Search results

Purpose – This chapter investigates the role that mandatory genetically modified (GM) labeling versus voluntary labeling has played in the split between those countries with small GM markets and those with large GM markets.

Methodology/approach – Data on product introductions and other market evidence are used to examine market outcomes and identify the likely drivers of GM market bifurcation.

Findings – Labeling has negligible effects on consumer choice or on GM differentiation costs and therefore does not explain the split in GM market outcomes. Other factors have driven market outcomes: namely, consumer confidence in government and the safety of the food supply, competition among manufacturers and retailers, market momentum, and most importantly, the affordability of a non-GM strategy. Ultimately, a non-GM market strategy is feasible only if consumers are willing to cover the additional costs associated with non-GM production and marketing. The two elements composing the cost/price wedge between GM and non-GM products – the cost-reducing benefits of the GM technology and the costs of differentiating non-GM products – therefore play an important role in market outcomes. In the mid-1990s, when producers, manufacturers, and retailers were determining their strategies, neither element was very large. As a result, both GM and non-GM marketing strategies were economically feasible.

Practical implication – Regardless of the labeling regime, changes in the cost/price wedge between GM and non-GM products could change the mix of GM and non-GM products on the market.

Originality/value of paper – This analysis extends the literature by focusing on the impact of labeling regime on both consumer behavior and the cost/price wedge between GM and non-GM products.

Briefly reviews previous literature by the author before presenting an original 12 step system integration protocol designed to ensure the success of companies or countries in their efforts to develop and market new products. Looks at the issues from different strategic levels such as corporate, international, military and economic. Presents 31 case studies, including the success of Japan in microchips to the failure of Xerox to sell its invention of the Alto personal computer 3 years before Apple: from the success in DNA and Superconductor research to the success of Sunbeam in inventing and marketing food processors: and from the daring invention and production of atomic energy for survival to the successes of sewing machine inventor Howe in co‐operating on patents to compete in markets. Includes 306 questions and answers in order to qualify concepts introduced.

The purpose of this paper is to express a general review on how best in the present time can one market genetically modified (GM) foods in the face of the controversial arguments faced globally. Despite the importance of marketing, many organizations though they understand its worth, fail to find radical strategic solutions for the problems encountered by their products. In fact most of them find that disclosing GM ingredients will prohibit consumers from buying their products, whilst, the few GM foods that were proactively marketed indicated the potential of effective marketing and successful product placement.

To be able to market GM foods, an understanding of customer value and problems customers envisage is discussed. The paper attempts to provide a general global perspective on consumer’s views about these issues and with the help of a conceptual model it attempts to identify some of the problems related with marketing GM foods.

The findings indicate that these products would have to be repositioned as being seen as less risky and more beneficial to consumers in the light that they can be scientifically proven.

This research is innovative in the sense it demonstrates an understanding of how to provide customer value for not only consumers who are the ultimate end users but also provides an insight to a broader audience such as manufacturers, agriculturalists and marketing professionals as to what are some of the contributing factors that consumers look for to make an informed choice.

The role played by the marketing function (MF) has been subjected to considerable academic and public media attention. Recent research reflects an ongoing debate on MF's decreasing influence attributed by some to its poor performance. However, studies have analyzed the general marketing (GM) function and domestic operations and remained silent on international marketing's (IM) influence and its impact on firms’ international operations and performance as another aspect of marketing's influence. This lacuna is unfortunate, given that internationalization is crucial to many firms in today's globalizing world. The purpose of this paper is to examine the interactions between IM and GM functions as determinants of IM's influence.

The study extends previous models to the international context, utilizes an inclusive set of strategic international orientations as consequences and mediators of IM's influence, and assesses possible synergy between orientations.

IM functions are influential, valuable, and play an important role. IM-GM coordination enhances IMs’ influence while IM-GM conflicts and IM's influence are unrelated. IMs’ influence enhances performance directly and indirectly through orientations. Importantly, the combined orientations had a negative synergistic effect on performance.

International marketers and top management should consider tactics to increase IMs’ influence and thus benefit their firms.

The study is the first to recognize and empirically focus on the relationships between IM and GM as distinct functions. The study accounts for a combined impact of international orientations on international performance.

This paper seeks to use branding literature to understand the rise and fall of GM's brands.

The approach takes the form of presenting a case analysis using secondary sources covering GM's brands and products, managerial leadership, and market and financial performance throughout its 100‐year history.

During much of its first 50 years, GM was led by engineers who pioneered professional brand management, and through intelligent allocation of resources created one of the world's strongest portfolio of brands. Government anti‐trust hearings shifted GM to a cost‐cutting orientation during its second 50 years that had a negative impact on the GM brands and brought the current financial problems.

This is a case study of only one firm, but parallels are drawn with other firms that have had similar brand issues.

Firms with multiple brands need top management leadership to ensure that each brand has a unique mission with minimal overlap and adequate resources for product development, innovation, and communications to achieve its mission. If the mission or resources disappear, non‐core brands need to be terminated. Governments that wish to support well managed firms with strong brands need to be careful in using anti‐trust actions, and should not force firms to make products that are not desired by customers.

The paper takes a novel approach to evaluating the current state of General Motors by examining the factors that led to chronic mismanagement of its brands, which in turn has reduced brand equity, market share, and profits, and that have magnified GM's problems with labor and legacy costs, productivity, and product mix.

Objective – The current biotechnology revolution has been associated with newly developed genetic modifications (GM) that offer new prospects for increasing agricultural productivity. This has stimulated a rapid adoption of GM corn hybrids by U.S. farmers. Yet, there is concern about the structure of competition among biotech firms that own patents over GM traits. This chapter evaluates the spatial differences in pricing of biotech corn hybrids, with a focus on the fringe versus core regions of the U.S. Corn Belt.

Methods – The analysis examines how local conditions and market concentrations affect the pricing of GM corn hybrids in different locations.

Results – We find evidence of more extensive subadditive pricing in the fringe region. We also examine how both own- and cross-market concentrations affect prices across regions. For GM hybrids, the results show that market power is generally more prevalent in the core region compared to the fringe.

Conclusions – The evidence shows that the pricing of GM corn hybrids varies across space. The observed pricing schemes benefit farmers more in the fringe than in the core region of the Corn Belt.

Purpose – The chapter provides a comprehensive review of trade-related regulations of genetically modified (GM) food, identifies their main effects, and analyzes the main motivations behind their support.

Methodology/approach – The analysis is substantiated by (a) results from the literature on GM food regulations and (b) comparative statics results from a simplified three-country partial equilibrium welfare and political economic model.

Findings – The analysis shows that in a non-GM producing country, trade-related regulations will benefit producers, but not necessarily consumers. Producers' support is found to be instrumental to push for a ban, for information requirements on shipments, or for mandatory labeling of GM food products. Outside pressure groups will play the role of swing voters in cases where consumers and producers do not agree.

Research limitations/implications – The analytical model is based on simplifying assumptions on the groups and market effects of each regulation. Future research is needed to empirically validate some of the main results.

Originality/value of the chapter – The goal of the chapter is to inform economic and policy researchers on the effects of GM food trade-related regulations. The chapter provides an updated comprehensive overview of the key trade regulations of GM food. It uses a unique model to derive the main welfare effects of GM food regulations. By comparing the effects of GM food regulations in different types of countries for different pressure groups, the findings provide new insights in this area.

Purpose – The chapter examines the international welfare effects of biotech crop adoption, based on a transversal literature review and a case study of the introduction of genetically modified (GM) food crops in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

Methodology/approach – The analysis is based on (a) a review of lessons from the applied economic literature and (b) simulations using an improved multimarket, multicountry, computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, calibrated with productivity hypotheses formulated with local scientists in the four Asian countries.

Findings – Results from the analysis show that, in the absence of trade-related regulations, GM crop adoption generates economic gains for adopting countries and importing non-adopters, that domestic regulations at adopters and especially non-adopters can reduce these gains, and that import regulations in other countries can also affect gains for exporting adopters. The case study illustrates these conclusions, but it also shows that net importers will mostly benefit from adoption in their terms of trade, and that segregation of non-GM crops for export markets can be beneficial if it is not too costly.

Research limitations/implications – The use of a CGE model allows for accounting for cross-sectoral effects, and for regulations affecting bilateral trade flows, but it also has a number of limitations. The model used here, like the ones used in the other papers in the literature, is static, based on an aggregated representation of the global economy (GTAP database), and assumes perfect competition. This means that the absolute results of each scenario may not perfectly represent the actual welfare effects engendered by the adoption of biotech crops. Still, what matters here is the comparison of the relative welfare effects across countries and scenarios. The simulations are also done ex-ante, so, even if the model here was calibrated with country-based data, the results do depend on hypothetical assumptions about the performance of the selected technologies.

Originality/value of the paper – The chapter aims to illustrate the welfare effects generated by GM crops for adopters, non-adopters, in a segmented and regulated international market. Unlike other papers, the review section provides key transversal lessons from the literature, accounting for results from both partial equilibrium and CGE model studies. The empirical application focuses on four populous Asian countries that have been largely left out of the literature. The model used in the simulation presents a number of improvement from the CGE literature on GM crops, including partial adoption, factor-biased productivity shock in each adopting country, GM labeling regulations modeled as trade filters, and the inclusion of costly non-GM segregation as observed in the international market.

In 1921, Alfred P. Sloan developed an extensive repositioning strategy that was instrumental to General Motors' success over the decades that followed. This paper aims to provide a review of the development and evolution of this strategy and how the later deviation from this strategy was responsible for the company's marketplace decline and eventual bankruptcy.

The paper reviews the historical 1921 repositioning strategy developed by Sloan and the specific models and price levels that were a part of this strategy. These price levels are then examined over the following decades to determine when and how this strategy was modified over time.

The findings indicate that although Sloan developed a brilliant strategy at the time of its inception, General Motors has over time deviated from its own historic and successful repositioning strategy. It is demonstrated that the deviation from the 1921 strategy has contributed to the decline in General Motors' market share and their bankruptcy in 2009. In addition, the 1921 strategy is compared to those of successful 21st century competition.

The research provides the reader with a historical review and analysis of the Sloan strategy and provides evidence that a historically successful marketing strategy can be applicable in other time periods for the company that developed it and for other competitors that make use of a similar strategy.