The Importance of Region of Origin in Sparkling Wines: An International Analysis of Consumers’ Perception
[ad_1]
1. Introduction
For this aim, two emerging regional wines with a designation of origin, Abruzzo and Romagna, were compared with the designation Prosecco and with generic Italian sparkling wine through a conjoint comparative analysis in the three main markets for Italian sparkling wines (Italy, the USA, and the UK). The choice of the Abruzzo and Romagna designations was because these regions, although characterized by an important wine sector, are not traditionally oriented towards the production of sparkling wines.
In particular, the following research topics were addressed:
-
How each designation of origin (representing the production region) impact consumers’ perceptions in the three markets.
-
Whether the positive/negative perception of one designation produces (or not) a cumulative effect (i.e., consumers who positively perceive a PDO wine extend the positive perception to the others).
-
How the positive/negative perception of each designation is influenced by the consumers’ perceived knowledge of wine and involvement in wine consumption.
2. Literature Review
The PDO system represents a form of intellectual property right designed to safeguard the reputation and authenticity of regional and traditional foods. It is particularly important in the European Union, where specific rules—provided by the EU Regulation No 1151/2012, which establishes the framework for quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs—outline the criteria and procedures for obtaining PDO status.
Even if the literature confirms the role of the attribute “designation of origin” as a quality cue in consumers’ perception, it is worth exploring if and to what extent this attribute is able in itself to add value to a generic wine or, conversely, how important is the knowledge of the region of production and of its characteristics, also in relation to more affirmed brands. Furthermore, it is worth exploring if consumers’ knowledge and attitudes influence the perception of the designations. This study tries to overcome these issues through a comparative analysis, comparing consumer perceptions of different Italian regional sparkling wines in different markets and investigating the relations between consumers’ self-perceived knowledge and involvement in wine consumption and their appreciation of each designation of origin.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Structure of the Survey
The analysis was conducted in spring 2022 on a sample of 363 wine consumers living in medium-sized or big cities in three markets: Italy, the United Kingdom, and the USA. In the Italian market, which is characterized by strong regional preferences, we selected consumers living in the Northern and Central regions. However, we excluded the areas of production of the regional brands Romagna and Abruzzo to avoid distortive effects. In the UK, the areas of London and Central England were selected. In the USA, the urban areas of the East Coast were chosen. The choice was dictated both by marketing reasons and by the search for a greater homogeneity of the sample.
The interviews were conducted by administering an online questionnaire to a sample of respondents who simultaneously complied with the following characteristics (checked using screening questions): being of legal age for the purchase of wine and consuming wine at least monthly. A market research company selected the respondents and collected the answers.
The questionnaire was conducted in Italian for the Italian market and in English for the two others, with limited modifications for adapting to specific national differences (i.e., in the school system).
The survey covered the following aspects:
-
Socio-demographic aspects.
-
Respondents’ consumption habits.
-
Level of involvement in wine consumption and perceived knowledge of wines.
3.2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Sample
The largest group by age was the “over 60” age group in the USA (31.4%) and in the English markets (38.5%), while in Italy, it was represented by people aged 36–50 (35.8%).
The educational level of respondents shows a very different picture: in the Italian and English markets, undergraduates represent the highest percentage, with 61.7% and 50.8%, respectively, while in the USA market, the group with a bachelor’s degree is the largest (44.6%).
3.3. Conjoint Analysis Experimental Plan and Analyses
U = u (a1) + u (a2) + … + u (an)
where U = utility for a product concept, and u (aj) = utility for the level of an attribute aj (j = 1 to n).
Respondents were asked to evaluate, based on their willingness to purchase the products at a generic point of sale, a series of labels with simplified graphics containing the following information, which is compulsory in a sparkling wine label, representing the following attributes and levels:
-
Attribute product category. It consists of the following levels: Sparkling (without designation of origin), Prosecco DOC, Abruzzo spumante (the Italian word to indicate sparkling), DOP, and Romagna DOC spumante. In Italian legislation, it is possible to use the abbreviation DOC to indicate PDO wine (hereafter, the PDO term is used). One of these types of wines was presented in each profile.
-
Attribute color of wine. It consists of the following levels: White or Rosé.
-
Attribute sugar content. It consists of the following levels: Brut or Extra dry.
-
Origin: Produced in Italy.
-
Quantity of content: 75 cl ℮ (typical content of a bottle).
The origin (Produced in Italy) and content (75 cl ℮) were fixed factors reported in all profiles and were not accounted for in the conjoint analysis.
Below is the list of reduced plan profiles administered to respondents.
-
Profile 1: Sparkling, Rosé, Extra-dry, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 2: Prosecco, Rosé, Brut, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 3: Prosecco, White, Extra-dry, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 4: Sparkling, White, Brut, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 5: Abruzzo, White, Brut, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 6: Abruzzo, Rosé, Extra-dry, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 7: Romagna, White, Extra-dry, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
-
Profile 8: Romagna, Rosé, Brut, Produced in Italy, 75 cl ℮.
Utility estimates (U.E.) were calculated for each profile of respondent for a total of 349 profiles (the analysis was not performed due to the absence of valid cases for 5 profiles of respondents in the Italian market, 3 in the USA market, and 6 in the English market).
To analyze the impact of the region of origin, the estimated utility in the perception of the attribute “product” concerning each of the three PDO wines was calculated for each respondent. Therefore, for each wine, the sample was divided into two groups: the first group comprised respondents associated with positive utility—resulting from the conjoint analysis (P.U. = U.E. > 0)—towards the product category, such as the specific PDO wine; the second group comprised those with negative or null utility (N.U. = U.E. ≤ 0). The two groups were identified for each wine and were compared based on the socio-demographic characteristics, consumption habits, level of involvement in wine consumption, and perceived knowledge of the sample.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. General Output of Conjoint Analysis
In the Italian market, the product category accounts for 51.4% of the consumer choices, followed by color (35.2%) and sugar content (13.4%). Analyzing the U.E., among the different proposed products, only the Prosecco denomination shows a positive value (U.E. = 0.54). Generic sparkling wine, although showing a negative utility, is perceived better than Abruzzo and Romagna PDOs. Consumers’ favorite color is white over rosé (U.E. = 0.28), and the wine characteristic of “brut” is more popular than “extra dry” (U.E. = 0.11).
In the US market, product category accounts for 57.7% of the consumer choices, with higher values than in the Italian market, followed by sugar content (41.9%), while color plays a very marginal role in consumers’ choices (0.5%). In addition, in this market, white is preferred to rosé and brut to extra dry. Meanwhile, Prosecco has positive utility, while Abruzzo and Romagna PDOs show negative utilities.
In the English market, the type of product assumes lower importance than in the previously investigated markets (47.1%), followed by sugar content (35.7%) and color (17.1%). A positive utility is associated with the Prosecco denomination and, at a lower level, with the generic sparkling wine. In addition, within this sample, the Abruzzo and Romagna PDOs show negative utilities. Brut wine is preferred to extra dry (U.E. = 0.11), and there are no significant differences between white and rosé.
The groups with P.U. associated with a single PDO expressed major preferences for Prosecco (30.4%), followed by Abruzzo (12.6%) and Romagna (8.0%). Regarding the P.U. associated with the respondents to two PDO wines, Prosecco and Romagna PDO represent the couple with the highest percentage (17.2%).
4.2. Influence of Socio-Demographic Factors and Frequency of Consumption on Utility Values
For Prosecco wine, positive utilities are located mainly in the Italian market (36.1%), for Abruzzo wine in the US market (35.4%), and for Romagna wine in the English market (39.0%).
Considering gender, there is a higher percentage of females with a positive perception of the Abruzzo and Romagna wines, while for Prosecco, there are no gender differences. With regard to age, in the case of the Abruzzo and Prosecco wines, there are no substantial differences, while in the case of Romagna wine, consumers with a negative perception of the brand have an average age of over 50 years (51.8), while the age of those who have a positive perception are aged around 47 years. A university education (master’s degree) seems to positively affect the perception of the PDO brands for all wines, while a bachelor’s degree positively affects the perception of the Abruzzo and Romagna wines.
Prosecco wine is preferred by people with a “good” and “normal” family economic status. For the Abruzzo wine, there is a higher percentage of P.U. among people with a “modest” financial situation, while the Romagna wine is preferred by people with a “good” economic status.
The Pearson Chi-square test was applied to socio-demographic variables comparing the P.U. and N.U. groups. Statistically significant differences were found only for a small number of variables, such as education for the Romagna PDO wine (absence of respondents that have a doctoral title in the P.U. group) and financial condition in the Abruzzo PDO output (higher values of people with a modest economic status in the P.U. group). The t-test applied to age reveals statistically significant differences in the Romagna PDO output with older respondents in the N.U. group.
4.3. Influence of Attitudes towards the Wine Sector on Utility Values
For Prosecco and Abruzzo, the differences between the P.U. and N.U. groups are very low and not statistically significant for all the items related to the perceived knowledge (I_1: very good knowledge of wine; I_2: ability to evaluate its quality; I_3: its value for money; I_4: capacity to distinguish the different types of sparkling wines; I_5: capacity to distinguish the different grape varieties) and for the items indicating involvement in wine consumption (I_7 “I have a passion for wine”, I_8 “I inform myself carefully before buying/consuming wine”, I_9 “I read the wine labels carefully”, and I_10 “I am interested about the wine origin”).
Concerning the Prosecco PDO, both groups express high interest in wine origin (I_10: μ P.U. group = 3.5; μ N.U. group = 3.4), careful reading of wine labels (I_9: μ P.U. group = 3.3; μ N.U. group = 3.3), a passion for wine (I_7: μ P.U. group = 3.4; μ N.U. group = 3.4) and enjoyment of drinking wine (I_6: μ P.U. group = 4.0; μ N.U. group = 4.0). The knowledge of grape varieties presents lower values (I_5: μ P.U. group = 2.7; μ N.U. group = 2.6), while average values are expressed for the ability to evaluate the wine value for money and wine quality (I_2 and I_3: μ P.U. group = 3.0; μ N.U. group = 3.0).
Similar findings are revealed from the analysis of Abruzzo PDO consumer characteristics, with higher values for the items indicating involvement in wine consumption than for items indicating knowledge.
Otherwise, the perception of Romagna PDO reveals statistically significant differences between the P.U. and N.U. groups for some statements, mainly related to wine knowledge. The P.U. group indicates a higher knowledge of grape varieties and characteristics (μ P.U. group = 2.9; μ N.U. group = 2.5) and a greater capacity to evaluate wine value for money (μ P.U. group = 3.2; μ N.U. group = 2.9). Additionally, the P.U. group slightly outperforms in the ability to evaluate wine quality (μ P.U. group = 3.1; μ N.U. group = 2.9) and exhibits a significantly higher knowledge of wine (μ P.U. group = 3.2; μ N.U. group = 2.9). In addition, the P.U. group exhibits a substantially higher inclination for gathering information before purchase/consumption (μ P.U. group = 3.3; μ N.U. group = 3.0).
5. Conclusions
This study explored the consumer perceptions of emerging regional wines with a designation of origin. Wines from two regions traditionally not oriented towards sparkling wine production, Abruzzo and Romagna PDOs, were compared with a well-established product (Prosecco PDO) and with a generic Italian sparkling wine. The consumer perception of the region of origin of these sparkling wines was analyzed in three markets, Italy, the USA, and the United Kingdom, considering the product category and two other intrinsic attributes (color and sugar content). The methodology used in this study tried to simulate more realistic market conditions using conjoint analysis with multiple options for wine attributes. The designation of origin of the product was introduced as an attribute of the product profile, maintaining full compliance with regulatory provisions, thereby maintaining the greatest possible fidelity to real market conditions. This methodological issue can be extended to other PDO wines and other intrinsic/extrinsic attributes.
The conjoint analysis showed that the product category is the factor that, in the set of investigated variables, mostly influences consumer perceptions in all three markets, with higher values in the US, followed by color in the Italian market and the sugar content in the other two markets.
The comparison of consumer perceptions of designations with different market positioning allowed us to explore further the role of the product category in relation to sparkling wines. Even if the importance of the region of origin is coherent with the consolidated literature, this study tries to offer new insight into our comprehension of the role of emerging designations, moving beyond well-established brands to explore consumer perceptions of novel designations. Abruzzo and Romagna are emerging brands for sparkling wine, while Prosecco is a widely recognized Italian sparkling wine in Italy and the international market. This aspect led to the consideration of whether its notoriety could also extend to other emerging products.
This study also offers new insight into the impact of novel wine designations of origin compared with generic sparkling wine without geographical information. The emerging designation of origin labels tested are not at the moment perceived as an additional value compared to the label of a generic sparkling wine without designation. This element is evidenced by the conjoint analysis results, in which the emerging designations of origin do not score better than the generic Italian sparkling wine.
The wine consumer’s perception is dynamic and will depend on the ability of PDO brands to grow in market reputation and notoriety. This means that proper marketing strategies are needed for these emerging designations, even considering that PDO wines normally have a higher price than wine without designation of origin.
These findings underscore the need to employ effective strategies for enhancing the visibility of emerging PDO wines, ensuring a clear distinction from wines without a designation of origin. This nuanced understanding of consumer behavior contributes to the broader discourse on the complexities of marketing and branding in the wine industry.
Moreover, through the partition into groups of respondents with positive and negative utilities, it emerges that there is no cumulative effect on the perception of PDO Italian wines: most of the P.U. values of the respondents are associated with only one PDO wine, mainly Prosecco. This means that consumer perception is associated with the reputation of each PDO wine, and even if statistics show a dragging effect of Prosecco on Italian sparkling wines in general, this effect is not applicable directly to the reputation of the other Italian regional sparkling wines. The recognition of a territory as a designation does not in itself imply an upgrade in consumer preferences. PDO wines have the potential to realize sustainable business models that strengthen territorial development through local production cycles and promote consumer awareness of sustainable consumption. However, the territorial systems must make an effort with appropriate communication actions in order to improve brand knowledge and consumer awareness.
The culture of the different countries, even if it is considered in the literature as an important factor that influences food choice, in this case, did not seem to differentiate the analyzed markets in a strong way in relation to the investigated variables. Consumer characteristics and perceptions of the different wines seem quite similar across the three investigated countries, suggesting the presence of an international wine market for sparkling wines. Furthermore, this study examines the interplay between the consumers’ perceived knowledge of wine, their involvement in wine consumption, and the perception of each designation of origin. The analysis indicates some distinctions in the perceived knowledge and involvement in wine consumption between the P.U. and N.U. groups, but this aspect cannot be generalized and depends on the specific designation.
In summary, this research provides insights into consumer perceptions of PDO sparkling wines but also contributes to broader discussions on wine market dynamics and consumer behavior.
The major limitations of this study are the small dimensions of the sample and the fact that other variables that can affect product choices are not considered. It represents a preliminary analysis, and the results should be confirmed using a large number of respondents in these three markets. In addition to the variables used, other attributes could be investigated in future research, but always maintaining compliance with the regulatory aspects of the PDOs labeling in the wine sector. These variables could be, for example, the presence of private brands, the alcohol content, and the labeling of specific ingredients or allergens.
Other promising research paths could be the comparison between the consumers’ perception of the wine products and their knowledge of the territories of production in terms of reputation about wine quality, environmental aspects, local history and culture and/or other issues connected with food or territory in general.
[ad_2]