagozzi, R. and Zatlman, G. (1978), “The dyadic paradigm with specific application
toward industrial marketing”, in Bonoma, T. and Zaltman, G. (Eds), Organizational Buying
Behavior, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 49-66.
Civic Economics (2002), Civic Economics Economic Impact Analysis: A Case Study: Local
Merchants vs Chain Retailers, Civic Economics, Austin, TX, prepared for Liveable City and
Austin Independent Business Alliance, available at: www.liveablecity.org/lcfullreport.pdf
Civic Economics (2004), The Andersonville Study of Retail Economics, Civic Economics, Chicago,
IL, October, available at: www.civiceconomics.com/Andersonville/AndersonvilleStudy.pdf
Crabtree, B. and Miller, W. (Eds) (1992), Doing Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Frenzen, J. and Davis, H. (1990), “Purchasing behavior in embedded markets”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 17, pp. 1-12.
National Home Center News (1998), “Global trends suggest larger retailers will dominate”,
National Home Center News, September 21, p. 21.
Granovetter, M. (1985), “Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness”,
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91 No. 3, pp. 481-510.
Grossbart, S. and Pryor, S. (2002), “Communal influences and social capital among retailers and
consumers”, Proceedings of the Annual Macromarketing Conference: Macromarketing in
the Asian Pacific Century, University of New South Wales, Sydney, pp. 220-5.
Kates, S. (2002), “The protean quality of subcultural consumption: an ethnographic account of
gay consumers”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 383-99.
Kozinets, R.V. (2002), “Can consumers escape the market? Emancipatory illuminations from
Burning Man”, Emancipatory Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 20-38.
Lewis, S. (1994), “When Wal-Mart says uncle”, Planning, August, pp. 14-19.
Lichbach, M. and Seligmann, A. (2000), Market and Community, The Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park, PA.
McCracken, G. (1988), The Long Interview, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
McCune, J. (1994), “In the shadow of Wal-Mart”, Management Review, Vol. 83, December,
pp. 10-16.
Marsden, P. (1981), “Introducing influence processes into a system of collective decisions”,
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 86, pp. 1203-35.
Marshall, C. and Rossman, G. (1999), Designing Qualitative Research, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
IJRDM Milchen, J. (2005), “The benefits of doing business locally”, American Institute of Business
Alliances, Boseman, MT, pp. 1-2, available at: www.amiba.net/pdf/benefits_
33,11 doing_biz_locally.pdf
Miller, C., Reardon, J. and McCorckle, D. (1999), “The effects of competition on retail structure: an
examination of intratype, intertype, and intercategory competition”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 107-21.
822 Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Desphande, R. (1992), “Relationships between providers and users
of market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 29, pp. 314-28.
Muniz, A. and O’Guinn, T. (2001), “Brand community”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27,
pp. 412-32.
National Trust for Historic Preservation (2004), Why are Main Streets Important?, National Trust
for Historic Preservation, Washington, DC, available at: www.mainstreet.org/About/
important.htm
Nee, V. and Ingram, P. (1998), “Embeddedness and beyond: institutions, change, and social
structure”, in Vinton, M. and Nee, V. (Eds), The New Institutionalism in Sociology, Russell
Sage, New York, NY, pp. 19-45.
Oldenburg, R. (1999), The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons
and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community, Marlowe and Company, New York, NY.
Peñaloza, L. (2000), “The commodification of the American West: marketers’ production of
cultural meanings at the trade show”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64, pp. 82-109.
Peñaloza, L. and Gilly, M. (1999), “Marketer acculturation: the changer and the changed”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 63, July, pp. 84-104.
Polanyi, K. (1944), The Great Transformation, Beacon Press, Boston, MA.
Polanyi, K. (1957), “The economy as instituted process: primitive archaic and modern
economies”, in Dalton, G. (Ed.), Essays of Karl Polanyi, Beacon Press, Boston, MA,
pp. 139-74.
Portes, A. and Sensenbrenner, J. (1993), “Embeddedness and immigration: notes on the social
determinants of economic action”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 98 No. 6, pp. 1320-50.
Presti, J. (2003), “Neighborhood business district analysis: pioneer square business improvement
area, Seattle”, professional project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degrees of Master of Public Administration and Master of Urban Planning, University
of Washington, Seattle, WA, available at: http://evans.washington.edu/research/psclinic/
pdf/01-02/jolenaprojectfinal.pdf
Reve, R. and Stern, L. (1986), “The relationship between interorganizational form, transaction
climate, and economic performance in vertical interfirm dyads”, in Pellegrini, L. and
Reddy, S. (Eds), Marketing Channels: Relationships and Performance, Lexington Books,
Lexington, MA, pp. 75-102.
Rohwedder, C. (1993), “Europe’s smaller food shops face finis”, The Wall Street Journal, Vol. B1
May 12, p. B7.
SBA Office of Advocacy (2004), The Small Business Economy: A Report to the President
2002-2003, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, available at:
www.sba.gov/advo/stats/sb_econ02-03.pdf
Schumpeter, J. (1950), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper Collins, New York, NY.
Sherry, J. Jr (1990), “A sociocultural analysis of a midwestern American flea market”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 17, June, pp. 13-30.
Shils, E. (1997), The Shils Report: Measuring the Economic and Sociological Impact of the An American
Mega-Retail Discount Chains on Small Enterprise in Urban, Suburban and Rural
Communities, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, University Park, PA, Main Street
available at: www.lawmall.com/rpa/rpashils.htm
Smelser, N. and Swedberg, R. (1994), “The sociological perspective on the economy”, in Smelser, N.
and Swedberg, R. (Eds), The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, NJ, pp. 3-26.
823
Stone, K. (1997), “Impact of the Wal-Mart phenomenon on rural communities”, Proceedings:
Increasing Understanding of Public Problems and Policies, Farm Foundation, Chicago, IL,
available at: www.seta.iastate.edu/retail/publications/10_yr_study.pdf
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
University of Wisconsin Center for Economic Development (2002), Downtown and Business
District Market Analysis: Using Market Data and Geographic Information Systems to
Identify Economic Opportunities in Small Cities, Board of Regents of the University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI, available at: www.uwex.edu/ces/cced/dma/
Uzzi, B. (1997), “Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of
embeddedness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42, March, pp. 35-67.
Wallendorf, M. and Arnould, E. (1991), “We gather together: consumptions rituals of
Thanksgiving Day”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 13-31.
Wathne, K., Biong, H. and Heide, J. (2001), “Choice of supplier in embedded markets: relationship
and marketing program effectiveness”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65, April, pp. 54-66.
Wright, P. (2002), “Marketplace metacognition and social intelligence”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 28, March, pp. 677-82.
Zukin, S. and DiMaggio, P. (1990), Structures of Capital: The Social Organization of the Economy,
Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.

Further reading
Andersen, A. LLP (1997), Small Store Survival, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Portes, A. (1998), “Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology”, Annual
Review of Sociology, Vol. 24, pp. 1-24.
Putnam, R. (1993), “The prosperous community: social capital and public life”, The American
Prospect, Vol. 13, pp. 35-42.