Generic Enquiry Task: Location of Secondary Industry (2014 submission)
Theme / Generic Enquiry Task / Key Question / Page in Specification3 / Investigate factors that determine the location of secondary industry / 2.1 What factors influence decisions about where to locate different economic activities? / 20
How the task may be contextualised:
As always, when selecting this Enquiry Task and deciding on a contextualised title it is advisable to take careful and considered note of the wording of the Key Question 2.1 of Theme 3 to which it is linked. The essential element here is that of focusing on the “location decisions” which have or could be made in regards to secondary industry choosing a particular site or indeed remaining in an existing one. Two possible approaches may be offered as examples of suitable titles:
Should the new canning factory be located on the HardwickIndustrial Park
or the North Lynn Industrial Estate?
The Tate & Lyle factory in North Woolwich is still in the best location.
The first title is a fairly standard and often adopted approach derived from best practice of the decision-making or DME method. Two alternative sites can be investigated using a variety of primary and secondary data, with plenty of scope for fieldwork assessment and scoring to compare them and a clear opportunity for photographic and map analysis. The “depth of coverage” column in the Specification has highlighted some physical and human factors to consider in the comparison exercise, but these are not necessarily exhaustive. For example the social and community impacts of comparable locations have become more of an issue with certain secondary industries e.g. power generation sites.When considering which of the two alternative sites is better, students aiming for higher levels in the assessment mark scheme will need to be encouraged to draw on the experiences of locations chosen by similar local or regional industries. Indeed, it is possible that students may, after careful consideration, wish to reject both sites offered in favour of another, which they can fully evaluate and justify.
The second title is a more unusual but nonetheless valid approach. It takes the premise that a long-time established secondary industry in a particular site may be investigated as to whether the original factors influencing its location choice have changed, and if so could this eventually bring about a re-evaluation of the site or ultimately provoke a re-location of the industry. This approach obviously works best if there is indeed a local company considering re-location. In these circumstances, candidates should be encouraged to ask both ‘why?’ and ‘where to?’ Candidates could be asked to apply their understanding of “industrial inertia” and comparisons made with other cases. A study of the original factors compared to the present factors, and the debate around what the student would choose to do and why, given the opportunity, brings an interesting angle to their analysis.
The context for the 2014 task is the location of secondary industry. The secondary sector of the economy manufactures components and finished goods. All of manufacturing, processing, and construction lies within the secondary sector. Activities associated with the secondary sector include metal working and smelting, automobile production, textile production, chemical and engineering industries, aerospace manufacturing, energy utilities, engineering, breweries and bottlers, construction, and shipbuilding. A study examining the location of a primary activity (such as a sugar beet farm) or a tertiary activity (such as the location of a new out-of-town retail store) would not be appropriate.
The centre must avoid creating a task that encourages a write-up of a visit to a particular factory as they will tend to be purely descriptive e.g. A visit to the Sony TV factory in Bridgend. Similarly, it is not advisable to choose an industry which is obviously “footloose”, since there are less likely to be substantial factors influencing location decisions. On the positive side, a good Enquiry here can be the basis of Case Study 13 in Theme 3.
Primary/Secondary data collection:
By its very nature, this generic Enquiry Task depends heavily of high quality location and site mapping, and the surveying/assessment of suitability for the chosen industry. There is ample scope for high level annotated mapping of evidence of location factors, annotated sketches/digital photographs and the customary practice of bi-polar scoring for particular chosen site benefits etc. These are most effective when carefully constructed to maximise their contribution to the overall analysis. However fieldwork visits always tend to throw up factors not obvious from map evidence; these should be encouraged and noted when they arise e.g. poor access points (narrow turning) or one-way traffic, local screening of trees, level of vegetation or junk littering potential site needing clearance, level of local support/unrest for industrial expansion, possible reuse of existing buildings etc.
It would be interesting to gather views and reactions of the local community/industries/commuters to a possible new site, using simple graded response surveys. Traffic flow surveys on local roads may be significant when considering transport factors, but plan carefully depending on day/time differences.
Secondary data source which would be most helpful for this task would include:
- Blank site maps or land use maps from the local planning office of the Local Authority
- Satellite images showing surrounding areas to the sites under investigation
- Local newspapers/Local Government documents giving details of planning decisions being made and incentives being applied to assist industrial development e.g. national/regional development grants
- Urban District Plans now have to include longer term industrial planning as part of the targets for areas
- Some bigger companies may publish Annual Reports covering locational issues, especially if there are considerations regarding re-locating in the near future
- There may be local pressure groups issuing information materials if industrial sites are potentially controversial
Application AO2 (see page 36 of the specification)
Your students will only be able to access higher marks for AO2 if they link their observations of the sites visited to their wider knowledge of otherindustrial locations or their wider understanding of commercial decision-making processes, concepts or theories. Some discussion as to whether the site locations observed are typical or atypical isa productive line of analysis for AO2. More able candidates might be expected to consider theories on industrial location, which would be undertaken somewhere in the analysis of their findings. This could cover such things as modern compared to traditional location factors, the influence of local/national policies, the power of “prestige planning”, cost-benefit analysis, transport innovations and technological change, carbon footprinting etc. There may also be specific industrial location decision processes proffered by major secondary companies or economists, such as location indexing, threshold areas and demand potential profiling.
How to encourage independent thought:
Students should be encouraged to be a part of the development of the survey structures and time must be allowed for students to become involved in the planning process before the fieldwork is conducted (see page 34 of the specification). An open discussion of the format of the survey/questionnaire to be used can take place at the pre-fieldwork stage, which will lead to additional factors/questions of their own choice being added to a common, group structured response sheet e.g. additional bi-polar categories. Developing some alternative forms of environmental impact assessment to compare sites would also be a useful approach.
Similarly, the range of primary data collected can be presented in a variety of ways, without the need for everyone to draw the same graphs or maps, or use the same photos/annotated sketches. The wording of Level 4 of the Assessment Objectives is a reliable guide to encouraging independent thought:
-reachessubstantiated conclusions (e.g. rejecting all sites and offering own justified alternative)
-links investigation to wider theories (e.g. industrial models/cost-benefit analysis/incentive policies)
-uses range of techniques/technologies to present information, (encouraging creativity)
-critically evaluates the methodology(e.g. how good was the evidence?/How could it be improved?)
Useful web links:
Good overview for students of main industrial location factors
› Business › Business Issues
More in depth discussion of location factors from a business perspective
› Invest in the UK › Why the UK
Both these sites look at the availability of location grants and incentives for businesses in UK
BREEAM is a company that specialises in helping individuals and organisations to review the impact of buildings on people and the environment. This page on their website allows candidates to see and access the wide range of environmental issues stemming from secondary location. For example, by clicking on “environmental assessment” you can see that BREEAM encourages a focus on important aspects of environmental concern (e.g. air quality / noise / light pollution) in terms of factory location. This kind of information could prompt more able candidates to consider / comment on a wider range of location factors, beyond those being studied by the main cohort.
5 May 2012 – The European Parliament and Council have published a new consolidated version of the Environmental Impact Assessment
Some case studies of carbon footprinting in manufacturing industries by a sustainability consultants company
Google maps using the satellite option