of the lower cost generated by large production units

General Mills bought Yoplait and the French Government is concerned about the consequences: it will be "particularly attentive to the implementation by the shareholders of an industrial development plan favourable to employment, innovation and the milk producers. The French dairy Lactalis Group purchases 29 of the shares of Parmalat, an Italian group of the same area and the Italian Government rises to the niche, enquiring about the circumstances in which it might block foreign acquisitions of "strategic" enterprises

These reactions are surprising on the part of Governments that proclaim their commitment to European construction. It is not merely a free trade area in which customs duties are removed; It is primarily to promote a single market in which the factors of production, including the capital, are moving from one country to another. This mobility has significant benefits. She submits managers to discipline increased by increasing the pool of buyers of poorly managed companies. It promotes the transfer of technologies between the economies of the different European countries. Finally, thanks to the concentration of production, it allows the European economy to take advantage of returns to scale - i.e. of the lower cost generated by large production units.

In an article published in the latest issue of the Journal of the American Economic Association, Catherine Thomas, a young researcher at Columbia University, New York, attaches to describe accurately the Organization constraints facing companies as they seek to take advantage of these returns to scale. She studied the European detergent market, an industry in which the size of production units. In the United States, Procter & Gamble has reduced the number of its fourteen late 1970 to four in 2005! Although less pronounced than in the United States, the concentration of production is also important in Europe - for example, all liquid detergents of P & G, for all of Europe, are produced at Amiens.

The point of view. One might worry, especially in an industry dominated by a few large companies, that producers benefit to impose excessive standardization of consumption. It is the study of this point that Catherine Thomas attaches.

Based on German, British, Spanish and Italian data shows first that the preferences of European consumers are very different from one country to another - for example, German consumers are more sensitive than others to a price increase while Italian consumers are less. Then it analyzes the choice by Unilever and P & G of the number of varieties in their lines Surf and Ariel, and shows that a standardization of the offer would allow them to increase their profits. According his calculations, Unilever increase for example its profits by replacing packets of eleven tablets sold in Britain and those of sixteen Italy sold shelves by a single product sold in the two countries. As it can be assumed that businesses do not express lose money, it is entitled to ask why Unilever accepts this costly proliferation. From Catherine Thomas, the reason is the need to degrees of freedom to the leaders of different brands. Give them the necessary incentives, to also give them enough responsibilities, even if this is done at the expense of the coordination at European level.

Of course, many elements come into play in the responses of Governments to cross-border shopping offers, including a number of fantasies and many political opportunism, as demonstrated by the embarrassment of the President of the Republic asked about the reactions of the Italian Government for the acquisition of Parmalat by Lactalis. The interests of producers and the lobbies have more weight than the interests of consumers. In all the circumstances, the work of Catherine Thomas shows that they do not have to fear a restriction of the offer because of these purchases.