There does not appear to be a singular variable that determines where companies choose to place their distribution centers, however there are several underlying factors that may alter companies’ decisions on what countries they develop distribution networks in. There are many reasons companies choose a distribution centers’ location: infrastructure, trade barriers, and costs are often considered as well as the supply and demand markets for the product offerings. Countries can alter aspects to increase the number of businesses that operate within their bounds. When a distribution center is constructed local communities benefit from corporate initiatives and funding as well as jobs and access to cheaper products. Countries often utilize taxes and regulation to positively impact the environment when introducing distribution centers to their economy. The goal is to understand the weights of different factors that shape where distribution centers are located and inform decision makers on the aspects they should alter to get the greatest return on investment. The resulting data will display how large retailers have positioned their current warehouse to indicate likely expansions and the factors that are currently affecting location decisions. <br/><br/>The research project asks the following questions:<br/><br/>When determining the best location for distribution centers, what factors have the largest impact on business decisions? <br/>What role do governments play in developing space for companies to conduct business in (how do they update their infrastructure and customs methods including the impact on trade across industries)? <br/>How can governments and the community limit outsourcing and/or bring businesses (and thus distribution centers) closer to home? <br/><br/>When determining distribution center locations, most companies analyze the political and market structure to decide whether they will enter the market. Once companies have chosen the general region they are hoping to gain, infrastructure and costs are analyzed to find to maintain a competitive advantage in cost while maintaining relatively close locations to stores and consumers. Many companies utilize intermodal transportation on a macroscale, however in last mile logistics it is uncommon for large retailers such as Amazon and Walmart to use anything other than trucks (most commonly their own fleet). Governments have a clear role in gaining or limiting business, however, these factors are typically only considered upon entry or due to changes in major trade barriers therefore policy changes are less likely to encourage growth than investments in infrastructure or alterations in economic conditions such as taxes. Consumers and governments should work together to create an environment that fosters business growth in both new companies entering the market and existing companies expanding by creating unique policies that utilize taxes and business investments to invest in infrastructure.

The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.