Page 1 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability as Market Strategy: The Case of Chicle
Tineke de Vries
Foreign Ministry of the Netherlands, New York City, USA
David Bray
Department of Earth and Environment, Florida International University USA
Karen Paul
Department of Management and International Business, Florida International University, USA
Annual Meeting, Australia and New Zealand Academy of Management
Melbourne, Australia, Dec. 2-4, 2009
(Submitted June 24, 2009)
ANZAM 2009 Page 2 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability
The Limits to Sustainability as Market Strategy: The Case of Chicle
Abstract Natural chewing is a product based on chicle which comes from the chicozapote tree, as opposed to the petroleum gum base used for conventional chewing gum. Certification of natural chewing gum as an organic, fair trade, and healthy forest product has been pursued in order to expand the demand and raise the market price for chicle, but this strategy has had limited success. Reasons for the failure of this market to develop, along with ethical issues involved, are discussed.
The concept of sustainability includes ecological, social, and economic dimensions, sometimes referred to as ¨equity, economy, environment¨ or as ¨people, planet, profits¨ (Hawkins,
1993; Rasmussen, 1996, 1993; World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). In either rubric, whether conceptualized within the category of the environment or within the category of the planet, sustainability is enhanced by the preservation of rainforest, the maintenance of biodiversity, and the continued viability of indigenous communities. Although
30% of tropical forests in Central America have been lost, there remain substantial tropical forests in Quintana Roo, a state in the Southeast of Mexico. These tropical forests rank high in biodiversity, but are subject to continued encroachment and threat. Since the major causes of deforestation are crop growing and animal raising (Taylor and Zagin 2000), sustainability will be enhanced by supporting products that can be harvested without environmental degradation.
In the forests of Quitana Roo, both rural development and conservation have occurred, showing that the two strategies can be compatible and even mutually beneficial (Barrera de
Jorgenson 1993). One product which illustrates both the successes and the continued problems of operationalizing sustainability is chicle, the raw material harvested from the chicozapote tree
(manilkara zapota ). The use of chicle dates back centuries, to the Maya and the Aztec civilizations who chewed chicle to quench thirst, and for medicinal and religious purposes
(Mathews 2009; Redclift 2004). The product was introduced to the United States in the mid-19th
Century by General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, who lived in the United States between
1 Page 3 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
periods when he served as President of Mexico. His interpreter and secretary, James Adams,
experimented, blending chicle with sugar, corn syrup, and flavorings such as licorice and
peppermint. Adams created chewing gum, founding the Adams Chewing Gum Company to
produce and distribute the product. As a result of the demand created by this new product, chicle
exports from Mexico to the United States increased from 4.2 tons in 1885-86 to 1,633 tons in
1995-96 (Matthews: 2009). Yet the rainforest remained viable during this period, mainly because
indigenous peoples had developed a method of harvesting chicle which did not damage the trees.
Consumers were led to believe that chewing gum facilitated digestion, mitigated thirst,
and helped relieve nervous tension. These applications were seen as beneficial, even for U.S.
military troops serving in World War I and World War II who spread chewing gum around the
world with their military rations. After World War II demand for chewing gum continued to
grow around the world, but, ironically, this growing demand created difficulties for the chicle
industry. Production of chicle was dependent on the fluctuations typical of any agricultural
product, and especially of products made by indigenous communities. Furthermore, producers
had become greedy. Harvesters responded to increases in demand by using excessive harvesting
practices that debased the trees producing their livelihood, and further debased their product by,
for example, adding objects such as rocks to the raw materials that increased its weight while
decreasing its purity. The natural product was difficult to obtain and unreliable in quality.
Producers of chewing gum, finding that a petroleum base could be substituted for chicle, wasted
little time in switching to the substitute product. The market for chicle dropped precipitously.
Only a few companies continue to use chicle in producing chewing gum, not enough for it to
thrive. The market is so small that product improvements and advances in distribution and
marketing cannot be supported. Only three U.S. companies, along with other very small
companies in Japan, Italy, and Mexico still use chicle rather than the petroleum base. Redclift
2 ANZAM 2009 Page 4 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability uses the word “miniscule” to describe the size of this market, and says that existing chicle stocks are mainly held in warehouses (2004: 175). Although natural chewing gum made from chicle is a product appropriate for “green” consumers and ethical investors, developing and marketing a commercially viable product is very difficult. The problems in developing this market may be illustrative for the issue of sustainability generally.
CHICLE: THE PRODUCT AND THE PROBLEM
Developing the market for chicle would create several beneficial effects. Chicle is a
Non-Timber Forest Product (NTFP) that grows in the rainforest of Quintana Roo, a province in southern Mexico. This category of products (NTFPs) contributes to forest conservation and sustainable forest exploitation (Neumann and Hirsch 2000). NTFPs are important for sustainability because the forest can remain standing and more or less intact biologically. In this respect, chicle production differs from rainforest timber harvesting, which ultimately destroys the forest and the biodiversity contained in it. Chicle production occurred on a modest scale for centuries before world markets developed in the 1800s, and continued to be harvested without serious damage to the rainforest for many decades, until the middle of the 20th century when demand for the product declined. This decline in demand had contradictory effects. On the one hand, reduced demand eased the pressure on production, thus reducing the likelihood of forest degradation. On the other hand, the stake that indigenous communities had in maintaining sustainable harvesting practices declined as the commercial viability of the product became more doubtful and with the drop in income provided indigenous communities from the product.
The problem of chicle is complicated by the governmental interest, or lack of interest, in the product. In theory the national government of Mexico is a federation and state governors have long considered themselves to be the sovereign authority in a state. However, the President of Mexico can name candidates for governor and can remove them from office. In Mexico, as
3 Page 5 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
elsewhere, for most people most of the time, politics is local, and this is especially true in
indigenous communities. In this case, local means not only the state of Quintana Roo, but also
the municipal level and the level of the ejido , which is a community that owns land collectively.
Plots may be allocated to individuals or family units, but pastures and forest resources are held in
common. Mexico has more forest lands under active community administration than any other
country in the world (Bray 1995). Indeed, 80% of Mexican forests are administered as a common
property resource (Ostrom 1990). Ejido forest lands are exploited communally, with profits
divided among the members of the ejido , called ejiditarios . The right to use the common
resources is determined by the rules of the ejido . The World Bank considers these community
based organizations to be a vital part of the emerging civil society, the ¨third sector¨ (Fox 1997).
Traditionally, communities of chicle harvesters operate according to the rules and practices of
their ejidos . The ejido depends on the revenue from chicle production to supplement income
from other agricultural activities, and has an interest in maintaining and preserving the integrity
of the chicozapote trees. However, they are far removed from enterprises farther along the supply
chain such as firms essential for product development, distribution, and marketing (Bray 1995).
Additional problems revolve around the economics of chicle production and marketing.
Chicle producers face the difficulty of doing business with a limited set of buyers. The single
buyer of the raw product is a state sponsored cooperative organization known as the Union.
About 50% of the product is sold to Mexitrade, a trading company working to promote many
different Mexican products, of which chicle is only a tiny part. Mexitrade was formerly a
government-owned company, but has been privatized in recent years. In addition to selling chicle
to foreign companies, Mexitrade also uses chicle to make its own brand of natural chewing gum,
SpeakEasy, which it sells in México and also exports for resell abroad. About 43% of the product
is sold to Mitsui, who markets it to Mitsuba for the production of natural chewing gum for the
4 ANZAM 2009 Page 6 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability
Japanese market. One American producer has marketed natural chewing gum under the brand name ‘JungleGum’, while another brand, ‘GleeGum’, produced by Verve, Inc., has been available on an extremely limited basis. In recent years there has been considerable variation in prices paid for chicle by producers of natural chewing gum. Speakeasy has paid only US $3.50 per kilogram, while Mitsui paid US$4.70, and JungleGum paid $5.25 (Aldrete 2001). In the case of JungleGum a ¨fairtrade¨ price has been paid to comply with certification requirements. With proper product development and marketing, this should create added demand among ¨green consumers,¨ but in practice few resources exist to develop the market.
Demand for chicle is low (under 50% of production) due to the use of petroleum gum base by most commercial companies and the lack of market development for natural chewing gum. Because supply has exceeded demand in recent years, the product has been stockpiled.
Because demand is low and inventory high, prices are low for chicle producers. The result is a drop in the supplemental income of indigenous communities in recent years, and further impoverishment of indigenous communities.
Market Potential. Green consumers prefer products produced with natural or organic products, products that contribute to environmental quality including biodiversity and rainforest protection, and products traded according to ¨fair trade¨ principles whereby producers are assured a just price for their goods. Green consumers should prefer natural chewing gum over the usual product, which is based on a petroleum product. Buying the natural product would contribute to the preservation of biodiversity, would assist the economic viability of indigenous communities, and possibly could deliver perceived health benefits to consumers when compared to the petroleum product. However, chicle producers have few resources to grow the market, U.S. producers of natural chewing gum are not able to capitalize sufficiently to compete with conventional brands, and the Japanese company has not yet seen the merits of expanding globally.
5 Page 7 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
The expanding market for green consumer goods presents a new opportunity for the
chicle market. Consumers of organic or green products avoid products made of synthetic
material if a natural product is available. Chewing gum using a chicle base fits this consumer
demand. Another motivation to consume green products is the contribution of the product to the
conservation of diversity. Consumers of fair trade products have yet another motivation for
buying these products. Their motivation is to make sure that small holders, farmers and
producers obtain direct benefits, i.e ., access to agricultural and managerial training, and a price
that compensates them for real production costs, therefore qualifying as a ¨fair price¨ or ¨fair
trade¨ item. The niche market of green consumers is growing rapidly, producing the potential for
market growth for natural gum, but the synthetic chewing gum continues to dominate.
Selling Points of Natural Chewing Gum. Conventional chewing gum using a petroleum base is
promoted as contributing to feelings of freshness, flavor, and cleanliness. It is supposed to
sweeten the breath and refresh the mouth and throat, as well as tasting good. Sometimes
marketers suggest that chewing gum can preserve healthy teeth, because the stimulation of saliva
helps to neutralize acids from foods. Some consumers feel that chewing gum helps to alleviate
stress and promote relaxation. Others chew gum to contradict the effects of medications that
produce a dry mouth or medical conditions that have a similar effect. Virtually no consumers of
conventional chewing gum realize that they are consuming a petroleum-based product. Chewing
gum labels listing ingredients use the term ¨gum base.¨ It is probably safe to say at least some
consumers would reconsider their use of the product if they knew it contained a petroleum
product. Natural chewing gum might be an attractive product for some of these consumers.
Further market expansion might come from consumers of organic foods who favor
organic food and avoid artificial ingredients and flavorings, and who probably do not use
chewing gum at the present time. Furthermore, environmentally conscious consumers may feel
6 ANZAM 2009 Page 8 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability like using natural chewing gum because of the contribution the product makes to sustainable forestry, conservation of the rainforest, and preservation of biodiversity. Fair trade enthusiasts might be attracted to the product because it has a positive impact on the economic viability of indigenous communities. These market segments also seem primed to pay higher prices for goods than conventional markets if the products offer comparable quality.
In August, 2009 Heathrow Natural Food & Beverage, Inc. (HNFB) began test production of two new chewing gum products, marketed not as a traditional chewing gum, but rather as a delivery system for antioxidants contained in acai and other herbal extracts previously marketed in liquid or capsule form. These products will be sold in the nutritional supplements section of supermarkets and other retailers (Heathrow Natural … 2009). Another potential product for
‘green consumers’ is a biodegradable gum reportedly being developed for the United Kingdom market, based on chicle from FSC certified Mexican co-operatives (Partos 2009). The success of these products in the marketplace is still to be determined.
Potential Consumers . The strongest centers for green marketing are in North America and
Europe, although it is also represented in Australia (Gurau and Ranchhol 2005) and Japan (Rex and Baumann 2007). In Europe, especially in the Netherlands, the demand for organic food is increasing. About one out of every five Dutch consumers states a preference for organic products
(de Wit 2001), a potential market of approximately five million people in this country alone. In the USA consumers of organic food products have been studied by the Natural Marketing
Institute (Lampe and French 2002). The LOHAS (Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability) market includes about 30% of all U.S. consumers, or 63 million adults. This market is segmented according to attitudes and behaviors. Two defining characteristics of the LOHAS market are willingness to pay up to 20% more for LOHAS related products and a willingness to teach family and friends about the benefits of these products, behaviors extremely important for indentifying
7 Page 9 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
future trends. LOHAS consumers have concerns that include environmentalism and intense
concern for health, including the environmental aspect in the health of the individual, the society,
and the planet. They express a high level of concern for social justice, for conservation of natural
resources, for personal development, and for the wellness of body, mind, spirit, and planet. In
choosing environmentally friendly products, they make decisions based on the impact these
products have on the world. In addition, they favor products that support sustainable agriculture.
Marketing appeals should be targeted toward these potential consumers. One caveat should be
recognized. If health is the main motivation of most potential consumers of natural chewing
gum, then we have to consider whether chewing gum, natural or not, can ever be sold as a healthy
product. Its taste appeal must rely on either sugar or an artificial sweetener, both questionable in
terms of health benefit. Furthermore, the environmental appeal will surely be questioned by
anyone who has encountered a wad of used gum stuck in the carpet or under a table.
Certification as a Marketing Strategy. In order to attract consumers who have health on their
mind, the appeal of natural chewing gum has to rely primarily on its appeal as an organic or green
product based on pure, natural ingredients. A second dimension that can be used to appeal to
these consumers might be conservation of the rainforest. Thirdly, fair trade principles might
attract consumers. Externally verified certification is available in all three areas. Obtaining this
certification might give natural chewing gum the appeal it needs in order to grow the market.
Forest certification. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) manages an international
labeling scheme for forest products, providing a credible guarantee that the product comes from a
well-managed forest. All products bearing the FSC logo meet the FSC´s Principles and Criteria
of Forest Stewardship. Forest inspections are carried out by several FSC accredited certification
bodies, evaluated and monitored to ensure their competence and credibility. Products with FSC
8 ANZAM 2009 Page 10 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability the logo are sold through regular distribution channels for timber products and can be found in retail stores such as Home Depot in the United States and Mexico (Donovan 2000).
Fair trade certification. Another type of certification assures fair trade goals, demonstrating that producers receive just compensation for their labors. It seeks to minimize the number of middlemen in the distribution chain so as to assure that original producers receive a just return for their labor. ‘Fair Trade’, an organization internationally recognized for this type of certification, is based in the Netherlands, and has been in existence since 1967. In addition to certifying products, this organization maintains more than 400 Wereldwinkels (world shops) and nine exclusively FairTrade shops that distribute products it certifies.
Organic certification. In the United States the federal government announced standards by which goods may be labeled organic beginning in 1990. Prior to the federal standards, certification was available through the an organization called ¨Florida Organic Growers.¨
However, since chicle is produced abroad, the more applicable standards would likely come from the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movement (IFOAM), a non-governmental organization (NGO) based in Germany with representation in more than 100 countries.
Chicle Certification. The Noh-Bec ejido , working in conjunction with the producer of the natural chewing gum Wild Things, has aggressively pursued a certification strategy with the expectation that this would lead to higher prices and increased sales for chicle. Noh-Bec has achieved all three types of certification reviewed here: Fair Trade, FSC, and IFOAM. The expectation of both the chicle harvesters and the company making WildThings was that certification would promote higher prices for the raw material and greater market demand for this brand of natural chewing gum. The first objective has been met to a modest degree, but the second remains elusive. The market for natural chewing gum remains a small and undeveloped market, insufficient to even produce demand that would deplete existing stocks of chicle. Most
9 Page 11 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
consumers are not aware that there is any distinction between natural chewing gum and the
petroleum-based product, although more aggressive marketing by chicle-based gum producers
might enhance awareness. Third party certification is obviously not a substitute for product
development, investment, and effective marketing.
MARKET LIMITING ELEMENTS
Three natural chewing gums have been marketed in North America. Speakeasy has been
marketed in the USA and Mexico by Mexictrade. GleeGum has been marketed in the USA by
Verve, Inc., while JungleGum has been marketed in the USA by WildThings, Inc., which has
pursued the certification strategy in conjunction with the ejido Noh-Bec. The three companies
have presented their products in slightly different yet related ways. Each product has used its
packaging to communicate that it is a natural product. Yet, what that actually means is unclear.
Consumers have no way to compare the natural product with the other type, i.e. , the conventional
gum made of a petroleum gum base. No journalistic coverage that can be located has publicized
the use of the petroleum base instead of the natural chicle. The organization Consumers Union,
the producer of the magazine Consumer Reports, has never evaluated chewing gum. Physicians
in the Public Interest, a non-governmental organization active in the United States, has never
given attention to chewing gum. Health food stores generally do not feature chewing gum or
provide information about its qualities. In fact, consumers of health foods, natural products, and
fair trade products may not have ever heard of natural chewing gum, and may in fact regard all
chewing gum as environmentally degrading and unhealthy.
Fair Trade certification has not been of much use for promoting natural chewing gum.
Although the Fair Trade organization has a large number of retail outlets, natural chewing gum
does not fit into their marketing plans. In fact, these stores are more and more gift shop type
outlets, selling goods like jewelry, articles of clothing, and decorative objects, e.g., organizations
10 ANZAM 2009 Page 12 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability represented in http://www.fairtradefederation.org/ , although coffee, tea, and chocolate (all high profit margin goods) are represented. Consumables like chewing gum have less appeal because of their low profit margin, their being subject to out-of-date inventory spoilage, and, frankly, their appeal to vermin and rodents. Studies of organic or green consumers show that health is their primary motivation, so promotion of natural chewing gum as a Fair Trade product would not seem to have much potential in growing the market. The same can be said of FSC certification.
For most consumers of chewing gum, natural or otherwise, the leap to rainforest conservation and the well-being of indigenous communities is just too great a mental leap to make without some focused coaching. In this respect, the case of natural chewing gum can be contrasted with organically grown coffee, tea, and chocolate. The organization Transfair, based in Oakland, California, working with only these products, has mobilized a large network of churches and other organizations to sell them at premium prices. The marketing effectiveness of
Transfair includes education of the consumer, development of niche distribution networks, and high product quality, none of which can be said to have taken place currently.
One ethical issue stands out in the development of certification as a market strategy. This is who is to bear the cost of certification. Traditional producers of chicle live on the margin of economic survival. Furthermore, their livelihood is threatened by interlopers who range through the territory harvesting chicle for short term gain without real regard for the sustainability of the rainforest. In addition, the market position of the traditional producers is weakened by the existence of Mexitrade which retains its position as the dominant buyer of the raw material and acts both as wholesaler of the product and producer of a retail brand that competes with other natural chewing gums in the market. Although Fair Trade, FSC, and organic certified chicle sells for a higher price than the uncertified alternative, it is unclear that the premium in price justifies
11 Page 13 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
the cost of the certification process. The only guarantee of a good return would be if the market
were to grow sufficiently to use up existing inventory and create a demand for more production.
Growing the market would require either a serious infusion of capital, which none of the
small producers of the retail product would be able to accomplish, or discrediting the
conventional petroleum-base product, which possibly could be accomplished by a determined and
credible non-governmental organization or even a serious social entrepreneur. If the market were
to grow, it would seem to require educating a wider public about the fact that conventional
chewing gum uses a petroleum base, and suggesting the use of natural chewing gum as an
alternative. Mounting a political offensive to require that labeling of conventional chewing gum
in the United States tell what kind of gum base is being used, natural or petroleum, would seem to
be a first step. Implicit would be the idea that chewing a petroleum based product might be
dangerous to the health, particularly for children. Is it ethical to deliberately strategize to
discredit an existing market in order to grow a new market? If not, there would seem to be
simply no room in the market to grow the demand for natural chewing gum.
Conclusions. The market for organic goods, fair trade products, and products that contribute to
sustainability, diversity, and rainforest conservation is growing. However, the limits of that
market may be illustrated in the case of natural chewing gum based on chicle harvested from the
rainforest. Much of the appeal of natural chewing gum depends on consumers understanding that
the gum base used in conventional chewing gum actually is a petroleum product. Thus, growing
the natural product requires educating consumers about the composition of the conventional
product. However, the producers of chicle are very poor and far removed from the
communications networks of the global marketplace. Thus, popularizing this product would need
to be done by a determined social entrepreneur or an NGO. Furthermore, acquiring certification
by external groups is costly, and it seems unfair for the ejidos in which production occurs to be
12 ANZAM 2009 Page 14 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability expected to assume this burden, and no alternative source of funding currently exists. In the case of chicle, there seems to be no likely source of capital for the certification effort, product development, or marketing efforts needed to make natural, chicle-based gum a viable product.
Thus, natural chicle may be a good example of “the limits of sustainability” as a marketing strategy, illustrative of many difficulties that may be faced by other sustainable products.
13 Page 15 of 16 ANZAM 2009
The Limits to Sustainability
References
Aldrete, M (2001) El mercado regional del chicle natural. Cheturnal: Union de productores de chicle natural. Presentation, Tercer Encuentro Chiclero Guatemala, Belice y México, Cheturnal, Mexico.
Barrera de Jorgenson, A (1993) Chicle extraction and forest conservation in Quintana Roo, México. Paper from Latin American and Caribbean Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Bray, D (1995) Peasant organizations and ¨The permanent reconstruction of nature¨: Grassroots sustainable development in rural Mexico. Journal of environment and development 4(24): 185- 204.
de Wit, M (2001) Wie koopt EKO producten? Voeding Un (Amsterdam).
Donovan, RZ (2000) Observations on equity after ten years of SmartWood certification. Paper delivered at Second Annual FSC Conference, Oaxaca, Mexico.
Fox, J (1997) The World Bank and social capital: Contesting the concept in practice, Journal of international development 9(7): 963-971.
Gurau, C & Ranchhol, A (2005) International green marketing: A comparative study of British and Romanian firms, International marketing review 22(5): 547-561.
Hawken, P. The Economy of Commerce: A Declaration Sustainbility , New York: HarperBusiness.
Heathrow Natural ACAI Plus Chewing Gum to be Distributed in the United Kingdom & Ireland (2009) Thomson Reuters: Market Wire. Accessed August 31, 2009 at http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=US148521 .
Lampe, F and French, S (2002) New market segment turns on sustainability and social consciousness. Natural Foods Merchandiser. (October) Retrieved July 1, 2004 from http://www.newhope.com/nfm backs/oct 02/LOHAS.cfm .
Matthews, J (2009) Chicle. The Chewing Gum of the Americas: From the Ancient Maya to William Wrigley, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Neumann, RP & Hirsch, E (2000) Commercialisation of non-timber forest products: Review and analysis of research. Paper at Center for International Forestry Research, Indonesia (Bogor).
Ostrom, E (1990) Social capital: A fad or fundamental concept? Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change. Workshop on Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University (Bloomington).
14 ANZAM 2009 Page 16 of 16
The Limits to Sustainability
Partos, L (2009) Rainforest chewing gum could answer sustainable needs, Food and Drink Europe.com (30-Mar). Accessed Aug. 31, 2009 at http://www.foodanddrinkeuropelcom/content/view/print/241802 .
Rasmussen, LR (1996) Earth Community, Earth Ethics New York: Orbis.
Redclift, R (2004) Chewing Gum: The Fortunes of Taste, Routhledge, New York City.
Rex, E & Baumann, H. (2007) Beyond ecolabels: What green marketing can learn from conventional marketing, Journal of Cleaner Production 15(6): 567-576.
Taylor, PL & Zagin, C (2000) Neoliberal reform and sustainable forest management in Quintana Roo, México: Rethinking the institutional framework of the Forestry Pilot Plan, Agriculture and human values 17(2) 141-156.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future, New York: United Nations Press.
15