Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2022 Oct 31;88(3):2799–2812. doi: 10.1007/s10708-022-10782-6

Spatial distribution of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang city, Indonesia

Wahyu Saputra 1, Sri Rum Giyarsih 2,✉
PMCID: PMC9628423  PMID: 36340742

Abstract

The emergence of startups in Indonesia contributes to increasing the number of those working as startup users. Startup users define those who make use of startup services and enterprises to perform their business. This research was designed to explain the spatial distribution of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang City, Indonesia. It employed spatial analysis with inverse distance weighting and kernel density. The results indicated that startup (Gojek and Grab) users who established their business before 2020 were in densely-populated parts of the city. However, based on the interpolation of their business locations, they were variably distributed in lowly to densely-populated areas whose economic activities were dominated by trade and services. Furthermore, the nearest neighbor analysis revealed that startup (Gojek and Grab) users were close to permanent markets (including semi-permanent ones, supermarkets, restaurants, and grocery shops) and had better access to online transportation and communication with good cell phone receptions.

Keywords: Spatial distribution, Startup (Gojek and Grab) users

Introduction

The development of interregional connections is currently skyrocketing (Santoso & Wahyuni, 2018). The internet enables people to connect without direct face-to-face interaction, especially in the rise of digital meeting applications during the COVID-19 pandemic, e.g., Zoom and Google Meet. Nowadays, there are myriads of social media platforms developed by startups aiming to connect numerous social groups or communities (Van Alstyne et al., 2016). Startups are newly established businesses that are currently becoming a trend among youth. They have penetrated various sectors in Indonesia, e.g., e-commerce, game, and fintech, by developing platforms to ease business transactions. These platforms connect sellers with buyers and vice versa (Hagiu & Wright, 2015). So far, trade transactions between sellers and buyers are performed in conventional ways; however, as of the emergence of these platforms, such transactions have started shifting to online ones. Gojek is one of those platforms (Wahyuningtyas, 2019) that, as an application company, facilitates service providers or sellers to connect online with their customers. In addition, Grab is another platform offering similar services.

The online network enables micro-enterprises to grow sporadically (Eisenmann, 2006). As evidence, there is an increasing number of micro-enterprises because the internet has facilitated their online product sales through mobile applications or platforms. In the social era, appropriate business models are necessary for the community (Oestreicher-Singer & Zalmanson, 2013), including online business run from home that has been steadily growing since the COVID-19 pandemic. Newcomers rising due to such online businesses are disrupting existing or established markets (Christensen, 1997; Schmidt & Druehl, 2008). Businesspersons who have been esteemed in conventional trades are prone to newcomers accustomed to innovation and technology. If not immediately anticipated, their established position will soon be replaced by these newcomers.

Disruptive innovation is closely related to digital ridesharing (Yuana et al., 2020). In Indonesia, it has occurred since the emergence of Gojek, Grab, and other similar applications. In the future, the digital economy is expected to continue to grow. This is supported by the high number of startups established in the country (Hertina et al., 2021), especially after the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, wherein most online businesses are developing rapidly (Hertina et al., 2021). These opportunities are grasped by those having establishments in the informal sector to expand their business capacities by utilizing Gojek and Grab applications, creating a digital market. As a result, digital market players have disrupted traditional or non-digital markets (Bharadwaj et al., 2013; Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020; Kollmann et al., 2021) and turned buyers to digital markets through lower and more compelling prices.

Nowadays, various e-commerce applications can be used for online selling, including Gojek and Grab. Many informal sector entrepreneurs have demonstrated a good command of using the Gojek platform (Santoso & Wahyuni, 2018). It further emphasizes that startups are inseparable from these entrepreneurs as their users. There has been a high number of informal sector entrepreneurs using startups like Gojek and Grab as their online selling platforms. The informal sector is highly associated with the poor in urban areas (Fathurrahman, 2020); however, it is not necessarily true in the current disruptive innovation era, for many informal sector workers can make use of innovation, the internet, and technology from those startups. Therefore, the novelty of this research lies in the inclusion of technology in occupations in the informal sector, allowing it to develop businesses both offline and online. In addition, previous studies have solely focused on startups, whereas this research is centered on startup users as the object of the analysis.

The data presented in Table 1 show that Palembang has the highest number of informal sector workers among the cities in South Sumatra (268,766 workers or 66.05 percent). It can be assumed that all these workers are startup users in the field of services or trade. However, their temporal and spatial characteristics remain unknown. Thus, the main problems discussed in the research are related to their year of establishment, place of business, and neighboring startup users. Accordingly, the research aimed to analyze the year of establishment spatially, study the interpolation of the business location, and determine the spatial distribution of startup users in the city using the nearest neighbor analysis.

Table 1.

Urban informal sector workers in South Sumatra in 2020.

Source: Workforce in South Sumatra Province, August 2020 (BPS, 2019)

No City Number of informal sector workers Percentage
1 Palembang 268,766 66.05
2 Prabumulih 44,002 10.82
3 Pagar Alam 49,128 12.07
4 Lubuk Linggau 44,958 11.06
406,854 100.00
Open in a new tab

Literature review

Entrepreneurs are required to possess knowledge related to entrepreneurship to stand out and survive in a competitive market (Gralha et al., 2018; Tripathi et al., 2019a, b; Tripathi et al., 2019b), including digital business know-how (Autio et al., 2018; Nambisan, 2017) and strategies to distinguish and seize business opportunities (Ireland et al., 2003; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). Many new types of businesses are created with the help of the internet (Frizzo-Barker et al., 2020). In establishing one, entrepreneurs are demanded to find a permanent business model that the target society needs (Oestreicher-Singer & Zalmanson, 2013).

A startup is a cyclically measured business model (Blank, 2010). Startups have penetrated various fields, one of which is the global electronic business controlled by most well-known startups whose innovations often disrupt other areas (Chenoweth, 2008). Newcomers in startup businesses frequently develop unique marketing strategies to compete with other established competitors (Escalante & Turvey, 2006). Established companies certainly have distinctive features compared to startups (Nurcahyo et al., 2018). Characteristics of startups can be categorized based on innovation, ownership, finance, organization (Lester et al., 2008; Miller & Friesen, 1984; Quinn & Cameron, 1983), rapid growth potential, and high risk (Mustapha & Tlaty, 2018). In addition, the established startups are inevitably related to startup users who, for the most part, rely on their quality for being able to provide works that are flexible (McRobbie, 2002) and modern (Marwick, 2013) and create novel ways for business ventures in urban regions (Florida, 2005).

In the 21st century, communication has undergone a digital transformation (Luo, 2021) and, globally, digitalization has infiltrated to almost every aspect of people’s lives (Coviello et al., 2017; Luo, 2021). The rapid development of technology (Supardianto et al., 2019), particularly the revolutionary one called the internet of things (Zhang et al., 2015), has made it easier for people in different regions to interact (Santoso & Wahyuni, 2018). Besides, technological innovations reduce the time and distance in communication and information dissemination in various sectors (Lusch & Nambisan, 2015). For example, online purchase and sale have characterized today’s financial and marketing revolutions (Tapscott & Kaplan, 2019), indicating a shift in transaction (Jesemann et al., 2020) where, nowadays, sellers and buyers do not need to be physically present in the same place (Hertina et al., 2021).

As complex phenomena continue to occur in the society (Berger, 2016), digital technology enables more innovations to be created and introduced to the service sector (Briel et al., 2018; Kannan et al., 2017; Teece & Linden, 2017; Thérin, 2007; Zott et al., 2011), such as digital platforms (Milat et al., 2013) (Clarysse et al., 2014; Eaton et al., 2015). The platforms created by startup companies allow people to order food and clothing from their smartphones (Giardino et al., 2016; Gutbrod et al., 2017; Melegati et al., 2019; Unterkalmsteiner et al., 2016) over the internet (Hagiu & Wright, 2015; Van Alstyne et al., 2016). The created platforms have attracted users of various demographics (Zielske & Held, 2021).

Unicorn startup companies influence Indonesia’s current economy (Suwarni et al., 2020). Through them, users are able to meet the needs in the service and trade sectors. Startup users define those who make use of startup applications in their trading or service activities (Eichhorn & Tukel, 2018) and daily life (Tzafilkou & Protogeros, 2017). They primarily work in the creative economy (Syauqi, 2016). Mobile applications developed by startups contribute to increasing the number of startup users (Faizal, 2021), which eventually affects the growth of startups (Perdani et al., 2018; Semrau & Werner, 2014). It means that the more startup users utilize the provided services, the faster those startups grow and vice versa. The startup users in this research are those of Gojek and Grab.

The number of startup users population increases as more people become familiar with startups (Saad et al., 2021) and “new users” and “old users” (Sayyed-alikhani et al., 2021) interact with each other (Goldenberg et al., 2009; Rand & Rust, 2011) using social media to purchase or adopt products (Goldenberg et al., 2007). In addition, they use various applications (Rand et al., 2018; Serrano & Iglesias, 2016). The experience of startup users can affect the sales value of their wares (Klotins et al., 2021). Therefore, it is essential for them to improve their capacities to survive and grow (Baldwin & von Hippel, 2011); one of which is by providing maximum services to customers (Iansiti & Levien, 2004).

Study area

Palembang is the capital of South Sumatra, Indonesia. It covers 2.65 percent (40,061 ha/km2) of the total land area of South Sumatra with a total population of 1,668,848 people in 2020 (BPS, 2021s). Geographically, it borders Muara Enim and Ogan Ilir in the south and Banyuasin Regency in the north, east, and west. Palembang consists of 18 districts, namely Seberang Ulu 1, Ilir Timur 1, Jakabaring, Plaju, Seberang Ulu 2, Ilir Barat 1, Sako, Ilir Barat 2, Kemuning, Bukit Kecil, Sematang Borang, Ilir Timur 2, Alang-Alang Lebar, Gandus, Ilir Timur 3, Kertapati, Kalidoni, and Sukarami. As a city heading toward a metropolis, in 2020 Palembang has the population growth rate of 1.38 because of high migration and demographic factors (BPS, 2021s). As for its local economic conditions, there are 42 permanent markets, two semi-permanent markets, 663 supermarkets, 718 restaurants, and 8,354 grocery shops (BPS, 2021s). The map of the research area is presented in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Map of the research area showing 18 administrative districts of Palembang city

Methods

This research employed an analytical survey method. Survey research uses questionnaires as the main data collection instrument distributed to samples of a population (Singarimbun & Efendi, 2006). The questionnaires used were designed to measure two variables, i.e., characteristics and spatial distribution of startup (Gojek and Grab) users. The former was assessed with structured interviews, while the latter was retrieved through field observations using GPS (coordinate readings). Objects of this quantitative research were startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang City, which were validated by identifying their location coordinates, business name, address (place of business), the field of business, year of establishment, and the applications used.

This research was conducted for three months. Samples were selected by an accidental sampling technique from the city’s informal sector workers (research population) under the assumption that they used startup (Gojek and Grab) applications to carry out their business. The data used can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2.

Research methods.

Source: own study

Variable Instrument Data collection technique Data type Source
Business name, business address, field of business, applications used, year of establishment of startup users Questionnaire Interview Primary Respondents
Distribution of startup users GPS Coordinate Primary Field survey
Open in a new tab

Spatial analysis is the method used to further analyze the data mentioned above so as to describe the spatial distribution of startup users (Gojek and Grab) in Palembang. Palembang was selected as the research area for it had the highest number of urban informal workers in South Sumatra (BPS, 2019). The spatial analyses used inverse distance weighting and kernel density. The formula for inverse distance weighting (Azpurua & dos Ramos, 2010) is as follows:

Z∗=∑i-1nwiZi

where Zi (i = 1,2, 3, … N) is the number (N) of points for which the value of data height is tolerated and wi is formulated as follows:

wi=hi-p∑j=0nhi-p

p is a power parameter with an adjustable positive value and hi is the distance of point-to-point interpolation distribution, which is formulated as follows:

hi=x-xi2+y-yi2

x, y are the coordinates of interpolation points and xi,yi are the coordinates of the points distribution. Furthermore, the kernel density is a non-parametric statistic applicable in geographic information system to analyze the density distribution patterns in an area (Nanda et al., 2019) and estimate the intensity distribution of a point within a certain radius (Silverman, 2018).

Findings and discussion

Spatial Distribution Analysis of Startup (Gojek and Grab) Users in Palembang City per Year of Establishment

The establishment year of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang can be categorized into three, namely before 2020, in 2020, and after 2020. Based on the results of the field observation, startup (Gojek and Grab) users establishing their business before 2020 were in Sukarami, Alang-Alang Lebar, Sematang Borang, Kalidoni, Plaju, Ilir Timur II, Jakabaring, Kertapati, Seberang Ulu I Sub-district, Ilir Barat 2, and Bukit Kecil Districts. Businesses started in 2020 were in Ilir Barat I, Gandus, Ilir Timur I, Seberang Ulu II, Ilir Timur III, and Sako Districts. Those set up after 2020 were in Kemuning District.

Based on the data, startup (Gojek and Grab) users were dominated by those establishing the business before 2020 (distributed in 11 districts), followed by those set up in 2020 (distributed in six districts) and after 2020 (one district). Startup (Gojek and Grab) users who launched their business before 2020 were found in areas with a high population (BPS, 2021s), e.g., Sukarami (183,667 people), Kalidoni (122,474 people), and Alang-Alang Lebar District (105,201 people). The map used in the spatial distribution analysis is presented in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Spatial distribution of the startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang city based on their year of establishment

Based on the year of establishment, the results showed two categories of startup (Gojek and Grab) users: new and old users (Sayyed-alikhani et al., 2021). Over time, startup users are increasing sporadically (Saad et al., 2021) because digital communication eases interpersonal interaction. Digital communication is one of the dominant characteristics of the 21st century (Luo, 2021); hence, it seems inevitable not to use online digital platforms or applications in this era. In addition, many workers were interested in working as startup (Gojek and Grab) users because they could easily interact online despite high competition. To establish a business in a highly competitive market, entrepreneurs must have the ability and knowledge of entrepreneurship (Gralha et al., 2018; Tripathi et al., 2019a, b), for such knowledge enables them to manage or govern the business more sustainably in the long term.

Based on the data derived in the field, startup users had different characteristics and used various applications, i.e., Gojek, Grab, or both. This finding indicates variations in the application that users rely on to perform their business, either in the trade or service sector (Rand et al., 2018; Serrano & Iglesias, 2016). In addition, startup users interact with not only startup customers but also other users by, for instance, sharing product marketing tips. Interaction between users is essential to improve the skills of startup users in product marketing to a broader market both directly and indirectly (Goldenberg et al., 2009; Rand & Rust, 2011) and to improve the products they sell (Tzafilkou & Protogeros, 2017).

Both user-user and user-customer interactions are possible because of the internet and startup applications. Furthermore, connections between regions have been developing rapidly (Santoso & Wahyuni, 2018), indicating ease in interacting with different parties regardless of distance. The interactions have resulted in the development of online businesses in Palembang City, including micro-enterprises, due to the network effect (Eisenmann, 2006). From this finding, it can be inferred that the city’s micro-enterprises will grow rapidly because of the convenience of online networking.

Interpolation of business places for startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang city

Interpolation of business places for startup (Gojek and Grab) users can be seen from population density and economic activities. Trade and services were the dominant economic activities in each district of Palembang city (BPS, 2021s), and startup (Gojek and Grab) users grasped this situation as a potential to open or establish a business. In addition, population density also affects business places. The distribution of population density from the highest to the lowest is elaborated as follows: Alang-Alang Lebar (30,505 people/km2) (BPS, 2021a), Seberang Ulu I (11,010 people/km2) (BPS, 2021p), Ilir Barat II (10,870 people/km2) (BPS, 2021d), Ilir Timur I (10,353 people/km2) (BPS, 2021g), Jakabaring (9,871 people/km2) (BPS, 2021i), Seberang Ulu II (9367 people/km2) (BPS, 2021o), Kemuning (8965 people/km2) (BPS, 2021k), Ilir Timur II (7898 people/km2) (BPS, 2021f), Ilir Barat I (7129 people/km2) (BPS, 2021e), Sako (6568 people/km2) (BPS, 2021n), Plaju (5981 people/km2) (BPS, 2021m), Ilir Timur III (4946 people/km2) (BPS, 2021h), Kalidoni (4387 people/km2) (BPS, 2021j), Bukit Kecil (3890 people/km2) (BPS, 2021b), Sukarami (3570 people/km2) (BPS, 2021r), Kertapati (1709 people/km2) (BPS, 2021l), Sematang Borang (1470 people/km2) (BPS, 2021q), and Gandus District (1087 people/km2) (BPS, 2021c). Figure 3 is the interpolation map of startup users’ business places in Palembang City. It shows that the higher population density an area has, the more businesses startup (Gojek and Grab) users establish, and vice versa.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Interpolation of business places for startup users in Palembang city

Based on the results, trade and services were the two dominant economic activities in each district. It has been well-known that technology disrupts many aspects of life, especially interaction. Technology significantly alters how individuals communicate (Supardianto et al., 2019). One of the prominent examples is interaction in online product marketing. In addition, the internet of things appears to be a revolutionary technology (Zhang et al., 2015), affecting delivery services, e.g., online transactions and product marketing (Akins et al., 2015). Online trade is a revolution in finance (Tapscott & Kaplan, 2019). Nowadays, people effortlessly order or buy foods or goods through their smartphones (Melegati et al., 2019). Such increasing digital consumption habits are due to the multiplying number of platforms or applications developed by startups (Giardino et al., 2016; Gutbrod et al., 2017; Unterkalmsteiner et al., 2016), which also implies shifts from offline to online markets (Jesemann et al., 2020). As a consequence, startup users correspondingly begin promoting their products online.

Similarly, startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang utilized social media for communicating in an effort to improve their traded products. In many cases, social media aid in exchanging information leading to new product lines (Goldenberg et al., 2007). It is imperative to sustain this practice because the future digital market will only be increasingly competitive, which makes product quality enhancement challenging without communication between startup users. Furthermore, experience is indispensable in conducting business online. From the customers’ perspective, products sold with a maximum value result from the excellent experience of startup users (Klotins et al., 2021), meaning that the longer startup users run their business online, the more they gain experience in trade and services.

Currently, sellers interact with buyers through digital platforms (Hagiu & Wright, 2015). As a result, face-to-face interactions are no longer necessary; instead, online transactions are considered an adequate substitute (Hertina et al., 2021). In this world, digital platforms have connected enormous amounts of social groups online, allowing startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang City to reach and interact with customers (Van Alstyne et al., 2016). This way, digital platforms significantly help startup users sell their products or services.

Spatial distribution of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang city based on the nearest neighbor analysis

The nearest neighbor analysis used in this research encompassed whether or not the location of startup (Gojek and Grab) users was close to permanent markets (including semi-permanent ones, supermarkets, restaurants, and grocery shops) and whether or not they had better access to online transportation and communication with good cell phone receptions. Table 3 describes the distribution of permanent markets, semi-permanent markets, supermarkets, restaurants, and grocery shops in districts of Palembang City.

Table 3.

Permanent markets, semi-permanent markets, supermarkets, restaurants, and grocery shops in Palembang City.

Source: BPS-Statistics per district in Palembang City, 2021 (BPS, 2021s)

District Permanent market Semi-permanent market Supermarket Restaurant Grocery shop
Seberang Ulu 1 3 – 17 21 134
Ilir Timur 1 3 1 35 89 127
Jakabaring 5 – 32 54 86
Plaju 2 – 25 16 590
Seberang Ulu 2 1 – 40 16 159
Ilir Barat 1 3 – 67 75 719
Sako 2 – 89 31 572
Ilir Barat 2 1 – 19 18 455
Kemuning 3 1 35 89 127
Bukit Kecil 3 – 15 43 98
Sematang Borang 1 – 14 17 157
Ilir Timur 2 1 – 8 11 1,443
Alang-Alang Lebar 3 – 73 67 134
Gandus 2 – 14 19 388
Ilir Timur 3 3 – 35 68 103
Kertapati 1 – 8 11 1,442
Kalidoni 1 – 53 3 390
Sukarami 4 – 84 70 1,230
Open in a new tab

Based on Table 3, most of the permanent markets were in Jakabaring (five units), followed by semi-permanent markets in two other districts, Ilir Timur I and Kemuning (two units). Supermarkets were mostly built in Sako (89 units), while restaurants were concentrated particularly in two other districts, Ilir Timur I and Kemuning (89 units per district). Shops/grocery shops were largely found in Ilir Timur II (1,443 units). Furthermore, reliable internet network and online transportation services had covered most of the areas in all districts (BPS, 2021s); this is believed to have boosted startup (Gojek and Grab) users to optimize their business management using online applications. The map in Fig. 4 shows the spatial distribution of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang City based on the nearest neighbor analysis results. It suggests that the more permanent markets (including semi-permanent ones, supermarkets, restaurants, and grocery shops) an area has, the more startup (Gojek and Grab) users reside, and vice versa.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Spatial distribution of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang city based on the nearest neighbor analysis

This research also identified if the startup (Gojek and Grab) users were located close to permanent markets (including semi-permanent ones, supermarkets, restaurants, and shops/grocery shops) and had better access to online transportation and communication with good cell phone reception so as to create business opportunities. Startup users are usually able to take advantage of existing opportunities, thus accounting for the largest share of the creative economy members (Syauqi, 2016). In recent years, the chance to open a business venture has been exceptionally good (Calás et al., 2009; Fachin & Langley, 2017; Garud et al., 2014; Tedmanson et al., 2012) because of all the digital platforms and applications. These days, combining business opportunities with technological innovation has become inevitable. Innovation of services is often the product of complex social phenomena in the community (Berger, 2016) and the emergence of digital technology (Briel et al., 2018; Kannan et al., 2017; Teece & Linden, 2017; Thérin, 2007; Zott et al., 2011). Both facilitate startup users to provide better services for their customers.

Entrepreneurs must thereby seize these business opportunities (Ireland et al., 2003; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000), particularly in the current digital era (Autio et al., 2018; Nambisan, 2017). It seems logical to infer that there will be myriads of business opportunities resulting from the increasing number of smartphone users (i.e., customers) transacting digitally, changing the existence of traditional markets. Digital markets create disruptions to the traditional ones (Bharadwaj et al., 2013; Ghezzi & Cavallo, 2020; Kollmann et al., 2021), for they can quickly attract customers in broader regions and improve the sale of products and services through various online shopping applications on their smartphones.

In today’s world, digitalization has penetrated almost every aspect of people’s lives (Coviello et al., 2017; Luo, 2021), including the population of Palembang City that has started to transform from face-to-face trades and services to online transactions. Also, with digitalization, many parties are showing significant interest in the platforms that startup users created (Zielske & Held, 2021), for instance, the users of two startup companies in Palembang City, i.e., Gojek and Grab, which also utilize other e-commerce applications, e.g., Shopee and Tokopedia, and social media applications, e.g., Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube, to market their products.

With the increasing number of startup (Gojek and Grab) users in Palembang City, having the ability to continuously develop and survive is of vital importance. For this purpose, these startup users should increase their resilience (Baldwin & von Hippel, 2011) by improving product quality to prevent customers from switching to other products, brands, or merchants. In addition, excellent customer services are nonnegotiable (Iansiti & Levien, 2004), which can otherwise lead to loss of customers and, eventually, income.

The internet has helped entrepreneurs create new types of businesses (Frizzo-Barker et al., 2020) that run digitally or online. Technological innovations have been making old types of business compete with the new ones (Adomavicius et al., 2008; Ali et al., 2020), mainly because nowadays people can easily order products and services from the comfort of their homes through smartphone applications without having to meet the sellers directly. In other words, technological innovations are responsible for the emergence of current digital platforms (Clarysse et al., 2014; Eaton et al., 2015), and this relationship can be attributed to their success in facilitating distance and accommodating information (Lusch & Nambisan, 2015). Therefore, distance is no longer an obstacle in ordering products and services, and information can circulate rapidly and vastly with the development of the internet.

Currently, people require more varying types of platforms and innovations (Milat et al., 2013), especially urban populations like the one in Palembang City—the center of the economy of Sumatra Selatan Province. This is because they have to meet a variety of daily needs quickly, easily, and affordably, all of which are the qualities and conveniences that digital platforms and technological innovations offer. Furthermore, business owners and managers should consider that nowadays people require the suitable business model to develop their enterprises (Oestreicher-Singer & Zalmanson, 2013). For instance, those who use Gojek dan Grab in Palembang City benefit from the online or digital business model that the two startup companies accommodate so as to market their product quickly and widely.

Conclusion

The spatial distribution of the startup users observed in Palembang City can be categorized into three, namely, based on the year of establishment, place of business, and nearest neighbor analysis results. Based on the year, there are startup users established before, in, and after 2020. Those starting before 2020 have long been familiar with online-based businesses, while those starting later are new to this type of business model. In addition to Gojek and Grab, they also use social media applications such as Instagram and Facebook and other e-commerce applications like Shopee and Tokopedia to market their products. Based on the place of business, startup (Gojek and Grab) users are primarily concentrated in parts of the city that have high population densities, resulting in vast opportunities for startup (Gojek and Grab) users to open a business. Besides, the trade and services sector that accounts for most economic activities in the city practically stimulates the emergence of these opportunities. Lastly, based on the nearest neighbor analysis results, the number of startup (Gojek and Grab) users somewhat increases with proximity to permanent markets, meaning that more startup (Gojek and Grab) users can be found closer to these markets, and vice versa, fewer are established farther. In addition, good cell phone receptions and reliable interregional transportation networks that are mostly online widen online business opportunities for the city’s population.

Acknowledgments

The researchers expressed their gratitude to Universitas Gadjah Mada for funding the publication of the research results through the 2021 post-doctoral scheme

Authors’ contribution

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by WS and SRG. The first draft of the manuscript was written by WS and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Direktorat Penelitian UGM dan Tim Peningkatan Reputasi UGM menuju World Class Universitas-Kantor Jaminan Mutu UGM, grant number 6144/UN1.P.III/DIT-LIT/PT/2021.

Declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Footnotes

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Wahyu Saputra, Email: wahyusaputra@univpgri-palembang.ac.id.

Sri Rum Giyarsih, Email: srirum@ugm.ac.id.

References

  1. Adomavicius G, Bockstedt JC, Gupta A, Kauffman RJ. Making sense of technology trends in the information technology landscape: A design science approach. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems. 2008;32(4):779–809. doi: 10.2307/25148872. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Akins BW, Chapman JL, Gordon JM. A whole new world: income tax considerations of the bitcoin economy. Pittsburgh Tax Review. 2015;12(1):24–56. doi: 10.5195/taxreview.2014.32. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Ali O, Ally M, Clutterbuck, Dwivedi Y. The state of play of blockchain technology in the financial services sector: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Management. 2020;54(August 2019):102199. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102199. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Autio E, Nambisan S, Thomas LDW, Wright M. Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. 2018;12(1):72–95. doi: 10.1002/sej.1266. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Azpurua M, dos Ramos K. A comparison of spatial interpolation methods for estimation of average electromagnetic field magnitude. Progress in Electromagnetics Research M. 2010;14(August):135–145. doi: 10.2528/PIERM10083103. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Baldwin C, von Hippel E. Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organization Science. 2011;22(6):1399–1417. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0618. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Berger ESC. Toward a configurational understanding of entrepreneurship using qualitative comparative analysis. University of Hohenheim; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bharadwaj A, El Sawy OA, Pavlou PA, Venkatraman N. Digital business strategy: toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly. 2013;37(2):471–482. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2013/37:2.3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Blank, S. (2010). What’s a startup? First principles. https://steveblank.com/2010/01/25/ whats-a-startup-first-principles/
  10. BPS. (2019). Keadaan Angkatan Kerja di Provinsi Sumatera Selatan Agustus 2019.
  11. BPS. (2021a). Kecamatan Alang-Alang Lebar dalam Angka 2021a.
  12. BPS. (2021b). Kecamatan Bukit Kecil dalam Angka 2021b.
  13. BPS. (2021c). Kecamatan Gandus dalam Angka 2021c.
  14. BPS. (2021d). Kecamatan Ilir Barat Dua Dalam Angka 2021d.
  15. BPS. (2021e). Kecamatan Ilir Barat Satu dalam Angka 2021e.
  16. BPS. (2021f). Kecamatan Ilir Timur Dua dalam Angka 2021f.
  17. BPS. (2021g). Kecamatan Ilir Timur Satu dalam Angka 2021g.
  18. BPS. (2021h). Kecamatan Ilir Timur Tiga dalam Angka 2021h.
  19. BPS. (2021i). Kecamatan Jakabaring dalam Angka 2021i.
  20. BPS. (2021j). Kecamatan Kalidoni dalam Angka 2021j.
  21. BPS. (2021k). Kecamatan Kemuning dalam Angka 2021k.
  22. BPS. (2021l). Kecamatan Kertapati dalam Angka 2021l.
  23. BPS. (2021m). Kecamatan Plaju dalam Angka 2021m.
  24. BPS. (2021n). Kecamatan Sako dalam Angka 2021n.
  25. BPS. (2021o). Kecamatan Seberang Ulu Dua dalam Angka 2021o.
  26. BPS. (2021p). Kecamatan Seberang Ulu Satu dalam Angka 2021p.
  27. BPS. (2021q). Kecamatan Sematang Borang dalam Angka 2021q.
  28. BPS. (2021r). Kecamatan Sukarami dalam Angka 2021r.
  29. BPS. (2021s). Statistik Daerah Kota Palembang 2021s.
  30. Calás MB, Smircich L, Bourne KA. Extending the boundaries: Reframing “entrepreneurship as social change” through feminist perspectives. Academy of Management Review. 2009;34(3):552–569. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.40633597. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Chenoweth, S. (2008). Undergraduate software engineering students in startup businesses. 21st conference on software engineering education and training undergraduate. 118–125. 10.1109/CSEET.2008.27
  32. Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press.
  33. Clarysse B, Wright M, Bruneel J, Mahajan A. Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy. 2014;43(7):1164–1176. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Coviello N, Kano L, Liesch PW. Adapting the uppsala model to a modern world: Macro-context and microfoundations. Journal of International Business Studies. 2017;48(9):1151–1164. doi: 10.1057/s41267-017-0120-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Eaton B, Calderwood SE-, Sørensen C, Yoo Y. Distributed tuning of boundary resources: The case of Apple’s IOS service system. MIS Quarterly. 2015;39(1):217–243. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.1.10. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Eichhorn B, Tukel O. Business user impact on information system projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. 2018;11(2):289–316. doi: 10.1108/IJMPB-02-2017-0016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Eisenmann TR. Internet companies’ growth strategies: Determinants of investment intensity and long-term performance. Strategic Management Journal. 2006;27(12):1183–1204. doi: 10.1002/smj.567. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Escalante C, Turvey CG. Business start-up survival challenges and strategies of agribusiness and non-agribusiness entrepreneurs. Agricultural Finance Review. 2006;66(1):61–75. doi: 10.1108/00214660680001180. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Fachin, F. F., & Langley, A. (2017). Researching organizational concepts processually: The case of identity. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods (Issue June, pp. 308–327). SAGE.
  40. Faizal M. Perancangan simple design system canvas sebagai pedoman antarmuka pengguna start up di Indonesia. Serat Rupa Journal of Design. 2021;5(1):108–121. doi: 10.28932/srjd.v5i1.2100. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Fathurrahman, I. (2020). Preserving the precariat in the name of the innovation economy. Case study: Online motorcycle taxis in Indonesia [Lund University]. https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9027050
  42. Florida R. Cities and the creative class. Routledge; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  43. Frizzo-Barker J, Chow-White PA, Adams PR, Mentanko J, Ha D, Green S. Blockchain as a disruptive technology for business: A systematic review. International Journal of Information Management. 2020;51(November 2019):102029. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.10.014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Garud R, Gehman J, Giuliani AP. Contextualizing entrepreneurial innovation: A narrative perspective. Research Policy. 2014;43(7):1177–1188. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Ghezzi A, Cavallo A. Agile business model innovation in digital entrepreneurship: Lean startup approaches. Journal of Business Research. 2020;110(February 2017):519–537. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Giardino C, Paternoster N, Unterkalmsteiner M, Gorschek T, Abrahamsson P. Software development in startup companies: The greenfield startup model. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2016;42(6):585–604. doi: 10.1109/TSE.2015.2509970. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Goldenberg J, Libai B, Moldovan S, Muller E. The NPV of bad news. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2007;24:186–200. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.02.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Goldenberg J, Han S, Lehmann DR, Hong JW. The role of hubs in the adoption process. Journal of Marketing. 2009;73(2):1–13. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.73.2.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Gralha, C., Damian, D., Wasserman, A. I. T., Goulão, M., & Araújo, J. (2018). The evolution of requirements practices in software startups. Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering. 823–833. 10.1145/3180155.3180158
  50. Gutbrod, M., Münch, J., & Tichy, M. (2017). How do software startups approach experimentation? Empirical results from a qualitative interview study. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 10611 LNCS(November), 297–304. 10.1007/978-3-319-69926-4_21
  51. Hagiu A, Wright J. Multi-sided platforms. International Journal of Industrial Organization. 2015;43:162–174. doi: 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2015.03.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Hertina D, Effendi KA, Ichsani S. Technological education and its influence on digital economic readiness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Review of International Geographical Education. 2021;11(1):699–711. doi: 10.48047/rigeo.11.1.56. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Keystones and dominators: framing operating and technology strategy in a business ecosystem. Harvard Business School, Working Paper. 3–61.
  54. Ireland RD, Hitt MA, Sirmon DG. A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management. 2003;29(6):963–989. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00086-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. Jesemann I, Beichter T, Herburger K, Constantinescu C, Rüger M. Migration of the Lean-Startup approach from high-tech startups towards product design in large manufacturing companies. Procedia CIRP. 2020;91:594–599. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2020.03.110. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Kannan PK, Li H, “Alice” Digital marketing: A framework, review and research agenda. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2017;34(1):22–45. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Klotins E, Unterkalmsteiner M, Chatzipetrou P, Gorschek T, Prikladnicki R, Tripathi N, Pompermaier LB. A progression model of software engineering goals, challenges, and practices in start-ups. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2021;47(3):498–521. doi: 10.1109/TSE.2019.2900213. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Kollmann T, Stöckmann C, Niemand T, Hensellek S, de Cruppe K. A configurational approach to entrepreneurial orientation and cooperation explaining product/service innovation in digital vs. non-digital startups. Journal of Business Research. 2021;125(October 2019):508–519. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.041. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Lester DL, Parnell“Rick” JA, Crandall W, Menefee ML. Organizational life cycle and performance among SMEs: Generic strategies for high and low performers. International Journal of Commerce and Management. 2008;18(4):313–330. doi: 10.1108/10569210810921942. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Luo Y. New OLI advantages in digital globalization. International Business Review. 2021;30(2):101797. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101797. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Lusch RF, Nambisan S. Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective1. MIS Quarterly. 2015;39(1):155–175. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.1.07. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Marwick AE. Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. Yale University Press. 2013 doi: 10.1177/0734371x14558066. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. McRobbie A. Clubs to companies: Notes on the decline of political culture in speeded up creative worlds. Cultural Studies. 2002;16(4):516–531. doi: 10.1080/09502380210139098. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Melegati J, Goldman A, Kon F, Wang X. A model of requirements engineering in software startups. Information and Software Technology. 2019;109:92–107. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2019.02.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Milat AJ, King L, Bauman AE, Redman S. The concept of scalability: Increasing the scale and potential adoption of health promotion interventions into policy and practice. Health Promotion International. 2013;28(3):285–298. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dar097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Miller D, Friesen PH. A longitudinal study of the corporate life cycle. Management Science. 1984;30(10):1161–1183. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.30.10.1161. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  67. Mustapha A, Tlaty J. The entrepreneurial finance and the issue of funding startup companies. European Scientific Journal. 2018;14(13):268–279. doi: 10.19044/esj.2018.v14n13p268. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  68. Nambisan S. Entrepreneurship : Toward a digital technology perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2017;414:1029–1055. doi: 10.1111/etap.12254. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  69. Nanda, C. A., Nugraha, A. L., & Firdaus, H. S. (2019). Analisis Tingkat Daerah Rawan Kriminalitas Menggunakan Metode Kernel Density Di Wilayah Hukum Polrestabes Kota Semarang. Jurnal Geodesi Undip. 8(4):50–58. https://ejournal3.undip.ac.id/index.php/geodesi/article/viewFile/25144/22354
  70. Nurcahyo R, Akbar MI, Gabriel DS. Characteristics of startup company and its strategy: Analysis of Indonesia fashion startup companies. International Journal of Engineering and Technology(UAE) 2018;7(2):44–47. doi: 10.14419/ijet.v7i2.34.13908. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  71. Oestreicher-Singer, G., & Zalmanson, L. (2013). Content or Community? A digital business strategy for content providers in the social age. MIS Quarterly. 37(2):591–616. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43825924
  72. PerdaniWidyawan MDK, Santoso PI. Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi pertumbuhan startup di yogyakarta. Seminar Nasional Teknologi Informasi Dan Komunikasi. 2018;2018:337–349. [Google Scholar]
  73. Quinn RE, Cameron K. Organizational life cycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence. Management Science. 1983;29(1):33–51. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.29.1.33. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Rand, W., Rust, R. T., & Kim, M. (2018). Complex systems: Marketing’s New Frontier. AMS Review. 7:111–127. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s13162-018-0122-2.pdf
  75. Rand W, Rust RT. Agent-based modeling in marketing: Guidelines for rigor. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2011;28(3):181–193. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.04.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  76. Saad J, Martinelli S, Machado LS, de Souza CRB, Alvaro A, Zaina L. UX work in software startups: A thematic analysis of the literature. Information and Software Technology. 2021;140(June):106688. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2021.106688. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  77. Santoso AS, Wahyuni S. Maximizing strategic alliances in the multi-sided platform firms. International Journal of Business. 2018;23(1):26–52. doi: 10.31227/osf.io/eyskp. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  78. Sayyed-alikhani A, Chica M, Mohammadi A. An agent-based system for modeling users ’ acquisition and retention in startup apps. Expert Systems with Applications. 2021;176:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114861. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  79. Schmidt GM, Druehl CT. When is a disruptive innovation disruptive? Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2008;25(4):347–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2008.00306.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  80. Semrau T, Werner A. How exactly do network relationships pay off? The effects of network size and relationship quality on access to start-up resources. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice. 2014;38(3):501–525. doi: 10.1111/etap.12011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  81. Serrano E, Iglesias CA. Validating viral marketing strategies in twitter via agent-based social simulation. Expert Systems with Applications. 2016;50:140–150. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2015.12.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  82. Shane S, Venkataraman S. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review. 2000;25(1):217–226. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2000.2791611. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  83. Silverman BW. Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. Technometrics. 2018;29(4):1–13. doi: 10.1080/00401706.1987.10488295. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  84. Singarimbun, M., & Efendi, S. (2006). Metode Penelitian Survai. In Lp3Es (pp. 1–336).
  85. Supardianto, Ferdiana R, Sulistyo S. The role of information technology usage on startup financial management and taxation. Procedia Computer Science. 2019;161:1308–1315. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.11.246. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  86. Suwarni RN, Fahlevi M, Abdi MN. Startup valuation by venture capitalists: An empirical study Indonesia firms. International Journal of Control and Automation. 2020;13(2):785–796. [Google Scholar]
  87. Syauqi, A. T. (2016). Startup sebagai Digitalisasi Ekonomi dan Dampaknya bagi Ekonomi Kreatif di Indonesia. Department of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology. 1–4.
  88. Tapscott, D., & Kaplan, A. (2019). Blockchain revolution in education and lifelong learning: preparing for disruption, leading the transformation. IBM Institute for Business Value, April, 1–46. www.blockchainresearchinstitute.org/contact-us,%0A https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/93DDVAKE
  89. Tedmanson D, Verduyn K, Essers C, Gartner WB. Critical perspectives in entrepreneurship research. Organization. 2012;19(5):531–541. doi: 10.1177/1350508412458495. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  90. Teece DJ, Linden G. Business models, value capture, and the digital enterprise. Journal of Organization Design. 2017 doi: 10.1186/s41469-017-0018-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  91. Thérin, F. (2007). Handbook of research on techno-entrepreneurship. In Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc. Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc. 10.4337/9781847205551
  92. Tripathi N, Oivo M, Liukkunen K, Markkula J. Startup ecosystem effect on minimum viable product development in software startups. Information and Software Technology. 2019;114(June):77–91. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2019.06.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  93. Tripathi N, Seppänen P, Boominathan G, Oivo M, Liukkunen K. Insights into startup ecosystems through exploration of multi-vocal literature. Information and Software Technology. 2019;105((August 2017)):56–77. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2018.08.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  94. Tzafilkou K, Protogeros N. Diagnosing user perception and acceptance using eye tracking in web-based end-user development. Computers in Human Behavior. 2017;72:23–37. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.035. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  95. Unterkalmsteiner M, Abrahamsson P, Wang XF, Nguyen-Duc A, Shah S, Bajwa SS, Baltes GH, Conboy K, Cullina E, Dennehy D, Edison H, Fernandez-Sanchez C, Garbajosa J, Gorschek T, Klotins E, Hokkanen L, Kon F, Lunesu I, Marchesi M, Yagüe A. Software startups-A research agenda. E-Informatica Software Engineering Journal. 2016;10(1):89–123. doi: 10.5277/e-Inf160105. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  96. van Alstyne, M. W., Parker, G. G., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Pipelines, platforms, and the new rules of strategy: Scale now trumps differentiation. Harvard Business Review. 94(April):54–62. https://enterprisersproject.com/sites/default/files/piplelines_platforms_and_the_new_rules_of_strategy.pdf
  97. von Briel F, Davidsson P, Recker J. Digital technologies as external enablers of new venture creation in the IT hardware sector. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2018;42(1):47–69. doi: 10.1177/1042258717732779. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  98. Wahyuningtyas SY. Self-regulation of online platform and competition policy challenges: A case study on Go-Jek. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries. 2019;20(1):33–53. doi: 10.1177/1783591719834864. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  99. Yuana SL, Sengers F, Boon W, Hajer MA, Raven R. A dramaturgy of critical moments in transition: Understanding the dynamics of conflict in socio-political change. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 2020;37:156–170. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2020.08.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  100. Zhang Y, Xiao Y, Xie Y, Zhu L, Shi D, Cheng C. Fluorene-centered perylene monoimides as potential non-fullerene acceptor in organic solar cells. Organic Electronics. 2015;21:184–191. doi: 10.1016/j.orgel.2015.03.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  101. Zielske M, Held T. Application of agile methods in traditional logistics companies and logistics startups: Results from a German Delphi study. Journal of Systems and Software. 2021;177:110950. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.110950. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  102. Zott C, Amit R, Massa L. The business model: Recent developments and future research. Journal of Management. 2011;37(4):1019–1042. doi: 10.1177/0149206311406265. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Geojournal are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES