Small breweries that own at least one pub are more likely to succeed, a study by a team of economists from Staffordshire University has found.
However, the study has failed to support the drive by Siba, the society of independent brewers, and Camra, the Campaign for Real Ale, to persuade the government to introduce a sliding scale for beer duty.
Siba and Camra both believe so-called "progressive beer duty", with small brewers paying less tax on beer than big ones, will help the smaller brewers in their fight to stay in business.
However, a study by Dr Geoff Pugh and John Wyld, from Staffordshire University's Business School, together with David Tyrall from the Open University, says progressive beer duty would not have the huge direct benefit that Camra and Siba may have hoped for.
Instead it found that the common factor for those small breweries that did succeed was that they all owned their own tied estate, which means they owned at least one pub.
The results of the study have been published in an article called Will Progressive Beer Duty Really Help UK Small Breweries? A Case Study in Profit Appropriation, in the latest edition of the Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.
Dr Pugh said: "Camra and the independent brewery sector believed a sliding tax system would help them be more competitive in this David and Goliath sector, as well as offering the consumer a much wider choice.
"However, our research found that the use of a progressive beer duty would not have the huge direct benefit that Camra and Siba may have hoped for.
"Indeed, our research revealed that the most significant aspect affecting small breweries is having to sell their products to powerful distributors, who therefore control prices.
"By owning a public house, a small brewery has direct access to their consumers and can overcome the distribution problem."
However, the study has failed to support the drive by Siba, the society of independent brewers, and Camra, the Campaign for Real Ale, to persuade the government to introduce a sliding scale for beer duty.
Siba and Camra both believe so-called "progressive beer duty", with small brewers paying less tax on beer than big ones, will help the smaller brewers in their fight to stay in business.
However, a study by Dr Geoff Pugh and John Wyld, from Staffordshire University's Business School, together with David Tyrall from the Open University, says progressive beer duty would not have the huge direct benefit that Camra and Siba may have hoped for.
Instead it found that the common factor for those small breweries that did succeed was that they all owned their own tied estate, which means they owned at least one pub.
The results of the study have been published in an article called Will Progressive Beer Duty Really Help UK Small Breweries? A Case Study in Profit Appropriation, in the latest edition of the Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.
Dr Pugh said: "Camra and the independent brewery sector believed a sliding tax system would help them be more competitive in this David and Goliath sector, as well as offering the consumer a much wider choice.
"However, our research found that the use of a progressive beer duty would not have the huge direct benefit that Camra and Siba may have hoped for.
"Indeed, our research revealed that the most significant aspect affecting small breweries is having to sell their products to powerful distributors, who therefore control prices.
"By owning a public house, a small brewery has direct access to their consumers and can overcome the distribution problem."
