Open Economies Review

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 203–219 | Cite as

Multinationals: Too Many or Too Few?— The Proximity–concentration Trade-off

  • Eric Toulemonde
Research article


The paper builds an analytically tractable model that illustrates the “proximity–concentration trade-off” involved in horizontal multinationals. For low trade costs, firms are single-plant firms, for intermediate costs, some are single-plant firms whereas others are multinationals, for large trade costs, firms are multinationals. Because of the modeling strategy, the model is suited for a welfare analysis of multinationals. It shows that too many firms choose to concentrate their production in only one location. Also, for some transport costs, a reduction in transport costs worsens welfare.


Globalization Economic integration Trade costs Multinational firms Welfare 

JEL Classification

F12 F15 F23 H23 


  1. Anderson JE, van Wincoop E (2004) Trade costs. J Econ Lit 42:691–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin R, Forslid R, Martin Ph, Ottaviano G, Robert-Nicoud F (2003) Economic geography and public policy. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  3. Barba-Navaretti G, Venables AJ (2004) Multinational firms in the world economy. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  4. Blonigen BA, Davies RB, Head K (2003) Estimating the knowledge-capital model of the multinational enterprise: comment. Am Econ Rev 93:980–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brainard SL (1993) A simple theory of multinational corporations and trade with a trade-off between proximity and concentration, NBER Working Paper 4269Google Scholar
  6. Brainard SL (1997) An empirical assessment of the proximity–concentration trade-off between multinational sales and trade. Am Econ Rev 87:520–540Google Scholar
  7. Charlot S, Gaigne C, Robert-Nicoud F, Thisse, JF (2006) Agglomeration and welfare: the coreperiphery model in the light of Bentham, Kaldor, and Rawls. J Public Econ 90:325–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davies RB (2005) State tax competition for foreign direct investment: a winnable war? J Int Econ 67:498–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dixit AK, Stiglitz J (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. Am Econ Rev 67:297–308Google Scholar
  10. Elberfeld W, Götz G, Stähler F (2005) Vertical foreign direct investment, welfare and employment. Topics in Econ Anal Policy 5(1): article 3Google Scholar
  11. Fujita M, Krugman P, Venables AJ (1999) The spatial economy: cities, regions and international trade. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Fujita M, Thisse J-F (2006) Globalization and the evolution of the supply chain: who gains and who loses? Int Econ Rev 47:811–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glaeser EL, Kohlhase JE (2003) Cities, regions and the decline of transport costs. NBER, Working paper 9886Google Scholar
  14. Helpman E, Krugman P (1985) Market structure and foreign trade. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Helpman E, Melitz MJ, Yeaple SR (2004) Export versus FDI with heterogeneous firms. Am Econ Rev 94:300–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Markusen JR (1984) Multinationals, multi-plant economies, and the gains from trade. J Int Econ 16:205–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Markusen JR (2002) Multinational firms and the theory of international trade. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Markusen JR, Maskus KE (2002) Discriminating among alternative theories of the multinational entreprise. Rev Int Econ 10:694–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Markusen JR, Maskus KE (2003) General-equilibrium approaches to the multinational firm: a review of theory and evidence. In: Choi EK, Harrigan J (eds) The handbook of international trade. Blackwell, London, pp 320–349Google Scholar
  20. Markusen JR, Venables AJ (1997) The role of multinational firms in the wage-gap debate. Rev Int Econ 5:435–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Markusen JR, Venables AJ (2000) The theory of endowment, intra-industry and multi-national trade. J Int Econ 52:209–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin P, Rogers CA (1995) Industrial location and public infrastructure. J Int Econ 39:335–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mirrlees J (1972) The optimum town. Swed J Econ 74:114–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Picard PM, Thisse JF, Toulemonde E (2004) Economic geography and the distribution of profits. J Urban Econ 56:144–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Samuelson PA (1952) The transfer problem and transport costs: the terms of trade when impediments are absent. Econ J 62:278–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vickerman R, Spiekermann K, Wegener M (1999) Accessibility and economic development in Europe. Reg Stud 33:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wildasin D (1986) Spatial variation of marginal utility of income and unequal treatment of equals. J Urban Econ 19:125–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FUNDP–University of NamurNamurBelgium
  2. 2.CORE–Université Catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  3. 3.IZABonnGermany

Personalised recommendations