SAVANNAH MOZINGO

The following essay is my final project comparing Customization and Standardization practices for a specific company withing their market, This was written for my International Marketing class that I enrolled in during my study abroad at the University of Strathclyde. It strongly supports my ability to target approach research material, synthesize it and then communicate it to others. 

 

Savannah Mozingo

MK325 Essentials of International Marketing

Pr. Rebekah Russell-Bennett
University of Strathclyde — Glasgow, Scotland
13 November 2012

 

Whole Foods Market: Customization versus Standardization

 

Today’s markets face a whole new set of challenges brought on by the increasing liquidity of foreign market entrance and the demands of international customers springing from the aggregating interconnectedness of the world. As technology continues to rapidly advance, for companies globalization is now more a question of “When?” rather than “Why?”.  However, with new opportunities come new challenges; while a different market has the possibility to bring additional revenue and longevity to the company, there are also issues raised along political, economic and socio-cultural divides as well as the current market-saturation to consider. Each company must conduct its own research and analyses to decide how to best enter another market should they so choose. The product or service that is being brought over must be thoroughly critiqued to determine if any adjustments need to be made or whether it should be frozen and implemented as is. This practice of choosing between customization and standardization is going to be the focus of the following essay in specific regards to Whole Foods Market, abbreviated WFM.  Whole Foods Market is a natural and organic grocer based out of Austin, Texas with current operations in the United States, Canada, and most recently, the UK. Several traditional factors such as the four “P’s” and marketing mix go into the screening conditions when researching a new market opportunity. Specific to Whole Foods Market (2011) is a model that analyzes prospective sites based on various criteria such as level of education, density of population and level of income. With both traditional and corporate specific determination factors in mind, a risk analysis comparison between Japan, France and India decided France as the best new entry market for this purposes of this essay.  With the entry country decided, more targeted questions arise concerning WFM’s ability to move in can be successfully met with a combined application of the theories, facts, and customization as well as standardization concepts. This essay will give a compressed overview of WFM to situate the level of comprehension and relevance for it go on to explore the issues facing a food service retailer in globalizing their firm in areas of product, price, place, and promotion, the network model, advantages and disadvantages of both categorization and standardization as they pertain to WFM, and finally conclude with a ultimate recommendation of applying customization and summary of the points that have led to it.

 

It began with the merging of Saferway and Clarksville Natural Grocery in 1980 that resulted in the first opening of the Whole Foods Market store. This was the start of what has become the largest natural and organic food superstore in the world. The combination of mergers, acquisitions, and independent openings over the years has resulted in over 310 retail stores currently operating in 3 countries: the United States, Canada and the UK.  Besides the actual product being sold, it is the manner in which Whole Foods conducts its business that attracts customers. Setting high standards, such as the 5-Step Animal Welfare Rating and the Eco-Scale Rating and providing the information to their shoppers, is an interactive way for customers to directly impact Whole Foods with their “vote” or purchase and make themselves heard. The company’s mission statement is the key to its success. It is the goal of Whole Foods Market to 1.) sell the highest quality natural and organic products available 2.) satisfy and delight its customers 3.) support team member happiness and excellence 4.) create wealth through profits and growth 5.) take care of the communities it’s a part of as well the environment as whole and actively promote sustainability 6.) create ongoing win-win partnerships with suppliers  and finally, 7.) promote the health of stakeholders through healthy eating education (Whole Foods Market, 2011). The commitment to the company mission combined with partnerships who have initiatives in areas such as value, animal welfare, and healthy eating actively aligns Whole Foods with their core customer base; people who are environmentally aware, health-conscious, and wanting to make a positive impact on the future. With a fixation on lifestyle rather than specific product promotion, WFM is able to be more flexible — with reason — within individual stores according to the needs and desires of the surrounding community. Each store offers the same product selection but within each selection, the specificities are left to be determined so that they can sourced as ethically as possible. This means that local and regional farms can be suppliers of a store —provided they meet quality standards — to minimize transportation and support the community’s economy. The evidence of Whole Food’s success is seen in their healthy growth year after year, particularly in 2011 in the midst of a wavering economy.  Sales increased 12% and operating margin improved to 5.4%. There was 8.5% comparable store sales growth, the highest result in five years and average weekly sales per store of $636,000, translating to sales per square foot of $874 (Whole Foods Market, 2011). These numbers show a company fit to globalize; it has a firm hand in its home country and with no debt, the risk associated with expanding into foreign markets is one Whole Foods can afford to take. Already, it practices customization on a small scale in its regular day-to-day activities so the company ought to be well prepared to handle the flexibility required of entering a foreign market.

 

Customization is the application of the emic perspective to marketing technique, stressing variation across cultures. It’s argued that an effective strategy takes the country’s national character into consideration and tailors to its specific needs and sensibilities (Bennett, 2012). In contrast, standardization applies the etic perspective and focuses on the commonalities across cultures. It remains the most cost effective perspective as it stresses developing and implementing a single theme that promotes high economies of scale. What defines Whole Foods Market is their core values and these must be a standard of every store as research has found a positive correlation between used in a marketing strategy and the firm’s performance (Cavusgil & Zou, 1994). However, because the company seeks to be part of their community, they are required to customize their products to reflect this for the best interests of the company as a whole. The fact that WFM is dependent on resources controlled by others is an implication of it utilizing the network model. Whole Foods acts as the go between for those in agriculture and those consuming it. There are social and cognitive ties between the retailer and its suppliers, which must be taken into consideration with each specific interaction. No two places are alike; understanding and adapting to the consumer is key for service producers.  

 

Although Whole Foods Market may be the golden child of American food retailers, entering the French market won’t be without its difficulties. To begin, there are the issues of its product or rather, its products, which include seafood, vegetables, meat, fruits, grocery, bakery, specialty (wine, beer and cheese), coffee and tea, prepared foods, supplements and body care, and educational material.  Nearly 67% of what the store offers is perishable (Whole Foods Market, 2011) and this raises matters of concern over transportation, predicted shelf life and waste reduction, a particularly important aspect for a company who plays so much on having a “green” image. Unlike retailers with non-perishable goods such as clothing, WFM can not rotate products between stores if one item is not selling well. With little opportunity for stock cost reduction, it’s important that Whole Foods stores have the correct products; ones that will appeal to the customers from the moment they first open their doors in France. Otherwise, they run the risk of accumulating food and monetary waste if too much adjusting is required to accommodate the French diet.  France may be physically far but it is not so psychologically distant. Alcohol consumption is similar to that in America; it’s well enjoyed although not usually overindulged as health and wellness consciousness is widely practiced (Demossier, 2010). A study of the typical American food intake was written up in the Wall Street Journal showing there was an overwhelming tendency towards meat, snacks, and specialty foods (Lobb, 2005). French culture on the other hand, avoids snacks and instead has only three meals a day that consist of light breakfast — typically bread and coffee — and then lunch and dinner menus that emphasize meat, bread and cheese (Diggs).  In both cultures there is a growing emphasis on eating healthy while paying attention to the quality of ingredients so Whole Foods’ can uphold their mission statement of providing superior food although they may need to adjust their stock. The current model for suppliers to WFM involves localizing as much as possible when the providers meet standards of excellence for responsible and organic practices. Research conducted by Forschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbaua showed that as of 2009, only 2.5% of the agricultural land in France was organic even after growing 23.7% from the year before. Though there were over 16,000 organic farms counted by Agence Bio (Agencie Bio, 2010), considering the saturation of the market, there is still a question whether that would be enough to support a large retailer such as Whole Foods. It would be imperative for Whole Foods to clear any of the products they would plan on bringing from outside Europe with the MHRA in the case any might contain banned ingredients (World Health Organization, 2010). This would cause serious delay if it were insisted products remained standardized or they weren’t to be sold at all. The benefit of keeping with the same products though might be worth the extra trouble because there is already a relation to the supplier and the company trusts the product.

 

Among the many differences an American company might expect to encounter in a foreign market, they might also find language barriers to be a factor and this can affect their promotion. Whole Foods relies primarily on word-of-mouth and social media in the form of Facebook, blogs and Twitter to engage their customers. The rest of the marketing budget is usually spent on in-store activities, such as local farmers’ markets, taste fairs, classes, tours and product samplings (Whole Foods Market, 2011). This is all meant to mirror the commitment to community and environment. Since the store team members deliver the events orally, it is up to them to decipher the promotions. Each store has a its own separate budget for making contributions to a variety of humanitarian and public activities with the desire of fostering goodwill and making themselves known within the community. Returning to the matter of Whole Foods’ non-oral promotion, currently, all of their social media sites are in English, which disrupt the interpretation of context. It can’t be expected for standardization of the information to pass in France when only 31% of the country even speaks a second language (European Commission, 2006). The packaging of grocery items plays a role in its appeal as it is expected to both catch the consumer’s eye and then provide them with the appropriate information. The increase of technology and globalization means that more choices than ever before are at the customer’s disposal. Brought in closer contact with each other, products are under harsher scrutiny from the consumers. There is freedom of information that allows for comparison between two similar products. A powerful marketing mix of informative packaging and effective branding would be necessary to overcome the American country-of-origin dilemma a health food retailer would face. It would also offer a risk reduction strategy for international consumers shopping in foreign markets.

 

Effective promotion feeds into justifying price.  Organic or natural products will be more expensive no matter the location due a variety of agricultural or production factors. If they’re also to be affected with the cost of additional tariffs and transportation resulting from the efforts to maintain standardized products throughout the chain, the threat of substitutes offered by the competition may all too easily undermine WFM. Food can only be so differentiated; it relies on high value in food culture. The rise of the popularity of ethical consumerism in France is exactly the push needed to justify price (Datamonitor, 2005). It differentiates the food retail industry by effect of the standards it imposes. There’s a chance of blue ocean for the new organic market that has grown out of the red ocean general food retail. If the grocer can establish a premium or product line price policy, they are able to justify higher prices as well as stake out a newly developed area of the market.

 

Like Western culture, the French also place a value on community (Fishler et al, 2011) that makes the issue of placement a sensitive factor in the success of company. As was mentioned in the introduction, Whole Foods has very specific criteria when it comes to picking a location for their stores; they rely on appealing to an active, healthy lifestyle as well as those to whom money is no large matter, as their products tend to be more expensive. Besides needing to scout out for the right psychological and social atmosphere, Whole Foods would need to be prepared to go through a lot of red tape. Even if they were to find an ideal location, it does not mean they can secure it for development. A modification to French legislature in 2008 makes the opening of new stores incredibly difficult, particularly to foreign companies. The legislature allows the opening of new stores under 1,000 square meters, a size smaller than anything Whole Foods has ever attempted (Gauthier, 2009). There is also competition from cafés, patisseries, brasseries, boulangeries, and farmer’s market common in large cities where Whole Foods commonly looks to set up.

 

Customization is indeed the way a food retailer should handle globalization of their company.  In this essay, the issues concerning product, promotion, price, and place specific to Whole Foods Market were explored and explained. Standardization would not bring the company to its fullest operating potential. Specific adjustments to channel management, packaging and the design of the store layout would reflect the foreign country’s quality and community values. To maintain product freshness as well as an effective value chain and channel management, Whole Foods Market would need to avoid outsourcing. Instead they should use local French suppliers wherever they can so that they are positioned to fit the consumer.  Standardization conceptions would argue that the idiosyncrasies of multiple channels create confusion but the fact of the matter is that Whole Foods Market isn’t overwhelmingly committed to one channel even in the Unites States. Already, the company has a policy of purchasing at both regional and national levels to ensure better negotiations while allowing the level of customization to accommodate local products and a unique product mix. A French store would maintain these policies but would customize their list of suppliers.  Given the diet differences between France and America and the rich culinary culture of the former, an emphasis on perishables could continue count for the largest part of Whole Foods’ inventory.  There is presently a good deal of competition in the French food retail industry (Wood, 2011), but none have the commitment to organic and natural products that Whole Foods Market does. Adjustments must be allowed concerning the specific products sold although the standards for quality should remain the same. Without dedication to standards, the company core values are compromised and they cease to be a true entitlement to the Whole Foods Market corporation. Luxury (Gauthier, 2009) is in fact a large selling point in the French economy so it could be expected that the specialty (wine, cheese and beer) entity of the store would be popular as would produce because of the connotation of wealth and responsibility that comes with buying organic (Cornwell & Schwepker, 1991). Not everything can be left up to the customers’ perceptions though. Promotions of all forms – verbal and social-media – would require customization for WFM’s current oral and technology driven strategy to work abroad. A sister site entirely in French would be needed to translate the WFM experience to their new customers if it were to significantly impact the foreign market consumers; “Internet sales of food and non-food products are progressing at a rate of 30% yearly” (Gauthier, 2009). It’s understandable that a person wants to know what they’re buying; a company is obligated to provide the appropriate information. Labels such as the nutrition values and ingredients might need to be reprinted in French. U.S. direct exporters have been able to reach over 200 French outlets (Gauthier, 2009) but there has never been a store that has relied entirely on American food imports. Another way to ease the transition into a foreign market would be to merge with grocery already within the country. In combination with local sourcing, it would ease cultural economy resentment (Levitt, 1983) by showing that Whole Foods is not charging in with a plan to impose itself but is ready and willing to compromise with the community. Customization of the store’s aesthetic appearances makes it less of a foreign entity and thus French consumers will be more willing to accept it. With 20% of French food sales occurring within traditional outlets, it’s important to be able to align under this domain (Gauthier, 2009). In summary, the perishable nature of Whole Foods Market offerings as well as language barriers and the company’s desire to fit community is best served by customizing. Focusing on the etic perspective of appealing to similar lifestyles across cultures requires a standardization of policies but the success of Whole Foods in France depends on its ability to correctly interpret what “healthy and informed” means to the French and customize in due form.   

 

 

 

 

 

The following essay is my final project evalutaing the effectiveness of Environmental Economic regulations put into action by the Maritime Act of 1972. This was written for my Environmental Economics class that I enrolled in during my study abroad at the l'Université d'Ottawa. It strongly supports my ability to comprehend and analyze the cause and effects of environmental economic measures.

 

 

Savannah Mozingo

Econ 2118 A

Prof. Alexandree Sauquet

5 December 2014

 

Permits to Permit Failure: the case of the Maritime Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972:

The use of dumping permits as a sufficient policy to control ocean pollution but an inefficient overall policy for total decreased pollution

 

 

I. Introduction

Permits are a policy instrument that aim at sharing the monetary burden between the government and the firms. This paper is intended to examine the success of the limits imposed by both 1.) the quantity of permits issued as well as 2.) the restrictions within the permits themselves regarding the balance of preservation a fragile marine ecosystem and allowing financially feasible levels of necessary drudging and dumping required for an area to remain as economically viable as the United States. The Maritime Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) concerns mainly the United States but also other countries using its waters for access to various ports or routes. Prior to the MPRSA, the United States was seeing millions of tons of petroleum, acid chemical (via pulp mills), heavy metal (via industrial waste) and organic chemical wastes being released into the marine environment that were above its absorbing capacity. A large part of this was due to the massive amounts of post-war chemical dumpings done by the U.S. military[1]. This was having a profound negative effect on fishing industries, marine biodiversity and the health of individuals living near highly contaminated areas.

 

The difficulty of measuring and enforcing effects by one specific country is that the ocean and its currents know no boundaries. However, the application of the MPRSA was restricted to waters within U.S. jurisdiction. Aims of the Act were divided amongst its four titles: Permit Program, Research Program, Marine Sanctuaries and Regional Marine Research Program. This paper will focus on the first title. The MPRSA made a point to distinguish between the dumping of waste and the dredging of material. Responsibilities of determining compliance with the Act were deferred to the following agencies: the U.S. Environment Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Coast Guard. Effectiveness and usefulness of each agency will be used in the final analysis of the policy’s success. When discussing and analyzing this policy, the paper will draw comparisons between levels of dumped materials, number of permits, trends in the fishing industry, trends in manufacturing and offshore industries, and enforceability that should show a positive correlation between restricted dumping and the overall vitality of the American economy.    

 

II. Background

In the latter half of the 20th century, concern for environmental protection was growing and with it, an interest in and application of various economic and policy instruments. It can be said to have begun with Congress’s passing of the Marine Resources and Engineering Act in 1966. This act resulted in the formation of the Commission on Marine Sciences, Engineering, and Resources (COMSER), which ultimately came to be known as the Stratton Commission in recognition of its first chairman, former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Julius Stratton. COMSER was created with two goals in mind: first, to review the status of America’s ocean policy, and secondly, to investigate the possibilities of a coastal resource conservation coordinated by efforts of the government. Three years after the initial passing of the Marine Resources and Engineering Act, the Commission issued its first report nicknamed the “Stratton Report” in which a few important themes were highlighted.  

 

To begin with, it suggested that the realization of the nation’s marine and costal resources full benefits required a centralization effort from the federal government. Alongside that, the report called for the creation of a civilian-run ocean and atmosphere agency to undertake the full range of actions needed to realize the effective use of the sea. Secondly, the report advocated more research, stating the urgency of the need for a concentrated effort of the planning and recommended a federal-state program management for the nation’s coastal zones. Conclusively, the report underlined the necessity for an expansion of programs on both national and global levels in marine science, technology and engineering.

 

The Stratton Commission’s report and other studies were the catalyst to Congress’s decision to introduce a series of bills between 1970 and 1972. These bills culminated in legislation that contained many fundamental coastal and near-shore ocean protective measures. Among those enactments was the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)[2], which is being analyzed here. Despite recognition that economic regulations are deemed more desirable and efficient in the protection of the environment, in this case policy instruments were used[3][4].

 

In the United States, environmental protection is under both federal government and consulted state and local governments[5]. Within the provisions outlined by the MPRSA, cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was required in the case of dredged material and, in their allowances, the engineers must comply with the environmental criteria set forth and subjected to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The MPRSA collaborated with third parties that specialized in engineering and research in order find the appropriate levels and subsequent limitations of dumped materials that would maximize the benefits of the permit’s opposing stakeholders — the individuals and fisheries suffering from pollution and, on the other hand, the companies’ whose economic viability was dependent on the creation of those products which created the waste that had to be dealt with.

 

Pollution and improper dredging-and-dumping practices resulted in the mismanagement of ocean territory understood to be within U.S. jurisdiction as determined at the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone[6], the major culprits being unregulated dredging without any sort of strategy or organization of zones as well as the failure to measure purposely dumped toxic wastes. The annual reports following the first year of implementation indicated lower levels of measured waste with little negative impact reflecting itself in the economy of fisheries and pindustry markets, as demonstrated in this graph using statistics given by MPRSA annual reports, the World Bank and Robert Yuskavage and Yvon Pho’s joint publication of “Gross Domestic Product by Industry for 1987-2000."Total ocean waste experienced a general downward trend while both U.S. GDP and U.S. Export Value continued to grow. Inferences could be drawn here that the permits that sought to reduce the waste resulting from industry productions did not overtly or irreparably negatively affect industry revenue. Although the value added decreased, value was still added to GDP.

 

III. Analysis

Beginning with the permits themselves, the details in which they were outlined was both one of the strengths and weaknesses of the overall policy. Specifying the exact materials being allowed for dumping and the quantities in which they were allowed — marked by a permit type of special, interim, emergency, research or general — streamlined the follow-up surveying process required in annual reports. It was easier to identify polluters who had violated their permits as well as expedite the issuing of fines. Also, accepted applicants were required to conduct — and thus bear the cost of — subsequent comprehensive monitoring reports. The Administrator of the EPA was allowed to prescribe processing fees for permits that offset the cost in labor of his having to take the extensive amount of time needed to review each application. The Administrator was also allowed to require an applicant for a permit to provide any information as he may consider necessary to review and evaluate the application. However, it’s generally accepted that plant managers only provide information that is in their favor. To expect that a manager’s information would be completely free of bias, without any overstatement of their plant’s control cost, is unrealistic.

 

Another drawback occurs with permits having to be originally issued on a case-by-case with levels and cost specifically tailored to each accepted application. There was still a significantly high initial cost born by the U.S. Environment Protection Agency rather than the polluter. Conditions of an authorized permit included the type of material sanctioned to be transported for dumping or to be dumped; the amount of material ratified to be transported for dumping or to be dumped; and the location where such transport for dumping will be terminated or where such dumping will occur. Such conditions were necessary to assure consistency with an assigned site management plan. Despite the Agency’s best efforts to gather precise information, perfect knowledge of the control costs to each applicant would have remained unknown. If each applicant had been allocated an equal amount of allowed pollutants, they would have sold amongst themselves. Market demand would have ensured that the correct market equilibrium price for a permit had been found. But, due to the specifications tied to each permit, a trading program that would have delivered the lowest cost outcome was also not allowed.

 

IV. Conclusion

By December 1991, there was no longer any ocean dumping. The MPRSA’s permit policy had effectively phased out this particular pollution practice[7]. Ironically enough, anticipation of future pressure on ocean dumping practices resulted in the creation and implementation of more and improved waste treatment facilities according to the 1974 annual report to Congress made by the Environmental Protection Agency on the account of the Administration of the Ocean Dumping Permit Program.

 

In this case, permits proved to be an appropriate policy when the policy objective was to completely eliminate ocean dumping. It was not, however, the economic policy that encouraged the cost-effective market equilibrium in a manner wasting the least amount of time and centralized public agency resources. Permits here were at least generally more cost-effective than other methods of waste disposal reduction such as subsidies and advance disposal fees because the government was not making payments at the same time that pollution was still being created. It was also important that the definition of “material” in the MPRSA included matter of any kind or description, including “dredged material, solid waste, incinerator residue, garbage, sewage, sewage sludge, munitions, radiological, chemical, and biological warfare agents, radioactive materials, chemicals, biological and laboratory waste, wreck or discarded equipment, rock, sand, excavation debris, and industrial, municipal, agricultural, and other waste.[8]” It’s important to note that this simple idea of narrowing the definition of “matter” allowed for the exclusion of accidental spills that a cargo ship might experience. Thus ships involved in trade were not intimidated or frightened of facing barriers to trade; imports and exports remained unaffected.

 

A further advantage of having the issuance of permits directly controlled by the federal government was that if the Administrator perceived there to be any concerns with a permit application, he could quickly intervene. To be specific, if it appeared to the Administrator that the disposition of material may have an unreasonably adverse affect on the navigation of sea of the United States’ territorial seas, approaches to any United Sates harbor, or might create an artificial island[9], the Administrator had the authority to deny a permit application. Thus the economic viability of ports was not impaired.

 

The MPRSA was written in a way to encourage the revenue effect with subsection E in which it is stated that a “person who enters into a compliance agreement or an enforcement agreement […] shall establish a trust account for the payment and use of fees and penalties under this section[10].” The revenue created by permits paid for the preparation of reports and other research, studies and projects considered necessary for the development and implementation of alternative systems for the management of sewage sludge and industrial waste. As phasing out was implemented on a case-by-case basis rather than immediately, it gently encouraged polluters towards alternative approaches such as investment in waste management technology as opposed to illegal dumpings.

 

A drawback of the permit program was that a lack of precise scientific data on the impact of materials means that the costs of a permit could have been incorrectly under or over valued and excessive dumping might have been allowed. In addition, because land dumping was not addressed in the same accordance as ocean dumping, there’s a strong possibility the information provided in the MPRSA annual reports did not properly address the specifics of new technology or if there was an increase in land dumping. Furthermore, it’s likely that companies faced with these new legal regulations offshored production and sent their waste somewhere else with more lax environmental protection practices.

 

As far as the enforceability of MPRSA’s ocean dumping permits, through coordinated efforts of the EPA, NOAA, Coast Guard, CEQ and the Corps of Engineers, the MPRSA had ample administration. Both the NOAA and EPA were working towards the development of baseline and trend assessment surveys on a continuing basis. While the measurement of ocean pollutants before the enactment of the MPRSA had not been properly measured and recorded, both groups began to contribute to detailed and accurate yearly reports. Also, beginning in 1972, the Corps of Engineers underwent a five year dredged material research program to evaluate dredged material disposal sites. This would have vastly improved the database of scientific evidence needed to evaluate the policy’s effectiveness, but it still was not perfect. In the meantime, the U.S. Coast Guard’s access to air patrol, maritime vessels, mandatory inspections prior to any authorized dumping activity and the group’s Vessel Traffic Services radar provided satisfactory compliance with the permits[11]. 

 

V. Suggestion

The use of highly controlled and dictated permits was not cost-effective because marginal costs couldn’t be clearly defined and absolutely known for every applicant. If it had been imposed with trading, the polluter market comprised of industries would have eventually resulted in the equilibrium market price that is achieved even when the government has no information whatsoever. This would have been because industries know their own costs analysis and therefore would only buy the number of permits that they most benefited from; those industries that had an excess of permits would only sell as many as was profitable for them. The market would be in equilibrium as supply would coincide with demand through competition. Although this paper is limited to preliminary research immediately pertinent to the MPRSA permits, future research should be done to evaluate the quality of technologies invented as well as the probability of offshore pollution and observed trends in land dumping practices. A permit policy to reduce waste is not truly a green practice if the waste is only re-allocated rather than completely eliminated.

           

 

 

 

 

This next article is one of my Feature stories written as a Marketing Content UHIP intern. It displays not only my writing competency, but the way I was able to link themes and ideas of the Clemson brand from the entire semester into a call for action: for parents to enroll their students in Clemson summer camps thus contributing financially and emotionally to Clemson University. 

 

 

Clemson’s summer programs have created opportunities for students and alumni to explore ideas and create memories they can transition from cabin to classroom.

 

The camper was standing off to the side after the day’s program at Adventure Summer Camp, watching other kids free-play and ride mountain bikes. Although camp was well underway, at times his hands still seemed to tap aimlessly by his side without a game controller to hold onto. Confused as to why this boy — who up until this point had been one of the most enthusiastic leaders in every game — wasn’t joining in, counselor Brandon Driscoll tried to coax him to ask for a turn on one of the bikes.

 

“I don’t know how,” came the simple reply, eyes staring straight ahead, refusing to meet Driscoll’s, even as a slow red blush started to creep onto his 13-year-old cheeks.

 

In this quiet confession, Driscoll saw an opportunity. He called two other counselors over and asked for them to bring a bike. Seeing it wheeled over, the boy balked at first, but under the counselors’ assurances, he took a chance.

 

Again and again he tried, at first tilting this way and that, then straighter and straighter still.

 

Finally, he rode that bike across the field on his own, the three counselors running alongside cheering.

 

“Afterward, he looked up at me and said, ‘Thanks Mr. Brandon,’” said Driscoll.  “I asked him what for, and he told me that if he’d been home, he wouldn’t have had anyone else to play with outside so he simply wouldn’t. He would stay inside and play his video games because at least then there was someone on the other side.”

 

While most people only think of camp in terms of a week, camp leaders know it’s so much more.

 

“What we know is that a one-week experience can last a lifetime,” said Pamela Bryant, director of public information for the Clemson University Youth Learning Institute (YLI). “Kids try new things, meet new friends and find out more about themselves and their talents. So much of that is transferable toward the classroom, toward how they act back home and even toward their future. It truly has lifetime value.”

 

The art of camping

 

Being part of campers’ first outdoors experiences never ceases to thrill Driscoll — and he’s been involved in camps since he was a Clemson student himself. Now, he manages Camp Hannon, which is one of the many properties operated by YLI.

 

The idea of having new experiences, being outside and being independent, epitomizes what camp is supposed to be. To teach “the art of camping” to kids, to see the smiles stretched over their faces during each program hooked Driscoll from the beginning.  

 

The variety of Clemson camp initiatives — from traditional outdoors and sports options to specialized academic options — assures that all kids can find a camp experience that best fits their interests. Whether it’s lighting a Bunsen burner or a campfire, each camper finds encouragement from staff and counselors to follow his or her own passion or the courage to discover a new one.  

 

Testing out the future

 

Take Clemson sophomore Camille Swanson. Her story shows that it’s not just the outdoor camps that are exciting interest in kids. Academically-geared programs such as Clemson’s Summer Scholars attract the best and brightest rising seventh through twelfth graders from around the world and give them an opportunity for hands-on learning in a subject of their choosing. 

 

As a rising ninth grader back in 2009, Swanson was intrigued by the biology course offerings of the Summer Scholars program. At the time, she was a hopeful future doctor and felt it would be a good opportunity to explore her dream career before having to make a college commitment. The lab activities at camp would give her the hands-on learning to help tie-in the reality of a career as a doctor and the type of learning experience she would have later.

 

Through the dissections and labs, she found a permanent love of science that has followed her in her Clemson experience. Although she switched from physics into economics after her freshman year, Swanson says that she finds her Summer Scholars experience has continued to support her academics. To her, economics is the science of business. Now, it’s just more about connecting micro factors into market predictions rather than connecting the minute elements of physics or the human body.

 

From camper to camp leader

 

Just like the 13-year boy who learned to ride a bike, Swanson had her own fears that camp helped her overcome.

 

“It was tough at first, being around so many new people,” she said. “I was reserved as a kid. But the atmosphere at camp is like no other. It helped me come out of my shell.”

 

By the end of her week, the shy girl with the quietest voice in her group had a new confidence. She was no longer afraid of speaking to new people. In fact, it’s hard to believe that the bubbly sophomore she is today ever had a hard time speaking out.   

 

That summer left Swanson with a list of new friends, a newfound confidence and a permanent love of Clemson.

 

No matter where these campers’ paths take them, exploring them at such a young age gives them the opportunity to plant their roots deep into the interests that will carry them through the rest of their lives.

 

Four years after her Summer Scholars experience, Swanson found herself a Clemson student, but she certainly wasn’t through with camp. After finding out that she now had the opportunity to be a counselor herself, she quickly seized the opportunity.

 

“Camille stood out to us in her interview from the beginning with her positive attitude and obvious love for [the University],” said Chelsea Schwabe, director of Summer Scholars. “Through our program, we hope to grow our scholars into the best and brightest Tigers that Clemson has ever seen, and Camille is absolutely a testament to that.”

 

“Once I knew I had the opportunity to come back as a counselor, I was excited because I could relate to the campers since I’d been in their shoes [having been] a camper myself,” said Swanson. “It wasn’t just a job.”

 

Story by summer-rich story, Swanson brings her past experience with Summer Scholars back to life with recollections from both her camper and counselor experiences. There were the dorms where she and the campers would congregate in the hallway to swap stories at the end of a long day. There was the mixed look of shock and amazement on her fellow campers’ faces at the first dissection. Above all, there was the easy sense of community that allowed her to open up to and start leading others.

 

The images are right there, always at the front of her mind and ready to share with any others who need to find just a little more confidence in themselves.

 

Online registration for summer programs are now open. Early bird discounts are available through April 1. See a list of Clemson summer camps at http://clemson.edu/aspire