Featured Post from Villanova University

Success Is Sweet: Ferrero's Crown Jewel, Nutella, Turns 60

Apr 26, 2024

4 min

Luca Cottini, PhD

Six decades ago, on April 20, 1964, the first jar of Nutella left Gruppo Ferrero's factory in the Italian town of Alba. In its gooey wake, the chocolate-hazelnut treat would spread across continental Europe, and then the world, like a healthy schmear on toast.


Today, Nutella is the crown jewel of Ferrero's confectionary empire, propping up a business that generates roughly 17 billion euros in revenue each year. Annually, a whopping 365,000-plus tons of the stuff are sold across 160 countries, and nearly one quarter of all hazelnuts harvested are devoted to its production.


Luca Cottini, PhD, is an associate professor of Italian in Villanova University's College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and an expert on modern Italian culture, history and society. He also is the author of a book on Michele Ferrero, the mastermind behind Nutella and its meteoric rise: Il fabbricante di cioccolato.


To mark the iconic Italian brand's 60th anniversary, Dr. Cottini shared some thoughts on its Willy Wonka-like creator, early (accidental) origins and recipe for international success. Here's a taste:


Q: According to Business Insider, a jar of Nutella is sold every 2.5 seconds—just about the time it takes to finish this sentence. How did we get so "nuts" for Nutella, anyway?


Dr. Cottini: Well, much of the success of Nutella relates to its novelty, to the idea of spreadable chocolate. At one point, to think that spreading chocolate would be popular was as crazy as to predict that spreadable coffee would be a hit.


The idea developed because, in the mid-to-late 1940s, Michele Ferrero's father Pietro was to combine the scarcity of cocoa in his area with hazelnuts, which was the ingredient most available in Alba. It seemed like condemnation that they should have only hazelnuts. Well, he combined them with cocoa to produce this mix—it's called "gianduja" in Italian—and he sold it.


But when the Ferreros sold it in southern Italy, they had a problem: The chocolate was melting with the summer heat; and a lot of the workers in Naples, to not waste it, started to spread it on slices of bread. And it's interesting. The Ferreros have a completely non-moralistic approach to failure. You sell chocolate; it melts. This is somewhat embarrassing. But their approach was instead to see this situation as the beginning of a new idea, of a new concept.


Q: Is Nutella's story unique in this respect?


DC: Several Italian innovators have similar stories to the Ferreros', especially during the 1930s. [Salvatore] Ferragamo, for instance, developed the wedge shoe because there was a shortage of steel, with an embargo imposed on Italy. So, he used Sardinian cork as a replacement, and that generated the wedge shoe. [Guccio] Gucci, during a leather shortage, started using hemp and decorating the hemp with a double "G," and that became the trademark of the company. [Alfonso] Bialetti, who produced the modern coffeepot, used the only metal that was allowed during Fascism, which was aluminum, since the Partito Nazionale Fascista would not import iron or prime metals. But Bialetti took this poor, hybrid ore and made it something that could become valuable. And so, he invented the moka coffeepot in 1933, which is one of the symbols of Italian design. That’s one of the keys of the Italian model of entrepreneurship: producing objects that are not just trendy for one season, but eventually become evergreen or classic.



Q: What inspired the name "Nutella?"


DC: It was the product of 18 years of research. For all intents and purposes, "Nutella" first came out in 1946. It was called "SuperCrema" and, before that, "Cremalba." But in 1962, there was a law in Italy that prevented companies in the food industry from using prefixes like "super" or "extra." So, that led Ferrero—by then, under the leadership of Michele Ferrero—to figure out a new alternative to SuperCrema.


At the same time, the company was expanding into Germany and France, and they needed a brand name that could be pronounced easily. So, Ferrero joined the "ella" sound from mozzarella, stella, caramella—Italian words that people could recognize—with the word "nut," like the English "nut," which gave their product an international feel. It's really a "glocal" [global and local] name. It was conceived as a very rooted enterprise with a global horizon.


Q: In 1964, were Ferrero's global ambitions practical?


DC: It was honestly a bit of a gamble. In 1957, the European Economic Community was established, which is the beginning of the European Union. And that same year, Michele Ferrero organized in Rome the first conference of his company, which was by then somewhat national, to plan exportation in Europe.


In the Italy of the 1950s and 1960s, this was very pioneering. Michele Ferrero was actually one of the first businesspeople to export products to Germany in the 1950s, at a time when there was a lot of resentment against Italians because of everything that happened during the Second World War. So, he entered this incredibly difficult market, and still today, Ferrero and Nutella are strong.



Q: What do you think accounts for Nutella's continued popularity, 60 years after its introduction?


DC: Michele Ferrero thought of his products as speaking products. It's something very common to the automobile industry in Italy. This is characteristic of Ferrari and Lamborghini; they produce cars that are appealing not just because they're "super cars," but because they say something.


Nutella is a food that says something. When someone puts it on the table, it compels people to jump in and share their own stories—of trying it with a friend, of having it on a hike or of taking part in "Nutella Day."


Today, if you're in the market for a chocolate-hazelnut spread, you might find products that are even better than Nutella. Actually, surely better. But they will never replicate the appeal and the grasp that Nutella has. Because Nutella has that aura of storytelling and mythmaking other products simply don't have.


Connect with:
Luca Cottini, PhD

Luca Cottini, PhD

Professor of Italian Studies

Luca Cottini, PhD, is a scholar of 20th-century Italian design and literature and the creator of the YouTube channel "Italian Innovators."

Italian DesignItalian Industry & AdvertisingEntrepreneurship & InnovationDesign ThinkingItalian Literature

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Villanova University

4 min

Roderick Cooke, PhD, French and Francophone Studies Professor, Shares Thoughts on Louvre Heist, Artifacts Stolen

On Sunday, October 19, at 9:34 a.m., four masked individuals surged into the Louvre’s Galerie d’Apollon from a severed, second-floor window. Hurriedly, they smashed open two display cases, seized eight pieces of jewelry, then shimmied down a ladder and sped off on motorbikes toward Lyons. In seven minutes’ time, in broad daylight, they absconded with an estimated $102 million in valuables from the world’s most famous museum. This past Saturday, October 25, French authorities announced the first arrests in connection with the daring heist. However, despite the police’s progress, the country continues to litigate the matter—embroiled in discussions of heritage, history and national identity. Recently, Roderick Cooke, PhD, director of French and Francophone Studies at Villanova University, shared his perspective on the situation as well as the artifacts lost. Q: The Louvre heist has been described as “brazen,” “shocking” and a “terrible failure” on security’s part. Is there any sort of precedent for this event in the museum’s history? Dr. Cooke: Nothing on this scale has ever happened to the Louvre since its founding as a museum during the Revolution. The closest equivalent is the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa by a former employee who claimed it should be returned to Italy. However, that was one painting, the heist was not committed by organized crime, and the Mona Lisa did not have the renown it enjoys today. The impact of the theft was thus lower, although it did cause major outrage and a sweeping law-enforcement response at the time. Ironically, that theft is often credited with making da Vinci’s painting the global icon it continues to be. Q: What has the reaction to this event been among the French people? DC: It’s harder to get a sense of reactions across French society, because so much of the aftermath has focused on the intellectual milieux’s opinions. And in those realms, it has immediately become a political football. Individuals positioning themselves as anti-elite or anti-status quo, such as Jordan Bardella of the National Rally party, have called the theft a “humiliation,” immediately tying it to French national prestige. Former President François Hollande has conversely and vainly called for the event to be de-polemicized, citing national solidarity. This is happening because the Louvre is one of the most visible manifestations of French soft power—the most-visited museum anywhere on Earth. As such, anything attacking its integrity becomes an attack on the nation, and how individual French citizens feel about the theft is closely tied to their broader view of the nation. Q: Several of the items stolen from the Louvre once belonged to Empress Eugénie. Could you share a bit of information on her story? DC: Eugénie de Montijo was a Spanish aristocrat who married the Emperor of the French, who ruled as Napoleon III between 1852 and 1870. It was a time of authoritarian repression and sham democracy—Napoleon III installed the Empire through a coup. Its clearest legacy is that Paris looks the way it does today largely because of the thorough modernizations overseen by Napoleon III’s appointee Baron Haussmann. So, Eugénie and her now-lost jewels represent a complex point in French history, when culture and the economy developed quickly, but did so in a climate of fear for any French person who opposed the regime too loudly (like Victor Hugo, who went into exile on the Channel Islands and wrote poems savaging Napoleon III and his deeds). Some accused the Empress of being responsible for the more hardline and conservative stances taken by her husband’s government. On a different note, she was a diligent patron of the arts and arguably the most significant figure in the contemporary fashion world, famous for setting trends such as the bustle that radiated across Europe. This explains the mix of anger and admiration that followed her depending on the sphere she was operating in. A new English-language biography argues that far from being a traditionalist, she was a pioneering feminist by the standards of the time. It looks like her historical importance will continue to be debated. Q: Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez described the stolen items as “of immeasurable heritage value.” How significant of a cultural loss do you consider this theft? DC: These jewels are referred to in French as “les Joyaux de la Couronne” (the Crown Jewels), but of course that phrase lands very differently in republican France than it does across the water in the United Kingdom. The items actually represent several different dynasties of French rulers, some of whom came to power through direct conflict with others. The now-ransacked display at the Louvre smoothed over these historical divisions, for which many French people died over the centuries. President Macron referred to the stolen items as embodying “our history,” which is emblematic of the French state’s work to create a conceptual present-day unity out of the clashes of the past. At a time when France is arguably more divided than at any point since World War II, any unitary symbol of identity takes on greater significance. Q: Do you have any closing thoughts on the artifacts taken and what they represent? DC: I’d reemphasize the previous point about the smoothing effect of the museum display on the violent history that made it possible. Much of the reporting on the stolen jewels lists off the different queens and empresses who owned them, without giving readers a sense of the complicated succession of regime changes and ideologies that put those women in power in the first place. The relative stability of the last 60-odd years is an anomaly in modern French history. This set of jewels and the names of their original owners may seem far removed from the concerns of an ordinary French citizen today, but just beneath their surface is a legacy of changing governments and tensions between social classes that survives in new forms in 2025.

4 min

Villanova Astrophysicist Joey Neilsen, PhD, Plays Prominent Role in Groundbreaking XRISM Collaboration Study

A global team of researchers using the new X-ray Imaging and Spectroscopy Mission (XRISM) telescope, launched in fall 2023, discovered something unexpected while observing a well-studied neutron star system called GX13+1. Instead of simply capturing a clearer view of its usual, predictable activity, their February 2024 observation revealed a surprisingly slow cosmic wind, the cause of which could offer new insights into the fundamental physics of how matter accumulates, or “accretes,” in certain types of binary systems. The study was one of the first from XRISM looking at wind from an X-ray binary system, and its results were published in Nature—the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal—in September 2025. Spectral analysis indicated GX13+1 was at that very moment undergoing a luminous super-Eddington phase, meaning the neutron star was shining so brightly that the radiation pressure from its surface overcame gravity, leading to a powerful ejection of any infalling material (hence the slow cosmic wind). Further comparison to previous data implied that such phases may be part of a cycle, and could “change the way we think about the behavior of these systems,” according to Joey Neilsen, PhD, associate professor of Physics at Villanova University. Dr. Neilsen played a prominent role as a co-investigator and one of the corresponding authors of the project, along with colleagues at the University of Durham (United Kingdom), Osaka University (Japan), and the University of Teacher Education Fukuoka (Japan). Overall, the collaboration featured researchers from dozens of institutions across the world. GX13+1 is a binary system consisting of a neutron star orbiting a K5 III companion star—a cooler giant star nearing the end of its life. Neutron stars are small, incredibly dense cores of supergiant stars that have undergone supernovae explosions. They are so dense, Dr. Neilsen says, that one teaspoon of its material would weigh about the same as Mount Everest. Because of this, they yield an incredibly strong gravitational field. When these highly compact neutron stars orbit companion stars, they can pull in, or accrete, material from that companion. That inflowing material forms a visible rotating disk of gas and dust called an accretion disk, which is extremely hot and shines brightly in X-rays. It’s so bright that sometimes it can actually drive matter away from the neutron star. “Imagine putting a giant lightbulb in a lake,” Dr. Neilsen said. “If it’s bright enough, it will start to boil that lake and then you would get steam, which flows away like a wind. It’s the same concept; the light can heat up and exert pressure on the accretion disk, launching a wind.” The original purpose of the study was to use XRISM to observe an accretion disk wind, with GX13+1 targeted specifically because its disk is persistently bright, it reliably produces winds, and it has been well studied using Chandra— NASA’s flagship X-ray observatory—and other telescopes for comparison. XRISM can measure the X-ray energies from these systems a factor of 10 more precisely than Chandra, allowing researchers to both demonstrate the capabilities of the new instrument and study the motion of outflowing gas around the neutron star. This can provide new insights into accretion processes. “It's like comparing a blurry image to a much sharper one,” Dr. Neilsen said. “The atomic physics hasn't changed, but you can see it much more clearly.” The researchers uncovered an exciting surprise when the higher-resolution spectrum showed much deeper absorption lines than expected. They determined that the wind was nearly opaque to X-rays and slow at “only” 1.4 million miles per hour—surprisingly leisurely for such a bright source. Based on the data, the team was able to infer that GX13+1 must have been even brighter than usual and undergoing a super-Eddington phase. So much material was ejected that it made GX13+1 appear fainter to the instrument. “There's a theoretical maximum luminosity that you can get out of an accreting object, called the Eddington limit. At that point, the radiation pressure from the light of the infalling gas is so large that it can actually hold the matter away,” Dr. Neilsen said, equating it to standing at the bottom of a waterfall and shining light so brightly that the waterfall stops. “What we saw was that GX13+1 had to have been near, or maybe even above, the Eddington limit.” The team compared their XRISM data from this super-Eddington phase to a set of previous observations without the resolution to measure the absorption lines directly. They found several older observations with faint, unusually shaped X-ray spectra similar to the one seen by XRISM. “XRISM explained these periods with funny-shaped spectra as not just anomalies, but the result of this phenomenally strong accretion disk wind in all its glory,” Dr. Neilsen said. “If we hadn’t caught this exact period with XRISM, we would never have understood those earlier data.” The connection suggests that this system spends roughly 10 percent of its time in a super-Eddington phase, which means super-Eddington accretion may be more common than previously understood—perhaps even following cycles—in neutron star or black hole binary systems. “Temporary super-Eddington phases might actually be a thing that accreting systems do, not just something unique to this system,” Dr. Neilsen said. “And if neutron stars and black holes are doing it, what about supermassive black holes? Perhaps this could pave the way for a deeper understanding of all these systems.”

4 min

Two Decades Later, Villanova Engineering Professor Who Assisted in Hurricane Katrina Investigation Reflects on Role in the Storm's Aftermath

Twenty years ago, Hurricane Katrina hit the southeastern coast of the United States, devastating cities and towns across Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama and beyond. The storm caused nearly 1,400 fatalities, displaced more than 1 million people and generated over $125 billion in damages. Rob Traver, PhD, P.E., D. WRE, F.EWRI, F.ASCE, professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Villanova University, assisted in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) investigation of the failure of the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System during Hurricane Katrina, and earned an Outstanding Civilian Service Medal from the Commanding General of USACE for his efforts. Dr. Traver reflected on his experience working in the aftermath of Katrina, and how the findings from the investigation have impacted U.S. hurricane responses in the past 20 years. Q: What was your role in the investigation of the failure of the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System? Dr. Traver: Immediately after Hurricane Katrina, USACE wanted to assess what went wrong with flood protections that had failed during the storm in New Orleans, but they needed qualified researchers on their team who could oversee their investigation. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), an organization I have been a part of for many years, was hired for this purpose. Our job was to make sure that USACE was asking the right questions during the investigation that would lead to concrete answers about the causes of the failure of the hurricane protection system. My team was focused on analyzing the risk and reliability of the water resource system in New Orleans, and we worked alongside the USACE team, starting with revising the investigation questions in order to get answers about why these water systems failed during the storm. Q: What was your experience like in New Orleans in the aftermath of the hurricane? Dr. Traver: My team went down to New Orleans a few weeks after the hurricane, visited all the sites we were reviewing and met with infrastructure experts along the way as progress was being made on the investigation. As we were flying overhead and looking at the devastated areas, seeing all the homes that were washed away, it was hard to believe that this level of destruction could happen in a city in the United States. As we started to realize the errors that were made and the things that went wrong leading up to the storm, it was heartbreaking to think about how lives could have been saved if the infrastructure in place had been treated as one system and undergone a critical review. Q: What were the findings of the ASCE and USACE investigation team? Dr. Traver: USACE focused on New Orleans because they wanted to figure out why the city’s levee system—a human-made barrier that protects land from flooding by holding back water—failed during the hurricane. The city manages pump stations that are designed to remove water after a rainfall event, but they were not well connected to the levee system and not built to handle major storms. So, one of the main reasons for the levee system failure was that the pump stations and levees were not treated as one system, which was one of the causes of the mass flooding we saw in New Orleans. Another issue we found was that the designers of the levee system never factored in a failsafe for what would happen if a bigger storm occurred and the levee overflowed. They had the right idea by building flood protection systems, but they didn’t think that a larger storm the size of Katrina could occur and never updated the design to bring in new meteorological knowledge on size of potential storms. Since then, the city has completely rebuilt the levees using these lessons learned. Q: What did researchers, scientists and the general population learn from Katrina? Dr. Traver: In areas that have had major hurricanes over the past 20 years, it’s easy to find what went wrong and fix it for the future, so we don’t necessarily worry as much about having a hurricane in the same place as we’ve had one before. What I worry about is if a hurricane hits a new town or city that has not experienced one and we have no idea what the potential frailties of the prevention systems there could be. Scientists and researchers also need to make high-risk areas for hurricane activity in the United States known for those who live there. People need to know what their risk is if they are in areas where there is increased risk of storms and flooding, and what they should do when a storm hits, especially now with the changes we are seeing in storm size.

View all posts
Powered by