Italian consumers' preferences regarding dealcoholized wine, information and price

Wine Economics and Policy

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 54-61

  Stasi, Antonio ^a   Bimbo, Francesco ^a   Viscecchia, Rosaria ^a   Seccia, Antonio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FOGGIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Acceptability; Choice modeling; Dealcoholized wine; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

EID: 84921425459     PISSN: 22133968     EISSN: 22129774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wep.2014.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adamowicz, W., Boxall, P., Williams, M., Louviere, J., 1998. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 80, 64-75.
2. Angulo, A.M., Gil, J.M., Gracia, A., Sanchez, M., 2000. Hedonic prices for Spanish red quality wine. Br. Food J. 2 (7), 481-493.
3. Bennet, J., 1999. Some fundamentals of environmental choice modeling. University College, The University of New South Wales, Canberra, A.C.T. (Choice Modeling Research Report 11).
4. Bjorner T.B., Hansen L.G., Russel C.F., 2002. Environmental labeling and consumers' choice - an empirical analysis of the effect of the Nordic Swan. Working paper no. 02-W03.
5. Blamey, R.K., et al., 1998. Attribute selection in environmental choice modeling studies: the effect of casually prior attributes. University College, The University of South Wales, Canberra, A.C.T. (Choice Modeling Research Report 7).
6. Burton, M., et al., 2001. Consumer attitudes to genetically modified organisms in food in the U.K. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 28 (4), 479-498.
7. Cicia, G., Del Giudice, T., Esposito, P., 2004. Semplicità operativa VS completezza nell'analisi delle preferenze del consumatore: un confronto tra conjoint analysis e modelli ad utilità stocastica. In: Antonelli, G. (Ed.), Marketing agro-alimentare, specificità e temi di analisi. Franco Angeli, Milano (a cura di):).
8. Cicia, G., Del Giudice, T., Scarpa, R., 2005. Consumers' perception of quality in organic food: a random utility model under preference heterogeneity and choice correlation from rank-orderings. Br. Food J. 104, 3-5.
9. Corbet-Milward J., Loftus S. 2011. When is a wine not a wine? Bringing a low alcohol product to market presentation at OIV meetings.
10. Di Vittorio, A., Ginsburgh, V., 1994. Pricing red wines of Médoc Vintages from 1949 to 1989 at Christie's auctions. Journal de la Société Statistique de Paris 137, 19-49.
11. Donovan, J.L., et al., 2002. Urinary excretion of catechin metabolites by human subjects after red wine consumption. Br. J. Nutr. 87, 31-37.
12. Goldberg, I.J., et al., 2001. Wine and your heart. Circulation 103, 472.
13. Goodman, S. et al., 2008. International comparison of consumer choice for wine: a twelve country comparison. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of the Academy of Wine Business Research, Siena, 17-19 July.
14. Hansen, L., Schmidt, M., 1999. Revisiting Conjoint: How Danish Pig Producers Found the Future Road to Environmentally Concerned Danish Consumers. Mimeo, Edimburg.
15. Hieronimi H.H.2010. Alkoholfreier Wein? Erfahrungen in Deutschald. In: Proceedings of the XXXIII World Congress of Vine and Wine - Final Papers, Tbilisi, Georgia, June 20-25.
16. Lai M., Del Giudice T., Pomarici E.,2006. Unobserved heterogeneity in the wine market: an analysis on sardinia wine via mixed logit. Colloque International de la Vineyard Data Quantification Society, Bordeaux, 26-27/05.
17. Lecocq, S., Visser, M., 2006. What determines wine prices: objective vs. sensory characteristics. J. Wine Econ. 1 (1), 42-56.
18. Masson, J., Aurier, P., D'Hauteville, F., 2010. Effects of non-sensory cues on perceived quality: the case of low-alcohol wine. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2 (3), 215-229.
19. McFadden, D., 1974. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka, P. (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics. Academic Press, New York, pp. 105-142.
20. Meillon, S., Urbano, C., Guillot, G., Schlich, P., 2010a. Acceptability of partially dealcoholized wines - measuring the impact of sensory and information cues on overall liking in real-life settings. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 763-773.
21. Meillon, S., Viala, D., Medel, M., Urbano, C., Guillot, G., Schlich, P., 2010b. Impact of partial alcohol reduction in Syrah wine on perceived complexity and temporality of sensations and link with preference. Food Qual. Prefer. 21 (7), 732-740.
22. Morrison, M.D., et al., 1996. A comparison of stated preferences techniques for estimating environmental values. The University of New South Wales, Canberra, A.C.T. (Choice Modeling Research Reports).
23. Nerlove, M., 1995. Hedonic price function and the measurement of preference: the case of Swedish wine consumers. Eur. Econ. Rev. 39, 1697-1716.
24. Noeva, N., 2006. Wine quality and regional reputation. Hedonic analysis of the Bulgarian wine market. East. Eur. Econ. 43 (6), 5-30.
25. Orth, U.R., Krska, P., 2002. Quality signals in wine marketing: the role of exhibition awards. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 4, 385-397.
26. Pickton, D.W., Wright, S., 1998. What's SWOT in strategic analysis? Strateg. Change 7, 101-109.
27. Roselli, L., Seccia, A., Stasi, A., 2006. Atteggiamento dei Consumatori Nei Confronti Dell'evoluzione del Sistema Agro-Alimentare: L'introduzione Di Alimenti Geneticamente Modificati. Rivista di Economia Agro-alimentare 1, 127-150.
28. Stasi, A., Carlucci, D., Seccia, A., 2008. Informazione Asimmetrica e Regolamentazione per l'Etichettatura del Vino. Rivista di Economia Agraria 2, 233-254.
29. Stasi A., Seccia A., Nardone G.,2009. Italian Wine Market Structure and Consumers' Demand. International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IAMA) (Budapest: Giugno, pp. 20-23.
30. SWG 2010. Tomorrow Ricerche sul futuro. Approfondimento tematico sulla salienza rivestita dal grado alcolico, Ricerca commissionata dal Gruppo Santa Margherita.
31. Tamura, T., et al., 2009. Iron is an essential cause of fishy aftertaste formation in wine and seafood pairing. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57 (18), 8550-8556.