Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025)
Original Research Article

Debating wine health-warning labels using Q methodology

PDF
  • Francesco Solfanelli,
  • Serena Mandolesi,
  • Ileana Silvestri,
  • Simona Naspetti,
  • Raffaele Zanoli
Francesco Solfanelli
Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali (D3A), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Serena Mandolesi
Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali (D3A), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Ileana Silvestri
Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali (D3A), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Simona Naspetti
Dipartimento di Scienze e Ingegneria della Materia, dell’Ambiente ed Urbanistica (SIMAU), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Raffaele Zanoli
Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali (D3A), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-17056

Published 2025-02-11

Keywords

  • health-warning labels,
  • labelling,
  • wine,
  • attitudes,
  • Q methodology

How to Cite

Solfanelli, F., Mandolesi, S., Silvestri, I., Naspetti, S., & Zanoli, R. (2025). Debating wine health-warning labels using Q methodology. Wine Economics and Policy, 14(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-17056

Copyright (c) 2025 Francesco Solfanelli, Serena Mandolesi, Ileana Silvestri, Simona Naspetti, Raffaele Zanoli

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

In Europe, alcohol-related diseases have an increasingly high impact on healthcare costs every year. Hence, rising consumer consciousness regarding the risks and harms of drinking alcohol is a primary goal of the EU Commission. Recently, the Commission has been discussing the mandatory adoption of health-warning labels (HWLs) on all alcoholic beverages, including wine. This study investigated expert and non-expert perceptions of adopting health-warning labels on wine bottles. The research used Q methodology, a mixed-method approach to explore subjective viewpoints regarding adopting health-warning labels for the wine sector. Respondents were evenly distributed among wine experts and consumers. The results provided four different views based on participants’ perceptions of HWLs. Factor 1 (the “Nationalism” view) strongly opposes the proposal, which is considered extremely dangerous for the entire wine market. Factor 2 (the “Market-oriented” view) believes that health warnings will increase transparency in the market and help consumers make informed choices, thereby respecting consumer autonomy. Factor 3 (the “Health-first” view) strongly believes that informing consumers through health labels on all alcoholic beverages is necessary to protect public health. Lastly, Factor 4 (the “Keep Us Alive” view) underestimates warning labels’ effectiveness in promoting the right behaviours. The findings highlight different “sides” of this debating topic and provide valuable insight into how policymakers can investigate new strategies, always considering and respecting consumer choice.

PDF

References

  1. European Parliament, The EU wine sector, 2023. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2023/751399/EPRS_BRI(2023)751399_EN.pdf.
  2. E. Fiorio, Wine, Italy: despite a growing consumer base, Italy’s overall wine consumption is declining, (2022). https://www.winemeridian.com/english-news/wine_italy_despite_a_growing_consumer_base_italy_s_overall_wine_consumption_is_declining/#:~:text=The number of people who,half a liter per day.
  3. M. Lanfranchi, A. Alibrandi, A. Zirilli, G. Sakka, C. Giannetto, Analysis of the wine consumer’s behavior: an inferential statistics approach, British Food Journal 122 (2020) 884–895. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2019-0581.
  4. European Commission, EU agricultural outlook for markets, income and environment, 2021-2031, DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Brussels, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2762/753688.
  5. A. Annunziata, L. Agnoli, R. Vecchio, S. Charters, A. Mariani, Health warnings on wine labels: a discrete choice analysis of Italian and French Generation Y consumers, Wine Economics and Policy 8 (2019) 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2019.03.001.
  6. WHO, Global status report on alcohol and health 2018, 2018. http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/msbgsruprofiles.pdf%0Ahttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29355346 (accessed June 25, 2023).
  7. WHO, Global strategy to reduce the harmful use of alcohol, (2010) 1–38.
  8. A. Annunziata, L. Agnoli, R. Vecchio, S. Charters, A. Mariani, The Influence of Alcohol Warning Labels on Consumers’ Choices of Wine and Beer, Wine Economics and Policy 9 (2020) 3–21. https://doi.org/10.36253/web-8189.
  9. K. Vallance, T. Stockwell, J. Zhao, S. Shokar, N. Schoueri-Mychasiw, D. Hammond, T.K. Greenfield, J. McGavock, A. Weerasinghe, E. Hobin, Baseline assessment of alcohol-related knowledge of and support for alcohol warning labels among alcohol consumers in northern canada and associations with key sociodemographic characteristics, J Stud Alcohol Drugs 81 (2020) 238–248. https://doi.org/10.15288/JSAD.2020.81.238.
  10. S. Ramlo, Mixed Method Lessons Learned From 80 Years of Q Methodology, J Mix Methods Res 10 (2016) 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815610998.
  11. C. Staub, M. Siegrist, How health warning labels on wine and vodka bottles influence perceived risk, rejection, and acceptance, BMC Public Health 22 (2022) 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12564-8.
  12. C. Staub, C. Fuchs, M. Siegrist, Risk perception and acceptance of health warning labels on wine, Food Qual Prefer 96 (2022) 104435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104435.
  13. European Parliament and of the Council, Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, 2013. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02013R1308-20230101.
  14. European Parliament and of the Council, Regulation (EU) 2021/2117, 2021. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2021.435.01.0262.01.ENG.
  15. Minister for Health, S.I. No 249/2023 - Public Health (Alcohol) (Labelling) Regulations, 2023.
  16. FoodNavigator, Should alcohol health warnings and ingredient lists appear on-label, off-label, or not at all?, (2022). https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2022/04/12/New-alcohol-labelling-on-label-off-label-via-QR-codes-or-not-at-all.
  17. S. Minzer, R. Estruch, R. Casas, Wine Intake in the Framework of a Mediterranean Diet and Chronic Non-Communicable Diseases: A Short Literature Review of the Last 5 Years, Molecules 25 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25215045.
  18. F.G. Santeramo, A. Seccia, G. Nardone, The synergies of the Italian wine and tourism sectors, Wine Economics and Policy 6 (2017) 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2016.11.004.
  19. W. Stephenson, Technique of factor analysis, Nature 136 (1935) 297–297. https://doi.org/10.1038/136297b0.
  20. S.R. Brown, Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science, 1980.
  21. J. V. Stanton, D.T. Guion, Consumer attitudes toward organic foods: An exploration of U.S. market segments, Elsevier, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0885-2111(2010)0000012004.
  22. S. Naspetti, S. Mandolesi, R. Zanoli, Using visual Q sorting to determine the impact of photovoltaic applications on the landscape, Land Use Policy 57 (2016) 564–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.021.
  23. C. Hall, Identifying farmer attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) crops in Scotland: Are they pro- or anti-GM?, Geoforum 39 (2008) 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.06.003.
  24. S. Mandolesi, S. Naspetti, R. Zanoli, Exploring edible insects’ acceptance through subjective perceptions: a visual Q study, J Insects Food Feed 8 (2022) 565–577. https://doi.org/10.3920/jiff2021.0016.
  25. P. Walder, J. Kantelhardt, The Environmental Behaviour of Farmers – Capturing the Diversity of Perspectives with a Q Methodological Approach, Ecological Economics 143 (2018) 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.018.
  26. K.B. Song, S. Lê, H.R. Kim, S.M. Yoo, M.S. Kang, H.N. Chu, I.S. Hwang, J.H. Hong, Consumer-driven characterization of healing foods using Q methodology and Q based sorting, Food Qual Prefer 117 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105181.
  27. A. Goodluck, D.J. Otieno, W. Oluoch-Kosura, Understanding farmers’ perceptions on advisory services in Tanzania: Comparative insights from principal component analysis and Q-methodology, Heliyon 10 (2024) e34541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34541.
  28. L. Zagata, T. Uhnak, J. Hrabák, Moderately radical? Stakeholders’ perspectives on societal roles and transformative potential of organic agriculture, Ecological Economics 190 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107208.
  29. N. Yarar, U.R. Orth, Consumer lay theories on healthy nutrition: a Q methodology application in Germany, Appetite 120 (2018) 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.08.026.
  30. A. Svanidze, M. Costa-Font, Revealing the challenges facing Georgia’s wine industry from a natural winemaker perspective using Q-methodology, International Journal of Wine Business Research 35 (2023) 89–120. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-06-2021-0036.
  31. L. Jakšić, E. Ivanjko, M. Njavro, Q-methodology: theoretical framework for policy making in the Croatian wine sector, International Journal of Wine Business Research 30 (2018) 428–445. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-07-2017-0046.
  32. K.J. Winkler, K.A. Nicholas, More than wine: Cultural ecosystem services in vineyard landscapes in England and California, Ecological Economics 124 (2016) 86–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.01.013.
  33. W. Stephenson, The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, US, 1953.
  34. S. Ramlo, Examining Subjectivity with Q Methodology, 1st Editio, Routledge, London, 2025.
  35. W. Stephenson, The inverted factor technique, British Journal of Psychology. General Section 26 (1936) 344–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1936.tb00803.x.
  36. D.J. Delprato, S.R. Brown, Q Methodology and the Operant Construct, Operant Subjectivity 25 (2002) 139–147. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.02.100599.
  37. T.A. Steelman, L.A. Maguire, Understanding participant perspectives: Q-methodology in national forest management, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18 (1999) 361–388. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(199922)18:3<361::AID-PAM3>3.0.CO;2-K.
  38. B.F. Skinner, Science and Human Behavior, 1953.
  39. A. Stirling, “Opening Up” and “Closing Down,” Sci Technol Human Values 33 (2008) 262–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907311265.
  40. A. Wolf, Many Minds, Common Sense and Genetically Modified Food: A Role for Q Methodology, East Asian Sci Technol Soc 4 (2010) 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12280-010-9142-1.
  41. S. Watts, P. Stenner, Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation, Qual Res Psychol 2 (2005) 67–91. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088705qp022oa.
  42. B. McKeown, D.B. Thomas, Q Methodology (Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Book 66), 2nd ed., Sage Publications, 2013.
  43. C.H. Davis, C. Michelle, Q Methodology in Audience Research : Bridging the Qualitative / Quantitative ‘ Divide ’?, Journal of Audience & Reception Studies 8 (2011) 559–593.
  44. A. Zabala, C. Sandbrook, N. Mukherjee, When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research, Conservation Biology 32 (2018) 1185–1194. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13123.
  45. S.R. Brown, Q Technique and Questionnaires, Operant Subjectivity 25 (2002). https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.02.100594.
  46. D.B. Thomas, L.R. Baas, The Issue of Generalization in Q Methodology: “Reliable Schematics” Revisited, Operant Subjectivity 16 (1992) 18–36. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.92.100599.
  47. W. Stephenson, Protoconcursus: the concourse theory of communication*, Operant Subjectivity (1986) 37–58.
  48. S.R. Brown, A primer on Q methodology, Operant Subjectivity 16 (1993) 91–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239600600408.
  49. G. Sneegas, S. Beckner, C. Brannstrom, W. Jepson, K. Lee, L. Seghezzo, Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review, Ecological Economics 180 (2021) 106864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106864.
  50. S. Mandolesi, E. Cubero Dudinskaya, S. Naspetti, F. Solfanelli, R. Zanoli, Freedom of Choice - Organic Consumers’ Discourses on New Plant Breeding Techniques, Sustainability 14 (2022) 8718. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14148718.
  51. R.A. Fisher, The design of experiments, 1960. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.1.3923.554-a.
  52. J.S. Dryzek, J. Berejikian, Reconstructive democratic theory, American Political Science Review 87 (1993).
  53. S.E. Toulmin, The Uses of Argument, Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1958.
  54. P. Kline, An easy guide to factor analysis, 1st Editio, Routledge, London, London, UK, 1994. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315788135.
  55. S. Eden, A. Donaldson, G. Walker, Structuring subjectivities? Using Q methodology in human geography, Area 37 (2005) 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2005.00641.x.
  56. T. Webler, S. Danielson, S. Tuler, Using Q method to reveal social perspectives in environmental research, Social and Environmental Research 01301 (2009) 1–54. http://www.seri-us.org/pubs/Qprimer.pdf.
  57. S. Banasick, KADE: A desktop application for Q methodology, J Open Source Softw 4 (2019) 1360. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01360.
  58. S. Watts, P. Stenner, Doing Q methodological research: theory, method and interpretation, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446251911.
  59. J. Fisher, K. Brown, Wind energy on the Isle of Lewis: Implications for deliberative planning, Environ Plan A 41 (2009) 2516–2536. https://doi.org/10.1068/a41129.
  60. P. Lundborg, B. Lindgren, Risk perceptions and alcohol consumption among young people, J Risk Uncertain 25 (2002) 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020695730192.
  61. M. Siegrist, J. Árvai, Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research, Risk Analysis 40 (2020) 2191–2206. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13599.
  62. K.M. Joyce, M. Davidson, E. Manly, S.H. Stewart, M. Al-Hamdani, A systematic review on the impact of alcohol warning labels, J Addict Dis 42 (2024) 170–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10550887.2023.2210020.
  63. J. Rehm, D.W. Lachenmeier, R. Room, Why does society accept a higher risk for alcohol than for other voluntary or involuntary risks?, BMC Med 12 (2014) 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-014-0189-z.
  64. N. Gold, M. Egan, K. Londakova, A. Mottershaw, H. Harper, R. Burton, C. Henn, M. Smolar, M. Walmsley, R. Arambepola, R. Watson, S. Bowen, F. Greaves, Effect of alcohol label designs with different pictorial representations of alcohol content and health warnings on knowledge and understanding of low-risk drinking guidelines: a randomized controlled trial, Addiction 116 (2021) 1443–1459. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15327.
  65. C.M. Doran, T.A. Jainullabudeen, Economic efficiency of alcohol policy, Appl Health Econ Health Policy 8 (2010) 351–354. https://doi.org/10.2165/11584830-000000000-00000.
  66. U. Fradera, N. Fritella, D. Gonzalez, G. Sandeman, E. de Diego, C. Terrien, Digital online training for wine professionals: From responsible service to a sustainable consumption of wine, BIO Web Conf 68 (2023) 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20236804011.
  67. WHO, Health Taxes Policy and Practice, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1142/9781800612396_bmatter.
  68. WHO, Global alcohol action plan, 2024.
  69. R. Griffith, M. O’Connell, K. Smith, Tax design in the alcohol market, J Public Econ 172 (2019) 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.12.005.
  70. K. Anderson, G. Wittwer, Proposed alcohol tax reform in the United Kingdom: Implications for wine-exporting countries, Journal of Wine Economics 17 (2022) 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2022.19.
  71. T. Bucher, K. Deroover, C. Stockley, Production and Marketing of Low-Alcohol Wine, in: Advances in Grape and Wine Biotechnology, 2019. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.87025.
  72. K. Anderson, The emergence of lower-alcohol beverages: The case of beer, Journal of Wine Economics 18 (2023) 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2023.8.
  73. S. Renaud, M. de Lorgeril, Wine, alcohol, platelets, and the French paradox for coronary heart disease, The Lancet 339 (1992) 1523–1526. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(92)91277-F.
  74. A. Nieddu, L. Vindas, A. Errigo, J. Vindas, G.M. Pes, M.P. Dore, Dietary Habits, Anthropometric Features and Daily Performance in Two Independent Long-Lived Populations from Nicoya peninsula (Costa Rica) and Ogliastra (Sardinia), Nutrients 6 (2020) 1621. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12061621.
  75. G. Benedetto, D. Carboni, The Health effects of wine: The case of longevity in Sardinia, BIO Web Conf 56 (2023) 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20235604004.
  76. P. O’Brien, D. Gleeson, R. Room, C. Wilkinson, Marginalising health information: Implications of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement for alcohol labelling, 2017.
  77. N. Siegfried, D.C. Pienaar, J.E. Ataguba, J. Volmink, T. Kredo, M. Jere, C.D.H. Parry, Restricting or banning of alcohol advertising to reduce alcohol consumption in adults and adolescents, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010704.
  78. E.A. Hennessy, E.E. Tanner-Smith, Effectiveness of brief school-based interventions for adolescents: A meta-analysis of alcohol use prevention programs, Prev Sci. 16 (2015) 463–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-014-0512-0.
  79. K.K. Strøm, F. Adolfsen, S. Fossum, S. Kaiser, M. Martinussen, Effectiveness of school-based preventive interventions on adolescent alcohol use: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 9 (2014) 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-597X-9-48.
  80. UNESCO, What is Intangible Cultural Heritage?, (2010). https://ich.unesco.org/en/what-is-intangible-heritage-00003.
  81. A. Trichopoulou, Mediterranean diet as intangible heritage of humanity: 10 years on, Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases 31 (2021) 1943–1948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.numecd.2021.04.011.
  82. E. Pomarici, A. Corsi, S. Mazzarino, R. Sardone, The Italian Wine Sector: Evolution, Structure, Competitiveness and Future Challenges of an Enduring Leader, Springer International Publishing, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40797-021-00144-5.
  83. ISMEA, Vino - I numeri del settore, (2024).
  84. P. Clingeleffer, Terroir: The Application of an Old Concept in Modern Viticulture, in: N.K. Van Alfen (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems, Academic Press, 2014: pp. 277–288. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52512-3.00157-1.
  85. H. Johnson, The world atlas of wine: A complete guide to the wines spirits of the world, First Edit, Mitchell Beazley, 1971.