ABSTRACT
In Alfred Chandler’s classic text Scale and Scope, major American business enterprises achieved a ‘managerial revolution’ from the late nineteenth century by making a ‘threepronged investment’ in (1) large-scale production; (2) distribution within a verticallyintegrated framework; and (3) professional management. In consequence, there was a marked decline in the importance of family-run enterprise or ‘personal capitalism’ (Chandler 1990). At first sight, modern European brewing, with its high levels of concentration, distributive networks and oligopolistic corporate structures, appears to match this paradigm very well. On closer inspection, however, the temptation to declare brewing to be a ‘Chandlerian’ industry soon fades. Several commentators, while noting the high levels of concentration in individual European countries, such as the Netherlands, Denmark and France, point to the diversity of European brewing as a whole, a situation which differs from that in the more homogeneous markets of the United States, Australia and Brazil (Steele 1991:26). Europe’s differing conditions from country to country rest on the persistence of national differences in consumer preferences, beer types, drinking habits, and in government regulation and taxation. These elements have worked to limit the scope for European-wide brewing conglomerates and have helped to provide market niches for smaller, family-run brewers. In an earlier study of market conditions in three of the world’s leading beer-producing countries (USA, Germany and the UK) (Gourvish 1994) it was found that progress towards a Chandlerian pattern in brewing was complicated by three elements: (1) the extent of government regulation; (2) the behaviour of firms, particularly those in the small and medium-sized sectors; and (3) consumer preferences.
