Motivated by varied green product line extension strategies in practice, we consider price and quality optimization while selling (at most) two product variants: base product, green variant with recycled/reused content. On the demand-side, two distinct consumer segments with opposing perceptions of recycled/reused content have heterogeneous valuations. On the supply-side, incorporating more recycled/reused content increases production costs and decreases input material costs. Consumers’ and non-government organizations’ typical association of low environmental impact with “uniformly green” (UG) product line adoption or higher recycled/reused content influences two research questions: Should consumers with distinct green preferences be “targeted” with distinct product variants, or is profitable UG adoption possible? Are UG product lines environmentally preferable?

Employing non-linear programming theory and endogenous demand models reflecting conventionals’ dislike and naturalites’ extra utility of recycled/reused content, we characterize five distinct equilibrium scenarios. Using Environmental Burden Ratio (EBR), a metric to assess environmental impact, we show that neither UG adoption nor higher recycled content necessarily yields product lines with lower EBR. We highlight conventional-dominated markets and both consumer types perceiving product variants of similar functional quality as necessary (demand-side) factors increasing UG strategy adoption. Yet, these factors also decrease recycled/reused content at equilibrium, thus increasing EBR. In contrast, supply-side (production, procurement) cost reductions concurrently increase UG adoption with maximum recycled/reused content, thus reducing EBR.

We prescribe key insights for firms aspiring to profitably adopt UG while reducing environmental impact. Instead of seeking markets dominated by aggressive naturalities, firms should educate conventionals on how comparable (to base products) green variants’ functional quality is. For concurrent profit and environmental improvements, firms should take control of design/quality decisions and lower production and recycled/reused material collection/procurement costs. Finally, environment advocates should not blindly demand UG adoption or higher recycled/reused content, as doing so may yield worse environmental outcomes.

Short Bio