Search results

Consumer likeability and willingness to pay (WTP) for two Italian sparkling wines, (Conegliano Valdobbiadene Prosecco DOCG and Prosecco DOC) are evaluated through a non-hypothetical Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) auction during a wine-tasting experiment. The purpose of this paper is to estimate individual WTP and relate it to likeability for both wines, with and without supplying additional information on their features.

Data were collected in May–June 2019 from a sample of 99 consumers in Northern Italy. A non-hypothetical BDM auction in a wine-tasting experiment was implemented.

The results show that the additional information plays a significant role in widening the WTP gap between the two geographical indications (GIs), while the blind tasting narrows this gap. The “superiority” of the Conegliano Valdobbiadene Prosecco DOCG is confirmed but relies more on its better reputation than its better taste.

The authors are aware of two main limitations in the study. The first is the territorial composition of the consumer sample. The second is the selection of the Prosecco bottles used in the experiment. The results are considered pioneering and need to be verified by additional experiments with different consumer and bottle samples.

Promotional suggestions for the Tutelary Consortia of the two GIs stem from the results. The Prosecco DOC should primarily stress its likeability, while the Conegliano Valdobbiadene Prosecco DOCG should primarily emphasise the reasons for its “superiority”.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, no previous study has related likeability and WTP for similar GI wines produced in contiguous areas. Moreover, the current research has applied a non-hypothetical BDM auction in a wine-tasting experiment.

This study aims to reveal the implications that trust, as a key driver of consumer behaviour, might have on consumer acceptance of front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) and policy effectiveness. By conducting three studies on 1956 European consumers with different levels of exposure to FOPLs, this study offers additional theoretical and experimental support through a deep investigation of the central role of trust in consumers’ decision-making towards healthier and more informed food choices.

Study 1 used structural equation modelling to assess whether trust is a relevant mediator of the relationship between attitude and behavioural intention (BI), thus upgrading the front-of-pack acceptance model (FOPAM); Study 2 tested the model by comparing two labels at the extremes of the current European scheme (NutrInform Battery [NiB], Nutri-Score [NS]); Study 3 assessed the effect in cases where the connection between trust and algorithms is made transparent and evaluated trust dimensions, focusing on the perception of an algorithm presence behind FOPLs information.

Study 1 strengthens the FOPAM model with the mediating role of trust in FOPLs, demonstrating a positive effect of attitude on trust and, in turn, on BI, and resulting in a higher model fit with all the significant relationships; Study 2 revealed that the relative performance of the different labels on the FOPAM can be explained by the trust dimension; Study 3, investigating the dynamics of trust in the FOPAM, revealed that the NS is less effective than the NiB on attitude, BI and trust.

The sample was limited to Italian, French and English respondents, and two labels at the extreme of the spectrum were examined. Furthermore, the research has relevance to the issue of trust. Other moderators used in previous studies on technology acceptance model, such as actual use versus perceptual use, user experience level or type of users and type of use might be investigated.

The investigation of trust, with the upgrade of FOPAM, enhances understanding of consumers’ decision-making processes when aided by food labels and makes a new contribution to the European Union “Inception Impact Assessment” in preparation for the finalization of the “From-Farm-to-Fork Strategy”, providing new insights into the role of trust by assessing the relative performance of FOPLs in consumers’ acceptance of food-related information. Furthermore, this study revealed that consumers’ perception of FOPLs worsens when they realize that they are the result of an algorithmic calculation. Finally, the new FOPAM represents a reliable theoretical model for future research on FOPL.

This study increases the knowledge about the performance of different FOPLs on several dimensions of food decision-making, positions the upgraded FOPAM as a valid alternative to existing theoretical models to assess the relative performance of labels, also extending the literature in the context of algorithm-based FOPL, and could be used as a valid support to policymakers and industry experts in their decision towards a unified label at European level.