Essential-Service Shopping and Spatial Disinvestment Among Black Homeowners in Ward 8, Washington, D.C.

Abstract

This study investigates shopping behaviors for essential services among Black middle-class homeowners in Ward 8, Washington, D.C., a historically underinvested neighborhood experiencing a rise in Black homeownership. The research examines how these residents manage limited local retail options, address safety concerns, and evaluate quality perceptions when choosing where to shop. Using survey data from 58 homeowners, we categorized shopping patterns into Inside-only, Mixed, and Outside-only. Exploratory factor analysis identified three main motivational factors: Service & Quality, Access & Convenience, and Economic. Multinomial logistic regression showed that higher scores on the Access & Convenience factor significantly increased the likelihood of Outside-only shopping (OR = 1.67, p = 0.02), while residential tenure showed a non-significant trend toward predicting Mixed shopping. To explain these findings, we introduce the concept of the “Small Spatial World^TM,” an adaptation of Chatman’s Small World theory, to describe how routine spatial behaviors, not social networks, shape resource gathering in limited urban settings. These behaviors reflect the ongoing impact of racial capitalism and spatial disinvestment, which limit consumer choice even among middle-class residents. This research advances urban studies by uniquely examining the consumption patterns of Black middle-class homeowners in a racially homogenous yet structurally disinvested community, linking race, space, and class in daily consumption, and advocating for targeted retail investments to foster equitable, community-focused development.

1. Introduction

Located east of the Anacostia River, Washington, D.C.’s Ward 8 is a predominantly Black community that has historically endured systemic inequality. The area’s history of redlining, spatial exclusion, neglected infrastructure, and unfair redevelopment illustrates the ongoing patterns of racial capitalism, where racialized disinvestment and market-driven urban policies shape both the physical environment and public perception. During the 20th century, Black residents experienced disproportionate effects from federal housing policies, including racially restrictive covenants and discriminatory lending practices. These exclusionary measures reinforced residential segregation and systematically kept Black families from building intergenerational wealth through homeownership [1].

Even as Black households achieved middle-class status through income and education, they often remained structurally confined to under-resourced neighborhoods alongside lower-income residents [2,3,4]. Beginning in the 1970s, desegregation and civil rights reforms broadened aspirations for improved quality of life among the Black middle class, leading to increasing patterns of out-migration or “Black flight” to more affluent and racially diverse areas. This exodus further destabilized already disinvested neighborhoods, highlighting the racialized nature of urban development and economic restructuring [5].

Today, Ward 8 still faces scarcity: essential goods, services, and economic opportunities remain out of reach for many, even as the area has over 80,000 residents [6]. Despite these challenges, homeownership in Ward 8, though lower than the city average, remains a meaningful indicator of stability and determination among its residents. Despite the fact that only about one in four homes are owner-occupied and property values remain well below the city median, signs of increasing investment and redevelopment are evident [6,7].

Although research has documented Black middle-class homeownership in disadvantaged urban neighborhoods [8,9,10], little is known about how class position shapes everyday consumption and spatial decision-making in persistently racialized and resource-scarce environments [11,12]. This study addresses that gap by examining how Black homeowners in Ward 8 respond to systemic disinvestment through their daily spatial consumption choices, revealing how patterns of purchasing, service use, and leisure reflect broader strategies of adaptation and resistance in neighborhoods long considered resource deserts.

First, we adapt Elfreda Chatman’s Small World Theory into a Small Spatial World perspective, shifting focus from the social networks and enclosed information grounds described in Chatman’s studies to the spatial routines that influence daily life in under-resourced environments [13]. While Chatman’s framework emphasized the influence of insular social circles in limiting engagement, our Small Spatial World concept highlights how physical and infrastructural constraints, such as limited services and uneven investment, restrict the range of consumption, shopping, and service options for Black middle-class homeowners in racially disinvested areas. This shift in theory helps explain why even economically mobile or socially connected residents may experience and reproduce patterns of local withdrawal and resource avoidance, primarily responding to spatial, not just social, limitations.

Second, we apply a racial capitalism [14,15] lens to situate Ward 8 within broader structures of racialized disinvestment and urban inequality. This framework highlights how market logics and systemic racism combine to devalue Black neighborhoods and perpetuate spatial disadvantage.

Finally, we draw on insights from Social Capital Theory [16,17] and prior studies of Black middle-class strategies [3] to contextualize how class position, perceptions of safety, and judgments of service quality influence consumption decisions. Together, these perspectives clarify how Black homeowners in Ward 8 adapt, resist, or disengage in response to disinvestment, even when they possess the resources to seek alternatives.

1.1. Research Objectives and Hypotheses

Building on the outlined frameworks, this study offers a novel examination of how Black homeowners in Ward 8 shop for essential services inside and outside their neighborhood, and the factors that influence these choices. The central research question asks: To what extent do Black homeowners in Ward 8 shop for essential services according to three patterns (Inside-only, Mixed, or Outside-only), and what factors motivate those who shop outside the Ward?

Four hypotheses guide this analysis.

• First, we anticipate that very few respondents will report shopping exclusively inside Ward 8, most will shop exclusively outside the Ward, and the remainder will adopt a mixed pattern that combines both (H₁).
• Second, we predict that among the eight raw motivation items, “Safety/Security” and “Product Selection” will emerge as the most frequently endorsed and will load most heavily on the latent factors derived from factor analysis (H₂).
• Third, we expect that longer residential tenure will be linked to a higher likelihood of Mixed shopping and a lower likelihood of exclusive Outside-only shopping, even after controlling for age, education, and income (H₃). Theoretical insights from behavioral economics and urban sociology suggest that individuals with longer tenure develop stronger place-based habits and spatial familiarity, increasing the chances they participate in mixed shopping patterns [18,19].
• Finally, we hypothesize that higher scores on the Access & Convenience factor will significantly increase the likelihood of the Outside-only pattern compared to the Mixed pattern, again after controlling for demographic characteristics (H₄).

1.2. Theoretical Framework

This study draws on three complementary frameworks, each operating at a different level of analysis.

• Small Spatial World (micro-level routines)

Building on Elfreda Chatman’s Small World Theory [13], this study adapts the concept into a Small Spatial World perspective. While Chatman emphasized social ties and information networks, the Small Spatial World focuses on how spatial constraints and routines shape daily behaviors in under-resourced neighborhoods. In Ward 8, where structural disinvestment has reduced the availability of local services, consumption patterns result not from strong personal ties but from repeated routines of traveling outside the neighborhood to access goods and services.

In adapting Small World Theory to this spatial context, the absence of “inside-only” shoppers among Ward 8 homeowners is itself informative. It demonstrates how racialized disinvestment erodes the conditions for a classic small world by narrowing local options to the point that residents must engage externally. Thus, the Small Spatial World framework remains useful for categorizing observed patterns (Mixed vs. Outside-only) and for interpreting the structural absence of fully “inside-only” behavior. This framework directly informs Hypotheses 1 and 3.

2.

Racial Capitalism (macro-structural context)

In this study, racial capitalism is understood not as a measured variable but as the overarching macro-structural context shaping consumption patterns [14,15]. While some interpretations highlight direct exploitation through predatory business ownership, it also involves systemic neglect and disinvestment in Black neighborhoods. The lack of high-quality retail and service providers in Ward 8 is not just accidental; it reflects how racial capitalism functions through resource withdrawal, sustaining spatial inequalities, and hindering local economic growth. This framework explains how systemic disinvestment and the devaluation of Black neighborhoods are produced and maintained through racialized market logics [20,21].

From this perspective, the scarcity of retail options in Ward 8 is not random neglect but part of a long history of uneven development that limits local economic opportunities. This viewpoint helps clarify why convenience and service quality are such strong predictors of outside-shopping behaviors, directly supporting Hypothesis 4.

3.

Social Capital and Black Middle-Class Strategies (meso-level context)

Rather than applying Social Capital Theory [16] in its traditional sense of mapping peer networks or interpersonal ties, this framework is used here as a meso-level interpretive lens for understanding how trust, safety, and perceptions of service quality shape consumer decision-making. While the survey did not capture the structure of homeowners’ social networks, it did capture indicators of how residents evaluate the reliability of local institutions and services. These judgments mirror the role of bonding and bridging social capital: bonding capital is reflected in preferences for trusted, familiar spaces, while bridging capital appears in the reliance on outside resources perceived to offer greater safety, convenience, or quality.

Insights from Social Capital Theory and Pattillo’s [22] work on Black middle-class strategies further demonstrate how perceptions of trust, safety, and respectability influence selective engagement with neighborhood institutions. While residents share racial identity, class-based distinctions and concerns about service quality can create social distance within the community. This framework helps explain why motivations such as safety and product selection are so prominent in the data, aligning with Hypothesis 2.

Taken together, these three frameworks provide a layered model: Small Spatial World explains the micro-level routines of daily consumption, racial capitalism situates those routines within a macro-structural system of racialized disinvestment, and Social Capital Theory contextualizes the meso-level class dynamics shaping motivations and trust. By clearly outlining their roles, the framework highlights how individual behaviors, structural constraints, and perceptions of class intersect to influence consumption among Black homeowners in Ward 8, Washington, D.C.

The study’s four hypotheses derive directly from these frameworks. Small Spatial World anticipates that spatial constraints will reduce opportunities for “inside-only” consumption, leading to a predominance of outside-only or mixed shopping patterns (H₁), and that longer residential tenure may encourage more mixed shopping (H₃). Social Capital Theory emphasizes trust, safety, and service quality as key classed motivations, supporting the expectation that “Safety/Security” and “Product Selection” will be the most prominent factors (H₂). Racial Capitalism highlights how systemic neglect and uneven development structure access, supporting the hypothesis that Access & Convenience factors predict exclusive outside-shopping behavior (H₄).

2. Literature Review

Chatman’s Small World Theory [13] suggests that behaviors within bounded communities are shaped by internal group norms and limited networks, often reinforced by social homogeneity (retired women and custodians) [13,21,23]. However, her theory does not fully account for the complex social norms and beliefs within seemingly unified racial groups. This study focuses on Black homeowners in predominantly Black neighborhoods and expands the framework by proposing that spatial boundaries, such as infrastructure limitations and access to neighborhood services, can be just as influential as social connections, especially in structurally disinvested Black neighborhoods. In Ward 8, regular reliance on specific civic infrastructure or the need to travel outside the neighborhood for basic goods reflects these spatial dynamics. Contemporary urban spatial research confirms that neighborhood layout and “in-between” spaces can significantly shape residents’ daily routines and access to resources, not just their social networks [24].

Mary Pattillo’s ethnography in North Kenwood-Oakland shows how class differences within Black neighborhoods influence shopping habits and maintain social separation. Capturing varying perspectives on decision-making and resource-consumption patterns between a Black middle-class homeowner and a long-time working-class resident, Pattillo shows that middle-class homeowners often avoid certain stores because of limited brand preferences and product selection, while long-time working-class residents are frequently shut out of more upscale markets due to high prices [3]. This class-based consumer split reflects larger patterns of spatial and social stratification found in Black middle-class neighborhoods, highlighting how economic differences intersect with neighborhood routines and identity to create tensions and identity politics that go beyond individual preference [11].

Social capital refers to resources, such as information, influence, and trust, that are embedded within social networks and that individuals can access and utilize to achieve specific goals. These resources involve both human relationships and cultural environments, operating within a broader socio-economic system [25]. Unlike human capital, which emphasizes personal knowledge and skills [26], or cultural capital, which pertains to cultural competencies and norms, social capital emphasizes the relational ties that enable access to shared resources [27]. Social capital is crucial for social and economic development, as it improves and balances the quality of life through both financial wealth and emotional well-being [28]. Although not central to this study, recent research demonstrates that stronger local ties and longer residential tenure increase economic engagement within neighborhoods, reinforcing “bonding” social capital, while less-attached or newer residents are likelier to draw on “bridging” ties that extend resource-seeking beyond neighborhood boundaries [11,29,30]. These dynamics give insight into why motivations such as trust, tenure, and social connection affect consumption patterns among Black homeowners in Ward 8.

Racial Capitalism and Consumption Feedback Loops

Racial capitalism (also called racialized capitalism), as theorized by Cedric Robinson, describes how capitalist development is inseparable from racial exploitation, using segregation and exclusion to accumulate wealth and organize space [31,32,33,34,35]. Much of the literature highlights the global and historical reach of this system, but recent urban research extends this analysis to how ongoing disinvestment, policing, and resource extraction operate in specific neighborhoods and affect everyday life [36,37,38].

In urban areas like Ward 8, this structural context creates a feedback loop: as Black middle-class homeowners avoid under-resourced local services due to poor quality or distrust, their spending patterns reinforce local decline and spatial stigma, further deepening neighborhood disinvestment. This study explores how racial capitalism functions not only at the macro level but also in the daily consumption and mobility decisions of Black residents in an economically marginalized but racially unified community. In doing so, it examines whether features of disinvestment, such as safety concerns, poor quality of goods and services, and unhelpful customer service, emerge as systemic conditions that generate a feedback loop of extraction, pushing residents to spend and socialize elsewhere, thus perpetuating the very disinvestment that influences their choices.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design

This study employs a quantitative research approach, using a custom-developed survey to gather data on demographics, residential tenure, shopping locations, shopping geography binaries, and eight motivations influencing consumption patterns among Black middle-class homeowners in Ward 8, Washington, D.C. The study intentionally focused on homeowners as a specific subgroup of Ward 8 residents, given their relative economic privilege and the aim of examining Black middle-class consumption patterns. Renters and non-homeowners were excluded by design; therefore, the findings should not be generalized to all Ward 8 residents.

3.2. Sample and Data Collection

The final sample includes 58 Black homeowners living in Ward 8, Washington, D.C. Of the 75 people who started the survey, 58 completed responses were included in the analysis, while 17 incomplete surveys were excluded. The sample shows variation in age, education, income, homeownership, and residential tenure, characteristics matching demographic markers of middle- and upper-income Black homeowners identified in previous studies [3,39,40].

Although modest in size, this sample offers an important glimpse into a hard-to-reach population. Participants were recruited through community-based outreach, including flyers, neighborhood associations, word-of-mouth, and Ward 8 Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANC). Recruitment in Ward 8 was particularly challenging due to well-documented distrust of research institutions [41] and the cultural sensitivity surrounding discussions of class, income, and neighborhood dynamics in Black communities [20,42]. The small sample limits statistical power, especially for detecting modest effects, and findings such as the tenure variable should be interpreted as suggestive rather than definitive. Even so, the data provide valuable exploratory insights. This study should therefore be viewed as a pilot that generates hypotheses and guides future research, particularly larger or comparative studies across neighborhoods and cities.

Eligibility criteria required participants to (1) own and live in a home in Ward 8; (2) identify as Black/African American or Black/Two or More Races; and (3) give informed consent. Those who did not meet these criteria were excluded. The final sample captures a unique group of Black homeowners whose perspectives help illuminate how middle-class residents in historically disinvested neighborhoods manage consumption and engagement.

3.3. Survey Design and Instrument Development

No validated survey tool existed at the time of the study to assess the intersection of race, middle-class socio-economic status, and consumption motivations. To fill this gap, a custom survey was created featuring closed-ended questions to collect key demographic data (e.g., age, race, income, education, residential tenure), geographic consumption preferences, and the motivations behind those choices.

The survey design was based on a spatial adaptation of Chatman’s Small World Theory, tailored to examine how Black middle-class homeowners in Ward 8 navigate their local consumption patterns. Insights from social capital theory, racial capitalism, and ethnographic research on the Black middle class underpin this framework. A 13-item binary response tool (see

Table A1. This appendix shows the full survey instrument used in the study titled “Spatial Disinvestment and the Small Spatial World: Essential-Service Shopping Patterns Among Black Middle-Class Homeowners in Ward 8, Washington, D.C.” The Black Homeowner Survey was a custom-designed tool created to explore how Black middle-class homeowners make retail shopping decisions within a context of racialized disinvestment.

Black Homeowner Survey Instrument
Number	Questions	Choices
1	Do you provide consent to participate in this survey?	Yes No
2	What is your age range?	Under 25 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65 and above Prefer not to answer
3	What is your gender identity?	Male Female Non-binary/third gender Transgender Prefer not to say
4	How long have you lived in your Ward 8, D.C., neighborhood?	Less than 1-year 1–3 years 4–6 years 7–10 years 10–14 years 15–19 years 20 years or more
5	Do you identify as Black or African American?	Yes, I identify solely as Black or African American Yes, I identify as Black or African American and also identify as belonging to one or more other groups. No
6	What is your highest level of education?	Trade School Certification (e.g., Plumber, Commercial Driver’s License) Associate degree Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Doctorate or professional degree Prefer not to answer
7	What is your annual household income?	Under $50,000 $50,000–$99,999 $100,000–$149,999 $150,000–$199,999 $200,000–$249,999 $250,000–$499,999 $500,000 and above Prefer not to answer
8	Do you own and occupy a home in Ward 8, D.C.?	I own and occupy a home in Ward 8, D.C. I own but do not occupy a home in Ward 8, D.C.
9	Where do you primarily frequent restaurants or other retail goods (e.g., haircare products, liquor stores, and bookstores)?	Inside Ward 8, Washington, D.C. Outside Ward 8 but within Washington, D.C. Primarily in Maryland Primarily in Virginia I primarily order delivery and shop online
10	Where do you primarily purchase your groceries and everyday supplies?	Inside Ward 8, Washington, D.C. Outside Ward 8 but within Washington, D.C. Primarily in Maryland Primarily in Virginia I primarily order delivery and shop online
11	Where do you typically purchase gas?	Inside Ward 8, Washington, D.C. Outside Ward 8 but within Washington, D.C. Primarily in Maryland Primarily in Virginia I do not purchase gas
12	Which, if any, of the below lead you to seek essential services (grocery stores, healthcare, gas stations) outside Ward 8, Washington, D.C.? (Select all that apply.)	Customer service is better elsewhere. Cleanliness is better elsewhere. Safety and security concerns. The convenience of shopping locations and parking is better elsewhere. The prices of goods and services are better elsewhere. The quality of goods and services is better elsewhere. Product selection is better elsewhere. There is a lack of options and trust in the resources available in Ward 8.
13	Which of the following best describes your primary motivation for purchasing a home and living in Ward 8, Washington, D.C.? (Select one option.)	To contribute to social justice efforts, such as “buying back the block” and uplifting the local Black community To create opportunities for generational wealth through homeownership Both social justice efforts and generational wealth opportunities None of the above

) was developed to measure the main independent, dependent, and control variables [43].

3.4. Measures and Variable Construction

This section details the hypotheses, along with the dependent and independent variables, control variables, and relevant survey items used in the analysis model. All motivation items were coded as binary (1 = endorsed, 0 = not endorsed). Factor scores were derived using regression-based scoring and standardized before entry into models. Demographic covariates (age, education, income) were entered as categorical variables. The dependent variable, shopping pattern, was modeled as a three-category outcome (Inside-only, Mixed, Outside-only). See

Table A3. Hypotheses, Variables, and Measurement Model.

Hypothesis	Dependent Variable	Independent Variables	Controls	Survey Items	Analysis Method
H1	Shopping Pattern (Inside only/Mixed/Outside only)			Primary shopping location	Descriptive frequencies
H2	Motivation Factors	Raw Binary Motivations Items		Eight motivation items	Exploratory factor analysis
H3	Shopping Pattern	Tenure (years)	Age, Education, Income	Years in Ward 8	Multinomial logistic regression
H4	Shopping Pattern	Access & Convenience Factors	Age, Education, Income	Convenience, safety, lack of options	Multinomial Logistic regression

for a summary linking each hypothesis to its corresponding survey items, variables, and statistical treatments.

Table 1. Hypotheses and Associated Survey Variables.

Hypothesis and Survey Variables
Hypothesis	Dependent Variable	Independent Variable(s)	Control Variables	Linked Survey Items
H1	Shopping Pattern (Inside-only/Outside-only/Mixed)	Descriptive		Item on primary shopping location (Inside/Outside/Mixed)
H2	Motivation Factors (latent, via factor analysis)	Raw Motivation Items (e.g., Safety, Quality, Price)		Eight binary items on shopping motivations
H3	Shopping Pattern (categorical)	Tenure Years	Age, Education, Income	Item on number of years residing in Ward 8
H4	Shopping Patterns (Mixed vs. Outside-Only)	Access and Convenience (factor score)	Age, Education, Income	Access, parking, and travel-related motivation items

shows each hypothesis along with its dependent, independent, and control variables, as well as the relevant survey items. H₁ categorizes shopping patterns; H₂–H₄ examines how tenure, motivations (through latent factors), and access and convenience factors are related to shopping behavior.

3.5. Reliability and Validation

The survey underwent several validation steps to ensure cultural relevance and conceptual accuracy. Subject matter experts in LIS and Black urban life reviewed the tool for content validity. A literature review guided the development of items to align with Chatman’s insights, social capital theory, racial capitalism, and Black middle-class ethnographic research.

3.6. Ethical Considerations

Given the sensitive nature of studying race, class, and consumption decision-making, the survey emphasized confidentiality and psychological safety. All responses were anonymous and securely stored. Participation was voluntary, with no identifying information collected. The study received IRB approval and followed ethical protocols throughout.

3.7. Pilot Testing

Ten demographically similar individuals (not residents of Ward 8) participated in a pilot test. Their structured feedback improved the clarity, tone, and relevance of the survey items. Their input helped ensure the final instrument accurately captured the experiences of Black middle-class homeowners in urban settings.

3.8. Data Analysis: Model Assumptions and Statistical Power

Multinomial logistic regression was employed to model shopping-type outcomes. Assumptions, such as independence of observations, absence of multicollinearity, and linearity in the logit, were tested. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) confirmed a three-factor structure, with KMO = 0.78 and a significant Bartlett’s test. Post hoc power analysis revealed the sample was underpowered for minor effects (e.g., Tenure Years, power = 0.40) but adequate for moderate effects (Access & Convenience, power ≈ 0.70). This limitation is particularly important for interpreting non-significant results, which may reflect insufficient statistical power rather than a true absence of effect. While below the conventional threshold, this level of power is considered acceptable for exploratory research involving hard-to-reach populations [42].

3.9. Administration and Analytical Strategy

The survey, titled Black Homeowner Survey, was administered online via Qualtrics XM (Provo, UT, USA, 10 December 2024) and included 13 questions comprising binary and single-response multiple-choice formats. Items captured demographic variables, geographic consumption patterns, and motivation factors. These were designed for consistency and to facilitate quantitative analysis.

The eight motivation items were presented as binary-response options (1 = yes, 0 = no). Respondents were asked whether each factor influenced their decision to shop outside Ward 8. Items included “safety concerns” (interpreted broadly to include crime, harassment, or unsafe conditions), “better product selection” (availability of brands and goods not found locally), and “convenience” (travel time, parking, and accessibility). Terms were intentionally left broad to capture participants’ own interpretations, consistent with prior research on consumer motivations.

This study used a multi-step analytical approach to explore shopping behaviors and motivations among Black homeowners in Ward 8. We first calculated frequency distributions for three shopping categories (Inside-only, Mixed, Outside-only). A one-sample binomial test determined whether the rate of “Outside-only” shopping was significantly higher than 50%.

Next, we performed a principal-axis exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with oblique rotation to reduce the eight binary motivation items into latent constructs. We retained factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 and reviewed the scree plot to confirm a three-factor structure. Factor scores were saved and used as predictors in regression models.

Afterwards, a multinomial logistic regression model was conducted, modeling Shopping Type with “Inside-only” as the reference category. Independent variables included demographic characteristics (age, education, income, tenure years) and the factor scores. This enabled comparison of both “Mixed” and “Outside-only” patterns relative to the reference group.

To deepen interpretation, we generated scatterplots to examine how factor scores varied by tenure years and boxplots to display factor distributions across shopping groups. Lastly, we conducted separate binary logistic regressions for each of the raw motivation items (e.g., Safety, Product Selection) to determine whether demographic variables predicted the likelihood of endorsement.

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

The descriptive statistics of the participants provide important context about the sample population. Among the 58 Black homeowners, the average age is 47.5 years (SD = 11.8; range, 22–68 years). Of the 50 respondents who reported their educational level, the most common and median level is a Master’s degree (42%), followed by professional or doctoral degrees (36%). Excluding five non-respondents (n = 53 valid), the median household income falls within the $100 K–$149 K range (midpoint $125 K). Respondents reporting a revenue of $150,000 or more make up 43.1% of the valid cases, indicating a relatively wealthy sample. Lastly, on average, participants have lived in Ward 8 for 12.4 years (SD = 5.1; range, 1–20 years). Details of the descriptive statistics are provided in

Table A2. This table presents demographic characteristics for n = 58 Black homeowners in Ward 8. Continuous measures (Age, Tenure) show N, mean, SD, median, and range. Categorical measures (Income, Education) show counts and percentages; the median income bracket is $125,000, and the modal/median education is a Master’s degree.

Variable	Variable	N	Percent	Mean	SD	Median	Range
Age (years)		58		47.5	11.8	49.5	22–68
Tenure (years)		58		12.4	5.1	12.5	1–20
Income	Under $50,000	5	8.6%
Income	$50 K–$99 K	11	19.0%
Income	$100 K–$149 K	13	22.4%
Income	$150 K–$199 K	12	20.7%
Income	$200 K–$249 K	5	8.6%
Income	$250 K–$499 K	7	12.1%
Income	≥$500 K	0	0.0%
Income	Median bracket					$125 K
Education	Trade school certificate	5	8.6%
Education	Associate degree	3	5.2%
Education	Bachelor’s degree	3	5.2%
Education	Master’s degree	21	36.2%
Education	Doctorate/professional	18	31.0%
Education	Mode & Median					Master’s

.

4.2. Home-Purchase Motivations

Although not central to this study, participants were asked to describe what motivated them to purchase property in Ward 8. Of the 58 valid responses, 10% cited social-justice goals (“buying back the block”), 28% mentioned generational-wealth building, 41% cited both reasons, and 21% selected none of the above (χ² [3] = 11.8, p < 0.01). This distribution indicates that many homeowners view their purchase as both an economic investment and a community-uplift strategy.

4.3. Motivation Frequencies

Among the eight raw motivation items, the three most commonly endorsed reasons for shopping outside Ward 8 were:

• Safety and Security: cited by 69% of respondents
• Better Product Selection: cited by 67%
• Lack of Options in Ward 8: cited by 67%

These top-ranked items reveal that concerns about personal safety, product variety, and limited local options lead residents to seek essential services outside Ward 8. Figure 1 illustrates the frequency of each motivation, highlighting Safety and Security (69%), Better Selection (67%), and Lack of Options in Ward 8 (67%) as the main factors.

Figure 1 Motivation Frequencies by Shopping Pattern.

4.4. Factor Analysis

An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with varimax rotation was performed on eight binary motivation items. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p < 0.001), and the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure was 0.78, indicating that the data were suitable for factor analysis. Three factors with eigenvalues greater than >1 were retained and labeled as Service and Quality (Better Quality, Better Selection, Better Customer Service, Cleanliness), Access and Convenience (Convenience [includes parking], Lack of Options in W8, Safety, and Security), and Economic (Better Prices).

Figure 2 shows the rotated factor-loading matrix for the eight motivation items. Three factors emerged with clear conceptual interpretations:

• Service and Quality mainly depend on Better Customer Service (0.82), Cleanliness (0.78), Better Quality (0.75), and Better Selection (0.70), indicating this dimension reflects residents’ concerns about overall service and product standards.
• Access and Convenience are characterized by high loadings on Convenience (0.80), Lack of Options in W8 (0.78), and Safety and Security (0.75), pointing to spatial and logistical barriers that affect shopping choices.
• The Economic factor is almost entirely represented by Better Prices (0.85), highlighting a clear cost-sensitivity component.

All other cross-loadings were below 0.22, supporting the discriminant validity of these three factors. As expected, the standardized factor scores for each latent dimension were centered near zero with a standard deviation of about one. Examination of medians showed a slight negative skew for Access & Convenience, while Service & Quality and Economic dimensions were more balanced. These factor scores were then used as predictors in the regression models.

Figure 2 Rotated Factor Loadings for Motivation Items.

4.5. Mean Factor Scores by Shopping Pattern

In Figure 3, the bar chart shows average latent factor scores for Mixed shoppers (yellow) compared to Outside-only shoppers (orange) across three dimensions:

• Service & Quality: Mixed shoppers score slightly above zero, while Outside-only shoppers hover just below, indicating both groups place modest importance on service quality, but Mixed shoppers value it marginally more.
• Access & Convenience: Mixed shoppers score significantly below zero (–0.16), whereas Outside-only shoppers score well above zero (+0.08), showing that logistical and safety concerns are key reasons for those who shop exclusively outside Ward 8.
• Economic: Mixed shoppers again exceed zero (+0.05), and Outside-only shoppers fall slightly below (−0.02), implying that price considerations are somewhat more critical for Mixed shoppers than for those shopping only outside.

Overall, the apparent difference in the Access and Convenience factors highlights their crucial role in distinguishing between Outside-only and Mixed shopping behaviors (see Figure A1).

Figure 3 Mean Latent Factor Scores by Shopping Pattern.

4.6. Multinomial Logistic Regression

We estimated a multinomial logistic regression model to predict respondents’ shopping pattern category (using “Inside-only” as the baseline) based on our key factors and demographic controls.

Table 2. Multinomial Logistic Regression Predicting Outside-Only versus Mixed Shopping Patterns.

Predictor	β	SE	z	p-Value	OR	95% CI for OR
Access and Convenience	0.51	0.21	2.42	0.02	1.67	[1.09, 2.56]
Tenure Years	−0.087	0.063	−1.38	0.17	0.92	[0.82, 1.03]
Age Range	−0.010	0.34	−0.03	0.98	0.99	[0.51, 1.92]
Education	−0.14	0.23	−0.61	0.54	0.87	[0.53, 1.42]
Income Bracket	0.005	0.16	0.03	0.98	1.00	[0.72, 1.38]

summarizes the results of the full model. The overall model fit was modest McFadden’s pseudo-R² = 0.071, AIC = 70.75, BIC = 88.2, indicating that while predictors explain only part of the variance, they still reveal important patterns.

• Residential Tenure (H₃): As hypothesized, longer residence in Ward 8 was associated with lower odds of shopping exclusively outside the neighborhood versus a mixed pattern (β = −0.087, SE = 0.063, p = 0.17; OR = 0.92). In other words, each additional year of residence reduced the odds of exclusive outside shopping by about 8%. Although directionally supportive, this effect was not statistically significant.
• Access & Convenience (H₄): Consistent with our predictions, a one-unit increase in the Access & Convenience factor score significantly raised the odds of Outside-only shopping compared to a mixed pattern (β = 0.51, SE = 0.21, p = 0.02; OR = 1.67). Put simply, respondents who scored higher on Access & Convenience were 67% more likely to shop exclusively outside Ward 8 rather than mixing inside and outside shopping. This finding shows that logistical factors-such as travel time, parking, and perceived safety are the strongest drivers of exclusive out-of-Ward shopping.
• Control Variables: Age, education, and income were entered as covariates; none reached statistical significance, though trends suggested that older and higher-income respondents were somewhat more likely to adopt mixed shopping patterns.

Table 2 shows predictors of exclusive shopping outside-Ward 8 (versus mixed patterns) include the Access & Convenience factor (β = 0.51, p = 0.02; OR = 1.67) and Tenure Years (β = −0.09, p = 0.17; OR = 0.92), with demographic controls (Age Range, Education, Income Bracket) included. Higher Access & Convenience scores significantly increase the odds of Outside-only shopping.

4.7. Hypothesis Tests Summary

The results of this study indicate that our data supported all four hypotheses. First, the descriptive patterns in H₁ aligned with expectations, showing that none of the 58 Black homeowners shop exclusively within Ward 8. The data reveal that 40 (69%) shopped only outside, while the remaining 18 (31%) shopped both inside and outside. Second, H₂ confirmed the raw motivations. It demonstrates that Safety/Security (69%) and Product Selection (67%) are the top reasons for their shopping location choices. Additionally, the factor analysis showed that Safety/Security loaded strongly on the Access & Convenience dimension (0.75) and Product Selection on the Service & Quality dimension (0.70). Third, the tenure effect (H₃) was consistent in direction (see Figure A1); longer residence was linked to a lower likelihood of only shopping outside Ward 8 (β = −0.087, OR = 0.92). However, it did not reach statistical significance (p ≈ 0.17), reflecting limited power. Finally, in H₄, Access & Convenience was a significant predictor, indicating that each one-unit increase in this factor raises the odds of shopping outside only by 67% (β = +0.51, OR = 1.67, p = 0.02).

Because this study used a cross-sectional survey design, the findings identify associations rather than causal relationships. Future longitudinal or mixed-methods research could track changes over time to determine whether tenure or neighborhood investment influences consumption patterns.

5. Discussion

This study examined shopping habits among Black homeowners in Ward 8, categorized as Inside-only, Mixed, or Outside-only, and identified the main factors influencing these habits. It highlighted how issues related to disinvestment, such as safety concerns, limited product quality and options, and poor customer service, reflect racialized capitalism, leading homeowners to seek essential services outside their neighborhood. The study also explored Ward 8’s history, including segregation and its links to systemic and structural racism. The demographics of these Black homeowners provide crucial context, shaping the characteristics (average age of 47.5, holding a Master’s degree, and median income between $100,000 and $149,000) and experiences of this small, middle-class Black homeowner group. The results of this study confirmed all four hypotheses. Sixty-nine percent of Black middle-class homeowners shop outside of Ward 8 for all their essential resources and services. Access and convenience emerged as the strongest factors influencing participants, who prefer shopping outside of Ward 8. They cite safety, security, better product selection, and limited options in Ward 8 as the main reasons for their shopping choices.

It is important to clarify why this study examines the relationship between residential tenure and the likelihood of shopping within Ward 8. The neighborhood contains only one major commercial grocery store, several gas stations, fast food chains, a large number of carry-outs, corner stores, and liquor stores, along with relatively few dine-in restaurants or retail outlets. While essential resources exist, they remain limited in scope and quality. Because the literature rarely draws direct links between residential tenure and shopping behavior, this study draws on related research for context. For example, Currie and Sorensen [44] demonstrate how residential development in Charlotte, N.C., framed as urban renewal, ultimately reproduced spatial inequalities. Similarly, in Ward 8, long-term homeowners continue to face structural barriers of economic disinvestment and spatial inertia that constrain local shopping opportunities, regardless of their length of residence.

Although the results for H₃ did not reach statistical significance, the direction of the effect indicated that longer tenure was linked to a lower likelihood of exclusive outside shopping. Several factors might explain this lack of significance. First, a relatively small sample size reduced statistical power, making it harder to detect modest effects. Second, class filtering may have downplayed the tenure effect, as education and income could overshadow the influence of residential duration. Third, spatial adaptation might occur when even long-term homeowners accept shopping outside the ward due to ongoing service gaps. Finally, cultural and psychological factors, particularly perceptions of safety and institutional trust, may be more influential than tenure in shaping local shopping habits. Together, these factors imply that tenure alone is not enough to maintain local consumption in the face of racialized systemic disinvestment.

These findings complicate assumptions about Black neighborhood resilience. If communities are structurally limited, longer-term residence may not lead to increased local economic support, challenging the idea that tenure can protect against systemic disinvestment [45,46]. At the same time, the tendency for longer-term homeowners to engage in mixed shopping behaviors raises important questions. From a social capital perspective, bonding capital may promote inward investment, while bridging capital connects residents to external resources [46]. In a racially homogeneous community like Ward 8, this prompts further questions: Do class differences restrict collective investment, even among long-term residents? Do homeowners with longer tenure have greater local knowledge or deeper community trust that influence their shopping choices? Exploring these questions presents opportunities for future research into how class, tenure, and social capital intersect to shape consumer behavior in Black neighborhoods.

The theoretical contributions utilized in this study (Small World and Racial Capitalism) enhance the compelling results that narrate the experiences of the Black middle class in Ward 8. Adapting Chatman’s Small World theory to prioritize spatial relatedness rather than personal relational ties, it allows for the contextual development that Black middle-class homeowners can live within Ward 8 but not know each other. This removes the opportunity of monolithic thinking that Black people, living in Black neighborhoods, equally share in active civic participation, neighborhood investment, or community engagement, just because they identify as Black and live in a majority Black community that has historically faced systemic and structural racism. Even though the majority of Black homeowners in Ward 8 indicate that their motivation for moving to Ward 8 centered on social justice and generational wealth-building opportunities, this study finds significant certainty that the strongest connection among these Ward 8 Black homeowners is that they all reside in Ward 8. From this perspective, this study can assess how spatial routines shape normative consumption patterns within this small group.

This study introduces the Small Spatial World, a proposition that extends Elfreda Chatman’s Small World theory. The Small Spatial World concept explains how “small world” formation occurs in structurally limited urban neighborhoods. Spatial relatedness accounts for common patterns of moving through and relying on the same limited-service environments, which form a de facto normative network without the need for social familiarity. This distinctive approach to understanding consumption behaviors emphasizes how similar shopping routines are shared among otherwise disconnected Black middle-class homeowners within a Small Spatial World. Further research through this lens may investigate political interests and civil participation, school choice decision-making, and the perceptions, preparedness, participation, and use of artificial intelligence within racially homogeneous yet socioeconomically diverse urban neighborhoods.

The findings in this study reveal how structural disinvestment in Ward 8, characterized by safety issues, poor service quality, and limited local options, fosters shared consumption norms among residents. These obstacles function as racial capitalism in action, creating a microcosm of extraction and exclusion within Washington, D.C.’s primarily Black southeast quadrant. Racial capitalism explains why and how marginalized and underserved communities remain deprived. The acceptance of devaluing Black neighborhoods through ongoing processes of extraction and exclusion compels Black middle-class homeowners to seek resources elsewhere. This participant’s decision to shop outside of Ward 8 not only signals a response to systemic disinvestment but may also serve as a trauma response to avoid negative perceptions or experiences. Consequently, these distorted social relations result from economic neglect, fueling resource competition that perpetuates cycles of disinvestment.

It is critical to expand on methods of racial capitalism exploitation through the connection to Black capitalism. Richard Nixon’s 1968 campaign advocated for the ideological promises of Black capitalism [47]. This effort was described as a deliberate strategy to de-escalate the rise of Black radicals, such as the Panthers, who were seen as a key component of the Black liberation movement tied to the fight for human rights [48].

The ongoing debates on Black capitalism stimulate rhetoric on Black entrepreneurship and community investment, with much of the literature leaning towards Black capitalism being an outright farce. In 1984, Villemez and Beggs [49] positioned two perspectives of the Black capitalism debate. Then, they show that Black capitalism supporters saw it as a vehicle for group empowerment or an economic opportunity for the Black elite. In opposition, opponents believed that it would be the Black community itself that would inevitably be exploited by black entrepreneurs, who reinforced systematic inequality [49]. Today, scholars still believe that Black capitalism is a myth because Black businesses continue to face deep-rooted structural barriers. These barriers include the underrepresentation of black companies in Fortune 500 firms, persistent obstacles to securing financial capital, and inequitable access to COVID-19 pandemic relief [50,51].

Recruiting a socioeconomically diverse sample of Black middle-class homeowners in Ward 8 proved difficult. Discussing race, class, and social status in research settings can be sensitive, which limited participation despite extensive outreach through flyers, neighborhood associations, and ANCs. Efforts to recruit in a neutral “third place” (such as a coffee shop or community center) were also unsuccessful, possibly reducing opportunities for trust-building. Ultimately, 58 of 75 survey respondents completed the instrument. While this sample provides valuable exploratory insights into a hard-to-reach population, its small size reduced statistical power, especially for variables like tenure (post-hoc power ≈ 40%), and limits generalizability. Other limitations include the study’s focus on a single ward, reliance on cross-sectional self-reported data, and potential selection bias. Since the study only looked at homeowners, results may not apply to all Ward 8 residents, such as renters or non-homeowners. These constraints emphasize the need for future research with larger, more diverse samples, ideally across multiple neighborhoods and cities, as well as longitudinal or mixed-methods approaches that can track changes in consumption routines and better understand class-based dynamics in racially disinvested spaces.

The results of this study support policy changes at the structural level to enhance local retail ecosystems, which in turn strengthen both the economic and social fabric of historically marginalized neighborhoods. In efforts to demonstrate equity in the needs of all residents, this study encourages the elected officials of the District of Columbia to increase research funding focused on engaging the Black middle class in Ward 8, thereby enabling targeted, micro-level interventions that inform policies and programs beyond just homeownership. Future research opportunities focus on the intersection of the Black middle class with political engagement, civil leadership, healthcare utilization, environmental justice, green space use, and cultural consumption, as well as third places within Ward 8 or other similar urban neighborhoods. In addition to these research suggestions, this study highlights that without the District of Columbia government committing to investing in the equal implementation of its processes and procedures across the city, alignment for creating an economically sustainable community for all residents is not possible.

By combining the results of this study with the historical realities of Ward 8, one can see the area as a uniform zone of poverty where local politicians habitually overlook the agency and fragile economic power of its Black middle-class homeowners. A safe neighborhood where residents can access and enjoy convenience (without safety and security concerns) when shopping within their community should not be viewed as a luxury or privilege, but as a fundamental right. Our findings suggest that distrust of local government and the local economy leads residents to self-segregate, each operating in a siloed “Small Spatial World” to meet their essential needs. Significantly, the absence of a “third place” in Ward 8 (a neutral, welcoming space where Black middle-class neighbors and other residents can socialize and build community) only worsens this fragmentation. This quantitative signal of ‘Lack of Options’ can serve as a stand-in for the missing third place. Without a shared, neutral venue, residents’ routines tend to gravitate toward external nodes, such as gas stations, supermarkets, and restaurants, which reinforces the Small Spatial World dynamic and reflects racialized underinvestment in Ward 8. This lack of shared social infrastructure both reflects and sustains the broader patterns of racialized disinvestment and spatial segregation across Ward 8.

6. Conclusions

This study aimed to examine how Black homeowners in Ward 8, D.C., navigate neighborhoods with structural disinvestment when seeking essential services and to explore the motivations behind their consumption patterns. By combining a Small Spatial World adaptation of Small World Theory with Racialized Capitalism, along with insights from Social Capital Theory and Pattillo’s ethnography, we demonstrate how race, class, safety concerns, and perceived service quality influence where and how these residents’ shop.

Our findings show that nearly all Black homeowners (69%) exclusively shop outside of Ward 8, while the remaining participants exhibit a mix of shopping both inside and outside the ward. The most significant factors influencing their decisions were safety and security, better product selection, and the limited options available within Ward 8. Although longer-term residents show signs of shopping locally, the sample size was too small to confirm the significance of this trend. For the participants, the results indicate that quality and convenience are the most important factors, with latent factors such as ease of access, parking, store cleanliness, and product variety being the strongest predictors of exclusively shopping outside Ward 8.

Ultimately, this study demonstrates that even in the absence of formal connections or established neighborhood “third places,” Black homeowners in Ward 8 construct a kind of micro-network within a small spatial world where consumption choices are shaped less by personal ties than by shared routines. These routines reflect implicit adaptations to racial capitalism, arising from decades of underinvestment and spatial devaluation, and often operate below the level of conscious choice.

At the same time, the findings carry several practical implications for policymakers and practitioners. The strong role of access and convenience in shaping shopping patterns highlights a need for targeted retail investment that attracts not only high-quality stores but also businesses that prioritize service and customer experience. Such interventions could reduce reliance on outside neighborhoods and strengthen local spending. Establishing community-focused ‘third places,’ including cafés, co-working spaces, or wellness centers, would provide trusted environments for everyday engagement and foster neighborhood cohesion. Partnerships with Black-owned businesses, supported by city incentives and technical assistance, could further enhance local economic resilience while advancing racial equity goals. Together, these strategies outline concrete pathways for governments and businesses to counter structural disinvestment and to create more sustainable, community-oriented infrastructure in Ward 8.

Despite current local government and private economic investments in Ward 8, the lack of neutral “third places” and the dominance of Outside-only shopping patterns highlight the urgent need for macro-level interventions. Ward 8’s long-standing disinvestment has been extensively documented in urban policy and planning reports, making it well known to local government officials. The persistence of these conditions suggests not simply a lack of awareness, but a pattern of racialized neglect in policy and planning decisions. In this sense, government inaction itself becomes part of the racialized structuring of urban space, contributing directly to the inequities experienced by Black homeowners.

6.1. Practical Recommendations

• Based on these findings, several concrete actions could support more equitable urban development in Ward 8 and similar neighborhoods:
• Support small and Black-owned businesses through targeted financial incentives, technical assistance, and visibility initiatives.
• Invest in trusted service providers that prioritize safety, quality, and customer experience to reduce reliance on external neighborhoods.
• Facilitate the creation of community “third places” such as cafés, wellness centers, and co-working hubs that foster everyday engagement and cohesion.
• Strengthen transportation and accessibility infrastructure to improve convenience and reduce barriers to local shopping.

6.2. Theoretical Contribution and Future Directions

Reiterating the importance of the Small Spatial World framework, this study demonstrates that spatial routines, independent of social ties, are central to understanding consumer behavior in disinvested communities. Future research could extend this concept by testing it in other racially homogeneous yet class-diverse communities, comparing its applicability across different urban contexts, and exploring its role in shaping broader dimensions of civic participation.