IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i16p12228-d1214445.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability as Strategic Differentiator: The Promise and the Problems of Using Chicle vs. Petro-Chemicals in Chewing Gum

Author

Listed:
  • Karen Paul

    (International Business, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA)

Abstract

Chewing gum as a commercial product was traditionally based on chicle, mainly harvested by indigenous people from trees in the tropical forest of southeastern Mexico. Chicle gum base has now been replaced by a petro-chemical gum base by the major manufacturers. However, several smaller companies are again attempting to market chewing gum using a chicle gum base. The question raised here is, will the differentiation provided by chicle gum—being natural, organic, and “plastic-free”—provide sufficient differentiation for meaningful competition against the less expensive brands using a petro-chemical gum base? This case provides an interesting application of Michael Porter’s strategy model in which differentiation and value are competing strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Paul, 2023. "Sustainability as Strategic Differentiator: The Promise and the Problems of Using Chicle vs. Petro-Chemicals in Chewing Gum," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-13, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:16:p:12228-:d:1214445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12228/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/16/12228/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kassar, Ilhem & Lasserre, Pierre, 2004. "Species preservation and biodiversity value: a real options approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 857-879, September.
    2. Loomis, John B. & White, Douglas S., 1996. "Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 197-206, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Charles Sims & David Finnoff & Alan Hastings & Jacob Hochard, 2017. "Listing and Delisting Thresholds under the Endangered Species Act," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(3), pages 549-570.
    2. Outeiro, Luis & Häussermann, Vreni & Viddi, Francisco & Hucke-Gaete, Rodrigo & Försterra, Günter & Oyarzo, Hugo & Kosiel, Klaus & Villasante, Sebastian, 2015. "Using ecosystem services mapping for marine spatial planning in southern Chile under scenario assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 341-353.
    3. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    4. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    5. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    6. Catherine Chambers & John Whitehead, 2003. "A Contingent Valuation Estimate of the Benefits of Wolves in Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 249-267, October.
    7. Burnett, Kimberly M. & D'Evelyn, Sean & Kaiser, Brooks A. & Nantamanasikarn, Porntawee & Roumasset, James A., 2008. "Beyond the lamppost: Optimal prevention and control of the Brown Tree Snake in Hawaii," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 66-74, August.
    8. Crowards, Tom M., 1998. "Safe Minimum Standards: costs and opportunities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 303-314, June.
    9. Erwin Bulte & Edward Barbier, 2005. "Trade and Renewable Resources in a Second Best World: An Overview," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(4), pages 423-463, April.
    10. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    11. Zandersen, Marianne & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 109-130, January.
    12. Sebri, Maamar, 2015. "Use renewables to be cleaner: Meta-analysis of the renewable energy consumption–economic growth nexus," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 657-665.
    13. Lakhani, Raksha & Doluweera, Ganesh & Bergerson, Joule, 2014. "Internalizing land use impacts for life cycle cost analysis of energy systems: A case of California’s photovoltaic implementation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 253-259.
    14. Cullen, Paula & Ryan, Mary & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Kilgariff, Paul, 2018. "The Economics of Agri-Environment Scheme Design: An Irish Case Study," 92nd Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2018, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 273499, Agricultural Economics Society.
    15. Martínez-Espiñeira, Roberto & Lyssenko, Nikita, 2011. "Correcting for the endogeneity of pro-environment behavioral choices in contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1435-1439, June.
    16. Chris Dumas & Pete Schuhmann & John C. Whitehead, 2004. "Measuring the Economic Benefits of Water Quality Improvement with the Benefit Transfer Method: An Introduction for Non-Economists," Working Papers 04-12, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    17. Jette Jacobsen & John Boiesen & Bo Thorsen & Niels Strange, 2008. "What’s in a name? The use of quantitative measures versus ‘Iconised’ species when valuing biodiversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(3), pages 247-263, March.
    18. Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2001. "The role of economics in global management of whales: re-forming or re-founding IWC?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 205-221, February.
    19. Rupert Gatti & Timo Goeschl & Ben Groom & Timothy Swanson, 2011. "The Biodiversity Bargaining Problem," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(4), pages 609-628, April.
    20. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:16:p:12228-:d:1214445. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.