2024: Just Accepted
Original Research Article

Influence of Information about Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties on Hedonic Ratings by Consumers – a Central Location Test in Germany

PDF (Just accepted)
  • Christoph Kiefer,
  • Gergely Szolnoki
Christoph Kiefer
Hochschule Geisenheim University
Gergely Szolnoki
Geisenheim University

Published 2024-09-23

Keywords

  • PIWI,
  • Innovation,
  • Wine quality,
  • Sustainability,
  • sensory quality

How to Cite

Kiefer, C., & Szolnoki, G. (2024). Influence of Information about Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties on Hedonic Ratings by Consumers – a Central Location Test in Germany. Wine Economics and Policy. Retrieved from https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/wep/article/view/16110

Copyright (c) 2024 Christoph Kiefer, Gergely Szolnoki

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Funding data

Abstract

This study examines the impact of information about resistant grape varieties on consumer sensory acceptance. Specifically, it investigates how consumers’ perception of fungus-resistant grape varieties is influenced by providing information about these varieties. The study utilises data from a central location test conducted with 244 consumers in Germany featuring 8 different wines. The sample was carefully selected to ensure representativeness across gender, age and frequency of consumption. The data were analysed using descriptive and multivariate statistical techniques. The results indicate that consumers rate the quality and willingness to pay for wines made from fungus-resistant grape varieties similarly to wines made from traditional grape varieties when tasted without any prior information about the wines or the influence of fungus-resistant grape varieties in viticulture. However, providing consumers with information prior to tasting results in a positive effect on their assessment of quality and willingness to pay for wines made from resistant grape varieties. By offering information about the positive effects of fungus-resistant grape varieties, it is possible to enhance consumer acceptance and increase their willingness to pay for wines from resistant grapes.

PDF (Just accepted)

References

  1. European Commission, Farm to Fork Strategy: For a Fair, Healthy and For a Fair, Healthy and Environmentally-Friendly Food System, 2020. https://food.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-05/f2f_action-plan_2020_strategy-info_en.pdf.
  2. C. Fechter, W. Sesselmeier, L. Zill, Akzeptanz neuer Rebsorten bei den Weinkonsumenten: Teilprojekt im Rahmen des internationalen Verbundprojekts Vitifutur, Staatliches Weinbauinstitut Freiburg, Freiburg, 2018. https://www.vitifutur.net/download/Akzeptanz%20neuer%20Rebsorten%20bei%20den%20Weinkonsumenten.pdf.
  3. K. Pedneault, C. Provost, Fungus resistant grape varieties as a suitable alternative for organic wine production: Benefits, limits, and challenges, Scientia Horticulturae 208 (2016) 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.03.016.
  4. E. Doye, C. Hoffmann, G. Michl, Etablierung eines Anbausystems pilztoleranter Rebsorten für den ökologischen Weinbau: Zusammenfassender Schlussbericht: Az.:18214, (2005).
  5. B. Eisenmann, C. Wingerter, M. Dressler, C. Freund, A. Kortekamp, J. Bogs, Fungicide-Saving Potential and Economic Advantages of Fungus-Resistant Grapevine Cultivars, Plants 12 (2023) 3120. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12173120.
  6. L. Strub, S. Mueller Loose, The cost disadvantage of steep slope viticulture and strategies for its preservation, OENO One 55 (2021) 49–68. https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2021.55.1.4494.
  7. B. Purvis, Y. Mao, D. Robinson, Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins, Sustain Sci 14 (2019) 681–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5.
  8. H. Willer, R. Zanoli, Organic Viticulture in Europe, in: H. Willer, U. Meier (Eds.), Proceedings 6th International Congress on Organic Viticulture, 2000: pp. 23–29. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277825820_Organic_Viticulture_in_Europe.
  9. G. Di Vita, G. Califano, M. Raimondo, D. Spina, M. Hamam, M. D’Amico, F. Caracciolo, From Roots to Leaves: Understanding Consumer Acceptance in Implementing Climate-Resilient Strategies in Viticulture, Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 2024 (2024) 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/8118128.
  10. C. Kiefer, G. Szolnoki, Consumer Acceptance of Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties—An Exploratory Study Using Sensory Evaluation Tests among Consumers in Germany, Sustainability 15 (2023) 10664. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310664.
  11. P. Sloan, W. Legrand, K. Krauss, The integration of fungus tolerant vine cultivars in the organic wine industry: the case of German wine producers, Enometrica Macerata : EUM, 2008 (2010) 37–50.
  12. J.R. Becker, T.B. Toldam-Andersen, The wine industry in Denmark, (2015). https://vinavl.dk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Wine-industry-in-Denmark.pdf.
  13. Central Bureau for Statistics, Betriebe mit Weinbau: Landwirtschaftszählung, Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Fischerei, Wiesbaden, 2021.
  14. W. Renner, PIWIS – around the World, (2021). https://piwi-international.de/2021/10/piwis-around-the-world/.
  15. A.L.K. Souza, A.F. Brighenti, E. Brighenti, V. Caliari, M. Stefanini, O. Trapp, J.P.P. Gardin, M.A. Dalbó, L.J. Welter, S.S. Camargo, Performance of resistant varieties (PIWI) at two different altitudes in Southern Brazil, BIO Web of Conferences 12 (2019) 01021. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20191201021.
  16. M. Stefanini, T.C. Tomazetti, M.D. Rossarolla, A. Costa, E. Dela Bruna, L.I. Malinovski, A.L. Silva, R.O. Nodari, M.P. Guerra, Phenology and thermal requirements of disease-resistant genotypes (PIWI) grown in the Goethe Grape Valley region of Brazil, Acta Hortic. (2019) 141–148. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2019.1248.21.
  17. P. Basler, H. Pfenninger, Disease-Resitant Cultivars as a Solution for Organic Viticulture, Acta Horticulturae (2003) 681–685. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2003.603.94.
  18. H. Tajfel, A.L. Wilkes, CLASSIFICATION AND QUANTITATIVE JUDGEMENT, British J of Psychology 54 (1963) 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1963.tb00865.x.
  19. S. Ram, J.N. Sheth, Consumer Resistance to Innovations: The Marketing Problem and its solutions, Journal of Consumer Marketing 6 (1989) 5–14.
  20. A. Fuentes Espinoza, A. Hubert, Y. Raineau, C. Franc, É. Giraud-Héraud, Resistant grape varieties and market acceptance: an evaluation based on experimental economics, OENO One 52 (2018). https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2018.52.3.2316.
  21. L. Nesselhauf, R. Fleuchaus, L. Theuvsen, What about the environment?: A choice-based conjoint study about wine from fungus-resistant grape varieties, IJWBR 32 (2019) 96–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-09-2018-0049.
  22. S. Mann, A. Ferjani, L. Reissig, What matters to consumers of organic wine?, British Food Journal 114 (2012) 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070701211202430.
  23. C. Kiefer, G. Szolnoki, An Exploratory Acceptance Study Associated with Fungus-resistant Grape Varieties – Mixed-methods Evidence of Wine Producers in Germany [Manuscript submitted for publication], Department of Wine and Beverage Business (2024).
  24. E. Pomarici, M. Amato, R. Vecchio, Environmental Friendly Wines: A Consumer Segmentation Study, Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 534–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.067.
  25. E. Pomarici, R. Vecchio, Will sustainability shape the future wine market?, Wine Economics and Policy 8 (2019) 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2019.05.001.
  26. L. Nesselhauf, J.S. Deker, R. Fleuchaus, Information and involvement: the influence on the acceptance of innovative wine packaging, International Journal of Wine Business Research 29 (2017) 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-08-2016-0026.
  27. K.B. Fuller, J.M. Alston, O.S. Sambucci, The value of powdery mildew resistance in grapes: Evidence from California, Wine Economics and Policy 3 (2014) 90–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2014.09.001.
  28. M.R. González-Centeno, K. Chira, C. Miramont, J.-L. Escudier, A. Samson, J.-M. Salmon, H. Ojeda, P.-L. Teissedre, Disease Resistant Bouquet Vine Varieties: Assessment of the Phenolic, Aromatic, and Sensory Potential of Their Wines, Biomolecules 9 (2019).
  29. A.L. Schwab, R. Knott, W. Schottdorf, Results from new fungus-tolerant grapevine varieties for Organic Viticulture, in: Proceedings 6th International Congress on Organic Viticulture, Stiftung Ökologie & Landbau, Basel, Switzerland, 2000: pp. 225–227. https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/2067/.
  30. M. van der Meer, F. Weibel, D. Lévite, A. Häseli, Acceptation des vins de cépages résistants par les consommateurs: Résultats du projet TOPiwi 2007 – 2008, Revue Suisse de Viticulture Arboriculture Horticulture (2010) 147–150.
  31. M. Weber, O. Kohlmann, U. Fischer, European consumer preference for wines made from fungus resistant grape varieties, in: VES Conference Series, 2021. https://ives-openscience.eu/8457/ (accessed September 22, 2023).
  32. K.-P. Wiedmann, N. Hennigs, S. Henrik Behrens, C. Klarmann, Tasting green: an experimental design for investigating consumer perception of organic wine, British Food Journal 116 (2014) 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2012-0090.
  33. G. Duley, A.T. Ceci, E. Longo, E. Boselli, Oenological potential of wines produced from disease‐resistant grape cultivars, Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safe 22 (2023) 2591–2610. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.13155.
  34. I. Boutrolle, D. Arranz, M. Rogeaux, J. Delarue, Comparing central location test and home use test results: Application of a new criterion, Food Quality and Preference 16 (2005) 704–713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.03.015.
  35. D. Asioli, R. Wongprawmas, E. Pignatti, M. Canavari, 1 School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom, 2 Department of Agricultural and Food Science, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy, 3 Consumer and Sensory Science, Nofima AS, As Norway, 4 Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, United States, Can information affect sensory perceptions? Evidence from a survey on Italian organic food consumers, AIMS Agriculture and Food 3 (2018) 327–377. https://doi.org/10.3934/agrfood.2018.3.327.
  36. R. Deliza, H.J.H. MacFIE, D. Hedderley, Information Affects Consumer Assessment of Sweet and Bitter Solutions, Journal of Food Science 61 (1996) 1080–1084. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1996.tb10936.x.
  37. H.J. Macfie, Nicholas. Bratchell, Keith. Greenhoff, L.V. Vallis, DESIGNS TO BALANCE THE EFFECT OF ORDER OF PRESENTATION AND FIRST‐ORDER CARRY‐OVER EFFECTS IN HALL TESTS, Journal of Sensory Studies 4 (1989) 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1989.tb00463.x.
  38. A. Kolb, GfK eBUS® 2020 13/14 März / April 2020, 2020.
  39. Central Bureau for Statistics., Einkommens- und Verbrauchsstichprobe. Heft 6, Einkommensverteilung in Deutschland, 310 Statistik, Wiesbaden, 2019. https://www.statistischebibliothek.de/mir/receive/DEHeft_mods_00075865 (accessed June 23, 2023).
  40. D.J. Leiner, SoSci survey, SoSci Survey GmbH, München, 2023. http://www.soscisurvey.com.
  41. T.C. Pimentel, A. Gomes Da Cruz, R. Deliza, Sensory Evaluation: Sensory Rating and Scoring Methods, in: Encyclopedia of Food and Health, Elsevier, 2016: pp. 744–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384947-2.00617-6.
  42. M. Dressler, The German Wine Market: A Comprehensive Strategic and Economic Analysis, Beverages 4 (2018) 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages4040092.
  43. R Core Team, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, (2023). https://www.R-project.org/.
  44. H. Stone, J.L. Sidel, Sensory evaluation practices, Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam Boston, 2004.
  45. G.S. Pereira, A.R. Honorio, B.R. Gasparetto, C.M.A. Lopes, D.C.N.D. Lima, A.A.L. Tribst, Influence of information received by the consumer on the sensory perception of processed orange juice, Journal of Sensory Studies 34 (2019) e12497. https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12497.
  46. M. Saïdi, G. Giraud, The differentiated effect of information on the sensorial appreciation of wine, BFJ 122 (2020) 2639–2653. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2019-0471.
  47. C. Kiefer, G. Szolnoki, Consumer preferences for fungus-resistant grape varieties: an explorative segmentation study in Germany, BFJ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-10-2023-0865.
  48. R. Vecchio, A. Annunziata, E. Parga Dans, P. Alonso González, Drivers of consumer willingness to pay for sustainable wines: natural, biodynamic, and organic, Org. Agr. 13 (2023) 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-023-00425-6.
  49. A. Ciceri, A. Stasi, G. Nardone, G. Songa, M. Mauri, V. Russo, Effect of information on food evaluation and willingness to buy: a study from a neuromarketing perspective, in: Neuromarketing Science & Business Association, 2015: pp. 12–14. https://www.academia.edu/37481497/Effect_of_information_on_Food_Evaluation_and_willingness_to_buy_A_Study_from_a_Neuromarketing_Perspective_pdf.
  50. U. Fischer, M. Weber, M. Gentner, O. Kohlmann, J. Vestner, Sensory Profiles and European Consumer Preferences related to Aroma and Phenolic Compostition of Wines made from Fungusresistant Grape Varieties (PIWI), in: IVES Conference Series, 2023. https://ives-openscience.eu/40799/ (accessed September 22, 2023).
  51. A. d’Astous, E. Kamau, Consumer product evaluation based on tactile sensory information, J of Consumer Behaviour 9 (2010) 206–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.312.
  52. C. Lange, C. Martin, C. Chabanet, P. Combris, S. Issanchou, Impact of the information provided to consumers on their willingness to pay for Champagne: comparison with hedonic scores, Food Quality and Preference 13 (2002) 597–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00059-9.
  53. Capitello, Sirieix, Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainable Wine: An Exploratory Study in France and Italy, Economies 7 (2019) 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies7020033.
  54. G. Mian, F. Nassivera, S. Sillani, L. Iseppi, Grapevine Resistant Cultivars: A Story Review and the Importance on the Related Wine Consumption Inclination, Sustainability 15 (2022) 390. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010390.