IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i24p16351-d996139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Conceptual Framework of Customer Value Proposition of CCU-Formic Acid Product

Author

Listed:
  • Yazan K. A. Migdadi

    (Department of Marketing and Management, College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

  • Ahmed A. Khalifa

    (Department of Finance and Economics, College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

  • Abdullah Al-Swidi

    (Department of Marketing and Management, College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

  • Abdulkarem I. Amhamed

    (Qatar Environment and Energy Institute (QEERI), Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha 34110, Qatar)

  • Muftah H. El-Naas

    (Gas Processing Center, College of Engineering, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

Abstract

This paper aims to develop a comprehensive conceptual framework of the customer value proposition of formic acid as an actual outcome of carbon capture and utilization (CCU) to support clean production and environmental sustainability worldwide. This study included different phases. The first phase was an extensive reading of the literature, followed by a content analysis of the selected literature. The aim of the content analysis was to identify key concepts and the general categories of these concepts. The final phase was a content analysis of the selected literature with the purpose of identifying the relationship between concepts. The outcome of this paper is to provide a comprehensive framework of the customer value proposition of the CCU–formic acid product and consequently support global research efforts in sustainability. This framework contains two general dimensions: market knowledge and customer value. The first dimension includes five variables: the customers’ acceptance of CCU technology, the customers’ intention to purchase formic acid produced by CCU technology, the degree of customers’ knowledge about CCU technology, the customers’ readiness for environmental issues, and the market segments of formic acid product. The second dimension includes seven variables: ecological benefits, the ecological risk of CCU, varieties of formic acid use, the pricing policy of formic acid, the variety of formic acid packages, the order size, and the order frequency of formic acid. The relationship between variables was identified according to the literature and hypotheses were developed. This study has attempted to build a more comprehensive framework containing all proposed value dimensions and market knowledge as well as identifying the relationships between variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Yazan K. A. Migdadi & Ahmed A. Khalifa & Abdullah Al-Swidi & Abdulkarem I. Amhamed & Muftah H. El-Naas, 2022. "A Conceptual Framework of Customer Value Proposition of CCU-Formic Acid Product," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-21, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16351-:d:996139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16351/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16351/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adrian Payne & Pennie Frow & Andreas Eggert, 2017. "The customer value proposition: evolution, development, and application in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 467-489, July.
    2. Cox, James C. & Kreisman, Daniel & Dynarski, Susan, 2020. "Designed to fail: Effects of the default option and information complexity on student loan repayment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Lauren Lutzke & Joseph Árvai, 2021. "Consumer acceptance of products from carbon capture and utilization," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Mathy, Sandrine & Menanteau, Philippe & Criqui, Patrick, 2018. "After the Paris Agreement: Measuring the Global Decarbonization Wedges From National Energy Scenarios," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 273-289.
    5. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Linzenich, A. & Kaetelhoen, A. & Sternberg, A. & Bardow, A. & Ziefle, M., 2019. "Same or different? Insights on public perception and acceptance of carbon capture and storage or utilization in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 235-249.
    6. Sharda, Bikram & Akiya, Naoko, 2012. "Selecting make-to-stock and postponement policies for different products in a chemical plant: A case study using discrete event simulation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 161-171.
    7. van Heek, Julia & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina, 2017. "Reduce, reuse, recycle: Acceptance of CO2-utilization for plastic products," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 53-66.
    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. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Tryfonas Pieri & Alexandros Nikitas & Athanasios Angelis-Dimakis, 2023. "Public Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Carbon Capture and Utilisation Products," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Lisanne Simons & Martina Ziefle & Katrin Arning, 2024. "How to shape communication for CO2-derived insulation boards considering different accepter profiles," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(10), pages 25367-25396, October.
    4. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Ziefle, M., 2021. "What drives public acceptance of sustainable CO2-derived building materials? A conjoint-analysis of eco-benefits vs. health concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    5. Offermann-van Heek, Julia & Arning, Katrin & Sternberg, André & Bardow, André & Ziefle, Martina, 2020. "Assessing public acceptance of the life cycle of CO2-based fuels: Does information make the difference?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    6. Severin Oesterle & Arne Buchwald & Nils Urbach, 2022. "Investigating the co-creation of IT consulting service value: empirical findings of a matched pair analysis," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 571-597, June.
    7. Latinovic, Zoran & Chatterjee, Sharmila C., 2022. "Achieving the promise of AI and ML in delivering economic and relational customer value in B2B," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 966-974.
    8. Ang, B.W. & Goh, Tian, 2019. "Index decomposition analysis for comparing emission scenarios: Applications and challenges," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 74-87.
    9. Ege Aksu & Sidhya Balakrishnan & Eric Bettinger & Jonathan S. Hartley & Michael S. Kofoed & Dubravka Ritter & Douglas A. Webber, 2024. "Navigating Higher Education Insurance: An Experimental Study on Demand and Adverse Selection"," Working Papers 24-07, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    10. Alassi, Abdulrahman & Bañales, Santiago & Ellabban, Omar & Adam, Grain & MacIver, Callum, 2019. "HVDC Transmission: Technology Review, Market Trends and Future Outlook," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 530-554.
    11. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & Clément Imbert & Johannes Spinnewijn & Teodora Tsankova & Maarten Luts, 2021. "How to Improve Tax Compliance? Evidence from Population-Wide Experiments in Belgium," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(5), pages 1425-1463.
    12. Gull, Ammar Ali & Ahsan, Tanveer & Qureshi, Muhammad Azeem & Mushtaq, Rizwan, 2023. "Striving to safeguard shareholders or maintain sustainability in periods of high uncertainty: A multi-country evidence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    13. Cho, Jihoon & Janda, Swinder, 2023. "Reciprocity in upward product line extensions: A longitudinal study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    14. Lars Behlen & Oliver Himmler & Robert Jäckle, 2023. "Defaults and effortful tasks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(5), pages 1022-1059, November.
    15. Christian Homburg & Moritz Tischer, 2023. "Customer journey management capability in business-to-business markets: Its bright and dark sides and overall impact on firm performance," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 1046-1074, September.
    16. Piepponen, Amanda & Ritala, Paavo & Keränen, Joona & Maijanen, Päivi, 2022. "Digital transformation of the value proposition: A single case study in the media industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 311-325.
    17. Saghiri, Soroosh S. & Barnes, Stuart J., 2016. "Supplier flexibility and postponement implementation: An empirical analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 170-183.
    18. Zhiming Shi & Yisong Li & Gábor Bohács & Qiang Zhou, 2022. "A Study on Optimal Location Selection and Semi-Finished Product Inventory Allocation in the Steel Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-21, November.
    19. Kum Fai Yuen & Ling Qian Choo & Xue Li & Yiik Diew Wong & Fei Ma & Xueqin Wang, 2023. "A theoretical investigation of user acceptance of autonomous public transport," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 545-569, April.
    20. Asongu, Simplice A. & Le Roux, Sara & Biekpe, Nicholas, 2017. "Environmental degradation, ICT and inclusive development in Sub-Saharan Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 353-361.

    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:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16351-:d:996139. 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.