Just Accepted Manuscripts
Review Article

Wine Quality as a Source of Information Asymmetry: Signals, Screens, and the Role of Emerging Technologies

(Just Accepted)
  • Jochen Heussner,
  • Jon Hanf
Jochen Heussner
Justus Liebig University Giessen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-18942

Published 2026-02-16

Keywords

  • Wine quality,
  • Information Asymmetry,
  • Signalling,
  • Screening,
  • blockchain,
  • Innovation
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Heussner, J., & Hanf, J. (2026). Wine Quality as a Source of Information Asymmetry: Signals, Screens, and the Role of Emerging Technologies. Wine Economics and Policy. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-18942

Copyright (c) 2024 Jochen Heussner, Jon Hanf

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

Wine quality is a multidimensional and contested concept that generates persistent information asymmetries among producers, consumers, experts, and regulators. This review synthesizes multidisciplinary evidence from economics, marketing, sensory science, and digital innovation to examine how wine quality’s intrinsic, extrinsic, institutional, and cultural dimensions interact with mechanisms of signalling and screening. Using a structured conceptual review and systematic evidence mapping of 76 peer-reviewed studies, the paper identifies where traditional mechanisms - such as price, reputation, expert ratings, geographical indications, and certification schemes - mitigate uncertainty and where they merely relocate it along the value chain. The analysis introduces the notion of layered systems of trust, showing that each corrective instrument reduces one type of asymmetry while generating dependencies elsewhere. Emerging digital tools, particularly blockchain and related traceability technologies, offer complementary ways to enhance transparency and governance but also create new informational challenges around data input and interoperability. The paper concludes that wine markets will continue to rely on hybrid constellations of traditional and technological signals, underscoring the need for governance frameworks that integrate digital innovation with the preservation of wine’s sensory, cultural, and institutional complexity.

(Just Accepted)

References

  1. S. Charters, S. Pettigrew, The intrinsic dimensions of wine quality, Food Qual. Prefer. 14 (2003) 201–215.
  2. S. Charters, S. Pettigrew, The dimensions of wine quality, Int. J. Wine Mark. 19 (2007) 97–119.
  3. E. Oczkowski, Identifying the effects of objective and subjective quality on wine prices, J. Wine Econ. 11 (2016) 110–129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2016.1
  4. R. Zanchini, S. Blanc, S. Theodorakis, G. Di Vita, V.M. Merlino, F. Brun, S. Massaglia, How European consumers value wine credence attributes: a cross-country comparison of France, Greece and Italy, Wine Econ. Policy 14 (2025) 3–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15235
  5. M.A. Amerine, E.B. Roessler, Wines: Their Sensory Evaluation, W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1983.
  6. P. Combris, S. Lecocq, M. Visser, Estimation of a hedonic price equation for Bordeaux wine: Does quality matter?, Econ. J. 107 (1997) 390–402. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0013-0133.1997.165.x
  7. R.T. Hodgson, An examination of judge reliability at a major U.S. wine competition, J. Wine Econ. 4 (2009) 105–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1931436100001152
  8. R. Goldstein, J. Almenberg, A. Dreber, J.W. Emerson, A. Herschkowitsch, J. Katz, Do more expensive wines taste better? Evidence from a large sample of blind tastings, J. Wine Econ. 3 (2008) 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1931436100000523
  9. H.H. Ali, S. Lecocq, M. Visser, The impact of gurus: Parker grades and en primeur wine prices, Econ. J. 120 (2010) 158–173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02147.x
  10. G. Mastrobuoni, F. Peracchi, A. Tetenov, Price as a signal of product quality: Some experimental evidence, J. Wine Econ. 9 (2014) 135–152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2014.17
  11. G.A. Akerlof, The market for lemons: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism, Q. J. Econ. 84 (1970) 488–500. https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431
  12. M. Spence, Job market signaling, Q. J. Econ. 87 (1973) 355–374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010
  13. J.E. Stiglitz, The theory of “screening,” education, and the distribution of income, Am. Econ. Rev. 65 (1975) 283–300.
  14. P. Dubois, The market for wine quality evaluation: Evolution and future perspectives, J. Wine Econ. 16 (2021) 150–167.
  15. R.H. Ashton, Improving experts’ wine quality judgments: Two heads are better than one, J. Wine Econ. 6 (2011) 160–178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1931436100001577
  16. R.H. Ashton, The value of expert opinion in the pricing of Bordeaux wine futures, J. Wine Econ. 11 (2016) 261–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2016.6
  17. J.C. Bodington, Rate the raters: A note on wine judge consistency, J. Wine Econ. 15 (2020) 190–196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2020.30
  18. D. Priilaid, J. Feinberg, O. Carter, G. Ross, Follow the leader: How expert ratings mediate consumer assessments of hedonic quality, S. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 40 (2009) 51–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v40i4.550
  19. L. Menapace, G. Moschini, The economics of geographical indications: An update, Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 16 (2024) 211–230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-101623-092812
  20. O. Gergaud, F. Livat, S. Resnick, Wine ratings: Seeking a consensus among tasters via normalization, approval, and aggregation, J. Wine Econ. 16 (2021) 215–236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2021.15
  21. P. Fanasch, B. Frick, The value of signals: Do self-declaration and certification generate price premiums for organic and biodynamic wines?, J. Clean. Prod. 255 (2020) 120221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119415
  22. S. López-Bayón, M. González-Díaz, V. Solís-Rodríguez, M. Fernández-Barcala, Influence of governance structure on the effectiveness of quality standards: The case of geographical indications, Agric. Econ. 47 (2016) 1–12.
  23. P. Mérel, A. Ortiz-Bobea, E. Paroissien, How big is the “lemons” problem? Historical evidence from French appellation wines, AAWE Conf. (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3444625
  24. G. Schamel, Wine quality and reputation: Lessons from wine competitions, Agric. Econ. 46 (2015) 155–164.
  25. T. Whitnall, J.M. Alston, Climate, weather, and collective reputation: Implications for California’s wine prices and quality, Am. J. Agric. Econ. (2025) forthcoming. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2025.8
  26. O. Kopsacheilis, E. Bru, D. Kaimann, Crowdsourcing the assessment of wine quality: Vivino ratings, professional critics and the weather, J. Wine Econ. 19 (2024) 45–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2024.20
  27. H. Treiblmaier, C. Garaus, Blockchain and consumer trust: Experimental evidence from the wine sector, Food Policy 116 (2023) 102434.
  28. M.P. Kramer, N. Adamashvili, D. Vrontis, J.H. Hanf, A. Galati, The dual role of blockchain in mediating credence attributes and moderating sensing capabilities in the wine sector, Int. J. Organ. Anal. (2024). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-08-2024-4737
  29. H. Snyder, Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines, J. Bus. Res. 104 (2019) 333–339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
  30. E. Jaakkola, Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches, AMS Rev. 10 (2020) 18–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0
  31. A. Castellini, A. Samoggia, Health concerns and segmentations in the wine market, Appetite 123 (2018) 18–27.
  32. B. Frick, R. Simmons, The impact of individual and collective reputation on wine prices: A meta-analysis, Appl. Econ. 45 (2013) 4811–4819.
  33. S. Castriota, M. Delmastro, G. Palumbo, Tasters’ bias in wine guides’ quality evaluations, J. Wine Econ. 8 (2013) 135–154.
  34. M. Dubois, J.M. Cardebat, N. Georgantzis, External evaluations under quality uncertainty: The market for wine ratings, Wine Econ. Policy 14 (2025) 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-16620
  35. V. Ferreira, A. Escudero, L. Culleré, Wine aroma vectors and sensory attributes, in: A.G. Reynolds (Ed.), Managing Wine Quality, Woodhead, 2022, pp. 229–258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102067-8.00008-7
  36. A. Corsi, O. Ashenfelter, Predicting Italian wine quality from weather data and expert ratings, J. Wine Econ. 14 (2019) 236–248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2019.41
  37. F. Livat, Do denominations of origin provide useful quality signals?, J. Wine Econ. 14 (2019) 123–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.06.003
  38. J.H. Hanf, R. Kühl, Branding and its consequences for German agribusiness, Agribusiness 21 (2005) 177–189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.20042
  39. J.H. Hanf, Cooperatives in the balance between retail and member interests, in: Proc. 8th AWBR Conf., Geisenheim, 2014.
  40. J.H. Hanf, M. Iselborn, How to deal with quality problems of German wine cooperatives: A double principal–agent approach, J. Wine Res. 25 (2014) 32–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571264.2014.871122
  41. J. Gal, The determinants of wine prices: A systematic literature review, J. Wine Res. 31 (2020) 289–308.
  42. G. Lo Monaco, J.L. Tavani, C. Codaccioni, Social factors and preference for quality cues: Towards a social construction of wine quality, Food Res. Int. 134 (2020) 109270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109270
  43. P. Nelson, Information and consumer behavior, J. Polit. Econ. 78 (1970) 311–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/259630
  44. A.J. Verdú Jover, F.J. Lloréns Montes, M.M. Fuentes Fuentes, Measuring perceptions of quality in food products: The case of wine, Food Qual. Prefer. 15 (2004) 453–469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2003.08.002
  45. M.R. Darby, E. Karni, Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud, J. Law Econ. 16 (1973) 67–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/466756
  46. C. Shapiro, Premiums for high quality products as returns to reputations, Q. J. Econ. 98 (1983) 659–680. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1881782
  47. J. Tirole, A theory of collective reputations (with applications to the persistence of corruption and to firm quality), Rev. Econ. Stud. 63 (1996) 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2298112
  48. I. Onur, J. Bruwer, L. Lockshin, Reducing information asymmetry in the auctioning of non-perishable experience goods: The case of online wine auctions, J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 54 (2020) 102060. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102060
  49. P. Oleksy, M. Czupryna, M. Jakubczyk, On fine wine pricing across different trading venues, J. Wine Econ. 16 (2021) 189–209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2021.14
  50. S. Nakamoto, Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system, 2008. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf (accessed 27 Oct 2025).
  51. F. Glaser, Pervasive decentralisation of digital infrastructures: A framework for blockchain enabled system and use case analysis, Proc. 50th HICSS (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.186
  52. M. Risius, K. Spohrer, A blockchain research framework, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 59 (2017) 385–409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0506-0
  53. R. Spadoni, et al., Blockchain technology for wine traceability, J. Sci. Food Agric. 99 (2019) 4567–4575.
  54. K. Behnke, M. Janssen, Boundary conditions for traceability in food supply chains using blockchain technology, Int. J. Inf. Manag. 52 (2020) 101969. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.025
  55. A. Brochado, F. Oliveira-Brochado, O. Silva, Wine tourism: A review of the literature, Tour. Rev. 75 (2020) 57–79.
  56. J. Yang, A dataset on the sensory analyses of 116 New Zealand Pinot Noir wines, Data Brief 44 (2025) 108576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2025.111638
  57. B. Malisic, N. Misic, S. Krco, A. Martinovic, S. Tinaj, T. Popovic, Blockchain adoption in the wine supply chain: A systematic literature review, Sustainability 15 (2023) 14408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914408