DANISH AND GERMAN ORGANIC WINE BUYERS’ PURCHASING MOTIVES
An Exploratory Study using Means-End Chain Analysis
Thesis written under the supervision of: Lucia A. Reisch (Assistant supervisor Wencke Gwozdz)
Sarah Johanna Margaretha Netter M.Sc. in Business, Language and Culture Jane Deters M.Sc. in Economics and Business Administration Copenhagen Business School 21. March 2011 The thesis includes 272.895 taps
Acknowledgments
Table of Content Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................IV Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................V 1. Background & Goal of the Study ................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Research question ............................................................................................................... 2 1.2. Scope & delimitations........................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Relevance ............................................................................................................................ 4 1.4. Structure of the study ........................................................................................................... 5 2. Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 7 2.1. Choice of approaches .......................................................................................................... 7 2.1.1. Choice of exploratory research...................................................................................... 7 2.1.2. Choice of overall philosophical stance........................................................................... 7 2.1.3. Choice of research approach......................................................................................... 7 2.1.4. Choice of mixed methods approach .............................................................................. 8 2.1.5. Choice of theory ............................................................................................................ 9 2.2. Scientific considerations....................................................................................................... 9 2.2.1. Primary data collection .................................................................................................. 9 2.2.2. Secondary data collection............................................................................................ 10 2.3. Critical reflections on research design................................................................................ 11 2.3.1. Validity......................................................................................................................... 11 2.3.2. Reliability..................................................................................................................... 12 2.3.3. Biases ......................................................................................................................... 12 3. Introduction to Key Issues......................................................................................................... 14 3.1. The product organic wine ................................................................................................... 14 3.2. The market......................................................................................................................... 14 3.3. The consumer .................................................................................................................... 17 3.4. Regulation.......................................................................................................................... 20 4. Literature Review ...................................................................................................................... 24 4.1. Introduction to comparative cross-cultural consumer research ........................................... 24 4.1.1. Forms of comparative cross-cultural consumer research............................................. 25 4.1.2. Lifestyle research ........................................................................................................ 27 4.1.3. Values in cross-cultural research................................................................................. 28 4.2. Introduction to relevant concepts of consumer behaviour & decision making ..................... 31 4.2.1. Factors influencing consumer behaviour ..................................................................... 31 4.2.2. Motives & motivation ................................................................................................... 33 4.2.3. Involvement in motivation research ............................................................................. 35 4.2.4. Perception ................................................................................................................... 36 4.3. State of the art: Organic wine consumtion .......................................................................... 38 4.3.1. Perception of organic wine & purchasing motives........................................................ 39 4.3.2. The assessment of quality........................................................................................... 41 4.3.3. The role of occasion, knowledge & risk........................................................................ 45 4.4. Theoretical framework........................................................................................................ 48 5. Hypotheses............................................................................................................................... 50 6. The Empirical Study.................................................................................................................. 52 6.1. Theory applied: Means-end chain theory............................................................................ 52 6.1.1. Introduction to the means-end chain approach ............................................................ 52 I
Acknowledgments 6.1.2. Introduction to different laddering techniques .............................................................. 55 6.2. Data collection.................................................................................................................... 57 6.2.1. Different types of primary data collection ..................................................................... 57 6.2.2. Development & design of the questionnaire ................................................................ 59 6.2.3. Operationalisation of hypotheses................................................................................. 60 6.2.4. Development & design of the laddering approaches.................................................... 62 6.3. Data processing ................................................................................................................. 65 6.3.1. Coding of data ............................................................................................................. 66 6.3.2. SPSS .......................................................................................................................... 67 6.3.3. MECanalyst ................................................................................................................. 68 7. Comparative Analysis ............................................................................................................... 69 7.1. Presentation of samples..................................................................................................... 69 7.1.1 Socio-demographic profile of Danish & German samples............................................. 69 7.1.2. Involvement in organic wine ........................................................................................ 71 7.1.3. Product perception & organic wine image.................................................................... 72 7.2. Hypotheses testing & analysis of further factors ................................................................. 72 7.2.1. Hypothesis 1 ............................................................................................................... 74 7.2.2. Hypothesis 2 ............................................................................................................... 75 7.2.3. Hypotheses 3a&b ........................................................................................................ 77 7.2.4. Hypotheses 4a&b ........................................................................................................ 81 7.2.5. Hypotheses 5a&b ........................................................................................................ 83 7.3. Analysis of HVMs & dominant perceptual orientations........................................................ 85 7.3.1. Danish HVMs & dominant perceptual orientations....................................................... 85 7.3.2. German HVMs & dominant perceptual orientations ..................................................... 90 7.4. Findings ............................................................................................................................. 95 7.4.1. Findings hypotheses tests ........................................................................................... 95 7.4.2. Findings comparative analysis HVMs .......................................................................... 97 8. Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 98 8.1. Similarities & differences in values ..................................................................................... 98 8.1.1. Country-specific values ............................................................................................... 98 8.1.2. Common values & different meanings ....................................................................... 100 8.1.3. Value synthesis ......................................................................................................... 102 8.2. Similarities & differences in motives ................................................................................. 105 8.2.1. Personal benefits....................................................................................................... 105 8.2.2. The role of involvement, knowledge & personal experience ...................................... 107 8.2.3. Perception of risk....................................................................................................... 111 8.2.4. The role of packaging ................................................................................................ 116 8.3. Implications for the theoretical framework ........................................................................ 118 9. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 120 10. Implications........................................................................................................................... 122 11. Limitations............................................................................................................................. 123 12. Further Research .................................................................................................................. 124 13. Reference List....................................................................................................................... 126
II
Acknowledgments
Figures Figure 1 – Empirical data collection process ................................................................................. 10 Figure 2 - Factors influencing consumer behaviour....................................................................... 32 Figure 3 - Organic wine consumer behaviour model ..................................................................... 49 Figure 4 - Consumers’ knowledge structure .................................................................................. 54 Figure 5 - Overview study design.................................................................................................. 57
Tables Table 1 - Overview hypotheses tests, underlying factors & further factors .................................... 73 Table 2 - Overview results hypotheses tests ................................................................................. 96
III
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgements The study at hand represents the concluding work of our master degrees within cand.merc. (International Management & Marketing) and cand.merc.int. (Intercultural Management) at Copenhagen Business School (CBS). We would like to thank the interviewed experts for their willingness to share their knowledge, providing us with invaluable insights. Furthermore, we would like to thank the respondents of the personal interviews, who were willing to spare their time and to answer at great length questions about their wine consumption habits. Our gratitude also goes Moritz Ludwig, Urte Wesebaum, and the English faculty of the Graf-AdolfGymnasium Tecklenburg, whose comments, suggestions, and linguistic feedback were very important for the final outcome of this study. Furthermore, we would like to thank our employers for their patience, support, and permission to use their facilities. A particular appreciation goes to our family and friends. Thank you. Finally, we would like to thank Professor Lucia A. Reisch and Assistant Professor Wencke Gwozdz for their irreplaceable supervision and support throughout the entire process of writing our master thesis.
Jane Deters & Sarah Netter Copenhagen, March 21st 2011
IV
Acknowledgments
Executive Summary The aim of this study is to explore the values and motives which underlie organic wine buying behaviour in the Danish and German context. Organic wine consumer behaviour has in comparison with other organic food products not received as much attention among researchers yet. Thus, the insights gained in this study into the buying behaviour of organic wine consumers in the two leading organic food markets Denmark and Germany provide the organic wine market, currently being at the borderline between niche and mainstream, with valuable information. This might contribute to improving the marketing efforts of organic winemakers as well as their umbrella organizations and strengthen their position. This exploratory study, which investigates the decision making processes of occasional organic wine buyers, adopts a mixed method approach, combining expert interviews, consumer interviews and an online consumer survey. The means-end chain approach was chosen for investigating the values and motives underlying the actual purchasing behaviour. The findings of this study reveal that pleasure is most central to the decision making of consumers from both countries. While Danish consumers are strongly influenced by a notion of solidarity and social recognition, German consumers display a pronounced concern for environmentalism and health. Despite heterogeneous values underlying the decision making, a value synthesis has been identified. Consumers from both countries, regardless of age or gender, appear to be driven by a combination of socially and individually oriented values. Pertaining to this, values of social nature appear for the most part to merely constitute a means to an end, namely contributing to individually oriented values. On the one hand, socially oriented values create a good conscience, which is found to increase consumption pleasure. On the other hand, these values are often used in hindsight to justify, conceal or counterbalance the hedonic elements of consumption. Furthermore, involvement, knowledge, personal experience, and risk are found to be key factors informing the decision making process, especially with regard to the cues used for evaluating product alternatives. In reference to this, packaging is decisive in its function to attract attention and reduce the existing information asymmetry between producers and consumers. Considering the hedonic elements of wine consumption, the organic characteristic is subordinate to taste and quality. While organic wines need to fulfil the same requirements as conventional wines, the organic feature has the potential of offering additional benefit, which might tip the scale in favour of organic wines when making a decision.
V
Introduction
1. Background & Goal of the Study In vino veritas – while there might be truth in wine, honesty might not always be an essential part of production. In today’s Information Era consumers are finding themselves confronted with numerous new food scares such as the glycol wine scandal that shook Austria, Italy and Germany in 1985 (Jenster & Jenster, 1993). Despite the fact that the amounts of glycol added to the wine were found not to be high enough to unfold their toxic effect, the media coverage during the mid80s nonetheless led to the collapse of the entire Austrian wine industry. It took the industry two decades and the implementation of one of the world’s most strict wine laws to overcome the crisis and re-establish the image of Austrian quality wine (Skinner, 1993). Looking at the example of the Austrian wine scandal, the power of information and knowledge in general as well as the impact of the media in particular becomes apparent. This is particularly valid for issues and threats that are beyond direct cognition, whether by virtue of a lack of knowledge or spatial distance (Rhomberg, 2009). While national states often appear to be helpless in the face of handling the grievances and problems of our globalized world (Beck, 1986), a steadily growing section of the population is starting to take matters into their own hands by deciding what products are finding the way into their shopping trolleys. Whether these actions can be explained by a general disenchantment with politics or rather by more individualistic self-actualizations, the result remains the same: Consumers are displaying an increased concern for ethical, environmental and health related issues by means of their day to day shopping practices (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008; Wier & Calverley, 2002). As a consequence, the European organic-food market has undergone a tremendous growth and constitutes nowadays “the biggest market for organic food worldwide” (Janssen, Heid, & Hamm, 2009, p.205). Nonetheless, different countries within the European Union display different degrees of development: In general but particularly as far as specific product categories are concerned (Baker, Thompson, Engelken, & Huntley, 2004). Especially the market for organically produced wine has displayed a significant development over the last years, although no common legislative framework for production and processing standards exists on the European level (Willer & Minou, 2006). Despite this economic development and growing scientific and commercial interests to understand the buying behaviour of organic consumers and gain insight into the market’s dynamics and potentials, only very few data about the market for organic wine, potential future development as well as the consumer exist at the current point in time (ORWINE D 5.8., 2009).
1
Introduction In this study, the authors aim to explore the values and motives which trigger organic wine buying behaviour. This exploratory study, which investigates the decision making processes in the Danish and German context, will be based on expert interviews, consumer interviews and an online consumer survey, and combines qualitative and quantitative research methods. A theoretical framework, which establishes the link between consumer decision making processes and the product organic wine will be proposed and empirically tested. This study aims at providing insight into the psychological factors that influence the decision to purchase organic wine, which can be utilized by organic wine producers and traders for their communication and marketing efforts. Within consumer behaviour research, the psychological factors influencing the choice to buy organic beverages have only marginally been researched (e.g. Fotopoulos, Krystallis, & Ness, 2003). Consequently, this cross-cultural study does not only contribute to the existing body of knowledge within organic food consumption research in particular but also cross-cultural consumer research in general.
1.1. Research question Several studies that focus on the organic consumer market suggest that health and environment related issues have become increasingly important and popular (e.g. Baker et al., 2004; LataczLohmann & Foster, 1997; Siderer, Maquet, & Anklam, 2005; Wier & Calverley, 2002; Zanoli & Naspetti, 2002). This can partly be explained by a general lifestyle trend which focuses on personal health but also by various scandals regarding quality and food security. Besides rather hedonistic motives of organic food consumption and an increasing interest in personal health and nutrition matters, various studies suggest that consumers are equally driven by more altruistic motives, focusing on the environment, working conditions as well as animal welfare (e.g. Wier & Calverley, 2002). This is clearly the case in terms of organic food such as vegetables, dairy products, and meat. As various studies have proven, consumers associate organic labelled food with better taste and harmless consumption that generates additional value to their consumption patterns (e.g. Baker et al., 2004). Organic labelled wine, on the other hand, has not received as much attention among researchers, although industry experts evaluate organic wine as having great market potential (Schmid et al., 2009). There is no or rather insufficient information and research on the buying behaviour of organic wine consumers (Häseli, Schmid, Jonis, & Micheloni, 2009). Psychological and cognitive factors like attitudes, emotions and motives of the consumer as well as the state of knowledge about and the expectations of the product are more or less unknown (Fotopoulos et al., 2003).
2
Introduction The academic field of wine marketing offers only a small number of studies on organic wine consumption. Likewise, there appears to be a lack of cross-cultural research. While few crosscultural studies that focus on motives and values underlying organic food consumption are available, the product itself has been object of cross-cultural research endeavours to an even lesser extent. The lack of information about consumers prevents all actors within the organic wine industry from establishing selective marketing and communication measures which actually form the basic prerequisites for the success of a product. Consequently, further research is demanded. Based on the previously outlined considerations this study will investigate the following research question:
What are the motives and values underlying organic wine purchase in Denmark and Germany?
The question is based on the hypothesis that values and motives affect the buying decision process. The main aim of this pilot study is to determine the dominant values and motives guiding consumer behaviour in both countries by means of a consumer survey. While numerous studies (e.g. Chryssohoidis & Krystallis, 2005; S. C. Grunert & Juhl, 1995b; Rokeach, 1973; Vinson, Scott, & Lamont, 1977) have shown that the purchase decision making processes are largely influenced by personal and cultural values, when asked, only the minority of consumers is able as well as willing to explicitly determine the values and motives underlying their behaviour. Consequently, a laddering approach will be adopted, which has proven useful for identifying values and motives (Zanoli & Naspetti, 2002).
1.2. Scope & delimitations Consumer research is a large academic field characterized by various approaches and perspectives. Generally, it can be stated that consumer behaviour is affected by psychological as well as cultural, social and personal factors (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004) . As the purpose of this study is to identify motives and values which underlie organic wine purchase, the primary focus is on exploring psychological factors. However, as people do not live within a social vacuum, the impact and meaning of environmental factors, such as sociodemographics and source of information, cannot completely be disregarded and will therefore be considered wherever applicable. The focus of this study is private consumption. Consumption within gastronomy or the decision making processes and purchases of companies and institutions will not be included. While 3
Introduction the focus is on organic wine, comparisons to conventional wine will only be made when applicable and necessary. Other beverages, alcoholic and non-alcoholic, will not be investigated. Albeit the potential benefits of including non-organic wine consumers as a discriminatory group, studying their purchasing behaviour goes beyond the scope of this study and is therefore neglected. As the focus of this study is on actual consumer behaviour, the authors refrain from studying consumers who have never heard of or consumed organic wine as this would only provide insights into proclaimed purchase intentions instead of actual behaviour. The authors hypothesise that only very few stringent organic consumers exist. Thus, it was decided to focus on the occasional organic wine buyer. In line with Fotopoulos et al. (Fotopoulos et al., 2003) the authors define occasional organic wine buyers as those who have purchased at least one bottle of organic wine one month prior to the survey period. While the advantage of this adopted definition lies in its practical implication, the downside might be that frequent organic wine buyers, who possess valuable insights, might be excluded from the study, if they have not purchased wine within the above mentioned time frame. While the level of analysis will be on the micro level in both countries, the impacts of the macro level, especially in terms of the legislative framework on organic agriculture and labelling of organically produced products provided by the European Union, will be taken into consideration where necessary. The implications for the meso level, the organic winemakers and their umbrella organizations, will be addressed in one of the corresponding concluding chapters, outlining the implications for the industry. The terms and definitions sustainable winemaking, organic winemaking and biodynamic winemaking are often used interchangeably, thus disregarding the fundamental differences of the three approaches. Within the scope of this study, the authors will not pay attention to sustainable or biodynamic winemaking practices, thus exclusively focussing on organic winemaking.
1.3. Relevance This study and its focus on the motives and values of organic wine consumers in Denmark and Germany are of special relevance for organic wine producers and traders. As organic viticulture has grown considerably over the past two decades, retailers as well as top wine producers are increasingly becoming interested in non-conventionally produced wines. This increased attention on the part of business has great market potential and might soon lead organic wine out of its long-time niche existence (ORWINE D 2.4., 2006).
4
Introduction While both Denmark and Germany are assigned leading roles in the organic food market, both countries have displayed a very different development (Wier & Calverley, 2002) not only concerning market share and per capita consumption but also with respect to the retailing channels used (European Commission. DG AGRI., 2005). However, what still constraints the positive development of organic viticulture is the lack of product knowledge on the part of consumers and retailers who are not specialised in organic products. By the same token, this applies as well to the persistent negative image of organic wine as well as the lack of a precise definition of organic wine (ORWINE D 5.8., 2009). In order to strengthen the position of organic wine producers and improve their market performance, efficient communication and marketing strategies that reach and inform the potential consumers and retailers need to be developed. Such communication and marketing efforts are to date relatively rare. For the most part, this can be explained by the current lack of knowledge producers have about the consumers (Schmid et al., 2009). As organic wine consumers have, to the authors’ knowledge, not been investigated in a crosscultural study before, insights into the buying behaviour of consumers in these two leading markets will provide the organic wine market, currently being at the borderline between niche and mainstream (Wechsler, 2010), with valuable information, which might contribute to improving the marketing efforts of organic winemakers as well as their umbrella organizations and strengthen their position.
1.4. Structure of the study In this section, the structure and organization of the study will be presented. The study is structured into 12 main chapters. The methodology, constituting the second part, will address the choice of approaches, e.g. research philosophy, scientific considerations, i.e. primary and secondary data collection, as well as present critical reflections on the research design. The following third part will provide an introduction to key issues of this study, i.e. on the product, the market, the consumer, and regulation. This part is followed by the fourth chapter, the literature review. This section is concerned with illustrating the state of the art in organic wine consumption research and introducing relevant concepts of consumer behaviour. Furthermore, theoretical concepts and models dealing with cross-cultural consumer research will be presented. These theoretical considerations will lead to the choice of the appropriate theoretical framework for investigating the study’s object of research. On basis of the acquired knowledge about the product organic wine, the current market situation as well as the status quo within the academic realm of consumer research, the hypotheses will be derived and formulated in section five. 5
Introduction The following part, the empirical study, consists of three elements. The first part is concerned with the theory applied, introducing the means-end chain theory that forms the basis of the data collection process and analysis. The second part illustrates the data collection with regard to sampling and questionnaire design for the expert interviews, personal consumer interviews and online survey. The chapter concludes with a section on data processing. The subsequent comparative analysis constitutes the seventh chapter. In the first part of this chapter, the samples will be presented in terms of socio-demographics, involvement, and product perception. The formulated hypotheses will be tested and further factors will be analysed in the following section. Part three of this chapter investigates the dominant perceptual orientations. Thereafter, the findings of the study will be briefly presented and reflected upon in the subsequent discussion chapter. The conclusion chapter outlines and summarizes the core findings of this study. In the following chapter, implications for selective marketing measures will be given. The subsequent limitations section presents identified weaknesses of the study, reflect upon the research method used as well as provides alternative means on how to approach researching organic wine purchasing behaviour differently. Lastly, suggestions for future research will be presented.
6
Methodology
2. Methodology This chapter presents the research methodology applied in this study. The chapter consists of three parts: (1) choice of approaches, (2) scientific considerations, and (3) critical reflections.
2.1. Choice of approaches In the following, the different approaches chosen for this study will be introduced and justified. The following approaches will be addressed within this section: choice of (1) exploratory research, (2) philosophical stance, (3) research approach, (4) mixed method, and (5) theory.
2.1.1. Choice of exploratory research An exploratory approach was chosen as the phenomenon of organic wine consumption has to the authors knowledge not been studied in the Danish and German context yet. Exploratory studies are especially adequate when the area of research is relatively new, little is known about the research problem or important variables have not been identified or clearly defined yet (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2005). This pilot research intends to provide first insights into the phenomenon and tests the feasibility of the developed research design in order to lay the grounds for potential further largescale investigations of organic wine consumer behaviour in both countries.
2.1.2. Choice of overall philosophical stance Research paradigms can be defined as worldviews or basic sets of beliefs, which guide research decisions and are reflections of these decisions (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The paradigm underlying this study follows the pragmatic paradigm, which evolved as a “Third Way” out of the paradigm wars debate (Armitage, 2007, p.3); a debate about the relationship between methodology and paradigm (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). While traditionally, the philosophical stance of the researcher influences or dictates the choice of design approach, the pragmatic paradigm originates from the conviction that the choice of approach is directly linked to the nature and the purpose of the research question (Creswell, 2009). Research should thus be able to address real life problems by means of methods that are appropriate and work and should not be limited to idealistic debates and mono-methodological positions (Armitage, 2007; Creswell, 2009). Hence, the research problem is most important, instead of the method. Therefore, the authors decided to adopt pluralistic approaches, which can, according to Creswell (2009), contribute to understanding the problem in a holistic manner.
2.1.3. Choice of research approach The research of this study has been carried out on the basis of the review of relevant literature and theories as well as an empirical investigation. In line with the pragmatic paradigm, the research 7
Methodology strategy combines inductive as well as deductive reasoning. As data can neither be viewed detached from theory, nor are theories without empirical foundations possible (Sæther, 1998), the research strategy used combines inductive as well as deductive reasoning in order to overcome the potential weaknesses of each individual approach. It is important to bear in mind that it is not the aim of this study to develop new theories but to provide insights and deepen knowledge. Thus, the study moves away from the dualistic perspective on either adopting inductive or deductive research strategies (Sæther, 1998). Instead, there is an attempt to acknowledge that most research is characterized by a dynamic interaction between induction and deduction, moving back and forth between empirical evidence and theory (Blumberg et al., 2005; Ragin, 1994). While the inductive elements of this study are concerned with discovering patterns or trends of organic wine consumer behaviour based on the empirical data, testing of theories and hypotheses falls into the realm of deduction (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). This constant process is illustrated in figure 1 in section 2.2.
2.1.4. Choice of mixed methods approach The research approach applied in this study is a mixed method design, combining qualitative as well as quantitative research methods and techniques within the research process, which is in line with the pragmatic paradigm (Creswell, 2009). As the aim of this study is to provide exploratory insights into the researched phenomenon, the overall research objective is of qualitative nature. Data was collected in a simultaneous and sequential manner, using qualitative and quantitative methods. The combination of the two approaches is assessed to be well suited for this multidisciplinary study, embracing the complexity of consumer decision making and thus allows researching the phenomenon of organic wine consumption in a holistic manner (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). The rationales for adopting a mixed methods approach are thus manifold. While the triangulation allows corroborating the findings from both approaches, it also enables complementarity, in the sense that results from one method can be further clarified by those achieved through the other approach. According to Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004, p.18), a combination of different approaches is ideally “likely to result in complementary strength and nonoverlapping weaknesses”, thus produce superior results than can be yielded by means of monomethod studies (Armitage, 2007; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). In addition to that, the adoption of both qualitative and quantitative methods contributes to expanding the range and breadth of the research. As Armitage (2007, p.4) highlights, the advantages of mixed method approaches are based on their ability to “provide stronger inferences
8
Methodology through depth and breadth in answer to complex social phenomenon” and to “provide the opportunity through divergent findings for an expression of differing viewpoints”.
2.1.5. Choice of theory A multiplicity of approaches for studying consumer motivation and decision making exists. One of the most prominent approaches is the theory of reasoned action respectively the theory of planned behaviour, developed by Ajzen and Fishbein (1980). The theory is based on the assumption that consumers “[...] are usually quite rational and make systematic use of the information available to them” as well as “[...] consider the implication of the actions before they decide to engage or not engage in a given behaviour” (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980, p.5). Considering the multidimensionality and complexity of human decision making, the authors view consumers as fragmented individuals; individuals, who need to negotiate and balance their different roles and identities as well as the expectations and behavioural patterns attached to them. Consequently, consumers are limited in their rationality. Different roles include different priorities of desired end states of being, resulting in conflicting ideals, leading to emotionally laden, and often contradictory, non stringent behaviours and decisions. Within cognitive psychology, approaches have been developed that allow studying the rational, irrational and emotional motives underlying behaviour (Solomon, Bamossy, & Askegaard, 2001). In this study, the means-end chain approach and the associated laddering technique for conducting interviews has been adopted and will be presented in-depth in chapter 6.1.
2.2. Scientific considerations In the following, the primary and secondary data collection processes will be briefly introduced. A detailed presentation of the primary data collection can be found in chapter 6.2. of this study.
2.2.1. Primary data collection The primary data for this study was collected by means of interviews with experts, which were conducted face-to-face and via telephone, personal consumer interviews and an online consumer survey. Non-probability sampling was used for all three forms of data collection. While a purposive sampling was adopted for the expert interviews, potential respondents for the personal consumer interviews were recruited by means of a convenience sample. Snowball sampling was used for the online consumer survey. While non-probability samplings are often criticized for being likely to yield unrepresentative results (Pole & Lampard, 2002), these types of sampling are often used in pilot studies, which do not aim at producing generalisable results but providing first insights into an understudied research 9
Methodology phenomenon. Non-probability samplings assist the development of research instruments, which can then be used in further large-scale studies (Pole & Lampard, 2002).
2.2.2. Secondary data collection Secondary data has been collected prior and sequential to the collection of primary data and consists of qualitative and quantitative data. Quantitative data is based on statistical material regarding the organic food market in general and, when available, on the organic wine market. The qualitative data used in this study was collected by means of an extensive literature review and an internet research, serving as a source and recurrent reference point for the empirical data collection. Secondary data was used for establishing the theoretical basis of this study, especially with regard to developing the empirical investigation and serving as a starting point for the analysis. Primary and secondary data was used mutually in the analysis and discussion chapters, in order to corroborate the findings. The empirical data collection process is illustrated in the figure below. Figure 1 – Empirical data collection process
Source: Compiled by the authors
10
Methodology
2.3. Critical reflections on research design While mixing methods can in principle lead to overcoming the weaknesses of the individual approaches, it also involves the risk that threats to validity and reliability are multiplied (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Many different approaches to reliability and validity exist, which largely depend on the research methods adopted. Validity can be defined “as the degree to which the research has successfully measured the social phenomena upon which it has been focussed”, whilst reliability refers “to the extent to which repetition of the research will yield the same results” (Pole & Lampard, 2002, p.207), thus the consistency of the results (Diekmann, 2004). As knowledge is “both constructed and based on the reality of the world” (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004, p.18), the authors endorse fallibalism, i.e. research conclusions are hardly ever perfect or absolute. Findings should thus be viewed as provisional truths. In the following, the chosen research design will be critically reflected. This section consists of three parts: (1) validity, (2) reliability, and (3) potential biases.
2.3.1. Validity In the following, the threats to the internal and external validity of this study will be addressed.
Internal validity The rigor of this study was achieved by carefully designing and conducting the research. The methods used, as well as the theoretical concept and hypotheses developed were based on an extensive literature review and expert interviews. The trustworthiness and credibility of the study were accomplished by the use of multiple sources of evidence, which were triangulated and analysed. This was further enhanced by two researchers conducting the study. Alternative possible explanations for the results were, where possible, ruled out. It needs to be considered, however, that the aim of this study is to discover relations and provide tentative explanations concerning the factors influencing the phenomenon and not to infer causalities.
External validity A common problem of non-probability samples is the difficulty of producing generalisable results, as the samples are in most cases not representative for the entire population (Pole & Lampard, 2002). Findings can often not be transferred directly to other contexts or samples. However, by means of mixed methods used in the personal interviews as well as online survey, similar patterns were discovered, which conditionally enhance the transferability to other populations.
11
Methodology
2.3.2. Reliability This section provides critical reflections on the internal and external reliability of the study at hand.
Internal reliability The study has a high internal reliability, as the different steps of the research and the logic have been described in-depth in the methodology, data collection, processing, and analysis. Furthermore, the questionnaires and summaries are included as appendices, as are the data sets and audio files available upon request. The authors are confident that other researchers will be able to follow the same procedures, reanalyse the data and come to the same findings and conclusions.
External reliability The non-probability sampling adopted in this study affects the external reliability. It is possible that other researchers, who adopt the very same approach with a different sample, might not arrive at the same findings and conclusions. The authors initially planned on doing a re-test with an additional online consumer survey. Due to relatively few respondents indicated their willingness to participate in a second round, this initial plan was abandoned. A re-test would have contributed to testing and enhancing the external validity as well as the reliability of this study. However, the online consumer survey, being for the most part based on the approach developed for the personal interviews, constitutes some sort of replication. Nonetheless, this replication being done within the scope of the same study by the same researchers, the authors evaluate the external reliability as conditionally given.
2.3.3. Biases While the authors attempted to be objective, the potential influence of personal biases, characteristics, perceptions and emotions cannot be ruled out. A general risk that is likely to have occurred is that of selective perception. Selective perception of researchers can be defined as the risk of only perceiving some aspects that support one’s world view and hypotheses, while ignoring others (Diekmann, 2004). With regard to the conducted data collection and analysis, the risk of selective perception was addressed by the two authors transcribing, coding and analysing the data individually, and consequently finding an agreement. Further critical reflections are concerned with the potential of sampling bias. With all types of sampling, whether probability or non-probability, certain types of sampling bias are likely to occur. Non-response bias, the risk that some respondents choose not to answer certain questions, is likely to have occurred. While in the online consumer survey, respondents were forced to take a stand and answer all questions in order to obtain completed questionnaires this bears the risk that 12
Methodology some respondents might choose to abandon the survey. An additional risk connected with forced choice ratings is that respondents choose an answer option not out of conviction but simply because they have to, in order to continue the survey. While the authors attempted to reduce potential sampling biases, especially with regard to the recruitment of potential respondents for the personal consumer interviews as well as online survey, a coverage bias, the risk that some population members do not appear in the sample, is likely to have occurred. Certain age segments of the population might display a higher Internet affinity than others. As potential respondents of the online survey were primarily contacted via social networks or direct e-mail contact, it is likely that certain age groups are overrepresented in the sample. It has to be acknowledged that it remains unknown as to what extent the sample covers the general population. The potential risk of socially desirable responses is likely to occur when potential respondents are excessively questioned regarding the purchasing behaviour prior to the actual survey (Pole & Lampard, 2002). However, it needs to be considered that every interview situation or survey bears the risk of social desirability bias (Diekmann, 2004). While the authors tried to reduce this bias in the personal interviews and online survey by avoiding leading questions, using neutral formulations, and, in the case of the face-to-face interviews, to conduct the interviews in settings that reduced the likely influence of the social environment of the respondents, social desirable responses cannot be entirely ruled out. This is especially relevant with regard to unpleasant questions, such as drinking habits. Additionally, it is likely that socially desirable responses were given regarding the proportion of organic food and organic wine consumed.
13
Introduction to Key Issues
3. Introduction to Key Issues This chapter will provide an introduction to the product organic wine, the market, the consumer as well as regulation.
3.1. The product organic wine Wine is an alcoholic beverage made of fermented fruit juice, generally from grapes. It comes in many varieties, vintages, styles and from many parts of the world ranging from low to premium wine qualities and price levels. Wine is characterized by a complexity and conflicting nature, which is also referred to as a dual-role character. It can be regarded as a luxury and/or a fashion item signalling a symbol of status whereas in other cultural contexts it represents a rural and peasant drink. Furthermore, it is associated with a healthy lifestyle, while in excess it can lead to addiction, causing sequelae and death. Since ancient times wine is of significant religious and cultural relevance, though today it is more and more linked with hedonistic and debauched behaviour (M. C. Hall, 2008). In general wine is regarded as an experience good, as the quality can only be evaluated through the experience of consumption (Altaffer & Washington-Smith, 2009). Krystallis (2010) points out that available information at the point of purchase, like price, or on the back and front label, describing the expected taste, are regarded as reliable indicators for quality and heuristics guiding the consumer during the wine selection process. Since the quality assessment of wine is very subjective and depends on the consumer’s degree of knowledge, consumers experience difficulties in processing the quality cues relevant for determining whether the wine is of good quality. The consumer can, for instance, use wine quality certificates, which in turn presumes that the consumer believes in their credibility (Andersen, 1994). Consequently, wine can be defined as an experience good with credence characteristics, which cannot be assessed upon consumption. In the case of organic wine, the element “organic” or the organic label, if presented on the bottle, represent an additional credence characteristic, which the consumer has to trust in as it is not assessable upon consumption (Scholderer, Nielsen, Bredahl, Claudi-Magnussen, & Lindahl, 2004).
3.2. The market The term organic wine is used for wine produced from organically grown grapes indicating that only the cultivation of vineyards, i.e. the outdoor activity, forms the basis for organic viticulture as opposed to the oenological indoor processing approach. However, some organic wine producers apply specific oenological processing methods for their wines, which they consider as being in line with organic farming principles (Trioli & Hofmann, 2009). Organic viticulture takes the protection of the ecological system into consideration in which the most important criterion is the holistic treatment of the whole production system. The difference in cultivation practices constitutes the main distinction between organic and conventional wine. Møller Sørensen (2011) points out that in 14
Introduction to Key Issues the 1970s organic wines had a poor sensory quality, which caused a negative image. Nowadays, almost no difference in taste compared to conventional wines exists, which has contributed to a general improvement of the image of organic wines. Since the 1980s organic viticulture started to be regulated by private organic organizations and in 1991 organic wine cultivation got its first pan-European regulation (Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91, 1991). By reason of a common EU regulation and the emergence of national eco-labels, several winemakers saw a positive market development and started converting their production system to organic cultivation. Møller Sørensen (2011) outlines that Denmark has a small number of wine producers, whereof 40 organic wine producers are selling their wines. Wine cultivation in Denmark accounts for 99 hectare resulting in a maximum of 1000 bottles per year, most of it constitutes of red wine. According to Hoffmann (2010), Germany cultivates 4.500 hectare ground used for organic wine production, whereof 50% fall under the German national organic label, BIO, which covers the requirements laid out by the EU regulation. The production under private labels is significantly smaller and several producers prefer marketing their organic wines as conventional, consequently, neglecting the use of any label. Today, the cultivation of organic wine occurs in accordance with the farming methods defined at European level by Council Regulation (EC) 834/2007 (2007) as well as by additional national and private standards formulated by organizations from producing countries, for instance Ecovin, Demeter, Bioland, GAÄ, and Naturland in Germany.
The EU regulation defines the
following principles for organic cultivation:
•
No chemical and synthetic pesticides
•
No readily soluble mineral fertilizers
•
No genetic practices with grapes and yeast
•
Maintenance and enhancement of the natural soil fertility
•
Cultivation of resistant and robust plants
•
Enhancement and increase of plant and animal diversity
•
Reduction of water and soil contamination
Due to the fact that organic viticulture falls under the regulation of organic products in general, the use of copper pesticides and sulphur for wine conversation has not been constituted yet on a European level. The use of copper and sulphur forms the key issues for discussion and negotiation on a common EU regulation for organic wine. A more detailed picture about the EU legislation will be given in section 3.4.
15
Introduction to Key Issues
Market development In order to receive concrete numbers on wine production and consumption, Hoffmann (2010) suggests that it is crucial to include imports, as the biggest part of organic wine consumed in Germany and Denmark stems from other EU and non-EU countries. However, using import quantities for calculating organic wine consumption and production is not possible since organic wine has not become a relevant statistical category yet and still falls under the same category as conventional wine. As a further factor, which impedes the conduction of statistical data for organic wine production, Wechsler (2010) refers to the small and fragmented structure of the German wine market, in which federal states have different registration requirements. Wine producers are obliged to register how much they harvest of which type of grape and how much wine they have processed. However, they do not need to list the wine as organic. The general organic hype of the last years as well as the introduction of national eco-labels enhanced the demand for organic products and gave reason for retailers, especially for discounters and supermarkets, to enrich their assortments with organic products. In Germany, discount chains started to offer organic wine. Consequently, the German wineries, which tap, bottle, and distribute organic wines to retail chains, have experienced difficulties in meeting the increase in demand. As a result, the price for organic bulk wine exceeded the price for conventional wine, giving wine farmers, who mainly produce bulk wines, the incentive to convert from conventional to organic wine making. Denmark imports almost all organic wines, where according to Møller Sørensen (2011), France, Spain and Chile account for the major importing countries of organic wine. Moreover, he states that 80-85% of all wines in Denmark are sold in supermarkets, wherein Irma with 8% of the total wine offer provides the largest selection of organic wine in 2010. Irma can be described as a high-end supermarket with a generally greater selection of organic products and wine. He adds that the offer of organic wine largely depends on the location of the supermarket. In the area of greater Copenhagen and North-Sealand the general interest in organic products is larger than in other parts of the country. Furthermore, the wine assortment of that area is greater compared to other regions of the country, as for instance in Southern Jutland, where the consumers prefer to buy wines across the border in Germany. In general it is assumed that organic in the wine sector constitutes a relatively small share compared to other organic farming products like fruits, vegetables and eggs. While organic food products constitute an independent premium category, organic wines find themselves in the middle of the wine assortment, being present in different categories (e.g. red or white wines), within different grape varieties as well as within different price segments. In total, Hoffmann (2010) suggests that organic wine constitutes for only 1% of the wine selection offered in German points of sale. With regard to the point of purchase of organic wines in the German market, Wechsler 16
Introduction to Key Issues (2010) estimates that 50% are sold in discounters, 20% in supermarkets, 17% directly at the wine producer, and 7% in specialised stores. Currently, German producers are stuck with an overproduction as they cannot compete with foreign producers in terms of pricing as well as a slight decrease in demand of organic wine in discounters and supermarkets. Wechsler (2010) points out that the German wine industry has structural weaknesses based on the fact that there are numerous wine farmers, but only very few cooperatives and wineries that are able to sell wine on a grand scale. Compared to well-organized and functioning production systems like in Australia, California or Spain, the German wine industry is not yet equipped to produce as cost-effective as other countries. In light of the current market situation, German producers need to find alternative channels to marketing their products as well as to innovate their production systems to overcome the industry’s structural weaknesses. German organic wine needs to strategically better position itself within the market. This could be done by focusing more on regionalism and direct marketing (Hoffmann, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). Within various categories of organic groceries the regional character of products is regarded as one of the main reasons for buying. Wine itself has a regional character, which is also visible on the labels but lacks to be anchored deeper with the product. Instead the major focus is put on taste which according to Wechsler (2010) is arbitrary. If organic producers could manage to attach the regional character of wine to the product, it could be successfully adopted as a buying criterion for German consumers. Furthermore, Hoffmann (2010) sees potential for German organic wine in focusing on direct marketing where the value creation is highest. Several organic bulk wine producers have already converted to bottled wine production and start labelling their bottles with the national eco-label, thereby giving their production system and brand philosophy an additional ad-on. This is a good basis to start intensifying the search for customers which are motivated by environmental concern and regional affinity as well as a higher willingness to pay for environmental friendly products.
3.3. The consumer Within the growing European organic consumer market, Denmark and Germany play a very important role, with Germany constituting the largest market in terms of sales values and Denmark having the highest per capita consumption in 2008 (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), 2010). While there is a relatively considerable number of statistics available on organic fresh food products, to the authors’ knowledge almost no official statistics on organic wine consumption exist (Hoffmann, 2010; Schmidt, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). Although statistics on general organic consumption might be valuable in presenting general tendencies regarding the willingness to purchase and interest in organic products (Schmidt, 2010), one cannot infer that what applies to organic fresh food products, also applies to processed 17
Introduction to Key Issues organic products, such as organic wine. While organic fresh food products are to a large extent consumed for nutritious and health reasons, the consumption of wine has more dimensions (Hoffmann, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). Many consumers perceive wine to be a natural product and do not necessarily see a need for wine to be organic (Hoffmann, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). As Wechsler (2010) highlights, this is largely influenced by the fact that the wine industry has in recent years been untroubled by scandals and food scares that have e.g. hit the meat industry and consequently led to increased consumer awareness. Regarding the health aspects, influencing wine consumption, it has to be said that overindulgence of wine, organic and conventional alike, certainly has negative effects on one’s health (Wechsler, 2010). Considering that small quantities of red wine are scientifically medically proven to be beneficial for one’s health (Krystallis, 2010), wine is quite possibly perceived as the least harmful option within the spectrum of alcoholic beverages. In the case of organic wine, the exclusion of synthetic pesticides and additives might further contribute to this perception (Hoffmann, 2010). Further important dimensions of wine consumption are pleasure and experience elements (Møller Sørensen, 2011; Wechsler, 2010). However, cultural differences exist. In Southern European countries, wine constitutes an integral part of everyday life, being a luxury one allows oneself everyday in small portions. In Northern European countries, historically speaking beer producer-consumer markets, wine is more perceived as a luxury or prestige product, which is more consumed on special occasions (Krystallis, 2010). According to Wechsler (2010) and Møller Sørensen (2011) wine is a product one can use to distinguish oneself in one’s social environment. However, Møller Sørensen (2011) presumes that consumers do not deliberately attempt to achieve a certain social status by consuming organic wine. Furthermore, Møller Sørensen (Møller Sørensen, 2011) suggests there might be gender differences, with women being more interested in ecology, and men being more interested in achieving status by means of consumption of certain prestigious objects. In recent years, shifts in the consumption patterns of alcoholic beverages have occurred (Smith & Solgaard, 1996). Especially in Denmark, a classical beer producer-consumer market with almost no wine production, wine is nowadays increasingly consumed at the expense of beer (Møller Sørensen, 2011; Schmidt, 2010). According to Schmidt (2010) and Møller Sørensen (2011) this is mainly due to three factors: (1) an increase in purchasing power, (2) wines, even organic wines, being affordable in supermarkets, as well as an (3) increased willingness to travel. This willingness is also reflected in consumers’ preferences regarding the country of origin of wines. As Hoffmann (2010) highlights, does the personal affinity towards a certain country constitute an important factor of influence, besides the influential role of social environment and lifestyle. This personal affinity as well as positive memories and associations with one’s vacation can have an impact on consumers’ preferences.
18
Introduction to Key Issues While some consumers prefer to purchase their wine in connection with special wine tours, the majority of conventional and organic wines are sold in large supermarkets and discounters. A lesser proportion is sold in health-food shops, specialised shops and through direct marketing by winemakers (Wechsler, 2010). Although this applies to conventional and organic wine alike, Hoffmann (2010) hypothesises that the stereotypical organic wine consumer primarily purchases organic wine in health-food shops as part of the normal grocery shopping. In addition to this specialised shop orientation of organic consumers, Hoffmann (2010) presumes that these organic wine consumers also display a strong manufacturer orientation, which becomes apparent in business relationships with specific organic winemakers. It has to be said that the choice of point of purchase is to a large extent determined by the consumption occasion and consumer involvement. Consumers with little knowledge and low levels of involvement will be more likely to purchase wine for special occasions, i.e. as gifts, in specialised shops or on order by winemakers, than, as customary, in supermarkets. Furthermore it can be assumed that special occasions lead to an increased willingness to pay (Wechsler, 2010). The interviewed experts (Hoffmann, 2010; Møller Sørensen, 2011; Schmidt, 2010; Wechsler, 2010) agree that the majority of Danish and German consumers alike has little knowledge about wine in general as well as organic wine in particular. The proportion of consumers, who are intensely involved in wine and know a lot, constitutes the group that consumes quantitatively the lion’s share of the sales volume (Hoffmann, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). However, Hoffmann (2010) states that the stereotypical organic wine consumer by trend does not purchase and consume that much wine, as wine contains alcohol, which is, after all perceived as being at odds with an ecological and healthy way of living. Furthermore, the highly involved organic wine consumer knows by trend more about organic wine cultivation than the average wine consumer (Hoffmann, 2010). According to Schmidt (2010) and Hoffmann (2010), the organic wine consumer is most likely to be found among highly involved organic food consumers. In addition to that, the stereotypical organic wine consumer resides in major cities or university towns (Hoffmann, 2010; Møller Sørensen, 2011), and has by trend a comparatively high level of education and income. According to Hoffmann (2010), students constitute an important portion of organic consumers, living in an environment that by trend critically asses their environment and actively discuss their personal role and influence in environmental issues. Older consumers constitute the other end of the spectrum, while moving closer to end of one’s life expectancy many display a stronger focus on treating oneself by purchasing superior products and an increased willingness to pay more (Hoffmann, 2010). This can be accepted with reservations, as younger consumers and retirees often do not have sizable financial means.
19
Introduction to Key Issues Treating or indulging oneself, pleasure and perceived personal benefits of consumption are, according to Wechsler (Wechsler, 2010), of particular importance. Although there is still a certain proportion of consumers who act upon conviction and altruistic motives, the majority of consumers is primarily motivated by treating themselves without a feeling of remorse. The ecological character of the product can be seen as a positive side effect, which enhances the personal pleasure and benefits, as the consumption does not inflict damage on the environment (Wechsler, 2010). While consumers wish to protect the environment, they are not willing to do this under the conditions of a product of inferior quality (Hoffmann, 2010; Krystallis, 2010). These motives are especially prevalent for consumers above the age of 35, with a certain income and social position (Wechsler, 2010). According to Wechsler (2010), these consumers are very involved and interested in wine, not least due to the perceived prestige and status elements that come with being perceived as a connoisseur. As aforementioned however, this is especially relevant with regard to conventional wine and might not apply in equal measure to organic wine. To sum up, the interviewed experts (Hoffmann, 2010; Møller Sørensen, 2011; Wechsler, 2010) agree that only a small proportion of wine consumers actually consume organic wine. Gender differences might exist, as Møller Sørensen (Møller Sørensen, 2011) hypothesises, who presumes that organic wine is predominantly consumed by women, due to perceived higher degrees of salubriousness.
3.4. Regulation In common parlance, there is a wide variety of terms referring to organic farming. An increasing consumer demand for organic food products in recent years necessitated the establishment of a regulatory framework, which would not only aim at harmonising the different existing standards, creating transparency and induce consumer confidence, but ultimately protect producers and consumers alike (Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, 2007). The Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (2007) became effective in 2009, in order to facilitate the above outlined objectives. This directive constitutes the regulatory framework for organic production as well as the labelling of organically produced products within the European Union. The hitherto effective Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91, which constitutes the first European legislation, defining the requirements or organic farming (1991), was repealed by the 834/2007 regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, 2007). One of the essential elements of the Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 is the request for establishing Commission rules as well as a general Community framework for processed foods, such as wine (Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, 2007). While the cultivation of grapes is regulated by the aforementioned Council Regulation and the implementing Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 (2008), there is no pan-European regulation for the processing and marketing of organic wine. What is referred to as organic wine thus lacks a legal foundation and definition. 20
Introduction to Key Issues Given that only the cultivation is governed by the effective Council Regulation, it may only be referred to and labelled as “wine made from organically grown grapes” (Hofmann, 2011). The final report of the EU-funded ORWINE project as well as the „code of good organic viticulture and wine making“ were submitted to the Commission, in order to provide a basis for discussion between the involved stakeholders and states. The Commissions proposal failed to achieve majority approval, resulting in a withdrawal of the proposal and an adjournment sine die. Consequently, the term organic wine may still not be used by producers labelling their products. Furthermore, the use of the new mandatory EU organic label, introduced in July 2010, is not allowed for organic wine (Hofmann, 2011). However, the respective national labels and nongovernmental organization labels may still be used. The proposal fell through mainly due to political matters, namely the use of sulphate and copper, resulting in an issue of location (Hoffmann, 2010). Especially the southern European countries were in favour of lowering the sulphur dioxide limit, as the use of sulphate in wine is generally perceived negatively by consumers. A lowering of this limit was met with protests on the part of the northern European producing countries, in particular Germany, Austria but also Luxemburg, who feared to be no longer able to compete. While the failure of the new proposal is deplored by the majority of the involved parties, it is at the same time appreciated, as no regulation is perceived to be better than a poor regulation (Hofmann, 2011).
Labelling Albeit the new EU organic label may not be used for wine made from organically grown grapes, a variety of governmental and non-governmental labels are still in use. The EU organic farming regulation, whose rules of action constitute the least common denominator of all members of the Common Market, forms the basis of all the different national and non-governmental labelling schemes (Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, 2011; European Commission, 2011; Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri - Fødevarestyrelsen, 2010). However, it needs to be considered that these non-governmental organizations are stricter in their requirements than laid down by the Council and the Commission Regulations. In the German wine context, Ecovin, Bioland, Naturland and Demeter (albeit bio-dynamic) rank among the well-known non-governmental organizational labelling schemes (Wechsler, 2010). These organizations often conduct additional inspections of compliance with their regulations, besides the annual state control of certified producers (Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, 2011; Wechsler, 2010). As the EU has failed to formulate a common regulation so far, many organic wine producers produce their wines according to these private label standards (Schmidt, 2010). The national organic labels have an important role, in the Danish as well as the German context (Schmidt, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). The German national eco-label, the Bio-Siegel, has been 21
Introduction to Key Issues introduced in 2001, while the Danish national eco-label, the Ø-mærke, has already been introduced in 1989. Both national labels are voluntary and free of charge. If a producer wishes to market his products with the terms organic or eco, he needs to comply with the EU eco-regulation and be controlled and certified by one of the official control bodies and authorities (Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, 2011; Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri - Fødevarestyrelsen, 2010). Both national labels need to comply with the standards laid out by the EU eco-regulation. National interpretations of the regulation are not allowed (foodwatch, 2009). As wines coming from non-EU countries cannot be labelled with the EU organic label, the Danish and German national labels can be used – if desired, given that the production complies with
the
EU
eco-regulation
(Bundesministerium
für
Ernährung,
Landwirtschaft
und
Verbraucherschutz, 2011; Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri - Fødevarestyrelsen, 2010). It is also possible that these wines are only labelled with their respective national label or non-governmental labels from the respective country of origin (Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, 2011; foodwatch, 2009). While the use of labels is intended to contribute to increasing transparency and enhancing consumer confidence, it is far from being unproblematic. As highlighted by Wechsler (2010) and Hoffmann (2010) the market is currently characterized by some sort of “label inflation”. Besides the variety of national and non-governmental labels used, wines are often equipped with further decorations and award information, often resulting in increased confusion on the part of consumers. For the most part, consumers are familiar with the term organic used on labels (Buxel, 2010). However, in many cases, consumers do not know what these labels specifically include (Wechsler, 2010). As Hoffmann highlights (2010), the use of the German organic label is not unproblematic as it can lead to some form of market distortion. Consumers perceive products, which are labelled as organic, to be pure, natural and equate them with simply good products. Conversely, consumers associate non-labelled products to be somehow unnatural, manipulated or treated with chemicals, consequently equating them with bad products. This is often not the case. In recent years, the wine market has witnessed a convergence of the existing production approaches. Many winemakers have adopted more environmental friendly practices without labelling their products as such or strictly following the regulations as laid out by the EU. Critics of the excessive use of labels and insufficient education of consumers like Hoffmann make a good point in saying that eco-labels have the potential of being deceptive, promising consumers pure, natural and superior products, while in fact the minimal requirements laid out by the EU might not live up to these expectations, suggesting a wider product differentiation that does not actually exist. But the promotion of labels on the part of the national states does not only bear the potential of misleading the consumer but might also artificially blow-up or create a hype in the 22
Introduction to Key Issues market. Hoffmann (2010) hypothesises that the organic market would today only be half as big, if it was not for the EU organic label. The question whether or not to label organic wine is basically a matter of which channels of distribution are chosen by the winemakers. Winemakers and wine cellars choosing to supply food retailers, discounters and specialised stores have a high interest in using labels, as it can substitute the communication, which normally takes place between producer and consumer in direct marketing their wines (Wechsler, 2010). As highlighted by Wechsler (2010), all the wines produced following organic practices will be explicitly labelled as such when put up for sale in supermarkets. The selection of wines in supermarkets is, considering the wide range of products, often a difficult one for consumers, wherefore it is important to have a clear and simple message, informing consumers about the environmental friendliness of the product. According to Buxel (2010), consumers are comparatively familiar with the term organic. The often underlying uncertainty regarding what these labels include might have negative effects, when consumer expectations are not met. For example, if consumers equate the German eco-label with no pesticides or additives being used, they might respond negatively to the information (which all wines – organic or conventional – need to carry) that a wine contains sulphite, perceiving this to be at odds with the standards of the eco-label expected by him (Hoffmann & Szolnoki, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). In direct marketing, winemakers are able to inform consumers about the necessity and consequences of sulphur dioxide use, thus are able to counterbalance the potential negative effects of misunderstandings. Thus, labelling does not play an important role in direct marketing, where consumer trust and confidence can be achieved by means of the personal contact and communication about the environmentally friendly practices (Wechsler, 2010). In recent years there has been an increased discussion about sustainability within the wine industry. In light of increased imports from overseas, whether coming from carbon neutral wineries in Chile or fair trade wineries in South Africa, European winemakers will have to take a stand. The question remains, however, whether consumers can relate to the term sustainability (Wechsler, 2010). According to Wechsler (2010), it can be assumed that winemakers, who label their wines sustainable but not organic will in the medium term face difficulties to communicate and sell this to the consumer. Winemakers, labelling their products to be organic will, for now, be better positioned, with a clear and simple message that consumers are familiar with.
23
Literature Review
4. Literature Review In the following chapter, a literature review will be conducted. The aim of this chapter is to introduce theories, concepts, and findings from previous research, relevant for understanding the research question and developing the theoretical framework, which will guide the empirical study. This chapter consists of four sections: (1) introduction to comparative-cross cultural consumer research, (2) introduction to relevant concepts of consumer behaviour & decision making, (3) state of the art of research on organic wine consumption, and (4) the theoretical framework.
4.1. Introduction to comparative cross-cultural consumer research This section is divided into three parts: (1) presentation of different forms of cross-cultural consumer research, (2) lifestyle research, and (3) the role of values in cross-cultural research. Some of the main purposes of consumer research are to understand, describe and explain consumer behaviour in order to be able to predict and influence the likely outcomes of initiatives, ranging from consumer information policy to marketing campaigns (Solomon et al., 2001). In order to be successful, these initiatives must, amongst other things, take the context in which consumer decisions occur into account (de Mooij, 2004; Solomon et al., 2001). This can prove to be a difficult task, as consumer decisions are largely influenced by cultural and social, as well as personal and psychological factors, of which culture exerts the strongest and most extensive impact (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004). According to de Mooij (2004, p.26) culture can be defined as “shared beliefs, attitudes, norms, roles, and values found among speakers of a particular language who live during the same historical period in a specific geographic region”. Therefore it cannot be separated from the historical or geographic context or from the individuals that make up societies as it can be seen as the sum of the things that have worked in the past and thereby governs the behaviour of those “who were conditioned by the same education and life experience”(Hofstede, 1991, p.5). Different definitions of how culture exerts its influence on consumer behaviour exist. According to Solomon et al. (2001) culture can be understood as a lens or prism through which consumers observe and perceive products. In a similar vein, Reisch and Gwozdz (2010) suggest that this cultural lens is used by the members of a culture to perceive, interpret and evaluate the social as well as economic consequences connected with potential consumption decisions. Besides this lense function, culture functions as a blueprint that provides individuals with a plan of action that is acceptable within the given cultural context. Based on these two sides of the same coin, culture shapes reality and provides meaning (McCracken, 1986). For the study at hand, it is thus important to bear in mind that the respondents and authors alike are shaped by their cultural backgrounds. 24
Literature Review
4.1.1. Forms of comparative cross-cultural consumer research Culture, constituting a psychological construct (Maheswaran & Shavitt, 2000; Triandis, 1994), cannot only be studied from a multitude of different perspectives but also with different focal points and on different levels. Consequently, comparative cross-cultural studies have become very diverse, not only in terms of topics and perspectives guiding the research efforts, but also with regard to scope, methodology and content (Douglas & Craig, 1997). Below, a brief overview of the historical development of this type of research will be given, followed by an introduction to different forms of comparative cross-cultural research. Since studies that aim at investigating consumer behaviour in different cultural contexts emerged in the United States in the 60s and 70s, the interest in studying cultural factors and contextual influences on consumer behaviour has not only increased, which can be seen in the number of studies published, but also extended its scope (Douglas & Craig, 1997). The early days were characterized by primarily descriptive studies and were dominated by concepts that were frequently exclusively developed in the US, aiming at testing the universality of these models. However, the multiplicity of younger studies stands out on the basis of various extremely different approaches used. This distinction becomes not only apparent with regard to the countries or cultural contexts studied, but also with respect to the methodology applied (Douglas & Craig, 1997). While for a long time, quantitative approaches were dominant, mainly due to time, fiscal as well as language aspects, the means-end chain model, which, despite some quantitative elements can be regarded as a qualitative approach, has proven its worth within cross-cultural consumer research (Salciuviene, Auruskeviciene, & Lydeka, 2005). Applications of the means-end approach can primarily be found within the stream of research that is concerned with comparative investigations of aspects influencing consumer attitudes and behaviour, for instance decision making, values or cognition. The study at hand belongs to this stream of research, which focusses on similarities and differences and constitutes the largest body of research within the cross-cultural consumer behaviour field (Douglas & Craig, 1997).
Examples of different forms of comparative cross-cultural research In order to explore, explain and interpret the potential differences and similarities between consumers in different countries, researchers need to clearly define the level or unit of analysis relevant for the study (Douglas & Craig, 1997). As Kale (1995) points out, defining the appropriate level or unit of analysis is one of the most crucial aspects when studying culture or the impact of culture on marketing efforts and policy making. Whereas cross-national, intercultural and cultural orientation studies focus on comparing different cultures on the group level, another stream of research is concerned with studying the 25
Literature Review effect of belonging to multiple cultures on the individual respectively the performance of the individual within different cultural contexts (Reisch & Gwozdz, 2010). In the following, crossnational, intercultural and cultural orientation studies will be briefly introduced.
Cross-national studies When talking about culture, the term culture is often used synonymously with national culture. Studies conducted on the macro level compare countries on the national culture level. These cross-national studies, focussing on identifying cultural differences and similarities between two or more countries, often aim at producing generalisable results and testing the universality of consumer behavioural models (Douglas & Craig, 1997; Triandis, 1994). Studies which focus solely on the national culture level fail to address the multiplicity of cultures existing within the national culture frame namely within-group variations. Differences, for example with regard to values, attitudes and beliefs are for the most part ignored. Studies on the national culture level might therefore be too broad and simplistic (Kale, 1995).
Intercultural & cultural orientation studies While every society has a culture (Solomon et al., 2001), it has to be acknowledged that each culture contains various forms of subcultures, which consist of “groups of people with shared value systems based on common life experiences and situations” (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004, p.180). Membership can be based on multiple components, such as nationality, geographic region, ethnicity, religion or other sociocultural factors (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004). Drawing clear boundaries between these groups often is not a simple task. Most often, various overlaps with other groups can be identified. Hence, consumers might belong to more than one cultural group (Douglas & Craig, 1997), which means that multiple sources that influence consumers self image and behaviour exist. Consequently, it has to be taken into consideration that cultural differences not only exist between different countries but also within the national boundaries, when trying to identify and explain the influence of culture on consumer behaviour (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004). While intercultural studies, which compare ethnic groups within and between countries, constitute one example of research addressing the multiplicity of within-culture variations, a further stream of research is concerned with comparing subcultures within and between countries. These studies aim at studying the cultural orientations of groups of individuals deviating from national culture (Reisch & Gwozdz, 2010). As the aim of this study is to explore the value orientations of occasional organic wine consumers, the study falls into the stream of research that compares consumer segments between countries. Different approaches to segmenting consumers exist. Segmentation by demographics constitutes the most popular form of segmentation (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004). 26
Literature Review In the following, lifestyle research, which is concerned with consumer segmentation, will be introduced.
4.1.2. Lifestyle research In modern consumer societies people are able to choose products, services, and activities freely in order to define themselves and thereby constructing a social identity. A person’s choice of products and services allows making propositions on who the person is and which group of people he or she intends to identify with or dissociate from (Solomon et al., 2001). The concept of lifestyle has been very popular in both academic and applied marketing research. At least three reasons can be given for this. First, there is a widespread agreement that demographic variables and other classical, “hard” parameters for segmentation purposes have become less useful in predicting and explaining consumer behaviour due to fragmentation of markets as well as an ongoing individualisation of consumers (Spiller, 2006). Second, demographic segmentation criteria are insufficient for designing effective advertising strategies. Third, the development of post-material values in Western societies presented by Inglehart (1977) has redirected the focus on identifying consumers holding these values (K. Grunert, 1993). According to Henrik Dahl (2006) analysing lifestyles means to discover the profundity of the superficial. Self-concepts, reference groups as well as social status serve as indicators for defining a distinctive lifestyle, thereby creating a new system of status less based on income than the availability of information on goods and how they function as a social differentiation (Solomon et al., 2001). The literature does not present a consistent understanding and deployment of the term lifestyle. Furthermore, the term is not clearly defined whereby the contemporary meaning of the term traces back to the sociologist Max Weber (Enneking & Franz, 2005). The fundamental idea of identifying different lifestyles is receiving growing attention especially since the 1980s. The increasing interest in the concept has led to an emerging number of approaches and application areas resulting in a growing heterogeneity of different commercial and scientific approaches (Enneking & Franz, 2005). Market research shows a variety of segmentation possibilities in the field of organic purchasing behaviour. According to Kreeb (2008) and Spiller (2006), organic purchasing behaviour is prevalently connected with general environmental concern, which can be understood as value orientation and lifestyle, influencing behaviour patterns and mind-sets in a relatively enduring manner. According to Spiller (Spiller, 2006) environmental consciousness is characterized by pluralisation of different lifestyles and individualisation of the consumer, where diverse combinations of environmental friendly as well as harmful behaviour can be observed within lifestyle segments. In terms of organic and sustainable consumer behaviour, Spiller (2006, p. 3) uses the term presented by Reusswig (1993) “organic-ambivalent patchwork lifestyles” to describe the development of consumption trends implicating that for the most people environmental 27
Literature Review conscious value orientation is not a prioritized orientation, but rather an integrated part within different lifestyle patterns. Environmental concern can go along with hedonism, pleasure and adventuresomeness as well as skepticism, traditionalism and frugality (Spiller, 2006). While it is not the aim of this study to develop consumer typologies based on lifestyle, lifestyle constitutes an important source of influence and will therefore be addressed in the empirical study.
4.1.3. Values in cross-cultural research One of the main challenges for researchers conducting cross-cultural research is the fact that cultures are dynamic (Solomon et al., 2001; Ting-Toomey, 1999; Triandis, 1994). While cultures generally tend to change slowly (Solomon et al., 2001), this pace has increased. Segmentation based on subgroups has proven difficult though fruitful for scholars and marketers alike. However, this has become an increasingly difficult task in times of heightened regional integration and advanced forms of communication (Douglas & Craig, 1997). Today, consumers are increasingly exposed to a variety of cultures, which enables them to develop new tastes, lifestyles and preferences while at the same time also exerting influence on the cultural contexts they encounter (Douglas & Craig, 1997; Luna & Forquer Gupta, 2001; Salciuviene et al., 2005). As a result, countries cannot be viewed in isolation; neither can their cultures be understood as being static. Instead, culture has to be regarded as an ever evolving synthesis between old and new ideas (Solomon et al., 2001). While some observable elements of culture suggest a cultural convergence, it can be concluded that other areas of culture remain stable (Douglas & Craig, 1997; Luna & Forquer Gupta, 2001; Salciuviene et al., 2005). Consequently, researchers are increasingly focussing on these aspects (Douglas & Craig, 1997). In line with Luna and Forquer Gupta (2001, p.46) who state that “the term values rests at the heart of most definitions of culture”, Douglas and Craig (1997) suggest that most researchers assess values as a key concept for identifying and understanding the differences and similarities between cultural groups, as most definitions of culture position values as a central element, which is shared by most people within the same cultural group (S. C. Grunert & Juhl, 1995a). According to Schwartz and Bilsky (1987), values, respectively the five main elements of values can be defined as follows: Values are (a) beliefs or concepts, (b) about desirable behaviours or end states that (c) transcend specific situations, (d) guide the evaluation or selection of behaviours and events, and ultimately are (e) ordered by relative importance. Luna and Forquer Gupta (2001) conclude that many researchers assume that values can be considered as elementary driving forces of human behaviour. According to Overby et al. (2005) this can be explained by cultural values exerting influence on the perception, relative importance 28
Literature Review and meaning, which consumers ascribe products and services. However, it must be considered that cultural values do not equal personal values. While consumer or personal values constitute beliefs that consumers attach to specific objects of consumption, cultural values are concerned with the specific modes of conduct or goals that are of importance to cultural groups. Furthermore, it needs to be asserted that cultural values tend to have more of a general character, whereas the relevance of consumer values for the most part depends on the context of consumption (Overby et al., 2005). Nonetheless, Overby et al. (2005) conclude that culture and cultural values serve as some sort of metaphorical lens, which influences the meaning and relative importance of personal values that consumers attach to products and services. It can be said that culture does not only influence consumer behaviour intrinsically but also extrinsically (Overby et al., 2005). As Gutman (1982), who introduced the means-end chain theory to consumer and marketing research, suggests, cultural values can be regarded as the source of personal desired end-states. Focusing on the intrinsic influence of culture on consumer behaviour, Overby et al. (2005, p. 150) state that “cultural values affect consumers’ desired end-states by becoming embedded in the end-state content”. However, culture does not only exert intrinsically or direct influence, by means of cultural values affecting desired end-states. When focusing on the extrinsic aspects of cultural influence, Overby et al. (2005, p. 151) suggest that “culture may make certain consequences or attributes salient and ultimately more important than others”.
Approaches to studying values The study of human values has a long tradition within the fields of sociology and psychology. While for some time, these studies were guided by a belief that personal values are fixed and stable elements of human life, an alternative understanding emerged and prevailed which suggests that values are not fixed. On the contrary, these studies suggest that individuals create hierarchies of values based on the values that are available within their cultural context. These hierarchies of values are not only personal but also flexible, i.e. values, understood as guiding principles in life, are not solely significant in specific situations but transcend them, can develop and change over time and under changed living conditions. Furthermore, they provide some sort of guidance in the selection of behaviour as well as idealised modes of living. Inherent contradictions underlay this dynamic system, as conflicts in the process of satisfying different values can occur (Debats & Bartelds, 1996). While a number of different approaches exist to studying or comparing values in different cultural contexts, this stream of research has for the most parts been influenced and advanced by the work conducted by Milton Rokeach (1973). As one of the first studies, focusing on the role of values in the understanding human behaviour, Milton Rokeach defines values in his book The Nature of Human Values as “an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is 29
Literature Review personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct” (1973, p. 5). Correspondingly, he presents value systems as “an enduring organization of beliefs concerning preferable modes of conduct or end-states of existence along a continuum of relative importance” (ibid.). Rokeach (1973) distinguishes between means and ends by equally classifying a total of 36 values into 18 terminal as well as 18 instrumental values. While terminal values, for example, security, freedom and happiness, refer to desired end-states of existence or idealised modes of living (ends), instrumental values (means), such as independent, courageous or honest, refer to modes of conduct which are socially desirable and perceived as effective means for achieving the personally relevant end-states. This described relation between the two types of values, instrumental (means) and terminal (ends), constitutes the value system (Rokeach, 1973). Among the approaches that build upon the work of Rokeach (1973), Schwartzs’ Theory of the Universal Content and Structure of Values (Schwartz, 1992) constitutes one of the most prominent and widely recognized approaches, not only within personal values research but also within marketing and consumer research (Lehnert, 2009). Besides being based on Rokeachs’ Value Survey, this theory is primarily based on earlier studies conducted by Schwartz and Bilsky (1987) as well as Hofstedes’ work (1991; Kahle, Beatty, & Homer, 1986). While Schwartz adopts a variety of the values introduced by the Rokeach Value Survey, his value scale originally comprised 56 single values. The values selected by Schwartz cover elementary needs of human existence, for instance physiological needs and social interaction, which are expressed as goals one strives to fulfil. These values are said to be universally applicable (Lehnert, 2009; Schwartz, 1992). According to Schwartz (Schwartz, n.a.), values are beliefs that are tied to emotions. They are motivational constructs as they refer to goals that people desire and strive to reach. Unlike norms and attitudes that are specific to situations, actions or objects, values are abstract and transcend specific situations and actions. Furthermore, they serve as standards, guiding the evaluation and selection of behaviour, actions, events and people. While these values are universally valid, people form individual hierarchies of values depending on which values are of relative importance to them. Schwartz divides the list of 56 single values into ten groups based on the motivational goals that underlie these values. These groups of values are also known as value types or motivational domains and constitute the value system according to Schwartz (1992). While some suggest an eleventh value domain, spirituality, this domain has not proven valuable in cross-cultural research (S. C. Grunert & Juhl, 1995b) and will therefore not further be regarded here. The ten value types form a continuum that Schwartz visualizes by means of a circle (see appendix 1). While those values and value types that support similar goals are arranged in relative near proximity (e.g. achievement and power), those values that conflict are arranged opposite to each 30
Literature Review other (e.g. achievement and benevolence). Moreover, Schwartz suggests the use of two bipolar orthogonal dimensions: Self-enhancement vs. self-transcendence as well as openness to change vs. conservation. The dimension openness to change vs. conservation expresses the conflict between independent action, feelings and thought and an emphasis on self-restriction, resistance to change and keeping up the existing order (self direction & stimulation vs. conformity, tradition & security). The dimensions self-enhancement vs. self-transcendence expresses the conflict arising from an emphasis on pursuing self-interest and a concern for the interests and welfare of others (universalism & benevolence vs. power & achievement). The value type hedonism shares elements of both self-enhancement and openness to change (Schwartz, n.a.). Besides grouping the single universal values into ten groups, these value types can further be differentiated by their emphasis on individualistic interests (power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, and self-direction), collectivistic interests (benevolence, conformity, and tradition) as well as those value types that cover both individualistic and collectivistic interests (universalism and security) (Lehnert, 2009). For this study, the approach developed by Schwartz has been adopted, which has proven to be suitable for studying values in different cultural contexts.
4.2. Introduction to relevant concepts of consumer behaviour & decision making Consumer behaviour can be defined as the study of the processes taking place when individuals or groups select, purchase, use or dispose of products, services, ideas or experiences, in order to satisfy needs and wishes (Solomon et al., 2001). This section is divided into four parts: (1) factors influencing consumer behaviour, (2) motives and motivation, (3) involvement, and (4) perception.
4.2.1. Factors influencing consumer behaviour On a daily base, consumers make a variety of decisions, ranging from everyday issues to more complex decisions. As Reynolds and Olson (2001) point out, every decision is not simply a choice of a certain product or service. Instead, every choice decision involves the selection of one alternative action or behaviour over the other. Conceptualizing behaviours instead of products or brands as choice alternatives allows the research of decision making to be placed in the context, in which the behaviour occurs (Reynolds & Olsen, 2001). For a long time, consumer research has been dominated by an economic thinking, which promoted the idea of consumers as being rational individuals who base their decisions on complete information in order to maximise their utility (Dubois, 2000). However, research has given rise to 31
Literature Review questioning whether the construct of consumer preferences is actually stable enough, to explain consumer choice (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007). Moreover, as McCracken (1986, p.71) points out, “consumer goods have a significance that goes beyond their utilitarian character and commercial value”. Theoretical models that solely explain consumer decisions based on the functionality or utility of a product or service disregard the importance of the cultural meanings and symbolic values that these products carry for consumers (Sørensen, 2000). To understand the underlying motives of consumers’ decision making, it is not sufficient to study the observable aspects of consumer behaviour, e.g. what they buy, when, where and how much. In order to understand the “why”, the reasons, various factors and needs that guide consumers in their decision making need to be considered (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004; Sørensen, 2000). Consumer behaviour is defined and guided by complex internal processes and external factors. As can be seen in figure 2, Kotler and Armstrong (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004) distinguish between cultural, social, personal and psychological characteristics as those factors that exert the strongest influence on consumer purchases. Figure 2 - Factors influencing consumer behaviour
Source: Kotler (2004, p. 179)
Most of the factors outlined above, which in conjunction influence consumer behaviour (whether cultural, social, or individual) are outside the sphere of control of marketers (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004). However, as these different factors are interlinked and exert their influence in a complex interaction, it is crucial for marketers to take these factors into consideration when studying consumer behaviour (Dubois, 2000). According to Kotler and Armstrong (2004), individual factors can be divided into personal (e.g. age or occupation) and psychological characteristics. 32
Literature Review Consumer research approaches that focus on psychological characteristics attempt to reveal the hidden reasons underlying the individual consumer purchases. As Kotler and Armstrong (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004) suggest, motivation, perception, learning, as well as beliefs and attitudes are the main four psychological factors that influence consumer decision making. In this study, the authors decided to focus on the psychological determinants, namely the motives of consumers. Further psychological elements, such as perception and involvement, will also be included. In addition to that, personal factors, e.g. socio-demographics, will also inform the empirical study.
4.2.2. Motives & motivation The aim of this part of section 4.2. is twofold. Firstly, it will provide an introduction to motives and motivation. Secondly, difficulties, which researchers are likely to encounter when studying motives, will be addressed. The study of motivation and motives is valuable due to its underlying psychological implications and explanatory power for human behaviour. Gaining knowledge of these motivational components does not only in general cater for improved insights into the “why” of behaviour but in particular provide a better understanding of consumer behaviour, the choice of products as well as preferences (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007; Lehnert, 2009; MacDonagh, Linehan, & Weldridge, 2002). Motives can be understood as the reasons for people’s actions (Kunz, 2010). Bose (2006, p.507) defines a motive as “a drive or an urge for which a person seeks satisfaction. It becomes a buying motive when the person seeks satisfaction through the purchase of something”. More frequently, motives are also defined as “needs, wants, drive, and impulses, etc. within the individual” (2006, p.507). There are several ways as to differentiate motives. While physiological needs are natural and caused by physiological tension-systems and processes within a person (e.g. thirst), psychogenic needs are learned through the environment of the consumer (Bayton, 1958). Different cultural and social environments can consequently result in different motives (Kunz, 2010). According to Westbrook & Black (1985), shopping motives can furthermore be understood as relatively enduring and stable characteristics of individuals. According to Kunz (2010), motivation explains why certain situations prompt or stimulate people to act. Motivation can be understood as a result of interaction between individual and situation, which means that specific enduring motives become activated by means of certain perceived situational conditions or stimuli. Hence, a motive can be defined as an enduring characteristic of an individual while motivation constitutes the condition of a person at a given point in time respectively in a given situation (Trommsdorff, 2008). Moreover, while one action can be 33
Literature Review caused by multiple motives, different acts can likewise be caused by the exact same motive (Solomon et al., 2001). As Trommsdorff (2008) highlights, motives are not only goal-oriented but also emotional and cognitive forces.
They can be influenced by emotions as well as knowledge (Foscht &
Swoboda, 2007). While in general motives are unconscious, they can mostly become conscious through thinking and interrogation (Trommsdorff, 2008). Consequently, motivation can be understood as complex processes that not only push or drive consumers to take actions but also provide them with direction (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007; Lehnert, 2009). Within motivation research a wide variety of different approaches exist (Bänsch, 2002; Foscht & Swoboda, 2007; Solomon et al., 2001). In the following, pitfalls of motivation theory approaches will be addressed. While monothematic approaches in many cases fall short to explain behaviour by identifying a single motive or drive as explanatory variable, polythematic approaches attempt to circumvent this problematic and instead explain behaviour by means of a multiplicity of motives (Bänsch, 2002; Foscht & Swoboda, 2007). This often results in unmanageable catalogues of motives (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007; Lehnert, 2009) that do not take the individual complexity, instability and dynamic of human behaviour into account (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007). According to Bayton (1958), motivation theory often misleadingly assumes that in any given situation, consumers are solely motivated by one specific motive or need. Instead he suggests that consumers are in most situations directed by a combination of different needs. In these combinations, some needs will be relatively weaker, while others will be relatively stronger. The need that is the strongest within that given combination is also referred to as the “prepotent” need. Consequently, consumer can be defined not only by their unique need combinations but also by the relative strength that these needs display. Furthermore, Bayton (1958) questions the assumption that identical behaviour can be traced back to identical motivations. This is not only relevant in the case of two different individuals but also with regard to the behaviour of the same person at different points in time. Ultimately, Bayton (1958) highlights the possibility of difficulties in the study of motives based on the difference between what we perceive as “true motives” and “rationalized motives”. Sometimes consumers are unaware of the actual needs guiding their behaviour. In case they are confronted with this, passively or actively, consumers very often attempt to retrospectively rationalize their behaviour, by assigning motives or needs to their behaviour which are consistent with their personality or socially acceptable. In most cases, these processes of rationalizing behaviour take place subconsciously. In other cases, however, consumers are well aware of their
34
Literature Review true motives. They deliberately attempt to conceal them, as they perceive their revelation to be socially unacceptable or harmful. According to Foscht and Swoboda (2007), motivation research is therefore increasingly consulting psychology for analysing consumer behaviour, as the common methods of investigation appear to be relatively worthless with regard to uncovering the true motives. For one, this can be explained by the respondents’ unwillingness to reveal their actual motives but another reason might be that respondents are unable to recognize or verbalise them. One of the approaches that have proven to deliver valuable insights in the study of consumer behaviour and decision making is known as the means-end chain approach (Olson & Reynolds, 2008), which will be used in this study.
4.2.3. Involvement in motivation research Many scholars attach great importance to involvement (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007; Lehnert, 2009; Solomon et al., 2001), in its capacity as predispositional influence on consumption decisions (Trommsdorff, 2008). The following paragraph will provide a brief introduction to the concept concerned with selfinvolvement, engagement and subjective importance that consumers feel and display towards products (Dubois, 2000; Foscht & Swoboda, 2007). Involvement refers to the degree of a personally felt relevance and/or interest evolving from a stimulus (or stimuli) in a specific situation. Involvement can be regarded as the motivation, to search and process information. If consumers put much effort into satisfying their needs, they are motivated to process all information regarded as highly relevant to achieve their goals, while others might not consider this being relevant (Solomon et al., 2001). Consumers will be motivated to gain information about a specific product if they feel a strong connection between needs, goals, values and product knowledge (Solomon et al., 2001). When relevant stored knowledge in a consumer’s memory gets activated, a state of motivation is developed which influences behaviour (e.g. shopping). The process of gathering information depends on the consumer‘s degree of involvement. The degree of involvement can be regarded as a continuum ranging from entirely indifferentism to obsession with a product and/or a marketing activity. The consumption at lower-level involvement is characterised by inactivity as consumers act according to their habits, thus, not being motivated to take other possibilities into consideration. At the other end of the continuum consumers’ involvement is indentified by an impassionate intensity that consumers apply to objects with great personal relevance (Solomon et al., 2001).
35
Literature Review Park and McClung (1986) suggest that it can be distinguished between affective and cognitive involvement. In the case of affective involvement, an individual’s involvement is linked with his or her deep ego as well as with anxiety to express it when making purchases. This refers to the pleasure and emotions generated through purchase and consumption. Thus, affective involvement stems from emotional motives (Kapferer & Laurent, 1986; Park & McClung, 1986). On the other hand, cognitive involvement refers to cases where interest in a given activity, e.g. reading job adverts, is described by necessity. In this case one would even talk of rational involvement stemming from utilitarian motives (Kapferer & Laurent, 1986; Park & McClung, 1986). Sherif & Cantril (1961) and Sherif & Hovland (1947) conceptualize ego-involvement, suggesting that it only exists when there is identification of oneself with a decision or a brand choice. Others (Sheth & Venkatesan, 1968; Taylor, 1974) suggest that involvement is nothing more than to resume the concept of perceived risk in consumer behaviour, initially developed by R. A. Bauer (1960), which implies a high degree of social and/or financial risk in line with negative consequences of mispurchases. Still, Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) remark that there are more positive sources of involvement, such as gratifications accompanying the after purchase of a product, where the hedonic value of consumption and the product’s expressive value stand first. A commonly used method for measuring consumer’s involvement is the context-free Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) developed and revised by Zaichkowsky (1986; 1994). Context- free in terms that PII intends to measure the state of involvement rather than regarding involvement as a stable trait, since involvement may change over time. In this study the Personal Involvement Inventory method will be applied in order to measure consumers’ level of involvement in organic wine.
4.2.4. Perception As motivation presses people to take action to satisfy their needs, the way how people act and react depends on each individual’s perception (Kotler & Armstrong, 2004). Perception is frequently defined as the process by which individuals select, organize and interpret sensory information in order to produce a meaningful picture of the world (MacDonagh et al., 2002). This cognitive process of information processing is not only characterized by the individual decoding of external cues and stimuli but also by factoring in internal cues, therewith developing an inner image of the world as well as the self. Rational for this behaviour is to make sense of the environment in order to be able to not only asses but also select the appropriate behaviour in a given situation (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007; MacDonagh et al., 2002). The way in which people make sense of the different forms of stimuli, which is sensory information received through the senses sight, hearing, smell, touch and taste, as well as external and internal cues, is highly individual (Bänsch, 2002). The perception of situation, environment and 36
Literature Review self is not necessarily accurate. Instead of acting upon an objective reality, there is only an individual interpretative reality (MacDonagh et al., 2002). Different perceptions, hence different behavioural responses to situations, are influenced by many variables. Past experiences, motivations, emotions, and expectations, to mention just a few factors, influence the unique pictures or personal constructions of the world. Consequently, as there is no objective reception of stimuli, what is meaningful to one person might be irrelevant for someone else. Hence, there are no rational choices that can be considered as universally valid (Bänsch, 2002; MacDonagh et al., 2002). Perception is however not only relevant with regard to identifying a products’ ability to satisfy a certain functional need but also symbolic needs. According to McCracken (1986), product or services often carry a symbolic value for consumers. This symbolic value does not only reflect the perceived image of a product but also the perceived self-image. In purchasing e.g. status items, consumers often attempt to transfer the perceived symbolic value or status of a product onto them (MacDonagh et al., 2002). Everyday, people are confronted with a vast variety of internal and external stimuli (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007). In order to protect oneself from this stimulus satiation, people actively engage in a process, known as perceptual selectivity, by which individuals select those stimuli that are relevant for them and filter other information in order to make sense. This process is influenced by two sorts of factors, also known as cues. While external cues are located within the object that is perceived, internal cues reside within the individual who is perceiving (MacDonagh et al., 2002). In the case of wine, being an experience good with credence qualities, external cues consist of extrinsic as well as intrinsic cues. While extrinsic cues mainly relate to size, packaging, price, brand name or labelling information, intrinsic cues cover more sensory characteristics, such as taste, aroma or colour, which can only be assessedd through tasting. However, these overall external cues are also closely related to internal cues, such as past experience. Other activating processes such as emotions, motivation and involvement do as well influence the intensity and selectivity of perception, whether consciously or unconsciously (Foscht & Swoboda, 2007). With regard to perception, the concepts of habituation and the halo effect need to be taken into consideration. Habituation means that consumers stop paying attention to certain stimuli once they become familiar (MacDonagh et al., 2002). The halo effect, on the other hand, describes the phenomenon that people tend to base perceptions or judgements of an object on one characteristic and in consequence attribute other logical or similar characteristics, which are not necessarily existent, to that object (MacDonagh et al., 2002; Solomon et al., 2001). As Scholderer et al. (2004) highlight in the case of consumer perceptions regarding organic pork, the halo effects regarding quality expectations, arising from the organic characteristic of products, has the potential of becoming a serious problem. 37
Literature Review Consumers often associate organic not only with environmental protection and health but also with good taste, which means that the credence characteristics of a product, e.g. organic, become partly transformed into experience characteristics (Philipsen & Andersen, 1998). The quality expectations regarding experience goods can, unlike credence goods, be confirmed or disconfirmed after the consumption. Thus, if consumers turn credence characteristics into experience characteristics, expectations arise, e.g. concerning the taste of organic wine, which quite possibly are unrealistic. The disconfirmation of these expectations might result in a decision not to purchase this product again. These perceptual contrast effects might thus pose a potential barrier for a positive market development (Scholderer et al., 2004).
4.3. State of the art: Organic wine consumtion As literature about studies focussing on organic wine consumers is comparatively rare, this paragraph provides not only a review of the existing organic wine consumption literature, but will further draw upon additional conventional wine literature where necessary in order to gain insight into relevant concepts influencing the purchasing decision. Understanding what drives consumers wine choice, their individual motives as well as the variations by consumer segments has always been crucial for successfully marketing wine. In the last years however, with increased competition, globally as well as locally, this has become even more important (McCutcheon, Bruwer, & Li, 2009), especially as the consumption patterns and preferences for wine have changed significantly since the late 1980s (Fotopoulos et al., 2003; Smith & Solgaard, 1996). These changed patterns and preferences are on the one hand characterized by wine losing its traditional religious and symbolic function and values and, on the other hand, characterized by an increase in new consumption behaviour related with pleasure, psychological satisfaction, cultural interest, hospitality and sophistication. Thus, a demand for so called “new wines” has developed equipping the market with greater wine varieties, for instance those produced by organically grown grapes (Fotopoulos et al., 2003). Nevertheless, wine consumption has always had a dual role, being an edible as well as luxury good (Stolz & Schmid, 2009). This can to some extent be explained by the fact that wine cannot only be assessed as a food product with a necessity character but also as a luxury item with a stimulating effect. Consequently, they (Stolz & Schmid, 2009) suggest that the results obtained from studies on consumer perceptions of organic food cannot automatically be translated or applied to the perceptions of consumers regarding wine in general and organic wine in particular. Comparisons between these two different product groups need to take the dual character of wine consumption into account. Two studies concerned with organic wine consumption were identified as highly relevant for the study at hand. The first study, a qualitative cross-cultural consumer survey conducted by Stolz and 38
Literature Review Schmid (Schmid et al., 2009; Stolz & Schmid, 2009) as part of the ORWINE EU project on organic viticulture and winemaking, was conducted in Italy, France, Germany and Switzerland. The second study was conducted by Fotopoulos et al. (2003) in the Greek context. Unlike the cross-cultural comparative EU project, the latter study encompasses a comparative study with organic and nonorganic wine consumers in Greece. These two studies were evaluated to be relevant as both research projects explicitly focus on organic wine consumers as well as adopt a comparative approach. One of the main aims of the ORWINE project was to investigate consumers’ knowledge and perception towards organic wine as well as product attributes that promote or prevent purchase. Furthermore, consumers’ preferences regarding different labelling concepts and their attitudes towards the use of additives/processing aids during the wine making process were explored. The results have been incorporated in ORWINE‘s propositions for the new EU regulation on the processing of organic wines (Schmid et al., 2009; Stolz & Schmid, 2009). Fotopoulos et al. (2003) qualitative study focuses on organic wine by relating wine purchase to Greek consumers’ personal value structures. It aims at contributing to the redirection of the Greek wine sector towards high-quality competitive products. The aim of the study is twofold. Firstly, it aims at understanding consumers’ attribute preferences, motives and cognitive structures in terms of wine. Secondly, it focuses on distinguishing between two pre-selected consumer groups, organic and non-organic wine buyers, with similar socio-demographic profiles in order to understand organic purchase behaviour. The means-end chains methodology and the related laddering technique have been applied in order to expose the way motives are linked to wine purchase behaviour of consumers. Furthermore, it investigates how purchase-relevant knowledge is stored and arranged in consumers’ memories with regard to their personal consequences and values.
4.3.1. Perception of organic wine & purchasing motives As highlighted above, only few studies have been conducted, specifically focussing on consumer perceptions of organic wine and their purchasing motives. The aforementioned studies (Fotopoulos et al., 2003; Stolz & Schmid, 2009) highlight that consumers perceive the image of organic wine as highly positive in terms of production and processing methods due to the abandonment of chemical pesticides. According to Stolz and Schmid (2009), consumers regard organic wine to be a pure and natural product. This belief is based on consumers’ assumptions that no additives and harmful substances are used during the wine pressing. Moreover, Stolz and Schmid (2009) identified that consumers assess organic wines, in contrast to conventional wines, to come from small-scale productions. Thus, these wines are considered to be healthier and more salubrious than conventional mass produced wines. Nevertheless, the respondents criticize the rather poor image of organic wine regarding taste. Some respondents express disappointment as they see no additional benefits regarding the taste 39
Literature Review and think that organic wine tastes worse than conventional wines, mainly due to too much acidity. Only very few respondents stated that they appreciate the taste of organic wine. Stolz and Schmid (2009) argue that the persisting negative image regarding the sensory quality of organic wine stems from the early stages of organic wine production. The former lack of know-how regarding the wine pressing, hence the sensory deficits, has influenced the image of wine strongly. Besides the two studies conducted by Fotopoulos et al. (2003) and Stolz and Schmid (2009), Brugarolas Mollá-Bauzá et al. (2005) conducted a study in the Spanish context, which investigated what consumers are willing to pay for an organic wine in comparison with a similar conventional wine. Their findings suggest that consumers who are highly concerned about the environment are willing to pay a premium price. However, for the largest part of their sample the main factor explaining their willingness to pay more for an organic wine were their concerns about health and diet. According to Bruragolas Mollá-Bauzá et al. (2005) environmental concern and a general interest in a healthy life style can be identified as two factors that highly influence the purchasing intention as well as willingness to pay more for organic wine. These findings are supported by Thach and Olsen (2010), who found that, while all respondents of their survey expressed a general concern for protecting the environment, only organic wine consumers believe that they can actually have an impact on this by choosing organic products. In this study conducted by Thach and Olsen (2010), it was revealed that organic wine consumers highly value the health benefits associated with organic foods in general and with organic wine in particular. Nevertheless, it was found that all consumers participating in this survey perceived wine as a natural and healthy product anyway. The natural or organic claims do in this sense not provide an automatic sign for health benefits, hence does only to some extent allow for product differentiation (Hoffmann & Szolnoki, 2010; Thach & Olsen, 2010). Sirieix and Remaud (2010) suggest that consumers perceive especially organic wine as being good for one’s health, while conventional wine was assessed negatively on this dimension. Conventional wine, on the other hand, was associated with being harmless for the environment. Besides perceived health benefits, organic wines were primarily associated with being more expensive and good to give as a gift. These findings are interesting, considering the impact of consumption occasion as well as what consumers want to express respectively whom they want to impress (Gluckman, 1990; J. Hall & Lockshin, 2000), which will be further elaborated on in section 4.3.3. As Barber et al. (2009) highlight consumers’ willingness to purchase organic wine is highly influenced by their general eco-friendly attitude. However, as Sirieix and Remaud (2010) suggest, the buying intentions and positive attitudes displayed by consumers regarding organic food in general does not seem to translate to organic wine. This can to some extent be explained by the hedonic elements of wine consumption. As Olsen et al. (2006) suggest, wine is primarily associated with pleasure and taste. The respondents of their study expressed negative 40
Literature Review associations with organic wine, i.e. bad taste, which leads to less pleasure. Their findings further indicate that health, which is a primary motive of choice with other organic products, is less important in the case of wine consumption than pleasure. These findings can be supported by Neely et al. (2010), who suggest that wine is primarily consumed for a hedonic utility achieved through consumption, which Hirschman and Holbrook (1982, p.92) define as “those facets of consumer behaviour that relate to the multisensory, fantasy and emotive aspects of one’s experience with products”. Hedonic consumption thus provides an escape from the banalities of everyday life. As aforementioned, wine, bearing resemblance to food products, with regard to cultivation and processing differs from food products regarding the function or role of consumption as well as its alcoholic content. According to Stolz and Schmid (2009), when referring to wine, in particular organic wine, as a luxury product, consumers highlight that enjoying the taste of the wine, its sensory quality, to be the predominant aspect underlying their wine consumption. On the other hand, when referring to wine as an edible, consumers especially appreciate the health aspects associated with wine consumption. They evaluate the health benefits of organic wine to be higher than of conventional wine. In a similar vein, Fotopoulos et al. (2003) found that the three major reasons to buy organic wine are healthiness, environmental friendliness and superior quality in comparison to conventional wine.
4.3.2. The assessment of quality The consumer decision when purchasing wine is influenced by many factors (McCutcheon et al., 2009), of which five will be addressed in this section: (1) perceived quality, (2) geographical origin, (3) price, (4) labels & packaging, and (5) taste.
Perceived quality Perceived quality, which is based on extrinsic and intrinsic cues, plays a crucial role in the decision making process (J. Hall & Lockshin, 2001; Lockshin, Jarvis, D’Hauteville, & Perrouty, 2006; Quester & Smart, 1996). While extrinsic quality cues relate to the expected quality, intrinsic cues relate to both expected as well as experienced quality (Jover, Montes, & Fuentes, 2004). Consumers are prior to the purchase unable to determine the quality of the wine, hence focus on proxy indicators to assist them in their choice (Gluckman, 1990; J. Hall & Lockshin, 2001; Lockshin & Rhodus, 1993; McCutcheon et al., 2009). Price, region, brand name, label, and packaging constitute some of these extrinsic cues (J. Hall & Lockshin, 2001). Lockshin et al. (2006) highlight that the ability of consumers to assess quality prior to the purchase is severely hindered when a product has a high proportion of attributes which can only be assessed during consumption. In the case of wine, consumers will fall back on extrinsic cues in the assessment of quality. Consumers try to minimise uncertainty by processing various extrinsic cues or signals of quality such as price, brand name, vintage, region, awards, and recommendation from 41
Literature Review e.g. shop staff or impersonal information sources (wine guides, reviews, advertising) (Lockshin et al., 2006). Furthermore, Lockshin and Rhodus (1993) state that the quality perception of wine consumers can be measured either objectively or subjectively. Intrinsic cues such as grape variety, alcohol content, and wine style result in objective quality, and refer to the wine itself and the processing method. On the other hand, extrinsic cues including price, packaging, labelling, and brand name relates to subjective or perceived quality. Extrinsic cues can be adjusted without changing the actual product. Moreover, they suggest that consumers with little knowledge about wine rely on extrinsic information available when selecting wine. Stolz and Schmid (2009) suggest that consumers are having difficulties choosing a wine, given the wide range of different types available, as well as being actually able to assess the quality of wines. References, such as producing region and winemaker, are therefore highly valued when choosing a wine. The results from Stolz and Schmid’s (2009) study indicate that Italian, French, German and Swiss consumers assess the quality of a wine based on its sensory qualities. Furthermore, French and Swiss consumers are positively influenced in their assessment of the wine quality by the origin of the wine, especially referring to knowledge regarding the vineyard and winemaker.
Geographical origin Lockshin et al. (2006) point out that consumers being familiar with certain brand names use them as a proxy for a number of attributes including quality. In this way brand names act like a short cut in dealing with risk and providing product cues. Moreover, Lockshin et al. (2006) state that consumers have developed a small brand repertoire that incorporates a selection of brands and generic types, such as grape varieties or region of origin. However, due to the wide array available of European and “new world” wines, the brand name for itself is not a strong enough cue for the decision to purchase. Stolz and Schmid (2009), in line with Remaud and Lockshin (2009), found that geographical origin forms the primarily and implicit criteria for consumers that guides their decision when purchasing wine. Furthermore, Lockshin et al. (2006) state that wine regions have difference in salience, which confers recognition and can drive the wine choice process. According to Remaud and Lockshin (2009), salience can be defined as a measure of the number of attributes one associates with a product. Greater salience gives rise to the probability that the cue is recalled in a purchase situation, hence wine regions with greater recognition among consumers are more likely to be chosen.
Price Price, given a perceived price-quality correlation, constitutes another important extrinsic cue to quality when there are few other cues available, when the product cannot be evaluated before 42
Literature Review purchase, and when there is some degree of risk of making the wrong choice (Lockshin et al., 2006; Quester & Smart, 1996; Spawton, 1991). However, some consumers doubt that whether cheap wines stand for poor quality or, conversely, whether expensive wines always fulfil high quality standards (Stolz & Schmid, 2009). In case of organic wine consumers, Fotopoulos et al. (2003) found that organic wine buyers indicate that wine choice is not a matter of money but a quality aspect. The findings from Forbes et al. (2009) support Fotopoulos et al. (2003) in favor of the position that consumers actually display a higher willingness to pay more for environmentally friendly produced products in general and organic wines in particular, with about 80% of the questioned consumers indicating their willingness to pay more. Price as an extrinsic source of information is an important cue when only few other cues are available or when the perceived risk of making a wrong selection is high (Quester & Smart, 1996). Nonetheless, price as an indicator for quality seems to emerge from consumers’ inexperience and low involvement with the product wine. Highly involved consumers on the other hand are more likely to differentiate wine quality by applying intrinsic cues or from their stored repertoire, consequently being less dependent on price. With respect to price, however, Quester and Smart (1996) conclude that there is no significant difference between highly and low involved consumers. A reason for this might be the counter balancing effect between two arguments apparent in the literature: if price contributes to financial risk, then less involved consumers may wish to minimise the potential loss resulting from the purchase of unsuitable wine by selecting the cheaper alternative and would therefore use price as an important choice criteria (Mitchell & Greatorex, 1988; 1989). Furthermore, if and when high quality wine was sought, for a special occasion or because of social influences, the less involved consumer would also be likely to use price as a the prime indicator of suitability of the wine and may then prefer to buy the more expensive one (Mitchell & Greatorex, 1988; 1989).
Labels & packaging Labels and packaging play a crucial role in wine marketing, not only in their function as key recognition factors through design, colour and shape but also as supportive factors for establishing brand image and brand recognition. Packaging and labelling cannot be viewed separately, as labels (front as well as back) constitute one element of the packaging, aside from the cask or bottle, its shape as well as awards (Lockshin & Hall, 2003). According to Barber et al. (2008), wine consumers are faced with complex buying decision due to the great variety of cues used on wine packaging, ranging from the bottle shapes and colours, labels, types of closures as well as geographical origins and grape varieties. Some of the packaging components have a traditional or historical background, such as the shape or colour of the glass bottle and the use of cork closures. Producers are increasingly trying to differentiate or modernize their products by using alternative materials, modifying the shapes of bottles and as using new closures. However, these forms of product differentiation might have adverse effects. As 43
Literature Review some researchers (Chaney, 2000; Jennings & Wood, 1994; Reidick, 2003) highlight, the design of the package cannot be seen separately from the product, meaning that consumers perceive the package as a direct reflection of the quality of the wine. According to Reidick (2003), consumers assign lesser quality to wine that is packaged in boxes, aluminium containers, oversized bottles or where screw-top closures were used. In a similar vein, Barber et al. (2006) suggest that while cork seals are regarded as an indicator for quality, screw tops are associated with cheap wine. Similarly, Marin et al. (2007) found that wine consumers were not able to detect sensorial differences between wine samples with different closure types in an experiment. Provided with the information that the wine was sealed with a natural cork, the ratings for the linking and the quality of the wine did not change significantly. Upon revelation that the wine had a synthetic cork or a screw-cap, the liking as well as the quality ratings changed significantly. According to Gluckman (1990), wine consumers use labels as a primary source for providing them with information about the quality. Instead of seeking assistance in the shops, some consumers prefer to form their own opinion about a wine by reading the labels. Thus, it is extremely important that the front label, in its quality to attract attention when standing in front of a shelf, is visually attractive designed and that back label provides relevant information (Barber et al., 2008). As Barber et al. (2006) highlight, the main function of the back label is to provide relevant technical information, such as taste descriptions, cellaring advice or recommended food pairing (Mueller, Lockshin, Saltman, & Blanford, 2009), while the front label is considered to provide an attraction and serve as an eye-catcher. According to some studies (M. A. Delmas & Grant, 2008; Thach & Olsen, 2010), wine consumers are confused not only by the plethora of environmental labels used within the industry but also about the actual meaning of these claims. Delmas (2010) states that consumers perceive ecolabels negatively if unfamiliar with these labels. If consumers become familiar with a label, not only does their perception of this specific label improve, but also leads to increased awareness to other eco-labels used within the market. The findings further indicate that perception is especially improved when consumers are able to link personal benefits to the organic or biodynamic wine by means of the used eco-labels. According to Delmas (M. Delmas, 2010; M. A. Delmas & Grant, 2008), labels are primarily used in order to reduce the existing information asymmetry, which exists between producers and consumers. This information asymmetry is largely a consequence of the credence characteristics of organic products. Consumers are first and foremost not present in the production and processing of the wine and can thus not observe the accuracy of the environmental claims. As a consequence, consumers prefer to rely on labels and other signals of assurance. Thus, labels should be credible and provide some source of trust, when direct interaction with the producer is not possible. Signalling superiority compared to other non-labelled products in the market constitutes another function of labels (M. A. Delmas & Grant, 2008). 44
Literature Review Delmas (2010) found that not all consumers are easily convinced or trust eco-labels. Her findings indicate that especially male and higher educated respondents were more sceptical towards the claims made by eco-labels. Mueller and Remaud (2010) arrived at a similar conclusion. While the influence of environmental claims made by eco-labels on the purchasing decision strongly increased for the environmental sensitive consumer segment, an eco-allergic consumer segment emerged. This segment, mainly consisting of male, young to mid-aged consumers, believes that environmental problems and threats are exaggerated, rejects eco-labels and merely perceives them as marketing gimmicks.
Taste Despite the above discussed important role of extrinsic cues for determining the quality and influencing the purchasing decision, Stolz and Schmid (2009) identified that consumers are mainly driven by the taste, the sensorial qualities of wine. Interestingly, consumers tend to account the processing methods for the sensorial qualities of wine. Production methods are said to have only a minor impact on the taste. Consequently, consumers refer to the production of wine merely as a purchasing criterion of minor importance (Stolz & Schmid, 2009). Furthermore, Lockshin et al. (2006) suggest that taste is the most highly correlated attribute relating to wine choice. Nevertheless, the taste of wine constitutes one of the major perceived risks, as outlined by Mitchell and Greatorex (1988). They (Mitchell & Greatorex, 1988) state that the taste of wine is the kind of risk that consumers are fretting mainly about. It is hard to minimise the risk due to the fact that almost all wine purchase situations do not include the opportunity to taste the wine before purchase. Consequently, very often, the bottle’s back label provides descriptions of wine tastes such as “fruity sweet wine” or “tannic and full-flavoured red” to guide consumers’ preferences (Hughson, de la Huerga, & Moskowitz, 2004), but unfortunately the link to purchase and/or purchase intention has not been identified yet.
4.3.3. The role of occasion, knowledge & risk According to Spawton (1991), three underlying factors play a major role in how consumers assess and evaluate various product attributes and subsequently influence the selection and purchasing process of wine: (1) consumption occasion, (2) consumer product knowledge, and (3) perceived risk. These factors will be addressed in the following.
Consumption occasion Hall and Lockshin (2001) highlight that it is crucial to identify the product-use situation, as consumers’ perceptions pertain to this factor, which stimulates purchase. Furthermore, it needs to be considered that all wine attributes are related to the situation where the consumer intends to drink the wine (J. Hall & Lockshin, 2000). Hall and Lockshin (2000) suggest that different consumption situations increase or mute the importance of different wine attributes. Thus, the 45
Literature Review number of wine brands considered involves greater search for information on price limit. Consequently, sources of information are all likely to vary with the consumption occasion, suggesting that consumers’ purchase depends on the degree to which they associate the product characteristics with their anticipated consumption situation (Belk, 1974; Chow, Celsi, & Abel, 1990). Lockshin and Hall (2000) found that for example high price was important when a consumer purchases wine in order to impress a business associate, whereas low price was important, when the situation is to relax at home or for entertaining at an informal party. Hence, people prefer different wine attributes for different occasions and for different contexts depending on what the consumer wants to express, e.g., sophistication, esteem, hospitality, etc. (Gluckman, 1990).
Consumer product-knowledge As Stolz and Schmid (2009) highlight, the general lack of knowledge regarding the production of conventional and organic wine on the part of the consumers constitutes one of the main barriers hindering a positive development of the organic wine market. Dodd et al. (2005) state that knowledge is recognized as a key concept in consumer decision making, where consumers use partially processed information from both their own knowledge and preferences for wine as well as recommendations from various outside sources (personal and impersonal information sources). Moreover, Dodd et al. (2005) argue that the concept reflects how experience with a product builds consumers’ product knowledge and how knowledge may influence the importance of various sources of information. In the context of wine consumption research, consumers’ product knowledge is associated with consumers’ degree of product involvement and how it is influencing the extent of their decision making process and information search. According to Quester and Smart (1996), involvement is defined as the perceived linkage between an individual’s needs, goals and values, and his/her product knowledge. Quester and Smart (1996), in line with Rasmussen (2001), suggest that consumers with little knowledge about wine, rely on extrinsic information, whereas high involved consumers use intrinsic attributes of wine in their decision making process due to greater experience with the product. Consequently, the level of involvement results in different importance allocated to wine attributes and in a wider range of information search.
Perceived risk Bauer (1960) found that any purchase situation always involves two aspects of risk: the uncertainty of how likely a choice is to be wrong, and the uncertainty about the consequences resulting from a wrong choice. Furthermore, it can be distinguished between four forms of perceived risk in wine consumptions: (1) financial risk, (2) functional risk, (3) physical risk and (4) social risk. In the realm of financial risks, the wines’ cost must be compared relative to the total disposable income of the buyer. Functional risks are concerned with the taste and whether the wine suits the meal or 46
Literature Review occasion. Physical risks incorporates concerns about health aspects such as harmful substances and repercussions e.g. hangover while social risks are mainly concerned with selecting the right wine as defined by the reference group (Mitchell & Greatorex, 1988). In the quantitative study conducted by Mitchell and Greatorex (1988), respondents rated functional risk as the most crucial one, followed by social, financial, and physical risk. Spawton (1991) suggests that consumers mainly adopt four strategies in order to reduce the perceived risks. Firstly, consumers turn to known brands which they associate with quality. Secondly, they rely on the recommendations by family, friends or peers. Thirdly, they ask the shop staff for authoritative assistant and to provide them with information. Lastly, they base their decision on the package of the wine, which does not only include the design of the bottle but also the labels. However, this does not apply to all consumers. As Thach and Olsen (2010) state, organic wine consumers are more likely than conventional wine consumers to seek for advice, ask for recommendations as well as try new brands. The concept of consumers’ self-confidence is closely related to the concept of perceived risk. As Olsen et al. (2003) highlight are consumers often intimidated and doubt their ability to make the right choice of an appropriate wine, especially with regard to special occasions. If the consumer has a high self-confidence, he will not be influenced by potential negative consequences of wrong choices. Consumers with low self-confidence will attempt to seek more information in order to minimise the perceived risks. This is especially relevant for occasions that could involve social risks, such as wine selection at a restaurant or as a gift. For home consumption, consumers will most likely purchase those alternatives they already know. According to Hall et al. (2000), cited in (Barber et al., 2006), there are considerable gender differences in terms of social factors and self-image related to the purchase of wine. With regard to wine purchase and consumption, male consumers are more driven by psychological and social values than female consumers, in the sense that they are more driven to impress others or place importance on the opinion of others. On the contrary, Mitchell and Greatorex’s (1988) suggest that men associate wine drinking with femininity and shy away from wine consumption due to this perceived image. This perceived image can be considered a psychological or social risk, a barrier to wine consumption. This is not to say that female consumers are not insecure when making choice. As Barber and Almanza (2007) suggest, female consumers appear to be more concerned with making the wrong choice than male consumers. This finding appears interesting in the light of the findings of Jennings and Wood’s (1994) research, indicating that nearly 70% of all wine purchasing decision that are undertaken in supermarkets and other retail houses are, as part of the daily or weekly shopping routine, done by women.
47
Literature Review
4.4. Theoretical framework Based on the three previous sections of this chapter, a theoretical framework for understanding organic wine consumer behaviour was developed, which for the most part follows the model for wine consumer behaviour developed by Geraghty (2010). The framework consists of three main elements, which influence the choice whether to purchase the product: (1) individual consumer, (2) consumer decision making, and (3) environmental influences. The authors refrain from a more interlinked illustration in order to simplify matters. Thus the framework is better understood as a rough outline than an exact depiction of organic wine consumer behaviour. The factors belonging to the framework elements individual consumer and environmental influences affect the decision making, which ultimately leads to the choice for or against a product alternative. In addition to these elements, two feedback loops depict the processes which come into effect upon purchase. While the feedback loop going back to the individual consumer has is mainly concerned with the post-purchase evaluation and the question whether to repurchase, the feedback loop going back to the environment has two dimensions. For one, it is concerned with the reactions of the environment regarding one’s purchase, which might have social consequences and additionally effect the repurchase decision. The second dimension relates to the postpurchase evaluation of the individual consumer and the decision whether to recommend this product alternative to other individual consumers within one’s social environment.
Consumer decision making This framework element is informed by section 4.2. and 4.3. of this study. While section 4.2. provides the overall basis for understanding decision making (4.2.1.), need recognition (4.2.2.), involvement (4.2.3.) and assessment of stimuli (4.2.4.), the literature review in section 4.3. provides an in-depth understanding of the factors affecting the decision making in the case of organic wine. Of special importance is in this regard the paragraph on quality assessment (4.3.2.), which addresses the evaluation of intrinsic and extrinsic cues. This is subject to the involvement of consumers, wherefore paragraph 4.3.3. is of further relevance, as involvement and knowledge are closely linked.
Individual consumer This element is informed by all three previous sections. The factors perception and motives are not only influenced by the paragraph on motivation and motives (4.2.2.) as well as on perception (4.2.4.) but also by the review of relevant organic wine consumption literature. With regard to
48
Literature Review perception, the paragraphs on perceived quality (4.3.2.), knowledge, and risk (both 4.3.3.) are of special importance. While the paragraph on lifestyle research (4.1.2.) covers the factors lifestyle and demographics, the paragraph on values (4.1.3.) refers to personal values and cultural value; the latter belonging to environmental influences
Environmental influences Besides influencing decision making in conjunction with the individual consumer, environmental influences also have a direct effect on factors belonging to the individual consumer framework element. Personal values, for instance, can be understood as reflections of cultural values, as highlighted in section 4.1. and 4.1.3. of this study. Similarly, the factor consumption occasion (4.3.3.) constitutes an important source of influence on more individual factors, such as perception of risk (4.3.3.). With the focus of the study at hand being on consumer motives and values, the framework element environmental influences is of lesser importance. However, as outlined in paragraph 4.2.1., environmental influences can, due to the interlinked nature of the factors influencing consumer behaviour, not totally be disregarded. Figure 3 - Organic wine consumer behaviour model
Source: Compiled by the authors, following Geraghty (2010)
49
Hypotheses
5. Hypotheses In the following, the hypotheses (H) derived from the review of relevant literature, background information and expert interviews will be presented and linked to the theoretical framework. The hypotheses will be operationalised in chapter 6. and empirically tested in chapter 7. The results from the expert interviews and the review of relevant organic wine literature indicate that consumers who have a high affinity and willingness to purchase organic food products presumably constitute the majority of consumers who purchase organic wine. H1: The higher the proportion of organic groceries of the total grocery shopping of consumers, the higher the proportion of organic wine of their total wine purchase quantity.
Despite the fact that wine constitutes an alcoholic beverage, which, if excessively consumed, might be detrimental to one’s health, organic food products and beverages are in general associated with a healthy lifestyle. In the case of wine, it is scientifically medically proven that small quantities of red wine are good for one’s health. Thus, it can be assumed that wine in general and organic wines in particular are perceived as the least harmful option within the spectrum of alcoholic beverages. While wine often been consumed in combination with food, an interrelation between the two can be assumed. It remains to be tested whether there is a positive correlation between high interest in healthy diet and purchasing frequency, or whether the relation is a negative one. H2: The higher the consumer interest in a healthy and well-balanced diet, the more frequent the consumer buys organic wine.
H1 and H2 are both related to the factor lifestyle, which belongs to the framework element individual consumer. As indicated by some experts, it can be assumed that female consumers are more drawn to the organic idea than their male counterparts, nonetheless due to the perceived higher degree of compatibility compared to conventional products. Additional health benefits associated with organic products might further influence this affinity. Male wine consumers on the other hand are in general more motivated by the promise of prestige and status associated with the consumption of wine. Whether this also applies to organic wine has yet to be proven. H3a: Female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by the motives security and universalism. H3b: Male consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by the motives achievement and power.
50
Hypotheses H3a&b are related to the factors demographics and personal values, which belong to the framework element individual consumer. Labels can contribute to reducing the information asymmetry between consumers and producers. If labels are credible and trustworthy, consumers prefer to rely on labels to reduce the perceived risk. However, previous studies indicate that gender differences exist regarding the perceived trustworthiness of labels. Especially male consumers appear to be sceptical towards the claims made by eco-labels and perceive them as marketing gimmicks. While research undertaken in the USA and Australia suggests that gender differences exist, this has yet to be proven for the German and Danish context. H4a: Male consumers distrust eco-labels when making their purchase decision. H4b: Female consumers rely on eco-labels when making their purchase decision.
H4a&b are related to the factors demographics and risk perception, which belong to the framework element individual consumer. Some experts suggest that differences regarding the stage of life of consumers might have an effect on the motives and values underlying the purchase decisions. Younger consumers, especially students, often find themselves in a chapter of their life where they critically assess their role in life, their impact on their social as well as physical environment. Older consumers, moving closer to the end of their life-cycle, on the other hand, might reconsider their foci in life, which often results in refocusing on treating or indulging oneself.
H5a: Older consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by hedonistic motives. H5b: Younger consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by altruistic motives.
H5a&b are related to the factors demographics and risk perception, which belong to the framework element individual consumer.
51
The Empirical Study
6. The Empirical Study This chapter will introduce the empirical study and set the stage for the subsequent comparative analysis in chapter 7. In the first section of this chapter, (1) the theory applied, the means-end chain theory, will be introduced, which will be used for identifying the motives and values of the organic wine consumers. In the second section, (2) the data collection of the study will be presented. Amongst other things, this section will provide an overview of the different types of primary data collection used and the operationalisation of the hypotheses. Lastly, (3) the data processing will be presented.
6.1. Theory applied: Means-end chain theory This section consists of two parts. In a first step, the means-end chain approach (MEC) will be introduced. In a second step, the laddering techniques, which are part of the MEC approach, will be addressed.
6.1.1. Introduction to the means-end chain approach As Olson and Reynolds (2008) state, the MEC approach is deeply rooted in different theoretical concepts which primarily originate from psychology. These concepts range from Kelley’s personal construct theory to Rokeach’s value theory, just to mention two. Besides identifying the choice criteria relevant for selecting one alternative, this approach has proven useful in explaining why these particular criteria are salient respectively have self relevance for the consumer. Thereby, the MEC approach cannot only be used for describing consumer decisions but also for understanding them. The increase of the application of the MEC approach within consumer research has been relatively slow. Olson and Reynolds (2008) mention a few reasons for this development. Even though the MEC approach bears some resemblance to quantitative methods with regard to its degree of structuring, the approach has to rather be assigned to qualitative methods. Many researchers are more familiar with quantitative approaches and prefer to avoid the necessary subjective interpretations, which follow the extensive and time-consuming data collection and evaluation (Olson & Reynolds, 2008). Olson and Reynolds (2008) trace this back to the fact that publications about the theoretical as well as methodological basics of the MEC approach have somewhat been scarce and scattered. Consumer decision making can be understood as a process of solving a problem. A Consumer consumes a certain product or displays certain behaviour as a mean, in order to reach a certain desired end-state, objective or goal (Zanoli & Naspetti, 2002). In line with Zanoli and Naspetti 52
The Empirical Study (2002), Olson and Reynolds (2008) argue that it is crucial to identify two key issues in order to understand consumer decision making. First of all, it is essential to identify those criteria that consumers rely on when evaluating and comparing different product or service alternatives. As a second step, it needs to be investigated why consumers specifically assess these factors as being important.
Three stage process As Zanoli and Naspetti (2002) suggest, it can be very difficult to identify consumers’ actual motivations by directly asking them why they have chosen a specific product. This is mainly due to the fact that consumers are either not aware of their decision, unable or unwilling to express it (Bayton, 1958). The process of three sequential stages of the MEC approach has proven to be successful. The three stages, (1) choice criteria elicitation, (2) laddering interview, and (3) hierarchical value maps, will be briefly presented in the following. The first stage consists of eliciting those choice criteria (or product attributes) most relevant for the consumer (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). In order to obtain the actual choice criteria, it is necessary to ensure that the consumer is mentally putting himself in the decision context. In order to accomplish this and fully understand the consumers’ decision making, the researcher needs to have a clear idea of those factors that define and influence the decision context. Context in this sense is not limited to the immediate environment, e.g. the point of purchase, but also the social environment (Olson & Reynolds, 2008). Consequently, the influence of reference groups and broader sociocultural environment needs to be considered (Dubois, 2000). As Olson and Reynolds (2008) suggest, a researcher might arrive at different conclusions for the same alternative depending on the way the interview questions was formulated. This can be explained by the potential of different questions triggering or activating different mental decision contexts. The second stage consists of the in-depth interviews (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). This process is also known as laddering, which will be further elaborated on in section 6.1.2. The aim of this stage is to reveal the way how consumers link their product knowledge to their self- knowledge (Fotopoulos et al., 2003; Zanoli & Naspetti, 2002). Or more specifically, how they link product attributes to consequences and finally values (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). The final stage consists of graphically representing the results of the analysis in cognitive maps, so called hierarchical value maps (HVMs). The maps contain the aggregated consumer information on the linkages between attributes, consequences and values. These aggregated linkages are also called ladders (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). According to Olson and Reynolds (2008), personal relevance of choice criteria can be seen as the most significant factor for understanding consumer decision making. Personal relevance has to be understood in the way that consumer prefer those alternatives, which in their mind can be 53
The Empirical Study assessed as the ones providing most satisfaction of their needs respectively are most useful for achieving personal value or goals. Furthermore, they (ibid.) suggest that this specific focus on and understanding of personal relevance of choice criteria exhibits the relative strength and advantage of the MEC approach.
Three levels of product knowledge As Olson and Reynolds (2008) suggest, product knowledge can be seen on three different levels: (1) product attributes, (2) consequences or effects of consumption, as well as the (3) superior values and goals, which the consumer aims to achieve or satisfy through consumption. These different levels can be visualized by means of a simple hierarchical association chain: ATTRIBUTES – CONSEQUENCES – VALUES This chain is known as the means-end chain. In this model, products are not only selected or purchased for themselves and their features, but rather for the subjective meaning they create for the consumers (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). Consumers choose products as means to satisfying a certain end. The satisfaction of relevant consequences and values can be seen as those ends (Olson & Reynolds, 2008). The meaning and value of a product is in this sense primarily defined by the subjectively perceived consequences of consumption. The hierarchical association chain can further be dichotomised in order to gain deeper insight into the consumers’ knowledge structures (Figure 4) (Sørensen, 2000): Figure 4 - Consumers’ knowledge structure TERMINAL VALUES I INSTRUMENTAL VALUES
CONSUMER‘S
I
SELF-KNOWLEDGE
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES I I FUNCTIONAL CONSEQUENCES I
CONSUMER‘S
ABSTRACT ATTRIBUTES
PRODUCT KNOWLEDGE
I CONCRETE ATTRIBUTES Source: Compiled by the authors
Concrete attributes represent tangible, physical characteristics of the product, while abstract attributes correspond to intangible, subjective characteristics. Functional consequences allow for tangible and directly experienced outcomes of product usage, whereas psychological 54
The Empirical Study consequences are less tangible benefits. Instrumental values are cognitive structures of preferred manner of behaviour and terminal values are the representation of desired end-states (Krystallis, 2007). Within the six-level MEC, the three lower levels compose the product knowledge of consumers, whilst three higher levels represent consumer’s self-knowledge (Olson & Reynolds, 2008). While some researchers distinguish between instrumental (means) and terminal (ends) values, Schwartz (1992) suggests that this distinction has not been empirically established when using other methods than the Rokeach Value Survey (Rokeach, 1973). The difference suggested by Rokeach (1973) might in reality be not that distinct, as a means can become an end, and vice versa (Schwartz, 1992). Adopting Schwartz Value Survey in this study, the authors deviate from the instrumental/terminal distinction, only speaking of values in the following. According to Olson and Reynolds (2008, p.13), „this means-end model connects the tangible, concrete attributes of a product to highly abstract and intangible personal and emotional values (goals or needs) through a chain of increasingly relevant abstract outcomes that also become increasingly personal, emotional, motivating, and self-relevant”. The salience of positive, as well as negative or aversive consumer choice criteria depends on the identification of perceived personal relevant consequences, which exist on all levels of abstraction (Olson & Reynolds, 2008). The personal relevance of choice criteria is identified by means of the laddering technique (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008), which will be presented in the following section.
6.1.2. Introduction to different laddering techniques Laddering, the interviewing method that is most often coupled with the MEC model is an in-depth probing technique, which combines qualitative information with quantitative analysis to elicit and dissolve the content of consumers’ knowledge and motivation (Baker, 2002; Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). It can be distinguished between two laddering techniques: soft and hard laddering. Soft laddering is to date the most commonly used technique by researchers. It requires the expertise of highly skilled interviewers to be implemented. The conduction of these individual, face-to face semistructured interviews provides respondents more freedom of expression, thus providing more valuable results due to minimisation of forced answers (Veludo-de-Oliveira, Ikeda, & Campomar, 2006) Grunert (1995) states that soft laddering suits better in situations where the subject of research is very complex or new characterized by very weak cognitive structures of the respondent. On the other hand, when the research area is well known among respondents, which
55
The Empirical Study enhances the construction of meanings, hard laddering is beneficial as it minimises the influence of researchers. Hard laddering constitutes for the variation of the laddering technique with greater structuring in interview and data collection procedures demanding less skill of researchers. Hard laddering is beneficial in terms of being less time consuming, cheaper and less prone to interviewer bias compared to soft laddering (Russel et al., 2004). Furthermore, using computerized hard laddering, these benefits can even be enhanced due to automation of data collection as well as the provision of relative anonymity (Veludo-de-Oliveira et al., 2006). Generally,
hard
laddering
constitutes
for
computer-based
and
self-administered
questionnaires using a paper-and-pencil version as well as the card sorting technique introduced by Valette-Florence in 1998 (1998; Veludo-de-Oliveira et al., 2006). As outlined in the section on the MEC approach, the model is following a three stage sequential process. In the first stage, relevant choice criteria, attributes are elicited (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). Different techniques are available for the elicitation, e.g. focus groups, interviews, experiments, etc. or deduction from existing literature (Fotopoulos et al., 2003). The study at hand elicited relevant choice criteria from expert interviews as well as from extensive literature review on wine consumer behaviour, hence involves inductive and deductive eliciting techniques. These elicited product attributes or choice criteria are the starting point for the subsequent in-depth interviews, which constitute stage two of the process. According to Reynolds and Gutman (2008, p.25), “laddering involves a tailored interviewing format using primarily a series of directed probes, typified by the “why is that important to you” question, with the express goal of determining sets of linkages between the key perceptual elements across the range of attributes (A), consequences (C), and values (V).” The differences in the derived ladders can be used as a basis for categorising and distinguishing among and between product classes and products (Fotopoulos et al., 2003; Reynolds & Gutman, 2008). After analysing the data received from the interviewing phase, a summary table, called Implication Matrix, can be constructed. This Matrix serves as a basis for graphically representing the dominant connections or orientations in a tree diagram, i.e. a HVM. The interpretation of this in-depth, qualitative information allows researchers to develop a deep understanding of the underlying consumer motives for the product in question (Reynolds & Gutman, 2008).
56
The Empirical Study
6.2. Data collection The empirical data collection of the study is of both qualitative and quantitative nature. While the face-to-face and telephone interviews with experts in Denmark and Germany were based on an open-ended and semi-structured interview guide, the face-to-face consumer interviews in both countries were based on a structured questionnaire as well as a laddering interview. The online consumer survey was based on the structured interview guide developed for the face-to-face consumer interviews as well as an adjusted laddering interview. Figure 5 - Overview study design
Expert Interviews n=5 Consumer Interviews GER n=11 DK n=11
Qualitative Data Collection
Online Consumer Survey GER n=73 DK n=17
Quantitative Data Collection
Source: Compiled by the authors
This section consists of four parts. Firstly, the three primary data collection approaches will be briefly introduced. Secondly, the development and design of the questionnaire used for the consumer interviews and online survey will be presented. Thirdly, the operationalisation of the hypotheses will be described. Lastly, the different designs of the laddering approach used for the consumer interviews and survey will be illustrated.
6.2.1. Different types of primary data collection The participants of the interviews were either selected based on their expertise within the field of organic wine, as in the case of the Danish and German experts, or on the grounds of the definition of occasional organic wine buyers adopted in this study. This subsection consists of three parts: (1) expert interviews, (2) consumer interviews, and (3) online consumer survey.
57
The Empirical Study
Expert interviews In order to gain detailed insights regarding organic wine, its production, regulation as well as consumption relevant aspects, five interviews were conducted with experts within organic wine, wine marketing, winemaking as well as EU regulation. Consequently the interviews with experts from Denmark and Germany differed in focus, in order to cater for the respective fields of expertise. Non-probability purposive sampling was used to determine whom to include, based on the criterion to cover all areas of interest and obtain a diverse view on the issue. An overview of the interviewed experts and their fields of expertise can be found in appendix 2. A semi-structured and open ended interview guide was developed (Pole & Lampard, 2002). The topics and questions covered in the interview guide were generated on the basis of questions that arose during the reviewing process of existing literature and statistical data. Minor adjustments of the interview guide have been made in the course of the data collection. The overall semistructured interview guide can be found in appendices 3 & 4. In the case of experts based in Denmark, face-to-face interviews were conducted upon suggestion of the interviewees at their respective work places. Due to spatial distance and consequential financial constraints, telephone interviews were conducted with the German experts. Due to prior correspondence regarding the content and approximate length of the interview, potential disadvantages of telephone interviews compared to face-to-face interviews could be balanced (Diekmann, 2004). The interviews lasted between one hour and two hours each. Upon approval of the interviewees, all interviews have been recorded on tape. Full transcripts of the interviews are available upon request. Summaries of the interviews are attached in the appendices 5-9. Information gathered in the course of these interviews served as a third source, besides the review of relevant literature and theory, for developing hypotheses for the consumer interviews and online survey.
Consumer interviews A total of 22 personal interviews were conducted with consumers in Denmark and Germany. Respondents were recruited by means of a convenience sample. The convenience sample was chosen due to the exploratory nature of the study as well as the relative scarcity of organic wine buyers. Only those respondents were included who had purchased at least one bottle of organic wine one month prior to the survey period. Due to this relatively broad definition, some respondents fulfil the minimum requirements of participation while others display a higher purchase frequency. 58
The Empirical Study The convenience sample adopted in this study resulted in a disproportionate rate of female urban respondents with higher levels of education. As this explorative study does not aim at producing representative results, the uneven composition of this sample does not pose a problem for the outcome of the study. On the contrary, it appears to be in line with studies, which highlight that most shopping in households is conducted by the female members, and other studies, which suggest that greater environmental awareness and concern with dietary habits are associated with higher levels of education (e.g., Peattie, 2001; Van Lier & Dunlap, 1981). The face-to-face consumer interviews in both countries were conducted by using a structured questionnaire which was followed by an interactive laddering interview. Due to practical reasons and in order to establish a comfortable interviewing situation for the respondents, the interviews were carried out by one interviewer in each country. In order to secure that both interviewers followed the same procedure, four pilot interviews were conducted in Copenhagen with Danish and German respondents in which both interviewers were present. The primary purpose of the pilot interviews was to insure that the developed questionnaire and the chosen laddering approach were technically feasible. Following these interviews, the two interviewers agreed upon a common approach for how to conduct the interviews.
Online consumer survey For the online survey, a total of 400 potential respondents were contacted as a first step of the adopted snowballing sample. Personal contacts and social networks were used as a starting point. The online survey was conducted in December 2010 over a period of three weeks. For the Danish sample, the non-probability sampling produced a total number of 17 analysable responses. The sample size for the German respondents was comparatively higher, with a total number of 73 analysable responses. The questionnaire for the online survey was based on the questionnaire originally developed for the personal consumer interviews. In the beginning of the questionnaire, an elimination question covering the issue of whether they could be considered occasional organic wine purchasers was posed for identifying suitable respondents.
6.2.2. Development & design of the questionnaire In this section, the development and design of the questionnaire will be presented.
Developing the questionnaire The questionnaire (appendix 10) was developed based on the hypotheses derived from background information and the developed conceptual framework of factors influencing purchase decisions. 59
The Empirical Study The main aim of the questionnaire was to gain insight into consumers’ involvement, perception, as well as knowledge and information seeking regarding organic wine. In addition to the factors dealing with the thinking processes and mental structures of consumers, the questionnaire was also intended to cover motivational factors and potential barriers of their consumption such as variety seeking, experience, risk aversion, as well as social status. In addition to that, information regarding their buying behaviour, attitudes and life situation constitutes a further source for analysing and interpreting the results derived in the second part of the interview, the laddering.
Structure & design of the questionnaire The questionnaire consists of three parts and 17 questions in total, thereof nine questions on socio-demographic data, five questions regarding buying behaviour and consumption of organic and conventional groceries and wine, as well as three statement batteries aiming to shed light on attitudes, lifestyle, dietary habits, purchasing behaviour in general and in terms of organic and conventional wine, as well as product perception. An overview of the structure of the questionnaire can be found in appendix 11. With regard to the statement batteries, statements covered the areas enjoyment of food & wine, health awareness, brand preference & price consciousness, point of purchase, origin, safety need & risk aversion, role of labels, social status, environmental aspects, occasional appropriateness, and product perception & organic wine image. An overview of the statements and the corresponding factors can be found in appendix 12.
6.2.3. Operationalisation of hypotheses The hypotheses have been operationalised by allocating an independent as well as a dependent variable to each hypothesis. The operationalisation of the variables with regard to the derived hypotheses can be found in appendix 13. In the following, the different scales used for the questionnaire will be briefly presented. Scaling indicates the level of measurement of the variables in question where numbers are assigned to a property of objects in order to impart some of the characteristics of numbers to the properties in question. Depending on the property of object, there are four different levels of measurement: (1) nominal, (2) ordinal, (3) interval, and (4) ratio scale. These have an influence on the information content as well as on the applicability of arithmetic operations (Blumberg et al., 2005; Kornmeier, 2007). By means of scaling, the qualitative characteristics of the variables are transformed into a quantifying size. The types of data chosen in the questionnaire are nominal, interval and ratio data. 60
The Empirical Study Nominal scales are least powerful due to their restriction for measurement to only frequency count of cases in each category. Thus, no arithmetic operations are possible. Nevertheless, they are useful for exploratory work where the objective is to uncover relationships. Consequently, nominal scales are mainly used to classify socio-demographic variables as well as to take on cross-tabulation with other variables in order to provide deeper insights into important data patterns. In the questionnaire, nominal scales are applied for determining data on sex, nationality, household, education, occupation and residence. Interval scales are commonly applied when measuring attitudes. Interval data have the strength of nominal and ordinal data. Additionally, they inform about the concept of equality of interval (Blumberg et al., 2005). Interval data are measured along a scale in which each position is equidistant from one another. This allows for the distance between two pairs to be equivalent. In the questionnaire, the participants’ attitude towards organic wine as well as their involvement was measured along an arbitrary scale between two extremes using the arithmetic mean as the measure for central tendency (Blumberg et al., 2005). Lastly, ratio scales incorporate all characteristics of numbers, thus representing the highest level of measurement, where all arithmetic operations are possible (Kornmeier, 2007). Compared to the other levels of measurement, ratio scales contain a natural zero point as it was the case of income and age in the questionnaire. Due to feasibility reasons, the ratio scaled data on income have been transformed to nominal scaled data by representing income in the questionnaire with help of pre-formulated income levels. Furthermore, the ratio scaled data representing age have been grouped in the data mining process according to their proportionality. Except for five open questions, the questionnaire mainly consists of closed questions with preformulated answers using four different types of rating scales. These will be presented in the following. Simple category scale was applied for socio-demographic questions as well as for dichotomous questions, where two mutually exclusive choices “Yes”/”No” were given. Multiple-choice scales in form of single-response as well as multiple-response scales were used for questions, where the respondent had to select one or several alternatives. Both multiplechoice scales provided an “other” category added with a blank space, where the respondent was able to insert another answer in case the pre-formulated list did not provide desired answers. The semantic differential scale was adopted for measuring the respondent’s involvement profile in organic wine. This type of scaling is based on the proposition that an attitude object (organic wine) can have several dimensions of connotative meanings. The meanings are located in multidimensional property space, called semantic space (Blumberg et al., 2005). The question measuring the involvement profile of the respondent adopted a semantic differential scale, 61
The Empirical Study consisting of a set of bipolar rating scales using a seven point rating, where “N” indicated indifferent. After connecting the different evaluations of the respondent on organic wine, an involvement profile was generated that was measured with help of mean calculation. Lastly, the Likert scale was applied to the three statement batteries of the questionnaire. The Likert scale is a frequently used variation of the summated rating scale. It consists of statements that express either a favourable or unfavourable attitude towards the object of interest (Blumberg et al., 2005). Each statement in the battery uses four levels of agreement ranging from agree, partly agree to partly disagree and disagree. Each response had a numerical score to reflect its degree of favourableness followed by totalling all scores in order to measure the respondent’s attitude towards organic wine. The numbers were not visual in the statement batteries but were used for data coding and analysis. Usually, a five point Likert scale is deployed. However, in order to avoid “neither/nor” answers, the respondent was forced to take a stand, also called forced choice rating (Kornmeier, 2007). The questionnaire comprised five open questions regarding age, nationality, information seeking, occasion and knowledge. Since the questionnaire intended to include only German and Danish participants, the open question on nationality was coded and measured as a simple category scale producing nominal data. The free-response questions aiming at knowledge, occasion and information seeking served primarily as sub-questions in order to provide a frame of reference for the respondent, thereby gaining deeper insights into the factor in question. Due to the variety of different responses, coding and measuring data was impeded, thus limited to content analysis and frequency count of same or related data.
6.2.4. Development & design of the laddering approaches In this study, laddering approaches were chosen to detect the personal motives underlying the organic wine purchase decision. In this section, the development of the laddering material will be presented, followed by an introduction to the different approaches used for the consumer interviews and online survey. The section concludes with a critical reflection on the chosen approaches.
Developing the material for the laddering approaches In a first step, salient product attributes were identified by means of an extensive literature review, expert interviews as well as informal conversations with consumers. In a second step, product attributes were grouped into 14 product attribute categories which were further divided into four superior groups (see appendix 14).
62
The Empirical Study For this study, the “attribute on the list” method was chosen, due to the extensive list of 14 product attribute categories of 61 attributes, which cover four superior cognitive and abstract categories. The chosen method is not only suitable as it simplifies matters but also feasible, considering the given time and resource constraints of this study. A list of 53 values, which were taken from the Schwartz List of Values (Schwartz, 1992), was prepared (appendix 15). The chosen values were consistent with the once represented by ten of the 11 value domains. The values belonging to the collectivist domain “spirituality” were deliberately excluded. The selected values were presented in random order.
Consumer interviews In this study, a hard laddering approach, a combination of the “attribute on the list” as well as an adjusted version of the card sorting method, which was first introduced by Valette-Florence (De Ferran & Grunert, 2007; 1998), has been adopted. A list comprising 14 superior category names was prepared. The product attributes within each category were then coded on cards that were of different colour in order to maintain lucidity. As a starting point of generating the ladders (attributes, consequences, and values), respondents were asked to identify the three most important product attribute categories from the list of all 14 categories and rank them according to their importance. This information was recorded by the interviewer on a separate piece of paper. In case the respondent felt that an important product attribute category had not been present on the list, it was possible to add this to the list. As a second step, the different pre-coded card decks for the chosen categories were taken out of the box of all product attribute card decks. The most important category was the start of the laddering. The interviewee was informed that it was possible at all times to add additional product attributes that had not been mentioned in the respective card decks on an unwritten card. The respondent was asked to sort the attributes of the first card deck into two sets according to their importance. One pile constituted the attributes that were most important to the respondent, while the second pile comprised the attributes that were not important. Following, the respondent had to rank the attributes of the first pile by importance. In all interviews, respondents selected one to three attributes to be important. The most important attribute within the pile of important product attributes of the first card deck constituted the start of the first ladder. For each of the up to three product attributes, consumers were asked why this was important to them. The questioning stopped when no additional information was generated. As a final step, respondents were presented with a list comprising 53 values taken from Schwartz Value Survey (Schwartz, 1992). They were asked to three words which expressed their answers on the value level best. In case they felt that none of the words fit their answers,
63
The Empirical Study consumers were encouraged to add an additional word to the list. No respondent felt the need to do this. Finally, respondents were asked how they understood the values they had identified. This was done in order to assure that the value they expressed, resulting from the consequences of consumption, actually fit the official definition of the corresponding value given by Schwartz. After completion of the first ladder, the above outlined procedure was adapted again to the product attributes of second and third order until each respondent had formulated at least one ladder per important product attribute/product attribute category.
Online consumer survey The laddering part has been adjusted by adopting a rating system for the online survey. A rating system was adopted in order to provide more lucidity, considering the amount of product attribute categories and consequences that needed to be covered. Respondents were introduced to four tables. The first table contained product attribute categories, the second and third table covered functional and psychological consequences while the fourth table contained value types (appendices 16-19). First of all, survey participants were asked to identify the three most important attribute categories that are relevant for them when purchasing organic wine. In a second step, they were asked to identify the three most important reasons as to why the three selected product attribute categories are important to them in their purchase from the list of functional consequences in table two. Likewise, respondents were asked to indicate the three most important reasons for their choice of product attribute categories from the list of psychological consequences in table three. Finally, survey participants were asked in table four to indicate the three most important value types that they felt as guiding their purchase. Answers had to be indicated and ranked from one to three, in order of their importance. One being of most importance, while three being of least importance of these personally relevant combinations. The same attributes were used that had been elicited for the consumer interviews. However, the 61 attributes were subsumed into their 14 corresponding product attribute categories, which were represented in the column to the very left, in order to increase technical feasibility. For those product attribute categories that cover diverse attributes, information was provided as to which attributes these categories entailed. Consequences were elicited based on the responses derived in the personal consumer laddering interviews. 15 functional and 17 psychological consequences were identified in the face-to-face interviews conducted in Denmark and Germany. They were represented in the respective columns 64
The Empirical Study to the very left in table two and three. For some consequences that were by nature comparatively ambiguous, additional information or examples were provided. In order to simplify the selection of values, the list of 53 values was subsumed into the corresponding 10 value domains: power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, benevolence, conformity, tradition, universalism, and security. For each value domain information was provided as to which values these domains entailed. This list was based on the Short Schwartz Value Survey (Schwartz, 1992).
Criticism of chosen laddering approaches The online adaption of the laddering approach carries risks. Firstly, no assistance can be provided by the researchers, in case respondents encounter problems. Secondly, the use of pre-established lists of product attributes, consequences and values might pose the risk of prompting answers that would not have been mentioned otherwise. The latter risk also applies to personal interviews. Furthermore, the use of these preestablished lists might lead to the selection of attributes and values that are socially desirable. This threat is not uncommon for hard laddering approaches. However, it has to be considered that even most soft laddering approaches use a list of attributes as a starting point for the laddering interview. Furthermore, as de Ferran and Grunert (2007) point out, the use of a list of product attributes, consequences, and values has in previous studies which adopted a hard laddering approach not proven to have a negative impact on the results. The approaches chosen for the personal interviews and online survey have been adopted due to practical reasons. According to de Ferran and Grunert (2007) and Beckmann and Schrøder (2004), both approaches are supposedly two of the fastest as well as easiest ways to collect data for studies attempting to discover consumers’ MEC structures. Consequently, the approaches are technically as well as time and budget wise feasible within the scope of this study.
6.3. Data processing After finishing the data collection by means of personal interviews and an online survey, the retrieved information was prepared for further processing. The data obtained was imported and entered into Microsoft Office Excel and prepared for the subsequent analysis with SPSS and MECanalyst, in which the respondents’ names were made anonymous by using a combination of country codes and numbers (e.g. DK1-DK11). This section consists of three parts: (1) the coding of the data, (2) SPSS, and (3) MECanalyst.
65
The Empirical Study
6.3.1. Coding of data In this section, the coding of the data from the questionnaire and the processing of the laddering data from the personal interviews will be presented.
Questionnaire part While developing the questionnaire, the potential pre-formulated answers had already been provided with numerical codes. In order to receive consistent results, prevent coding errors and secure inter-coder reliability (Creswell, 2009) both interviewers agreed on the codes used for the Danish and German interviews and continuously checked whether the codes were still appropriate. The codebook is available upon request. For open questions that had not been fitted with designated codes prior to the actual data collection, a content analysis was conducted, aiming at quantifying the qualitative data. Disjunctive and precise categories (Diekmann, 2004) were developed for each of the open questions based on the answers given. As multiple responses were encouraged, each category was assigned with one variable in SPSS and dichotomously coded. An overview of the categories developed and the content analysis for the corresponding questions can be found in appendix 20. Country-specific questions regarding education and income were during the coding of the data regrouped into new categories that allow for cross-national comparisons. The questionnaire categories for income were assigned to the new categories (low income, lower middle income, middle income, higher income, high income), which were developed following the classifications suggested by the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (2010) and Danmark Statistik (2010). The classifications made by the authors do not take account of factors influencing the relative income of households, such as number of earners, adult members and children in the household. Potential effects of the urban-rural divide will likewise be disregarded within the scope of this study. Likewise, the country-specific categories for education were reassigned to new categories, which were developed based on the classifications suggested by the International Social Survey Programme (2010). An overview of the new categories and the corresponding Danish and German categories used in the questionnaire can be found in appendix 21. Besides readjusting the categories for income and education level, two new categories for the variable age were created. Respondents under the age of 35 were classified as younger; likewise, respondents above the age of 35 were classified as older. The threshold of 35 was primarily defined based on the average age of both personal interview samples. Furthermore, as suggested by some experts, the mid thirties can also be assessed as a social threshold, meaning individuals older than 35 are often more socially settled then their younger fellow men. As a consequence of 66
The Empirical Study an increased participation of women in the job market and postponement of starting a family, the average age of women at first childbirth has considerably increased in both countries over the past years (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend, 2005; Danmark Statistik, 2010; Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland, 2010). In 2009, the average age in Denmark was 29 (Danmark Statistik, 2010), whereas in Germany it was 30.4 years (Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland, 2010). A change in values and priorities in the course of this later parenthood can be assumed.
Laddering part The information obtained by means of the personal interviews was processed in a twofold manner in order to cater for the system requirements of SPSS and MECanalyst. The responses were content analysed by developing precise and exhaustive categories in order to enable comparisons and facilitate interpretations. Subsequently, the categories for functional and psychological consequences were assigned to the corresponding answers. The values expressed by the respondents were in a final step linked with the corresponding value domains for the subsequent testing of the respective hypotheses. An overview of the derived categories and the content analysis of the personal interviews can be found in appendices 22-24.
6.3.2. SPSS The data from the personal interviews and online survey was entered into SPSS according to the developed codebook. For questions with a single response option, single variables were created. Questions that allowed respondents to give more than one answer were fed into the system by creating a variable for each possible answer. In a second step, these variables were grouped into multiple response sets. In order to enable statistical testing of the values expressed by the respondents in the personal interviews, variables were created for the highest number of answers given by a respondent. Subsequently, the codes for the value domains were entered into the program for each respondent. Only few respondents from the online survey managed to complete the laddering part of the survey. While for the most part they were able to follow the instructions given by the authors for identifying the product attributes, functional and psychological consequences, only a small number of respondents indicated the three most important value types. The a priori relatively small number of cases in the German and Danish online survey sample would thus have been considerably diminished if these responses would have been excluded from the overall analysis. 67
The Empirical Study It was therefore decided not to include the laddering data from the online survey in the analysis of the value orientations and the corresponding hypotheses. For the other parts of the analysis, the remaining data of the online survey was however kept. The statistical evaluation of value orientations was thus limited to the data collected by means of the personal interviews.
6.3.3. MECanalyst The analysis of the laddering data from the personal interviews was furthermore undertaken by using the MECanalyst software. Two projects were created for the Danish and German survey. Besides entering the individual ladders, the demographic variables age (younger/older) and gender (male/female) were defined for each respondent. The inserted data was transformed into implication matrices, which display how often one item has led to another item. Matrices were created separately for the two projects. Four additional matrices corresponding to the defined demographic variables were created for each country. In order to clarify and visualize the results, HVMs were produced. Five HVMs were rendered for each country. For all respondents, a cut-off level of 3 relations was defined, while for HVMs for male, female, younger and older respondents, the cut-off level of 2 was found to produce stable, clear and informative sets of relations. Consequently all relations below the respective cut-off levels were ignored. While the width of the connecting lines indicates the numerical strength of the associations between attributes, functional and psychological consequences as well as values, the place holders of the individual items contain additional information as to how often an item has been mentioned in total and by how many respondents. The dominant perceptual orientations of each group were identified on the basis of the width of the connecting lines. The thicker the line, the stronger the association between the items.
68
Comparative Analysis
7. Comparative Analysis In the following, the results from the personal interviews and online survey will be presented. This chapter consists of four parts. Following the (1) descriptive presentation of the samples, the (2) hypotheses will be tested. Further analysis of factors relevant for the discussion of the hypotheses will be presented where applicable. Subsequent to this section, the (3) HVMs and dominant perceptual orientations of the personal samples will be addressed. The (4) findings from the hypotheses tests and comparative analysis of the HVMs and dominant orientations will be briefly presented in the fourth part of this chapter. While some of the hypotheses have been tested for the total number of respondents, combining the personal and online responses for each country, the hypotheses concerning the consumer values could only be tested for the personal samples. If differences within the samples, that is between the personal and aggregated sample, were observed, these will be presented and analysed where applicable, as will the concerned sample be explicitly indicated as such. Even though the samples for the most part of the analysis have been aggregated, the sample sizes are still comparatively small. Thus, significant and robust results are not to be expected, which is quite typical for small scale research, which can merely be considered as a pretest for a subsequent larger survey. Statistically insignificant results do, however, not automatically indicate that no relations or differences exist.
7.1. Presentation of samples This section aims at presenting the samples, not only in terms of socio-demographics but also with regard to involvement and perception. The statistical computations and evaluations for section 7.1. can be found in order of appearance within this chapter in appendices 39-44.
7.1.1 Socio-demographic profile of Danish & German samples In the following, the personal and aggregated samples will be briefly presented.
Danish samples The aggregated sample (n=28) consisted of 11 respondents from personal interviews and 17 respondents from the online survey. Overall, female and male respondents were relatively evenly distributed (53.6% men, 46.4% women). A comparable distribution could be observed for the personal sample. While younger respondents were strongest represented within the aggregated sample (75%), the personal sample displayed a relatively equal representation of younger (54.5%) and older (45.5%) respondents. 69
Comparative Analysis The largest part (85.7%) of the respondents from the aggregated sample was living in households without children and predominately resided in large cities (85.7%). Regarding monthly relative net-income, households with lower middle income were strongest represented (37.7%), followed by middle (25%) and low (14.3%) income households. Higher middle income and high income households were represented with 10.7% each. While low and lower middle income groups were primarily represented by female (76.9%) and younger (57.1%) respondents, male and older respondents were strongest represented in the middle and higher middle income groups. Moreover, 20% of all male respondents were solely representing the high income group, with older respondents being slightly stronger represented than younger ones (14.3% older, 9.5% younger). The personal sample was evenly distributed within the lower middle, middle, and higher middle income groups (27.3% each). Likewise, 9.1% of the respondents indicated low, respectively high income, with the low income households being solely represented by women (20%) and high income households being exclusively constituted by men (16.7%). The education level of the Danish aggregated sample was slightly higher than for the German aggregated sample. While 78.6% had an academic degree, 10.7% had at least a university-entrance diploma. Within the high education level category (academic degree), the distribution was gender wise relatively even.
German samples The aggregated sample (n=84) was composed of 11 respondents from personal interviews and 73 respondents from the online survey. Female respondents were overrepresented with 61.9% women and 38.1% men. A comparable gender distribution could be observed when looking at the two samples separately. Within the aggregated sample, younger respondents accounted for three-fourth of the respondents, whereas a balanced proportion between young and old was observed for the personal sample. The majority (90.5%) of all respondents from the aggregated sample was living in households with no children and was primarily located in large cities (69%) or in provincial towns (17.9%). The higher middle relative net-income was strongest represented (31%), with the majority of older respondents within this category (57.1%) and approximately one-fourth of the younger ones (22.2%). While younger respondents were strongest represented (71.4%) in the low, lower middle and middle income groups, the high income group (2.4%) was only composed of older respondents. The personal sample displayed on average a higher income, with 36.4% indicated higher middle income and 18.2% high income. The education level of the aggregated sample was relatively high. The largest group (64.3%) had an academic degree or at least a university-entrance diploma (31%). Female
70
Comparative Analysis respondents had a comparatively higher education level, with 71.2% of all women having an academic degree, compared with 53.1% of all men.
7.1.2. Involvement in organic wine The respondent’s involvement in organic wine was measured by using the Personal Involvement Inventory (Zaichkowsky, 1986; 1994) consisting of a set of nine bipolar rating scales using a seven point rating, where “N” indicated indifferent. When summating all rating scales, the involvement continuum ranged from nine as being the lowest score to 63 indicating the highest score for involvement in organic wine per respondent. Since a score of 36 represents the middle of the continuum, it has been decided to group all respondents with a score under 36 as low involved and 36 and higher as involved respondents, whereof scores above the value of 54 have been defined as high involved respondents.
Danish aggregated sample The involvement continuum of the Danish aggregated sample ranged from 28 to a score of 54. The majority (93%) could be defined as being involved in organic wine. The low involvement category was represented by 7% of the aggregated sample. Along the continuum from 36 to 54, women were predominately found in the middle of the involved segment, while men were stronger represented along the higher end of the continuum. However, only men constituted the low involvement segment. While the low involvement category was only represented by younger Danes, the involved segment displayed a relatively even age distribution.
Danish personal sample The respondents displayed a higher involvement in organic wine compared to the aggregated Danish sample, with the continuum ranging from 39 to 54. This indicates that all respondents were involved in organic wine. Within the general involved segment, only male respondents were found at the higher and lower ends of the continuum. With regard to age, it is noticeable that only older respondents represented the higher scores along the involvement continuum.
German aggregated sample Overall, it can be said that German respondents displayed a comparatively higher interest in organic wine, as the sample’s score continuum ranged from 34 being the lowest to 60 being the highest score. The majority (88%) of this sample could be classified as being involved, whereof 3% could be considered highly involved in the product organic wine. The low involvement segment was represented by 12% of the respondents. Looking at the age distribution, it becomes apparent that younger respondents were more involved in organic wine in comparison with older Germans, who were stronger represented in the 71
Comparative Analysis low involvement category. However, within the small segment of highly involved respondents, older respondents were comparatively stronger represented. With regard to gender, it is noticeable that men were relatively stronger represented within the low and high involvement categories.
German personal sample The respondents displayed a similar degree of involvement compared to the aggregated German sample. However, with scores ranging from 34 to 57, the involvement continuum of the personal sample indicated a slightly lower degree of involvement. The majority (91%) of respondents were generally involved, whereof 9% could be classified as highly involved. The low involvement category was represented by 9%. The low and the high involvement segments were solely constituted of women. With regard to age, it is noticeable that the low involvement segment was only represented by younger Germans, whereas the high involvement category was constituted of older Germans.
7.1.3. Product perception & organic wine image Consumers’ perception regarding organic wine was measured using eight statements. Except for the statement organic means quality to me, the image of organic wine was investigated by means of direct comparison with the image of conventional wine. A relative indecisiveness was observed for Danes and Germans alike for the majority of statements, with responses comparatively evenly distributed and clustered within the response options partly agree and partly disagree. Only with regard to the statement organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine unambiguous results were observed, with the majority of all samples expressing total agreement ( 64.3% Danish aggregated, 72.7% Danish personal, 52.4% German aggregated, 81.8% German personal). It is noticeable that respondents from the personal German sample displayed a lower degree of indecisiveness in their responses. This becomes not only apparent with regard to the above presented statement, but also in terms of the statements organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine (54.5% agree) and organic means quality to me (62.5% agree).
7.2. Hypotheses testing & analysis of further factors In the following, the hypotheses formulated in chapter 5. will be tested. In addition to these hypotheses tests, the individual analysis of the factors underlying the hypothesis and further factors relevant for the discussion of the findings will be presented where applicable. Table 1 provides an overview of the factors underlying the hypotheses and further relevant factors.
72
Comparative Analysis Table 1 - Overview hypotheses tests, underlying factors & further factors Hypothesis H1
Underlying Factors - Proportion organic groceries - Proportion organic wine
Further Factors
H2
- Health Awareness - Purchasing Frequency Organic Wine
- Wine Consumption Frequency
H3a
- Security Value Domain - Universalism Value Domain
H3b
- Achievement Value Domain - Power Value Domain
- Health Awareness - General Safety Need & Risk Aversion - Environmental Aspects - Origin - Social Status
H4a
- Role of labels
- General Safety Need & Risk Aversion
H4b
- Role of labels
- General Safety Need & Risk Aversion
H5a
- Hedonism Value Domain
- Enjoyment of Food & Wine
H5b
- Universalism Value Domain - Benevolence Value Domain
- Environmental Aspects
Source: Compiled by the authors
The further factors are based on the results from the different statement batteries. The scores of the different statements have been summed up for the corresponding factors. In order to test whether each item was qualified for measuring the related target dimension (Diekmann, 2004), the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient has been calculated for each set of items and their sum score (see appendices 45 & 46). For the German aggregated sample, all items were positively correlated with their sum score. The correlation coefficients of the majority of items were relatively high. Only very few items displayed small correlation coefficients. Statistical significance of all items has been established. For the Danish aggregated sample, statistical significance was not given for all correlation coefficients. This can mainly be explained by the relatively small number of cases in the Danish sample compared to the German sample. However, as all items were positively correlated with their sum score, all items were kept for further analysis. The statistical computations for 7.2. can be found in appendices 47-62 in order of appearance.
73
Comparative Analysis
7.2.1. Hypothesis 1 In the following, the hypothesis test for H1 and the analysis of the underlying factors proportion organic groceries and proportion organic wine will be presented.
Hypothesis test for H1 H1: The higher the proportion of organic groceries of the total grocery shopping of consumers, the higher the proportion of organic wine of their total wine purchase quantity. H0: There is no relationship between proportion of organic groceries and proportion of organic wine. The null hypothesis for H1 has been tested for the German and the Danish aggregated samples, using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rho) for ordinal or ranked variables. This nonparametric correlation coefficient, which can take on values between -1 and +1, indicates the strength and direction of the relationship. While the negative or positive sign out the front of the r value indicates the direction of the correlation, the strength can be small (r=.10-.29), medium (r=.30-.49) or large (r=.50-1.0) (Pallant, 2007, p.126-133). For the German sample, there was a strong positive correlation between the two variables, r=.541, n=84, p<.1, with high levels of organic grocery proportion associated with high levels of organic wine proportion. Thus the null hypothesis was rejected; the alternative hypothesis was confirmed. For the Danish sample, there was a medium positive correlation between the two variables, r=.331, n=28, p<.1. Thus the null hypothesis was rejected; the alternative hypothesis was confirmed.
Analysis of underlying factor proportion organic groceries Considering how much of the shopping comes from organic cultivation, only one third (30.9%) of the German respondents indicated that organic groceries constitute more than 51% of their shopping, whereof 7.1% declared purchasing 76-100% organic. It is noticeable that women purchase relatively more organic groceries than their male counterparts. In comparison with the German sample, it becomes apparent that for Danish respondents relatively less of the shopping comes from organic cultivation, as 21.4% of the Danes indicated more than 51% of their shopping to be organic. As in the German sample, 7.1% of the Danish respondents declared purchasing 76-100% organic. It is noticeable that none of the women indicated to purchase more than 51% organic, whereas 40% of all men stated that more than 51% of their shopping stems from organic cultivation. With regard to age, it becomes apparent that the distribution in both aggregated samples for the top category (76-100%) was the same, with older respondents being stronger represented (14.3%) than younger ones (4.8%). 74
Comparative Analysis
Analysis of underlying factor proportion organic wine One-fourth of the German respondents indicated that organic wine constitutes for more than 51% of their average wine purchase quantity. It becomes apparent that the majority of all older respondents (61.9%) indicated to purchase only small quantities of organic wine, whereas younger respondents were comparatively stronger represented in the medium purchasing quantity categories. Within the highest category, older respondents were slightly stronger represented. Compared to the aggregated German sample, it becomes apparent that Danish respondents purchase only small quantities of organic wine. Only 7.2% of the Danes indicated that organic wine constitutes more than 51% of their average wine purchase quantity. While older Danish respondents were considerably stronger represented in the group which indicated to purchase only small quantities of organic wine (85.7% older, 66.7% younger), they were also significantly stronger represented in the top category (76-100%), with 14.3% of all older respondents compared to none of the younger ones. With regard to gender, it becomes apparent that for the Danish respondents, only men indicated to purchase more than 51% (13.4% men), while for the German sample the gender distribution for the top categories was relatively even (25% women, 28.1% men).
7.2.2. Hypothesis 2 In the following, the hypothesis test for H2 will be conducted. Subsequently, the analysis of the underlying factors health awareness and purchasing frequency organic wine as well as the analysis of the further factor wine consumption frequency will be presented.
Hypothesis test for H2 H2: The higher the consumer interest in a healthy and well-balanced diet, the more frequent the consumer buys organic wine. H0: There is no relationship between interest in a healthy and well-balanced diet and frequency of organic wine purchase. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient has been used for testing the null hypothesis for the German and Danish aggregated samples. For the German sample, there was a very small positive correlation between the two variables, r=.038, n=84, p>.1. As the results were not significant, the null hypothesis was retained; the alternative hypothesis was rejected. For the Danish sample, there was a small positive correlation between the two variables, r=.149, n=28, p>.1. As the results were not significant, the null hypothesis was retained; the alternative hypothesis was rejected.
75
Comparative Analysis
Analysis of underlying factor health awareness The majority of the aggregated German sample (88.1%) displayed high health awareness. Medium and low concern, on the other hand, was indicated by 6% each. It is noticeable that women were comparatively stronger represented in the highly aware group (94.2% women, 78.1% men). Regarding age differences, it becomes apparent that comparatively more younger respondents attached high importance to this factor (90.5% younger, 81% older). Within the German personal sample, all respondents displayed high health awareness. No gender or age differences existed. The majority of the respondents from the aggregated Danish sample (82.1%) exhibited high health awareness. In comparison with the German sample, it is noticeable that the Danish male respondents were stronger represented in the highly aware category (86.7% men, 76.9% women). While none of the Danish women indicated no or little concern for their health, 6.7% of all male respondents did. Unlike the German sample, all older Danes displayed high health awareness, thus were considerably stronger represented than younger ones (76.2%). In comparison with the aggregated sample, a considerably higher concern for health was observed for the Danish personal sample, with 90.9% displaying high awareness and none expressing little or no interest. All men as well as 80% of all female respondents belonged to the high concern category.
Analysis of underlying factor purchasing frequency organic wine While only 1.2% of all German respondents claimed to purchase organic wine at least once per week, 65.5% indicated to purchase once per month or less. The majority of all Danish respondents (89.3%) indicated purchasing organic wine once per month or less. Only a small group of respondents indicated a high purchasing frequency (3.6% at least once per week).
Analysis of further factor wine consumption frequency Asked regarding their wine consumption habit, approximately one-third (34.5) of the respondents from the German aggregated sample claimed to consume wine at least once per week, while 6% stated that they drink wine every day. In comparison, the Danish respondents displayed a higher consumption frequency. Half of the respondents (50%) indicated to drink wine at least once per week, while 3.6% of all Danish respondents claimed to consume wine daily. While none of the Danish female respondents indicated to consume wine daily, 5.8% of all German female respondents did, which is comparable to the proportion of Danish (6.7%) and German men (6.3%). As for age differences, it becomes apparent that none of all younger respondents (German & Danish) indicated to consume wine daily, whereas 23.8% of all older Germans and 14.3% of all older Danes did. For both aggregated samples, the majority of older respondents indicated to 76
Comparative Analysis consume wine at least once per week, with Danes being slightly stronger represented in this category than Germans (57.1% older DK, 47.6% older GER).
7.2.3. Hypotheses 3a&b In the following, the hypotheses tests for H3a&b will be conducted. Subsequently, the analysis of the further factors general safety need & risk aversion, social status, environmental aspects, origin and health awareness will be presented.
Hypotheses tests for H3a&b H3a and H3b have been subdivided into two subsequent hypotheses in order to allow for statistical testing. As the variables in question are not normally distributed, which has been identified by assessing the skewness and kurtosis for each variable, the hypotheses have been tested for the personal samples using the Mann-Whitney U Test, which is ideal for data that do not fulfil the requirements of parametric techniques, such as the t-test (Pallant, 2007, p.220). This non-parametric test is used for identifying differences between two independent groups and “evaluates whether the ranks for the two groups differ significantly” (Pallant, 2007, p.220). H3a: Female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by the motives security and universalism. H3a1: Female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by security motives. H0: The distribution of the security value domain is the same across categories of gender. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of security motives of males (MD = 2, n = 3) and females (MD = 2, n = 5), p=.87. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. For the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed significant differences regarding the importance of security motives of males (MD = 1, n= 5) and females (MD = 3, n = 2), p=.014. Thus the null hypothesis was rejected; the alternative hypothesis H3a1 was confirmed. H3a2: Female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by universalism motives. H0: The distribution of the universalism value domain is the same across categories of gender. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of universalism motives of males (MD = 2, n = 3) and females (MD = 2, n = 7), p=.634. Thus the null hypothesis was retained.
77
Comparative Analysis Likewise, for the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of universalism motives of males (MD = 1, n= 3) and females (MD = 2, n = 3), p=.114. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. H3b: Male consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by the motives achievement and power. H3b1: Male consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by achievement motives. H0: The distribution of the achievement value domain is the same across categories of gender. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of achievement motives of males (MD = 1, n = 1) and females (MD = 1, n = 3), p=1. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. Likewise, for the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of achievement motives of males (MD = 1.5 , n= 2) and females (MD = 2, n = 3), p=.543. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. H3b2: Male consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by power motives. H0: The distribution of the power value domain is the same across categories of gender. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test could not be computed as none of the males indicated the power value domain. Thus the null hypothesis could neither be rejected nor retained. For the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of power motives of males (MD = 1 , n= 1) and females (MD = 1, n = 1), p=1. Thus the null hypothesis was retained.
Analysis of further factor general safety need & risk aversion Almost two-thirds of the respondents (63.6%) from the German personal sample attached high importance to this factor. A comparatively small proportion of Danish respondents (36.4%) shared this concern. It becomes apparent that Danish respondents were comparatively stronger represented in the group which expressed little or no concern (27.3% DK, 18.2% GER). With regard to gender, it is noticeable that within both personal samples, women attached comparatively higher importance to this factor than men, wherein Germans were in general comparatively stronger represented within this high importance category (75% GER women, 33.3% GER men, 60% DK women, 16.7% DK men). With regard to age differences, different distributions for both personal samples could be observed. While for the German respondents, a comparatively even distribution between older and younger respondents could be observed for the high (66.7% older, 60% younger) as well as little or no concern categories (16.7% older, 20% younger), uneven distributions were found for the Danish 78
Comparative Analysis sample. While none of the older Danes expressed high concern, 66.7% of the younger respondents did. Likewise, while none of the younger ones indicated little or no interest in the matter, 60% of all older Danes did. In comparison with the personal German sample, it becomes apparent that a lesser proportion of respondents from the aggregated sample attached high importance to this factor (63.6% personal, 40.5% aggregated). Likewise, a smaller proportion of female and male respondents were represented within this category (75% personal female, 51.9% aggregated female, 33.3% personal male, 21.9% aggregated male). A convergence of both aggregated samples could be observed.
Analysis of further factor social status Slightly more than one-third (36.4%) of all German respondents from the personal sample attached little or no importance to social status. While the majority (54.5%) attached medium importance, only 9.1% indicated that social status was very important to them. For the Danish personal sample, the distribution was somewhat different, especially with regard to those respondents who attached high importance to social status (27.3% high, 27.3% medium, 45.5% little or no importance). With regard to gender differences, it becomes apparent that while none of the German men indicated this high importance, 33.3% of all Danish men did. Similarly, Danish female respondents were comparatively stronger represented in this category than their German counterparts (20% DK women, 12.5% GER women). Considering the age of the respondents, it becomes apparent that none of the older German respondents attached high importance to social status, while 40% of all older Danes did. Younger respondents across both samples were relatively evenly distributed within this top category (20% younger GER, 16.7% younger DK). In comparison with the personal German sample, it becomes apparent that the distribution for the aggregated sample was somewhat different. A comparatively larger proportion of respondents indicated little or no interest in social status (52.4% aggregated, 36.4% personal). Likewise, comparatively more respondents from the aggregated sample attached high importance to this factor (17.9% aggregated, 9.1% personal). While none of the male or older respondents in the personal German sample indicated high interest, a considerable number of respondents in the aggregated sample did (31.1% aggregated men, 28.6% aggregated older). For the Danish aggregated sample, no significant differences compared to the personal sample were observed.
Analysis of further factor environmental aspects It becomes apparent that the majority of both personal samples expressed high concern for environmental aspects (81.8% in both samples).
79
Comparative Analysis While there were no significant gender differences in the Danish personal sample regarding high importance being attached to this factor (83.3% DK men, 80% DK women), considerable differences in the German personal sample were observed (33.3% GER men, 100% GER women). With regard to age, no significant distribution differences were observed within and across both personal samples (high concern: 83.3% GER older, 80% GER younger, 80% DK older, 83.3% DK younger). In comparison with the personal samples, it becomes apparent that a slightly smaller proportion of respondents from the aggregated samples indicated high concern (72.6% GER aggregated, 75% DK aggregated). A considerable increase could be observed regarding the proportion of men from the aggregated German sample, expressing high concern for environmental aspects in comparison with the personal sample (53.1% GER aggregated men). Despite this increase, male respondents from the Danish aggregated sample were still comparatively stronger represented (80%). On the contrary, while the aggregated German sample registered a decrease of female respondents indicating high concern, in comparison with the aggregated Danish sample, female respondents from the German sample were still comparatively stronger represented within the top concern category (84.6% GER aggregated women, 69.2% DK aggregated women).
Analysis of further factor origin It is noticeable that with regard to the personal samples, almost three-fourths of the German respondents (72.7%) placed high emphasis on the origin of products, in comparison with nearly half of the Danish respondents (45.5%). While only 9.1% of the Germans attached little or no importance to this factor, this lack of interest was expressed by 18.2% of the Danes. With regard to gender, it could be observed that within the German personal sample, women expressed a higher interest in the factor than men, while within the Danish sample a significantly larger proportion of men indicated this high importance (75% GER women, 66.7% GER men, 20% DK women, 66.7% DK men). However, despite the stronger representation of German women within the high importance category, it is noticeable that none of the men indicated little or no interest, while 12.5% of the female respondents did. For the Danish personal sample, the gender distribution within the low interest category is relatively even (20% DK women, 16.7% DK men). Considering the age of the respondents, it is noticeable that a significantly larger proportion of older German respondents exhibited high concern for this factor in comparison with their Danish counterparts (100% GER older, 60% DK older). Regarding the younger respondents, a relatively even distribution across both samples could be observed, with the German respondents being slightly stronger represented within the high importance category (40% GER younger, 33.3% DK younger).
80
Comparative Analysis Comparing the personal samples, it becomes apparent that German respondents attached considerably more importance to the origin of products than the Danish respondents did. This difference becomes even more significant when looking at the aggregated samples for both countries. While almost all respondents from the aggregated German sample exhibited high concern for the origin, less than half of the respondents from the Danish aggregated sample did (86.9% GER aggregated, 39.3% DK aggregated). With regard to gender, it is noticeable that within the German aggregated sample a relatively even distribution regarding high concern could be observed (88.5% GER aggregated women, 84.4% GER aggregated men). The comparatively stronger representation of men within the high interest category, which was observed for the personal Danish sample, was confirmed for the aggregated sample (53.8% DK aggregated men, 23.1% DK aggregated women). Considering the age of the respondents, it becomes apparent that, in comparison with the personal sample, younger Germans within the aggregated sample were comparatively stronger represented in the high interest category (84.1% GER aggregated younger, 40% GER personal younger). While for the older German respondents from the aggregated sample expressing high interest only a slight decline was observed (100% GER personal older, 95.2% GER aggregated older), a considerable decline was registered for the Danish respondents from the aggregated sample (60% DK personal older, 42.9% DK aggregated older). Within both aggregated sample, relatively even age distributions for the high concern category were observed.
Analysis of further factor health awareness It could be interesting to discuss the factor health awareness with regard to H 3a&b. However, as this factor has already been introduced, the authors refrain from further presentations.
7.2.4. Hypotheses 4a&b In the following, the hypotheses tests for H4a&b will be conducted. Subsequently, the analysis of the underlying factor role of labels will be presented. The further factor general safety need & risk aversion will be briefly addressed.
Hypotheses tests for H4a&b H4a: Male consumers distrust eco-labels when making their purchase decision. H4b: Female consumers rely on eco-labels when making their purchase decision. H0: There are no gender differences in the role of labels. The null hypothesis for H4a&b has been tested for the German and the Danish aggregated samples, using the Chi-square test for independence. The test is used for identifying the relationship between the two categorical variables gender and role of labels. It is based on a crosstabulation table for the two variables (Pallant, 2007, p.214). 81
Comparative Analysis A Chi-square test for the German sample revealed a violation of the test, as 33.3% of the cells had expected counts less than five. Thus the test did not produce sufficient results. However, by assessing Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, there was a small significant positive correlation between the two variables, r=.194, n=83, p<.1, with female gender being positively associated with importance of role of labels. Thus the null hypothesis was rejected; the alternative hypotheses were confirmed. Likewise, the Chi-square test for the Danish sample revealed a violation of the test, as 66.7% of the cells had expected counts less than five and consequently did not produce sufficient results. Using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, it was found that a small negative correlation between the two variables, r= -.19, n=28, p>.1, exists, with male gender being positively associated with importance of roles of labels. As the results were not significant, the null hypothesis was retained.
Analysis of underlying factor role of labels Almost two-thirds of all respondents (60.2%) from the aggregated German sample attached high importance to the role of labels, followed by 31.3% indicating medium importance and 8.4% who displayed no or little interest. It is noticeable that comparatively more Danes attached high importance to this factor (71.4% high, 21.4% medium, 7.1% little or no interest). With regard to gender differences, it is noticeable that within the German sample, female respondents were comparatively stronger represented within the high importance category (66.7% GER women, 50% GER men), while within the Danish sample a significantly higher proportion of men attached high value to this factor (80% DK men, 61.5% DK women). Considering the age of the respondents, it becomes apparent that within both aggregated samples, younger respondents displayed higher concern for the role of labels than their older counterparts (61.9% GER younger, 55% GER older, 76.2% DK younger, 57.1% DK older), wherein younger Danes were comparatively stronger represented than younger Germans. In comparison with both personal samples, considerable differences were observed. However, as the hypotheses 13a&b have been tested for the aggregated samples, differences regarding the personal sample will not be further elaborated here.
Analysis of further factor general safety need & risk aversion It could be interesting to discuss the factor general safety need & risk aversion with regard to H 4a&b. However, as this factor has already been introduced, the authors refrain from further presentations.
82
Comparative Analysis
7.2.5. Hypotheses 5a&b In the following, the hypotheses tests for H5a&b will be conducted. Subsequently, the analysis of the further factor enjoyment of food & wine will be presented. The further factor environmental aspects will be briefly addressed.
Hypotheses tests for H5a&b H5a: Older consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by hedonistic motives. H0: The distribution of the hedonism value domain is the same across categories of age. The hypotheses have been tested for the personal samples using the Mann-Whitney U Test. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of hedonism motives of young (MD = 4, n = 5) and old (MD = 2, n = 4), p=.451. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. For the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of hedonism motives of young (MD = 2, n= 5) and old (MD = 4, n = 4), p=.071. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. H5b has been subdivided into two subsequent hypotheses. H5b: Younger consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by altruistic motives. H5b1: Younger consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by universalism motives. H0: The distribution of the universalism value domain is the same across categories of age. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of universalism motives of young (MD = 1, n = 4) and old (MD = 2, n = 6), p=.147. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. For the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of universalism motives of young (MD = 1.5, n= 4) and old (MD = 1, n = 2), p=.264. Thus the null hypothesis was retained. H5b2: Younger consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by benevolence motives. H0: The distribution of the benevolence value domain is the same across categories of age. For the German sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of benevolence motives of young (MD = 1, n = 5) and old (MD = 1, n = 4), p=.176. Thus the null hypothesis was retained.
83
Comparative Analysis For the Danish sample, the Mann-Whitney U test revealed no significant differences regarding the importance of benevolence motives of young (MD = 1, n= 6) and old (MD = 2, n = 5), p=.106. Thus the null hypothesis was retained.
Analysis of further factor enjoyment of food & wine It is noticeable that almost all of the Danish respondents from the personal sample attached high importance to this factor (90.9%), compared to slightly more than half of the German respondents (54.5%). With regard to gender, it is striking that none of the German men attached this high importance, in contrast to all Danish men. In general, female respondents from both personal samples indicated high interest in the enjoyment of food and wine, with Danish women being slightly stronger represented than German women (80% DK women, 75% GER women). Considering the age of the respondents, it becomes apparent that younger Germans attached higher importance to this factor in comparison with older Germans (60% GER younger, 50% GER older). The age distribution within the Danish personal sample was somewhat different for the high importance category, with older Danes being stronger represented than younger Danes. Likewise, while all older Danes exhibited high interest in this factor and were thus stronger represented than their German counterparts, younger Danes were also stronger represented than younger Germans within this category (83.3% DK younger). In comparison with the aggregated samples only few differences were observed. For the German aggregated sample, it is noticeable that while none of the men from the personal sample attached high importance to this factor, 43.8% of all men from the aggregated sample did. In contrast, a slight decline regarding the representation of female respondents within the high importance category was observed (63.5% GER aggregated female). For the Danish aggregated sample, slightly fewer respondents indicated that enjoyment of food and wine was important to them (82.1% DK aggregated). Similarly, the pronounced representation of men and older respondents from the personal Danish sample within the high importance category was mitigated. Yet, a considerable proportion of men and older respondents from the aggregated Danish sample attached high importance to the enjoyment of food and wine (86.7% DK aggregated men, 85.7% DK aggregated older).
Analysis of further factor environmental aspects It could be interesting to discuss the factor environmental aspects with regard to H 5a&b. However, as this factor has already been introduced, the authors refrain from further presentations.
84
Comparative Analysis
7.3. Analysis of HVMs & dominant perceptual orientations In the following, the HVMs and dominant perceptual orientations for both countries will be presented, not only for the overall samples but also divided by age and gender. This approach was chosen in order to identify potential differences. The graphical illustrations of the HVMs can be found in appendices 25-34.
7.3.1. Danish HVMs & dominant perceptual orientations This section provides an overview of the HVMs and dominant perceptual orientations for the Danish respondents.
All Danish respondents In comparison with the German overall HVM, the map for the Danish respondents is relatively richer, not only in terms of a higher number of attributes but also with regard to more consequences being mentioned. Unlike the German HVM, the Danish HVM is characterized by some incomplete chains at the chosen cut-off level. The attributes (A) country and region have been mentioned most often. Likewise, the functional consequences (FC) taste, quality and suitability as well as the psychological consequences (PC) experience and minimise risks play an important role and are highly interconnected. Five dominant orientations were identified: Dominant orientations of all Danish respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Pleasure Honesty Enjoying life Respect for traditions Responsibility
Pleasure: The most dominant orientation showed great concern for the value (V) pleasure, which is closely connected with the value curiosity. While pleasure (V) is directly connected with dry (A), two stronger chains were identified. The lesser complex chain leads from spicy (A) via experience (PC) and curiosity (V) to pleasure (V). Within the second, more complex chain, minimise risks (PC) has a central role. For one, it is connected with quality (FC) and value for money (A). Secondly, the psychological consequence is indirectly connected with taste via suitability (both FC), with which it also shares a direct connection. Taste specifications (A) leads directly via suitability (FC) to minimise risks (PC), and is thus connected with the dominant orientation. Region and country (both A) are connected to pleasure (V) via the indirect link taste and suitability (both FC). 85
Comparative Analysis Honesty: The second value chain leads from country (A) via control and taste (both FC) to the value honesty. Enjoying life: For this orientation, two chains were identified. Firstly, the value enjoying life is directly connected with experience (PC) and spicy (A). Secondly, the orientation was derived from country, region and full-bodied (all A), which are connected with taste and suitability (both FC). Respect for traditions: This orientation showed great concern for respect for traditions (V). This chain leads from value for money (A) via quality (FC) to the value. Responsibility: For the final orientation responsibility (V), four chains were identified, of which two are incomplete. All of these chains are connected with the value via take responsibility (PC). The first incomplete chain derives from being environmentally conscious (PC), which is directly connected with take responsibility (PC). The second incomplete chain leads from healthy (FC). The first complete chain leads from region (A) via taste (FC) to take responsibility (PC) and is thus connected with the value. The second complete chain leads from country (A) via control and taste (both FC) to take responsibility (PC) and responsibility (V).
Danish female respondents The HVM for the female respondents is fairly clear in its structure and characterized by a high number of attributes and psychological consequences. Nevertheless, few incomplete chains exist at the chosen cut-off level. The attributes country, region, grape variety and taste specifications have been mentioned by most of the respondents. As in the HVM for all Danes, the functional consequences taste, quality and suitability as well as the psychological consequences minimise risks and experience have a central role and are highly interconnected. Four dominant perceptual orientations were identified: Dominant orientations of all Danish female respondents 1. 2. 3. 4.
Pleasure Enjoying life Protecting the environment Responsibility
86
Comparative Analysis Pleasure: The most dominant orientation pleasure (V) is established through two chains, which are characterized by different degrees of complexity. The attributes taste specifications, country and region are connected with the value via suitability, taste and quality (all FC) as well as minimise risks (PC). Furthermore, dry (A) is connected with pleasure via memories (PC). Enjoying life: This orientation leads from full-bodied and region (both A) via taste (FC) and experience (PC) to the value enjoying life. Protecting the environment: The third strongest orientation showed great concern for the value protecting the environment. Although the chain is incomplete at the chosen cut-off level, the orientation was retained as the majority of respondents indicated this value. It is closely linked with quality and suitability (both FC). Responsibility: The final dominant orientation is derived through two chains, which are partly incomplete. Firstly, the value responsibility is derived from being environmentally conscious (PC) via take responsibility (PC). No connection with attributes could be established at the chosen cut-off level. Secondly, the value is connected with control and taste (both FC). While no connection with attributes could be established for control, taste is connected with country and region (A).
Danish male respondents It is noticeable that the HVM for the Danish male respondents is considerably richer than the HVM for the German male respondents. The map is characterized by relatively many clear connections. Only few incomplete chains exist. The functional consequences taste and quality and the psychological consequence experience play an important role. Likewise, the attributes value for money and country have been mentioned by most respondents. Two dominant orientations were identified: Dominant orientations of all Danish male respondents 1. 2.
Pleasure Honesty
87
Comparative Analysis Pleasure: For the most dominant orientation pleasure (V) four chains were identified. Regarding the first chain, value for money (A) leads to quality (FC), which is firstly connected with pleasure via take responsibility (PC). A second branch within this first chain leads from quality (FC) via experience (PC) to curiosity (V), which is strongly linked with pleasure (V). A second chain leads from spicy (A) via experience (PC) and curiosity (V) to pleasure (V). The third and most complex chain within this orientation derives from full-bodied, region and country (all A). These attributes are via taste (FC) - by means of the two branches suitability (FC) and minimise risks (PC) - connected with experience (PC) and thus linked to curiosity (V) and pleasure (V). A fourth chain leads from velvet (A) via texture (FC) and curiosity (V) to pleasure (V). Honesty: The second most dominant orientation honesty (V) is closely connected with the value respect for traditions (V). This orientation is characterized by three overall chains. Although honesty (V) is closely connected with need for information (PC), no connection with attributes could be established for this psychological consequence at the chosen cut-off level. A second chain leads from country (A) via taste (FC) to honesty (V). Lastly, honesty (V) is – via respect for traditions (V) connected with quality and attractiveness (both FC). While the latter consequence derives from overall attractive appearance (A), quality (FC) is connected with value for money (A).
Younger Danish respondents The HVM for the younger respondents is very rich, in terms of the high number of attributes, consequences and values mentioned. Moreover, it is also characterized by a high degree of interconnectedness and some incomplete chains. Similar to the overall HVM for the Danish respondents, the consequences taste, quality and suitability (all FC) and minimise risks (PC) have a key position within the map for the younger respondents. The attribute country has been mentioned by most respondents. Although the HVM is very rich, only one actual dominant orientation (1) could be identified, as either many weak links with values exist or no connections with attributes could be established. Among the weaker chains, one (2) relatively stronger orientation could be identified: Dominant orientations of all younger Danish respondents 1. 2.
Pleasure Protecting the environment
88
Comparative Analysis Pleasure: The value pleasure is very strongly connected with minimise risks (PC). The link to this psychological consequence is established via suitability and quality as well as taste (all FC). These consequences are derived from taste specifications, region, full-bodied as well as country (all A). A second chain leads from dry (A) via memories (PC) to pleasure (V). Protecting the environment: The value protecting the environment is closely connected with being environmentally conscious (PC) as well as quality (FC). However, at the chosen cut-off level, no connections with attributes could be established.
Older Danish respondents The HVM for the older respondents is relatively clear in its structure. It is noticeable that a comparatively higher number of consequences exist. Furthermore, relatively many incomplete chains could be identified. The attributes country, region and value for money have been mentioned by most respondents. Similar to the HVM for all Danish respondents, the functional consequences taste and quality and the psychological consequence experience have a central role. Four dominant perceptual orientations could be identified: Dominant orientations of all older Danish respondents 1. 2. 3.
Pleasure Honesty Enjoying life
Pleasure: The most dominant orientation, pleasure (V), is closely connected with the value curiosity. Four chains could be identified within this orientation. Firstly, velvet (A) leads via texture (FC) to pleasure (V). The second chain is more complex in its structure, leading from value for money (A) to quality (FC), which is via two branches connected with pleasure (V). For one, quality (FC) and pleasure (V) are connected via take responsibility (PC). The second branch leads via experience (PC) and curiosity (V) to pleasure (V). The third chain derives from country and region (both A) and is via taste (FC) - by means of the two branches suitability (FC) and minimise risks (PC) – connected with experience (PC) and thus linked to curiosity (V) and pleasure (V). Lastly, spicy (A) is connected with the value via the experience (PC) – curiosity (V) link. 89
Comparative Analysis Honesty: The value honesty is closely connected with need for information (PC). However, at the chosen cut-off level, this chain is incomplete. A second chain, leading from country (A), connects the value with taste (FC). Enjoying life: The final orientation, enjoying life (V), is strongly linked with experience (PC). Three chains could be identified within this orientation, establishing a connection with the value via experience (PC). The strongest chain leads from country (A) via taste, suitability (both FC) and minimise risks (PC) to experience (PC). Furthermore, experience is also directly derived from spicy (A). The third chain leads from value for money (A) via quality (FC) to experience (PC).
7.3.2. German HVMs & dominant perceptual orientations In this section, the HVMs and dominant perceptual orientations for the German respondents will be presented.
All German respondents Overall, the map is rather clear in its structure with relatively few interconnections. Taste (FC) was identified to play an important and central role, not only as it has been mentioned by all respondents but also due to its close relations with quality (FC) and minimise risks (PC), which both have been mentioned by the majority of respondents. However, while the majority of respondents indicated great concern for minimising risks, no direct connection with values could be established at the chosen cut-off level. As for attributes (A), value for money and dry have been indicated relatively often. After eliminating weaker ladders, two dominant perceptual orientations and three, or rather four, weaker orientations were identified: Dominant orientations of all German respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Enjoying life Pleasure Unity with nature Health Protecting the environment / Responsibility
Enjoying life: The most dominant perceptual orientation leads from dry, grape variety and value for money (all A) via taste (FC) and within the budget (FC) to the value enjoying life. Furthermore, the value is directly linked with suitability (FC) and enjoyment (PC).
90
Comparative Analysis Pleasure: The value pleasure is linked with taste (FC) and suitability (FC). Taste is connected with the attributes dry and grape variety, whereas suitability is directly connected with the value. Unity with nature: This orientation leads from the same attributes as the second dominant perceptual orientation, via taste (FC) to the value unity with nature. Health: The orientation that showed a great concern for health (V) is connected with quality (FC), which leads from quality classifications and value for money (both A). Protecting the environment / Responsibility: The final dominant orientation showed great concern for protecting the environment (V) through the chain organic label (A), control (FC) and being environmentally conscious (PC). While protecting the environment is directly connected with the latter consequence, the value responsibility is only linked with the FC control.
German female respondents The map for the female respondents is comparatively more complex, characterized by few direct links and a high degree of interconnectedness. As in the overall German HVM, taste (FC), minimise risks (PC) and quality (FC) have a key position. Comparatively many attributes have been mentioned, of which dry and value for money have been indicated by most of the respondents. Four dominant perceptual orientations have been identified: Dominant orientations of all German female respondents 1. 2. 3. 4.
Enjoying life Pleasure / Health Unity with nature Responsibility
Enjoying life: Four links could be established, leading to enjoying life (V). Besides pleasant (A) and suitability (FC), which are directly connected with the value, two more complex chains could be identified. The most complex chain leads from quality classifications, dry, velvet and full-bodied (all A) via quality and taste (both FC) to the PC minimise risks, which is connected with enjoying life (V). The second chain leads from value for money (A) via within the budget (FC) to the value. 91
Comparative Analysis Pleasure: The value pleasure is directly connected with the value health. Furthermore, direct connections with suitability (FC) and healthy (FC) could be identified. It is noticeable that the latter consequence is not directly connected with health (V). Instead, the link is established via pleasure (V). Although a direct connection between pleasant (A) and pleasure (V) could be established, a more complex chain leads to the value from dry and full-bodied (both A) via the FC taste. Lastly, the value health is connected with velvet (A) and the FC compatibility, via the FC taste. Unity with nature: The third dominant perceptual orientation showed a great concern for unity with nature (V) through the chain region (A), taste (FC) and associations with country/culture/vacation (PC). Responsibility: The final dominant orientation leads from organic label (A) via control (FC) to the PCs being environmentally conscious and minimise risks, which are both connected with responsibility (V).
German male respondents The HVM for the male respondents is less complex compared to the map of the female Germans, not only in terms of the number of mentioned attributes, consequences and values but also with regard to interconnectedness. Few complete chains were established at the chosen cut-off level, with some chains not being connected with attributes and some consequences constituting ends in themselves. One dominant as well as three weaker orientations were identified: Dominant orientations of all German male respondents 1. 2. 3. 4.
Enjoying life Choosing your own goals Sense of belonging Protecting the environment
While choosing your own goals (V), sense of belonging (V) and protecting the environment have all been mentioned by an equal number of respondents, choosing your own goals constitutes the only orientation with a complete chain. Enjoying life: The value is connected with the PC enjoyment, which is linked with the FC suitability.
92
Comparative Analysis Choosing your own goals: One chain leads from grape variety (A) via taste (FC) to choosing your own goals (V). A second chain leads from quality (FC) via minimise risks (PC) to the value. Sense of belonging: The value is connected with loyal commitment (PC), which derives from quality (FC). Protecting the environment: The value derives from the psychological consequence being environmentally conscious.
Younger German respondents It becomes apparent that the map for the younger respondents is characterized by few attributes, a high degree of interconnectedness as well as some pronounced values. Despite the fact that there are relatively many strong chains, the HVM is also characterized by some weak or incomplete chains. The attribute value for money has been mentioned by most respondents and is closely linked to the central consequences minimise risks (PC) as well as suitability (FC). Likewise, the consequences taste as well as within the budget (both FC) have a key position within the map. Although minimise risks has a central role within this map, no direct connection with values could be established at the chosen cut-off level. Four dominant perceptual orientations were identified: Dominant orientations of all younger German respondents 1. 2. 3. 4.
Enjoying life Pleasure Freedom Loyalty
While the value protecting the environment has been mentioned by almost half of the respondents, it was only possible to establish an incomplete chain at the chosen cut-off level. Enjoying life: The most dominant orientation showed great concern for enjoying life (V). The value is strongly connected with enjoyment (PC) and within the budget (FC), which derive from taste and suitability (both FC). The latter consequence is connected with value for money (A), whereas taste is linked with full-bodied (A).
93
Comparative Analysis Pleasure: The value pleasure is closely linked with the value health. Although no direct chain for the latter value could be established, it is connected with healthy (FC) via pleasure (V). The strongest chain for the orientation derives from full-bodied and dry (both A) via taste (FC) and the subsequent consequence enjoyment (PC). Furthermore, suitability (FC) is also connected with the value via enjoyment (PC). This chain is however not connected to an attribute at the chosen cut-off level. Freedom: This orientation derives from an incomplete chain. The value freedom is connected with taste and quality (both FC). No connection with attributes could be established at the chosen cut-off level. Loyalty: The final dominant orientation was concerned with loyalty (V) and is derived from grape variety (A), which is connected with taste (FC) and loyal commitment (PC). This latter consequence is also connected with sense of belonging (V).
Older German respondents The map for the older respondents is characterized by a relatively high number of attributes and distinct links. The consequences taste, quality, compatibility (all FC), minimise risks and being environmentally conscious (both PC) have been mentioned by most respondents. Five dominant orientations have been identified: Dominant orientations of all older German respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Unity with nature Health Enjoying life Inner harmony Responsibility
Unity with nature: The value unity with nature is directly connected with attractiveness (FC). This link constitutes the weakest chain within this orientation, as no connection with an attribute could be established at the chosen cut-off level. The strongest chain derives from region (A) via taste (FC) and associations (PC). Health: This orientation showed great concern for health (V). This chain leads form value for money (A) via within the budget and quality (both FC) to minimise risks (PC), which is connected with health (V).
94
Comparative Analysis Enjoying life: This orientation consists of two independent chains. One chain leads from dry (A) via taste and compatibility (both FC) to enjoying life (V). The second chain derives from value for money and quality classifications (both A). While the latter attribute is directly connected with quality (FC), value for money (A) is connected with the value via the FC within the budget and the subsequent consequence quality (FC). Inner harmony: The value inner harmony is closely linked with compatibility (FC). This consequence is directly linked with velvet (A). In addition to that, a second chain was identified, leading from dry (A) via taste (FC) to compatibility (FC). Responsibility: This final orientation showed great concern for responsibility (V). This chain leads from organic label (A) via control (FC) to being environmentally conscious (PC), which is directly linked with the value.
7.4. Findings In the following, the findings from the comparative analysis will be briefly presented. Section 7.4.1. addresses the hypotheses tests and the limitations of the findings, whereas section 7.4.2. provides an overview of the findings from the comparative analysis of the HVMs.
7.4.1. Findings hypotheses tests In the following, the limitations of the findings from the hypotheses tests will be addressed. Regarding the outcome of the hypotheses tests for H3a&b as well as H5a&b it has to be admitted that it comes as no surprise that the Mann-Whitney U test suggested to retain most null hypotheses, thus rejecting the alternative hypotheses, due to the small sample sizes. Although the null hypotheses for the most part could not be rejected for H3a&b and H5a&b, this does not automatically indicate that no differences exist. For further analysis of potential differences regarding the values underlying the purchasing decisions, the study will focus on the analysis of the HVMs and dominant perceptual orientations. These will be presented in the following section. The further factors presented in connection with the hypotheses tests will be taken up in the discussion chapter. Table 2 provides an overview of the results from the hypotheses tests.
95
Comparative Analysis Table 2 - Overview results hypotheses tests Alternative Hypotheses H1: The higher the proportion of organic groceries of the total grocery
Result DK
9
Result GER
9
shopping of consumers, the higher the proportion of organic wine of their total wine purchase quantity. H2: The higher the consumer interest in a healthy and well-balanced diet, the
Rejected
Rejected
more frequent the consumer buys organic wine. H3 a&b H3 a1: Female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by security motives.
9
Rejected
H3 a2: Female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by universalism motives.
Rejected
Rejected
H3 b1: Male consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by achievement motives.
Rejected
Rejected
H3 b2: Male consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by power motives.
Rejected
Could not be computed
H4 a&b H4 a: Male consumers distrust eco-labels when making their purchase decision.
Rejected
9
H4 b: Female consumers rely on eco-labels when making their purchase decision.
Rejected
9
H5 a&b H5 a: Older consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by hedonistic motives.
Rejected
Rejected
H5 b1: Younger consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by universalism motives.
Rejected
Rejected
H5 b2: Younger consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by benevolence motives.
Rejected
Rejected
Source: Compiled by the authors
96
Comparative Analysis
7.4.2. Findings comparative analysis HVMs Comparing the dominant perceptual orientations identified for each country, it was found that the samples had the orientations pleasure, enjoying life and responsibility in common. While Germans also showed great concern for unity with nature, health, and protecting the environment, these orientations were not identified for the Danes. The Danish sample, on the other hand, placed great emphasis on honesty and respect for traditions; orientations, which were not identified for the German sample. Appendices 35 & 36 provide an overview of the common and country-specific dominant orientations as well as exemplary quotations from the interviews. Seven central common consequences were identified for both samples: Taste, quality, minimise risks, suitability, compatibility, being environmentally conscious, and within the budget, of which taste, quality and minimise risks constituted the most important consequences indentified within and across both sample. The central consequence experience was indentified to be of high importance to Danes. Appendices 37 & 38 provide an overview of the central consequences.
97
Discussion
8. Discussion The aim of this chapter is to discuss the results presented in the previous chapter in the light of existing literature and relevant theory. More specifically, this chapter aims at answering the research question by discussing the values and motives which were identified as being central to the Danish and German consumers’ behaviour concerning the purchase of organic wine. For the most part, the findings discussed in this chapter are based on the analysis of the data on values and motives derived from the personal interviews, as the online survey did not provide sufficient information for the MEC analysis. Thus, the personal samples constitute the population of this study. When speaking of Danes or Germans, the authors do not generalize but refer to the Danish and German respondents of the personal interviews. In the following, the results from the laddering interviews, hypotheses tests and statistical analysis of further factors will be discussed. Implications for the theoretical framework, which has been introduced in section 4.4., will be briefly addressed.
8.1. Similarities & differences in values The findings presented in the analysis suggest that, despite some superficial similarities, Danish and German organic wine buyers rather differ with regard to the values underlying their purchasing decision making process. This becomes not only apparent in terms of the country-specific values but also with regard to the different meanings attached to the common values identified for Danes and Germans. In the following, the country specific values honesty and respect for traditions (DK) as well as unity with nature, health, and protecting the environment will be discussed. As a second step, the different meanings attached to the common values pleasure, enjoying life, and responsibility will be addressed.
8.1.1. Country-specific values The value honesty was identified as being highly important to Danish respondents. This value belongs to the benevolence value domain. A considerable number of respondents indicated that they preferred to confide in winemakers. In return, they expect this trust not to be betrayed. Danes appear to prefer relying on producers, hope for sincerity in pricing, cultivation and communication. They seem to be willing to reward this honest and hard work, however expect in return that this will not be exploited. It can be suggested that some sort of give-and-take relation exists. This strong emphasis on trust and honesty could be explained by solidarity being a basic principle of the Danish welfare system, which is based on the individual’s contribution to the 98
Discussion common good. Everybody has a share and expects this in return from others. Thus, a system of reciprocity, honesty and trust emerges, which enables stability. Everybody benefits if everybody contributes. Respect for traditions (tradition value domain) was identified as a further value unique to the Danish respondents. With regard to this value, an appreciation of winemaking traditions was expressed by most Danes. It can be hypothesised that this strong focus on winemaking traditions is in line with Danes’ generally strong concern for maintaining traditions. Denmark is a small country, in which the maintenance of traditions appears to be an integral part of the national culture. This can be seen within a variety of areas of social life, ranging from Christmas traditions and monarchy to the use of the national flag (Dannebrog) for all sorts of occasions, just to mention a few. Alternatively, it can be hypothesised that this appreciation of the making of a cultural good is due to wine not having a long-standing tradition in the classical beerproducing and consuming country Denmark. Thus wine opens up a different world. This can be supported by some Danes expressing romantic, misty-eyed, and nostalgic ideals regarding wine making. This appreciation of winemaking traditions and honest work is closely linked to the value honesty. German respondents, on the other hand, expressed great concern for the values unity with nature, health, and protecting the environment. Common to these values is a strong focus on the relation between self and environment. These two elements appear to be intrinsically tied. This becomes especially apparent with regard to unity with nature (universalism value domain). German respondents attached high importance to the feeling of inner harmony and balance. This balance in their consumption appears to be reached by reconciling the needs to treating oneself while at the same time attempting to reduce potential damages for the environment. Beyond a focus on indulgence, Germans expressed a strong concern for their personal well-being. A good conscience in one’s consumption appears to arise from the conviction of protecting the environment, or rather one’s consumption being in line with one’s personal ideals. The importance of packaging reflecting the organic characteristic of the content was frequently mentioned by Germans with regard to this value. Packaging was not only mentioned with regard to unity with nature, but also in reference to health (security value domain). Respondents indicated a need to be certain that the wine and its packaging do not constitute a source of environmental pollution, which in turn might have negative effects for one’s health. Thus, it can be concluded that, while environmental protection appears to be important, environmentalism mainly appears to be a means to ensuring that one’s well-being is not harmed by one’s consumption. 99
Discussion Nonetheless, it seems that the connection between self and environment does not in all cases have an explicit inward focus. With regard to the value protecting the environment (universalism value domain), it becomes apparent that environmentalism also has clear altruistic elements for Germans. Purchasing wines form far-away regions, for instance, was highlighted by Germans to be at odds with environmental thinking. With regard to the carbon footprint of products, some German respondents expressed that they preferred to purchase German wines, in order to reduce environmental pollution. However, considering the hedonic undertone of the values specific to the German context, it could be argued that this focus on reducing environmental pollution is not purely altruistic but also constitutes another source of good conscience. Possible explanations for this strong focus on personal well-being, health, and environmentalism could be found in the comparatively high number of food scares in recent years. It seems that German consumers have become increasingly aware of the consequences of their consumption. Not only with regard to one’s health but also in terms of effects for the environment. In addition to that, it could be suggested that this pronounced emphasis on the environment shown in the purchasing behaviour of German organic wine consumers is rooted in Germany’s long tradition for environmentalism. Waste separation and recycling, for instance, are long-standing practices, which concern all citizens. The preoccupation with these matters is not only enforced by public order authorities but also informed by social pressure. Individuals who decide not to participate in these activities have to fear paying a penalty and being exposed to the judgment of neighbours and fellow citizens. A further example of this deep-rooted concern in German society can be observed with regard to the increased representation of environmental matters within politics. Not only does the German green party continue to be increasingly popular and influential but also do other parties more and more incorporate environmental matters into their political agendas.
8.1.2. Common values & different meanings Besides the country-specific values discussed above, the values pleasure, enjoying life, and responsibility were identified to be highly important for Danish and German consumers, of which pleasure and enjoying life were associated with the top three most dominant perceptual orientations for both countries. Although it appears that both countries have a great deal in common, the content analysis of the individual interviews revealed that for some cases different meanings were attached to the values expressed by the respondents. While socializing was indicated by respondents from both samples regarding the pleasure orientation, the connection between this orientation and the aspect indulgence was only 100
Discussion established by Germans. Danes, on the other hand, associated pleasure with the joy of identifying a great deal, a general feeling of excitement and the good feeling stemming from one’s consumption being in line with one’s ideology. Similarly, both samples associated indulgence and socializing with enjoying life. Despite these commonalities, Germans and Danes alike associated additional aspects with this orientation, which were unique to the samples. Germans associated relaxation with enjoying life, whereas some Danes referred to the hobby character and the delights of wine tourism. The differences between and within the samples in the values pleasure and enjoying life outlined above are not sizeable. Significant differences could, however, be observed regarding the meanings attached to responsibility. At first glance, a high degree of similar meanings seem to be attached to this value, as both Danes and Germans indicated some sort of ethical consumption in connection with responsibility. However, differences in terms of the dimensions of ethical consumption could be observed comparing the two countries. While Germans expressed a great concern for the environment, attempts to make a difference, Danes showed a strong focus on the responsibility for others, not only within their personal environment but also for the faceless other, thus, with the latter putting strong emphasis on the political dimensions of ethical consumption. Taking wage levels and political circumstances in other countries into consideration when selecting a wine was frequently mentioned by Danish respondents. It is possible that there might be some confusion regarding the difference between fair trade and organic. Alternatively, it might be the case that consumers associate the same ideals with the two concepts, or rather perceive them to be closely linked. This can be assessed as some sort of halo effect taking place, with Danish consumers attributing characteristics of fair trade products to organic wine, which are not necessarily existent (MacDonagh et al., 2002). Beyond the social and political dimensions of responsibility, Danes expressed a concern for financial responsibility and the good conscience stemming from it. Besides the environmental, social and political dimensions discussed above, responsibility also has individual dimensions. These will be addressed in the following. While taking responsibility is important to Danes, it is also important to further communicate this responsibility to others. On the one hand, the intention underlying this communication is supposed to be an attempt to convince others to become aware of their own responsibility. On the other hand, it is also a matter of image which respondents would like to create for themselves and how they would like to be perceived by others. Taking responsibility by purchasing organic products is
101
Discussion perceived to be important but ultimately it is also very important to be perceived by others as responsible consumers. Thus, purchasing organic wine has a clear image dimension. This can be related to McCracken (1986) and MacDonagh et al. (2002), who suggested that consumers often attempt to transfer the symbolic value or status of products onto them. However, this does not apply to all Danes. Some of the respondents solely indicated altruistic reasons with regard to the social and political dimensions of responsibility. It appears plausible that the socially oriented value responsibility obviously has an individualistic element for some Danish consumers, concerned with the potential personal benefits arising from responsibility. These personal benefits might come in the form of good conscience or social recognition. For the Germans, responsibility matters with regard to the self and the environment. This is further manifested in the country-specific values. However, the focal point of this seemingly environmental dimension of ethical consumption needs to be examined more closely. Environmentalism appears to be important, positive benefits are however for the most part concerned with the self; one’s own health, and personal well-being. This is shown in the importance attached to avoiding pesticides or additives, which are perceived as harmful, in order not to threaten one’s own well-being and health. Furthermore, it was highlighted by respondents to ensure that the environment is not severely harmed so that secondary damages for one’s own health can be avoided. Lastly, respondents expressed the possibility of having a good conscience about their wine consumption, as it is perceived as not damaging the environment. Similar to the Danish respondents, some Germans exclusively expressed altruistic reasons regarding the environmental dimension of responsibility. However, it appears that expressing concern and responsibility for the environment is in many cases merely a means to an end, namely increasing well-being and pleasure. Similar observations were made regarding the values specific to the German sample. Thus, the socially oriented values obviously have individualistic elements for some German consumers, which are concerned with the potential personal benefits in the form of protecting one’s health, increasing pleasure via good conscience.
8.1.3. Value synthesis Despite some commonalities, it is noticeable that – looking at the country specifics and different meanings attached to common values outlined above – rather different values influence the purchasing decisions of Danish and German consumers. Nonetheless, it appears that consumers from both countries are defined by a combination of individually and socially oriented values.
102
Discussion Pleasure and enjoying life both belong to the hedonism value domain and can thus be considered as values of individual nature. Responsibility and honesty on the other hand, belong to the benevolence value domain, which emphasizes collectivistic interests (Lehnert, 2009). The same applies for the value respect for traditions (tradition value domain). These three values can thus be considered to be of social nature. The values specific to the German consumers belong to the universalism and security value domains. These two domains can be assessed to be of both social and individual nature, as universalism and security equally cover collectivistic and individualistic interests (Lehnert, 2009). The combination of individually and socially oriented values could not only be observed when comparing the dominant perceptual orientations of all Germans and Danes but also with regard to age and gender within each sample. While each subgroup of the samples displayed heterogeneous dominant orientations, all subgroups had individually oriented values belonging to the hedonism value domain in common. Differences were observed regarding the socially oriented values, with some displaying a stronger appreciation for benevolence, and others attaching great importance to the universalism, tradition or security value domains. These findings from the comparative analysis of the dominant perceptual orientations are supported by the findings from the hypotheses tests for H3a&b and H5a&b, which suggest that no differences within age or gender exist. In retrospect, this can also be concluded for H3a1. While the hypothesis test for H3a1 suggested that Danish female consumers’ buying behaviour of organic wine is driven by security needs, this can be considered a fallacy, as the importance of the security value domain could not be confirmed in the analysis of the dominant perceptual orientations. This can be explained by the fact that the identification of leading orientations is not limited to the frequency of values mentioned. Instead, it focuses on establishing strong connections between product attributes, perceived benefits and values. As values belonging to the security domain were not represented in the HVM for the female Danes, it can be concluded that the results of hypothesis test H3a1 are mainly due to few exceptional cases exhibiting pronounced concern for security, which was not shared by the majority of female Danes. It can thus be concluded that the null hypothesis should in fact be retained. Based on the results from the tests of H3a&b and H5a&b it can be concluded that consumers are regardless of age or gender - not exclusively driven by either socially or individually oriented values. Even though there might be differences in the composition of values, a combination, or rather synthesis of values of social and individual nature can be considered valid throughout the sample.
103
Discussion With reference to the different dimensions of socially oriented values identified for both countries, it can be argued that these values to some extent can be considered a means to an end by contributing to individually oriented values. This raises the question whether the contradictory statements were deliberately made by the respondents or whether this occurred unconsciously. With reference to Bayton (1958) and Foscht and Swoboda (2007), it can be concluded that consumers are frequently not aware of their true motives. Despite this ignorance, it can furthermore be asserted that consumers are often unwilling to reveal their reasons. Attempts to conceal, or rather rationalize them in retrospect in line with personal and social norms are not uncommon, if the true motives are perceived as personal weaknesses or being socially undesirable. Regarding the values indicated by the German and Danish respondents, it is most likely the case that their purchasing decisions are for the most part influenced by individually oriented values. However, as purely individually oriented consumer behaviour might be perceived as being socially undesirable, or rather create an image or social perception which is not in line with one’s self perception, the respondents most likely justified their individually oriented behaviour in hindsight by assigning socially oriented values to it. Nonetheless, it needs to be considered that this does not apply to all respondents.
Sub-conclusion 8.1. In light of the above discussion, it can be concluded that rather heterogeneous values influence the purchasing behaviour of Danish and German organic wine consumers. While Danish consumers appear to be comparatively strongly influenced by a notion of solidarity, environmentalism seems to be of high importance for German consumers. This becomes not only apparent with regard to the country-specific values but also in terms of the different meanings attached to the common value responsibility. With reference to the latter socially oriented value, common to Danes and Germans is the importance attached to making a difference. Moreover, consumers from both countries equally value pleasure and enjoying life in their organic wine consumption. Moving beyond the value level, it appears that Danish and German consumers have more in common. The findings from the analysis of the dominant perceptual orientations suggest that consumers from both countries exhibit some sort of value synthesis between socially and individually oriented values. While this combination of the two types of values was observed for all respondents, the meanings attached to these values might differ. In addition to that, the findings indicate that socially oriented values frequently have individualistic elements. Thus, these values can be regarded a means to an end; increasing pleasure by contributing to values of individual nature.
104
Discussion For Danish consumers, this is mainly related to having a good conscience in one’s consumption and social recognition. German consumers, on the other hand, appear to achieve a good conscience not only with regard to making a difference for the environment but also for one’s own health.
8.2. Similarities & differences in motives The comparative analysis of the dominant perceptual orientations of both countries revealed taste, quality, minimise risks, suitability, compatibility, and being environmentally conscious to be common central consequences, of which taste, quality, and minimise risks were indicated most frequently. The central consequence experience was specific to the Danish sample. Based on the analysis of these central consequences, the hypotheses tests, and analysis of further factors, four main areas of interest were identified. Firstly, the personal benefits associated with organic wine consumption will be addressed. Secondly, the discussion will focus on the role of involvement, knowledge, and personal experience. Thirdly, the perception of risk and its influence on the purchasing decision will be examined. Lastly, a discussion on the importance of packaging and its different elements will conclude this section. For the following discussion, it needs to be considered that personal benefits, involvement, knowledge, experience, and risk are closely linked and mutually influence each other. Thus, intersections are inevitable. The raison d’être for a special paragraph on packaging in this section lies in its role as a mediator for the aforementioned factors.
8.2.1. Personal benefits The hypothesis test for H1 revealed that a positive relationship between the proportion of organic groceries and the proportion of organic wine of consumers’ total shopping exists, meaning that those who have a high affinity for purchasing organic groceries are also those consumers who purchase comparatively more organic wine. However, this does not automatically imply that organic wine is only purchased for its organic characteristic. As highlighted by Danish and German respondents alike, the organic characteristic can merely be considered to be subordinate to quality and taste. This is in line with Hoffmann (2010) and Krystallis (2010), who suggested that protecting the environment is important for consumers but not under the conditions of purchasing a product of inferior quality. Thus, it can be concluded that organic and conventional wines alike constitute an indulgence food. Consequently, organic wines need to meet the same requirements consumers demand from conventional wines. This assumption can further be supported by the findings regarding the product perception, presented in section 7.1.3. It appears that consumers are not willing or able to make any generic 105
Discussion statements regarding the superiority of one wine type over the other. Opinions in terms of taste or quality of a wine, for instance, appear to be formed from case to case, based on parameters other than the organic feature. However, it can be assumed that the organic characteristic of organic wine constitutes a source of additional benefit. For German consumers, these benefits come mainly in the form of good conscience arising from the conviction that one’s consumption poses no threats to one’s own health and the environment. This is closely related to the perceived personal benefits for German respondents addressed in section 8.1. Danes, on the other hand, primarily referred to personal benefits in terms of the experience elements of organic wine consumption. The different perceived personal benefits will be addressed in the following. With regard to health, it can be said that an overindulgence of wine, being an alcoholic beverage, is in general not associated with a healthy lifestyle (Hoffmann, 2010; Wechsler, 2010). While it needs to be acknowledged that for certain amounts of red wine consumed, functional health benefits have been proven, basically it can be said that there is generally a negative relation between alcohol consumption and health. For the most part, it appears that consumers find it relatively easier to establish a link between other organic groceries and personal well-being. Nonetheless, as discussed in section 8.1., many Germans established a connection between organic wine and health, or rather well-being, either indirectly or directly, via the value health and other values, thus reducing a feeling of remorse. Therefore it can be concluded that seemingly conflicting motives underlying a purchasing decision do not constitute an exception but the rule. As highlighted by Bayton (1958), consumers are in most situations motivated by a combination of different needs, whereof some might be more prepotent than others. These conflicting motives can thus, with regard to Foscht and Swoboda (2007), be regarded as manifestations of the individual complexity, dynamic and instability of human behaviour. In addition to the perceived health benefits associated with the consumption of organic wine, a second source of good conscience lies in the perceived environmental friendliness of the product. It is noticeable that only Germans indicated that purchasing wines from far-away regions to be at odds with environmental thinking. With regard to the carbon footprint of products, some German respondents expressed that they preferred to purchase German wines, in order to reduce environmental pollution. As the statistical analysis of factor 5, origin, suggested, German respondents did indeed attach high importance to the origin of products. One of the statements used for measuring this
106
Discussion factor addressed the importance of purchasing regional products. It is noticeable that a considerable smaller number of Danish respondents indicated high concern for origin. Considering the hedonic undertone of most socially oriented values identified before, it could be argued that this focus on origin and reduction of environmental pollution is not purely altruistic but might also constitute another source of good conscience. The benefit experience was indicated by most Danish respondents. This is in line with the findings from the statistical analysis of the factor enjoyment of food & wine, to which almost all Danes attached very high importance. A considerable number of Danes expressed that they enjoyed the process of finding and testing new wines. As highlighted by respondents, this process can sometimes be fun and surprising; at other times it can be disappointing. Thus many Danes indicated that within their variety seeking, they hold on to their personal preferences or taste patterns. Besides the fun and risk associated with the search and testing of unknown wines, most Danes expressed that they enjoyed discovering great bargains, the thrill of the hunt, which sometimes was referred to as some sort of hobby or art. A relationship to the general Danish bargain culture in grocery shopping (Hansen, 2011, p.16) can be clearly established. Supermarkets are frequently offering for example three wines for the price of two in their advertising brochures. In addition to the shopping experience, most Danes mentioned the sociability, or hygge character of wine consumption. It can be said that hygge constitutes an integral part of Danish culture. Critically assessing the experience benefit discussed above, it raises the question whether this benefit is specific to the consumption of organic wine or whether this could– in line with the Danish bargain culture and focus on hygge - rather be considered an essential part of the consumption of any indulgence food in the Danish context.
Sub-conclusion 8.2.1. In light of the above discussion, it can be concluded that while organic wines need to fulfil the same requirements that apply for conventional wines, the organic characteristic constitutes a source of additional benefits. Thus, provided that the demands of taste and quality are met, the organic feature might tip the scale in favour of organic wine.
8.2.2. The role of involvement, knowledge & personal experience Involvement, knowledge, and personal experience were identified to be key factors influencing the purchasing decisions of Danish and German consumers.
107
Discussion In the following, the level of involvement and knowledge of Danish and German consumers will be discussed. Secondly and thirdly, the impact of these factors on the assessment of taste and quality will be addressed.
The level of involvement & knowledge of Danish and German consumers As most Germans and Danes expressed, good taste and quality are two of the most important criteria when choosing a wine. This is in line with the findings from Stolz and Schmid (2009) and Lockshin et al. (2006). Danes and Germans alike expressed a large variety of taste indicators and cues used for the assessment of wines’ quality. While commonalities were observed, some differences could be identified within as well as across the samples. These differences, not only regarding the meaning attached to these indicators but also regarding the type of indicators, can mainly be explained by different levels of knowledge and involvement. While involvement in organic wine has been tested in this study, a general involvement in wine and wine knowledge has been disregarded. The comparative analysis of the involvement profiles for both countries revealed that Germans were slightly higher involved in organic wine than Danes. This appears contradictory to the high degree of elaboration displayed by Danes in the personal interviews. In comparison with the German respondents, Danes were very specific in their answers and used an extensive vocabulary for expressing their personal preferences as well as the cues used for evaluating quality and taste. A considerable number of Germans on the other hand were only able to express their personal preferences by describing what they liked in the light of what they did not like. In a similar vein, the comparison of the HVMs of Danish and German consumers gave the impression that Danes were comparatively higher involved than Germans, as the HVMs for the Danish respondents were not only richer but also characterised by a higher degree of complexity and interconnectedness. Despite the fact that the involvement analysis suggested that Germans were slightly higher involved in organic wine than Danes, it can thus be assumed that Danes might be higher involved in wine in general. However, this has not been tested within this study.
Taste indicators The differences in levels of involvement and knowledge become very apparent with regard to the product attributes country and region, used by respondents as taste indicators. These attributes were mentioned by most respondents, not only with regard to taste, but were also linked to a wide variety of other perceived benefits. This is in line with the findings from Stolz and Schmid (2009)
108
Discussion and Remaud and Lockshin (2009), who suggested that origin constitutes the primary and implicit criterion for consumers’ decision making. A comparatively higher number of Germans associated country and region with taste by referring to personal experiences, on and off location. Past vacations and travel experiences were used as a source of creating mental images. On the one hand, these were used for associating oneself with another culture and way of life. On the other hand, these mental images enabled respondents to link past personal experiences with taste expectations. This also applied for a small number of Danes. A high degree of sophistication and knowledge was exhibited by a considerable number of Danes and relatively few Germans. For these respondents, connections between taste and geographical information are not only established based on personal experiences but for the most part determined by their knowledge. Thus, these respondents appear to be capable of making taste inferences based on information about terrain, climate and cultivation. In reference to this, some Danes indicated that information about country, region and cultivation location is frequently used as a guideline for strategically narrowing down the range.
Quality indicators A large variety of quality indicators were identified by both German and Danish respondents. As in the case of taste, the use of quality indicators is highly determined by the consumers’ levels of knowledge. The extrinsic quality cues price, packaging, and front label were indicated by Germans and Danes alike. Further intrinsic and extrinsic cues were country-specific. It is noticeable that Germans rely increasingly on verifiable and controllable extrinsic cues, such as quality classifications, ISO/HACCP, and organic label, cues, which were not indicated by Danes In the following, two peculiarities regarding quality indicators will be discussed. First of all, the relation between price and quality will be addressed. Secondly, the differences regarding the controllability of extrinsic cues mentioned above will be elaborated. Price used as a quality indicator clearly needs to be discussed considering the level of knowledge and involvement of consumers. Some of the German respondents, who referred to themselves as being no experts when it comes to determining the quality of a wine, associated cheap wines with poor quality. While respondents shied away from purchasing low-priced wines, they likewise expressed a dislike of purchasing expensive wines, as the risk of being disappointed is perceived to be higher the more expensive the wine is. This is in line with the findings reported by Quester and Smart (1996) and Lockshin and Rhodus (1993), who suggested that consumers who were inexperienced had little knowledge or a low degree of involvement preferred to rely on extrinsic cues, such as price, in order to assess the quality of a wine.
109
Discussion However, this does not apply to all Germans. Some indicated that no definite relation between price and quality exists, stating that while a high price does not automatically indicate high quality, low price cannot generally be equated with inferior quality. Consumer doubts regarding a potential price-performance correlation were also found by Stolz and Schmid (2009). Similar perceptions regarding the connection between price and quality were observed for some Danish respondents. As one Dane indicated, purchasing expensive wines could be regarded as a no-win situation, as the respondent found it difficult to actually distinguish between low and high priced wines in terms of taste and quality. For many Germans, a good bargain was defined as getting as much as possible for the price one is willing to pay. This attitude was shared by some Danes. However, it appears that for most Danes, the attribute value for money bears a different understanding and should probably be reformulated as money for value. Danes attached high importance to appreciating the hard and honest work involved in wine making, as well as the underlying traditions, which they perceive as prerequisites for high quality. Danes expressed that these efforts need to be valued by paying an appropriate price; a price corresponding with those efforts. In general it can be said that Danes displayed an increased willingness to pay, which they perceived as an expression of their appreciation for winemaking traditions as well as hard and honest work. This is closely linked to the country-specific values respect for traditions and honesty, discussed in section 8.1. It appears that German and Danish consumers adopt different strategies, or rather rely on different sources of assurance for assessing the quality of organic wine. While Germans rely increasingly on verifiable and controllable sources of quality assurance provided by independent institutions, which lay out objective traceability criteria, Danes appear to be exclusively relying on their personal experiences and capabilities. The subjective sources or quality indicators used by Danes range from bottler, grape variety and winemaker to country. With regard to the latter product attribute, Danes indicated that different quality standards were associated with different countries. However, these standards were not further specified by the respondents. These strategies are closely linked to the different strategies adopted for minimising risks and avoiding disappointment, which will be discussed in-depth in the subsequent section. It can be argued that the strategies adopted and quality indicators used are highly influenced by the level of knowledge, involvement and personal experience of consumers. Alternatively, it might also be a matter of consumers’ self-confidence as well as their general safety needs and degree of risk aversion.
110
Discussion
Sub-conclusion 8.2.2. While the comparative analysis of the involvement profiles indicated that Germans were somewhat higher involved in organic wine than Danes, the analysis of the personal interviews and HVMs suggest differently. More precisely, higher levels of involvement on the part of Danish consumers cannot only be inferred from the high degree of sophistication exhibited by most Danes, e.g. in terms of vocabulary, and the money for value attitude but also by the strong focus on verifiable quality cues indicated by Germans. However, this pronounced emphasis on controllable sources of quality assurance might as well be an expression of a heightened sense of risk, independent of the levels of involvement, knowledge, and experience of German consumers.
8.2.3. Perception of risk As highlighted in the foregoing section of this chapter, German consumers appear to increasingly rely on verifiable cues in their quality assessment. It seems reasonable to assume that, in comparison with Danes, Germans have higher risk sensitiveness, hence are more inclined to avoid or minimise these potential risks. This assumption can be supported by the findings from the analysis of factor 6a general safety need & risk aversions, which revealed that Germans displayed a considerably stronger concern for this factor than Danes. It could be argued that food scares in recent years influenced German consumers more strongly than it was the case for Danes. Alternatively, it can be hypothesised that cultural differences exist with regard to the importance attached to scientific proof provided by independent institutions. The consumer organisation and foundation Stiftung Warentest constitutes one example of such a German independent institution. With an average paid circulation of 500.000 per month (Stiftung Warentest, 2011), Stiftung Warentest’s magazines can be considered to be among the most important and influential sources of information for consumers in the German context. In the light of the above, it could be assumed that Germans associated comparatively more risks with the purchase decision. However, analysing the respondents’ statements with regard to the classification of risks introduced by Bauer (1960), it becomes apparent that Danes are concerned by a wider scope of risks than their German counterparts. While functional, financial, and physical risks associated with the purchasing decision were identified by respondents from both countries, Danes additionally mentioned social risks. Considering the findings from section 8.1., suggesting that Danes are highly concerned with enhancing one’s social recognition, these social risks appear to be of high importance.
111
Discussion In general, it can be said that personal preferences appear to be the most important selection criteria regarding taste for Danes and Germans alike. Confidence in wines and taste patterns that they are familiar with provides some sort of confidence and assurance. This is in line with one of the risk reducing strategies in wine purchase introduced by Spawton (1991), who suggested that consumers increasingly rely on what they know. In this study, respondents from both countries used personal preferences as a starting point. The assessment whether a wine suits one’s personal preferences was based on the perception whether a match between preferences and information provided by extrinsic as well as intrinsic cues exists. In the following, the different strategies adopted by Danish and German consumers for reducing perceived risks will be addressed.
Strategies for minimising functional risks Referring to taste specifications as a way of minimising the functional risks was indicated by Danes and Germans alike. The information provided on the back label provides clues as to whether the wine matches with expectations or preferred taste patterns. In conjunction with taste specifications, Germans furthermore indicated the use of food recommendations in order to minimise functional risks. As respondents from both countries highlighted, it is very important that the wine goes well with the food and suits the occasion, i.e. its suitability. In addition to that, Germans tended to use alcoholic level as an indicator for quality and taste, hence minimising functional risks.
Strategies for minimising functional & financial risks High functional as well as financial risks were associated with assessing the price-performance ratio of wines. As Germans and Danes alike indicated, low priced wines are often associated with the functional risk that the wine does not taste good. For expensive wines, the perceived risks are considerably higher, as these wines are not only associated with functional but also financial risks. Consequently, consumers prefer positioning themselves in the middle price segment, for which they perceive the risk of being disappointed comparatively low. This is similar to the findings reported by Mitchell and Greatorex (1988; 1989), who suggested that less involved consumers preferred to rely on cheaper wine options in order to reduce the perceived financial risk. Common to Danes and Germans was the expressed willingness to pay more, if the wine is intended to be purchased for a special occasion and if consumers are sure that the quality is right. With regard to the willingness to pay more for special occasions, similar findings were reported by Mitchell and Greatorex (1988; 1989).
112
Discussion However, many respondents admitted that they were unsure whether they were actually capable of identifying high quality, or rather, a good bargain. Similarly, Olsen et al. (2003), discussing consumers’ self-confidence, suggested that consumers were especially doubtful whether they made the right choice when purchasing wines for special occasions. Referring to this, Danes outlined the strategy to purchase wine online, thus having the possibility to compare prices and to read recommendations attentively in order to avoid hasty decision making, which could be the case at supermarkets. Furthermore, Danes expressed that quality classifications constitute a source of assurance for evaluating the appropriateness of priceperformance ratios.
Strategies for minimising physical risks Besides the strategies for minimising functional and financial risks discussed before, Germans and Danes adopted different strategies for minimising physical risks. These appear to be closely linked to the central consequence compatibility. Germans and Danes alike indicated to deselect products which were perceived as being at odds with one’s personal tolerance and evaluated as a cause or potential source of physical discomfort. Negative personal experiences and memories were mentioned to be important reference points for Danish respondents in their attempts to minimise potential physical risks. This was not mentioned by Germans. However, it appears that Germans relied mainly on the organic label or ISO/HACCP. Germans especially highlighted the importance of feeling certain not to ingest pesticides or additives, which were perceived as being harmful to one’s health. This is in line with Delmas (2010), who suggested that perceived personal benefits mainly influenced the perception of organic labels. The analysis of factor 2 suggests that Danes and Germans had high health awareness. The hypothesis test for H2 indicated that a small positive correlation between health awareness and purchasing frequency of organic wine existed. However, as the results were not significant for both samples, the outcome could be regarded as coincidental. Thus, the alternative hypothesis was rejected. It can be assumed that in connection with health awareness, wine consumption frequency might be more relevant than purchasing frequency, as purchasing cannot be automatically equated with consumption. This is in line with Hoffmann (2010), who suggested that frequent purchase and consumption might be perceived to be at odds with a healthy and ecological way of living. As indicated by German respondents regarding the central consequence suitability, moderate consumption and not to get wasted were expressed as being very important. Even though it has not been explicitly mentioned, it can be assumed that excessive consumption was associated with physical risks. 113
Discussion The importance attached by Germans to moderate consumption was further supported by the statistical analysis of wine consumption frequency. It is noticeable that Germans indicated to consume wine considerably less frequently than Danes. It can be assumed that for Germans, health awareness is intrinsically tied to moderate consumption. Organic wine is after all an alcoholic beverage. It can be supposed that the negative repercussions of excessive alcohol consumption are not mitigated because of the wine stemming from organic cultivation. This can be supported by the statements from German respondents regarding health being limited to pesticides, additives and flavour enhancers as well as the importance attached to moderate consumption. While the organic characteristic does not constitute a legitimation for thoughtless overindulgence, it can be assumed that organic wine is perceived as being a lesser harmful option within the wine spectrum.
Strategies for minimising social risks While Danes appeared to be relatively confident in their ways of handling functional, financial, and physical risks, they seemed to be comparatively uncertain as to how to mitigate the perceived social risks associated with the wine selection. Information about the alcoholic level was regarded by most Danes as an important guideline for minimising social and physical risks. Potential negative consequences for one’s own and others’ well-being could, according to some Danes, be mitigated by using information about the alcoholic level as a parameter for assessing ones roadworthiness. Interestingly, social risks were only explicitly mentioned by Danes. This appears to be in line with the findings from the analysis of factor 7, social status, for which Danes were found to attach comparatively higher importance. Besides the social risks associated with alcoholic level mentioned above, Danes also expressed a concern for expectations of others. Both product attributes were strongly linked by Danes with the value responsibility, referring to the image dimensions and impact of organic wine consumption for one’s social recognition. Expectations of others were not only perceived to play an important role by one Danish respondents who was job wise involved in organic farming and felt a need to live up to expectations but also by other Danes. These respondents were predominantly concerned with the expectations and pressures associated with being hosts and how they were generally perceived by others. Similar findings were reported by Gluckman (1990) and Hall and Lockshin (2000), who suggested, what consumers whish to express and whom they want to impress being highly determined by the consumption occasion. A concern for social perception was, on the other hand, not explicitly addressed by German respondents. Instead, Germans raised the issue of wine being a prestige tool, which they 114
Discussion vehemently refused to be relevant to them. However, it is questionable whether the social perception or image dimension of wine consumption really is of no importance to German respondents. It might in fact be the contrary as it was refused so vehemently. It could be hypothesised that respondents were aware of this being applicable in their cases, which made them feel uncomfortable, as they potentially had a different self-perception. Thus by refusing the prestige elements of wine consumption so strongly, it could be assumed that they attempted to create an alternative image of themselves. This can be related to Bayton (1958), who suggested that consumers frequently attempt to conceal their true motives if perceived as socially unacceptable or personal weaknesses. The issue of wine being a prestige tool was exclusively addressed by male Germans. Interestingly, one of their most dominant perceptual orientations showed great concern for the value choosing your own goals. In connection with this value, respondents indicated the importance of not letting themselves be affected by status or prestige thinking in their wine selection. This seems interesting in the light of the findings reported by Hall et al. (2000), who suggested that especially men were driven to impress or place importance on the opinions of others in their wine consumption. It could thus be hypothesised that by neglecting the prestige dimensions of wine consumption to be relevant for them, German men attempted to relieve themselves from the perceived burden of having to live up to the expectations of others. Considering the assumptions discussed above, it raises the questions whether choosing your own goals is in fact a value underlying their purchasing behaviour or whether this can better be understood as an idealized life goal.
Sub-conclusion 8.2.3. It becomes apparent that Danes and Germans for the most part adopt similar strategies for minimising perceived risks. However, these strategies appear to be subject to the degree of these risks. In terms of functional and financial risks, consumers from both countries seem to have similar perceptions, which can also be observed with regard to the strategies adopted. Physical risks, on the one hand, appear to be more pronounced for German respondents. This is in line with the strong focus on health expressed with regard to the dominant perceptual orientations and personal benefits, addressed in section 8.1. and 8.2.1. Danes, on the other hand, expressed a great concern for social risks. As in the case of the German respondents, this can be linked to the strong focus on social recognition indicated by Danes with respect to the dominant perceptual orientations, in particular the value responsibility, addressed in section 8.1.
115
Discussion Although German men explicitly refused to be influenced by a prestige thinking and social pressure in their organic wine consumption, their vehement protests suggest that the opposite might in fact be the case. Considering the points raised above, it can be concluded that Germans have higher risk sensitiveness than Danes.
8.2.4. The role of packaging Packaging, front and back label as well as organic labels were identified to play a decisive role in the decision making process. Respondents connected these product attributes with a variety of consequences, of which quality, taste, being environmentally conscious and healthy appeared to be most important. Germans and Danes alike expressed that the overall attractive appearance of the front label as well as text or design which create an environmentally friendly image were decisive eye-catchers. Furthermore, these product attributes were said to kick start taste and quality associations. These findings are in line with Gluckman (1990) and Mueller et al. (2009), who suggested that the front label of a wine could be assessed as the primary source of attracting attention and functioning as an eye-catcher. While the appearance of the labels was said to have the potential to convey trustworthiness, it was also identified by a considerable number of Danes as a source of scepticism. Exaggerated organic looks or messages were perceived as not being reliable or authentic. This is closely linked to the value honesty, for which Danish respondents highlighted that they appreciated honest communication and disliked labels which try to trick them. These findings are similar to those reported by Delmas (2010) and Mueller and Remaud (2010), who suggested, with regard to eco-labels, consumers might perceive them as marketing gimmicks that cause scepticism. The hypothesis test for H4 revealed that German women and Danish men highly rely on labels when making a purchasing decision. However, it is noticeable that only German respondents indicated in the personal interviews that organic labels were an important criterion for selecting a wine. Organic labels were said to be an important source of assurance that a wine is actually organic. As in the case of the value responsibility, organic labels have two functions. Firstly, they evoke the feeling that the wine has been produced and processed in an environmentally friendly manner. Secondly, it provides a source of assurance that no harmful substances will be ingested. Once again, it could be argued that organic labels merely constitute a source of good conscience.
116
Discussion Considering the results from hypothesis test 4, it is surprising that none of the Danes referred to organic labels. However, as the factor underlying H4 referred to the general role of labels when going grocery shopping, it could be assumed that organic labels are important to Danes for products other than wine. This is in line with the findings from Neely et al. (2010) and Sirieix and Remaud (2010), who suggested that the positive attitude of consumers towards organic groceries did not translate to organic wine, due to the hedonic elements of wine consumption. This assumption can further be supported, considering the statements made by Danes that in the case of wine, organic is subordinate to taste. Nonetheless, some Danes suggested that they preferred the use of the organic label instead of overdone organic imagery. Less also appears to be more in the case of organic wine, as some respondents suggested that, with regard to the visual design of the front label, minimalism as a sign of quality. This does, however, not imply that classical or old fashioned designs were not appreciated. On the contrary, some Danes expressed that these were preferred over too modern or abstract styles. This is in line with Chaney (2000), Jennings and Wood (1994), and Reidick (2003), who suggested that modernizing the packaging of wine might have adverse effects. With regard to the back label, Danes suggested that the information provided on the back of the bottle has the potential of constituting an important source of credibility, given unambiguous, straight forward communication without any nonsense or ballyhoo. In a similar vein, Barber et al. (2006; 2008) suggested that consumers assessed the main function of back labels as one of providing relevant technical information. Similar to the visual design of the front label, Danes indicated that less might also be more in the case of the amount of information provided on the back label. With regard to taste specifications, respondents stated that they believed the first few things listed to be correct and the rest to be made up for decoration purposes. In comparison with the Danish respondents, Germans appeared to be more concerned with the overall packaging. Respondents indicated that the packaging needs to be of high quality, to be attractive and to live up to their aesthetic demands. As one respondent suggested, wine is a “classy product and deserves a classy packaging”. Glass bottles were perceived as being the most attractive, classical and simply proper vessel for wine. This is in line with Chaney (2000), Jennings and Wood (1994), and Reidick (2003), who suggested that the packaging was perceived by consumers as a direct reflection of the quality of wine. Even though some respondents were aware of the fact that alternative packaging might be more environmentally friendly or sustainable, they indicated that these did not match their quality demands, as alternative packaging was associated with inferior sensory quality. This is in line with the findings reported by Reidick (2003) and Marin et al. (2007). 117
Discussion Nonetheless, some Germans expressed that it was important to them that glass bottles were recycled, which they perceived to be very important for the product to be ecological throughout. In their holistic understanding, they considered organic wine only truly organic, if the organic characteristic was not limited to the content.
Sub-conclusion 8.2.4. Pertaining to the above discussion, it can be concluded that packaging plays a key role in the decision making process of organic wine consumers. The different elements of packaging fulfil multiple functions. First and foremost, they have the potential of acting as mediators, thus reducing the existing information asymmetry between producers and consumers. While back and front labels have the ability to function as eye-catchers, provide relevant information and kick-start taste and quality associations, they also constitute potential sources of scepticism and refusal. Thus, a balance between attractive and informative presentation appears to be crucial. Furthermore, it can be concluded that organic labels play an important role for German consumers, whereas for Danes, these labels appear to be more relevant with regard to products other than wine.
8.3. Implications for the theoretical framework Some of the relations outlined in the theoretical framework have been investigated within this study. The authors decided to focus - as a first step - on the framework elements individual consumer and consumer decision making. With regard to the foregoing discussion, one may conclude that personal values, motives, knowledge and personal experience as well as the perception of risks and quality have an influence on organic wine consumers’ decision making. Furthermore, the lifestyle aspect was also identified to have an effect. While this factor was among others addressed in reference to health awareness, it can certainly be assumed that further factors need to be considered. In terms of demographics, gender and age were used for segmentation purposes. However, it can be suggested that these factors might not be sufficient in the case of organic wine. On the basis of the analysis of the laddering data of the two samples, it was found that, although minor differences existed with regard to the dominant perceptual orientations, similarities were identified across age and gender on the consequence and value domain level. For further research, it might be advisable to reassess this and potentially use alternative segmentation criteria. The framework element consumer decision making has primarily been discussed with reference to the individual consumer. The personal interviews offered valuable insights into the evaluation of alternatives by means of product attributes and personal preferences, as well as the 118
Discussion use of intrinsic and extrinsic cues. Furthermore, involvement was identified to be an important underlying factor in the decision making, which was closely connected with knowledge and personal experience. This is in line with Dodd et al. (2005), who suggested that knowledge, involvement and personal experience are key factors in wine consumers’ decision making. To a lesser extent, the framework element environmental influence was studied, with a focus on consumption occasion and the role of reference groups. These were primarily addressed with regard to the feedback loop to environment and social perception matters. The factor cultural values, or rather cultural peculiarities were only partially taken into consideration, as the focus of this study is on personal values. However, as personal values can be assumed to be strongly influenced by cultural values, further research should incorporate these more explicitly, in order to strengthen the explanatory power of the framework element environmental influences.
119
Conclusion
9. Conclusion This study was set out to investigate the following research question: What are the motives and values underlying organic wine purchase in Denmark and Germany? By means of a cross-cultural exploratory study, based on expert interviews, consumer interviews and an online survey, the purpose of this study was two-fold. On the one hand, the study aimed at exploring the values and motives driving the purchasing behaviour of organic wine consumers in the Danish and German contexts, adopting a means-end chains approach. On the other hand, it aimed at explaining the factors involved in the decision making process of organic wine consumers in both countries. In this respect, a theoretical framework was developed, based on a review of relevant literature, theory and expert interviews, which laid grounds for the empirical investigation and thus contributed to the explorative purpose of this study. Similarities and differences in the values and motives of Danish and German consumers were identified. Pleasure, enjoying life and responsibility were common to consumers from both countries. While Danes attached great importance to the values honesty and respect for traditions, Germans were driven by a desire for unity with nature, health and environmental protection. Despite the identified similarities in values and value domains, differences regarding the meaning attached to them were identified. These were especially prevalent in the case of the value responsibility, which was besides environmental, social and political aspects also associated with personal benefits. For most Germans, an increase in consumption pleasure was experienced as a consequence of a good conscience arising from the conviction that one’s health and/or the environment were not threatened by one’s consumption. For most Danes, on the other hand, this gain in pleasure was achieved via a good conscience arising from doing good, showing solidarity and the conviction that this will improve one’s social perception. A clear image dimension of organic wine consumption was identified for Danish consumers. Pertaining to the above, it can thus be concluded that – despite some similarities - rather heterogeneous values underlie the purchasing decisions of Danish and German organic wine consumers. All in all it was found that Danes and Germans alike were in principle driven by a combination of socially and individually oriented values, i.e. value synthesis. These values belonged, for the most part, to the hedonism, benevolence and universalism value domains. Furthermore, it was found that socially oriented values in the majority of cases appeared to have an individual dimension, relating to personal benefits, such as an increase in consumption pleasure, good conscience, social recognition or personal well-being.
120
Conclusion Thus, it can be concluded that socially oriented values frequently constitute a means to an end, namely contributing to individually oriented values, and are used in hindsight to justify, conceal or counterbalance individually oriented behaviour. Pleasure was identified to be the central element of organic wine consumption. Danes and Germans alike indicated the organic characteristic of organic wine to be subordinate to taste and quality. What became apparent is that most consumers are not willing to purchase organic wine under the premises of inferior quality or taste. It can thus be assumed that organic wine needs to fulfill the same requirements as conventional wine. However, in comparison with conventional wine, organic wine appears to provide additional benefits, reducing potential remorse on different levels. In the case of German consumers, this appears to be especially relevant with regard to health and protecting the environment. For Danes, consumption experience was identified to be a key element. Besides the values and motives presented above, knowledge, involvement, personal experience and risk were identified to be important factors influencing the decision making process and the criteria used for evaluating alternatives. It was found that Germans intensely focused on verifiable sources of assurance, which can be regarded as an expression of their comparatively higher risk sensitiveness. Danes, on the other hand, appeared to primarily rely on their own capabilities, knowledge and experience. Common to consumers from both countries was the connection between the values underlying their purchasing behaviour and country-specific most pronounced perceived risks. Physical risks appeared to be of higher relevance for Germans, while Danes attached high importance to social risks. In this regard, packaging was found to be a decisive factor in the decision making of organic wine consumers; functioning as a mediator, packaging has the potential of dispelling scepticism. To the authors’ knowledge, the study at hand constitutes the first cross-cultural study on organic wine consumers in the Danish and German context. These first insights into their motives and values contribute not only to the existing body of knowledge of organic beverage and food consumption but also provide information that is of use to the industry. Denmark and Germany are both assigned leading roles in the organic food market. Thus, for an industry, being on its way from niche to mainstream, insights into these two markets can prove valuable for organic winemakers, their umbrella organisations, traders and retailers, in their attempts to improve their marketing and communication strategies. 121
Implications
10. Implications In the following, implications for the organic wine industry will be presented. As highlighted in the discussion chapter, packaging was identified to play a crucial role in the purchasing decision of organic wine consumers, not only in its function as an eye-catcher (attracting attention), but also in its ability to kick start quality and taste associations and to allow consumers to link their desired personal benefits with the product. In this regard, recommendations for the design of front and back labels as well as overall packaging can be given, which might be especially relevant for wines marketed through other channels than direct marketing. It was identified that less might be more, not only with regard to the visualisation but also to the technical information provided on the front and back labels. In order to reduce the existing information asymmetry between consumers and producers, honest and reliable communication was identified as being essential, in which attractive appearance and understatement need to be balanced. Information about the organic characteristic, cultivation and winemaker is important and perceived as an added value. However, excessively used organic claims were frequently mentioned as a source of scepticism. It can be suggested that a promising strategy might be to focus on the quality and taste of the wine instead of overstating the organic elements, as organic was identified to be important but subordinate. Nonetheless, the organic characteristics appear to provide additional benefits, which might tip the scale in favour of organic wine, given equal quality and taste, and should thus not be completely disregarded in the marketing of the wine. It might therefore be advisable to rather use organic labels, which were identified as being important sources of assurance, instead of excessive organic allusions. With regard to the back label, it was identified that consumers appreciated relevant technical information. Again, it appears imperative to find the right balance, as too much information was frequently perceived to mainly serve decorative purposes and thus may potentially cause scepticism. With regard to the visual presentation of the front label, too modern designs or excessive organic imagery might have adverse effects, as the packaging is frequently perceived to be a direct reflection of the quality of the wine. Consumers appear to appreciate minimalistic or classical designs, which they associate with high quality. In a similar vein, alternative packaging might likewise have adverse effects. While few consumers adapt a holistic approach and wish the packaging to be in line with the organic content, for most consumers, glass bottles are perceived to be the most adequate choice in the case of wine. Few consumers are aware of the fact that alternative packaging might be more environmentally friendly and not necessarily have negative effects on quality and taste. However, despite this objective assessment, subjectively, alternative packaging is frequently equated with inferior quality. 122
Limitations
11. Limitations This section intends to provide reflections on the consequences of the chosen methodological approach as well as its effects on the research design’s validity. The major limitation of this study is its inability to produce generalisable results, due to the relatively small sample size and the adopted convenience sampling. Selective perception constitutes an additional limitation. While it was attempted to minimise the risk of selective perception by both authors being involved in the transcribing, coding and analysing of the data derived from the personal interviews, the likelihood that selective perception has occurred cannot be ruled out. In order to countervail this issue and other potential weaknesses of qualitative research methods, a mixed method approach was adopted. Besides the personal interviews, an additional online survey was conducted, which aimed at compensating for the weaknesses of the qualitative data collection and corroborate the findings. Eventually, this could have provided a basis for giving methodological implications, as to whether two different data collection approaches can provide similar results regarding the values and motives of organic wine consumers. Unfortunately, this could not be accomplished, for which two determining factors could be identified. Firstly, with regard to the relatively small response rate for the online survey, it can be assumed that the applied sampling method (snowball sampling) might be inadequate for recruiting a sufficient number of organic wine buyers as well as for targeting the intended group of respondents. For future research, it would be advisable to use alternative recruitment methods, i.e. directly at points of purchases or via the usage of internet platforms concerned with organic wine or food. Secondly, the attempt to adopt the laddering technique, initially being of qualitative nature, for a quantitative approach in the form of an online survey provided technical difficulties, as some respondents failed to follow the instructions provided in the online questionnaire. Consequently, the data derived from the laddering part of the online survey could not be used for further analysis. Thus, for future research it would be advisable to adjust the implementation of the laddering technique for online survey usage.
123
Future Research
12. Further Research One of the primary aims of this exploratory study was to provide first insights into organic wine consumers’ behaviour in Denmark and Germany and thus lay grounds for potential further large scale research projects. In the following, topics relevant for further research projects will be briefly presented. As a first step, a reproduction of the study at hand should be conducted with a higher number of cases, in order to test whether the findings from this exploratory study can be confirmed for a larger sample. In this regard, it should additionally be investigated whether different methods of collecting data have the potential of yielding similar results, thus corroborating the findings. As a second step, the theoretical model proposed for explaining organic wine consumer behaviour should be tested more in-depth. Within this study, only few selected relations between different factors could be statistically tested. Influences of further factors and moderating variables should be investigated. Thirdly, factors useful for segmentation should be identified, in order to develop a typology of organic wine consumers. Within this study, attempts were made to classify consumers with respect to age and gender. As this proved to be only partially useful, it remains to be tested whether age or gender are in fact of limited value for the purposes mentioned above or whether this was merely owed to the size of the samples. Alternatively, it might be interesting to further investigate the usefulness of knowledge, involvement and personal experience for segmentation purposes, as these factors were identified to not only directly influence the decision making but also inform other influential factors. Furthermore, it would be valuable to work with control groups, such as non-organic wine consumers, to draw further comparisons, not only across cultures, but also within. A direct comparison of organic and non-organic consumers would not only contribute to further clarifying and distinguishing the motives and values underlying the purchasing behaviour of these two groups, but also add to identifying the barriers preventing non-organic consumers from choosing the organic alternative. These insights would be of high value for the marketing of organic wine and furthering the transition from a niche product to one becoming mainstream. In addition to the topics mentioned above, which are primarily related to improving the approach of the study at hand and ways to corroborate the findings, additional topics for further research were identified. Recently, the wine industry has been displaying an increased interest in the sustainability movement. In the light of increased imports from sustainable wineries from overseas, the European wine industry will have to take a stand. In this regard, future studies should focus on how consumers relate to the concept of sustainability. In the light of this recent development, the issue of alternative packaging could be a key factor. It is up for further investigation how alternative packaging is perceived, what types of 124
Future Research alternative packaging can still live up to quality and taste expectations, yet at the same time be cost efficient and contribute to protecting the environment. Last but not least, further research should address whether the combination of socially and individually oriented values, with socially oriented values in many cases merely constituting a means to an end, can be considered unique for the product organic wine, or whether this also applies to other organic products, whose consumption firstly has a strong hedonic dimension and secondly does not allow consumers to directly establish a relation with health.
125
References
13. Reference List Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Altaffer, P., & Washington-Smith, G. (2009, 1. July). From the corners of the world: Regional branding. exploring a ripe marketing opportunity for the natural products industry., 1-2. Andersen, E. S. (1994). The evolution of credence goods: A transaction approach for product specification and quality control. (Aarhus School of Business, MAPP). MAPP Working Paper no. 21, Armitage, A. (2007). Mutual research designs: Redefining mixed methods research design. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Institute of Education, University of London, 5-8 September 2007. Baker, S. (2002). Laddering: Making sense of meaning. In D. Partington (Ed.), Essential skills for management research (pp. 226-253). London: Sage Publications Ltd. Baker, S., Thompson, K. E., Engelken, J., & Huntley, K. (2004). Mapping the values driving organic food choice. European Journal of Marketing, 38(8), 995. Bänsch, A. (2002). Käuferverhalten (9. Auflage ed.). München: Oldenbourg. Barber, N., & Almanza, B. A. (2007). Influence of wine packaging on consumers' decision to purchase. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 9(4), 83-98. Barber, N., Almanza, B. A., & Donovan, J. R. (2006). Motivational factors of gender, income and age on selecting a bottle of wine. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 18(3), 218-232. Barber, N., Ismail, J., & Dodd, T. (2008). Purchase attributes of wine consumers with low involvement. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 14(1), 69-86. 126
References Barber, N., Taylor, C., & Strick, S. (2009). Wine consumers' environmental knowledge and attitudes: Influence on willingness to purchase. International Journal of Wine Research, (1), 59-72. Bauer, R. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. In R. S. Hancock (Ed.), Dynamic marketing for a changing world (1st ed., pp. 389-398). Chicago: American Marketing Association. Bayton, J. A. (1958). Motivation, cognition, learning - basic factors in consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 22(January), 282-289. Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in die andere Moderne. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Beckmann, S. C., & Schrøder, M. (2004). Means-end chains analysis online. ESOMAR Publications, , 241-254. Belk, W. (1974). An exploratory assessment of situational effects in buyer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 11, 156-163. Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2005). Business research methods. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education. Bose, D. C. (2006). Principles of management and administration (Fourth Printing ed.). New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited. Brugarolas Mollá-Bauzá, M., Martínez-Carrasco Martínez, L., Martínez Poveda, A., & Rico Pérez, M. (2005). Determination of the surplus that consumers are willing to pay for an organic wine. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 3(1), 43-51. Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz. (2011). Bio-Siegel. Retrieved 01/20, 2011, from http://www.bio-siegel.de/startseite/
127
References Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend. (2005). Gender-Datenreport. 1. Datenreport zur Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Retrieved 02/14, 2011, from http://www.bmfsfj.de/Publikationen/genderreport/4-Familien-undlebensformen-von-frauen-und-maennern/4-4-Heirat-und-uebergang-zur-elternschaft/4-4-3spaete-mutter-und-vaterschaft.html Buxel, P. D. H. (2010). Akzeptanz und Nutzen von Güte- und Qualitätssiegeln auf Lebensmitteln. Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung. Fachhochschule Münster, Fachbereich 8). Studienbericht, Retrieved from https://www.fhmuenster.de/fb8/downloads/buxel/10_Studie_Lebensmittelsiegel.pdf Chaney, I. M. (2000). External search effort for wine. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 12(2), 5-21. Chow, S., Celsi, R., & Abel, R. (1990). The effects of situational and intrinsic sources of personal relevance on brand choice decision. Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 755-759. Chryssohoidis, G. M., & Krystallis, A. (2005). Organic consumers’ personal values research: Testing and validating the list of values (LOV) scale and implementing a value-based segmentation task. Food Quality and Preference, 16(7), 585-599. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.01.003 Commission Regulation (EC) no 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 Laying Down Detailed Rules for the Implementation of Council Regulation (EC) no 834/2007 on Organic Production and Labelling of Organic Products with Regard to Organic Production, Labelling and Control, (2008). Council Regulation (EC) no 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on Organic Production and Labelling of Organic Products and Repealing Regulation (EEC) no 2092/91, (2007). Council Regulation (EEC) no 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 on Organic Production of Agricultural Products and Indications Referring Thereto on Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs, (1991). 128
References Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design - qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Third Edition ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. Dahl, H. (2006). Hvis din nabo var en bil. København: Akademisk Forlag. Danmark Statistik. (2010). Danmark i tal 2011. Retrieved 02/14, 2011, from http://www.dst.dk/pukora/epub/upload/14848/dkital.pdf De Ferran, F., & Grunert, K. G. (2007). French fair trade coffee buyers' purchasing motives: An exploratory study using means-end chains analysis. Food Quality and Preference, 18(2), 218. de Mooij, M. (2004). Consumer behavior and culture - consequences for global marketing and advertising Sage Publications, Inc. Debats, D. L., & Bartelds, B. F. (1996). The structure of human values: A principal components analysis of the rokeach value survey (RVS). Retrieved 19.11.2010, 2010, from http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/ppsw/1996/d.l.h.m.debats/c5.pdf Delmas, M. (2010). Perception of eco-labels: Organic and biodynamic wines. UCLA Institute of the Environment). Delmas, M. A., & Grant, L. E. (2008). Eco-labelling strategies: The eco-premium puzzle in the wine industry. American Association of Wine Economists, AAWE Working Papers(No. 13) Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung e.V. (2010). Einkommensentwicklung in Deutschland: Die Mittelschicht verliert. Retrieved 02/14, 2011, from http://www.diw.de/de/diw_01.c.357516.de/themen_nachrichten/einkommensentwicklung_in_d eutschland_die_mittelschicht_verliert.html Diekmann, A. (Ed.). (2004). Empirische Sozialforschung - Grundlagen, Methoden, Anwendungen (12.. ed.). Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH.
129
References Dodd, T., Laverie, D., Wilcox, J., & Duhan, D. (2005). Differential effects of experience, subjective knowledge on sources of information used in consumer wine purchasing. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 29(1), 3-19. Douglas, S. P., & Craig, C. S. (1997). The changing dynamics of consumer behavior: Implications for cross-cultural research. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14, 379-395. Dubois, B. (2000). Understanding the consumers. A european perspective. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Enneking, U., & Franz, R. (2005). Lebensstilkonzepte und Nachhaltigkeit: Stand der Forschung und Anwendungsbeispiele. TU München Professur für BWL der Brau- und Lebensmittelindustrie). Consumer Science, Diskussionsbeitrag Nr. 3 European Commission. (2011). Agriculture and rural development - organic farming - consumer confidence. Retrieved 01/20, 2011, from http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/organic/consumerconfidence_en European Commission. DG AGRI. (2005). Organic framing in the european union facts and figures. Bruxelles, 3 Novembre 2005 G2 EW - JK D (2005). P. 8-30: foodwatch. (2009). Welche Regeln gelten für importierte Bio-Produkte aus anderen EU-Staaten und Drittländern? Retrieved 01/20, 2011, from http://www.foodwatch.de/kampagnen__themen/biolebensmittel/eu_oeko_verordnung/fragen_ und_antworten/frage_7/index_ger.html Forbes, S., Cohen, D. A., Cullen, R., Wratten, S. D., & Fountain, J. (2009). Consumer attitudes regarding environmentally sustainable wine: An exploratory study of the new zealand marketplace. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(13), 1195-1199. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.04.008
130
References Foscht, T., & Swoboda, B. (2007). Käuferverhalten: Grundlagen - Perspektiven - Anwendungen (3. ed.). Wiesbaden: Dr. Th. Gabler. Fotopoulos, C., Krystallis, A., & Ness, M. (2003). Wine produced by organic grapes in greece: Using means—end chains analysis to reveal organic buyers' purchasing motives in comparison to the non-buyers. Food Quality and Preference, 14(7), 549-566. doi:DOI: 10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00130-1 Geraghty, S. (2010). Wine consumer behaviour: An irish wine market analysis. A literature review. Shannon College of Hotel Management). Retrieved from http://www.shannoncollege.com/wpcontent/uploads/2009/12/THRIC-2010-Full-Paper-S.-Geraghty.pdf Gluckman, R. (1990). A consumer approach to branded wines. European Journal of Marketing, 20(6), 21-35. Grunert, K. (1993, Towards a concept of food-related life style. Appetite, 21, 151-155. Grunert, K. G., & Grunert, S. C. (1995). Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(3), 209-225. doi:DOI: 10.1016/0167-8116(95)00022-T Grunert, S. C., & Juhl, H. J. (1995a). Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16(1), 39-62. Grunert, S. C., & Juhl, H. J. (1995b). Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16(1), 39-62. doi:DOI: 10.1016/0167-4870(94)00034-8 Gutman, J. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. The Journal of Marketing, Vol.46(No. 2), 60-72. Hall, J., & Lockshin, L. (2000). Using means-end chains for analyzing occasions-not buyers. Australian Marketing Journal, 8, 45-54.
131
References Hall, J., & Lockshin, L. (2001). Exploring the links between wine choice and dining occasion: Factors of influence. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 13(1), 36-53. Hall, J., Shaw, M., Lascheit, J., & Robertson, N. (2000). Gender differences in a modified perceived value construct for intangible products. ANZMAC 2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge, Hall, M. C. (2008). In Mitchell R. (Ed.), Wine marketing: A practical guide. Oxford: ButterworthHeinemann. Hansen, H. O. (2011). Relationerne mellem fobrugerpriser og råvarepriser i landbruget. Fødevareøkonomisk Institut, Københavns Universitet). FOI Udredning, , 1-35. Retrieved from http://www.foi.life.ku.dk/Publikationer/FOI_serier/~/media/Foi/docs/Publikationer/Udredninger/ 2011/Forbrugerpriser_og_raavarepriser.ashx Häseli, A., Schmid, O., Jonis, M., & Micheloni, C. (2009). Results of the ORWINE EU project. scientific background for the new rules of the european commission for organic wine Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-101. Hoffmann, D. (2010). In Deters J. (Ed.), Personal communication Hoffmann, D., & Szolnoki, G. (2010). Verbrauchereinstellung zu Biowein in Deutschland. Paper presented at the OIV-Tagung, Tiflis, 20-27 Juni 2010. Hofmann, D. U. (2011). Stellungnahme zum Scheitern einer europäischen Regelung zur Öko-BioWeinbereitung. Retrieved 01/20, 2011, from http://www.uwehofmann.org/Stellungnahme%20zur%20Bio-Weinregelung.pdf Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw Hill.
132
References Holbrook, M., & Hirschman, E. (1982). The experiential aspect of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 132-140. Hughson, A., de la Huerga, V., & Moskowitz, H. (2004). Mind-sets of the wine consumer. Journal of Sensory Studies, 19(2), 85-105. Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. ISSP International Social Survey Programme. (2010). ISSP 2006 - "role of government IV" - ZA no. 4500.http://www.gesis.org/en/services/data/survey-data/issp/modules-study-overview/role-ofgovernment/2006/ Janssen, M., Heid, A., & Hamm, U. (2009, Is there a promising market ’in between’ organic and conventional food? Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 24, 205-213. Jennings, D., & Wood, C. (1994). Wine: Achieving competitive advantage through design. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 6(1), 49-62. Jenster, P. V., & Jenster, L. (1993). The european wine industry. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 5(1), 30-73. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, Vol. 33(No. 7), 14-26. Jover, A. J. V., Montes, F. J. L., & Fuentes, M. d. M. F. (2004). Measuring perceptions of quality in food products: The case of red wine. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 453-469. Kahle, L. R., Beatty, S. E., & Homer, P. (1986). Alternative measurement approaches to consumer values: The list of values (LOV) and values and life style (VALS). The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.13(No. 3), 405-409.
133
References Kale, S. H. (1995). Grouping euroconsumers: A culture-based clustering approach. Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 3(No. 3), 35-48. Kapferer, J., & Laurent, G. (1986, Consumer involvement profiles: A new practical approach to consumer involvement. Journal of Advertising Research, , 48-56. Kornmeier, M. (2007). Wissenschaftstheorie und wissenschaftliches Arbeiten. Heidelberg: PhysicaVerlag. Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2004). Principles of marketing (Tenth Edition ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Kreeb, M., Motzer, M., & Schulz, W. (2008). LOHAS als Trendsetter für das Nachhaltigkeitsmarketing. In C. Schwender, W. Schulz & M. Kreeb (Eds.), Medialisierung der Nachhaltigkeit (pp. 303-314) Metropolis - Verlag für Ökonomie, Gesellschaft und Politik. Krystallis, A. (2007). Using means-end chains to understand consumers' knowledge structures. In A. MacFie (Ed.), Consumer-led food product development (pp. 158-196) Woodhead Publishing in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition. Krystallis, A. (2010). In Netter S. (Ed.), Personal communication Kunz, C. (2010). Das Führen und Motivieren von Teams (1. Auflage ed.) Grin Verlag. Latacz-Lohmann, U., & Foster, C. (1997, From "niche" to "mainstream" - strategies for marketing organic food in germany and the UK. British Food Journal, 99, 275-282. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.esc-web.lib.cbs.dk/10.1108/00070709710188336 Lehnert, M. (Ed.). (2009). Präferenzanalyse ethischer Produkte - Eine verhaltenswissenschaftliche Analyse am Beispiel von Bio und Fairtrade (1.. ed.). Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovaþ. Lockshin, L., & Hall, J. (2003). Consumer purchasing behaviour for wine: What we know and where we are going. International Wine Marketing Colloquium, Adelaide. 134
References Lockshin, L., Jarvis, W., D’Hauteville, F., & Perrouty, J. (2006). Using simulation from discrete choice experiments to measure consumer sensitivity to brand, region, price, and awards in wine choice. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 166-178. Lockshin, L., & Rhodus, W. (1993). The effect of price and oak flavor on perceived wine quality. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 25(6), 48-56. Luna, D., & Forquer Gupta, S. (2001). An integrative framework for cross-cultural consumer behavior. International Marketing Review, 18(1), 45-69. MacDonagh, J., Linehan, C., & Weldridge, R. (2002). Behavioural science for marketing and business students (2nd Edition ed.). Dublin: Gill & Macmillan Ltd. Maheswaran, D., & Shavitt, S. (2000). Issues and new directions in global consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 59-66. Marin, A. B., Jorgensen, E. M., Kennedy, J. A., & Ferrier, J. (2007). Effects of bottle closure type on consumer perceptions of wine quality. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 58(2), 182-191. McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13(No. 1), 71-84. McCutcheon, E., Bruwer, J., & Li, E. (2009). Region of origin and its importance among choice factors in the wine-buying decision making of consumers. International Journal of Wine, 21(3), 212-234. Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri - Fødevarestyrelsen. (2010). Ø-Mærket. Retrieved 01/20, 2011, from http://www.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/Foedevarer/Oekologi/O_maerket/forside.htm
135
References Mitchell, V., & Greatorex, M. (1988). Consumer risk perception in UK wine marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 22(9), 5-15. Mitchell, V., & Greatorex, M. (1989). Risk reducing strategies used in the purchase of wine in the UK. European Journal of Marketing, 23(9), 31-45. Møller Sørensen, T. (2011). In Deters J. (Ed.), Personal communication Mueller, S., Lockshin, L., Saltman, Y., & Blanford, J. (2009). Message on a bottle: The relative influence of wine back label information on wine choice. Food Quality and Preference, Mueller, S., & Remaud, H. (2010). Are australian wine consumers becoming more environmentally conscious? robustness of latent preference segments over time. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference of the Academy of Wine Business Research, Auckland (NZ), February 2010. Neely, C. R., Min, K. S., & Kennet-Hansel, P. A. (2010). Contingent consumer decision making in the wine industry: The role of hedonic consumption. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(4), 324-335. Olsen, J., Nowak, L., & Thach, E. (2006). Integrating environmentally friendly behaviour with hedonic consumption: The case of organic wine. Paper presented at the 13th Academy of Marketing Science World Marketing Congress, Verona, Italy. Olsen, J., Thompson, K., & Clarke, T. (2003). Consumers self-confidence in wine purchases. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 15(3), 40-52. Olson, J. C., & Reynolds, T. J. (2008). The means-end approach to understanding consumer decision making. In T. J. Reynolds, & J. C. Olson (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision making: The means-end approach to marketing and advertising strategy (pp. 3-23). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
136
References ORWINE D 2.4. (2006). Analysis of market needs. preliminary reportInstitut Technique de l'Agriculture Biologique. ORWINE D 5.8. (2009). Proposal and recommendations for elaborating rules for organic wine in EU regulation on organic production and labelling of organic productsInstitut Technique de l'Agriculture Biologique. Overby, J. W., Woodruff, R. B., & Fischer Gardial, S. (2005, The influence of culture upon consumers’ desired value perceptions: A research agenda. Marketing Theory, Vol. 5, No. 2, 139-163. Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual. A stept by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows (3rd edition ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press McGraw-Hill Education. Park, C., & McClung, G. (1986, The effect of TV program involvement on involvement with commercials. Advances for Consumer Research, , 544-548. Peattie, K. (2001). Golden goose or wild goose? the hunt for the green consumer. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(4), 187-199. Philipsen, K., & Andersen, E. S. (1998). Free-range pork: Innovation and control of a new credence good. Aarhus School of Business). MAPP Working Paper no. 33, Pole, C. J., & Lampard, R. (2002). Practical social investigation - qualitative and quantitative methods in social research. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Quester, P., & Smart, J. (1996). Product involvement in consumer wine purchases: Its demographic determinants and influence on choice attributes. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 8(3), 37-56. Ragin, C. C. (1994). Constructing social research. the unity and diversity of method. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.
137
References Rasmussen, M. (2001). The effect of region and origin on consumer choice behavior. University of South Australia). Reidick, O. (2003). People buy the wine label, not the wine. Graphics I, , 1-27. Reisch, L. A., & Gwozdz, W. (2010). Finanzkulturen in Europa: Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede. In SCHUFA Holding AG (Ed.), SCHUFA Kredit-Kompass 2010Empirische Indikatoren der privaten Kreditaufnahme in DeutschlandAuswirkungen der Wirtschaftskrise auf den Konsumentenkredit (pp. 139-158). Wiesbaden: Remaud, H., & Lockshin, L. (2009). Building brand salience for commodity-based wine regions. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 21(1), 79-92. Reusswig, F. (1993, Die Gesellschaft der Lebensstile. Zur modernen Lebensstilforschung und ihrer ökologischen Bedeutung. Politische Ökologie, 33., 6-9. Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (2008). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. In T. J. Reynolds, & J. C. Olson (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision making: The means-end approach to marketing and advertising strategy (pp. 24-63). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Reynolds, T. J., & Olsen, J. C. (2001). In Reynolds T. J., Olsen J. C. (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision making: The means-end approach to marketing and advertising strategy. USA: Psychology Press. Rhomberg, M. (2009). Die Massenmedien in der Risikokommunikation des Klimawandels. Eine systemtheoretische Beobachtung. Paper presented at the DVPW-Jahrestagung 2009. Kiel. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press, New York.
138
References Russel, C. G., Busson, A., Flight, I., Bryan, J., van Pabst, J. A., & Cox, D. N. (2004). Comparison of three laddering techniques applied to an example of a complex food choice. Food Quality and Preference, 15(6), 569-583. Sæther, B. (1998). Retroduction: An alternative research strategy? Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 7(4), 245-249. Salciuviene, L., Auruskeviciene, V., & Lydeka, Z. (2005). An assessment of various approaches for cross-cultural consumer research. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 3, 147-159. Schmid, O., Stolz, H., Jonis, M., Hofmann, U., Trioli, G., & Micheloni, C. (2009). Charakteristika Bio-Weinproduktion und Weinvermarktung. Sichtweisen von Bio-Weinproduzenten, Händlern und KonsumentInnen in Europa. Erhebung im Rahmen des ORWINE Projektes 2006-2009 Schmidt, M. (2010). In Deters J., Netter S.(Eds.), Personal communication Scholderer, J., Nielsen, N. A., Bredahl, L., Claudi-Magnussen, C., & Lindahl, G. (2004). Organic pork: Consumer quality perceptions. The Aarhus School of Business). Project Paper no. 02/04, Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25 ed., pp. 1-65). New York: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H. (n.a.). Basic human values: An overview. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem). Retrieved from http://151.97.110.134/Allegati/convegno%207-8-10-05/Schwartzpaper.pdf; Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 550-562. Sherif, M., & Cantril, H. (1947). In Sherif M. (Ed.), The psychology of ego-involvement. New York: Wiley.
139
References Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. L. (1961). In Sherif M. (Ed.), Social judgement: Assimilation and contrasts effects in communication and attitude change. New Haven: Yale University Press. Sheth, J., & Venkatesan, M. (1968, Risk-reducing process in repetitive consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing, , 307-310. Siderer, Y., Maquet, A., & Anklam, E. (2005). Need for research to support consumer confidence in the growing organic food market. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 16(8), 332-343. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2005.02.001 Sirieix, L., & Remaud, H. (2010). Consumer perceptions of eco-friendly vs. conventional wines in australia. Paper presented at the 5th International Academy of Wine Business Research Conference, 8-10. Feb. 2010 Auckland (NZ). Skinner, P. (1993). The utilisation of a central wine marketing organisation in the re-marketing of austrian wine post - 1985. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 5(4), 4-14. Smith, D. E., & Solgaard, H. S. (1996). Changing patterns in wine consumption: The north-south divide. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 8(2), 16-30. Solomon, M., Bamossy, G., & Askegaard, S. (2001). Konsumentenverhalten. Der europäische Markt(B. Selbach, I. O'Connor Trans.). München: Pearson Studium. Sørensen, E. B. (2000). Means-end chains og laddering i et kognitivt perspektiv. Institut for Markedsøkonomi/MAPP Centret Århus). Ph.d.-Afhandling, Spawton, T. (1991). Of wine and live asses: An introduction to the wine economy and state of wine marketing. European Journal of Wine Marketing, 25(3), 1-48. Spiller, A. (2006). Zielgruppen im Markt für Bio-Lebensmittel: Ein Forschungsüberblick. Department für Agrarökonomie und Rurale Entwicklung, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen). Diskussionsbeitrag,
140
References Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland. (2010). Babys in den neuen Bundesländern haben jüngere Mütter. Retrieved 02/14, 2011, from http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2010/12/PD1 0__445__12641,templateId=renderPrint.psml Stiftung Warentest. (2011). Geschichte - Es begann mit Rührgeräten und Nähmaschinen. Retrieved 03/06, 2011, from http://www.test.de/unternehmen/chronik/ Stolz, H., & Schmid, O. (2009). Image von und Erwartungen an Biowein - eine qualitative Verbraucherstudie. Forschungsinstitut für biologischen Landbau (FiBL)). Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Taylor, J. (1974). The role of risk in consumer behaviour. Journal of Marketing, 38, 54-60. Thach, L., & Olsen, J. (2010). Marketing "green wine":New study provides insight to encourage consumers to buy organic and eco-friendly wines. Retrieved 01/12, 2011, from http://www.winebusiness.com/news/?go=getArticle&dataid=81025 Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: Guilford Press. Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and social behavior McGraw-Hill, Inc. Trioli, G., & Hofmann, U. (2009). ORWINE: Leitfaden biologischer Weinbau und Weinbereitung. Oppenheim: ECOVIN Bundesverband Ökologischer Weinbau. Trommsdorff, V. (2008). In Diller H., Köhler R. (Eds.), Konsumentenverhalten (7. Auflage ed.) W. Kohlhammer. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). (2010). EU27 organic products market report No. GAIN Report No. NL0022). The Hague:
141
References Valette-Florence, P. (1998). A causal analysis of means-end hierarchies in a cross-cultural context: Methodological refinements. Journal of Business Research, (42), 161-166. Van Lier, K. D., & Dunlap, R. E. (1981). Environmental concern: Does it make a difference how it's measured? Environmental Behaviour, 13(6), 651-676. Veludo-de-Oliveira, T. M., Ikeda, A. A., & Campomar, M. C. (2006). Laddering in the practice of marketing research: Barriers and solutions. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 9(3), 297-306. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.escweb.lib.cbs.dk/10.1108/13522750610671707 Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2008). Sustainable food consumption among young adults in belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values. Ecological Economics, 64(3), 542-553. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.03.007 Vinson, D. E., Scott, J. E., & Lamont, L. M. (1977). The role of personal values in marketing and consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 41(2), 44-50. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=4996750&site=ehostlive&scope=site Wechsler, B. (2010). In Netter S. (Ed.), Personal communication Westbrook, R. A., & Black, W. C. (1985). A motivation-based shopper typology. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 61(1), 78-103. Wier, M., & Calverley, C. (2002). Market potential for organic foods in europe. British Food Journal, 104(1), 45-62. Willer, H., & Minou, Y. (2006). The world of organic agriculture. statistics and emerging trends 2006.International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) & Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL).
142
References Zaichkowsky, J. (1986). Conceptualizing involvement. Journal of Advertising, 15(2), 4-34. Zaichkowsky, J. (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 13(4), 59-69. Zanoli, R., & Naspetti, S. (2002). Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food: A meansend approach. British Food Journal, 104(8), 643-653. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.esc-web.lib.cbs.dk/10.1108/00070700210425930
143
DANISH AND GERMAN ORGANIC WINE BUYERS’ PURCHASING MOTIVES
An Exploratory Study using Means-End Chain Analysis
APPENDIX
Thesis written under the supervision of: Lucia A. Reisch (Assistant supervisor Wencke Gwozdz)
Sarah Johanna Margaretha Netter M.Sc. in Business, Language and Culture Jane Deters M.Sc. in Economics and Business Administration Copenhagen Business School 21. March 2011
Table of Content Appendix 1: Graphical illustration of Schwartz’s value domains .......................................... 6 Appendix 2: Overview expert interviews .............................................................................. 7 Appendix 3: Danish version of the semi-structured interview guide ..................................... 8 Appendix 4: German version semi-structured interview guide ........................................... 10 Appendix 5: Summary expert interview with Michael Schmidt ........................................... 13 Appendix 6: Summary expert interview with Torben Møller Sørensen .............................. 17 Appendix 7: Summary expert interview with Prof. Dr. Dieter Hoffmann ............................. 21 Appendix 8: Summary expert interview with Bernd Wechsler ............................................ 29 Appendix 9: Summary expert interview with Athanasios Krystallis .................................... 38 Appendix 10: The questionnaire ........................................................................................ 42 Appendix 11: Structure of the questionnaire ...................................................................... 51 Appendix 12: Factors investigated in the statement batteries ............................................ 52 Appendix 13: Operationalisation of hypotheses ................................................................. 54 Appendix 14: Overview of all product attributes ................................................................. 55 Appendix 15: Overview Schartz’s list of values & value domains ...................................... 56 Appendix 16: Product attribute categories for consumer online survey ............................. 57 Appendix 17: Functional consequences used for the consumer online survey .................. 58 Appendix 18: Psychological consequences used for the consumer online survey ............ 59 Appendix 19: Values domains used for the consumer online survey ................................. 60 Appendix 20: Content analysis for the open questions of the questionnaire ...................... 61 Appendix 21: New categories for income and education level ........................................... 62 Appendix 22: Content analysis for personal interviews - functional and psychological consequences.................................................................................................................... 63 Appendix 23: Content analysis for personal interviews with German consumers .............. 65 Appendix 24: Content analysis for personal interviews with Danish Consumers ............... 88 Appendix 25: HVM all Danish respondents cut-off 3 ........................................................ 118 Appendix 26: HVM all Danish female respondents cut-off 2 ............................................ 119 Appendix 27: HVM all Danish male respondents cut-off 2 ............................................... 120 Appendix 28: HVM all younger Danish respondents cut-off 2 .......................................... 121 Appendix 29: HVM all older Danish respondents cut-off 2 ............................................... 122 Appendix 30: HVM all German respondents cut-off 3 ...................................................... 123 Appendix 31: HVM all German female respondents cut-off 2 .......................................... 124 1
Appendix 32: HVM all German male respondents cut-off 2 ............................................. 125 Appendix 33: HVM all younger German respondents cut-off 2 ........................................ 126 Appendix 34: HVM all older German respondents cut-off 2 ............................................. 127 Appendix 35: Common dominant orientations ................................................................. 128 Appendix 36: Country-specific dominant orientations ...................................................... 128 Appendix 37: Common central consequences ................................................................. 130 Appendix 38: Denmark specific central consequences .................................................... 133 Appendix 39: Danish socio-demographic analysis ........................................................... 134 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 134 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 138 Appendix 40: German socio-demographic analysis ......................................................... 140 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 140 German personal ......................................................................................................... 144 Appendix 41: Danish involvement in organic wine ........................................................... 146 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 146 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 149 Appendix 42: German involvement in organic wine ......................................................... 151 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 151 German personal ......................................................................................................... 156 Appendix 43: Danish product perception & organic wine image ...................................... 159 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 159 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 167 Appendix 44: German product perception & organic wine image .................................... 174 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 174 German personal ......................................................................................................... 182 Appendix 45: Product-moment correlation coefficient for Danish sample ........................ 187 Factor 1 – Enjoyment of Food & Wine.......................................................................... 187 Factor 2 – Health Awareness ....................................................................................... 188 Factor 3 – Brand Preferences & Price Consciousness................................................. 189 Factor 4 – Point of Purchase ........................................................................................ 191 Factor 5 - Origin ........................................................................................................... 191 Factor 6a – General Safety Need & Risk Aversion ...................................................... 192 Factor 6b – Role of Labels ........................................................................................... 193 Factor 7 – Social Status ............................................................................................... 193 Factor 8 – Environmental Aspects ............................................................................... 194 2
Factor 9 – Occasional Appropriateness ....................................................................... 195 Appendix 46: Product-moment correlation coefficient for German sample ...................... 196 Factor 1 – Enjoyment of Food & Wine.......................................................................... 196 Factor 2 – Health Awareness ....................................................................................... 198 Factor 3 – Brand Preference & Price Consciousness .................................................. 198 Factor 4 – Point of Purchase ........................................................................................ 199 Factor 5 - Origin ........................................................................................................... 200 Factor 6a – General Safety Need & Risk Aversion ...................................................... 200 Factor 6b – Role of Labels ........................................................................................... 201 Factor 7 – Social Status ............................................................................................... 202 Factor 8 – Environmental Aspects ............................................................................... 203 Factor 9 – Occasional Appropriateness ....................................................................... 203 Appendix 47: Hypothesis test for H1 ................................................................................ 204 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 204 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 204 Appendix 48: Analysis of underlying factors for H1 – proportion organic groceries ......... 205 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 205 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 207 Appendix 49: Analysis of underlying factors for H1 – proportion organic wine................. 209 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 209 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 211 Appendix 50: Hypothesis test for H2 ................................................................................ 213 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 213 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 213 Appendix 51: Analysis of underlying factor for H2 – health awareness ........................... 214 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 214 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 215 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 216 German personal ......................................................................................................... 217 Appendix 52: Analysis of underlying factors for H2 – purchasing frequency organic wine ......................................................................................................................................... 218 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 218 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 219 Appendix 53: Analysis of further factor for H2 – wine consumption frequency ................ 221 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 221 3
German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 223 Appendix 54: Hypothesis test for H3a&b ......................................................................... 225 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 225 H3a1 ......................................................................................................................... 225 H3a2 ......................................................................................................................... 226 H3b1 ......................................................................................................................... 227 H3b2 ......................................................................................................................... 228 German personal ......................................................................................................... 229 H3a1 ......................................................................................................................... 229 H3a2 ......................................................................................................................... 230 H3b1 ......................................................................................................................... 231 H3b2 ......................................................................................................................... 232 Appendix 55: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – general safety need & risk aversion 233 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 233 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 235 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 236 German personal ......................................................................................................... 237 Appendix 56: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – social status.................................... 239 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 239 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 240 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 241 German personal ......................................................................................................... 242 Appendix 57: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – environmental aspects.................... 243 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 243 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 244 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 245 German personal ......................................................................................................... 246 Appendix 58: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – origin............................................... 248 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 248 German personal ......................................................................................................... 249 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 250 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 251 Appendix 59: Hypothesis test for H4a&b ......................................................................... 252 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 252 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 254 4
Appendix 60: Analysis of underlying factor for H4a&b – role of label............................... 256 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 256 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 257 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 258 German personal ......................................................................................................... 259 Appendix 61: Hypothesis test for H5a&b ......................................................................... 260 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 260 H5a ........................................................................................................................... 260 H5b1 ......................................................................................................................... 261 H5b2 ......................................................................................................................... 262 German personal ......................................................................................................... 263 H5a ........................................................................................................................... 263 H5b1 ......................................................................................................................... 264 H5b2 ......................................................................................................................... 265 Appendix 62: Analysis of further factor for H5a&b – enjoyment of food & wine ............... 266 Danish aggregated ....................................................................................................... 266 Danish personal ........................................................................................................... 267 German aggregated ..................................................................................................... 268 German personal ......................................................................................................... 270
5
Appendix 1: Graphical illustration of Schwartz’s value domains
Openness to Change
SelfTranscendence
SelfDirection
Universalism
Stimulation
Benevolence
Conformity
Tradition
Hedonsim
Achievement
SelfEnhancement
Security
Power
Conservation
Source: Compiled by the authors according to Schwartz (1992)
6
GER GER DK
Head of Department, Geisenheim Research Center
Kompetenzzentrum Weinmarkt & Weinmarketing Rheinland-Pfalz DLR R-N-H Oppenheim
Associated Professor of Marketing and Statistics at Århus Business School, special research field: organic consumer behaviour, also on organic wine consumption and means-end chain theory
Prof. Dr. Hoffmann
Bernd Wechsler
Athanasios Krystallis
Source: Compiled by the authors
DK
Wine expert and cellar master, host for documentary about wine on Radio P4 Syd
Torben M. Sørensen
Country DK
Fødevarestyrelsen, concerned with the new EU regulation about organic produce and expert in organic wine
Name Michael Schmidt
Appendix 2: Overview expert interviews
13.10.2010
16.12.2010 & 06.01.2011
10.12.2010
05.01.2011
Date 11.02.2010
7
Focus Explorative on EU regulation, the new EU eco- label, market development in Denmark Explorative on Danish wine consumer and market development in Denmark Explorative on organic wine consumer expectations, retailing, organic Wine making Explorative on organic wine marketing, German wine consumer, market development in Germany Consultation about means-end chain theory applied to organic wine consumers
Appendix 3: Danish version of the semi-structured interview guide Vejledende håndbog til interviews med eksperterne i forbindelse med kandidatafhandlingen i ”Forbrugernes motiver ved købet af økologiske vin” Nedenstående spørgsmål bruges som en vejledende ramme for interviews med eksperterne i den danske kontekst. Hvert enkelt spørgsmål vil ikke blive genstanden af samtalen, snarere skal spørgsmålene bruges til orienteringen, som danner et udgangspunkt for samtalen. Den økologiske vin forbruger: Indledende spørgsmål: 1. Hvad tror du, hvilken status og betydning har vin generelt og især økologisk vin i Danmark? 2. Kan du fortælle os noget om, hvordan den typiske økologisk vin forbruger ”ser” ud? Viden: 3. Hvad tror du, hvor meget ved danske vin forbruger om økologisk vin? Information: 4. Hvad synes du er den vigtigste informationskilde med hensyn til indflydelse på købebeslutningen? 5. Hvilken rolle tilskriver du anbefalinger fra familie, venner, butiksmedarbejder og mærker (kvalitetsmærker, ø-mærke)? Forbrugernes opfattelse: 6. Hvad tror du, hvordan opfatter danske vin forbruger økologisk vin? 7. Hvilket image har økologisk vin i Danmark? 8. Kender du grunden til dette image? Helse & miljøbeskyttelse: Personlig sundhed og miljøbeskyttelse bliver navnet mest som begrundelse for forbrugernes valg af økologiske produkter over for konventionelle alternativer. 9. Hvad tror du, er de vigtigste fordele for sundheden og miljøet ved køb af økologisk vin? Forbrugernes købeadfærd: 10. Kan du fortælle os noget om de vigtigste produktegenskaber, som kunne forklare valget af økologisk vin overfor for konventionel vin? 11. Hvad synes du, er de personlige værdier bag ved købebeslutningen? 12. Hvad tror du, hvad er forbrugernes købemotiver? 8
PRODUKT & MARKEDET: Markedet: 1. Hvad kan du fortælle os noget om markedets udvikling, f.eks. med hensyn til salg og dyrkningsareal på økologisk vin i Europa og Danmark? 2. Hvad tror du er faktorer som understøtter eller hindrer en positive udvikling? 3. Hvilke institutioner, grupper, organisationer anser du som de vigtigste i den europæiske såvel som den danske kontekst, som fremmer produktionen og salget af økologisk vin? 4. Hvad tror du, er de største producerende lande for økologisk vin? Og hvad tror du, er de største forbrugerlande? 5. Hvad tror du, hvilke lande eksporter mest økologisk vin til DK Vin producenterne: 6. Hvad tror du, hvor mange økologiske vindyrker findes i DK? 7. Hvad betragter du som de største udfordringer for industrien i øjeblikket? 8. Hvad tror du, skifter mange vin dyrker fra konventionel vindyrkning til økologisk? Hvis ja, hvorfor? Labelling: 9. Hvilke mærker er mest brugte på økologisk vin i DK? 10. Hvilken holdning har danske forbruger overfor de forskellige mærker for økologiske produkter? Det bliver sagt, at kun få økologiske vin dyrker mærker deres produkter økologiske. 11. Hvad tror du forklarer deres adfærd? 12. Hvad tror du, hvilken indflydelse har deres “non-labelling” adfærd på afsætningen? Marketing: 13. Kender du til nogle specifikke og koordinerede marketing initiativer for at fremme økologisk vin? 14. Hvad synes du, er den bedste måde at fremme økologisk vin på? 15. Hvad tror du, hvilken rolle spiller vin turisme for at fremme økologisk vin? Salgskanaler: 16. Hvad tror du, hvilken salgskanal fortrækker danske forbruger for at købe økologiske produkter? 17. Hvad tror du, hvilken salgskanal fortrækker danske forbruger for at købe vin? 18. Hvad tror du, hvor køber danske forbruger økologisk vin? 19. Hvad kan du fortælle os om udviklingen af sortimentet på økologisk vin i danske butikker? 9
Appendix 4: German version semi-structured interview guide Anleitender Fragebogen für die Expertengespräche im Rahmen der Masterarbeit „Kaufmotive von Deutschen und Dänischen Biowein Konsumenten“ Die folgenden Fragen stellen einen anleitenden Leitfaden für die Gespräche mit Experten im deutschen Kontext dar. Nicht alle Fragen werden im Einzelnen in den Gesprächen erörtert, vielmehr sollen sie als Orientierungshilfe und Ausgangspunkt für die einzelnen Gespräche dienen. BIOWEIN KONSUMENTEN: Generelle Fragen: 1. Was glauben Sie, welchen Status und Bedeutung hat Wein im Allgemeinen und Biowein im Speziellen in Deutschland? 2. Was glauben Sie, wie könnte man den stereotypen Deutschen Biowein Konsumenten beschreiben? Wissen: 3. Was glauben Sie, wie sachkundig sind Deutsche Weinkonsumenten bezüglich Biowein? Was wissen sie? Information: 4. Was glauben Sie, was sind die wichtigsten Informationsquellen im Hinblick auf die Beeinflussung der Kaufentscheidung? 5. Welche Rolle schreiben Sie Empfehlungen von Familie, Freunden, Verkaufspersonal, Zeitungen/Magazinen und Labels zu? Wahrnehmung: 6. Was glauben Sie, wie nehmen Deutsche Weinkonsumenten Biowein wahr? 7. Was für ein Image hat Biowein in Deutschland? 8. Was glauben Sie, hat diesen Ruf beeinflusst? Gesundheit & Umwelt: Gesundheit und Umwelt Aspekte werden vielfach als Hauptgründe genannt, die Konsumenten in ihrer Wahl von ökologischen Produkten anstelle der herkömmlich hergestellten Produktalternativen beeinflussen. 9. Was glauben Sie, welche konkreten bzw. wahrgenommenen Vorteile für die eigene Gesundheit und für die Umwelt sind ausschlaggebend für den Kauf von Biowein? Konsumenten Entscheidungsfindung: 10
10. Was glauben Sie, was sind die wichtigsten Produkteigenschaften, die die Wahl von Biowein anstelle von konventionellem Wein erklären? 11. Was glauben Sie, welche Werte liegen der Kaufentscheidung zugrunde? 12. Was glauben Sie, was motiviert Konsumenten Biowein zu kaufen? PRODUKT & MARKT: Markt: 1. Was können Sie und über die Marktentwicklung, z.B. bezüglich Absatz und Anbauflächen in Europe und Deutschland berichten? 2. Was glauben Sie, welche Faktoren tragen zu einer positiven Entwicklung bei bzw. behindern diese? 3. Welche Institutionen, Gruppen oder Organisationen im europäischen und deutschen Kontext sehen Sie als die Wichtigsten an, die den Anbau von Biowein unterstützen und fördern? 4. Welche Länder produzieren am meisten und welche Länder konsumieren am meisten Biowein? Wie erklären Sie sich das? 5. Was glauben Sie, Bioweine aus welchen Ländern werden am meisten in Deutschland abgesetzt? Produzenten: 6. Was glauben Sie, wie viele Bio-Winzer gibt es in Deutschland? 7. Was würden Sie sagen, stellt zurzeit die größten Herausforderungen für die Industrie dar? 8. Stellen mittlerweile viele Winzer ihre Produktion auf Biowein um? Was sind die Gründe für beziehungsweise gegen eine Umstellung? Labelling: 9. Welche Labels und Gütesiegel werden vorrangig in Deutschland für Biowein verwendet? 10. Was glauben Sie, welche Einstellung haben die Deutschen Konsumenten gegenüber den verschiedenen Labels und Gütesiegeln, die für ökologische Produkte verwendet werden? Es wird vielfach genannt, dass nur wenige Bio-Winzer ihre Weine auch als Bioweine kennzeichnen. 11. Was glauben Sie, was sind die Hauptgründe für diese Entscheidung? 12. Was glauben Sie, welchen Einfluss hat die Entscheidung die Produkte nicht als Biowein zu kennzeichnen auf ihren Absatz.
11
Marketing: 13. Sind Ihnen spezielle Marketing Kampagnen oder koordinierte Initiativen bekannt, die sich damit befassen für Biowein in Deutschland zu werben? 14. Was halten Sie persönlich für einen erfolgreichen Ansatz Biowein zu fördern? 15. Was glauben Sie, welche Rolle spielt Tourismus für die Förderung von Biowein? Vertrieb: 16. Was glauben Sie, welche Vertriebskanäle bevorzugen Deutsche Konsumenten wenn sie Biowein kaufen? 17. Glauben Sie, diese bevorzugten Vertriebskanäle für den Kauf von Biowein unterscheiden sich von denen für den Kauf von konventionellem Wein? 18. Was können Sie uns über die Entwicklung des Sortiments (Einführung von Biowein) in deutschen Geschäften berichten?
12
Appendix 5: Summary expert interview with Michael Schmidt Interview Partner: Michael Schmidt, Fødevarestyrelsen in Copenhagen Date of Interview: 11.02.2010 Duration of Interview: 50 min. Den økologiske vin forbruger Hvis man er økologisk forbruger, så vil man også købe økologisk vin. Da er jo også en del økologisk vin på markedet allerede, netop som bare er dyrket på økologiske druer. Jeg kunne forestille mig, at der var flere økologiske forbrugere i det segment som drikker vin end drikker øl. Vin, øl og spiritus, er nydelsesmidler, som ikke er basale fødevarer. Jeg tror primært dem der køber både økologisk vin og øl, er folk som har en høj præference for økologien i forvejen. Jeg tror, den økologiske vin forbruger er en forbruger med et vist indkomst og uddannelsesniveau. Og jeg tror, at de også er kulinariske. Generelt, så er de folk, der går højt op i at spise godt. Men i hvert fald er det folk, som har et rimeligt økonomisk niveau. Jeg tror også, at de økologiske forbruger der køber økologisk vin, de er rigtige økologiske forbruger, altså de er ikke økologiske forbruger, som bare køber mælk, fordi det er meget af den samme pris. Jeg tor, det er en mindre andel af befolkningen i Danmark der vil købe økologisk vin. Viden af forbrugerne Jeg tror ikke, at den generelle danske forbruger ved noget specifikt om økologisk vin. Jeg tror, de vil tænke det samme som om øvrige økologiske produkter. Informationssøgning Det får folk gennem reklamer, tror jeg. Men selvfølgelig, der er jo også økologiske forbruger, der går dybere inde i det, fordi de interesserer sig meget mere for det. Men nogle af kæderne i Danmark gør meget ud af økologi reklamemæssigt og laver rigtig gode priser på økologiske varer. Derigennem tror jeg, får den almindelige forbruger information. Sundhed / miljøbeskyttelse Jeg tror der er en del forbrugere, som godt kunne tænke sig at købe vin med mindre sulfit, dem der reagerer på det for eksempel. Sulfit er, så vidt mig bekendt, ikke giftigt, men det er et allergisk, allergifremkaldende stof. Økologisk købeadfærd I Danmark er den økologiske forbruger indstillet på at betale en merpris for økologiske varer, fordi der er altså færre tilsætningsstoffer i. Vedrørende køberargumenter for økologisk vin, er det vigtigt, at prisen ikke bliver for høj og samtidig også, at der er en markant forskel. Hvis forskellen ikke er særlig høj, hvis for eksempel man forstiller sig, at der bliver et ubegrænset input på sulfit, så er det næsten ingen differentiering fra konventionelle vine. Så, hvis reguleringerne på økologiske vin metoder ikke giver en markant forskel, så tror jeg at forbrugeren bliver ligeglad med produktet. Men du har stadigvæk overvejende økologisk, det er jo bedre end ingenting. Markedet Det er et problem at økologi ikke er godt belyst gennem statistikken. jeg kunne mig da ikke forstille andet end, at økologisk vin også er i forandring /fremskridt ligesom i alle andre lande, men jeg har ikke nogle tal. Vin er trods alt gået frem på bekostningen af øl. Der mit indtryk. Vin har aldrig været billigere. Også drikkelig vin, da er jo sket en stor udvikling. Jeg mener, at vin forbruget i Danmark er steget og ølforbruget er faldet Der er meget økologisk vin på markedet. Det er det godt nok og jeg tror, at der er en rigtig stor interesse for det. 13
Distribution Man kunne godt forestille sig, at der måske vil komme økologiske vin butikker, fordi vin jo sælges også i vin forretninger. Der ser man også ved nogle bagerier in København, hvor de fokusere på økologi, så kunne man måske godt forestille sig det. Men igen, det kommer helt an på, hvor stor en volumen det kan trække på. Det ville ikke undre mig. Men igen, vi er jo ikke et producent land in den forbindelse. Det vil jo ryge ind ligesom alle de andre import vi har. Vindyrkning I DK er vin primært en hobby. Jeg mener der er nogle økologiske vinavlere i Danmark, men de er få. Vi ser det mere ud fra en forbrugersynsvinkel. Jeg tror ikke det bliver den helt store salgsvare for danske producenter. Jeg kunne forstille mig, at det er ligesom med alle andre fødevarer. Man laver om, hvis man har et økonomisk incitament. Der findes også økologer i dag, som er idealister, men der er også mange der kigger på pengene. Regulering Den gamle forordning blev afløst i 2007af en ny økologiforordning, der hedder 834/2007. EU’s forordninger har nogle tilhørende kommissionsforordninger, som udmønter for EU-forordninger via rammeprincipper. Så findes der en gennemførselsforordning der hedder 889. Den siger specifikt, hvordan det er med tilsætningsstoffer og hvilke stoffer der må bruges, hvad er det for en positiv liste osv. osv. Så den hedder 889, men den har ikke reguleret økologisk vin endnu. Vin er blevet reguleret, altså produktionen og fremstillingen af vin, er blevet reguleret et helt andet sted i EU's lovgivning, nemlig indenfor markedsordningerne. Man har en markedsordning for svinekød osv. og man har en markedsordning som regulerer vin, også fremstillingsmetoder. Det har man kunne regulere, men man har ikke kunnet regulere de ønologiske metoder før, men det ville man så kunne med en ny lovgivning. CMO omfatter de almindelige markedsordninger, det er der, hvor den konventionelle vin er reguleret i dag. Nu skal man så regulere den økologiske vinfremstilling. Altså er produktionen fuldstændig som ved grøntsager, tomater eller korn. Men selve disse ønologiske metoder, de skal blive reguleret i sin egen form. Der har været drøftet et forslag, som tager udgangspunkt i ORWINE projektets anbefalinger. Og den forordning er under forhandling. Men jeg tror man vil satse meget på, at få den færdiggjort således at man til sommer kan få det mærket med det nye økologimærke, og forbrugerne kan gå ud og købe en flaske økologisk vin. Det helt interessante kommer til at være, hvor stram den regulering bliver. Det er der sulfit er det helt store talepunkt. Sulfit diskussion: Man kan ikke købe en flaske vin i dag og se hvor meget sulfit du får i maven. Der står bare indeholder sulfitter. Det har vinorganisationer været ret gode til. De har deres egne ønologiske metoder, det er jo sådan en helt videnskab for sig selv. Og de har formået at kunne holde mærkningen på tilsætningsstoffer ude. Sådan ville det nok også blive med den økologiske vin - du vil ikke kunne se på flasken, hvor meget og hvad indeholder vinen. CMO'ens markedsordningen siger kun, at der må max. være 300 milligram i rødvin og et eller andet i hvidvin. Det maksimum man må tilsætte. Ofte går de jo nok under begrænsningen. Og den økologiske regulering den ville så gå ud på at halvere indholdet, eller noget i den retning. Der er jo store interesser på spil, fordi der er lande, specielt Tyskland og Østrig, som har nogle andre klimatiske betingelse, som gør, at de har behov for, mht. konservering af vinen, at bruge mere end f.eks. Spanien, Portugal. Der er jo meget forskel på klimaet. Og så har det nok også noget at gøre med, at mange af de vinproducerende lande i dag, fremstiller vine på økologiske druer efter private standarder, og nu skal de blive det jo reguleret fælles. For producenterne ville det være ærgerligt, hvis ikke man kan komme med der. Fordi, man kan godt med sin egen regulering stramme, men man kan altså ikke slække. Man må gerne stramme under de private mærker. 14
Jeg tror netop af de nye regler vil give løft, men igen kommer det nok også an på, netop hvordan de bliver skruet sammen, fordi hvis forbrugerne får lys om eller finder ud af, at der ikke er en markant forskel, så vil man nok ikke købe det til den pris. Jeg tror enkelte forbruger tænker meget sulfit-orienteret. Og i og med, at det står på flasken at den er dyrket på økologiske druer, så har de ikke nogen garanti for, at tilsætningsstofferne bliver reguleret. Da er jo masser af tilsætningsstoffer i vin udover sulfit. Jeg tror, hvis man kunne lave et ordentlig produkt uden sulfit, så tror jeg virkeligt, at der er hurtig en del folk, som vil reagere på det der, men det er svært at undvære konserveringsstoffer. Men hvis man for eksempel kunne markedsføre økologisk vin med 50 %. Her er kun halvdelen af sulfit i, så ville det være et stærkt salgs-power. Det er jo trods alt en væsentlig reduktion. Mærke Det er jo sådan i dag at man kan købe vin mærket, vin produceret af økologiske druer, men ikke økologisk vin. Men der er selvfølgelig rund omkring i EU nogle private standarder, som regulerer det, altså, Tyskland har Naturland og der er nogle andre standarder osv. Men nu forsøger man så at lave det som en fælles forordning. DK ø-mærke: når vi siger ø-mærket, så er det jo vores røde nationale mærke, som er på alle vores økologiske produkter. Og det er jo bare et mærke som signalerer, at det er blevet kontrolleret. Det er jo ikke et identitetsmærke. Vores mærke er et kontrolmærke, det er på alle produkterne, det kører sit eget liv, og det viser at produkterne har været igennem økologikontrollen. Det røde ø-mærke er simpelthen lige med økologi i Danmark. Så man har ikke fra branchen eller Økologisklandsforening eller andre haft lyst til at gå ind og udvikle et privat mærke. Det danske mærke har altid haft en meget større gennemslagskraft end det hidtidig blå EU mærke. Det danske mærke er, hvad forbrugerne identificerer med økologi, og det vil de fortsat gøre, og det vil stadigvæk også være på pakkerne. Vi har ikke nogen private mærker i Danmark, vi har ikke privat labelling. Det har de i mange af de andre EU lande indenfor økologi. Det er også det der gør, at de kan fastsætte regler der er strammere, det kan vi ikke gøre i Danmark, hvor vi kun har det nationale mærke Det europæiske økologiske mærke: Rent formelt, så vil det skulle vedtages i økologikomiteen nede i Bruxelles. Der er også nogle andre bestemmelser om, hvor mærket skal placeres på pakken og om overgangsordning, så virksomhederne kan få lov at bruge gammel emballage osv., osv. Så der er også praktiske ting, der også skal på plads. Vi har jo i Danmark været meget interesseret i, at det nye EU-logo bliver obligatorisk, så det kommer på alle fødevarer. Det vil også lette samhandelen på tværs af grænser, hvis alle produkter har det mærke på. Det bliver obligatorisk på produkter som er produceret i EU. Det bliver ikke obligatorisk for produkter som importeres udenfor EU. Jeg tror ikke EU mærket vil hindre at der stadigvæk vil komme en del andre private mærker. Vi lever i en meget mærkningsorienteret tid, med nøglehulsmærke og ditten og datten. Altså der er stadigvæk mange, mange mærker. Men jeg tror oprigtigt, at EU-mærket vil få en førerposition, fordi det kommer på alle varer nu. Så det bliver helt identificerbart. EU-mærket vil skulle ledsages af en mærkning med kontrolkode, dvs. hvilken kontrolinstans har 15
kontrolleret mærket. Og hvor ligger kontrolinstanserne henne. Og det vil også skulle ledsages af en oprindelsesmærkning omkring produktets herkomst: er det et fra EU, et non-EU produkt, eller et blandet produkt. Det skal også være selvlysende i mærket. Så når man tager varen op, får man yderligere informationer. Sådan står det i forordningen. Omkostningerne for det nye EU mærke ligger ved virksomhederne. Men de får muligheden for at bruge deres emballagelager op, inden de er tvunget til at sætte de nye på. Jeg tror absolut EU mærke vil hjælpe til at få økologisk vin ud af nicheeksistensen. Det vil absolut løfte. Men det kræver tid inden det slår ordentligt igennem. EU label lægger op til at det bliver økologisk vin som der er økologisk mælk. Så vi ikke bliver forvirrede længere mellem forskellen på vinen lavet af økologiske dyrkede druer og en helt gennemført økologisk vin, fra dyrkning til det færdige slutprodukt. Folk vil lynhurtig genkende økologisk vin i butikkerne, men igen, hvis man får lys om, at forskellen ikke er særlig stor, på trods af vinens mærkning, bliver forbrugerne skuffet. P.t. står der ikke på vinen andet end ”kan indeholde sulfit” eller ingenting. Jeg tror virkelig, at det vil være et godt instrument til at hjælpe økologisk vin på vej med et mærke på. Beslutningen bliver meget nemmere og lettere, fordi der er mærke på.
16
Appendix 6: Summary expert interview with Torben Møller Sørensen Interview Partner: Torben Møller Sørensen, Cellar Master from Odense Date of Interview: 10.12.2010 Duration of Interview: 54 min. Status og rolle af vin i DK Jeg tror, det med at vide noget om vin, det har noget med status at gøre. Det viser mange undersøgelser, at man har virkelig status, hvis man ved noget om vin. Hvorimod jeg tror ikke, at folk søger social status og anerkendelse i at drikke økologisk vin, eller at man bekender sig til økologi generelt. Det tror jeg ikke, at det umiddelbart hænger sammen. Det er i høj grad efter min mening, kvinder der er mere interesseret i økologi end mænd. Hvorimod mænd har behov for at vise en status og generelt ikke har en stor viden omkring økologien end kvinder har. At DK’s ølkultur skifter til fordel for et større vin forbrug, hænger sammen med vores bedre køberkraft og vores rejsevillighed og vores interesse for gastronomi. Og vores bedre viden om hvad der sker rundt omkring. Det vil sige kender man noget til vin, så kender man også noget til historie, geografi og kultur. Hvorimod øl, det er mere afgrænset til skandinaviske eller nordeuropæiske områder, og så er det lige så meget med vin at det er mere nyt i vores nordlige kultur, hvorimod øl har eksisteret i lang tid. Havde du spurgt mig for 20 år siden omkring den økologiske vin forbruger, så ville jeg har sagt, at det er mere nogle mennesker som gik rundt i hjemmesyet tøj. Men i dag er det nok i høj grad kvinder med en bedre uddannelse, bedre socialt status og højere løn. Jeg tror kvinder udgør størstedelen, fordi de har det bedre fysisk, hvis de drikker økologisk vin. De får ikke så meget ondt i hovedet og maven og nogle kvinder har en tendens til at blive rød i ansigtet og på brystet når de drikker vin, og da tro jeg har de det bedre med økologisk vin. Generelt, er det efter min mening ikke den lavest uddannet og lavest lønnet person som køber økologisk vin. Forbrugernes kendskab og opfattelse I DK ved man ikke ret meget om økologisk vin, fordi mange tror, at økologisk vin ikke indeholder svovl. Da ved ikke ret mange mennesker, hvad der ligger bag økologisk vin overhovedet. Jeg tror ikke det gamle image er så udbredt mere, især ikke ved den yngre generation. Jeg tror mange synes, at de skal betale lidt mere for økologisk vin. Vi kender det fra andre økologiske produkter. Jeg tror ikke at forbrugerne synes, at økologisk vin er decideret dårlig. Informationssøgning I supermarkeder vil de ikke få ret meget information omkring økologisk vin, fordi medarbejderne ved meget lidt om det. Hvor de får deres oplysninger fra, det er faktisk meget dårligt oplyst. Det kan være, at nogle går på nettet og læser om det, fordi de er interesseret i det. Men generelt er information omkring økologisk vin svært at finde. Også i faglitteratur. Så, jeg tror de fleste får deres informationer fra venner og bekendte, som måske har smagt på nogle vine som tilfældigvis eller decideret var økologiske. Forbrugernes adfærd Da er mange andre parametre, der er meget mere væsentlig hvis du handler med vin end lige at sige at den er økologisk. Man kan også sige det på den måde, at nogle af de dyreste produkter, da snakker man overhovedet ikke om økologi, da det ikke tænder hos mange forbruger. En champagne ville man ikke mærke med økologi. Parametrene kunne være historiske og kulturelle, det kan være snob-effekten. Hvor lang tid vinen lagrede på træfad, hvilken årgang, region/område som er meget efterspurgt. Jeg har ikke set f.eks. nogle stor bordeaux vine, som er dyrket økologiske. Markedets udvikling Den første gang jeg stødt på økologisk vin det var i 1970’erne, hvor det begyndte at dukke på i DK. Dengang var jeg meget professionel i vinbranchen, skulle koordinere store vinkøb for et internationalt firma. Da lagde jeg mærke til en stigende interesse i økologi og dermed også økologisk vin. Men stadigvæk var det meget småt. Det er først nu, at det kommer langt mere i gang. De første økologiske vine var af meget ringe kvalitet. Jeg vil sige det var jo mere sådan nogle personer eller vinproducenter, som var mere opslugt af den økologiske tanke end at de 17
kunne producere noget der kvalitetsmæssig var i orden. Der er også en udvikling i økologisk øl og der er mange mikro-bryggerier dukket op i DK. Det minder lidt om mange vinproducenter i starten 1970’erne, som dyrkede økologisk vin. Fordi mange af de økologiske øl producenter i DK har været meget dårlig til at brygge øl og kunne ikke sælge deres øl. De har markedsført deres produkter som meget gode produkter og har i realitet været meget dyre og meget dårlige produkter. Så mange mikro-bryggerier er lukket eller også så er de fusioneret. Da er ingen tvivl om, at der er en interesse i økologisk øl både dansk og udenlandsk. Øl forbruget i DK har været stærk faldende i det sidste 10-15 år, og man mener at faldet af øl i DK er omkring 6-8 %. Vin forbruget i DK er stabiliseret. Det er steget lidt sidste år. Man skal se på de nyeste tal fra DK statistik. Forbruget ligger omkring 35 liter per person i DK om året, hvis man tager alle personer med. Det svarer til at hver dansker i gennemsnit drikker en flaske vin om ugen. Det er et forholdsvis højt tal, hvis man sammenligner det med typiske øl producerende lande. Og forholdsvis mellem lavt, hvis man sammenligner med vin producerende lande som Frankrig og Italien, Spanien. Så vidt jeg er orienteret, så er Frankrig typisk for økologisk vin i DK. Det er også det førende land for økologiske vine sammen med Italien. Nu laver man også økologisk vin i Tyskland, men man bruger næsten ikke tyske vine i DK. Så er der en del af de nye oversøiske lande, som i meget høj grad dyrker økologi, f.eks. Chile som er det største vinland i DK. Og da laver man faktisk en del økologisk vin og de er meget med på den bølge. De kom meget sent i gang, men de har set en fordel i at dyrke økologisk vin, fordi der også er økonomiske interesser. Det er dyrt at købe pesticider og kunstgødning og at sprøjte, når det regner dagen efter, osv. Distribution Jeg tror de fortrækker at købe vin i supermarkeder. 80-85 % af alle vine der bliver solgt i DK, bliver solgt gennem supermarkeder. De fleste danskere fortrækker at købe vin i supermarkeder eller specialforretninger, da kan man også få vejledning. Et butikkens sortiment er afhængig af, hvor supermarkedet ligger i DK. Vin afdelingerne bliver større og større. Og der er generelt en store interesse i vin. Mange supermarkedskæder går meget op i vin, f.eks. en kæde som Irma er i høj grad fokuseret på vin. Irma ligger også typisk i Storkøbenhavn og Nordsjælland. Hvorimod, hvis du går i et supermarked i Sønderjylland, som ligger tæt på grænsen, så vil man finde et mindre sortiment, da mange kører over grænsen for at købe vin. Nu snakkede vi lige om Irma, og Irma har gjord mest for økologien i DK, og jeg mener at vide, at i 2010 har hævet sortimentet af økologisk vin på 8 %. Og det er nok det højeste vi har i DK. Generelt, så tror jeg ikke, at der sker den store udvikling på salg af økologisk vin. Det kraver at man investerer mere i oplysningsarbejde for forbrugerne på området. Vindyrkning Vinen må egentlig ikke kaldes økologisk vin, men vin produceret af økologisk dyrkede druer. Alt økologien foregår jo ude på vinmarken og ikke ned i kælderen. Biodynamisk vin har noget at gøre med filosofi og homøopati. I sidste ende er det jo bare en videreudvikling af økologi. Og man kan sige, at det grundlæggende regler for biodynamisk vin er jo ting, der ligger under økologisk vin. Det er rigtig nok at klimaet er meget afgørende for om man dyrker økologisk vin. Man kan sige, hvis du har et meget varmt og tørt klima, så har du aldeles lettere at dyrke økologisk vin, end hvis du har et varmt og fugtigt eller koldt og fugtigt klima, fordi sygdomsangreb, plantesygdom, angreb fra insekter kommer i meget højere grad, hvis klimaet et fugtigt. Hvorimod tørt og varmt klima er gode forudsætninger for at dyrke økologisk, fordi du næsten ikke behøver at sprøjte med fungicider eller pesticider. Men så kan man sige, at hvis du har meget varmt klima vil man gerne 18
tilsætte syrer til den vin, f.eks. citronsyre ellers bliver vinen ikke så god. Det behøver man ikke i Tyskland, da er dyrker man mange syrlige vine pga. klimatiske forhold. De vil til gengæld gerne tilsætte sukker i deres vine for at få en høj alkoholprocent, da de ikke kan få druerne til at modne nok. Det har de ikke brug for i de sydlige lande. Til gengæld, hvis de laver økologisk vin, så skal de faktisk bruge citronsyre som er dyrket økologisk. Det burde også kontrolleres. Det er et meget stort område inden for EU og jeg tvivler på, at man bliver enig om kort tid. Det tager sikkert mage år. Noget jeg har oplevet på mine vin rejser er, at det er at mange vinproducenter, der dyrker en bæredygtig vindyrkning. Det vil sige, at de dyrker ikke 100% økologisk. De dyrker faktisk økologisk, men i tilfælde, at der kommer et angreb på vinstokke, at de så får lov til at få den mulighed til at kunne sprøjte. Det er i realitet rigtig mange der dyrker bæredygtigt. Men der er også mange der ikke skriver det på flasken, at vinen er dyrket økologisk, fordi de tror, at det ikke er noget, som forbrugerne kaster sig over når det står på flasken. Selvom jeg kunne forestille mig, at detaljehandlen gerne vil have at de skriver det på flasken. Jeg tror der er mange flere vindyrker, der producerer mere bæredygtigt, fordi det er i højere grad også en økonomisk fordel. Da er mange der gerne vil have den mulighed at kunne sprøjte for at rede høsten. Men så er de afskåret for at kalde det økologisk for de næste 3 år, da jorden skal regenereres. Vin der bliver produceret i DK er meget småt og det er faktisk rimelig ligegyldigt. Man må producere vin i DK på 99 hektar jord og det svarer ca. til 200 tønder vand. Det findes en del producenter i DK, men de fleste er amatører, så de må kun lave vin, men ikke må sælge den. Der findes ca. 40 vindyrker der prøver på at lave en forretning. Og de dyrker økologisk. Men de fleste af dem dyrker måske højst et par 1000 flasker om året. Den danske vin er også meget dyrt og er ikke særlige god. Man dyrker mest rødvin, men efter min mening burde man dyrke hvidvin, hvis man tager vores klima i betragtning. Måske kommer vi til at dyrke mere vin, når man kigger på den globale opvarmning. De problemer har man allerede i de sydlige lande, f.eks. Sicilien. Da håber vi at vores innovation og teknologi kan tage stillingen til problemet. Da er mange udfordringer. Regulering jeg kan levende forstille mig, hvor vanskeligt det er at gennemgår sådan noget på EU-niveau, fordi der er så mange interesseorganisationer. Og at lave noget på landbrugsområdet indenfor EU, er stort set en umulig eller langvarige opgave. Alle har så mange forskellige meninger og hver gang man prøver at lave noget, som f.eks. en fælles EU lovgivning om økologisk vin, så skal man blive enig om den skal blive strammere eller løsere i de forskelle medlemslande, og det tager rigtig lang tid. Jeg ved ikke hvorfor det blev forkastet, men jeg er sikker på, at der er så mange forskellige interesser. En harmonisering af standarter ville være en fordel. At man kan sige nu har man en fælles aftale, og at man ved man køber en vin som er mærket på en bestemt måde. Så mange ville føle, at man køber et bedre produkt, også sundhedsmæssigt. Ligesom man har det med økologiske fødevarer. Økologiske mærker I DK bliver forskellige mærker brugt, alt efter hvilket land vinen kommer fra. Og da er en stor forvirring blandt forbrugere, fordi de fornemmer et stor miskmask. Pt. er der ikke en fælles holdning om, f. eks inden for EU. Og da er alene Frankrig, som det største producerende økologiske marked for vin. Da er ikke nogle generelle eller faste standarter indenfor EU, hvordan man definerer økologisk vin. Der er en meget stor forskel, hvordan man definerer økologisk i DK og i Frankrig. Hvis du dyrker økologisk vin f.eks. i Frankrig, så må du gerne sprøjte dine vinstokke med kobbersulfat. Også selvom du dyrker økologisk. Det må man gerne gøre. Men her i DK f.eks. må frugt og grøntsager slet ikke blive sprøjtet med kobbersulfat, ligegyldig om det er konventionelt eller økologisk. Det må bruges på økologisk vin f.eks. i Frankrig. Det er bare for at give et eksempel på, hvor forskellige lovning og reguleringer er, og derfor er der ikke mange danske forbruger, som kan overskue de forskellige nationale ø-mærker på vinen. Da er ikke et fast mærke indenfor EU på det. 19
Det er vigtigt at der er form for kontrol. Det er jo sket at producenterne har mærket deres vin som økologisk, men i virkeligheden var den langt fra at komme i nærheden af økologi. Da er kontrolinstanser og de er forskellige fra land til land, også hvordan det kontrollen bliver håndteret. Jeg tro faktisk ikke at de er særlige gode.
20
Appendix 7: Summary expert interview with Prof. Dr. Dieter Hoffmann Interview Partner: Prof. Dr. Dieter Hoffmann, Marktforschung, Forschungsanstalt Geisenheim Date of Interview: 10.12.2010 Duration of Interview: 51min
Fachgebietsleiter
Betriebswirtschaft
und
Statistische Erfassung von Biowein Wir haben im Rahmen einer repräsentativen Befragung die Orientierung gegenüber Bioprodukten bei verschiedenen Artikeln abgefragt, z.B. Obst, Gemüse, Fleisch, Milcherzeugnisse usw., aber auch Getränke und Wein. Die Konsumenten, die Biowein ganz spezifisch konsumieren, stellen lediglich einen Anteil von 4% der Verbraucher dar. Biowein ist somit eigentlich kein starkes Segment. Man muss aber auch mit der Einschätzung des Marktanteils realistisch sein, da Befragungen immer zu einer gewissen Überschätzung neigen, weil zum einen soziale Erwünschtheit bei vielen Befragten einfließt, und zum anderen nicht alle Befragten so eine Umfrage ernst nehmen. Es ist also nicht immer alles 1:1 vergleichbar. Bezüglich der Produktionszahlen ist die Lage insofern schwierig, weil man diese nicht über offizielle Statistiken bekommen. Das geht eigentlich nur über die Bioverbände. Wenn man konkrete Produktionszahlen in Deutschland hat, muss man die Importe hinzunehmen, da ein großer Teil von Biowein heute über verschiedene Kanäle nach Deutschland kommt. Im Lebensmittelhandel wie im Fachhandel kommt heute vieles aus Spanien und Frankreich. Dazu gibt es keine statistische Erfassung, weil Biowein bislang keine statistisch relevante Kategorie ist. Das macht es ein bisschen schwierig. Es gibt letztlich 2 Kennzahlen. Zum einen gehen wir heute davon aus, dass in Deutschland etwa 4.500 Hektar ökologisch relevant bewirtschaftet werden. Davon fallen in etwa 50% unter das EU - Biosiegel. Die rein auf Verbände orientierte Produktion ist deutlich kleiner. Generell muss auch davon ausgegangen werden, dass „bio“ im Weinsektor im Vergleich zu anderen landwirtschaftlichen Gütern immer noch einen relativ kleinen Anteil darstellt. Bei Obst, Gemüse, Eiern usw. ist organic deutlich weiter entwickelt als im Weinbereich. Das hat aber auch z.T. damit zu tun, dass die gesamte Sortimentdifferenzierung bei Wein völlig anders ist als bei den anderen Produkten. Bei Wein gibt es eine breite horizontale und vertikale Differenzierung, also auf sehr unterschiedlichen Qualitätsebenen, und da liefert „Bio“ eine neue Qualitätsdimension. Wenn man das auf andere Nahrungsmittel überträgt, dann ist „Bio“ eine Art Premiumkategorie mit einer eigenen Kennzeichnung und wird auch so in der Regel vom Verbraucher verstanden. Deswegen gibt es dort auch eine höhere Zahlungsbereitschaft. Bioweine bewegen sich eigentlich in der Mitte der gesamten Breite des Weinangebots, sowohl was verschiedenen Kategorien, ob weiß, rot, anbelangt, verschiedene Rebsorten als auch unterschiedliche Preise. Es gibt Bioweine für 2,49 Euro aus Sizilien bei Aldi, die gibt es aber auch im Direktvertrieb für deutlich höhere Preise direkt vom Erzeuger. Es gibt eine sehr breite Palette des Angebots und das macht es natürlich ein bisschen schwierig, sie zu erfassen, weil auf der einen Seite das Sortiment ohnehin schon stark differenziert ist, auf der anderen Seite das Biosegment im Weinbereich relativ klein ist. Deswegen hat man große Schwierigkeiten, dies statistisch in Mengen zu erfassen. Sortiment in Supermärkten :Verhältnis Biowein : konventioneller Wein Ich würde sagen, der Anteil von Biowein im Verhältnis zu konventionellem Wein liegt deutlich unter 1%. Es ist eine kleine Hobbykiste; eigentlich nicht marktrelevant. Biowein spielt bei Weinen in Deutschland eine sehr begrenzte Rolle. Es gibt einige Erzeuger, die sich Biowein mehr aus erzeugerphilosophischen Gründen zuwenden, aber die ganze Bioorientierung hat? auch keine sehr breit entwickelte 21
Nachfrage. Es gab vor einigen Jahren, als das EU - Biosiegel aufkam, Sonderplatzierung, spezielle Artikelgruppen, die im Handel in die Regale wanderten. Die sind heute fast alle wieder verschwunden, weil sie sich nicht verkauft haben. Dies ist ein Indiz dafür ist, dass „Bio“, das zeigt auch unsere Untersuchung sehr deutlich, bei Wein keine spezifische Orientierung von einem wesentlichen Teil der Verbraucher ist. Das mag vielleicht den einen oder anderen Bioengagierten ein wenig enttäuschen, aber meines Erachtens ist es eher eine eigenständige Produktionsphilosophie als eine verbraucherrelevante Nachfrage. Gründe, warum Verbraucher nicht so stark gegenüber Biowein orientiert sind wie beispielsweise gegenüber anderen Bioprodukte (z.B. Fleisch, Eier, Milchprodukte) „Bio“ ist eine Orientierung der Verbraucher, die eher aus privatem Nutzen hervorgeht. Er, der Verbraucher, glaubt, dass Bioprodukte für ihn gesünder seien. Gesundheit ist viel relevanter für ihn als sein Beitrag zu irgendwelchen umweltschonenden Produktionsmethoden. Und er stellt sich eben vor, dass direkt verzehrte Produkte bei „Bio“ für ihn gesünder sind, ganz einfach, weil er unterstellt, das „Bio“ keine Chemie beinhaltet in Form von Rückständen von Pflanzenschutzmittel. Das ist der wesentliche Punkt, um den es immer wieder geht. Bioprodukte sind ohne chemische Pflanzenbehandlung hergestellt worden, was ja häufig so dargestellt wird, was der Verbraucher aber teilweise überhaupt nicht versteht. Aber er glaubt, dass sie frei davon sind. Ohne Rückstände, ohne irgendwelche Belastung, sprich, er glaubt, dass Bioprodukte für ihn gesünder sind. Inwieweit das stimmt oder nicht, das ist ernährungswissenschaftlich sehr strittig, aber Verbraucher reagieren nach wissenschaftlichen Ergebnissen auf ein subjektive Wahrnehmen. Und dieser subjektive Glaube ist sehr viel marktbestimmender als irgendwelche objektiven Ergebnisse. Insbesondere bei Frischprodukte, wie Obst, Gemüse, ist es sehr relevant. Es gibt Verbraucher, die sagen: „Ich kaufe lieber „Bio“ weil ich glaube, dass es ein bisschen gesünder ist. Wie viel, das weiß ich auch nicht, aber ich tue meinem Körper auf jeden Fall nichts Schlechtes.“ Daher rührt auch die Zahlungsbereitschaft, wenn er die Zahlungsfähigkeit aufgrund eines entsprechenden Einkommens hat. Bei Wein ist das wieder etwas ganz anderes. Bei Wein fällt es wegen des Verarbeitungsprozesses extrem schwer, diesen direkten Bezug zwischen Naturprodukt „Traube“ und dem fertigen Wein herzustellen. Wir sehen in der Regel bei den meisten Verarbeitungsprodukten im Nahrungsmittelbereich nichts anderes. „Bio“ ist dort auch nicht sehr erfolgreich. Es ist viel erfolgreicher im Bereich Frische. Wenn S?ie an Bioeier denken, an Biohühner denken, an Biorindfleisch, an Bioobst und Gemüse, da ist es relevant. In allen Verarbeitungsprodukten ist es relativ wenig relevant. Das heißt, Wein ist ein Verarbeitungsprodukt, bei dem der Verbraucher ohnehin unterstellt, Wein sei gesund. Wieso soll jetzt Wein ein bisschen mehr gesund sein, nur weil da „Bio“ drauf steht. Zumal weil bei „Bio“ ein großer Teil ohnehin nicht so genau Bescheid weiß, was tatsächlich daran ist oder was nicht. Bei Wein unterstellt der Konsument immer, dass es ein sehr naturnahes Getränk ist, insofern ist naturnah bzw. noch näher für ihn schwer zu differenzieren. Erklärung für Zunahme an Bioprodukten und Biowein in den letzten Jahren Ich würde sagen, die ganze Biowelle ist eine Intelligenzwelle. Die kommt von der oberen intelligenten Oberschicht und nicht vom Durchschnitt der Verbraucher. Insofern sind Sie als Studenten mit Sicherheit dem viel näher. Als Studenten setzt man sich mit allem, was mit Umwelt zu tun hat, immer mehr auseinander, auch im Alltagsleben. Das findet in Vorlesungen statt, in Diskussionen unter Studenten, weil man sich als junger, intellektueller Mensch viel mehr Gedanken macht. In der ganzen Protestbewegungen, Antikernkraft usw. spielen Studenten, nicht nur, aber schon eine besondere Rolle. Insofern nehmen sie „Bio“ eher wahr. Ich sag mal, wenn Sie von einem Universitätsstandort kommen, dann werden Sie im Universitätsumfeld ein deutlich höheres Bioangebot finden über alle Kategorien hinweg und damit auch bei Wein als 50 km entfernt. Weil einfach Universitäten in dieser Frage weitaus aktiver sind und natürlich sozusagen alle Menschen an der Universität , ob das Dozenten 22
oder Studenten sind, sich mit Sicherheit mit diesen Umweltfragen weitaus kritischer auseinandersetzten und damit natürlich „Bio“ auch anders wahrnehmen. Ein weiterer Aspekt kommt aus meiner Sicht hinzu, das ist das Biosiegel . Das ist ein spezifischer, aus meiner Sicht, Erfolg von Frau Künast. Ich sehe es etwas kritisch, dass für die ökologischen Produkte der Begriff „Bio“ verwendet wurde, was an sich problematisch ist. Die anderen Produkte sind auch Bioprodukte und wenn wir dann überlegen, was sozusagen in der Vorstellungswelt von Durchschnittsverbrauchern stattfindet, dann unterstellt er, dass er überall dort, wo „Bio“ draufsteht, die reine Natur bekommt. Überall dort, wo nicht „Bio“ draufsteht, ist somit irgendetwas manipuliert, sprich behandelt mit Chemie. Und Chemie ist für die spontane Vorstellungswelt von Verbrauchern das Gegenteil von „Bio“. Chemie ist schlecht, was „Bio“ ist, ist gut. Was objektiv nicht? stimmt, aber das sind die subjektiven kurzfristigen spontanen Empfindungen und die machen natürlich Bioprodukte zunächst einmal etwas aktueller. Ich persönlich glaube, dass dies eine Welle ist, die schon wieder am Abebben ist. Das mag vielleicht im Bereich der Wissenschaft und der intelligenten Lehre bei weiten nicht so sein. Aber wenn Sie sich ein bisschen die Medien anschauen, die sich gerade in den letzten Wochen intensiv damit befasst haben, dann beginnt die Auseinandersetzung damit, was ist tatsächlich „Bio“ und was nicht, doch sehr kritisch zu werden. Unterstellt, dass es bei vielen Verbrauchern auch ankommt, dann führt das zu einer Art Relativierung und das kann man sicherlich auch daran sehen, dass der Handel relativ spontan diese Bioszene mit dem EU Biosiegel aufgenommen hat in die Regale, aber dann auch relativ schnell wieder prüft, was sich davon verkauft und was die reine Show ist. Und dann wird es dem Sortiment entsprechend angepasst. Ich beobachte, dass die Sortimente wieder kleiner geworden sind. Es sind bestimmt in manchen Kategorien wieder neue Bioprodukte ausgetaucht, aber das ist so eine ambivalente Sache. Ich glaube, wir sind im Moment in einer ambivalenten Situation. „Bio“ ist ein weitaus größeres mediales Thema als es Geschäft beinhaltet. Allemal bei Wein. ORWINE Projekt und Gründe für das Scheitern der Regulierung – Stand der Dinge Das Kernproblem in diesem Zusammenhang resultiert eigentlich aus 2 Kernfragen: Im Weinbaubereich die Anwendung von Kupfer als Pflanzenbehandlungs-, sprich Pflanzenschutzmittel gegen entsprechende Pilzkrankheiten, Pernostra. Ohne Kupfer gibt es im Moment kein „Bio“, weil man dann nichts erntet. Oder man ändert den Standort als andere Möglichkeit, das heißt, dass man die Produktion von Bioprodukten an die Standorte verlagert, die einen relativ geringen Infektionsdruck haben. Damit kommt man mit wenigen Anwendungen aus. Das ist aber ein sehr kritisches Thema, weil das hieße, dass der größte Teil der deutschen Produktion eben nicht mehr zukunftsfähig ist und dass sie sich irgendwo in trockenere Standorte, z.B. Spanien, verlagert. In Spanien gibt es große Landstriche, die überhaupt keine Probleme haben, „Bio“ zu erzeugen. Was letztendlich eine Standortpräferenz wäre oder werden könnte. Das haben sie aufgeschoben, aber das wird vielleicht noch kommen. Weil bisher dieses Biothema nicht so marktrelevant ist. Deswegen bekommt man teilweise aus Spanien auch relativ preiswerte Bioweine, weil deren Standardproduktion schon „Bio“ ist. Die haben nie etwas anderes gemacht, vielleicht ein bisschen Schwefel und Kupfer gespritzt. Etwas anderes spritzt der Biowinzer sonst weltweit auch nicht. Also waren die Winzer in Spanien eigentlich schon immer „Bio“. Und somit führt diese eine Kernfrage dazu, dass wir eine reine Standortdiskussion bekommen. Das heißt, die, die gute Klimabedingungen haben, die können „Bio“ machen, . Und die, die kritische Standortbedingungen haben, ein großer Teil in Frankreich, Deutschland, Österreich oder andere Standorte, die können in Zukunft kein „Bio“ mehr herstellen, wenn man beispielsweise Kupfer aus der Produktion ausschließen würde als Behandlungsmittel. Der 2. Aspekt, das ist der aktuellere, der wesentlichere, im ORWINE Projekt handelt von 23
ganz spezifischen Herstellungsverfahren für die Weinherstellung. Also eine Bioweinherstellung zu definieren. Bisher gab es nur Wein aus Biotrauben, die dann natürlich verkürzterweise auch Biowein genannt wurde. Aber die EU wollte jetzt für ihr Biosiegel auch eine ganz spezifische Herstellung von Wein definieren und da kommt der interessante Aspekt dazu: Der Verbraucher verbindet spontan mit Biowein einen Wein, dem kein Schwefel zugesetzt wurde. Warum? Weil er Schwefel für ein kritisches Element hält, objektiv berechtigt oder nicht ist eine andere Frage, aber beispielsweise bei Schwefelversäuerung der Böden taucht der Begriff Schwefel immer wieder auf. Schwefel ist Chemie, Chemie ist schlecht, also Wein mit Schwefel ist schlechter als Wein ohne Schwefel. So kurz und so einfach sind die Denkweisen der Verbraucher. Weil sie natürlich nicht informiert sind. Das weiß die EU, und sie weiß auch, eigentlich muss sie den Biowein definieren als Wein ohne Zusatz von Schwefel. Da gibt es einige Erzeuger, die sagen: „Ja, das wollen wir.“, beispielsweise Italien und Spanien haben sich dafür stark gemacht. Warum? Weil sie wieder von den Standorten kommen, an denen sie ein Produktionssystem haben, bei dem sie für die Weinherstellung ein bisschen weniger Schwefel brauchen. Beispielsweise weil sie Rotweine herstellen, da brauchen sie weniger, oder weil sie wesentlich stärker den Säureabbau für ihre Weine mit einsetzen und und und. Da gibt es unterschiedliche Gründe. Und deswegen sind sie für sehr niedrigen oder am besten Vermeidung von Schwefelzusatz. Das würde die Bioweinherstellung auch sozusagen inhaltlich definitorisch sauber von der anderen Weinherstellung abgrenzen. Das wollen aber wieder die nördlichen Gebiete nicht, weil die ohne Schwefel keine fruchtigen Weine herstellen können. Und damit haben wir eine Auseinandersetzung, die im Wesentlichen standortinduziert ist. Nämlich die Standorte, die so günstig sind, die einen anderen Typ von Wein herstellen, gegen Standorte, die nicht so begünstigt sind, um einen fruchtigen Typ von Wein herzustellen. Wir sind der Auffassung, dass die Aromafeinheit sozusagen unser Standortvorteil ist, den würden wir auch gerne erhalten. Wenn Sie Weine ohne Schwefel haben, dann schmeckt der Wein nach einem Jahr deutlich anders, vor allem wenn er dann noch 3 Monate oder 6 bei 25 Grad im Regal stand, dann ist er fast nicht mehr genießbar. Und damit ist natürlich die Frage beim Zusatz von Schwefel für die Weinherstellung, die Weinhaltbarmachung, eine kritische Frage, die bisher nicht geklärt ist. Und was dabei herauskommt, ist eine politische Auseinandersetzung. Ich sage mal, aus meiner persönlichen Sicht muss, der Ehrlichkeit wegen, eigentlich der Verbrauchererwartung nachgegangen werden. Insofern stimme ich der EU - Definition mit wenig Schwefel zu. Was gleichzeitig heißt, dass für den größten Teil der Erzeuger die Bioweinproduktion kaputtgeht. Jetzt haben wir 2 Dilemma und wir können uns nur für eins entscheiden. Entweder wir betrügen den Verbraucher und schreiben Biowein drauf, was er aber nach seinen Erwartungen nicht ist, nachgewiesenermaßen. Das können Sie in unserer Studie nachlesen. Oder wir orientieren uns nach ihm, aber er bekommt ein anderes Getränk. Das schmeckt anders. Ob dann seine Bioweinpräferenz so stark ist, dass er trotz des anderen Geschmacks den Wein auch kauft, das muss erst noch bewiesen werden. Das bezweifeln viele. Sodass dann, wenn ein Biowein ohne Zusatz von Schwefel auf den Markt käme, man aufgrund der geschmacklichen Andersartigkeit mit einem deutlichen Rückgang der Nachfrage rechnen muss. Stand der Dinge in Deutschland – Umstellung von konventionell auf bio Die aktuelle Diskussion ist so, dass diejenigen, die sich für Bioweinproduktion entschieden haben, es so belassen wollen, wie es gegenwärtig ist: Biotraubenerzeugung, aber normale Weinherstellung. Durchaus auch mit der Kennzeichnung auf dem Etikett: „Dieser Wein ist hergestellt aus biologisch erzeugten Trauben“, nach biologischen Regeln, aber nicht die 24
Weinherstellung, weil sie den Verzicht auf Zusatz von Schwefel aus qualitativen Gründen nicht wollen. Ansonsten sehe ich momentan eine deutliche Verlangsamung der Umstellung. In den spezifischen Märkten war die große Umstellung im letzten Jahr, weil durch das Biosiegel die Neueinführung der Erweiterung der Distribution im Fassweinmarkt, also nicht im Direktmarketingmarkt, eine größere Präferenz durch bessere Fassweinpreise für Bioweine entstand. Diese Präferenz ist weg. Der Fassweinpreis für Biowein ist im Wesentlichen so wie der für konventionellen Wein. Warum? Weil der Markt für Biowein sich im Lebensmitteleinzelhandel nicht so entwickelt hatte, dass größere Kellereien einen größeren Teil ihres Sortiments darauf umstellen, und dies kontinuierlich durchwachsend nachfragt. Der Fassweinpreis signalisiert in diesem Markt: Es gibt keinen Markt. Also ist die logische Folge für die Erzeuger doch: „Warum soll ich umstellen, ich habe keinen Vorteil. Ich habe einen Nachteil in Richtung höherer Produktionskosten, niedrigere Erträge, aber keinen Preisvorteil.“ Also gibt es keinen ökonomischen Anreiz, es sei denn, jemand ist dem Biowein produktionsphilosophisch zugetan, der wird es trotzdem tun, aber nicht aus ökonomischen Gründen. Ich denke, da muss man klar differenzieren. Die wachsenden letzten Jahre kamen aus ökonomischen Gründen im Bereich der einfachen Standardfassweinerzeugung. Im Bereich des Direktvertriebs habeneine Reihe von VDP-Betrieben in den letzten Jahren umgestellt. Das ist wieder eine ganz andere Welt. Das sind völlig andere Motive. Die bringen normalerweise ihre Weine nicht mit Biosiegel auf dem Markt. Und sie wollen ihr Produktionssystem und damit ihrer Markenphilosophie ein ad-on geben. Weil sie eben auch sehr nachhaltig, umweltfreundlich sind und an die intelligente, zahlungsbereite Kundschaft verkaufen und deren Zahlungsbereitschaft natürlich durch einen solchen Umwelteffekt eher noch ein bisschen stärker motiviert wird und die Kundenfindung intensiviert wird. Man erfüllt sozusagen das, was die Intelligenz und wohlhabende Kundschaft sich wünscht: Durch naturnahe Erzeugung auch bei dem Luxusprodukt Wein einen Beitrag für sich selbst zu leisten, indem man noch gesündere Weine trinkt. Ob realistisch oder unrealistisch spielt da keine Rolle, das sind immer subjektive Empfindungen und Träume und Wünsche. Ob es real ist, ist eine sehr kritische Frage. Biowein-spezifische Marketingkampagnen und Initiativen in Deutschland Es gibt relativ wenige. Es gibt eine eigene Fachmesse, die Biofach, auf der auch Biowein vorgestellt wird. Selbstverständlich engagieren sich die Verbände mit entsprechenden Präsentationen auch auf der Weinfachmesse ProWein. Aber eine breite öffentliche Kampagne kann ich momentan nicht sehen, dafür haben die Verbände in der Regel oft kein Geld. Das machen die Firmen, die Weingüter selbst. Die, die im Verbrauchermarkt tätig sind mit Flaschenweinvermarktung, die meisten sogar im Direktmarketing, die machen das von sich aus, sozusagen in ihrem Marktumfeld, aber nicht in den anderen Welten. Absatz von Biowein fördern Wie man den Absatz von Biowein erfolgreicher gestalten könnte, ist eine sehr komplizierte Frage. Die erste Frage ist, warum sollte man es fördern? Ist tatsächlich mehr „Bio“ umweltfreundlicher als der konventionelle Wein? Da muss ich ein dickes Fragezeichen anfügen. Denken Sie an die Problematik von Kupferverwendung. Das ist für mich ein nachhaltiges, substanzielles Problem, das eigentlich „Bio“ nicht „Bio“ ist, weil es ist nicht umweltfreundlich ist. Kupfer ist schädlich. In den restlichen Verfahren, die heute angewendet werden, ist bei Wein noch viel mehr als bei vielen anderen Produkten oder bei der Traubenerzeugung zwischen einer guten fachlichen Praxis und Bioerzeugung immer noch eine sehr, sehr geringe Differenz, die sich im Wesentlichen auf den Pflanzenschutz begrenzt. Und im Bereich des Pflanzenschutzes würde ich heute sagen, dass es eine sehr unklare Frage ist, ob Bio-Pflanzenschutz tatsächlich umweltfreundlicher ist als der konventionelle Pflanzenschutz. Und deswegen bin 25
ich in der Beziehung relativ kritisch. Also sag ich, warum soll ich etwas fördern, was nichts bedeutet? Das ist meine Einschätzung. Die ist vielleicht auch ein bisschen persönlich geprägt, aber ich glaube, dass ich es auch ordentlich begründen kann, weil ich die substanzielle Umweltförderung darin nicht sehe. Was ganz anderes ist es, dass diese Entwicklung in den letzten 20, 30 Jahren durchaus die konventionelle Produktion schon sehr umweltfreundlich beeinflusst hat. Das ist der Wert dieses mehr oder minder philosophisch-idealistischen Engagements und da bin ich immer sehr positiv erfreut. Die ganze Bio - Diskussion hat die konventionelle Erzeugung sehr positiv in Richtung Umweltsensibilität beeinflusst. Deswegen ist die Differenz auch klein geworden. Wenn man das auf den Status Quo von vor 30 Jahren zurückführen würde, wäre die Differenz groß. Heute ist sie sehr klein. Wenn sie an Begrünung der Weinberge denken, an Anwendung von Pflanzenschutzmittel, Recyclingspritzen, Pheromon-Fallen einsetzen anstelle von Insektiziden. Alle diese Dinge haben sich sehr in Richtung Umweltanpassung, Integration, Umweltfreundlichkeit entwickelt im klassischen normalen Wirtschaftsbetrieb, die auch wirtschaftlich sehr günstig sind, so dass die Differenz zu „Bio“ extrem klein ist. Das zweite ist der Verbraucher: Was soll ich ihm denn erzählen, wenn die Differenz klein ist? Und wenn ich keine klare Differenz transportieren kann, dann kann ich ihn auch letztendlich nicht zu einer Entscheidung für eine andere Kategorie motivieren. Das denke ich, ist das Dilemma bei Biowein, vielleicht mehr als bei irgendwelchen anderen Produkten. Bei Bioeiern, da ist die Haltung anders, da ist die Ernährung anders, da wird auf Antibiotika verzichtet, ob richtig oder falsch, das ist in dem Bereich etwas strittig, aber ich denke, dass sind möglicherweise ganz andere Verhältnisse. Aber auch dort ist zu beobachten, dass sich die Produktionssysteme annähern. Standardproduktion übernimmt sinnvolle Anregungen aus dieser umweltfreundlichen, tierfreundlichen Bioproduktion und versucht sie in kommerzielle Systeme zu integrieren, um damit die Vorteile einer natürlichen oder naturnäheren Produktionsweise zu integrieren. Das sehe ich bei Wein genauso. Die Diskussion über Schwefeleinsatz bei der Weinherstellung ist eine zweite, die ich für völlig irrelevant halte, weil es keinen gesundheitlicher Effekt gibt, ob ich weniger oder mehr Schwefel habe. Auf der anderen Seite, wenn der Verbraucher das bei „Bio“ erwartet, darf ich ihm nicht Biowein mit Schwefel anbieten. Wenn das eine spontane Erwartung ist, dann muss das auch auf dem Produkt gekennzeichnet werden oder es muss noch deutlicher darauf hingewiesen werden. Dies ist ein Wein, den darf ich dann auch nicht Biowein nennen, sondern nur Wein aus Biotrauben. Deswegen muss der Begriff Biowein weg. Die ganze Bioszene ist in sich sehr kontrovers und das macht es aus meiner Sicht auch schwierig. Und das kommt, glaube ich, auch so beim Verbraucher an. Wenn er auf einen Bauernhof fährt, wo er die Hühner sieht, wie sie draußen herumlaufen und munter sind und grünes Gras fressen, er eine Nähe zu dem ganzen Produktionssystem hat, dann kriegt er die Nähe und dafür zahlt er dann mehr für das Ei als im Supermarkt. Er nimmt sozusagen ein ganzes Produktionssystem mit auf und es befriedigt ihn auch. Da bin ich dafür, das ist der richtige Weg. Das, was wir heute sehen, ist, dass wir alle möglichen Artikel unter irgendwelche Kennzeichnungen mit „Bio“ stellen, die marginalste Veränderung gegenüber dem Standard bedeuten, und im Lebensmittelhandel dann preisaggressiv verkaufen. Das ist etwas, was ich nicht für fair halte. Was letztendlich denjenigen auch das Geschäft weitgehend kaputt macht oder erschwert, die mit einen hohen Engagement und Idealismus arbeiten. Ich habe hohen Respekt vor den Menschen und vor den Betrieben und das würde ich ihnen auch gerne wirtschaftlich belassen, diese Oase. Wie groß sie dann wird, ist etwas, was der Markt ganz von alleine entwickelt. Wenn Sie davon ausgehen: Die ganze Bioszene ist ohne EU - Biosiegel entstanden. Das Biosiegel ist, wenn Sie so sagen möchten, ein politisches Aufspringen auf den fahrenden Zug, und dadurch hat sich eine eigene Produktionswelt aus 26
eigener Produktionsphilosophie entwickelt mit einem eigenen Marktzugang und hat den Markt wieder neu differenziert. Deswegen gibt es meines Erachtens keinen Bedarf, dieses staatlich zu regeln. Das hat der Markt viel besser gemacht. Was jetzt der Staat regelt, ist, dass er Minimalanforderungen definiert und eigentlich einen maximalen Betrug betreibt. Das ist meine Sichtweise. Also deswegen meine Einstellung. Ich engagiere mich gerne zu loben, wenn jemand das als seine Produktionsphilosophie darstellt und für seine eigene Marke einen eigenen Markt sucht, was funktioniert. Aber ich bin dagegen, dass der Staat mit minimalsten Anforderungen eine maximale Differenzierung vortäuscht. Das ist nicht glaubwürdig. Das ist meine Kritik an dem Biosiegel. Gäbe es das EU - Biosiegel nicht, wäre der Biomarkt nur halb so groß. Man kann sagen, das hat der Biowelle einen Vorschub geleistet. Ich behaupte, dass der größte Teil dessen, was verkauft wird, eigentlich diese Differenzierung nicht verdient. Weil die Differenzen, die produktionstechnischen Differenzen, zu klein sind. Das ist zumindest bei Wein eindeutig so. Deswegen sehe ich nicht unbedingt eine Notwenigkeit, das zu fördern. Ich glaube auch, dass es auch den klassisch engagierten Menschen Schwierigkeiten bereitet, wenn jetzt überall Bioweine im Lebensmittelhandel ständen. Der größte Teil ist ja schon wieder unterbunden, weil der Lebensmittelhandelskunde darauf nicht orientiert ist. Der Direktkunde, der seinen Winzer auswählt, der kauft nicht nur den Wein nach Geschmack, sondern auch nach Erlebnis, nach Philosophie des Winzers, nach Atmosphäre zu dem Winzer. Also alles das, was er dort an Zusatzinformationen wahrnimmt, das ist, wenn Sie so wollen, der Zusatznutzen, den ihm der Winzer mitliefert, und dafür zahlt er auch. Insofern ist der Markt flexibel genug, das, was der Markt hergibt, auch zu bedienen. Wenn das ein wachsender Markt ist, wenn die Biobetriebe immer besser und schneller wachsen, dann wird es auch immer mehr geben, die sich dieser Richtung anschließen. Bleibt es eine exotisch kleine Philosophie, die vom Markt nicht stark akzeptiert wird, dann wird man einen Teil dieser umweltfreundlichen Produktionstechniken integrieren. Wenn Sie sich heute anschauen, was die Pharmaindustrie macht oder auch die Pflanzenschutzmittelindustrie, die immer mehr versucht, Naturstoffe als Pflanzenbehandlungsmittel zu integrieren, weil sich die Kenntnisse verbessert haben, haben wir doch eine Annäherung zwischen den beiden Systemen. Und bleiben trotzdem kostengünstig. Das ist meines Erachtens der richtige Weg. Der Wettbewerb der Systeme hat seine positive Auswirkung auf die Gesamtheit und es bleibt meines Erachtens genau besser erhalten, wenn die beiden Systeme nicht zu dicht beieinander sind und damit zu viel Täuschung betrieben wird, sondern eine klare Differenzierung das Attraktivere. Insofern glaube ich, dass das Biosiegel eher der Biowelt geschadet als ihr geholfen hat. Produktionsländer Präferenzen, Bioweine, deutsche Konsumenten Ich würde sagen, in Deutschland ist vermutlich, wenn Sie sich die Regale anschauen, der Konsum relativ gleich verteilt zwischen heimischen und importierten Bioweinen. Einer der großen Importeure ist die Firma Riegel, die sitzen in der Nähe vom Bodensee. Das ist der größte Importeur mittlerweile. Sie können vielleicht mal auf deren Internetseite gehen. (www.riegel.de) Sie importieren sehr viel aus Südfrankreich, aus Spanien, generell aus Standorten, in denen es relativ einfach ist, nach heutigen EU - Bioregeln Bioweine herzustellen. Insofern würde ich sagen, die Präferenz hängt mehr damit zusammen, ob der Konsument im klassischen Bioladen kauft. Dort wird er ein relativ breites, europäisches Angebot finden aus Europa, aber auch Übersee. Ob ein Biowein noch Biowein sein kann, wenn er aus Neuseeland hierher transportiert wird, ist ohnehin eine kritische Frage. Wenn er eigentlich ein ernst zu nehmender Bioweinkonsument wäre, dann müsste er eigentlich einen standortnahen Produzenten bevorzugen. Das wird aber natürlich für einen Biokunden aus Berlin oder Hamburg schwieriger als für einen Biokunden aus Freiburg oder 27
Stuttgart. Die Konsumenten in der Nähe von Anbaugebieten werden sich in der Regel mit Bioweinen eher aus der Region versorgen als aus großer Entfernung. Dennoch gibt es auch in Alnatura Läden in Freiburg Bioweine aus allen Ländern der Welt, die werden auch dort gekauft. Weil es Menschen gibt, die deutschen Weinen generell distanziert gegenüberstehen. Weil sie sagen“ „Naja wenn es generell so kalt ist, dann kann der Wein nicht schmecken. Der hat keine Qualität. Dazu braucht man Sonne und Trockenheit, und wenn ich in den Urlaub nach Spanien fahre, dann ist es immer sonnig und trocken. Und die machen wegen des besseren Wetters auch bessere Weine.“ Also diese verkürzte Qualitätsvorstellung in Abhängigkeit von Klima gibt es bei einigen Verbrauchern und deswegen sind sie Spanienfans oder Frankreichfans oder Italienfans. Das hat in der Regel auch sehr viel mit Urlaub zu tun, mit der generellen Länderorientierung. Es gibt manche Leute, die sind ausgeprägte Frankreichfans und manche Leute, die sind Frankreichhasser. Der Frankreichfan wird seinen Wein aus Frankreich beziehen und will ein bisschen frankophil sein. Es gibt andere, denen ist es ziemlich egal, wo der Wein herkommt. Oder sie sind sehr deutsch orientiert. Das sind die Patrioten und sie kaufen eben deutsche Weine. Also da gibt es beides. Das ist schwierig zu sagen, das ist individuell sehr unterschiedlich und hängt von sehr vielen Zufälligkeiten ab. Wo er seinen Urlaub macht, was er üblicherweise isst, in welchem sozialen Umfeld er lebt, welchen Lebensstil er pflegt. Ob er eine nennende Affinität hat oder nicht. Ist er Europäer, ist er Weltenbummler, ist er Deutscher, ist er Frankreichliebhaber… usw. All dies beeinflusst mit Sicherheit seine Weinpräferenz. Der stereotype deutsche Bioweinkonsument Der klassische deutsche Bioweinkonsument ist ein generell ausgeprägter Bionachfrager. Wenig Wein, also mehr oder minder Biowein als Zufallsprodukt. Der Bioweintrinker ist jemand, der generell relativ breit Bioprodukte konsumiert. Er konsumiert Wein eher unterdurchschnittlich, weil Wein Alkohol enthält und Alkohol nicht „io“ ist. Das würde ich eher kritisch sehen. Er kauft relativ regelmäßig in Bioläden seine Lebensmittel ein und auch seine Getränke, deswegen auch Wein. Und/oder er hat Beziehungen zu einem spezifischen Biowinzer in Deutschland oder z.B. Frankreich. Also stark fachhandelsorientiert oder erzeugerorientiert im Einkauf seiner Lebensmittel und Getränke. Das würde ich auf jeden Fall sagen, das gehört zu den typischen Bioweintrinkern. Aber das ist eine rare Gruppe, ich denke, die machen unter den Verbrauchern nach Messungen nur 4 % aus, in der Realität würde ich sagen nicht mehr als 2 % der Verbraucher. Aber sicherlich ein sehr motivierter Verbraucher und insofern auch als Meinungsbilder positiv für diese Kategorie. Sie setzen sich generell mit dem Bioproduktionsthema von Nahrungsmittel und Getränken auseinander. Ich denke mal, der Biowein-präferierende Mensch ist auch jemand, der sich ganz spezifisch über Bioerzeugung bei Trauben informiert. Er ist intelligent und überdurchschnittlich ausgebildet und in der Regel mit einem überdurchschnittlichen Einkommen, auf jeden Fall kein niedriges Einkommen. Er braucht nicht unbedingt ein großes Einkommen haben, es gibt viele Rentner. Denn mit zunehmendem Alter wird der Rest des Lebens immer rarer und das wissen die gut ausgebildeten Ökonomen, die Knappheit bestimmt die Zahlungsbereitschaft. Je knapper das Leben, desto höher die Zahlungsbereitschaft für Güter, die das Leben verlängern. Das ist zumindest etwas, was subjektiv mit „Bio“ erwartet wird.
28
Appendix 8: Summary expert interview with Bernd Wechsler Interview Partner: Bernd Wechsler, Leiter Kompetenzzentrum Weinmarkt & Weinmarketing Rheinland-Pfalz, DLR Oppenheim Date of Interview: 16.12.2010 and 06.01.2011 Duration of Interview: 1h 30min Hintergrund des Interviewpartners Ich bin Leiter des Kompetenzzentrums Weinmarkt & Weinmarketing Rheinland-Pfalz. Wir befassen uns neben konventionellem Wein auch stark mit dem Bioweinsegment in den Aufgaben, die wir haben. Zum einen Ausbildung, Beratung, Information und Wissenstransfer. Die Beratung für Ökoweinbau wird aber auch von uns durchgeführt. Also wenn Winzer auf ökologischen Anbau umstellen wollen, werden sie hier bei uns beraten. Ich befasse mich aber mehr mit Vermarktung und Marktfragen, auch in Hinblick auf mögliche neue Zielgruppen und Verbrauchergruppen. Wir selbst führen nicht unbedingt Marktforschung durch. Wir arbeiten aber eng mit Institutionen, die sich intensiv mit der Auswertung von Marktzahlen oder auch Zahlen der GfK auseinandersetzen. Z.B. die Forschungsanstalt in Geisenheim. Von daher wissen wir, was grade am Markt läuft Verbraucher Generell Der Biokunde ist noch nicht so gut untersucht, insbesondere was den Weinbereich angeht. Wir haben daher auch mit unserem Schwesterinstitut in Neustadt eine Untersuchung angeregt, die sich mit ähnlichen Fragen beschäftigen wird, wie die, die Sie gestellt haben. Bezüglich Biowein ist mir, mit Ausnahme der Expertenbefragung im Rahmen der Orwine Studie, nichts bekannt Produkteigenschaften und Faktoren, die den Kauf beeinflussen Die Qualität des Produktes ist das Hauptverkaufsargument. Im Weinbereich sind die Kunden auch vielleicht etwas anders als im Frischeprodukt - Bereich. Ich denke, das hat auch etwas damit zu tun, dass der Weinbereich, Gott sei Dank, in den letzten Jahren von größeren Skandalen verschont geblieben ist. Denke man an BSE oder Dioxin - Eier. Es ist eben nicht das unverarbeitete Produkt, sondern ein weiterverarbeitetes Produkt, bei dem vor allem der Genussaspekt ganz weit im Vordergrund steht. Der Gesundheitsaspekt, der bei frischen Bio - Lebensmitteln, wie Eiern oder Fleisch, im Vordergrund steht, ist bei Wein nicht unbedingt so weit vorne. Wie ein Kollege von mir immer sagt: „Das schlimmste Gift im Wein ist der Alkohol.“ Und da ist was dran. Weine, die in Deutschland die Qualitätsbezeichnung tragen möchten, müssen im Rahmen der Qualitätsweinprüfung sensorisch verkostet werden. Da gibt es keine Unterschiede zwischen Bioweinen und konventionellen Weinen bzgl. der sensorischen Qualität, die im Rahmen dieser Prüfung untersucht werden muss. Bezüglich der sensorischen Qualität gibt es keine signifikanten Unterschiede. Das heißt, wenn ich über Qualität spreche, dann meine ich nicht immer nur die innere, sensorische Qualität, sprich, dass es ein harmonischer Wein ohne störende Elemente ist. Die Qualität des Weins hängt sehr stark auch vom Gesamtprodukt, sprich, der Flasche, dem Etikett, dem Packaging bis hin zu dem zusätzlichen Service, den der Winzer mit seiner Produkteinheit liefert, ab. Diese Serviceleistungen, diese Soft Skills, fallen im LEH natürlich weg. Man muss häufig sagen, dass der Preis sehr entscheidend ist. Vor allem, wenn man gewisse Erwartungen in ein gewisses Preisniveau setzt. Bioprodukte und Biowein können höherpreisig verkauft werden. Bei Konsumenten ist das dann häufig das rationell? „Man möchte der Natur, wenn man schon mal Wein trinkt, vielleicht auch etwas Gutes tun“ 29
Die eigentliche innere Produktqualität unterscheidet sich nicht wesentlich bzw. gar nicht. Da kann lediglich der Gesundheitsaspekt auch noch eine Rolle spielen. Man weiß aus Untersuchungen, dass Biowein als grundsätzlich vielleicht gesünder angesehen wird. Wobei man, aus eben genannten Gründen etwas vorsichtig sein muss. Wenn ich viel Biowein trinke, bin ich auch irgendwann betrunken. Ein anderer Faktor ist das möglicherweise immer stärker werdende soziale Gewissen der Verbraucher. Aus meiner Sicht wird das in Zukunft noch stärker zunehmen, dass man mit Biowein einen gewissen respektvollen Umgang mit der Natur, mit Mitarbeitern etc. verbindet. Zugegebenermaßen ist der Weineinkauf im LEH nicht einfach für den Kunden, der vor einer Regalwand mit bis zu 500 Produkten steht. Zum einen ist die Konsumgelegenheit sehr entscheidend. Ist der Wein zum Essen gedacht, bekommt man Besuch, will man ihn verschenken oder einfach alleine trinken. Dann weiß man, ob man Rot- oder Weißwein möchte, welche Geschmacksrichtung es sein sollte, ob trocken oder süß. Darüber hinaus hat man eine gewisse Preisspanne, in der man sich bewegt. Wenn man etwas für den alltäglichen Konsum kauft, dann ist das häufig nicht so teuer, als wenn der Wein für ein besonderes Menü gedacht ist. Anhand des Anlasses wird womöglich auch die Einkaufsstätte gewählt. Beim alltäglichen Konsum geht man vielleicht eher zum Discounter; wenn es etwas besonderes sein soll, geht man vielleicht eher in den Fachhandel oder bestellt sogar direkt beim Winzer. Andere wichtige Faktoren sind dann auch Flaschenform, Farbe und Etikett. Auch wenn das niemand zugeben möchte. Das ist im Biowein noch nicht so stark untersucht worden wie im konventionellen Weinbereich, aber ich gehe stark davon aus, dass es sich da auch so verhält. LOHAS vs. Alt-Ökos? Was die LOHAS Diskussion angeht, so muss man sagen, dass diese Diskussion vor allem aus sehr weit nach vorne gerichteten Zukunftsperspektiven gespeist ist. Man erwartet, dass sich diese Trends verstärken. Momentan ist das noch keine wirkliche Zielgruppe im klassischen Sinne, die man sehr eng umreißen könnte sondern eher eine Form von Lebenseinstellung. Sie reicht von jüngeren zu älteren Menschen, die auch tendenziell eher ein gehobenes Einkommen haben, aber eigentlich durch alle Einkommensschichten reicht. Ich glaube aber, dass sich dieser Bereich noch stärker entwickeln wird. Wenn man sich die Konsumgewohnheiten dieser Menschen anschaut, dann ist der Genussaspekt im Vergleich zu den klassischen Ökos sehr weit im Vordergrund. Also man setzt nicht mehr auf Verzicht, sondern man konsumiert gerne, man möchte aber ohne Reue konsumieren. Ich glaube auch, dass sich dieses Segment auch im Bioweinbereich stärker entwickeln wird. Zumal dies ein ganzes Stück weit auch von den Erzeugern selbst befeuert wird. Viele qualitativ gute Flaschenweinvermarkter haben umgestellt, stellen um bzw. planen umzustellen, weil, wie gesagt, dieser nächste Qualitätsschritt ansteht. Und daher wird allein von dieser Seite aus mehr Biowein auf dem Markt auftauchen, da bin ich mir sicher. Ich glaube auch, dass aus Vermarktungssicht das Thema Biowein oder biologische Wirtschaftsweise etwas Gutes ist, was sich in der Kommunikation usw. sehr gut verkaufen lässt. Ich bin daher sehr zuversichtlich, dass da eine weitere Marktausweitung stattfinden wird. Flaschenweinvermarktung, also Direktvermarktung ist immer ein Stück weit auch Vorläufer für den großen Markt. Und da sind wir, wie bereits besprochen, momentan ein bisschen zwischen Baum und Borke. Wir haben noch nicht genug Menge, um wirklich konsequent auch den Markt zu bedienen. Da sind uns andere Länder wie Italien, Spanien und Frankreich deutlich voraus. Wir können auch das Preisniveau nicht halten, das müssen wir akzeptieren. Das ist dann nicht mehr der Bauernhofladen sondern Aldi. Und der verkauft nicht zu 9,50€ sondern zu 2,99€. Da muss man die entsprechenden Produktionskonzepte und Vermarktungskonzepte haben. Ich kann den Aldi nicht mit Kleinbauern-Produktionsverfahren bedienen, sondern muss das professionell durchorganisieren. Meiner Meinung nach sind wir in diesem Bereich in Deutschland vermarktungs- wie produktionsseitig noch nicht optimal aufgestellt. 30
Wahrnehmung – Wein als natürliches Produkt Um noch einmal zu dem Thema Weinwissen zu kommen: Viele Verbraucher sehen Wein von vornherein als ein natürliches oder nachhaltiges Produkt und sehen nicht zwangsläufig die Notwendigkeit für z.B. „bio“. Für die meisten Verbraucher besteht Wein aus vergorenen Trauben und sonst nichts. Das stimmt nicht. Die meisten Verbraucher, die Biowein trinken, sind auch sehr überrascht, wenn sie erfahren, dass die Biowinzer auch Pflanzenschutz betreiben. Dass nämlich auch Schwefel eingesetzt wird, was die konventionellen Winzer natürlich auch machen. Schwefel ist aber ein natürlicher Stoff, daher erlaubt. Wie Kupfer eben auch. Man versucht zwar den Einsatz von Kupfer im Bioanbau deutlich zu reduzieren, er ist aber notwendig, da wir Pflanzenkrankheiten haben, die momentan nur mit Kupfer behandelt werden können. Das ist natürlich schon kritisch und das wissen die Biowinzer auch. Daher ist der kommunikative Aspekt in der Direktvermarktung ja auch so wichtig, weil da sichergestellt werden kann, dass es entsprechend transportiert und nicht missverstanden wird. Wissen der deutschen Weinkonsumenten Es gibt dazu eine interessante Studie von Hoffmann und Szolnoki aus Geisenheim. Wir haben einen relativ großen Weinmarkt in Deutschland. 60% aller Menschen in Deutschland, die Lebensmittel kaufen, kaufen auch irgendwann Wein ein. Es gibt aber immer noch 35-40%, die kaufen gar keinen Wein ein. Von diesen weintrinkenden Menschen, gibt es vielleicht 7%, die mehrmals die Woche Wein trinken. Dazu kommt noch einmal in etwa die gleiche Zahl hinzu von Menschen, die mindestens einmal pro Woche ein Gläschen Wein trinken. Wenn ich die als Weinexperten bezeichnen will, dann sind das 14%. Diese 14% trinken, das haben die Geisenheimer ausgerechnet und ich vermute das auch sehr stark, 2/3 allen Weins. Die Kenntnis der übrigen 85%, die selten ein Glas trinken, ist relativ gering oder sehr gering. Weinexperten werden Sie eher unter den 15% finden, die relativ viel Wein trinken. Die sind allerdings auch sehr meinungsprägend. Das sind diejenigen, die sich stark mit dem Thema Wein befassen. Wein ist ein Thema, mit dem man sich durchaus in seinem sozialen und gesellschaftlichen Umfeld profilieren kann. Wein gehört einfach zu einem gehobenen Lebensstil. Man kann eine gewisse gesellschaftliche Anerkennung dadurch erwerben, wenn man sich mit Wein auskennt. Es gibt daher auch Menschen, die sich sehr intensiv mit dem Thema auseinandersetzen. Es gibt aber auch andere, und das ist der Großteil mit 85%, die wissen so gut wie gar nichts über Wein. Wenn es gut läuft, dann trinken diese Menschen das, was ihnen schmeckt, und wenn es schlecht läuft, dann trinken sie das, was sie glauben trinken zu müssen, weil es ihnen von jemandem gesagt wurde. Die Kenntnis ist also gering, was aus meiner Sicht nicht unbedingt ein Problem darstellt. Das geht uns letztendlich doch bei vielen Produkten so. Heutzutage kann auch niemand mehr sein Auto alleine im Hinterhof auseinanderschrauben und wieder zusammensetzen. Vor dem Hintergrund dieses komplexen Systems hilft man sich anhand anderer Signale über ein fehlendes Wissen hinweg, indem man z.B. eine Empfehlung liest oder von Freunden erhält oder man achtet einfach auf den Preis. Wenn man z.B. weiß, man bekommt Besuch von Freunden, die gerne Wein trinken, dann kauft man vielleicht nicht beim Aldi, sondern im Fachhandel nach einer Beratung den Wein ein. Wir haben eine sehr heterogene Kenntnisstruktur bei den Weintrinkern. Auf der einen Seite haben wir eine Gruppe, die sehr stark involviert ist und das teilweise auch sehr exzessiv betreibt, mit Weinliteratur, Seminare und Ähnliches. Das beginnt in etwa in dem Alter ab 35, spätestens 45. Menschen die im Beruf sind, die eine gewisse soziale Position erreicht haben und die Mischgetränke oder das Bier gegen ein gutes Glas Wein austauschen. Die machen gerne Touren in Weinanbauregionen, sei es in Deutschland, Frankreich, Spanien etc. 31
Das sieht man auch nicht nur in Fachzeitschriften, sondern auch Zeitungen wie z.B. der FAZ am Sonntag oder Essen & Trinken. Keine Zeitschrift, die sich mit Genuss beschäftigt, kommt ohne Wein aus. Diese Kunden ab 35 sind sehr involviert, sehr interessiert und sicherlich auch zu einem gewissen Grad egoistisch. Das heißt, es muss für einen selbst etwas Gutes dabei sein. Den Weltverbesserer, der Biowein trinkt, weil er weiß, dass kein chemischer Pflanzenschutz betrieben wurde, den wird es auch unter den neueren Zielgruppen nicht geben. Auch wenn man bereit ist, eine gewisse soziale Verantwortung zu tragen, so muss doch immer noch etwas Gutes für einen persönlich dabei herauskommen. Und sei es nur das gute Gewissen, man hat sich selbst und der Natur etwas Gutes getan. Diese Zielgruppe ist sehr individuell, individualistisch und sicherlich teils auch egoistisch. Und bei dieser sehr kleinen Zielgruppe ist ein großes Weininteresse da. Demgegenüber steht die große Gruppe der Weinkonsumenten, die eben sehr wenig Weinwissen haben, nicht nur in Bezug auf Biowein sondern generell bzgl. Wein. Ich kann nicht über den dänischen Verbraucher sprechen, wobei ich weiß, dass Dänemark nach Österreich auch relativ weit vorne liegt, was Biokonsum betrifft. Ich gehe allerdings davon aus, dass diese Aufteilung in Dänemark ähnlich ist. Insbesondere was das Weinwissen angeht. Statistische Erfassung von Biowein Die Datenerfassung in Deutschland ist schwierig. Was die Produktion angeht, gibt es schon die ein oder andere Statistik. Insgesamt muss man aber sagen, dass der Biowein-Markt statistisch nicht gut erfasst ist im Vergleich zu anderen Bio-Märkten. Man weiß über Kartoffeln, Tomaten oder Eier beispielsweise mehr. Das liegt zum einen daran, dass es ein relativ kleiner Marktbereich ist und flächendeckend momentan kein großes Interesse daran besteht. Die Ökowinzer sind ganz zufrieden mit der derzeitigen Situation und den Informationen, die sie haben. Sie wollen teilweise auch gar nicht in den Vergleich mit konventionellem Wein kommen, das muss man ganz klar sagen. Die schlechte Datenlage ist somit zum Teil auch auf Wunsch der Beteiligten so. Wenn niemand solche Studien in Auftrag gibt, passiert da auch nichts. Außer denen, die sich für den Markt interessieren und, auch anhand von Statistiken, verstehen wollen, wie sich der Markt entwickelt hat, gibt es von Seiten der Beteiligten wenig Interesse, Licht ins Dunkel zu bringen. Der Weinmarkt hat eine relativ kleine Struktur. Es fehlen somit häufig die Auftraggeber für größere Marktforschungen bei den kleinen Strukturen, die wir im deutschen Weinbereich haben mit zig tausend Winzern und wenigen Kellereien. Im Biobereich wird das dann noch weniger. Da ist das Interesse, Marktforschung zu betreiben und die ganzen Daten über die Institutionen einzufordern, relativ gering. Dazu kommen die unterschiedlichen regionalen Befindlichkeiten, das heißt, in den unterschiedlichen Ländern sind unterschiedliche Meldebedingungen und statistische Erhebungen von Seiten der Länder. Auch im Rahmen der Qualitätsweinprüfung ist es häufig explizit nicht von den Ökoverbänden gewünscht, anzugeben, der zuprüfende Wein sei ein Biowein. Es wird ja auch im Bioweinbereich nicht alles als „bio“ verkauft, sondern auch konventionell vermarktet. Man möchte sich da nicht gerne in die Karten blicken lassen. Das hat zu großen Teilen auch damit zu tun, dass die Preistransparenz am Markt nicht erwünscht ist. Es muss zwar alles gemeldet werden, wie, wo, wie viel geerntet wird, von welcher Rebsorte etc. und wie viel davon zu Wein gemacht wird. Es ist aber nicht meldepflichtig, ob es sich dabei um Biowein handelt. Das geht im großen Kontext unter. Orwine Studie 32
Die Studie hat einen gewissen weinbaupolitischen Hintergrund. Bislang haben wir rein bezeichnungstechnisch ja noch keinen Biowein. Wir haben nur Wein aus biologisch erzeugten Trauben. Also im allgemeinen Sprachgebrauch sagen wir zwar Biowein, aber es darf nicht auf dem Etikett stehen. Bislang ist nur der Anbau, sprich der Weinbau geregelt. Kellerwirtschaft und Vermarktung sind nicht geregelt. Deshalb gibt es eben auch nur Wein aus biologisch erzeugten Trauben. Die EU wollte das ändern. Die wollten auch eine Verordnung für die kellerwirtschaftlichen Maßnahmen durchführen. Im Rahmen dieser Studie wurde eine kleinere Verbraucherbefragung durchgeführt. Scheitern des Gesetzesentwurfs für die Regelung der Kellerwirtschaft In Deutschland wurde da insbesondere die Schwefelproblematik diskutiert. Schwefel wird Wein zugesetzt, um ihn haltbarer zu machen. Das ist ein gängiges Verfahren, was auch mit Höchstgrenzen belegt ist. Sie finden seit einigen Jahren auf jeder Flasche Wein die Hinweise, dass dieser Wein Sulfite enthält. Die EU bzw. die südlichen weinbautreibenden Länder wollten durchsetzen, dass die Grenzwerte für Schwefel ganz nach unten gesetzt werden bzw. deutlich gesenkt werden. Das würde nicht nur für den deutschen Weinbau insgesamt, sondern für die Biowinzer insbesondere bedeuten, dass ein ganz anderer Typ Wein entsteht. Es gibt Weine, denen kein Schwefel zugesetzt wird, die sind vom Geschmack allerdings ganz andere Weine. Da gab es gewaltigen Widerstand von Seiten der Biowinzer in Deutschland, Österreich aber auch aus Luxemburg. Und letztendlich wurde das Thema vom Tisch genommen. Das ist letztendlich ein bisschen ein politisches Ränkespiel, das sich an der Schwefelthematik aufgehängt hat. Fakt ist, das der Ottonormalverbraucher nicht weiß, dass Schwefel zur Stabilisierung und Haltbarmachung von Wein eingesetzt wird. Wenn Sie die meisten Verbraucher fragen, ob Schwefel in Wein gehört, dann werden sie das verneinen. Das ist ein Produktionsverfahren, das nicht an die große Kommunikationsglocke gehängt wird, was es meiner Meinung nach auch nicht muss, was aber immer wieder recht kritisch gesehen wird in der EU, weil man alles, was in diesem Bereich läuft, reduzieren möchte. Fehlen einer offiziellen rechtlichen Grundlage für Biowein als Problem für den Markt? Aus meiner Sicht nicht. Ich weiß nicht, ob die Bezeichnung Biowein etwas daran ändert. Wir haben ein Logo, das Künast – Bio - Logo. Ein neues Logo einzuführen, wäre aus meiner Sicht nicht glücklich. Das Bio - Logo das wir in Deutschland haben, das von Frau Künast eingeführt wurde, scheint mir adäquater zu sein bzw. auch die Verbandslogos, wie z.B. von Ecovin. Sobald diese Logos auf dem Wein sind, weiß der Verbraucher, dass es sich um ein Bioprodukt handelt. Da muss dann nicht noch extra Biowein drauf stehen. Logos und Labelling Systeme Deutschland Es gibt eine sehr interessante Studie der FH Münster zur Wirksamkeit, Akzeptanz und Nutzung von Qualitäts- und Gütesiegeln auf Lebensmitteln. Im Ökobereich gibt es sehr viele Labels, wie viele, weiß ich nicht. Im Weinbereich sind die wesentlichen Labels das EU - Label, das Bio (Künast) - Label, Ecovin, Demeter und Bioland, nur um die wichtigsten zu nennen. Es ist allerdings nicht immer nur eine Frage des Biolabels. Es kommen ja noch andere Weinlabels hinzu. Wir haben im Moment sowieso eine Inflation von Ordens- und Ehrenbezeichnungen. Das können wir beklagen, ändern können wir daran aber voraussichtlich nichts. Ob es immer dem Kunden dient, ist eine ganz andere Frage. Die meisten Verbraucher kennen zwar Logos und Labels, wissen in der Regel aber nicht, was dahintersteckt. 33
Bei „Bio“ ist das was anderes. Da erwartet man schon gewisse Sachen, die allerdings auch nicht alle vom Verbraucher überprüft werden. Aber es gibt schon eine relativ hohe Vertrautheit bzw. Vertrauen was Bioprodukten, also allgemeinen Lebensmittelprodukten, entgegen gebracht wird. Das zeigt mir auch ein bisschen das generelle Konsumentenverhalten, das „Bio“ nach wie vor die Konsumentenwünsche nach Reinheit, Gesundheit und vielleicht auch Regionalität transportiert und sich deshalb auch in den letzten Jahren sehr positiv entwickelt hat. Beim Wein ist es zugegebenermaßen nicht ganz wie bei den Frischeprodukten. Wein hat auch noch andere Dimensionen als die eben beschriebenen. Die Bioweintrinker sind vielleicht auch nicht die klassischen „Müslis“, die alten ökos, die Verbraucher, die stark auf Verzicht gesetzt haben. Wein hat eben einen Genussaspekt. Es gibt zwar auch die Alt-Bioweintrinker- Generation, aber ich glaube, es gibt mit den neuen LOHAS auch einen Trend hin zu unkompliziertem, trotzdem gesundem und nachhaltigem Konsum, vor allem aber auch Genuss, der ein Stück weit ein gutes Gewissen macht. Ohne Reue. Diesen Trend sehe ich auch auf den Weinbereich stärker zukommen. Wobei man hierbei vielleicht ein wenig trennen muss zwischen der Direktvermarktung beim Biowinzer und dem, was im Lebensmitteleinzelhandel passiert. Im Lebensmitteleinzelhandel werden Sie kaum ein Produkt sehen, dass ökologisch erzeugt ist und nicht prominent gelabelt ist. Bei den direkt vermarktenden Winzern ist der kommunikative Aspekt, „Bio“ nach vorne zu stellen, nicht das entscheidende. Es wird häufig aus anderen Gründen umgestellt, sei es, dass man sich bessere Vermarktungschancen für das Produkt verspricht, aber auch Qualitätsaspekte, die weiter reichen als beim konventionellen Wein. „Bio“ ist für gute Flaschenwein Direktvermarkter ein weiterer Qualitätsschritt. Der Schritt umzustellen ist nicht unbedingt ideologisch begründet, sondern wird vielfach aus Produktqualitätsgründen gewählt. Gründe für Winzer, vor allem Direktvermarkter, keine Labels zu nutzen In der Direktvermarktung ist das Label nicht kriegsentscheidend. Der persönliche Kontakt zum Kunden ist das, was das Geschäft ausmacht. Da geht es um Kommunikation mit dem Kunden, da geht es weniger um Labels. Labels sind im Grunde im LEH der Ersatz für die Kommunikation, die ein Direktvermarkter mit seinem Kunden auf dem Hof oder über das Telefon führen kann. Es geht vielmehr um die Betriebsphilosophie und Strategie, die der Winzer hat und ober diese dem Kunden vermitteln kann. „Bio“, der Verzicht auf synthetischen Pflanzenschutz und Düngemittel, ist etwas, was sich dem Kunden gut vermitteln lässt. Der Kunde möchte dafür aber keinen schlechteren Wein bekommen, sondern er möchte interessantere, authentischere und bessere Weine bekommen. Die Umstellung ist für einen Flaschenweindirektvermarkter arbeitswirtschaftlich gar nicht mehr so problematisch. Insbesondere in diesen kleinen Strukturen, die wir im Weinbau haben, ist es ganz wichtig, dass der Betriebsleiter auch hinter dem steht, was er tut. Da kann man nichts aufstülpen, das muss verinnerlicht sein. Und viele haben „Bio“ auch als weiteren Qualitätsschritt für sich erkannt. Dann ist die Kommunikation über Biolabels gar nicht so entscheidend. Vielleicht möchte man vielfach auch nicht in die Ökoecke gedrängt werden sondern einfach nur diesen weiteren Qualitätsschritt tun. Und dass das dann „Bio“ ist, das ist dann ein positiver Nebeneffekt. Bevorzugte Vertriebskanäle von Weinkonsumenten Der Weinverkauf in Deutschland läuft größtenteils über die Discounter. Beim Winzer wird knapp 15% gekauft, im Fachhandel knapp 7%, im Discounter – Aldi alleine 20%, die übrigen Discounter liegen bei cirka 28%. 34
Also fast 50% aller Weine werden bei den Discountern gekauft. Das ist etwas, was viele Menschen nicht wissen. Zu den Discountern kommen dann noch die größeren Warenhäuser und die LEH. 70% aller Weine werden im LEH und bei den Discountern verkauft. Entwicklung und Einführung von Biowein im LEH Wir haben vor 2,3, Jahren einen richtigen Bio-Boom erlebt. Auf einmal wollten alle „Bio“ kaufen. Die großen Discounter haben angefangen mit Bioprodukten, auch mit Bioweinen. Daraufhin wollten die Kellereien diese Nachfrage bedienen. Das geht natürlich nicht so schnell, Betriebe müssen ja erst einmal umgestellt werden. Die Nachfrage konnte also nicht so schnell bedient werden und wir hatten für Biowein vor 2 Jahren einen richtigen Hochpreis, der im Fassweinbereich bei 50-60 Cent über der konventionellen Ware lag. Daraufhin haben viele Winzer, die keine eigene Flaschenweinvermarktung haben, sondern im größeren Stile Fassweine produzieren, die dann von Kellereien abgefüllt und vermarktet werden, umgestellt. Es sind ja nicht die kleinen Winzer, die im LEH stehen, sondern die großen Kellereien und Genossenschaften. Dieser große Hype ist jetzt im großen Markt, also beim Discounter etwas wieder abgeflacht. Was momentan an Bioweinen beim Discounter steht, kommt vorrangig aus Spanien, Frankreich und Italien. Diese Länder haben auch stark in der Produktion und Marktentwicklung zugelegt. Diese Weine sind auch preislich attraktiver als die in Deutschland hergestellten Bioweine. Deutsche Weine sind insgesamt tendenzielle eh eher etwas teurer. Ich glaube allerdings, dass da noch Chancen für die Vermarkter im LEH sind. Wir sind mit dem Biomarkt momentan an der Schwelle. Wir kommen aus der Nische, mit Direktvermarktern und Spezialläden. Jetzt ist die Produktionsmenge gewachsen. Jetzt müssen sich die Vermarkter neue Wege zur Vermarktung suchen. Wenn man aus der Nische in den großen Markt kommt, wie z.B. im LEH oder noch schlimmer beim Discounter, dann ist da ein knallharter Preiswettbewerb. Und in dieser Situation sind wir. Da sind zum einen die Ökobetriebe, die aus der Direktvermarktung kommen, die eine relativ hohe Wertschöpfung haben, auch relativ hohe Preise erzielen können, und jetzt eine zu große Menge haben. Mit dieser großen Menge an Wein geht man jetzt in einen Markt, der sehr viel preisaggressiver ist. Hier kommen wir wieder zu dem Problem der Strukturen, die wir im deutschen Weinbau haben. Wir haben sehr viele kleine Winzer, eine Handvoll Genossenschaften und sehr wenige Kellereien, die den Wein verkaufen. Im Grunde gibt es in Deutschland 5-6 Kellereien, die den Wein in Deutschland im großen Stil verkaufen. Und diese strukturellen Schwächen haben wir im konventionellen Markt wie auch im Bio-Markt. Ich bin allerdings der Ansicht, dass der Verbraucher in Zukunft Bioprodukte, also auch Bioweine, nicht nur nach Preis wählen wird, sondern auch bereit sein wird, in Zukunft für deutsche Bioweine mehr Geld zu investieren. Allerdings ist die Wertschöpfungskette, wenn ein weiterer Handelspartner, sprich LEH oder Discounter, miteingebunden wird, natürlich enger. Regionalität bei Biowein Im Moment ist das noch nicht so. Zwischen Aussage und Wirklichkeit klafft beim Verbraucher oft ein großes Loch. Verbraucher sind momentan noch nicht bereit, für Regionalität bei Wein mehr zu zahlen. Wobei nicht vergessen werden darf, dass es im Weinbereich schon immer eine sehr enge Kennzeichnung gibt. Diese Regionalisierung ist beim Wein bezeichnungsrechtlich sogar vorgeschrieben. Wenn ich Qualitätswein produziere, muss ich draufschreiben, aus welcher Region der Wein kommt. Wenn ich einen Apfel in Deutschland verkaufe, muss ich nicht draufschreiben, woher dieser Apfel kommt. Bei einem Qualitätswein muss ich als Winzer angeben, woher der Wein stammt. Da kann der Weinberg bis hin zur Lage auf dem Etikett stehen. 35
Der Wein ist somit sehr eng regionalverortet. Das ist etwas, was die Weinkenner auch kennen. Die wissen, dass eine Lagenbezeichnung auf dem Etikett draufsteht. Regionalisierung ist somit beim Wein nichts Neues. Dies mag ein Grund sein, warum diese Regionalität, die beim Wein schon immer da ist, bei „Bio“ als Zusatznutzen noch nicht wirklich so funktioniert. Ich bin mir aber sicher, dass sich das noch weiter entwickeln wird und auch die Winzer noch ihre Hausaufgaben machen müssen bzgl. der Regionalität. Die Region, die sie plakativ auf ihre Etikette schreiben, muss auch im Produkt umgesetzt werden. Das ist nicht immer der Fall. Da steht zwar eine Region drauf, der Wein schmeckt aber, übertrieben gesagt, beliebig. Winzer müssen lernen, dass es nicht nur um die Regionalisierung in der Bezeichnung geht, sondern auch im Geschmack, der das Produkt ausmacht. Spezielle Marketingkampagnen zur Förderung von Biowinzern und Vermarktung von Biowein Es gibt keine Werbung im klassischen Sinne. Das ist vielfach auch eine Frage des Etats, was häufig nicht ausreichend vorhanden ist. Wir sprechen, wie gesagt , im Weinbereich über kleinstrukturierte Unternehmen, die meistens auch keine großen Marketingetats haben. Der Weinbau hat sich ein bisschen organisiert über die jeweiligen Regionen und die jeweilige Gebietsweinwerbung, die vielfach generische Werbung für Wein macht, z.B. Wein von der Mosel. Ich weiß, dass z.B. in Rhein Hessen, wo es einen sehr großen Anteil an Biowinzern gibt, dies in der Gebietsweinwerbung aufgegriffen wurde. Dies spielt dann auch eine Rolle in der Kommunikation mit der Presse, mit Sommeliers und in den Schulungen. Aber explizite Werbung für Biowein gibt es meines Wissens nach nicht. Rolle von Messen, z.B. BioFach In der Kommunikation und Werbung spielen Messen, wie die BioFach oder die ProWein eine große Rolle. Wobei man sagen muss, dass viele Biowinzer überlegen wo sie hingehen. Die BioFach ist ja eine Biomesse, die über Kosmetik, Textilien, Lebensmittel bis hin zu Wein reicht. Wohingegen die ProWein eine reine Weinmesse ist, die mehr oder weniger größte Fachhandelsmesse in Europa. Bei der BioFach ist auch eine spezielle Klientel. Bei der ProWein sind eher die Weineinkäufer, die Fachhändler vertreten, die den Wein letztendlich auch verkaufen. Bei der ProWein gibt es auch Gemeinschaftsstände, z.B. von Ecovin, wo das Thema Biowein gespielt wird. Auch Kellereien greifen das Thema auf, zumindest war das im letzten Jahr so. Etikett in Naturtönen oder Assoziationen mit Natur und Umweltschutz Das finde ich hochspannend, denn das ist im Detail noch nicht erforscht worden. Ich glaube, dass die Frage von Naturtönen, Naturmaterialien eine Rolle spielt. Das glaube ich, das kann ich nicht beweisen. Ich glaube auch, dass das etwas ist, was wir in der Beratung gegenüber den Biowinzern so formulieren müssen. Es muss eine natürliche Anmutung haben. Das gehört für mich, wie gesagt, zum Gesamtprodukt hinzu. Ich gehe davon aus, dass es schwierig sein dürfte, Biowein in Plastik zu füllen und knallig anzumalen. Es muss auch ein Stück weit Natur und Natürlichkeit verkauft werden. Wobei gesagt werden muss, dass insbesondere die neuen Zielgruppen, die wir vorhin schon angesprochen haben, sehr designfreudig sind. Somit sind innovative, gute Designlösungen bestimmt nicht ausgeschlossen. Nachhaltigkeit und Verwendung alternativer Verpackungen Verpackung ist ein Thema, dass wir gerade im Zusammenhang mit der Nachhaltigkeitsdiskussion besprechen. Flaschen, Glas, ist, was die CO² Bilanz angeht, ganz schlecht. Und trotzdem ist beim Verbraucher Glas gegenüber Tetrapak z.B. immer noch das Entscheidende. Obwohl Tetrapak möglicherweise von der Energiebilanz und der CO² Bilanz gar nicht schlecht dasteht. Aber wir müssen aus Vermarktungssicht immer auch die Verbrauchererwartungen berücksichtigen 36
und da steht Wein aus Glasflaschen immer noch vorne. Das Thema Nachhaltigkeit ist im Bereich der Weinwirtschaft momentan stark diskutiert. Und zwar nicht nur in Bezug auf CO² Bilanz, sondern ökologische, ökonomische und soziale Nachhaltigkeit. In Deutschland wurde vorletztes Jahr das Deutsche Institut für nachhaltige Entwicklung an der FH in Heilbronn gegründet. Daran sind auch Weinbetriebswirtschaftler beteiligt. Die streben an, dass ein neues Label eingeführt wird, bei dem Nachhaltigkeit im Vordergrund steht. Eine umfassende oder weitreichende Definition von Nachhaltigkeit. Ich habe das Gefühl, da wird teilweise auch eine Standortbestimmung von den Biowinzern gefordert. Die verstehen ja „Bio“ als Nachhaltigkeit, wobei die konventionellen Winzer das nicht so sehen. Auch das eben angesprochene Institut sieht das nicht so. Man produziert nicht automatisch nachhaltig, weil man Bio produziert. Man muss bestimmte Kriterien erfüllen. Ich bin gespannt, wie dieses Thema weitergeht. Biowinzer werden sich in den kommenden Monaten und Jahren noch deutlich zum Thema Nachhaltigkeit positionieren müssen. Ich weiß allerdings nicht, wie das komplexe Thema Nachhaltigkeit tatsächlich beim Verbraucher ankommt. Ich glaube, der Verbraucher braucht einfache, klare Botschaften. Und im Moment ist das „Bio“. Das ist eine einfache, verständliche Botschaft. Ob immer auch alles dahintersteckt, was der Verbraucher unter „Bio“ versteht, ist eine andere Frage. „Fair trade“ ist auch eine Sache, die der Verbraucher versteht. Fairer Handel; das sind meistens Betriebe in Südafrika oder Übersee. Insbesondere die Länder aus Übersee werben ganz genau mit diesen Faktoren: Nachhaltigkeit, fair trade, soziale Verantwortung. Und da wird es definitiv eine Aufgabe sein für die deutschen Biowinzer, sich in diesem Kontext zu positionieren. Ich habe zu diesem Thema noch keine abschließende Meinung. Aber ich glaube, wir brauchen einfache Botschaften für den Verbraucher und da haben die Biowinzer eine ganz gute Chance, weil sie eine verständliche, einfache Botschaft haben. Da werden es Winzer, die ihre Produkte als „nachhaltig“ kennzeichnen, aber nicht „Bio“ sind, mittelfristig schwer haben. Einsatz von Pflanzenschutzmitteln Es gibt Grenzwerte für den Einsatz und die liegen bei vielen Öko-Verbänden noch unter dem, was von der EU erlaubt wird. Kupfer, der im Weinberg eingesetzt wird, landet nicht im Wein. Wir haben ja einen Produktionsschritt davor, die Gärung. Und wenn zuviel Kupfer eingesetzt wurde, dann hemmt Kupfer die Gärung; es würde somit kein Wein zustande kommen. Der Einsatz von Kupfer ist somit eher ein Problem für den Boden. Es ist eben ein Schwermetall und somit negativ besetzt, auch wenn es schon seit Jahrhunderten eingesetzt wird. Es ist aber in der Diskussion und das ist auch den Ökobetrieben bewusst. Wenn diese 15%, die mehr wissen als der normale Verbraucher, beim Winzer sind, dann wollen sie auch mehr erfahren und dann muss der Winzer die entsprechende Kommunikation leisten.
37
Appendix 9: Summary expert interview with Athanasios Krystallis Interview Partner: Athanasion Krystallis, Associated Professor of Marketing and Statistics at Aarhus Business School Date of Interview: 13.10.2010 Duration of Interview: 1h 41min
The role of wine Wine is not a bulky food. On the contrary, however it is still one of the main agricultural products in many countries. The product has a special value. It is not a think product but a feel product as it appeals to emotional motivations internally. Wine is the Rolls Royce of food. It is a luxury food, so to speak. Not in terms of the monetary value but in terms of the value that it offers to us. It is a symbol. It has a strong symbolic meaning and it really accompanies us in our best moments more or less. But beyond that, it is a huge industry of course and it is a very nice vehicle. If one wants to test different marketing approaches and analyze how consumers develop associations and ideas about products, wine is a very good case. Because, as I explained before, it is not just a very straight forward trade-off between price and quality. On top there is a huge emotional layer that surrounds this trade-off and complicate things. It resembles to products that come from more sophisticated industries, which still have a symbolic meaning, like for instance say high tech products or gadgets, all sorts of things we like to buy to achieve, to express the way we see consumerism more or less. As I said before, it has a symbolic meaning and can really communicate to the surroundings, the social surroundings, the others that are next to us, think about us. It could be used as a means to transmit certain signals. In a similar way, I would imagine that those who prefer an Apple or a Mac than a pc would also like to transmit certain messages that they might be more sophisticated as consumers, as computer users. They want to show that they are different in certain areas. Wine comes in so many different varieties. There is always a type of wine that can satisfy different needs. It is beyond the typical trade-off approach and it gets into deeper psychological areas, psychological constructs inside us. If one wants to study consumer behaviour about wine, a look at the deeper processes is necessary to explain the reasons for choosing a type of wine. Actually, I would say that a red wine is among the very few scientifically proven naturally functional products. A small quantity of red wine per day is medically proven to help to improve certain aspects of our health. That is the case of very few products so far. They don’t have this medical support. This empirical support from nutritionists who are experts in that area. Tomatoes for instance, olive oil, red wine; there are very few products, it is a very short list, also proved by the United States food administration. These products are indigenously functional for the consumer. North – South divide To south Europeans, wine is not a surprise. Wine is something that exists for many centuries. Actually I think Greeks were the ones who produced wine first. Even from ancient years, it was one of the main export commodities for the ancient world. Part of the wealth and money came from exporting wine all over the world. We live with wine since we are very small and we can all remember how our fathers, parents used to chose. Whereas in north Europe, you tend to simplify things about food and you are focussing mainly on the practical aspects of the consumption. Choosing food in the supermarket or cooking food etc., it all has to be simple, quick, just satisfy some basic needs. Consequently, to you, special food and special wine comes occasionally. The context has to be appropriate. You spend more time cooking or you open a bottle of wine that is of better quality or even switch from beer to wine. I would expect that you would usually drink beer, and wine comes as some kind of extra 38 It has a special role, but in everyday life. It is something you allow yourself. A small luxury that
comes everyday in small portions. Never be drunk. That is socially completely unacceptable. And if you are drunk, people would simply think that you are an idiot. So you humiliate yourself. The point in south Europe is: you drink to have fun and to be a nice person, companion, when you are out or when you invite people etc. Wine is always there. There is no dilemma between say for instance beer or wine. People, 99% of the cases chose wine. I would be very surprised if you would have no wine to offer them. If this is your background and this is the cultural context within which you grow up since you are a kid, you always remember things in life together with a nice bottle of wine. I found out that you have occasionally a small production in DK only when the weather is not that wet for instance, so the pure plants can grow up in peace. You have an occasional wine production in Denmark and if this is the case you can understand, how important the year is. In Denmark, the weather and the year really defines whether or not you are going to have a production at all. South Europe is not that bad but still the weather can change or maybe the ground and the area of the vineyard. You know that wine comes from the North-East of Greece where the ground is more say heavy, strong ground, so you expect certain flavours in the wine. I cannot describe the flavour because I am not an oenologist. I don’t know the terminology, but I know what I mean. I can see the difference from the colour sometimes. You should not forget all those cultural prejudices and all those background that play a role in terms of wine. In most of the European countries wine is still an imported good, whereas beer relates to the domestic market. Beer has to be promoted in Denmark. In Denmark, for instance, the beer industry is such a big thing as well as Arla. Beer, dairy and pork is part of the Danish identity. Those things are kind of national products to Denmark. They have invested a lot of money and resources in general over the years to build really strong companies, export oriented companies that bring wealth back to the country and offer jobs to people in Denmark. Wine is important of course as a symbol, but it is not a national product. No one would really care that much if something wrong is happening with wine, say somewhere in Australia or wherever. But it could definitely hit the news if something is wrong with the pork industry or the beer industry. That is the opposite in south Europe. In south Europe, wine is more of a national product and the wine industry is so important for rural development purposes, rural communities etc. It keeps people in their villages. There is another variety of things that are at stake. But basically, in South and North it is different. To you, wine is just a luxury product. The European wine market In Europe, we still preserve identity of small areas around wine and we still take wine differentiation as important and we try to preserve it. If this is the case, your business model cannot compete against the model followed in new wine producing areas. Cost structure is more complicated and unit costs are higher. Unit prices are also higher, so you have to charge price premiums which mean you have to address segments of the market that are more willing to pay. If this is the case, consumers have to be more involved. But as we said before, the involvement part of the market gets smaller and smaller and smaller. The European wine industry gets under constant pressure. They have to follow the competition. They cannot charge really high prices because then consumers wouldn’t buy at all. On the other hand they need to find high-involved consumers who really are willing to pay for quality wine. How can they maintain their quality identity if consumers more and more care about a very positive low price-quality ratio than just about quality. Involvement If you are into something and you see yourself as an expert or not an expert, but still involved, you want to investigate a little deeper. Who is the wine producer of that particular wine, for example? If this is the case, then you care about the variety very much. Wine consumer behaviour I guess nowadays consumers use some heuristics as we call it, some cues that could be short cuts to quality expectations. If you have for instance bulk wine, which is still quite frequent in South Europe, the main short cut is the producer. If you know the producer or you know the area where the producer comes from, that is the main guarantee to quality. You know what to expect because that cue summarizes all 39
the small territory elements that are involved in wine. You know that wine comes from that specific area, not a big area, just a tiny place but you know that from past experience from ever since you were a kid and you keep tasting wines from that specific area and over the years the quality is really nice, so why bother looking for bottled wine or other types of wine, when you know that this wine satisfy your inner system of criteria. They just know that that area is really good in wine making, has a long tradition. That is the best guarantee and they feel safe by choosing wine that comes from that area. From a business approach again, from a market point of view, that is a narrow set of criteria to choose and very hard for the big wineries, those who go into the market and are export oriented. They find this mentality very hard to beat, to fight against. If this is the case, there is no need for marketing. Marketing cancels itself out so to say. There is no need for marketing. There are two different markets, to develop in parallel: bottled wine or mass wine or marketed wine is only one of those parallel channels, if you want to use this term. If this is the background in general in terms of your own experiences and how the market operates than wine is really interesting. For instance one might want to see what it takes for the transition. What does it take that segments of consumers change their mentality and start buying bottled wine which in most of the cases is even better than bulk wine. How are you going to convince those people? Young people like us, not necessarily my dad or your dad, but people like us who are accustomed or really convinced that bulk wine is better. How do you change their view about that? What type of marketing tools do you need? That was another reason why I thought back then, that wine was a really sexy product. Organic wine / Organic products Talking about organic, first of all in general. I still think it is a bit difficult to see organic, the overall organic movement as a marketing thing or something that is really a social need and something that satisfies deeper worries and concerns about environmental issues etc. I think it was on behalf of the industry, of the food industry. It was a misuse of the term organic. It was opportunistic, the way the food industry and the wine industry solve this thing was very opportunistic and I developed the idea about most of the companies, at least in the early years, say 10 years ago, they cared mostly about short-term profits that might come from launching new lines of products with the term organic on it. If I see things from a broader perspective, I would say I don’t believe that much in organic wine. I don’t think it is going to work. It is only a small market opportunity for some producers who want to establish something to more differentiate segments and wine is about emotions and pleasure and feelings and symbols. It is not about health. Organic label on wine The wine industry found itself under pressure and the thought that using organic labelling would definitely boost their sales at least within those segments of consumers, who buy bottled wine. It became trendy, fashionable. There was at a certain point in time 100 different labels with organic claims and that really destroyed and disintegrated the market. Consequently, a cannibalisation effect happened. One producer started fighting with the other about organic quality issue whereby none of them knew what organic wine was about. From a technical point of view those early organic wines were really lousy wines. Completely inferior to mainstream conventional wine. In the end they managed to succeed exactly the opposite. Consumers very soon lost faith in organic wines because the wine was bad. Environmental concerns are there but not as a main priority for mass markets. It is nice to have environmental friendliness on top but mainly we need something which is good, tasty or nutritious and if it is good for the environment, that is even better. But we would not really buy a lousy wine, just because it is organic. Wine and demographics There is a lot of discussion about generation Y. you know all those that are around 30s and wine is one of the few proto-categories where the generation effect or life stage circle really plays a role in the sense that we change our consumption models. We become less involved and more willing to use heuristics as short cuts because wine gets too complicated as a product for us. For us modern consumers it gets more complicated. Therefore, we tend to simplify the processes for convenience reasons due to all sorts of time constraints etc. Younger people tend to really simplify even more. This simplification process gets worse over the years and the generations. In 40
every generation a smaller percentage of those people will become involved in wine. Consequently, those who are really involved, the really involved customer basis gets smaller and smaller as generations go by. 30 years ago, there were more high-involved wine consumers than there are today. Because on the one hand we are faced with an even expanding variety of wines coming from all over the world and on the other hand we don’t know much about wine anymore. We simply want to choose something that goes fine with the occasion and the context. Extrinsic cues for wine selection The issue of these extrinsic quality cues, or if you like search cues, or everything that consumers can use in a search process before purchase or all information that comes exogenous as not part of the product itself. For instance all information on the labelling, or logos, brand names, even price. All those things are extrinsic quality cues used by consumers to make inferences about quality more or less. This heuristic process. Our recent work with wine is exactly about that, about finding out which of those attributes or quality cues or short cuts can really create loyalty. The assumption that we have for instance is, that the main attribute would either be the wine variety or the name or the fame of the wine maker. Not country. Of course country of is important but not that much. Variety is important in the sense that "ok we are safe, we know its chardonnay or merlot. It is something that we have tasted before. We won’t be too much exposed to something new". It is more of a conservative approach in choosing wine rather than exploratory one or variety-seeking etc. Not many consumers are able to assess whether it actually is a good price-quality ratio. A lot of respondents would say that it is important to them to get value for money but most of them would also say that they were not sure whether they could actually assess whether it is actually a good price-quality ratio when price is used as a prime quality indicator. European regulation on wine In every industry more regulations bring more noise on the side of the industry and more concern and usually, it increases production costs. Because of course the production basis has to comply with the new regulations, so they need to invest in certain things. That has definitely an impact on production cost. On the other side they might be also an effort to protect domestic production against the imports. If those things are used as import barriers then maybe the unit cost goes up a little bit but domestic production will be protected because, if wines from outside the EU do not comply with the European regulations, they cannot be imported. It is not clear to me, which of the two options is more prioritized nowadays. If it is completely free market conditions, extra regulation is always perceived as an extra barrier. But if those regulations in the end of the day protect the domestic industry, then I am sure the industry will see it from a more positive perspective.
41
Appendix 10: The questionnaire Survey on shopping behaviour and dietary habits First of all, we would like to thank you a lot for taking your time to participate in our study on shopping behaviour and dietary habits in connection with our master thesis at Copenhagen Business School. We would like to ask you to complete the questionnaire sincerely and completely. As our study is only conducted for research purposes, your anonymity will be guaranteed. Furthermore, we would like to ask you to answer uninterruptedly. The questionnaire is not a matter of measuring performance. In this kind of survey, there are no right or wrong answers. Every personal answer is valuable. The completion of the questionnaire takes approximately 15 minutes. Thank you very much! At the beginning of the survey, we would like you to provide some personal information that is necessary for the analysis of the results. 1. Please state your sex: 1 2
e male e female
2. Please state your age: ___________ years 3. What is your nationality? _____________ 4. How many people are continuously living in your household, including you? 1 2 3 4 5
e1 e2 e3 e4 e 5 and more people
5. Do children under the age of 18 live in your household? 1 2 3 4 5 6
e no children under 18 years e 1 child e 2 children e 3 children e 4 children e 5 children and more 42
6. What is the last education you have received, respectively which graduation degree do you have? (Note: in due consideration of differences in the national school and education systems) General translation: 1 2 3 4 5
e Still attending school e Elementary school e Secondary school e Secondary school without university-entrance diploma e University-entrance diploma, higher education entrance qualification or similar
6 7
e Academic degree e Other: __________________________
German Version: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
e Gehe noch zur Schule e Volks- oder Hauptschulabschluss e Mittlere Reife, Realschulabschluss e Weiterbildende Schule ohne Abitur e Abitur, Hochschulreife, Fachhochschulreife e Abgeschlossenes Studium e Andere Ausbildung: _______________________
Danish Version: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
e Stadigvæk i skole e Folkeskole e Studentereksamen eller HF e Højere Handelseksamen (HH, HG, HHX) eller teknisk eksamen (HTX) e Videregående uddannelse (3år) e Lang videregående uddannelse (5år) e Anden uddannelse: ________________________
7. What is the current profession that you are pursuing, respectively what was your last occupation? 1 2 3 4 5 6
e Pupil e Student e Employee e Self-employed e Civil servant (not included in the Danish questionnaire) e Temporarily without occupation 43
7 8 9
e Retiree e House wife/husband e Apprentice, trainee
8. What is the monthly net-income that is at the household’s disposal (all members of the household) including all revenues e.g. salary, pension, child allowance and further benefits? (Note: in due consideration of national differences in income levels and taxation systems) German Version: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
e below 1.000 Euro e 1.000 up to 1.500 Euro e 1.500 up to 2.000 Euro e 2.000 up to 2.500 Euro e 2.500 up to 3.000 Euro e 3.000 up to 3.500 Euro e 3.500 up to 4.000 Euro e above 4.000 Euro e not specified
Danish Version: 1 2 3 4 5 6
e below 12.500 DKK e 12.500 up to 25.000 DKK e 25.000 up to 50.000 DKK e 50.000 up to 75.000 DKK e above 75.000 DKK e not specified
9. You live… 1 2 3 4 5
e in a large city e in a suburb e in a provincial town e in a village e in a cottage or house in the countryside
44
In the following section, we would like you to give some specifications regarding your shopping habits. 10. a. How often do you normally go grocery shopping? Daily 4-6 times 2-3 times Once per Less than per week per week week once per week
b. Proportionately, how much of your shopping comes from organic cultivation? (in percent) 0 – 25% 26 – 50% 51 – 75% 76 – 100%
11. What comes to your mind when you think about organic wine? (Please state 3 catchwords)
12. a. Do you inform yourself about wine? 1
e Yes 2 e No (continue with question 13.) b. If „yes“: What are your primary sources of information? (Max. 3 answers e.g. Internet, friends, wine magazines)
45
13. To me, organic wine is…(„N“ means neutral)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9
Important Boring Relevant Exciting Insignificant Appealing Fascinating Valueless Of no necessity
f
N
g
Unimportant Interesting Irrelevant Unexciting
Significant Repellent Simple Valuable Necessary
14. a. How frequent do you purchase organic wine on average? At least once per 2-3 times per month Once per month or less week
b. How frequent do you purchase conventional wine on average? At least once per 2-3 times per month Once per month or less week
c. How many litres of wine does your household purchase per month on average? < 1 litre per 1 litre per < 3 litre per 3-8 litre per > 8 litre per month month month Month month
d. Proportionately, how much of this is organic wine? (in percent) 0 - 25% 26 – 50% 51 – 75% 76 – 100%
e. How regular do you consume wine? Daily At least Several once per times per week month
Once per month
Less than once per month
46
f. Where does the wine come from that you prefer to consume? (Max. 2 answers) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
e Denmark e Germany e France e Greece e Italy e Austria e Portugal e Spain e Oversee e Others: ______________________________ e No preferences
g. Here, several retailing options are listed. Where do you prefer to purchase wine? (Max. 3 answers) Winemaker Wine store Farmer’s market Supermarket Discount store Health-food shops (in the German questionnaire, distinguished between ”Reformhaus” and ”Bioladen”; in the Danish questionnaire, distinguished between “økologisk butik” and “helsekostbutik) Internet, delivery service Other h. Do you buy organic wine for special occasions? 1 2 i.
e Yes e No (continue with question no. 15)
If „yes“: For which occasions do you buy organic wine? (Please state 3 occasions)
47
15 In the following, we would like to know whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Every statement has four answering options ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Please answer every question to what extend it applies to you. Agree Partly agree 1. 2.
It is important for me to buy products from my region. I like to try new products and recipes.
3.
I pay attention to the origin of products.
4.
I don’t mind paying a premium for quality goods. It is important to me to purchase seasonal products. Variety is important to me.
5. 6.
Partly disagree
Disagree
7.
I like to spend time in stores and get inspired by the selection range. 8. I buy my groceries predominantly at discount stores. 9. I don’t mind paying a premium for organic products. 10. If possible, I prefer buying organic products over conventional. 11. It is important to me to eat well-balanced. 12. I like to cook. 13. I care about my health. 14. Good food & drinks are important to me. 15. It is important to me that the wine goes well with the food. 16. I like to watch TV-cooking shows, to read cooking books and magazines. 17. I like to eat out, occasionally also at expensive restaurants. 18. I like to cook for guests. 19. I always choose the wine after I have decided on the dish.
48
16 In the following we present you another set of statements. Please state whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Agree Partly agree 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Partly disagree
Disagree
I have changed my dietary habits due to food scandals. I rely on quality seals when choosing product. Among my acquaintances, I am normally one of the first to try new products or dietary trends. When choosing a wine for a special occasion, I am very often insecure whether I made the right choice. I like to try new wines. I like to rely on recommendations from friends and acquaintances in terms of wine. I have a great wine knowledge.
8.
It is important to me to be regarded as a wine connoisseur. 9. I like to buy wine directly from the winemaker and get explanations about the production. 10. I like to participate in wine tastings. 11. I like going to specialised wine stores and receive competent advice. 12. When shopping, I read labels and product information attentively. 13. When shopping, I pay attention to organic labels. 14. I prefer products that I know and that I have trust in. 15. It is important to me to be regarded as a good host.
49
17 At the end of the questionnaire we would like to present you some final statements. Please state to what extend you agree or disagree. Agree Partly Partly Disagree agree disagree 1. Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. 2. Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. 3. Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. 4. Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. 5. Conventional wine taste better than organic wine. 6. Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. 7. Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. 8. Organic means quality to me.
Thank you very much for your support!
50
Appendix 11: Structure of the questionnaire Part
Focus
Topics
Question Number
Part
Questions addressing socio-demographic variables
I
Sex
1
Age
2
Nationality
3
Size of household
4
Number
of
children
in
5
household Education
6
Occupation
7
Net household income
8
Residence
9 10a
Part
Questions addressing purchasing and consumption
Shopping frequency general
II
behaviour regarding organic and conventional groceries
groceries
as well as wine
Portion of organic product compared
to
10b
conventional
groceries Knowledge of organic wine
11
Search for information
12
Consumer
involvement
in
13
organic wine Shopping frequency as well
14a-d
as quantity of organic and conventional wine General
consumption
14e
frequency of wine Geographic
preferences
14f
regarding wine
Part
Statement
batteries
addressing
lifestyle,
attitudes,
III
dietary habits, purchasing behaviour in general and in
Points of purchase
14g
Occasion
14h 15-17
terms of organic and conventional wine, as well as product perception
51
Appendix 12: Factors investigated in the statement batteries Factor 1: Enjoyment of Food & Wine I like to try new products and recipes. Variety is important to me. I like to cook. Good food & drinks are important to me. I like to watch TV-cocking shows, to read cooking books and magazines. I like to cook for guests. I like to try new wines. I like to participate in wine tasting. Among my acquaintances, I am normally one of the first to try new products or dietary trends. Factor 2: Health Awareness It is important to me to eat well-balanced. I care about my health. Factor 3: Brand Preference & Price Consciousness I don’t mind paying a premium for quality goods. I like to eat out, occasionally also at expensive restaurants. I prefer products that I know and that I have trust in. Factor 4: Point of Purchase I like to spend time in stores and get inspired by the selection range. I buy my groceries predominantly at discount stores. I like to buy wine directly from the winemaker and get explanations about the production. I like to go to specialised wine stores and receive competent advice. Factor 5: Origin It is important to me to buy products from my region. I pay attention to the origin of products. Factor 6: Safety Need & Risk Aversion Factor 6a: General Safety Need & Risk Aversion I have changed my dietary habits due to food scandals. When choosing a wine for a special occasion, I am very often insecure whether I made the right choice. I like to rely on recommendations from friends and acquaintances in terms of wine. Factor 6b: Role of Labels I rely on quality seals when choosing products. When shopping, I pay attention to organic labels. When shopping, I read labels and product information attentively. Factor 7: Social Status It is important to me to be regarded as wine connoisseur. It is important to me to be regarded as a good host. I have a great wine knowledge
52
Factor 8: Environmental Aspects It is important to me to purchase seasonal products. I don’t mind paying a premium for organic products. If possible, I prefer buying organic products over conventional. Factor 9: Occasional Appropriateness It is important to me that the wine goes well with the food. I always choose the wine after I have decided on the dish. Factor 10: Product Perception & Organic Wine Image Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. Organic means quality for me.
53
Data: ordinal
Multiple-Choice Multiple-Response Scale
Simple Category Scale
Multiple-Choice Multiple-Response Scale
Simple Category Scale
Multiple-Choice Multiple-Response Scale
Gender (IV)
H3a: Security & Universalism (DV)
Gender (IV)
H3b: Achievement & Power (DV)
Data: interval Data: nominal
Likert Scale Summated Rating Simple Category Scale
Likert Scale Summated Rating Simple Category Scale
H4a: Distrust in eco-labels (DV) Gender (IV)
Data: ordinal
Multiple-Choice Multiple-Response Scale
Simple Category Scale
Multiple-Choice Multiple-Response Scale Simple Category Scale
Multiple-Choice Multiple-Response Scale
Simple Category Scale
Age (IV)
H5a: Hedonism (DV) Age (IV)
H5b: Altruism (DV)
Age (IV)
Data: nominal
Data: ordinal
Data: ordinal Data: nominal
Data: nominal
Data: interval Data: nominal
Likert Scale Summated Rating Simple Category Scale
H4b: Trust in eco-labels (DV) Gender (IV) Hypothesis 5: Purchasing motives(DV)
Data: interval Data: nominal
Data: nominal
Simple Category Scale
Gender (IV) Hypothesis 4: Trust in eco-labels (DV) Gender (IV)
Data: ordinal
Data: nominal
Data: ordinal
Data: nominal
Data: ordinal Data: interval
Data: ordinal Data: ordinal
Multiple-Choice Single Response Scale Multiple-Choice Single Response Scale
Multiple-Choice Single Response Scale Likert Scale Summated Rating
Data
Level of Measurement
Hypothesis 2: Purchasing frequency organic wine (DV) Consumer interest healthy & well-balanced diet (IV) Hypothesis 3: Purchasing motives (DV)
Hypotheses Variables Hypothesis 1: Purchasing proportion organic wine (DV) Purchasing proportion organic groceries (IV)
Appendix 13: Operationalisation of hypotheses
54
List of 53 values based on Schwartz Value Survey; how frequent “universalism” and “benevolence” value domains mentioned < 35; >35
List of 53 values based on Schwartz Value Survey; how frequent “hedonism” value domain mentioned < 35; >35
List of 53 values based on Schwartz Value Survey; how frequent mentioned, allocated to corresponding value domains < 35; >35
agree - partly agree - partly disagree - disagree Female – Male
agree - partly agree - partly disagree - disagree Female – Male
agree - partly agree - partly disagree - disagree Female – Male
List of 53 values based on Schwartz Value Survey; how frequent “achievement” and “power” value domains mentioned Female – Male
List of 53 values based on Schwartz Value Survey; how frequent “security” and “universalism” value domains mentioned Female – Male
List of 53 values based on Schwartz Value Survey; how frequent mentioned, allocated to corresponding value domains Female – Male
At least once per week – 2-3 times per month – once per month or less agree - partly agree - partly disagree - disagree
0-25% – 26-50% – 51-75% - 76-100% 0-25% – 26-50% – 51-75% - 76-100%
Scaling
Appendix 14: Overview of all product attributes General appearance 1. Packaging 1.1. Glass bottle 1.1.1. transparent 1.1.2. coloured 1.1.3. recycled
Sensory characeristics
5. Taste 5.1. Sweet 5.2. Soft-sweet 5.3. Dry 5.4. Semi-dry 5.5. Spicy 1.2. Paper box with tap 5.6. Velvet 1.2.1. Recycling paper 5.7. Full-bodied 5.8. Mild 5.9. Pleasant 1.3. Tetra Pak 1.3.1. Recycling paper 6. Aroma 2. Size 6.1. Aromatic 2.1. 0,75 litre 6.2. Fruity 2.2. < 0,75 litre 6.3. Flowery 6.4. Woody 3. Label 6.5. Spicy 3.1. Overall attractive appearance 7. Colour 7.1. Clear Source: Compiled by the authors 3.2. Text or design 7.2. Gold which highlights a 7.3. Gold-yellow regional character 7.4. Yellow 7.5. Yellow-green 3.3. Text or design 7.6. Scarlet which creates an 7.7. Ruby red environmentally friendly image 4. Bottle Closure 4.1. Cork 4.1.1. Natural cork 4.1.2. Plastic cork 4.2. Screw cap 4.3. Sealing
Price
Perceived quality information on back label
8. Price 8.1. Low 8.2. High 8.3. Value for money
9. Wine-specific Information 9.1. Quality classification 9.2. Grape variety 9.3. Alcoholic level (% vol) 9.4. Bottler 9.5. Taste specifications 10. Data 10.1. Bottling 10.2. Vintage 10.3. Best before 11. Geographical Origin 11.1. Country 11.2. Region 11.3. Geographical cultivation location 12. Quality Assurance 12.1. Organic Label 12.2. ISO/HACCP 13. Brand Name 13.1. Brand name 13.2. Winemaker’s name 14. Further Back Label Information 14.1. Information about cultivation 14.2. Information about wine pressing 14.3. Information about area of production 14.4. Storage recommendations 14.5. Drinking temperature recommendations 14.6. Food recommendations
55
Ambitious
Wealth
Source: Compiled by the authors
Self-respect
Intelligence
Preserve my public image
Authority
Pleasure
Influence
Social Recognition
Capability
Enjoying life
Success
Social Power
Hedonism
Achievement
Power
Daring
A varied life
An exciting life
Stimulation
Independence
Choosing your own goals
Curiosity
Creativity
Freedom
Self-Direction
Moderate
Mature love
Accepting one's portion in life
Devoutness
Respect for tradition
Tradition
Humble
Obedience
Honouring parents/elders
Self-discipline
Politeness
Conformity
True friendship
Loyalty
Honesty
Responsibility
Forgiveness
Helpfulness
Benevolence
Schwartz’s List of Values
Appendix 15: Overview Schartz’s list of values & value domains
Inner harmony
56
Health
Social justice Broad-minded
Clean
Family security
Reciprocation of favours
Stability of social order
National security
Sense of belonging
Security
A world of beauty
A world at peace
Protecting the environment
Equality
Wisdom
Unity with nature
Universalism
Appendix 16: Product attribute categories for consumer online survey Product Attribute Categories
1. Priority
2. Priority
3. Priority
Packaging (e.g. glass bottle, Tetra Pak) Size (e.g. 0.75 l) Label ( front label design) Bottle Closure (e.g. cork, screw cap) Taste (e.g. sweet, dry, full-bodied) Aroma (e.g. flowery, woody) Colour (e.g. gold, yellow, ruby red) Price (low, high, value for money) Wine-specific Information (e.g. grape variety, quality classifications) Data (e.g. bottling, best before) Geographical Origin (e.g. country, region) Quality Assurance (e.g. organic label, ISO/HACCP) Brand Name (e.g. wine maker) Further Back Label Information (e.g. food recommendation, drinking temperature)
57
Appendix 17: Functional consequences used for the consumer online survey Functional Consequences
1. Priority
2. Priority
3. Priority
Packaging (e.g. glass bottle, Tetra Pak) Size (e.g. 0.75 l) Label ( front label design) Bottle Closure (e.g. cork, screw cap) Taste (e.g. sweet, dry, full-bodied) Aroma (e.g. flowery, woody) Colour (e.g. gold, yellow, ruby red) Price (low, high, value for money) Wine-specific Information (e.g. grape variety, quality classifications) Data (e.g. bottling, best before) Geographical Origin (e.g. country, region) Quality Assurance (e.g. organic label, ISO/HACCP) Brand Name (e.g. wine maker) Further Back Label Information (e.g. food recommendation, drinking temperature)
58
Appendix 18: Psychological consequences used for the consumer online survey Psychological Consequences
1. Priority
2. Priority
3. Priority
Trust Memories Associations Loyal commitment Enjoyment To indulge oneself Minimise risks Need for information Maintain traditions Being environmentally conscious Good conscience To feel relaxed Contentment Right of choice Expectations of others Experience (e.g. good atmosphere, good discussions, fun) Take responsibility (e.g. supporting organic production, country, regional economy)
59
Appendix 19: Values domains used for the consumer online survey Values Domains
1. Priority
2. Priority
3. Priority
Self-direction (freedom, creativity, curiosity, choosing your own goals, independence Stimulation (an exciting life, a varied life, daring) Hedonism (enjoying life, pleasure) Achievement (success, influence, capability, intelligence, self-respect, ambitious) Power (social power, social recognition, authority, preserve my public image, wealth) Security (sense of belonging, national security, stability of social order, reciprocation of favours, family security, clean, health) Conformity (politeness, self-discipline, honouring parents/elders, obedience) Tradition (respect for tradition, devoutness, accepting one's portion in life, humble, moderate) Benevolence (helpfulness, forgiveness, responsibility, honesty, loyalty, true friendship, mature love) Universalism (unity with nature, wisdom, equality, protecting the environment, a world at peace, a world of beauty, social justice, broad-minded, inner harmony
60
Appendix 20: Content analysis for the open questions of the questionnaire Question 11
Question 12b
Question 14i
Thoughts about organic wine
Sources of information
Occasion
1. More Exspensive
1. Wine Store
2. Acceptably Priced
2. Supermarket
3. Skepticism
3. Health-food Shops
4. Health
4. Wine Maker
5. Purity
10. Avarage Quality
5. Recommendations from professionals/staff (e.g. shop staff, wine dealer, sommelier) 6. Reference groups (e.g. Colleagues, family, friends, network) 7. Events (e.g. wine bar, wine tasting, lectures) 8. Specialist literature (e.g. newsletter, documentary, Robert Parker list) 9. Print media (e.g. Magazines, newspapers, brochures) 10. Internet
11. Good Taste
11. By coincidence
6. Environmental Aspects 7. Production 8. Wine Pressing 9. Good Quality
1. Festivities (e.g. birthday, Christmas) 2. Special dinner or feast 3. Wine tasting (e.g. private, bar) 4. Gift (e.g. birthday present, hostess gift) 5. Indulge oneself 6. Socializing with friends 7. Expecting guests
12. Avarage Taste 13. Wine Maker 14. Geography 15. Regulation & Labelling 16. Working Conditions 17. Trend & Lifestyle 18. Occasion 19. Assortment 20. Good conscience 21. Positive Attitude 22. Wine Type 23. Sustainability 24. Fairtrade Wine 25. Market
61
Appendix 21: New categories for income and education level New Income Categories
Danish income categories
Income categories for coding
German income categories
1. < 12.500 DKK
1. Low income
1. <1000 Euro
2. 12.500 – 25.000 DKK
2. Lower middle income
2. 1.000 – 2.000 Euro
3. 25.000 – 50.000 DKK
3. Middle income
3. 2.000 – 3.000 Euro
4. 50.000 – 75.000 DKK
4. Higher middle income
4. 3.000 – 4.000 Euro
5. >75.000 DKK
5. High income
5. >4.000 Euro
6. Not specified
6. Not specified
6. Not specified
New education levels
Danish education levels 1. går i skole
3. Folkeskole
5. Studenter eksamen, HF, HH, HG, HHX, HTX
Education levels for coding
German education levels
1. still attending school
1. gehe noch zur Schule
2. Elementary school
2. Volks- oder Hauptschulabschluss
3. Secondary school
3. Mittlere Reife, Realschulabschluss
4. Secondary school without university-entrance diploma 5. University-entrance diploma, higher education entrance qualification or similar
4. Weiterbildende Schule ohne Abitur 5. Abitur, Hochschulreife, Fachhochschulreife
6. Lang og videregående uddannelse (3år, 5år)
6. Academic degree
6. Abgeschlossenes Studium
7. Anden uddannelse
7. Other
7. Andere Ausbildung
62
5.
Quality
Variety
Natural
8.
9.
10.
7.
Natürlich
Vielseitigkeit/Abwechslung
Qualität
Attraktivitet/Ästhetik
Kontrolle (z.B. Qualitätssicherung, Transparenz)
Struktur (z.B. angenehm)
Texture (e.g. pleasent)
4.
6.
Verträglichkeit/ Bekömmlichkeit
Compatibility (respectively Salubriousness)
Control (e.g. quality assurance, transparency) Attractiveness (respectively Aesthetics)
Gesundheit
Healthy
3.
2.
1.
Functional Consequences Suitability (e.g. Angemessenheit (z.B. Occasion, Food, Anlass, Essen, Saison, Season) Jahreszeit) Taste Geschmack (e.g. good, fresh, (z.B. gut, frisch, angenehm, pleasant, distinct, ausgeprägt, kräftig, rich, intense) intensiv, voll)
Naturlig
Variation/Afveksling
Kvalitet
Attraktivitet/Æstetik
Struktur (f.eks. behaglig, kan mærkes på tungen) Kontrolle (f.eks. kvalitetssikring, gennemsigtighed)
Fordøjelighed, sund og letfordøjeligt
Sundhed
Passende (f.eks. til anledning, mad, saison, årstid) Smag (f.eks, god, behagelig, forventet, fyldig, kraftig, frisk)
Loyalität gegenüber Weingut/Winzer/ Region/Rebsorte
Loyal commitment (towards vineyard/winemaker/ region/grape variety)
Tradition wahren Umweltbewusstsein
Being environmentally conscious
Informationsbedürfnis
Risiko minimieren
Sich etwas gönnen
Maintain traditions
Need for information
Minimise risks
To indulge oneself
Genuß
Assoziationen mit Land/Kultur/Urlaub
Associations (with country/culture/vacation)
Enjoyment
Erinnerungen
Vertrauen Ehrlichkeit
Memories
Trust (respectively Honesty)
Psychological Consequences
Appendix 22: Content analysis for personal interviews - functional and psychological consequences
Være miljøbevidst
Bevar traditioner
Behov for/tilegnelse af viden
Minimering af risiko
Forkælelse
Nyde/Fornøjelse
Loyalitet med vingård/vinavler/ region
Associering med land/kultur/ferie
Erindringer/minde
Tiltro Ærlighed
63
Within the budget
Good aroma
13.
14.
Verantwortung übernehmen/ Etwas bewegen/ Einfluss nehmen (z.B. Unterstützung ökologischer Anbau, Land, regionale Wirtschaft)
Take responsibility (respectively make a difference/ To have an influence, e.g. supporting organic production, country, regional economy)
16.
17.
Erwartungen Anderer/ Ruf wahren
Eigene Entscheidungen treffen/Individualität
Right of choice (respectively individuality) Expectations of others (respectively uphold ones reputation)
God aroma
Zufriedenheit
Contentment
Inden for budgetmæssige rammer
Tage ansvar/ Gøre en forskel/ Have indflydelse (f.eks. understøtte økologisk produktion, land, regional økonomi)
Friheden til at vælge/ Individualitet Social anerkendelse/ Bevar sit image Oplevelse (f.eks. god stemning, gode diskussioner, sjov)
Tilfredshed
Afslapning/ Hygge
Sich wohlfühlen/ entspannen
To feel relaxed
God samvittighed
Gutes Gewissen
Praktisk
Good conscience
Psychological Consequences
Erlebnis (z. B. Gute Atmosphäre, gute Diskussionen, Spaß)
Gutes Aroma
Im finanziellen Rahmen
Praktisch
Renhed (f.eks. uden pesticider og tilsætningsstoffer)
Experience (e.g. good atmosphere, good discussions, fun)
15.
Practical
12.
11.
Functional Consequences Purity Reinheit (e.g. no (z.B. ohne Pestizide und chemicals or Zusatzstoffe) additives)
64
DEP1
Respondent
1
Gender Age
1
Geographical origin
Product attribute category Country
Region
1
2
Attribute
Quality
Suitability
Functional Consequences
Memories
Enjoyment
Associations
Psychological Consequences
Ist davon überzeugt, dass Region nur relevant ist, wenn man die Region auch persönlich kennt. Unter Kennen versteht er in diesem Zusammenhang schon einmal in der betrefflichen Region gewesen zu sein, dort gute Weine und gute Qualität erlebt zu haben. Insgesamt einfach die Erfahrung gemacht zu haben, dass die Region gute Weine hervorbringt. Hat auch starke Loyalität gegenüber bestimmten Weintypen/Regionen, zb Rioja. Bei der Wahl zwischen zb einem Südafrikaner und einem Spanier würde er immer den Spanier wählen, auch wenn dieser teurer ist, einfach aus dem Grunde, dass er schon mehrfach in Spanien war und dort sehr
Persönliche Präferenz sind Weine aus Spanien. Generell hat er eher die Assoziation, das gute Weine aus südlichen Ländern kommen. Auch ist er davon überzeugt, dass die Wein-Kultur in Südeuropa eine andere ist. Wein dort eher als Lebensmittel und Genußmittel betrachtet wird. Er kann sich stark mit diesem Bild identifizieren und würde selber sich niemals mit Wein betrinken sondern Wein eher als Genußkomponente zu einem leckeren Essen sehen.
Consequences in text form
Appendix 23: Content analysis for personal interviews with German consumers
1
2
1
Sense of belonging
Pleasure
Enjoying life
Values
Security
Hedonism
Hedonism
Value Domain
Zu bestimmter Kultur. In diesem Fall zu Spanien.
Value explanation
65
Price
1
Value for money
Within the budget
Suitability
Loyal commitment Enjoyment
3
Wein ist für ihn ein 1 Genußmittel. Genuß bedeutet für ihn, dass es gut schmecken muss, das muss aber nicht automatisch einen hohen Preis erfordern. Für ihn ist Wein ein Genußmittel, kein Prestigemittel. Bei einem Verhältnismäßig knappen Budget möchte er nicht den Großteil für Wein ausgeben, weil Wein für ihn dann auch nicht einen so wichtigen Stellenwert einnimmt. Er kauft aber auch nie den aller billigsten Wein, eher Weine, die im Mittelfeld liegen, zu manchen Anlässen auch teurere. 2
gute Erfahrungen gemacht hat. Über die Erfahrungen mit dem Wein hinaus erinnert er sich bei dem Genuß des Weins auch an andere schöne Ereignisse, die ihm in der Region wiederfahren sind.
Inner harmony
Success
Enjoying life
Universalism
Achievement
Hedonism
66
Er assoziiert Wein mit hoher Bildung/weisen Leuten. Er glaubt, dass er sich vielleicht gebildeter machen möche, indem er hochwertigen Wein kauft. Äußert, dass er schon einen gewissen Druck verspürt und nicht den billigsten Wein kaufen möchte. Dass man das selbst als angemessen und in Ordnung betrachtet, dass man sich selbst etwas gönnt.
Bedeutet für ihn auf Qualität zu achten und nicht das billigste zu kaufen.
Wine-specific Information
Grape variety
2
Taste
Taste Suitability specificati ons
1
Loyal commitment
Er möchte einen Wein 1 auswählen, der den persönlichen Präferenzen entspricht. Darüber hinaus wird er stark vom Anlass beeinflusst. So soll der Wein zb zum Essen passen. Wird von persönlichen Präferenzen des Anlass entsprechend geleitet und möchte sicher gehen, dass der Wein auch passend ist. "Muss" Rotwein sein. Er trinkt 1 zwar auch Weißweine aber eher selten. Darüber hinaus ist er davon überzeugt, dass die Rebsorte auch etwas über den Geschmack aussagt. Zumindest seinen persönlichen Geschmacksassoziationen. 2 Benevolence
Security
Sense of belonging
Hedonism
Loyalty
Enjoying life
67
Verbundenheit oder Kulturzugehörigkeit zu einer bestimmten Region und den Erfahrungen, die er da gemacht hat. Weiß die Angaben zu verstehen. Das Äquivalent fehlt ihm in anderen kulturellen Kontexten, z.B Italien.
Er hat gute Erfahrungen mit einem bestimten Wein/Rebsorte gemacht und bleibe deshalb dabei. "Da weiß ich, was man daran hat".
Ich weiß, dass es mir schmeckt und dass es mir gut tut. Darüber hinaus unterstreicht es noch bestimmte Anlässe.
DEP2
Respondent
2
Gender
Respondent 2
Taste
Age Product attribute category 2 Dry
Velvet
1
2
Attribute
Compatibility
Taste
Compatibility
Taste
Functional Consequences
Psychological Consequences
1
2
Mag es nicht, wenn der Wein 1 zu viel Säure hat, zu herb oder stark im Geschmack ist. Präferiert weiche Weine. Wird beim Kauf einerseits von der persönlichen Präferenz des Geschmacks geleitet als auch von der körperlichen Verträglichkeit.
Hat keine Vorliebe für Süßes. Darüber hinaus hat das auch etwas mit der Verträglichkeit zu tun. Süßer Wein steigt ihr schnell in den Kopf.
Consequences in text form
Health
Inner harmony
Enjoying life
Values
Security
Universalism
Hedonism
Value Domain
Value explanation
68
Quality Assurance
Aroma
Organic Label
Flowery
2
1
Fruity
1
Minimise risks
Being environmentally conscious
Quality
Control
Good aroma
Good aroma
In erster Linie wählt sie Weine nach Rebsorte oder Herkunft aus und in zweiter Linie nach dem Bio Merkmal. Ist aufgefallen, dass sie eigentlich sehr viel Bio Lebensmittel kauft, aber beim Wein da irgendwie nicht so stark drauf achtet. Aber das Siegel gibt ihr Sicherheit, ist Zeichen für Qualität, bietet Schutz vor "schwarzen Schafen". Weiß, dass wenn man das Zeichen hat, der Betrieb reglmäßig kontrolliert wird. Gibt somit auch Garantie, dass der Wein wirklich ökologisch ist.
Assoziiert Wein mit Frucht und Blumen. Beides löst positive Assoziationen aus und schließt gleichzeitig auch konträre Aromen, wie zb "würzig" aus Assoziiert Wein mit Frucht und Blumen. Beides Löst positive Assoziationen aus und schließt gleichzeitig auch konträre Aromen, wie zb "würzig" aus
Respect for tradition
3
Tradition
Responsibility Benevolence
Universalism
Tradition
Universalism
Universalism
2
Unity with nature
Moderate
2
1
Inner harmony
Unity with nature
1
1
69
Intensivität des Geschmackserlebnis. Muss nicht viel trinken um großen Genuß zu haben.
DEP3
Respondent 3
2
1
overall attractive appearan ce
fullbodied
3
1
pleasant
2
Label
Dry
1
Taste
Value for money
1
Price
Attractiveness
Taste
Healthy
Compatibility
Healthy
Taste
Within the budget
Taste
Minimise risks
2
1
2
1
3
Möchte, dass der Wein kräftig 1 und intensiv schmeckt und nicht so fade ist. Ist ansprechend. Desweiteren 1 muss schnell klar werden, woher der Wein kommt und um was für einen Wein es sich handelt.
Möchte eine Halsreizung vermeiden. Der Wein soll schmecken. Kann schlecht genießen, wenn der Wein kratzt.
Weil sie süße Weine nicht so gerne mag. Von denen bekommt sie schnell Kopfschmerzen.
Kauft nicht einfach Bio, weil 1 es ein Bio produkt ist sondern es soll auch schmecken. Der Wein sollte nicht zu teuer aber auch nicht zu billig sein. Bei zu billigen Weinen hat sie die Befürchtung, das sie nicht schmecken, bei zu teuren Weinen ärgert man sich noch mehr, falls der Wein nicht schmeckt. 4-5 Euro ist sie gerne bereit für einen Wein zu zahlen. Ab und an, wenn man wirklich auch weiß, dass der Wein gut ist, dann ist sie auch bereit ein bisschen mehr zu bezahlen. 2 Power
Hedonism
Honesty
Enjoying life
Pleasure
Health
Pleasure
Health
Benevolence
Hedonism
Hedonism
Security
Hedonism
Security
Responsibility Benevolence
Preserve my public image
Enjoying life
70
3
2
text or Attractiveness design which creates an environm entally friendly image text or design which highlights a regional character
Take responsibility
Being environmentally conscious
Würde basierend auf dem Etikett ohne Nachdenken eher einen konventionellen Wein aus zb. Rheinland-Pfalz wählen, als einen Biowein aus Übersee. Einerseits möchte sie die lokale Wirtschaft unterstützen andererseits glaubt sie auch, dass regionale Herstellung eher dem Bio Gedanken entspricht.
Muss ausgewogen sein um ansprechend zu sein. Sollte klar und schlicht sein und sollte nicht wie eine Weledaflasche aussehen.
1
2
Hedonism
Protecting the Universalism environment
Pleasure
71
DEP4
Respondent 4
2
1
1
Price
Spicy
3
Value for money
overall attractive appearan ce
fullbodied
2
1
Dry
1
Label
Taste
Quality
Taste
Quality
Suitability
Taste
Taste
Taste
Minimise risks
Honesty
Benevolence
Self-direction
Freedom 3
Stimulation
Self-direction
Hedonsim
Stimulation
Self-direction
Security
Daring
Creativity
Pleasure
Exciting life
Curiosity
Social order
2
1
1
1
1
Preis muss mit Qualität 1 übereinstimmen. Möchte nicht enttäuscht werden. Möchte etwas gutes für ihr Geld bekommen. Setzt dabei eher auf mittleres Preissegment als auf zu teure Weine. Risiko zu groß enttäuscht zu werden. 2
Fällt ins Auge. Auslöser für Gedanken "Das könnte ein guter Wein sein. Der ist bestimmt lecker". Somit als Zeichen für Qualität. Löst Geschmacksassoziationen anhand des Designs aus.
Muss würzig sein um geschmackvoll zu sein. Passt gut/Ist lecker zum Essen.
Wein muss geschmackvoll sein und man muss den ganzen Geschmack wahrnehmen können.
Mag gar nicht süßen oder halbtrockenen Geschmack
72
DEP5
Respondent 5
2
1
Wine-specific Information
Taste
quality Quality classificat ion
3
Taste
Taste
Bottler
Taste
Quality
Taste
2
Velvet
3
Variety
grape variety
fullbodied
2
Taste
1
Dry
1
Minimise risks
Loyal commitment
Loyal commitment
Enjoyment
Enjoyment
Enjoyment
Sicherheit bezüglich der 1 Qualität des Weins. Erzeugt auch Geschmackserwartungen. In Kombination mit der Information über die Rebsorte kann sie einschätzen, was sie geschmacklich in der Flasche erwartet.
Hat Erfahrung was schmeckt. 1 Bleibt Rebsorten, die sie mag treu. Probiert selten neue Weine aus. Hat Erfahrung welches 1 Weingut, welche Region, welches Gebiet für gute Weine steht und bleibt ihnen treu. Bei Traditionsweingütern hat sie Vertrauen in den Geschmack.
Bedeutet für sie Geschmack 1 und Genuß. Mag andere Weine nicht. Erwartet von diesen Weinen 1 am meisten Genuß. Vollmundige Weine sind geschmacklich vielseitig. Mag schwere Weine. Weicher Geschmack, eckt 1 nicht an. Bedeutet Genuß und sieht es auch als Zeichen von Qualität an.
Pleasure
Freedom
Loyalty
Unity with nature
Pleasure
Enjoying life
Hedonism
Self-direction
Benevolence
Universalism
Hedonism
Hedonism
73
Price
1
value for money
Within the budget
Suitability
Right of choice
3
Weil ich möchte, dass mir für 1 einen guten Preis möglichst viel geboten wird. Glaubt beurteilen zu können, ob es sich auch tatsächlich um ein gutes Preis-Leistungs Verhältnis handelt. Man muss das gute Preis-Leistungs Verhältnis auch in Abhängigkeit vom Anlass und Budget betrachten. Z.B. ob es sich um ein Dinner für 2 handelt oder eine Party 2 Pleasure
Enjoying life
Hedonism
Hedonism
Responsibility Benevolence
74
DEP6
Respondent 6
2
1
transpare nt
recycled
1
2
Packaging
pleasant
1
Taste
Organic Label
1
Quality Assurance
Control
Taste
Control
Being environmentally conscious
Minimise risks
Being environmentally conscious Clean Health
2 3
2
Kann das Aussehen 1 beurteilen. Ob die Farbe beispielsweise künstlich aussieht. Man "sieht was man kauft". Umweltschutz 1
3
Self-direction
Freedom
Influence
Achievement
Protecting the Universalism environment
Unity with Universalism nature Responsibility Benevolence
Hedonism
Enjoying life
Security
Security
Protecting the Universalism environment
1
Muss an sich schmecken. Die 1 restlichen Produkteigenschaften sind anlassabhängig. 2
Gibt Sicherheit und Garantie, dass das Produkt auch wirklich biologisch ist.
75
DEP7
Respondent 7
2
2
1
1
Geographical origin
Taste
pleasant
Region
Suitability
Taste
Associations
Wechselbeziehung ziwschen angenehm und harmonisch. Muss passend zum Essen sein und wird in Abhängigkeit vom Anlass entschieden. Man bezieht auch das Essen ein.
Information über die Region liefert mit Information über das Terrain und somit Geschmacksindikator. Z.B. wenn ich weiß, der Wein kommt von der Mosel, dann kenne ich die Hänge, den Boden, die Trauben. Wenn die Region weiter südlich liegt, weiß ich auch, wieviel Sonne der Wein bekommt und wie sich somit der Geschmack verändert. Enjoying life
Pleasure
2
Curiosity
2 1
Unity with nature
1
Hedonsim
Hedonsim
Self-direction
Universalism
76
Wechselbeziehung zwischen Leben genießen und Freude.
Wechselbeziehung zwischen neugierig und Einheit mit der Natur. Neugierig, ob bestimmte Geschmacksvorstellungen, die mit bestimmer Region assoziiert werden bestätigt werden. Und auch, ob der Wein genauso schmeckt wie im Vorjahr. Also rückblickend auch unter Brücksichtigung des Klimas etc.
Packaging
1
glass bottle
Taste
Quality
Attractiveness
2
Eigentlich egal, was für eine 1 Glasflasche. Bei Rotweinen achtet sie aber darauf, dass die Flasche möglichst getönt ist, um den Wein vor Licht zu schützen. Präferenz von Glasflasche ergibt sich auch aus der Abneigung gegenüber anderen unschönen Verpackungen wie z.B. Schlauch, Karton oder Tetrapak. So ein edles Produkt wie Wein gehört für sie eben in ein edles Gefäß, wie Glas. Desweiteren assoziiert sie Glas mit sauber und rein. Darüber hinaus hat man etwas Schönes in der Hand. Ist sich bewußt, dass die Verpackung sicherlich kaum Einfluß auf den Geschmack hat. Würde es sicherlich vom Geschmack her nicht merken, wenn sie es nicht wüßte, dass der Wein aus einem anderen Behältnis als Glas kommt. Aber wenn sie es sehen würde, würde sie den Wein nicht runter bekommen. Self-respect
A world of beauty
Achievement
Universalism
77
Antwort auf negativer Erfahrungen, die man in seiner Jugend gemacht hat, z.B. Chiantiflaschen im Korb in Mengen in der Jugend getrunken
Hat bestimmte ästhetische (subjektive) Werte zu denen sie steht.
DEP8
Respondent 8
2
2
Geographical origin
Taste
Velvet
3
Region
Mild
2
1
Dry
1
Taste
Compatibility
Taste
Taste
Associations
Weil sie sich dann richtig vorstellen kann, wo der Wein herkommt. Weil sie eine persönliche Verbindung zu dem Wein herstellen kann. Aus Erfahrungen mit der Region Bilder im Kopf entstehen. Sie die Region auch mit einem gewissen Geschmack assoziiert. Die Region somit für sie als Geschmacksindikator.
Geschmacksabsicherung. Weil sie keine "kräuselige Zunge" haben möchte und Kratzen im Hals vermeiden möchte.
Geschmacksabsicherung. Weil sie aufdringliche, herbe Weine nicht so gerne mag.
Geschmacksabsicherung. Weil sie süße Weine nicht so gerne mag.
1
1
1
1
Unity with nature
Independenc e
Moderate
Inner harmony
Universalism
Self-direction
Tradition
Universalism
78
Dass das was ich trinke und tue, mit dem wie ich mich fühle und denke übereinstimmt. Dass das nicht übetrieben oder unmäßig ist, sondern passend ist. Dass ich nichts Falsches tue. Nicht zu viel trinken und essen aber auch generell z.B. Reisen oder Fernsehen. Bemühe mich, das rechte Maß zu halten. Nicht zu viele umweltbelastende Dinge zu mir zu nehmen. Lieber Verzicht üben, statt billige und schädliche Sachen zu mir zu nehmen. Das ich selbst bestimmen kann, was ich kaufe und was nicht. Dass ich mich nicht beeinflussen lasse von Werbung. Dass ich nur das mache, was ich will, weil ich mich dann auch besser fühle. Weiß, woher der Wein kommt, kenne die Region und bin, wenn auch nur in Gedanken, in gewisser Harmonie mit der mich umgebenden Natur. Kino im Kopf - fühle mich im Einklang.
Quality Assurance
1
Organic Label
Healthy
Purity
Control
Being environmentally conscious
Absicherung. Einerseits nach 1 Außen gerichtet, das Gefühl zu haben, Produkte zu kaufen, die Umweltschonend angebaut und weiterverarbeitet sind. Aber auch nach Innen gerichtet der Fokus auf die eigene Gesundheit. Die Gewissheit, keine belastenden Zusatzstoffe und Geschmacksverstärker zu sich zu nehmen.
Responsibility Benevolence
79
Das man bei seinen Einkäufen genau überlegt was man kauft, wo und wieso und was für Konsequenzen das für einen selbst und auch für andere hat. Auch wenn man vielleicht das Gefühl hat, allein nicht viel bewegen zu können, so kann man zumindest bei seinem Einkauf versuchen etwas zu verändern, einen positiven Beitrag zu leisten.
DEP9
Respondent 9
2
2
Price
Wine-specific Information
taste Taste specificati ons value for Within the budget money
3
1
alcoholic level
2
Quality
Quality
quality Quality classificat ion
1
Minimise risks
Ist verknüpft mit dem Produktattribut Qualitätsstufe. Hochprozentiger Wein wird gleichgesetzt mit hochwertiger und somit besserer Qualität. Qualitätsabsicherung Absicherung um nicht zu trockenen Wein zu kaufen. Geschmacksabsicherung Grundsätzlich sparsam. Aber durchaus bereit, wenn die Qualität stimmt, für Wein mehr auszugeben. Wenn der Wein zu teuer oder zu billig ist, kauft sie ihn eher nicht. Mekrt allerdings auch an, dass Sie sich nicht so gut auskennt.
Absicherung. Weiß anhand dieser Informationen, dass der Wein, falls Kabinet oder Prädikatswein, nicht minderwertig ist. Qualitätsabsicherung
Responsibility Benevolence
3
Hedonism
Security
Hedonism
Security
Hedonism
Enjoying life
Health
Pleasure
Health
Enjoying life
2
1
1
1
1
80
Genuß von Wein am Abend etwas besonderes. Freut sich darüber, dass die Arbeit getan ist, die Kinder im Bett sind und sie sich etwas Genuß gönnen kann. Verantwortungsbewusstsein nicht nur der eigenen Person und eigenen Gesundheit gegenüber, sondern auch gegnüber der Umwelt. Dass ich in meinem Genuß mir und der Umwelt nicht schade.
Im Zusammenhang mit Genuß. Sich auf hochwertigen Wein freuen können. Wenn ich für einen guten Wein Geld ausgebe, dann muss die Qualität stimmen. Der Wein darf nicht gepancht sein und somit gesundheitlich unbedenklich sein. Vor allem wenn er regelmäßig konsumiert wird.
Sich jetzt hochwertiges und Gutes gönnen zu können im Gegensatz zu früher, als sie noch jünger war und mit einem geringeren budget auskommen musste. Sich etwas gönnen, etwas gutes zu tun. Weil gesund, nicht belastet
Label
1
text or design which creates an environm entally friendly image Natural
Attractiveness
zu buntes Design passt nicht zu "bio". Ein ruhiges, schlichtes Etikett in Naturfarben gehalten löst bei ihr eher die Assoziation aus, dass der Wein natürlich ist.
Unity with nature
Intelligence
3
Health
2
1
Achievement
Universalism
Security
81
Gemäßigt, ruhig. Gibt mir das Gefühl, dass das Produkt in Ordnung ist. Nicht zu teuer, nicht zu billig. Die Qualität stimmt und es ist umweltschonend. Bin mit mir selbst und der Natur im Einklang. Man läßt sich nicht zu sehr beeinflussen von protziger Aufmachung sondern wählt etwas passendes.
Wenn ich für einen guten Wein Geld ausgebe, dann muss die Qualität stimmen. Der Wein darf nicht gepancht sein und somit gesundheitlich unbedenklich sein. Vor allem wenn er regelmäßig konsumiert wird.
DEP10
Respondent 10
1
2
Wine-specific Information
Packaging
grape variety
glass bottle coloured
2
1
glass bottle recycled
1
Taste
Attractiveness
Being environmentally conscious
Ich bilde mir ein, bestimmte Rebsorten zu mögen bzw. nicht zu mögen. Information über die Rebsorte fungiert für mich somit wie ein Geschmacksindikator.
dies ist eher nachrangig relevant. Nicht in Bezug auf die Qualität des Weins, sondern eher dass die Form schön ist und möglicher späterer Verwendungszweck.
Erster Eindruck, dass es sich um einen "ökologischen" Wein handelt, wenn die Flasche recycled ist. Das Produkt is rundum biologisch. Nicht nur Inhalt sondern auch Verpackung.
1
1
Choosing your own goals
Unity with nature
Universalism
Universalism
Protecting the Universalism environment
2
Security
Health
1
82
Gefühl, dass man mithilfe der 3 gennanten Produktattribute in der Kategorie Weinspezifische Informationen man am ehesten seine eigenen Ziele erreichen kann und einen Wein finden kann, der einem schmeckt. Auf der suche probiert er auch gerne häufig verschiedene Weine aus.
Wein hat für ihn etwas Ursprüngliches und steht immer in verbdinung mit gesundheit. Möchte sicher gehen, dass durch die produktion sowohl des inhalts als auch der vepackung keine umweltschädlichen stoffe produziert wurden, die wiederum gesundheitsschädlich sind. Möchte sicher gehen, dass durch das Produkt keine zusätzliche Umweltbelastung entstanden ist Fänd es komisch Bioprodukte in Glasflaschen oder anderen verpackungen zu kaufen, die den Nachhaltigkeitsgedanken des Produktes nicht mittragen
Further Back Label Information
informatio n about cultivatio n
taste Taste specificati ons
3
1
quality Quality classificat ion
2
Being environmentally conscious
Minimise risks
1
bietet manchmal Aufschluß 1 über die Region oder auch ob aus ökologischem Anbau. Glaubt z.B., dass wenn Anbau aus weit entfernten Regionen/Flugentfernung nicht im Einklang mit bioGendanken steht. Gibt gute deutsche Weine
Habe gewisse Präferenzen 1 und mag weder ganz liebliche noch ganz trockene Weine (würde z.B. wenn 1.&2. erfüllt sind, aber der Wein trocken ist, würde ich den Wein nicht kaufen). Somit Absicherung.
Weil ich nicht so viel Weinkenntniss habe, ist die Qualitätsstufe für mich eine Absicherung, dass wenn ich z.B. Kabinet oder Prädikat wähle einen besseren Wein bekomme.
Universalism
Universalism
Protecting the Universalism environment
Choosing your own goals
Choosing your own goals
83
Gefühl, dass man mithilfe der 3 gennanten Produktattribute in der Kategorie Weinspezifische Informationen man am ehesten seine eigenen Ziele erreichen kann und einen Wein finden kann, der einem schmeckt. Auf der suche probiert er auch gerne häufig verschiedene Weine. Gefühl, dass man mithilfe der 3 gennanten Produktattribute in der Kategorie Weinspezifische Informationen man am ehesten seine eigenen Ziele erreichen kann und einen Wein finden kann, der einem schmeckt. Auf der suche probiert er auch gerne häufig verschiedene Weine Information über den Anbau liefert indirket auch informationen über die Transportwege und somit die damit verbundenen Transportkosten und die Belastung für die Umwelt, insbesonders für Weine, die nicht in Deutschland hergestellt werden. Die Umweltbelastung sollte möglichst niedrig gehalten werden.
food recomme ndations
3
Suitability
informatio Healthy n about wine pressing
2
Kenntnis fehlt, welcher Wein zu welchen Speisen passt. Hilft wenn der Wein für bestimmte Anlässe gesucht wird
glaubt z.B., dass bei Rotweinen die Lagerung in Barrique Fässern gesundheitlich besser ist
1
1
Respect for tradition
Respect for tradition
Tradition
Tradition
84
Wein ist für ihn ein Genussmittel. Tradition sollte zum einen im Anbau aber auch in der Lagerung gewahrt werden, weil dies auch hochwertige Produkte für ihn bedeutet. Sieht zb die Lagerung in Barrique Fässern als traditionel an und achtet bei der Wahl des Produktes stark darauf. Tradition bedeutet für ihn aber auch welchen Wein man mit welchen Speisen traditionel kombiniert. Wein ist für ihn ein Genussmittel. Tradition sollte zum einen im Anbau aber auch in der Lagerung gewahrt werden, weil dies auch hochwertige Produkte für ihn bedeutet. Sieht zb die Lagerung in Barrique Fässern als traditionel an und achtet bei der Wahl des Produktes stark darauf. Tradition bedeutet für ihn aber auch welchen Wein man mit welchen Speisen traditionel kombiniert.
DEP11
1
Respondent 11
2
1
1
Quality Assurance
Taste
dry
ISO/HAC CP
Compatibility
Quality
Minimise risks
1. Bekömmlichkeit. Vertrage trockene Weine besser als süße. 2. aber auch Gewohnheit. Habe gute Erfahrungen mit trockenen Weinen gemacht und weiß, dass ich trockene Weine besser vertrage. Also suche ich gar nicht erst bei süßen Weinen sondern gehe automatisch zu den trockenen.
1
Enjoying life
Protecting the Universalism environment
3
Hedonism
Security
Clean
2
Security
Health
Gibt Sicherheit beim Kauf, 1 dass man gutes Produkt kauft und nochmal wiederkaufen kann. Als Orientierung für Folgekauf
85
Absicherung, dass Wein bekömmlich ist. Dass ich weiß, dass ich wenn ich täglich ein Glas guten Wein trinke, dass das keine Nebenwirkungen/Nachwirkun gen hat, besonders wenn mal ein Glas mehr getrunken hab. Dies bewirkt Wohlbefinden und Freude. Dass der Wein keine Fremdstoffe hat, nicht gepancht/vermischt ist, und dass er traditionell hergestellt wurde Ähnlich wie beim Wert sauber/rein. Möchte nicht das Wein so ähnlich wie GM Lebensmittel angebaut wird sondern wie natürliche Lebensmittel angebaut, verarbeitet und vermarktet wird. Im Allgemeinen: Zufriedenheit, Genuss, Freude an schönen Dingen/Weinen. Bedeutet auch Gemeinschaft, denn es macht mehr Spaß mit anderen als allein Feste zu feiern. Bedeutet aber auch zur Ruhe zu kommen.
semi-dry
pleasant
2
3
To feel relaxed
Contentment
Taste
Compatibility
Compatibility
1. verhält sich ähnlich wie mit trockenen Weinen. Ist akzeptabel und trinkbar, wird aber nicht so häufig gekauft wie trockene Weine. Aber wenn ein spezieller Wein schon einmal probiert wurde oder gute Erfahrungen damit gemacht wurden, wird er auch gekauft. (prozentual aber mehr trockene Weine) 1. besonders vom Geschmack her muss der Wein angenehm sein. Aber eben auch bekömmlich, so dass man auch mal ein Glas mehr trinken kann. 2. gutes Glas von angenehmen Wein löst Wohlbefinden aus. Bedeutet Entspannung, Zufriedenheit und Wohlbefinden, das angenehme Situationen ergänzt oder diese vertieft. 1
1
Inner harmony
Pleasure
Universalism
Hedonism
86
Bedeutet Ruhe und Ruhe zu finden bei einem Glas Wein. Stress-Abbau, sich Zeit nehmen, abschalten
Ähnlich wie beim Wert Leben genießen aber mehr im Besonderen. Bei Besonderen Anlässen, z.B. Geburtstagen oder ähnlichem.
Price
1
value for money
Right of choice
Loyal commitment
Within the budget
Quality
1. möchte keinen überhöhten 1 Preis für gegebenenfalls wenig Qualität zahlen müssen. 2. möchte lieber guten Wein für entsprechenden Preis kaufen und unterwirft sich nicht den Zwängen "Schikeria" Weine, die man getrunken haben "Muss" zu kaufen. Wein wird nicht zur Außendarstellung gekauft. Bin nicht bereit jeden Preis zu zahlen. Weiß, dass hohe Preise nicht automatisch bedeuten, dass der Wein gut sein muss. Nimmt auch günstige Weine wenn er weiß, dass sie schmecken. 3. Hauptgrund warum er Weine vorrangig beim Winzer kauft. Hier findet er häufig beides: bezahlbare Preise und gute Qualität. Kauf beim Winzer bedeutet hauptsächlich: nicht zu teuer, Sicherheit und gute Qualität. 2 Honesty
Humble
Benevolence
Tradition
87
Ich schätze faire, ehrliche Preise, wo ich nicht über den Tisch gezogen werde, aber der Winzer auch einen stimmigen Preis bekommt. Preis und Leistung muss stimmen. Ich möchte nicht abgezockt werden beim Wein. Für einen guten Wein bin ich auch gerne bereit etwas mehr zu zahlen, das darf aber nicht astronomisch werden. die Relation muss stimmen.
Ich lasse mich nicht sozial unter Druck setzen, z.B. in Bezug auf Trend & Szene Weine. Tendiere eher zu ehrlichen Weinen, die auch im unteren und mittleren Preissegment liegen. Ich muss mich nicht beweisen oder protzen. Auch nicht vor Freunden oder bekannten. Ich bin lieber bescheiden, und werde nicht getrieben von einem Wunsch nach Prestige oder sozialer Anerkennung,"einfach kann auch gut sein"
DKP 1
Respondent
2
Gender
Respondent 1
2
Price
Age Product attribute category
1. value for money
Attribute
Quality
Functional Consequences
Minimise risks
Psychological Consequences
Values
Balance mellem fornuftig pris 1. Intelligence til høj kvalitet. Økologisk vin er dyrere end konventionel, da det stadigvæk er et nichemarked. Hendes økologiske købeadfærd begrænser sig mest på kød og mejeriprodukter, da hun først og fremmest understøtter dyrevelfærd. Mht. økologiske agrarprodukter, ville det være optimalt at købe regionalt og sæsonafhængigt. Økologi skal betragtes i et større perspektiv, der er mange aspekter (eco-footprint, brak lægning af marker), som ikke gavner i sidste ende. Generelt er hun skeptisk overfor vine, der koster mindre en 50 kr. Tror, at de er dårlige blandingsprodukter (prismæssig orientering). Køber mest vin på internettet, da det er mere overskueligt og man kan tage sig tid til at læse anbefalinger og andre informationer. Hun køber vin i større mængder, da man tit for gode tilbud. 2. Influence
Consequences in text form
Appendix 24: Content analysis for personal interviews with Danish Consumers
en rationel beslutning at sammenligne prisen og kvalitet, man kan optimere sit valg.
på sine egne beslutninger og hvordan man allokere sine penge.
Achievement
Value explanation
Achievement
Values Domain
88
Winespecific Informatio n
Geographi cal origin
Control
2. Taste specificati ons
Taste
Taste
Taste
2. Region
1. grape variety
Suitability
1. Country
Minimise risks
Associations
Associations
Minimise risks
vigtig for hende, når hun skal købe hvidvin. Hun synes det er større fare for at købe en hvidvin, der ikke smager så godt, end ved rødvin. Hun fortrækker tørre hvidvin. Derfor læser hun en ekstra gang på bag etiketten, for at få bekræftet at vinen (Pino Grigio) er tør
gøre det nemmere at forholde sig til den forventede smag
Kan bruges til at indsnævre valget endnu mere. Forskellige druer fra forskellige regioner udgør smagen af vinen. Hun har boet i Italien og har været til vin smagning i vin regionerne. Drak næsten kun regionale vine da hun boet i Italien, fordi sådan gjorde man, lokale vaner.
1. Influence
1. Intelligence
1. Enjoying life
Når man har gode erfaringer 1. Loyalty med vine fra et bestemt land, så køber man det igen, da man ved at den burde være god. Det giver sikkerhed. Går tilbage til det man kender. Spiser meget italiensk mad og supplerer maden med italiensk vin. Det giver lidt ekstra
Achievement
Achievement
Hedonism
Benevolence
at øge grundlaget til at træffe en beslutning
man får oplysninger til at træffe et valg
89
DKP 2
Respondent
1
Gender
Respondent 2
Label
Age Product attribute category 2 Geographic al origin
Variety
2. Region
Quality
1. Overall Attractiveness attractive appearance
Taste
Taste
Functional Consequences
1. Country
Attribute
Enjoyment
Associations
Psychological Consequences
Tradition
Tradition
Self-direction
Benevolence
2. Honesty
1. Curiosity
Benevolence
Values domain
1. Loyalty
Values
Generelt et attraktivt design: 1. Humble eye catcher i supermarkedet. Da man normalt ikke kan smage vinen i supermarkedet, så bliver etiketten og teksten til et hjælpemiddel. Et attraktivt design uden for meget tamtam, med klare oplysninger om vinens herkomst og druesorten er vigtigt. Minimalisme udstråler kvalitet. 2. Respect for tradition
Regioner har forskellige druesorter, som kan bruges til at typisere smagen. At udforske forskellige vinregioner er forbundet med nysgerrighed og glæde.
Stor viden omkring tyske vine, især om hvidvine, derfor har han specifikke forventninger ved købet af vin, da han forudsætter en vis smag. Tyske hvidvine kan han bedst lide. Den geografiske nærhed er en fordel, da han gerne besøger tyske vinregioner. Han taler tysk dvs. at han kan kommunikere med vinavleren. De giver ham et godt indblik og transperens.
Consequences in text form
ikke at spræge rammen med vildt og modernt designet label
minimalisme udstråler kvalitet
at producenterne dyrker deres vin på en ærlig måde, minus blandingsprodukter generelt at beskæftige sig med vin og de forskellige vinproducerende lande
Loyal over for tyske vine pga. gode erfaringer
Value explanation
90
Price
1. value for money
2. Text or design which creates an environmen tally friendly image Experience
To indulge oneself
Quality
Taste
Being environmentally conscious
3. Honesty
udstråler et masseprodukt, 1. Honesty som han ikke satser på er helt igennem økologisk. Derimod synes han, at ømærket ville være den bedste metode at kommunikere miljøvenlighed på. Han stoler på ø-mærket det er en kunst at opdage 1. Enjoying life værdi for penge med hensyn til vin. I prissegmentet 50-70 kr. kan man finde værdi for penge, men da findes også rigtig mange dårlige vine. Men det er sjovt, at opdage et godt bargain. Han siger at gode kvalitetsvine er berettiget til at koste lidt mere, da fremstillingen af en god kvalitetsvin indebærer meget arbejde. Og han er villig til at betale en højere pris end normalt, men han får til gengæld også værdi for pengene. Kvaliteten kan smages. 2. Pleasure Benevolence
Hedonism
Hedonism
Benevolence
at opdage vine, hvor værdi for penge passer mht. prisdannelse
Dyre vine, at forkæle sig selv og at værdsætte det
mht. økologi
91
DKP 3
Respondent
1
Gender
Respondent 3
Geographi cal origin
Age Product attribute category 2
2. Region
1. Country
Attribute
Taste
Suitability
Taste
Functional Consequences
Experience
Experience
Psychological Consequences
Values
land, region og beliggenhed 1. Pleasure giver vinen et smagsmønster, de hjælper til at indsnævre smagen og kan bruges som orientering. Da U. har et stort kendskab til vin, er land, region, beliggenhed, de vigtigste udvalgskriterier mht. den forventet smag. Han har ikke nødvendigvis brug for smagsoplysninger på bagetiketten, derud over stoler han ikke rigtigt på vin beskrivelserne, tror at de er tit opdigtet. Anledning spiller også en rolle mht. maden og udvælgelse af vinen. Husets vin er en Beaujolais, en fransk rødvin, som drikkes i hverdagene. Prøver man nye
land, region og beliggenhed 1. Enjoying life giver vinen et smagsmønster, som hjælper til at indsnævre smagen og kan bruges som orientering. Da han har et stort kendskab til vin, er land, region, beliggenhed, de vigtigste udvalgskriterier mht. den forventet smag. Han har ikke nødvendigvis brug for smagsoplysninger på bagetiketten, derud over stoler han ikke rigtigt på vin beskrivelserne, tror at de er tit opdigtet. Anledning spiller også en rolle mht. maden og udvælgelse af vinen. Husets vin er en Beaujolais, en fransk rødvin, som drikkes i hverdagene. Prøver man nye vine, så plejer familien at lave en gætteleg, hvor man gennem smagen gætter vinens herkomst.
Consequences in text form
Hedonism
Hedonism
Values domain
hele familien er vin entusiaster, en hobby man deler, sammenvær
Vin et mangfoldig hobby og man vil gerne rejse til de lande, hvor man køber vinen fra
Values explanation
92
Winespecific Informatio n
Taste
Taste
2. grape variety
Suitability
Taste
Suitability
1. quality classificati on
3. Geographi cal cultivation location
To indulge oneself
Experience
giver informationer om smag og blandingsforholdende
udgør, at vinen smager ordentlig. Livet er for kort for dårlige vine.
1. Health
1. Honesty
land, region og beliggenhed 1. Responsibility giver vinen et smagsmønster, de hjælper til at indsnævre smagen og kan bruges som orientering. Da U. har et stort kendskab til vin, er land, region, beliggenhed, de vigtigste udvalgskriterier mht. den forventet smag. Han har ikke nødvendigvis brug for smagsoplysninger på bagetiketten, derud over stoler han ikke rigtigt på vin beskrivelserne, tror at de er tit opdigtet. Anledning spiller også en rolle mht. maden og udvælgelse af vinen. Husets vin er en Beaujolais, en fransk rødvin, som drikkes i hverdagene. Prøver man nye vine, så plejer familien at lave en gætteleg, hvor man gennem smagen gætter vinens herkomst.
vine, så plejer familien at lave en gætteleg, hvor man gennem smagen gætter vinens herkomst.
Security
Benevolence
Benevolence
min egen sundhed, undgår bladnings og strakte vine
med hensyn til de informationer der er på flasken
alkoholisk produkt, ansvar for sig selv og for sine gæster
93
Taste
Taste
Suitability
3. Dry
Texture
Suitability
Quality
2. Mild
1. Pleasant
3. Bottler
bryder sig ikke om tunge vine, som f.eks. fra Spanien. Han fortrækker lette vine med mange nuancer hvis vinen ikke serveres til maden, men bare for sig selv, så fortrækker han en tør vin. Den kan stå for sig selv. Til dessert ville han fortrække en sød vin
giver oplysninger om, hvor vinen blev aftappet, hos producenten eller først i DK. Han køber dem, som bliver aftappet hos vinavleren, da han mener, vinen er af bedre kvalitet. Generelt er vinens smag afhængig af maden. Det supplerer hinanden og giver en god smagsoplevelse. Det er en subjektiv fornemmelse – dig selv! For ham er en behagelig vin struktureret og kompleks, men behagelig i gammen. Vinen skal være harmonisk og rund.
1. Pleasure
1. Pleasure
1. Enjoying life
1. Capability
Hedonism
Hedonism
Hedonism
Achievement
tiltro og forståelse for hvor meget arbejde der står bag en kvalitetsvin
94
DKP 4
Respondent
1
Gender
Respondent 4
Compatibility
Quality
1. grape variety
2. quality classificati on
Loyal commitment
Trust
Take responsibility
Healthy
Winespecific Informatio n
Being environmentally conscious
Psychological Consequences
Purity
1. Organic Label
Attributeq Functional Consequences
Quality Assurance
Age Product attribute category 2
Values
Sikkerhed / kvalitetsgaranti. Hvis prisen og kvaliteten hænger sammen, så er han villig til at betalte lidt mere for kvalitetsvine, fordi han mener, at det kræver mere arbejde.
Man har gode erfaringer med nogle druer, som man kender, som smager godt og er let fordøjeligt. Han køber altid direkte ved vin producenten og har også besøgt hans vingård. Derfor stoler han på vinavlerens produkter og økologisk dyrkning.
1. Choosing your own goals
Self-direction
Achievement
Achievement
4. Influence 1. Success
Universalism
Benevolence
Security
Values domain
3. Protecting the environment
Gode erfaringer med 1. Health økologisk vin. Han får ikke hovedpine af økologisk vin pga. reduceret indhold sulfitter og tilsætningsstoffer. Han understøtter den økologiske landbrugsform, han er selv økologisk landmand og bruger ikke pesticider. Konventionelle vine bliver sprøjtet for meget. Man har et ansvar over for den næste generation. 2. Responsibility
Consequences in text form
udvælgelseskriterier efter egne standarter, mål og forventninger.
Jeg har truffet et godt valg
Value explanation
95
Geographi cal origin
1. Country
3. Taste specificati ons
Control
Suitability
Taste
Loyal commitment
Trust
Expectations of others
2. Honesty
1. Preserve my public image
Han prioriterer tyske, 1. Freedom chilenske og sydafrikanske vine, da spanske og italienske vine er for kraftig for ham. Dog køber han kun tyske økologiske vine, da han tror at de økologiske retningslinjer er striktere i Tyskland. Han stoler mere på tyske økologiske vine. Han er meget tilfreds med hans vinavler fra Tyskland. Man kunne også overveje at skifte, hvis vinen ikke er så god en årgang, man han ved at i økologisk landbrug er udkomsten ikke altid konstant, da kvaliteten er afhængig af høsten, klima, vejret og angreb fra insekter. 2. Respect for tradition
Han tør og lette vine fortrækker. Han kan lugte til vinen for at afgøre om han ville får hovedpine af vinen. Vinen skal passe til maden, men generelt spiller anledningen ikke en stor rolle. Når han giver vine i gaver, så er de økologiske, da han selv er økologisk landmand.
Tradition
Self-direction
Benevolence
Power
mit langt forhold til min vinavler
Du kan vælge selv!
mht. økologi
Jag kan ikke prædike økologi og så tilbyde konventionel vin til mine gæster
96
1
DKP 5
1
Age
Respondent Gender
Respondent 5
1. value for money
1. soft-sweet
Taste
Attribute
Price
Product attribute category
Taste
Within the budget
Functional Consequences
Contentment
Being environmentally conscious
Expectations of others
Psychological Consequences
Values
har en begrænset 1. Curiosity ”nuanceforståelse”, dvs. svært at navne det med et konkret ord. Liflig betyder for ham frisk og syrligt, ikke mild, og at vinen har en karakter og struktur uden at blive for tung. Mest hvidvin.
synes, at han ikke har stort 1. Pleasure kendskab til vin, derfor anser han købet af dyre vine som no winning situtation for ham, da han ikke kan smage forskel på en dyr eller billig vin. Han betegner det som snobberi, at man bruger prisen som indikator for kvalitet, når man egentlig ikke ved ret meget om vin. Omgangkredsen synes ikke, at det er af stor betydning at vinen er dyr. Det er netop mere anset at vinen er forholdsvis billig og smager fantastisk. Hvis man får gode anbefalinger eller en vin som man har smagt hos en bekendt, så tør man godt at investere i dyrere vine. Med hensyn til økologisk vin, så ligger værdien først og fremmest i, at man køber noget, der er bedre for miljøet, man køber en miljøværdi, dog køber han ikke økologisk vin pga. bedre smagen 2. Protecting the environment
Consequences in Text form
Self-direction
Universalism
Hedonism
Value domain
men stadigvæk vover at købe vine med andre smagsnuancer
økologisk vin er bedre for miljøet og afbalancerer fornøjelse, da det giver god samvittighed.
at købe vin er også en fornøjelse, og det giver ekstra værdi at finde en god vin til en moderat pris. Generelt, så er det en fornøjelse at drikke vin.
Value explanation
97
Label
1. Overall attractive appearanc e
Taste
3. dry
Attractiveness
Variety
Taste
Texture
2. full-bodied
Maintain traditions
generelt ville en miljøvenlig 1. Honesty etiket udtrykke det forkerte image. Han gå mere efter økologiske vine med en almindelig designet etiket, end en vin, hvor etiketten udstråler, nærmest påtrænger miljøvenlighed. For ham har det den omvendte effekt, da han mener at træde inde i en marketing fælde. Etiketten må være traditionel, synes ikke godt om hippe vin etiketter. Etiketten skal udstråle og ære traditionen i vindyrkning. Traditionelle etiketter giver billeder og visioner i hovedet om traditionel vindyrkning, lidt romantisk. Dog må etiketten ikke gå over i kitsch og alt for klicheagtig med alt for meget tamtam. Det kan være en eye catcher, men på den omvendte måde. Etiketten skal signalisere ærlighed og balance mellem at være traditionelt og kliche. Jo færre forstyrrende og påtrængende elementer, jo bedre. 2. Respect for tradition
Balance, etiketten forsøger ikke at snyde mig
etiket må gerne udtrykke traditioner og viden bag vindyrkning
Tradition
at han holder sig til de grundlæggende principper mht. til smagen, da han ikke har stort kendskab til vinen.
spænende at åbne vinen efter købet
Benevolence
franske rødvine kan være 1. Pleasure Hedonism kedeligt, fordi de ikke giver ham en stor smagsoplevelse i munden, som han ellers har med spanske eller sydamerikanske vine er et nemt 1. Family security Security udvælgelseskriterium. Som regel ville han fortrække en tør vin frem for en sød vin. Synes selv, at tørre vine byder på mere variation og differentiering mht. smagen end søde vine.
98
DKP 6
Respondent
1
Gender
Respondent 6
Price
Age Product attribute category 2
1. value for money
Attribute
Quality
Functional Consequences
Take responsibility
Experience
Psychological Consequences
Values
3. Sense of belonging
køber økologisk vin sjældent i 1. Curiosity supermarkedet, mest på vinbarer. Anbefalinger har indflydelse på valget af vinen (politikken, venner, bartenderen på vinbaren), anbefalinger giver sikkerhed ift. Valget af vinen. Værdi for penge er ikke kun relateret til prisen, men også til konsumoplevelsen og anbefalinger, der giver vinen merværdi. Prisen for vinen er også afhængig af lønforholdene i de respektive producerende lande. Franske vine er mere omkostningsfulde end f.eks. vine fra Sydamerika. Der er en snobeffekt omkring franske vine. Han synes at billige franske vine smager dårligere end en billig vin fra Sydamerika. Pris kan være en indikator for kvalitet, dog under hensyn af herkomsten. Prissegmentet hvor man kan finde rigtig gode vine ligger mellem 50 og 80 kr. I dette segment varierer kvaliteten mest, men man kan finde kvalitetsvin til lille penge. 2. Pleasure
Consequences in text form
Security
Hedonism
Self-direction
Values domain
vin er en social ting, giver merværdi geografisk herkomst af vinen, indflydelse som forbruger
holder anbefalinger stik, finder man god vin til en forholdsvis lav pris
Value explanation
99
Geographi cal origin
Taste
2. Region
1. Country
3. spicy
2. velvet
1. full-bodied
Suitability
Taste
Suitability
Quality
Texture
Compatibility
Suitability
Associations
Take responsibility
Experience
Til deles en stærk indikator, ”Narrow down the selection” . Regionen som købeargument giver først mening, når man har været der. Har været på vin rejse til forskellig franske vin regioner, snobeffekt
Mere en subjektiv fornemmelse. Det er behageligt til maden. Spænende smagsoplevelse: bliver smagsoplysningerne bekræftet, eller kan man slet ikke smage de forskellige nuancer og aromaer, som er angivet på flasken. Det er avanceret viden, hvis man har styr på sådan noget. stærke indikatorer med hensyn til smagen, man forbinder land med smagen fra bestemte vine. Generelt kan land bruges som segmenteringsmekanisme, italiensk vin, når man laver italiensk mad. Politisk holdning over for lande spiller også en rolle (f.eks. vin fra Sydafrika), man har et ansvar som forbruger, man kan understøtte eller fravælge bestemte producerende lande. Han kalder sig selv for en politisk forbruger.
kan mærkes på tungen, indikator for kvalitet
en fyldig vin er nemt at forholde sig til, nemt at bedømme. Fyldige vine passer til maden han fortrinsvis laver. Kan ikke drikke fyldige vine i store mængder, max. 2 glas til maden, mådehold
1. Curiosity
2. Pleasure
1. Responsibility
1. Enjoying life
1. Pleasure
1. Enjoying life
Self-direction
Hedonism
Benevolence
Hedonism
Hedonism
Hedonism
politiske forhold, man har et ansvar som forbruger
100
DKP 7
Respondent
2
Gender
Respondent 7
Winespecific Informatio n
Age Product attribute category 1
Quality
Suitability
3. taste specificati ons
Functional Consequences
2. bottler
1. grape variety
Attribute
Minimise risks
Minimise risks
Need for information Experience
Maintain traditions
Psychological Consequences
1. Respect for tradition
Values
billige vine bliver tit først 1. Protecting the aftappet i DK og ikke på environment chateauet. Bliver transporteret til DK i container læst. Vinen skal blive tappet på chateauet, det udgør en kvalitetsvin. Kvalitetssikring giver sikkerhed og 1. Pleasure retningslinjer, vigtigt mht. til maden og til anledningen
fortæller om ferien i Kroatien, hvor hun var på et vin chateau. Hun synes det er spænende at vide noget om druens og vinstokkens historie. Det hænger sammen med at bevare traditioner og at det er meget interessant og sjovt at vide noget om vinen man drikker. Det gør drikkeoplevelsen meget mere enestående.
Consequences in text form
Hedonism
Universalism
Tradition
Value domain
sjovt og spænnende
bevidst om, at der er mangel på ressourcer. Vindyrkning må ikke udnytte jorden.
for vindyrkning
Value explanation
101
Geographi cal origin
1. Country
Maintain traditions
Take responsibility
Control
Taste
regulering, rammer og 1. Sense of bestemte krav. EU vs. belonging Oversø: EU lande har striktere reglerne mht. økologisk landbrug end f.eks. i Sydamerika. Sikkerhed . En bestemt smag og tradition for dyrkning forbinder man med landet. Klimaet er også afgørende for vinens smag. Mht. land og region har man som forbruger også et ansvar. Om man nu vil understøtte fairtrade eller økologien, tag et valg! Hun foretrækker vin fra Sydafrika, da hun understøtter og føler et ansvar overfor landet og befolkningen. Som forbruger har man indflydelse. Det samme gælder for økologisk vin. Man har også et ansvar for miljøet. Når man køber økologisk vin, kan man formidle det videre til andre. 2. Responsibility Benevolence
Security
dig selv, kombinere fairtrade og økologi, understøtte lande og bestemte slags vine
Traditioner
102
Taste
Taste
Quality
1. full-bodied
2. dry
2. Region
Maintain traditions
Minimise risks
Memories
Experience
Take responsibility To indulge oneself
Being environmentally conscious
mest hvidvin. Giver sikkerhed at fravælge søde vine, da dårlige erfaringer som teenager. Forbinder tør vin med kvalitet. I familien er det en tradition at drikke tør hvidvin, forældrenes indflydelse.
2. Sense of belonging
1. Pleasure
smager godt, kan relateres til 1. Enjoying life land og region. Præference ligger på økologisk rødvin, som skal smage kraftig. Gode erfaringer med fyldige vine, giver sikkerhed at man vælger den rigtige vin. Fyldige vine er forbundet med hygge og forkælelse
Svært at skelne mellem land 1. Responsibility og region. Hvis man ved meget omkring vin, så spiller region også en stor rolle. Også forbundet med druer og traditioner/rammer for hvad en regional vin (f.eks. Bordeaux) skal indeholde, dvs. drueforhold osv. For at leve op til standarten. Mht. land og region har man som forbruger også et ansvar. Om man nu vil understøtte fairtrade eller økologien, tag et valg! J. foretrækker vin fra Sydafrika, da hun understøtter og føler et ansvar overfor landet og befolkningen. Som forbruger har man indflydelse. Det samme gælder for økologisk vin. Man har også et ansvar for miljøet. Når man køber økologisk vin, kan man formidle det videre til andre. 3. Health
Security
Hedonism
Hedonism
Security
Benevolence
103
geografisk: fyldige vine har en bestemt herkomst, personlig: gode erfaringer, traditioner
oplevelse, ideologi og principper bliver afdækket
sikkerhed, regulering af økologien mad & vin, glæde, kvalitet
dig selv, kombinere fairtrade og økologi, understøtte lande og bestemte slags vine
DKP 8
Respondent
1
Gender
Respondent 8
Taste
Age Product attribbute category 2
1. spicy
Attribute
Minimise risks
Experience
Texture
Psychological Consequences
Taste
Functional Consequences
Krydret, fløjlsblød, fyldig: denne kombination er hans favoritsmag. Gode erfaringer med denne kombination. Nysgerrig ift. til købet af nye vine, men stoler på samme smagsnuancer. Er mest til rødvin. Fortrækker en kraftig smag, som gerne må ses i farven af vinen. Vinen skal være struktureret og i god balance mellem de tre smagsretninger. Det giver sikkerhed i udvælgelsesprocessen, fordi man kan lide smagen og bliver for det meste ikke skuffet. Dog er man også nysgerrig til at prøve nye mærker som lover samme smag. Det bliver et slags hobby.
Consequences in text form
2. Curiosity
1. Pleasure
Values
Self-direction
Hedonism
Values domain
104
forbundet med processen i at smage vinen. Der er så meget variation, selvom man kun går efter tre smagspræferencer.
Forbundet med processen i at smage vinen. Der er så meget variation, selvom man kun går efter tre smagspræferencer.
Value explanation
3. full-bodied
2. velvet
Minimise risks
Experience
Texture
Taste
Minimise risks
Taste
Krydret, fløjlsblød, fyldig: denne kombination er hans favoritsmag. Gode erfaringer med denne kombination. Nysgerrig ift. til købet af nye vine, men stole på samme smagsnuancer. Er mest til rødvin. Fortrækker en kraftig smag, som gerne må ses i farven af vinen. Vinen skal være struktureret og i god balance mellem de tre smagsretninger. Det giver sikkerhed i udvælgelsesprocessen, fordi man kan lide smagen og bliver for det meste ikke skuffet. Dog er man også nysgerrig til at prøve nye mærker som lover samme smag. Det bliver et slags hobby.
Krydret, fløjlsblød, fyldig: denne kombination er hans favoritsmag. Gode erfaringer med denne kombination. Nysgerrig ift. til købet af nye vine, men stole på samme smagsnuancer. Er mest til rødvin. Fortrækker en kraftig smag, som gerne må ses i farven af vinen. Vinen skal være struktureret og i god balance mellem de tre smagsretninger. Det giver sikkerhed i udvælgelsesprocessen, fordi man kan lide smagen og bliver for det meste ikke skuffet. Dog er man også nysgerrig til at prøve nye mærker som lover samme smag. Det bliver et slags hobby.
1. Pleasure
2. Curiosity
1. Pleasure
Hedonism
Self-direction
Hedonism
105
forbundet med processen i at smage vinen. Der er så meget variation, selvom man kun går efter tre smagspræferencer.
forbundet med processen i at smage vinen. Der er så meget variation, selvom man kun går efter tre smagspræferencer.
forbundet med processen i at smage vinen. Der er så meget variation, selvom man kun går efter tre smagspræferencer.
Price
1. value for money
Quality
Texture
Contentment
Experience
Spiller en stor rolle generelt 1. Honesty mht. Købet af fødevarer. Værdi for penge betyder også at nyde vinen, at den er af god kvalitet, at det er lagt kærlighed i dyrkningen og produktionen. Og glæden ved nydelsen. Dvs. hele den værdi man får ved drikkelse af vinen er tilfredsstillende. Han synes, at vin er forholdsvis billig i DK sammenlignet med kildevand f.eks. Det synes han ikke er ok, når man ser på, hvor meget arbejde der er involveret i vindyrkning. Værdi for penge både i finansiel og symbolsk forstand. Skruelåg virkede billige for før, men nu, da han har fået forklaringen med hensyn til miljøbeskyttelse synes han, at der er fuldstændig i orden. Værdi er også relateret til etiketten, hvor meget arbejde der står bag ved at præsentere vinen på en god, attraktiv og informativ måde. En der har tænkt produktet færdigt. Prisen kan være en indikator for kvalitet, når man ikke ved ret meget. Men der findes sagtens gode vine, som ikke koster særlig meget. Det kræver at involvere sig i købet af forskellige vine for at finde frem til gode vine til little money.
2. Curiosity
Benevolence
Self-direction
106
forbundet med processen i at smage vinen. Der er så meget variation, selvom man kun går efter tre smagspræferencer. mht. dyrkning og produktionen, minus restdruer og sukker, ingen blandingsprodukter
Label
Taste
Attractiveness
2. Further Back Label Informatio n
3. Overall attractive appearanc e
1. text or design which highlights a regional character
Experience
Associations
Take responsibility
eye catcher og sætter mekanismer i gang, når man screener reolerne i supermarkedet. Især når man vil prøve en ny vin, spiller etiketten en intuitiv rolle. Ved købet af vinen vil man gerne købe hele pakken (livsstilen) og vinen giver udtryk for hvad den vil sige.
vurderingen af vinen, smagsoplysninger, anbefalinger til maden er alle sammen informationer som han stoler på og er af afgørende betydning for købet.
1. Creativity
1. Honesty
Self-direction
Benevolence
Security
Universalism
3. Protecting the environment
fortæller en historie og giver et 1. Sense of romantisk billede, ser en belonging drømmesekvens om traditionel vindyrkning, om at være en del af det. Man køber billedet
Tradition
2. Respect for tradition
værdi for penge, s.o.
107
man misbruger ikke jorden til at dyrke vinen, men tænker på miljøet på samme tid. Vindyrkning har en lang tradition og indebærer mange arbejdsskridte i processen. Vindyrkning er forbundet med omhu og kærlighed, som giver merværdi end hvis han køber vand eller øl. At gøre noget for miljøet er meget vigtigt. Hvis han køber økologisk vin, så tror han også, at han bidrager med noget godt for miljøet. bliver genspejlet af etiketten (område, region, osv.). Han kan lide at vinen fortæller en historie. Etiket, design og tekst giver et helhedsbillede. Derud over signaliserer etiketten, hvor meget umage producenten har gjort. at det som bliver skrevet og trykket på etiketten er oprigtigt også med hensyn til økologi. Vin specifikke informationer er retningslinjer for ham mht. forventet smagen, anbefalinger til maden osv.
DKP 9
Respondent
2
Gender
Respondent 9
Geographi cal origin
Age Product attribute category 1 Taste
Taste
2. Region
Functional Consequences
1. Country
Attribute
Experience
Minimise risks
Loyal commitment
Psychological Consequences
Values
Value domain
man kan bestemme smagen 1. Sense of ved hjælp af regioner, som belonging kan være skuffende og andre gange overraskende. Land og region kan bruges som et filter og hjælper til at indskrænke smagen. Det er en oplevelses- og læreproces, som man kan bruge hele livet på. Da er så meget variation blandt regionerne. Regionen skal udforskes, det er sjovt og en oplevelse
Security
man kan indkredse vinen med 1. True friendship Benevolence hensyn til dens forventede smag. Det hjælper mht. udvælgelse og fravælgelse. Hun foretrækker australske, italienske og californiske vine, som skal være kraftige vine. Franske vine er for tøre. Gode erfaringer med yndlings vine fra Australien, Italien, Californien og er loyal overfor dem, som indebærer genkøb. Det giver en form for sikkerhed og tryghed, da man har en anelse om, hvad man køber og hvad man kan forvente. Udvælgelsesprocessen er også forbundet med nysgerrighed, idet man prøver nye vine af samme karakter eller prøver nye vine, som har fået gode anbefalinger. 2. Pleasure Hedonism
Consequences in text form
108
god oplevelse når man har valgt en god vin, at udforske de forskellige vinregioner er forbundet med glæde genkender sig selv idet man køber, tryghed, selfidentity
man ved, hvad man kan stole på og hvad man køber, trust
Value explanation
Winespecific Informatio n
1. Taste specificati ons
Suitability
Need for information
Experience
bruges som retningslinjer til 1. Curiosity udvælgelse, det er vigtigt, at vinen passer til maden. Stoler på oplysningerne, giver sikkerhed. Bekræfter intuitionen og viden som man har tilegnet sig over tiden, når man sammenligner info på frontetiketten med smagsbeskrivelserne på bag etiketten. Det er sjovt og spænende, man prøver på at genkende smagsbeskrivelserne (træ, blomster etc.), når man drikker og lugter til vinen og giver god diskussioner blandt vennerne. Nogle gange køber man vinen netop pga. sjove og interessante smagsoplysninger. Personlig udvikling omkring smagen, man lærer noget til. Smagsoplysningerne kan være for romantiske med for meget pynt omkring smagen. Troværdighed. Erfaringer med at de 2-3 første ting der bliver beskrevet passer for det meste, resten er opdigtet og til pynt.
2. Pleasure
Self-direction
Hedonism
109
god oplevelse når man har valgt en god vin, at udforske de forskellige vinregioner At få bekræftet det man har læst på etiketten, eller kan genkende smagen (ingredienser) af interessante og sjove smagsoplysninger, når man drikker vinen.
2. grape variety
Minimise risks
Need for information
Quality
Taste
er en form for filtrering igen / retningslinje mht. smagen som er baseret på forbrugerens kendskab til og erfaringer med vin. Blandingsforhold mellem de forskellige druer udgør kvaliteten af vinen. Viden omkring druen minimerer risikoen for at købe et dårligt blandingsprodukt. Druen kan bruges til at bedømme den forventede smag. Druen har en lang dyrkningstradition og giver vinen en bestemt karakter. Dog er vindyrkning også innovative og under konstant udvikling også mht. økologisk vin. Det vækker ens nysgerrighed til at udvide sin horisont.
1. Respect for tradition
Tradition
Druer og vindyrkning generelt har en lang tradition, som skal værdsættes. Det giver en følelse af nostalgi og er af symbolsk karakter
110
Label
1. Text or design which creates an environme ntally friendly image
3. Alcoholic level
Expectations of others
Healthy
Take responsibility
Good conscience
Minimise risks
Take responsibility
Purity
Taste
1. Social recognition
3. Influence
design og tekst skal referer til 1. Clean økologi eller biodynamik mht. tilsætningsstoffer og ømærke. Det giver sikkerhed og skulle lovmæssigt fastlægges og standardiseres, sådan at man stoler på det man køber er oprigtig og ærligt. Yderligere, giver det udtryk for renhed og signaliserer sundhed. Man får god samvittighed ved købet. Ud af til giver det social anerkendelse, da man signaliserer, at man er til økologi. Og man kan formidle det videre til andre, at der findes økologisk vin, som smager godt, er sundere og skåner miljøet. 2. Health
giver oplysninger om smagen. Kraftige vine har et højere alkoholindhold. Når man skal køre bil eller skal cykle, skal man passe på, at man ikke overtræde loven, for ikke at risikere at andre eller en selv kommer til skade. Derfor er alkoholindholdet en retningslinje, som skaber sikkerhed.
Achievement
Security
Security
Power
111
signalisere renhed dvs. mindre tilsætningsstoffer under dyrkning og produktionen, sundhed på andre mennesker i og med at man kan formidle det videre. Man kan udgør en forskel som forbrugere for miljøet og ens sundhed
signalisere renhed dvs. mindre tilsætningsstoffer under dyrkning og produktionen, sundhed
man har tilegnet sig viden omkring vinen, giver status, snobeffekt
DKP 10
Respondent
2
Gender
Respondent 10
Taste
Age Product attribute category 1
Texture
2. velvet
Taste
Compatibility
Functional Consequences
1. pleasant
Attribute
To feel relaxed
Enjoyment
Experience
Psychological Consequences
Values
vinen har en stærkere karakter og struktur, den er stadigvæk behagelig, rund og harmonisk. Fløjlsblød bliver forbundet med rødvin og bliver købt mest om vinteren, da rødvin giver varme og skaber en hyggelig og harmonisk stemning derhjemme. (stearinlys, en god bog, et glas rødvin til)
1. Inner harmony
Vin nydes ikke i kombination 1. Enjoying life med mad. Vinen bliver drukket i selskab, når man mødes med venner eller kæresten. Derfor skal vinen være behageligt at drikke over lang tid og i større mængder. Den selskabelige situation er i fokus, ikke vinen, den til gengæld bidrager til at skabe god atmosfære.
Consequences in text form
Universalism
Hedonism
Value domain
at nyde et glas vin for sig selv, nyde smagen, og læse en bog kreerer glæde og harmoni.
forkælelse, skaber noget som gør hende glad, at være i selskab
Value explanation
112
Price
1. low
3. dry
Experience
Contentment
Quality
To feel relaxed
Memories
Within the budget
Suitability
1. Pleasure
3. Independence
er på studenterbudget, derfor 1. Responsibility er prisen afgørende for købet. Hun prøver at finde gode økologiske vine på tilbud og køber dem så i større mængder (f.eks. 6 flasker på en gang). Det er en fantastisk oplevelse at lave ”a good bargain” i supermarkedet, når man har købt kvalitetsvin til en lav pris, og hvis den er økologisk oven i købet, så er det et yderligere plus. Pris er en indikator for kvalitet for, da hun ikke er den store vinkender. Men efterhånden har hun fundet gode økologiske vine i lav pris segmentet, som hun er tilfreds med. 2. Humble
tørre vine bliver forbundet mest med hvidvin og bliver foretrukket om sommeren, fordi vinen skal være let, frisk og liflig. Det understreger fornemmelsen af sommeren og giver et billede af sol, grill hygge, være udenfor. Situationen skaber glæde og overskud.
Self-direction
Tradition
Benevolence
Hedonism
at kombinere budgettet med at nyde vin med god samvittighed, lidt er nok jeg har brug for at klare sig selv med de midler man har og stadigvæk kunne forkæle sig en gang imellem
at kombinere budgettet med at nyde vin med god samvittighed
113
det er en fornøjelse at smage forskellige vine og konsekvenserne forbundet med forbruget.
Label
Quality
2. overall attractive appearanc e
Attractiveness
Healthy
1. Text or design which creates an environme ntally friendly image
Maintain traditions
Being environmentally conscious Take responsibility to indulge oneself
Good conscience
formidler kvalitet, luksus, at man køber en lækker ting. Label skal være minimalistisk og stilrent, ikke for meget info på frontsiden. Label må gerne virke klassisk/gammeldags, sådan, at man forbinder vinen med vinproducentens traditioner og dygtighed. Dog må det ikke går over i kitsch (geografiske billeder osv.), idet label prøver på en romantisk historie.
god samvittighed, når man køber ø-vin og et miljøvenlig image formidler miljøbeskyttelse og helsebevidsthed. Et miljøvenligt image er en del af helhedspakken idet label appellerer til miljøbeskyttelse og for virker det som en ”eye catcher”. Købet giver en følelse at man som forbruger kan gøre en forskel med det man køber.
1. Honesty
1. Protecting the environment
Benevolence
Universalism
man kan stole på producenten, at det man køber overholder det producenten lover
114
ansvarsbevidsthed overfor miljøet, alle skulle være en del af det og bidrager til det
DKP 11
Respondent
2
Gender
Respondent 11
Geographi cal origin
Age Product attribute category 1
1. Country
Attribute
Expectations of others
Minimise risks
Suitability
Psychological Consequences
Taste
Functional Consequences
Values
Forbinder med landet en 1. Self-respect bestemt smag. Man tager maden med i betragtning, når man køber vin og da er det tit afhængig af, hvor vinen kommer fra. Det skal passe til maden. Det er vigtigt, når man får gæster, at de kan lide vinen og at gæsterne værdsætter, at man har ydet en indsats, at blive set som en god vært, at man med omtanke har planlagt aftenen godt. Når man har haft gode erfaringer med vinen fra et bestemt land, så køber man fra samme land igen, det giver sikkerhed ved udvælgelsen og hjælper med at orientere sig i supermarkedet. Vin fra forskellige lande har også forskellige kvalitetsstandarter. Rangorden ift. prestige, bedre kvalitet i nogle lande end andre. Top Argentina, Flop Californien 2. Choosing your own goals
Consequences in text form
Self-direction
Achievement
Value domain
man tager selv stilling til det land man køber fra, man kan vælge selvstændig
115
bestemt kvalitet fra specifikke lande, som stemmer overens med min kvalitetsstandart
Value explanation
1. Winemake r's name
1. full-bodied
Brand Name
Smag
Taste
Quality
Quality
Need for information
Loyal commitment
1. An exciting life
Stimulation
Self-direction
3. Freedom
Vinen må ikke være vandet. Smagen skal kunne mærkes. Også i små mængder, skal man få en smagsoplevelse i munden. En fyldig vin føles ofte som bedre kvalitet, da den har været gennem en lang og god proces og vinen fik lov til at danne sin egen karakter. tænker at fyldige vine er lidt ældre, da den virker mere afrundet i smagen
Achievement
Benevolence
Universalism
Forbinder det med et bestemt 1. Loyalty vinhus. Bedre kvalitet, når vinen kommer fra en bestemt vinavler, fordi man har gode erfaringer med en bestemt vinavler. Det er mest vigtigt, når man køber vin i en vinbutik. Da kan man få anbefalinger fra personalet og tit fortæller de lidt om vinavleren. Og det giver automatisk vinen en højere kvalitet. Det giver motivation til at søge flere vine fra samme vinavleren. Det er interessant, og man får mere viden omkring vin. I supermarkeder er det mere ved tilfælde, at man tager vinavleren med i betragtning. 2. Influence
3. Broad-minded
116
man støtter vinavleren, også økonomisk, vinavleren forsvinder ikke, da jeg påvirker efterspørgslen frit at vælge mellem produkter fra vinavleren uden at bekymre sig, da man kender vinhuset favorit smager er altid spændende at opleve
Åbenhed overfor et land, det er en fundamental værdi når man har god erfaringer med vinen fra en vinavler, så køber man igen
3. spicy
2. velvet
Taste
Suitability
Quality
Texture
Quality
Experience
To indulge oneself
en krydret vin er en kompleks vin, da der er mange aromaer og nuancer. Hun er ikke god til at identificere dem, men det er spændende. En harmonisk sammensætning af forskellige aromaer gør vinen mere spændende og giver en smagsoplevelse. Forbinder krydret med rødvin. Krydret vin passer bedst til maden, som hun fortrinsvis laver.
1. Curiosity
At den kan mærkes på 1. Protecting the tungen, er en indikator for environment kvalitet. En god struktur forudsætter, at vinen er lavet på en seriøs måde. Den ligger også prismæssig højere end de vine til 40 kr. Fløjlsblød er en luksusaspekt til specielle anledninger.
Self-direction
Universalism
117
når man har købt en vin der smager rigtig godt, så bliver man mere interesseret i selve vinene og efterforsker lidt dybere.
mht. bearbejdelsesprocessen: vinen er rigtig godt omhandlet. Druerne er valgt med omhu og omtanke. Gode råvarer kan mærkes på smagen
Overall attractive appearance nr:4 sub:36%
Attractiveness nr:4 sub:36%
Velvet nr:4 sub:36%
Texture nr:6 sub:55%
Being environmentally conscious nr:4 sub:36%
Healthy nr:3 sub:27%
Value for money nr:5 sub:45%
Quality nr:17 sub:91%
Take responsibility nr:9 sub:55%
Responsibility nr:6 sub:45%
Taste specifications nr:4 sub:36%
Fullbodied nr:5 sub:45%
To indulge oneself nr:5 sub:45%
Suitability nr:16 sub:73%
Respect for traditions nr:6 sub:55%
Appendix 25: HVM all Danish respondents cut-off 3
Grape variety nr:5 sub:45%
Taste nr:30 sub:100%
Minimise risks nr:15 sub:64%
Enjoying life nr:8 sub:55%
Region nr:6 sub:55%
Country nr:8 sub:73%
Control nr:5 sub:45%
Experience nr:17 sub:73%
Curiosity nr:9 sub:55%
Honesty nr:8 sub:55%
Spicy nr:3 sub:27%
Pleasure nr:17 sub:73%
118
Dry nr:4 sub:36%
Text or design create environmental friendly image nr:2 sub:40%
Healthy nr:2 sub:40%
Good conscience nr:2 sub:40%
Region nr:3 sub:60%
Need for information nr:4 sub:60%
Country nr:4 sub:80%
Suitability nr:7 sub:100%
Taste specifications nr:3 sub:60%
Control nr:2 sub:40%
Enjoying life nr:3 sub:60%
Velvet nr:2 sub:40%
Minimise risks nr:10 sub:80%
Influence nr:3 sub:40%
Texture nr:2 sub:40%
Experience nr:7 sub:80%
Curiosity nr:2 sub:40%
Quality nr:10 sub:100%
Respect for traditions nr:2 sub:40%
Taste nr:13 sub:100%
To indulge oneself nr:3 sub:60%
Maintain traditions nr:4 sub:40%
Grape variety nr:3 sub:60%
Sense of belonging nr:3 sub:40%
Full-bodied nr:2 sub:40%
Being environmentally conscious nr:2 sub:40%
Take responsibility nr:5 sub:60%
Responsibility nr:3 sub:40%
Protecting the environment nr:3 sub:60%
Appendix 26: HVM all Danish female respondents cut-off 2
Dry nr:2 sub:40%
Memories nr:2 sub:40%
Pleasure nr:5 sub:60%
119
Overall attractive appearance nr:3 sub:50%
Attractiveness nr:3 sub:50%
Respect for traditions nr:4 sub:67%
Value for money nr:4 sub:67%
Quality nr:7 sub:83%
Take responsibility nr:4 sub:50%
Responsibility nr:3 sub:50%
Suitability nr:9 sub:50%
Full-bodied nr:3 sub:50%
Region nr:3 sub:50%
Country nr:4 sub:67%
Control nr:3 sub:50%
Pleasure nr:12 sub:83%
To indulge oneself nr:2 sub:33%
Taste nr:17 sub:100%
Honesty nr:7 sub:83%
Minimise risks nr:5 sub:50%
Spicy nr:2 sub:33%
Experience nr:10 sub:67%
Enjoying life nr:5 sub:50%
Appendix 27: HVM all Danish male respondents cut-off 2
Need for information nr:2 sub:33%
Velvet nr:2 sub:33%
Texture nr:4 sub:67%
Curiosity nr:7 sub:67%
Trust nr:2 sub:17%
Loyal commitment nr:2 sub:17%
120
Overall attractive appearance nr:2 sub:33%
Attractiveness nr:2 sub:33%
Maintain traditions nr:5 sub:50%
Honesty nr:2 sub:33%
Control nr:2 sub:33%
Quality nr:10 sub:83%
Grape variety nr:3 sub:50%
Need for information nr:4 sub:50%
Sense of belonging nr:3 sub:33%
Respect for traditions nr:3 sub:50%
Region nr:3 sub:50%
To indulge oneself nr:3 sub:50%
Minimise risks nr:10 sub:67%
Country nr:4 sub:67%
Full-bodied nr:3 sub:50%
Suitability nr:7 sub:83%
Taste specifications nr:3 sub:50%
Being environmentally conscious nr:3 sub:50%
Pleasure nr:7 sub:67%
Taste nr:16 sub:100%
Influence nr:3 sub:33%
Protecting the environment nr:4 sub:67%
Appendix 28: HVM all younger Danish respondents cut-off 2
Text or design create environmental friendly image nr:2 sub:33%
Healthy nr:2 sub:33%
Good conscience nr:2 sub:33%
Take responsibility nr:5 sub:50%
Responsibility nr:3 sub:33%
Dry nr:3 sub:50%
Experience nr:7 sub:67%
Curiosity nr:3 sub:50%
Velvet nr:2 sub:33%
Texture nr:3 sub:50%
Memories nr:2 sub:33%
Enjoying life nr:3 sub:50%
121
Overall attractive appearance nr:2 sub:40%
Attractiveness nr:2 sub:40%
Trust nr:2 sub:20%
Loyal commitment nr:2 sub:20%
Respect for traditions nr:3 sub:60%
Value for money nr:3 sub:60%
Quality nr:7 sub:100%
Take responsibility nr:4 sub:60%
Spicy nr:2 sub:40%
Responsibility nr:3 sub:60%
Suitability nr:9 sub:60%
Experience nr:10 sub:80%
Curiosity nr:6 sub:60%
Region nr:3 sub:60%
Minimise risks nr:5 sub:60%
Pleasure nr:10 sub:80%
Appendix 29: HVM all older Danish respondents cut-off 2
To indulge oneself nr:2 sub:40%
Control nr:3 sub:60%
Country nr:4 sub:80%
Taste nr:14 sub:100%
Enjoying life nr:5 sub:60%
Honesty nr:6 sub:80%
Velvet nr:2 sub:40%
Texture nr:3 sub:60%
Need for information nr:2 sub:40%
122
Organic label nr:3 sub:27%
Control nr:4 sub:27%
Being environmentally conscious nr:7 sub:45%
Protecting the environment nr:5 sub:27%
Dry nr:6 sub:55%
Compatibility nr:7 sub:36%
Loyal commitment nr:5 sub:27%
Responsibility nr:4 sub:36%
Unity with nature nr:7 sub:55%
Grape variety nr:3 sub:27%
Taste nr:25 sub:100%
Inner harmony nr:4 sub:27%
Appendix 30: HVM all German respondents cut-off 3
Quality nr:13 sub:73%
Quality classifications nr:3 sub:27%
Minimise risks nr:10 sub:73%
Pleasure nr:10 sub:64%
Value for money nr:6 sub:55%
Suitability nr:7 sub:45%
Enjoyment nr:5 sub:18%
Health nr:8 sub:45%
Within the budget nr:5 sub:45%
Enjoying life nr:13 sub:73%
123
Text or design create environmental friendly image nr:2 sub:25%
Attractiveness nr:4 sub:38%
Being environmentally conscious nr:5 sub:50%
Healthy nr:3 sub:25%
Protecting the environment nr:3 sub:25%
Responsibility nr:4 sub:50%
Organic label nr:3 sub:38%
Control nr:4 sub:38%
Compatibility nr:4 sub:38%
Health nr:6 sub:38%
Pleasure nr:8 sub:63%
Pleasant nr:3 sub:38%
Enjoyment nr:3 sub:13%
Freedom nr:3 sub:38%
Dry nr:5 sub:63 %
Taste nr:21 sub:100%
Region nr:2 sub:25%
Minimise risks nr:7 sub:75%
Curiosity nr:2 sub:25%
Appendix 31: HVM all German female respondents cut-off 2
Full-bodied nr:3 sub:38%
Suitability nr:3 sub:38%
Inner harmony nr:3 sub:25%
Velvet nr:3 sub:38%
Quality classifications nr:2 sub:25%
Quality nr:9 sub:63%
Loyal commitment nr:2 sub:13%
Associations nr:2 sub:25%
Value for money nr:4 sub:50%
Within the budget nr:3 sub:38%
Unity with nature nr:6 sub:63%
Enjoying life nr:9 sub:75%
124
Being environmentally conscious nr:2 sub:33%
Protecting the environment nr:2 sub:33%
Grape variety nr:2 sub:67%
Taste nr:4 sub:100% Quality nr:4 sub:100%
Minimise risks nr:3 sub:67%
Choosing your own goals nr:3 sub:33%
Appendix 32: HVM all German male respondents cut-off 2
Loyal commitment nr:3 sub:67%
Sense of belonging nr:2 sub:33%
Suitability nr:4 sub:67%
Enjoyment nr:2 sub:33%
Enjoying life nr:4 sub:67%
Value for money nr:2 sub:67%
Within the budget nr:2 sub:67%
125
Being environmentally conscious nr:3 sub:40%
Protecting the environment nr:3 sub:40%
Full-bodied nr:3 sub:60%
Quality nr:5 sub:60%
Minimise risks nr:4 sub:80%
Health nr:2 sub:20%
Taste nr:14 sub:100%
Dry nr:3 sub:60%
Loyalty nr:2 sub:40%
Loyal commitment nr:4 sub:40%
Grape variety nr:2 sub:40%
Sense of belonging nr:2 sub:20%
Freedom nr:3 sub:60%
Appendix 33: HVM all younger German respondents cut-off 2
Enjoyment nr:5 sub:40%
Pleasure nr:7 sub:80%
Value for money nr:4 sub:80%
Suitability nr:5 sub:60%
Within the budget nr:3 sub:60%
Healthy nr:2 sub:20%
Enjoying life nr:8 sub:80%
126
Organic label nr:2 sub:33%
Control nr:2 sub:33%
Being environmentally conscious nr:4 sub:50%
Protecting the environment nr:2 sub:17%
Region nr:2 sub:33%
Responsibility nr:2 sub:33%
Taste specifications nr:2 sub:33%
Taste nr:11 sub:100%
Choosing your own goals nr:3 sub:17%
Dry nr:3 sub:50%
Associations nr:2 sub:33%
Enjoying life nr:5 sub:67%
Appendix 34: HVM all older German respondents cut-off 2
Velvet nr:2 sub:33%
Compatibility nr:6 sub:50%
Inner harmony nr:4 sub:50%
Quality classifications nr:2 sub:33%
Quality nr:8 sub:83%
Minimise risks nr:6 sub:67%
Unity with nature nr:6 sub:83%
Value for money nr:2 sub:33%
Within the budget nr:2 sub:33%
Attractiveness nr:3 sub:50%
Health nr:6 sub:67%
127
RESPONSIBILITY (Benevolence Value Domain)
ENJOYING LIFE (Hedonism Value Domain)
Appendix 36: Country-specific dominant orientations
Interrelation between Health & environment “Not only being responsible for yourself and your own health but also for the environment. I do not harm myself and the environment due to my consumption.”
Ethical consumption · Environmental concern “make a difference” “When going shopping, one should consider what, why and where you buy as well as thinking about the consequences for yourself and for others. Although you might have the feeling that you alone cannot make a difference, you can at least try to contribute through your shopping.”
Socializing & Relaxation “In general, it means contentment, enjoyment associated with wine as well as socializing with others. But it means to calm down, too.”
Indulgence “Now I can allow myself more than in the past where you needed to get along with a limited budget.”
Indulgence & Relaxation “The consumption of wine in the evening is something special. You are glad that the work is done, the children went to bed and that you have time to indulge yourself.”
Financial responsibility & Good conscience “To combine your budget and the consumption of wine with having good conscience.”
128
· Responsibility for faceless other (political dimension) “Responsible for what you buy in due consideration of political circumstances.”
Ethical consumption · Personal environment: responsibility for others within direct contact “It is an alcoholic product; you are responsible for yourself and for your guests.”
Hobby & Wine Tourism “Wine is a multisided hobby and you want to travel to the countries where the wine comes from.”
Socializing “You create something that makes you happy as well as while socializing.”
Indulgence “Expensive wines. To indulge oneself and it is worth it.”
Consumption in line with ideology “Experience, ideology and principles are covered.”
Excitement “It is exciting to open the wine after purchase.”
Socializing “The whole family consists of wine enthusiasts. It is a hobby that you share and you gather about.”
PLEASURE (Hedonism Value Domain)
Socializing „It is similar to the value enjoying life but more in connection with something special, e.g. special occasions like birthdays.”
Denmark Joy of identifying a great deal “To discover wines where the price-performance ratio is alright.”
Common Dominant Orientations
Indulgence “To look forward to wine of high quality.”
Germany
Appendix 35: Common dominant orientations
Price formation - no rip-off “Honesty with regard to price creation.”
Be at peace/in harmony “When I know where the wine comes from and I know the region, I can be somewhat present, although only imagination-wise. This gives me the feeling of being in a certain harmony with the nature surrounding me.”
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT (Universalism Value Domain) 2 CO reduction “Information about the cultivation delivers indirectly information about transport distance and about the environmental impact.” Naturalness “I don‘t want wine to be produced like GM groceries, but produced, processed and marketed like natural groceries.”
Interrelation between environment & my own health “For me, wine has something to with nativeness and it is always in connection with health. I want to be sure that the wine, its content as well as its packaging, does not produce any polluting substances which in turn are harmful for my health.”
HEALTH (Security Value Domain) Harmless for my health “If I spend money on a good wine, the quality has to be right. The wine is not allowed to be watered, thus harmless for your health; especially, when you consume wine regularly”.
In unison with ideals of ethical consumption “I would consider it as odd to purchase organic products in glass bottles or other packaging that is not supporting the sustainability thought of the actual product.”
HONESTY (Benevolence Value Domain) Reliability / Trustworthiness Cultivation “Honesty with regard to cultivation and processing. No rest grapes and sugar, no mixed products.”
UNITY WITH NATURE (Universalism Value Domain) Balance of self & environment “Moderate and calmness. It gives me the feeling that the product is alright. Not too expensive, not too cheap. The quality is right and it is environmentally friendly. I am in unity with myself and with nature.”
129
Feeling of nostalgia “Grapes and wine making has a long tradition that has to be appreciated. Wine gives a feeling of nostalgia and it has a symbolic character.”
Appreciation of classic design “The label should communicate traditions and knowledge underlying wine making”
RESPECT FOR TRADITIONS (Tradition Value Domain) Appreciation of wine making traditions In accordance with the environment “You don’t abuse the soil when producing wine but think about the environment at the same time. Wine making has a long tradition and incorporates many processes. Wine making is linked with care. It adds more value for than buying water or beer.”
Communication – no false pretences “The label does not try to trick me”.
Denmark
Germany
Country-specific Dominant Orientations
-
-
-
-
-
Prerequisite for pleasure & relaxation
Taste most important à “organic” subordinate
Overall attractive appearance of label à kick start taste associations
“I rely on what I know” à loyal
Knowledge Geographical Knowledge - Terrain - Climate - Conditions of cultivation à Taste expectations/estimations
Taste indicators Grape variety Taste specifications Quality classifications Vineyard Packaging Country - Personal experiences on/off location - Associations, pictures in mind Region - Personal experiences on/off location - Associations, pictures in mind Knowledge Narrow down the selection/range Determine taste patterns - Country - Region - Cultivation location Ability to taste quality/connection pricequality-taste
Taste indicators Grape variety Taste specifications Region Country Cultivation Climate
Personal preferences Specific Unspecific - Limited knowledge, vocabulary, understanding of nuances As response to disliking other tastes
Catchwords DK
Taste most important à “organic” subordinate
Personal experiences as source of assurance “I rely on the same taste” à loyal
-
-
-
-
-
-
Central Common Consequence Taste
Personal preferences Specific Unspecific - Limited knowledge, vocabulary, understanding of nuances As response to disliking other tastes
Catchwords GER
Appendix 37: Common central consequences
Quality indicators Region (personal experience on/off location) Organic label Taste Quality classifications ISO/HACCP Alcoholic level Wine maker
Quality indicator Packaging (glass bottle) - Distaste for alternative packaging “Classy product deserves classy packaging”
Quality indicator Price (in dependence of knowledge) - Little knowledge: low priced wine = poor quality - High price à not automatic sign of high - Quality: low priced does not necessarily mean cheap. can be good - Important: Fit between price & quality - If high quality, willing to pay more - Matter of knowledge: able to identify good bargain? - Get as much as possible for good price
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Catchwords DK
130
Quality indicator Price (in dependence of knowledge) Little knowledge: low priced wine = poor quality Country - Different wage levels, e.g. EU vs. South America - Snob effect Trial & error (when searching for well priced wines) Value for money: 2 dimensions - Financial value - Symbolic value - Enjoyment of consumption - Love, passion, hard work put into production Reasonable pricing - Appreciation of hard work & wine making traditions - Quality classifications Willingness to pay more for quality
Quality indicator Overall attractive appearance of label Eye-catcher Direct communication Balance between attractiveness & information Minimalism (no nonsense/ballyhoo) Classical & old fashion
Quality indicators Taste Country (different quality standards) Grape variety Wine maker (knowledge as added value to consumption) Texture ( “feel the wine”) Bottler (at point of origin)
Central Common Consequence Quality
Quality indicator Overall attractive appearance of label - Eye catcher à kick start quality associations “this could be a good one”
-
-
Catchwords GER
-
-
Organic label / ISO/HACCP Reduce physical risks Protection from “black sheep” No harmful additives or flavour enhancers threatening own health
Food recommendations Reduce functional risks Assurance that wine suits the meal
-
-
-
-
-
Reliance on personal experience Reduce functional and physical risks Rely on what you know Reduce risk of disappointment Taste: avoid repurchase due to bad memories Knowledge Reduce functional risks Information about grape variety and mixing proportion - Reduce risk to buy product of inferior quality Bottler: point of destination bottling = inferior quality Country: Different countries different quality standards Expectations of others Reduce social risks
Central Common Catchwords DK Consequence Minimise risks Financial risks - Functional risks - Physical risks Financial risks - Functional risks - Physical risks Social risks Price Price - Medium price segment - Reduce financial and functional risks - Reduce financial and functional risks - Scepticism low priced wine segment - Low priced wines = inferior quality - Low priced wines = inferior quality - Risk of disappointment higher the more - Organic wines = expensive wines expensive the wine - Take time to read recommendations and compare online ISO/HACCP / Quality classifications - Reduce functional risks Quality classifications - Assurance that wines tastes good/is of high - Reduce financial and functional risks quality - Assurance that correct price-performance ratio - Assurance that wine is of high quality Taste specifications - Reduce functional risks Taste specifications - Assurance that wine fits expectations - Reduce functional risks - Assurance that wine fits expectations Alcoholic level Alcoholic level - Reduce functional risks - Reduce social and physical risks - Taste/Quality assurance - Important guide line - Responsibility for self and others - Not to perpetrate the law (drink and drive)
Catchwords GER
Taste Specifications Assurance whether perfect fit
Suit Occasion Wine taken for itself In combinations with food Expectations of others when used as a gift Special occasions, special wines (more expensive) are required Seasonal suitability
Country Match between food and wine (Italian food with Italian wine)
Deselect products perceived as cause/potential source of physical discomfort
131
Larger quantities “When the wine is consumed for itself, it needs to be pleasant so I can drink more over a longer period of time”
Larger quantities “The wine needs to be pleasant, so once in a while I can drink larger quantities”
Compatibility
-
-
-
-
-
Catchwords DK
Personal tolerance/compatibility
Personal Preferences Occasion determine suitability
Modesty Indulgence food, wine is not a prestige tool, for image reasons to impress others
Not get wasted / drink in moderation
Suit Occasion Price - Special occasion, more willing to buy expensive wines
Food Recommendations Needs to go well with wine
Central Common Consequence Suitability
Personal tolerance/compatibility
-
-
-
-
Catchwords GER
Information about cultivation Important that organic
“Organic” subordinate in case of wine Generally high affinity for organic groceries but with wine “organic” subordinate
-
-
Packaging Recycled glass bottle: Protecting the environment Product is ecological all around: content and packaging à holistic
Organic label Assurance that wine is actually organic Two way security: 1. Feeling that something produced and processed in environmentally friendly manner 2. Inward focus: own health à assurance that no harmful additives or flavour enhancers ingested
Catchwords DK
Support organic cultivation Less use of pesticides and additives
Text or design creates environmentally friendly image Good conscience Communicates environmentally friendly image and health consciousness Part of total package Appeals to own ideals of environmental protection Eye-catcher
Personal health Experience less headache
Feel good about being able to make difference
-
-
-
-
Country & Region - In some countries/regions stricter regulations/standards for organic cultivation than others - Responsibility as a consumer à supporting countries àcommunicate and pass it on
-
“Organic” subordinate in case of wine - Taste most important - BUT environmental values, doing good for environment
Being environmentally conscious
Central Common Consequence
Information about region - To buy wines from far away regions at odds with environmental thinking à high CO2 Food print à need to reduce by regional/national
-
-
Catchwords GER
Occasion Within budget of given occasion
Frugality as general principle “If the quality is right and it is a special occasion, it is ok to buy more expensive wines” -
-
Catchwords DK
132
Lack of knowledge Expensive wines à no-win situation: cannot taste the difference
Against snob effect
Small budget Hunt for good bargains
Within the budget
Central Common Consequence
“Wine is important but not at any cost”
-
-
Small budget
Catchwords GER
Appendix 38: Denmark specific central consequences Denmark specific consequence: Experience Fun/thrill of bargain hunt - Art of finding good bargains Family game - Guess the origin based on taste Consumption experience in special locations (e.g. wine bar) Exciting & fun - Can taste specifications be confirmed? - Fun of learning something new - Trying something new - Sometimes risky business à surprising & exciting but sometimes also disappointing - Hobby Knowledge - Added value to consumption “Hygge” Purchase lifestyle/image - Can wine live up to what is communicated? Socializing - Wine can be ground for discussions Confirmation of intuition and knowledge - Does information on bottle match with what you actually taste?
133
Appendix 39: Danish socio-demographic analysis Danish aggregated Gender * Survey type Crosstabulation Survey type Personal DK Gender
Male
female
Total
Count
Online DK
Total
6
9
15
% within Gender
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
% within Survey type
54,5%
52,9%
53,6%
5
8
13
% within Gender
38,5%
61,5%
100,0%
% within Survey type
45,5%
47,1%
46,4%
11
17
28
39,3%
60,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Gender % within Survey type
Age * Survey type Crosstabulation Survey type Personal DK Age
<35
>35
Total
Count
Online DK
Total
6
15
21
% within Age
28,6%
71,4%
100,0%
% within Survey type
54,5%
88,2%
75,0%
5
2
7
% within Age
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
% within Survey type
45,5%
11,8%
25,0%
11
17
28
39,3%
60,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Age % within Survey type
Number of children in household Cumulative Frequency Valid
no children under 18
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
24
85,7
85,7
85,7
1 child
3
10,7
10,7
96,4
4 children
1
3,6
3,6
100,0
28
100,0
100,0
Total
134
Education level * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Education level Secondary school
Count
2
% within Gender
13,3%
,0%
7,1%
1
2
3
entrance qualification or similar
% within Education level % within Gender
Total
0
,0% 100,0%
Count
Other
2
Total
% within Education level 100,0%
University-entrance diploma, higher education
Academic degree
female
Count
33,3%
66,7% 100,0%
6,7%
15,4%
10,7%
11
11
22
% within Education level
50,0%
50,0% 100,0%
% within Gender
73,3%
84,6%
78,6%
1
0
1
Count
% within Education level 100,0%
,0% 100,0%
% within Gender
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
15
13
28
Count % within Education level % within Gender
53,6%
46,4% 100,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
135
Household's monthly relative net-income * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Household's
low income
Count
monthly relative net-
% within Household's monthly
income
relative net-income % within Gender lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly
female
Total
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
6,7%
23,1%
14,3%
3
7
10
30,0%
70,0%
100,0%
20,0%
53,8%
35,7%
5
2
7
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
33,3%
15,4%
25,0%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
13,3%
7,7%
10,7%
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
10,7%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Gender middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
not specified
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
136
Household's monthly relative net-income * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Household's
low income
Count
monthly relative
% within Household's monthly
net-income
relative net-income % within Age lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly
>35
Total
4
0
4
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
19,0%
,0%
14,3%
8
2
10
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
38,1%
28,6%
35,7%
5
2
7
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
23,8%
28,6%
25,0%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
4,8%
28,6%
10,7%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
9,5%
14,3%
10,7%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Age middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
not specified
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
137
Respondent's residence Cumulative Frequency Valid
In a large city
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
24
85,7
85,7
85,7
In a suburb
1
3,6
3,6
89,3
In a provincial town
1
3,6
3,6
92,9
In a village
1
3,6
3,6
96,4
In a cottage or house in the
1
3,6
3,6
100,0
28
100,0
100,0
countryside Total
Danish personal Household's monthly relative net-income * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Household's
low income
Count
monthly relative net-
% within Household's monthly
income
relative net-income % within Gender lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly
female
Total
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
relative net-income % within Gender middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
138
Total
Count % within Household's monthly
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
>35
Total
relative net-income % within Gender
Household's monthly relative net-income * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Household's monthly
low income
relative net-income
Count % within Household's monthly
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
50,0%
,0%
27,3%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Age lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
139
Appendix 40: German socio-demographic analysis German aggregated Gender * Survey type Crosstabulation Survey type Personal GER Gender
Male
Count
29
32
9,4%
90,6%
100,0%
27,3%
39,7%
38,1%
8
44
52
% within Gender
15,4%
84,6%
100,0%
% within Survey type
72,7%
60,3%
61,9%
11
73
84
13,1%
86,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Survey type
Total
Total
3
% within Gender
female
Online GER
Count
Count % within Gender % within Survey type
Age * Survey type Crosstabulation Survey type Personal GER Age
<35
Count
58
63
7,9%
92,1%
100,0%
45,5%
79,5%
75,0%
6
15
21
% within Age
28,6%
71,4%
100,0%
% within Survey type
54,5%
20,5%
25,0%
11
73
84
13,1%
86,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Survey type
Total
Total
5
% within Age
>35
Online GER
Count
Count % within Age % within Survey type
Number of children in household Cumulative Frequency Valid
no children under 18
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
76
90,5
90,5
90,5
1 child
4
4,8
4,8
95,2
2 children
2
2,4
2,4
97,6
3 children
2
2,4
2,4
100,0
84
100,0
100,0
Total
140
Education level * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Education level
still attending school
Elementary school
Count
1
1
% within Education level
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,1%
,0%
1,2%
0
1
1
% within Education level
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,1%
,0%
1,2%
13
13
26
Count
% within Gender Count
Secondary school without
Count
university-entrance diploma
% within Education level % within Gender
Total
Total
0
% within Education level
Secondary school
female
University-entrance diploma,
Count
higher education entrance
% within Education level
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
qualification or similar
% within Gender
40,6%
25,0%
31,0%
Academic degree
Count
17
37
54
% within Education level
31,5%
68,5%
100,0%
% within Gender
53,1%
71,2%
64,3%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count % within Education level % within Gender
141
Household's monthly relative net-income * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Household's monthly
low income
relative net-income
Count % within Household's monthly
female
Total
5
10
15
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
15,6%
19,2%
17,9%
6
17
23
26,1%
73,9%
100,0%
18,8%
32,7%
27,4%
5
8
13
38,5%
61,5%
100,0%
15,6%
15,4%
15,5%
14
12
26
53,8%
46,2%
100,0%
43,8%
23,1%
31,0%
0
2
2
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
3,8%
2,4%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
6,3%
5,8%
6,0%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Gender lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
not specified
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
142
Household's monthly relative net-income * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Household's
low income
Count
monthly relative net-
% within Household's monthly
income
relative net-income % within Age lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly
>35
Total
14
1
15
93,3%
6,7%
100,0%
22,2%
4,8%
17,9%
20
3
23
87,0%
13,0%
100,0%
31,7%
14,3%
27,4%
11
2
13
84,6%
15,4%
100,0%
17,5%
9,5%
15,5%
14
12
26
53,8%
46,2%
100,0%
22,2%
57,1%
31,0%
0
2
2
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
9,5%
2,4%
4
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
6,3%
4,8%
6,0%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Age middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
not specified
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
143
Respondent's residence Cumulative Frequency Valid
In a large city
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
58
69,0
69,0
69,0
5
6,0
6,0
75,0
15
17,9
17,9
92,9
In a village
3
3,6
3,6
96,4
In a cottage or house in the
3
3,6
3,6
100,0
84
100,0
100,0
In a suburb In a provincial town
countryside Total
German personal Household's monthly relative net-income * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Household's
low income
Count
monthly relative net-
% within Household's monthly
income
relative net-income % within Gender lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly
female
Total
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
33,3%
25,0%
27,3%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
9,1%
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
33,3%
37,5%
36,4%
0
2
2
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
25,0%
18,2%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Gender middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Gender
144
Household's monthly relative net-income * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Household's
low income
Count
monthly relative net-
% within Household's monthly
income
relative net-income % within Age lower middle income
Count % within Household's monthly
>35
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
60,0%
,0%
27,3%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
20,0%
50,0%
36,4%
0
2
2
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
33,3%
18,2%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
relative net-income % within Age middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
higher middle income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
high income
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
Total
Count % within Household's monthly relative net-income % within Age
145
Appendix 41: Danish involvement in organic wine Danish aggregated Involvement * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Involvement
28
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
3
1
4
% within Involvement
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
20,0%
7,7%
14,3%
2
1
3
% within Involvement
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
13,3%
7,7%
10,7%
2
3
5
% within Involvement
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
13,3%
23,1%
17,9%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
7,7%
3,6%
0
2
2
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
15,4%
7,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
7,7%
3,6%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
6,7%
15,4%
10,7%
1
2
3
% within Gender Count % within Involvement % within Gender 38
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
39
42
43
44
47
48
49
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
52
Total
1
% within Involvement
35
Female
Count
146
% within Involvement % within Gender 53
% within Gender
100,0%
6,7%
15,4%
10,7%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
13,3%
,0%
7,1%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
Total
66,7%
Count % within Involvement
54
33,3%
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
Involvement * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Involvement
28
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
2
2
4
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
9,5%
28,6%
14,3%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
9,5%
14,3%
10,7%
3
2
5
% within Involvement
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
% within Age
14,3%
28,6%
17,9%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
% within Age Count % within Involvement % within Age 38
Count % within Involvement % within Age
39
Count % within Involvement % within Age
42
Count % within Involvement % within Age
43
44
Total
1
% within Involvement
35
>35
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
147
47
Count % within Involvement % within Age
48
Count % within Involvement % within Age
49
Count % within Involvement % within Age
52
Count % within Involvement % within Age
53
Count % within Involvement % within Age
54
Count % within Involvement % within Age
Total
Count % within Involvement % within Age
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
9,5%
,0%
7,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
14,3%
,0%
10,7%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
9,5%
14,3%
10,7%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
148
Danish personal Involvement * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Involvement
39
Count
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
1
2
3
% within Involvement
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
% within Gender
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
0
2
2
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
40,0%
18,2%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
44
47
52
Count
Count
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
53
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
54
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
Total
Total
2
% within Involvement
43
female
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
149
Involvement * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Involvement
39
43
44
Count
2
2
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
40,0%
18,2%
2
1
3
% within Involvement
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Age
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
% within Age Count % within Involvement % within Age 52
53
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
54
Total
Total
0
% within Involvement
47
>35
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
150
Appendix 42: German involvement in organic wine German aggregated Involvement * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Involvement
24
29
Count
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
3,1%
1,9%
2,4%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,1%
,0%
1,2%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
3,1%
3,8%
3,6%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,3%
,0%
2,4%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
3,1%
3,8%
3,6%
0
2
2
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
3,8%
2,4%
2
2
4
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
6,3%
3,8%
4,8%
6
2
8
% within Involvement
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
18,8%
3,8%
9,5%
3
2
5
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
Count
% within Gender Count % within Involvement % within Gender 33
34
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
35
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
36
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
37
38
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
39
40
Total
0
% within Involvement
30
female
Count
Count % within Involvement
151
% within Gender 41
42
43
9,4%
3,8%
6,0%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
5
6
11
% within Involvement
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
% within Gender
15,6%
11,5%
13,1%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
3,1%
3,8%
3,6%
0
3
3
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
5,8%
3,6%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
6,3%
5,8%
6,0%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
3,1%
3,8%
3,6%
1
4
5
20,0%
80,0%
100,0%
3,1%
7,7%
6,0%
0
4
4
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
7,7%
4,8%
1
4
5
20,0%
80,0%
100,0%
3,1%
7,7%
6,0%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
3,1%
1,9%
2,4%
0
3
3
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
5,8%
3,6%
Count
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
44
45
46
Count
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
47
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
48
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
49
50
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
51
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
52
Count
152
53
Count
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
3,1%
3,8%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,1%
,0%
1,2%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,1%
,0%
1,2%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Involvement % within Gender 56
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
57
60
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
Total
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
Involvement * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Involvement
24
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,2%
,0%
2,4%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
4,8%
1,2%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
1,6%
9,5%
3,6%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
% within Age Count % within Involvement % within Age 30
33
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
34
Count % within Involvement % within Age
35
Total
1
% within Involvement
29
>35
Count % within Involvement
153
% within Age 36
3,2%
,0%
2,4%
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
1,6%
4,8%
2,4%
3
1
4
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
4,8%
4,8%
4,8%
4
4
8
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
6,3%
19,0%
9,5%
4
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
6,3%
4,8%
6,0%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
9
2
11
% within Involvement
81,8%
18,2%
100,0%
% within Age
14,3%
9,5%
13,1%
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
3,2%
4,8%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
4
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
6,3%
4,8%
6,0%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
3,2%
4,8%
3,6%
Count % within Involvement % within Age
37
Count % within Involvement % within Age
38
Count % within Involvement % within Age
39
Count % within Involvement % within Age
40
Count % within Involvement % within Age
41
Count % within Involvement % within Age
42
43
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
44
Count % within Involvement % within Age
45
Count % within Involvement % within Age
46
Count % within Involvement % within Age
47
Count % within Involvement % within Age
154
48
Count
3
2
5
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
4,8%
9,5%
6,0%
4
0
4
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,3%
,0%
4,8%
4
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
6,3%
4,8%
6,0%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,2%
,0%
2,4%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
3,2%
4,8%
3,6%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
3,2%
4,8%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
4,8%
1,2%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Involvement % within Age 49
Count % within Involvement % within Age
50
Count % within Involvement % within Age
51
Count % within Involvement % within Age
52
Count % within Involvement % within Age
53
Count % within Involvement % within Age
56
Count % within Involvement % within Age
57
60
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
Total
Count % within Involvement % within Age
155
German personal Involvement * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Involvement
34
36
37
39
Count
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
Count
Count
Count
% within Gender Count % within Involvement % within Gender 46
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
48
49
50
52
57
Total
0
% within Involvement
42
female
Count
Count
Count
Count
Count
156
Total
Count % within Involvement % within Gender
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Involvement * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Involvement
34
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age Count % within Involvement % within Age 37
39
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
42
46
48
Count
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
49
Count % within Involvement % within Age
50
52
Total
1
% within Involvement
36
>35
Count
Count % within Involvement
157
% within Age 57
Total
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Involvement
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
16,7%
9,1%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Involvement % within Age
158
Appendix 43: Danish product perception & organic wine image Danish aggregated Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more expensive disagree
Count
than conventional wine.
% within Organic wine is more
female
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
20,0%
23,1%
21,4%
7
6
13
53,8%
46,2%
100,0%
46,7%
46,2%
46,4%
4
4
8
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
26,7%
30,8%
28,6%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
159
Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine has a better
disagree
quality than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine has
female
Total
2
2
4
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
13,3%
15,4%
14,3%
6
6
12
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
40,0%
46,2%
42,9%
3
5
8
37,5%
62,5%
100,0%
20,0%
38,5%
28,6%
4
0
4
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
26,7%
,0%
14,3%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
160
Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more digestible
disagree
than conventional wine.
Count % within Organic wine is more
female
Total
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
33,3%
46,2%
39,3%
7
2
9
77,8%
22,2%
100,0%
46,7%
15,4%
32,1%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
13,3%
23,1%
17,9%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
6,7%
15,4%
10,7%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
161
Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is better for the
partly disagree
Count
environment than conventional
% within Organic wine is better
wine.
for the environment than
female
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
6
3
9
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
40,0%
23,1%
32,1%
8
10
18
44,4%
55,6%
100,0%
53,3%
76,9%
64,3%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
conventional wine. % within Gender partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
162
Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine tastes better
disagree
than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine
female
Total
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
13,3%
23,1%
17,9%
4
8
12
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
26,7%
61,5%
42,9%
4
2
6
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
26,7%
15,4%
21,4%
5
0
5
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
17,9%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
163
Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is healthier than
disagree
conventional wine.
Count % within Organic wine is
female
Total
3
2
5
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
20,0%
15,4%
17,9%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
6,7%
15,4%
10,7%
11
4
15
73,3%
26,7%
100,0%
73,3%
30,8%
53,6%
0
5
5
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
38,5%
17,9%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
164
Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional and organic wines disagree
Count
do hardly differ.
% within Conventional and
female
Total
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
6,7%
15,4%
10,7%
7
6
13
53,8%
46,2%
100,0%
46,7%
46,2%
46,4%
5
5
10
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
38,5%
35,7%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
13,3%
,0%
7,1%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
165
Organic means quality to me. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic means quality to me.
partly disagree
Count % within Organic means quality
female
Total
8
3
11
72,7%
27,3%
100,0%
53,3%
23,1%
39,3%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
33,3%
46,2%
39,3%
2
4
6
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
13,3%
30,8%
21,4%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
to me. % within Gender partly agree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
166
Danish personal
Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more expensive disagree
Count
than conventional wine.
% within Organic wine is more
female
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
33,3%
60,0%
45,5%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
167
Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine has a better
disagree
quality than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine has
female
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
33,3%
60,0%
45,5%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
168
Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more digestible
disagree
than conventional wine.
Count % within Organic wine is more
female
Total
2
2
4
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
40,0%
36,4%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
169
Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Organic wine is better for
partly agree
Count
the environment than
% within Organic wine is better for
conventional wine.
the environment than
female
Total
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
5
3
8
62,5%
37,5%
100,0%
83,3%
60,0%
72,7%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
conventional wine. % within Gender agree
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
170
Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine tastes better
disagree
than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine
female
Total
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
1
4
5
20,0%
80,0%
100,0%
16,7%
80,0%
45,5%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
33,3%
,0%
18,2%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
171
Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is healthier than
partly disagree
conventional wine.
Count % within Organic wine is
female
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
5
3
8
62,5%
37,5%
100,0%
83,3%
60,0%
72,7%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional and organic wines disagree
Count
do hardly differ.
% within Conventional and
female
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
33,3%
60,0%
45,5%
3
1
4
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
50,0%
20,0%
36,4%
organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
172
Total
Count
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
Organic means quality to me. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic means quality to me.
partly disagree
Count % within Organic means quality
female
Total
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
33,3%
60,0%
45,5%
2
1
3
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
to me. % within Gender partly agree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
173
Appendix 44: German product perception & organic wine image German aggregated Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more expensive disagree
Count
than conventional wine.
% within Organic wine is more
female
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
3,1%
1,9%
2,4%
6
7
13
46,2%
53,8%
100,0%
18,8%
13,5%
15,5%
14
33
47
29,8%
70,2%
100,0%
43,8%
63,5%
56,0%
11
11
22
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
34,4%
21,2%
26,2%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
174
Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine has a better
disagree
quality than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine has
female
Total
6
16
22
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
18,8%
30,8%
26,2%
21
30
51
41,2%
58,8%
100,0%
65,6%
57,7%
60,7%
5
5
10
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
15,6%
9,6%
11,9%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
1,9%
1,2%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
175
Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more digestible
disagree
than conventional wine.
Count % within Organic wine is more
female
Total
6
6
12
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
18,8%
11,5%
14,3%
20
16
36
55,6%
44,4%
100,0%
62,5%
30,8%
42,9%
5
21
26
19,2%
80,8%
100,0%
15,6%
40,4%
31,0%
1
9
10
10,0%
90,0%
100,0%
3,1%
17,3%
11,9%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
176
Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is better for the
disagree
Count
environment than conventional
% within Organic wine is better
wine.
for the environment than
female
Total
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
9,4%
,0%
3,6%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
6,3%
5,8%
6,0%
17
15
32
53,1%
46,9%
100,0%
53,1%
28,8%
38,1%
10
34
44
22,7%
77,3%
100,0%
31,3%
65,4%
52,4%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
177
Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine tastes better
disagree
than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine
female
Total
4
11
15
26,7%
73,3%
100,0%
12,5%
21,2%
17,9%
22
35
57
38,6%
61,4%
100,0%
68,8%
67,3%
67,9%
5
4
9
55,6%
44,4%
100,0%
15,6%
7,7%
10,7%
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
3,1%
3,8%
3,6%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
178
Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is healthier than
disagree
conventional wine.
Count % within Organic wine is
female
Total
7
4
11
63,6%
36,4%
100,0%
21,9%
7,7%
13,1%
16
16
32
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
50,0%
30,8%
38,1%
7
17
24
29,2%
70,8%
100,0%
21,9%
32,7%
28,6%
2
15
17
11,8%
88,2%
100,0%
6,3%
28,8%
20,2%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is healthier than conventional wine. % within Gender
179
Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional and organic wines disagree
Count
do hardly differ.
% within Conventional and
female
Total
3
7
10
30,0%
70,0%
100,0%
9,4%
13,5%
11,9%
9
21
30
30,0%
70,0%
100,0%
28,1%
40,4%
35,7%
18
20
38
47,4%
52,6%
100,0%
56,3%
38,5%
45,2%
2
4
6
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
6,3%
7,7%
7,1%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional and organic wines do hardly differ. % within Gender
180
Organic means quality to me. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic means quality to me.
disagree
Count % within Organic means quality
female
Total
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
9,4%
,0%
3,6%
8
4
12
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
25,0%
7,7%
14,3%
13
25
38
34,2%
65,8%
100,0%
40,6%
48,1%
45,2%
8
23
31
25,8%
74,2%
100,0%
25,0%
44,2%
36,9%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
to me. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
agree
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic means quality to me. % within Gender
181
German personal Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more expensive Disagree
Count
than conventional wine.
% within Organic wine is more
female
Total
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
2
2
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
25,0%
18,2%
0
2
2
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
25,0%
18,2%
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
37,5%
54,5%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
Agree
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more expensive than conventional wine. % within Gender
182
Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine has a better
Disagree
quality than organic wine.
Count % within Conventional wine has
female
Total
1
2
3
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
33,3%
25,0%
27,3%
2
4
6
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
66,7%
50,0%
54,5%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
Agree
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine has a better quality than organic wine. % within Gender
183
Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is more
Disagree
female
Count
digestible than
% within Organic wine is more
conventional wine.
digestible than conventional
Total
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
66,7%
37,5%
45,5%
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
33,3%
37,5%
36,4%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
partly agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
Agree
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Organic wine is more digestible than conventional wine. % within Gender
Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Organic wine is better partly agree
Count
for the environment
% within Organic wine is better for
than conventional
the environment than
wine.
conventional wine. % within Gender agree
Count
female
Total
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
66,7%
,0%
18,2%
1
8
9
184
% within Organic wine is better for
11,1%
88,9%
100,0%
33,3%
100,0%
81,8%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender Total
Count % within Organic wine is better for the environment than conventional wine. % within Gender
Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Conventional wine
Disagree
Count
tastes better than
% within Conventional wine
organic wine.
tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender partly disagree
Count % within Conventional wine
female
Total
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
33,3%
37,5%
36,4%
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
33,3%
37,5%
36,4%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
12,5%
18,2%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender partly agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
Agree
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
Total
Count % within Conventional wine tastes better than organic wine. % within Gender
185
Conventional and organic do differ. Gender Crosstabulation Organic wine Organic is healthier means wines than quality conventional tohardly me. * Gender wine.*Crosstabulation * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Gender Gender male male male Conventional and Organic means quality to Disagree partly disagree wine is partly disagree
Count Count Count
organic me. healthierwines than do
%%within Conventional and %within within Organicwine means Organic is quality
hardly differ. wine. conventional
organic hardly differ. to me.wines healthier thando conventional wine. %%within Gender %within within Gender Gender partly disagree partly agree partly agree
Count Count Count %%within Conventional and %within within Organicwine means Organic is quality
female female
Total Total
1 20
3 1 3
4 15
25,0% ,0% 40,0%
75,0% 100,0% 60,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
33,3% ,0% 66,7%
37,5% 12,5% 37,5%
36,4% 9,1% 45,5%
0 02
3 2 1
3 41
,0% 50,0% ,0%
100,0% 50,0% 100,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
,0% 66,7% ,0%
37,5% 25,0% 12,5%
27,3% 36,4% 9,1%
2 11
2 5 4
4 65
50,0% 16,7% 20,0%
50,0% 83,3% 80,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
66,7% 33,3% 33,3%
25,0% 62,5% 50,0%
36,4% 54,5% 45,5%
3 33
8 8
1111 11
27,3% 27,3% 27,3%
72,7% 72,7%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
100,0% 100,0%
100,0% 100,0% 100,0%
organic hardly differ. to me.wines healthier thando conventional wine. %%within Gender %within within Gender Gender partly agree agree agree
Count Count Count %%within Conventional and %within within Organicwine means Organic is quality organic hardly differ. to me.wines healthier thando conventional wine. %%within Gender %within within Gender Gender
Total Total
Count Count Count %%within Conventional and %within within Organicwine means Organic is quality organic hardly differ. to me.wines healthier thando conventional wine. %%within Gender %within within Gender Gender
186
Appendix 45: Product-moment correlation coefficient for Danish sample Factor 1 – Enjoyment of Food & Wine
products and recipes.
Pearson
Enjoyment of Food & Wine
products or dietary habits.
normally one of the first to try new
tastings. Among my acquaintances, I am
I like to participate in wine
I like to try new wines.
I like to cook for guests.
magazines.
to read cooking books and
to me. I like to watch TV-cooking shows,
Good food & drinks are important
I like to cook.
Variety is important to me.
recipes.
,422*
,701**
,038
-,119
,517**
,226
,079
,213
,371
,025
,000
,846
,546
,005
,247
,690
,277
,052
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
,422*
1
,589**
,305
,057
,280
,471*
,010
,511**
,688**
,001
,115
,773
,149
,011
,958
,005
,000
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
1
*
,383
,290
**
,300
,263
,345
,724**
,044
,135
,000
,120
,176
,072
,000
1
Correlation Sig. (2tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-
,025
tailed)
to me.
Variety is important
I like to try new
I like to try new products and
Correlations
N Pearson
28
28
**
**
,701
,589
,625
Sig. (2-
,000
,001
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
,038
,305
*
,383
1
,297
,136
,000
,113
,335
,438*
,846
,115
,044
,125
,491
1,000
,567
,081
,020
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
*
tailed) N Pearson
are important to me.
Correlation Sig. (2tailed)
read cooking books
N Pearson
28
-,119
,057
,290
,297
,546
,773
,135
,125
28
28
28
28
,517**
,280
,625**
,136
1
,272
,123
,181
,403
,285
,162
,534
,357
,033
,142
28
28
28
28
28
28
,272
1
,282
,373
,265
,560**
Correlation Sig. (2tailed) N Pearson
for
cooking shows, to cook
I like to I like to watch TV-
Good food & drinks
I like to cook.
Correlation
Correlation
187
Sig. (2-
,005
,149
,000
,491
,162
,146
,051
,173
,002
28
28
28
28
28
,226
*
28
28
28
28
,177
*
,471
,300
,000
,123
,282
,376
,446*
,247
,011
,120
1,000
,534
,146
,366
,049
,017
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
,079
,010
,263
,113
,181
,373
,177
1
,292
,454*
,690
,958
,176
,567
,357
,051
,366
,132
,015
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
,213
,511**
,345
,335
,403*
,265
,376*
,292
1
,658**
,277
,005
,072
,081
,033
,173
,049
,132
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
,371
**
**
*
,438
,285
**
*
*
**
1
tailed) N
1
Correlation Sig. (2wines.
tailed) N Pearson
Sig. (2tailed) N normally one of the
acquaintances, I am
wine tastings.
Correlation
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-
,000
tailed) N Pearson
,688
,724
,560
,446
,454
,658
Correlation Sig. (2Wine
Enjoyment of Food &
Among my
I like to participate in
I like to try new
Pearson
28
,052
,000
,000
,020
,142
,002
,017
,015
,000
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
tailed) N
28
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 2 – Health Awareness Correlations It is important to
It is important to me to eat well-
Pearson Correlation
balanced.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
I care about my health.
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Health Awareness
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
me to eat well-
I care about my
balanced.
health.
Health Awareness **
,797**
,000
,000
28
28
28
,663**
1
,724**
1
,663
,000
,000
28
28
28
**
**
1
,797
,724
,000
,000
28
28
28
188
Correlations It is important to
It is important to me to eat well-
Pearson Correlation
balanced.
Sig. (2-tailed)
me to eat well-
I care about my
balanced.
health.
,797**
,000
,000
28
28
28
,663**
1
,724**
1
N I care about my health.
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed)
,663
,000
N Health Awareness
Health Awareness **
Pearson Correlation
,000
28
28
28
**
**
1
,797
Sig. (2-tailed)
,724
,000
,000
28
28
N
28
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 3 – Brand Preferences & Price Consciousness
I don't mind paying a premium
Pearson Correlation
for quality goods.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
1
Price Consciousness
28
28
28
28
1
-,117
,292
,555
,131
28
28
28
28
-,035
-,117
1
,402*
,860
,555
28
28
28
28
*
1
,034
Brand Preference & Price
Pearson Correlation
,302
,292
,402
Consciousness
Sig. (2-tailed)
,118
,131
,034
28
28
28
N
Brand Preference &
,118
,568
N
trust in.
,860
Sig. (2-tailed)
Sig. (2-tailed)
know and that I have
,568
also at expensive restaurants.
and that I have trust in.
I prefer products that I
,302
,113
Pearson Correlation
expensive restaurants.
-,035
Pearson Correlation
I prefer products that I know
occasionally also at
,113
I like to eat out, occasionally
N
I like to eat out,
goods.
premium for quality
I don't mind paying a
Correlations
28
189
I don't mind paying a premium
Pearson Correlation
for quality goods.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
1
Price Consciousness
28
28
28
28
1
-,117
,292
,555
,131
28
28
28
28
-,035
-,117
1
,402*
,860
,555
28
28
28
28
*
1
,034
Brand Preference & Price
Pearson Correlation
,302
,292
,402
Consciousness
Sig. (2-tailed)
,118
,131
,034
28
28
28
N
Brand Preference &
,118
,568
N
trust in.
,860
Sig. (2-tailed)
Sig. (2-tailed)
know and that I have
,568
also at expensive restaurants.
and that I have trust in.
I prefer products that I
,302
,113
Pearson Correlation
expensive restaurants.
-,035
Pearson Correlation
I prefer products that I know
occasionally also at
,113
I like to eat out, occasionally
N
I like to eat out,
goods.
premium for quality
I don't mind paying a
Correlations
28
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
190
Factor 4 – Point of Purchase
I like to spend time in
Pearson Correlation
N
I buy my groceries
Pearson Correlation
predominantly at discount Sig. (2-tailed) stores.
N
I like to buy wine directly
Point of Purchase
competent advice.
wine stores and receive
I like going to specialized
the production.
get explanations about
from the wine maker and
I like to buy wine directly
stores.
-,173
,163
,357
,607**
,378
,408
,063
,001
28
28
28
28
28
-,173
1
-,231
-,340
,040
,237
,077
,840
1
stores and get inspired by Sig. (2-tailed) the selection range.
predominantly at discount
I buy my groceries
the selection range.
stores and get inspired by
I like to spend time in
Correlations
,378 28
28
28
28
28
Pearson Correlation
,163
-,231
1
,139
,622**
from the wine maker and
Sig. (2-tailed)
,408
,237
,481
,000
get explanations about
N
28
28
28
28
28
1
,530**
the production. I like going to specialized
Pearson Correlation
,357
-,340
,139
wine stores and receive
Sig. (2-tailed)
,063
,077
,481
competent advice.
N
28
Point of Purchase
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
,004
28
28
28
28
**
,040
**
**
1
,001
,840
,000
,004
28
28
28
28
,607
,622
,530
28
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 5 - Origin
It is important for me to buy
Pearson Correlation
products from my region
Sig. (2-tailed) N
,000
28
28
28
1
,599**
products.
Sig. (2-tailed)
,288
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Origin
,288
,208
Pearson Correlation
products.
,800**
Pearson Correlation
Origin
to the origin of
,208
1
I pay attention to the origin of
N
I pay attention
my region
products from
for me to buy
It is important
Correlations
,001
28
28
28
**
**
1
,800
,599
,000
,001
28
28
28
191
It is important for me to buy
Pearson Correlation
products from my region
Sig. (2-tailed)
,288
,000
28
28
28
1
,599**
Pearson Correlation
,208
products.
Sig. (2-tailed)
,288
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Origin ,800**
I pay attention to the origin of
N
products.
to the origin of
,208
1
N
Origin
I pay attention
my region
products from
for me to buy
It is important
Correlations
,001
28
28
28
,800**
,599**
1
,000
,001
28
28
28
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 6a – General Safety Need & Risk Aversion
I have changed my dietary
Pearson Correlation
Risk Aversion
General Safety Need &
of wine.
acquaintances in terms
friends and
recommendations from
I like to rely on
choice.
whether I made the right
am very often insecure
for a special occasion, I
,152
,012
,580**
,439
,951
,001
28
28
28
28
1
,147
,737**
,456
,000
1
habits due to food scandals. Sig. (2-tailed) N
When choosing a wine
scandals.
dietary habits due to food
I have changed my
Correlations
When choosing a wine for a
Pearson Correlation
,152
special occasion, I am very
Sig. (2-tailed)
,439
often insecure whether I
N
28
28
28
28
1
,459*
made the right choice. I like to rely on
Pearson Correlation
,012
,147
recommendations from
Sig. (2-tailed)
,951
,456
friends and acquaintances
N
28
28
28
28
,580**
,737**
,459*
1
,001
,000
,014
28
28
28
,014
in terms of wine. General Safety Need & Risk Pearson Correlation Aversion
Sig. (2-tailed) N
28
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
192
Factor 6b – Role of Labels
I rely on quality seals when
Pearson Correlation
choosing products.
Sig. (2-tailed)
1
N
Role of Labels
attentively.
product information
read labels and
When shopping, I
organic labels.
-,292
,270
,083
,131
,164
28
28
28
28
1
,243
,747**
,214
,000
Pearson Correlation
,334
to organic labels.
Sig. (2-tailed)
,083
N
pay attention to
,334
When shopping, I pay attention
28
28
28
28
-,292
,243
1
,625**
,131
,214
28
28
28
28
Pearson Correlation
,270
**
**
1
Sig. (2-tailed)
,164
,000
,000
28
28
28
When shopping, I read labels
Pearson Correlation
and product information
Sig. (2-tailed)
attentively.
N
Role of Labels
When shopping, I
choosing products.
seals when
I rely on quality
Correlations
N
,000
,747
,625
28
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 7 – Social Status
It is important to me to be
Pearson Correlation
regarded as a connoisseur.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
,000
28
28
28
28
1
-,007
,381*
,970
,045
,105
Social Status
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Social Status
,000
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
knowledge.
,105
regarded as a good host.
Sig. (2-tailed)
I have a great wine
,900**
,313
Pearson Correlation
good host.
,617**
Pearson Correlation
I have a great wine knowledge.
be regarded as a
,313
1
It is important to me to be
N
It is important to me to
connoisseur.
be regarded as a
It is important to me to
Correlations
28
28
28
28
**
-,007
1
,752**
,000
,970
28
28
28
28
**
*
**
1
,617
,900
,381
,000
,752
,000
,045
,000
28
28
28
28
193
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Factor 8 – Environmental Aspects
It is important to me to purchase Pearson Correlation seasonal products.
1
Sig. (2-tailed) N
28
I don't mind paying a premium
Pearson Correlation
,186
for organic products.
Sig. (2-tailed)
,342
N
Aspects
Environmental
conventional.
products over
buying organic
If possible, I prefer
products.
premium for organic
I don't mind paying a
products.
to purchase seasonal
It is important to me
Correlations
,186
,406*
,721**
,342
,032
,000
28
28
28
1
**
,503**
,001
,006
,598
28
28
28
28
*
**
1
,723**
If possible, I prefer buying
Pearson Correlation
,406
organic products over
Sig. (2-tailed)
,032
,001
conventional.
N
28
28
28
28
Environmental Aspects
Pearson Correlation
,721**
,503**
,723**
1
,000
,006
,000
28
28
28
Sig. (2-tailed) N
,598
,000
28
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
194
Factor 9 – Occasional Appropriateness
It is important to me that the
Pearson Correlation
wine goes well with the food.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
I always choose the wine after I
Pearson Correlation
have decided on the dish.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Occasional Appropriateness
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Appropriateness
Occasional
the dish.
have decided on
the wine after I
I always choose
the food.
goes well with
me that the wine
It is important to
Correlations
,538**
,753**
,003
,000
28
28
28
,538**
1
,857**
1
,003
,000
28
28
28
**
**
1
,753
,857
,000
,000
28
28
28
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
195
Appendix 46: Product-moment correlation coefficient for German sample Factor 1 – Enjoyment of Food & Wine
I like to try new
Pearson
products and
Correlation
recipes.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Variety is
Pearson
important to me.
Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
I like to cook.
Pearson
Enjoyment of Food & Wine
new products or dietary habits.
normally one of the first to try
tastings.
Among my acquaintances, I am
I like to participate in wine
I like to try new wines.
I like to cook for guests.
magazines.
to read cooking books and
to me.
I like to watch TV-cooking shows,
Good food & drinks are important
I like to cook.
Variety is important to me.
recipes.
I like to try new products and
Correlations
,278*
,425**
,259*
,328**
,462**
,244*
,142
,010
,000
,017
,002
,000
,025
,197
,000
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
*
1
,155
,107
,009
,213
,160
,187
,158 ,286**
,159
,334
,935
,052
,146
,088
,150
,008
84
84
1
,278
,010
,413** ,507**
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
,425**
,155
1
,321**
,435**
,731**
,220*
,185
,246* ,643**
,000
,159
,003
,000
,000
,044
,092
,024
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
1
**
*
,209
**
,002
,011
,056
,001
,060
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
1
**
,185
**
**
,642**
,000
,092
,005
,000
,000
84
84
Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Good food &
Pearson
drinks are
Correlation
important to me.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
I like to watch TV-
Pearson
cooking shows, to
Correlation
read cooking
Sig. (2-tailed)
books and
N
84
84
*
,259
,107
**
,017
,334
,003
84
,321
,341
,278
,359
,206 ,506**
84
84
84
**
,009
**
**
,002
,935
,000
,002
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
,462**
,213
,731**
,278*
,423**
1
,317**
,349**
,000
,052
,000
,011
,000
,003
,001
,033
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
**
1
**
,328
,435
,341
,423
,303
,404
magazines. I like to cook for
Pearson
guests.
Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
I like to try new
Pearson
wines.
Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
84
*
,244
,160
*
,220
,209
,185
,025
,146
,044
,056
,092
,003
84
84
84
84
84
84
,317
84
,405
,233* ,663**
,086 ,505**
,000
,436
,000
84
84
84
196
I like to participate
Pearson
in wine tastings.
Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Among my
Pearson
acquaintances, I
Correlation
am normally one
Sig. (2-tailed)
of the first to try
N
,142
,187
,185
,359**
,303**
,349**
,405**
,197
,088
,092
,001
,005
,001
,000
84
1
,286** ,551**
,008
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
**
,158
*
,246
,206
**
*
,086
**
1 ,456**
,000
,150
,024
,060
,000
,033
,436
,008
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
,507**
,286**
,643**
,506**
,642**
,663**
,505**
,551**
,456**
1
,000
,008
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
84
,413
,404
,233
,286
new products or dietary habits. Enjoyment of
Pearson
Food & Wine
Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
197
Factor 2 – Health Awareness
It is important to me to eat well-
Pearson Correlation
balanced.
Sig. (2-tailed)
Pearson Correlation
,000
,000
84
84
84
**
1
,610**
,000
N Pearson Correlation
Awareness
Health
my health.
I care about
,759**
,605
Sig. (2-tailed)
Health Awareness
,605**
1
N I care about my health.
balanced.
well-
to me to eat
It is important
Correlations
,000
84
84
84
,759**
,610**
1
,000
,000
84
84
Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 3 – Brand Preference & Price Consciousness
I don't mind paying a premium
Pearson Correlation
for quality goods.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Brand Preference & Price
Pearson Correlation
Consciousness
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Price Consciousness
Brand Preference &
,000
84
84
84
84
1
,025
,529**
,823
,000
,420
N
trust in.
,003
Sig. (2-tailed)
Sig. (2-tailed)
know and that I have
,420
also at expensive restaurants.
and that I have trust in.
I prefer products that I
,445**
,089
Pearson Correlation
expensive restaurants.
,323**
Pearson Correlation
I prefer products that I know
occasionally also at
,089
1
I like to eat out, occasionally
N
I like to eat out,
goods.
premium for quality
I don't mind paying a
Correlations
84
84
84
84
**
,025
1
,504**
,003
,823
84
84
84
84
,445**
,529**
,504**
1
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
,323
,000
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
198
Factor 4 – Point of Purchase
Point of Purchase
competent advice.
wine stores and receive
I like going to specialized
production.
get explanations about the
I like to buy wine directly
from the wine maker and
stores.
predominantly at discount
I buy my groceries
selection range.
and get inspired by the
I like to spend time in stores
Correlations
,175
,079
,187
,611**
,111
,476
,089
,000
84
84
84
84
84
Pearson Correlation
,175
1
-,074
-,116
,311**
predominantly at
Sig. (2-tailed)
,111
,504
,291
,004
discount stores.
N
84
84
84
1
**
,556**
,000
,000
I like to spend time in
Pearson Correlation
stores and get inspired
Sig. (2-tailed)
by the selection range.
N
I buy my groceries
1
84
84
I like to buy wine
Pearson Correlation
,079
-,074
,499
directly from the wine
Sig. (2-tailed)
,476
,504
maker and get
N
84
84
84
84
84
1
,646**
explanations about the production. I like going to
Pearson Correlation
,187
-,116
,499**
specialized wine
Sig. (2-tailed)
,089
,291
,000
stores and receive
N
84
84
84
84
84
,611**
,311**
,556**
,646**
1
,000
,004
,000
,000
84
84
84
84
,000
competent advice. Point of Purchase
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
199
Factor 5 - Origin Correlations It is important for
It is important for me to buy
Pearson Correlation
products from my region
Sig. (2-tailed)
me to buy
I pay attention to
products from my
the origin of
region
products.
I pay attention to the origin of
Pearson Correlation
products.
Sig. (2-tailed)
,000
,000
84
84
84
,619**
1
,772**
,619
,000
N Origin
,744**
1
N
Origin **
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
,000
84
84
84
,744**
,772**
1
,000
,000
84
84
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 6a – General Safety Need & Risk Aversion
I have changed my dietary
Pearson Correlation
habits due to food scandals.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
1
84 *
When choosing a wine for a
Pearson Correlation
,220
special occasion, I am very
Sig. (2-tailed)
,045
often insecure whether I made
N
Aversion
General Safety Need & Risk
wine.
and acquaintances in terms of
recommendations from friends
I like to rely on
the right choice.
often insecure whether I made
special occasion, I am very
When choosing a wine for a
habits due to food scandals.
I have changed my dietary
Correlations
,220*
,278*
,676**
,045
,010
,000
84
84
84
1
**
,645**
,002
,000
,332
84
84
84
84
1
,649**
the right choice. I like to rely on
Pearson Correlation
,278*
,332**
recommendations from friends
Sig. (2-tailed)
,010
,002
and acquaintances in terms of
N
84
84
84
84
,676**
,645**
,649**
1
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
,000
wine. General Safety Need & Risk
Pearson Correlation
Aversion
Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
200
I have changed my dietary
Pearson Correlation
habits due to food scandals.
Sig. (2-tailed)
1
N
,220
special occasion, I am very
Sig. (2-tailed)
,045
often insecure whether I made
N
Aversion
General Safety Need & Risk
wine.
and acquaintances in terms of
,278*
,676**
,045
,010
,000
84
84
84
1
**
,645**
,002
,000
*
Pearson Correlation
recommendations from friends
,220*
84
When choosing a wine for a
I like to rely on
the right choice.
often insecure whether I made
special occasion, I am very
When choosing a wine for a
habits due to food scandals.
I have changed my dietary
Correlations
,332
84
84
84
84
1
,649**
the right choice. I like to rely on
Pearson Correlation
,278*
,332**
recommendations from friends
Sig. (2-tailed)
,010
,002
and acquaintances in terms of
N
84
84
84
84
,676**
,645**
,649**
1
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
,000
wine. General Safety Need & Risk
Pearson Correlation
Aversion
Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 6b – Role of Labels
I rely on quality seals when
Pearson Correlation
choosing products.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
When shopping, I pay attention
Pearson Correlation
to organic labels.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Role of Labels
information attentively.
labels and product
When shopping, I read
labels.
attention to organic
When shopping, I pay
products.
when choosing
I rely on quality seals
Correlations
,580**
,031
,662**
,000
,777
,000
84
83
84
83
,580**
1
,236*
,774**
,032
,000
83
83
1
,000 83
83
201
When shopping, I read labels
Pearson Correlation
,031
,236*
and product information
Sig. (2-tailed)
,777
,032
attentively.
N
84
83
84
83
**
**
**
1
Role of Labels
Pearson Correlation
,662
Sig. (2-tailed)
,774
1
,000
,410
,000
,000
,000
83
83
83
N
,410**
83
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Factor 7 – Social Status
It is important to me to be
Pearson Correlation
regarded as a connoisseur.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
It is important to me to be
Pearson Correlation
regarded as a good host.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
I have a great wine knowledge.
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Social Status
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
1
84 **
,367
Social Status
knowledge.
I have a great wine
host.
be regarded as a good
It is important to me to
connoisseur.
be regarded as a
It is important to me to
Correlations
,367**
,681**
,827**
,001
,000
,000
84
84
84
1
**
,560**
,000
,000
,001
,397
84
84
84
84
,681**
,397**
1
,807**
,000
,000
84
84
84
84
**
**
**
1
,827
,560
,000
,807
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
202
Factor 8 – Environmental Aspects
It is important to me to purchase Pearson Correlation seasonal products.
1
Sig. (2-tailed) N
84
I don't mind paying a premium
Pearson Correlation
for organic products.
Sig. (2-tailed)
**
,530
If possible, I prefer buying
Pearson Correlation
organic products over
Sig. (2-tailed)
conventional.
N
Environmental Aspects
Pearson Correlation
,524**
,711**
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
1
**
,706**
,000
,000
,651
84
84
84
84
**
**
1
,784**
,524
Sig. (2-tailed)
Environmental Aspects
,530**
,000
N
conventional.
organic products over
If possible, I prefer buying
products.
premium for organic
I don't mind paying a
products.
purchase seasonal
It is important to me to
Correlations
,651
,000
,000
84
84
84
84
,711**
,706**
,784**
1
,000
,000
,000
84
84
84
N
,000
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Factor 9 – Occasional Appropriateness Correlations
It is important to me that the
Pearson Correlation
wine goes well with the food.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
I always choose the wine after I
Pearson Correlation
have decided on the dish.
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Occasional Appropriateness
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
It is important to
I always choose
me that the wine
the wine after I
goes well with the
have decided on
Occasional
food.
the dish.
Appropriateness **
,823**
,000
,000
84
84
84
,573**
1
,795**
1
,573
,000
,000
84
84
84
**
**
1
,823
,795
,000
,000
84
84
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
203
Appendix 47: Hypothesis test for H1 Danish aggregated Correlations Proportion
Spearman's rho
Proportion organic grocery
Correlation Coefficient
shopping
Sig. (2-tailed)
Proportion
organic wine
organic grocery
purchase
shopping
quantity
1,000 .
,331 ,085
N
28
28 1,000
Proportion organic wine
Correlation Coefficient
,331
purchase quantity
Sig. (2-tailed)
,085 .
N
28
28
German aggregated Correlations Proportion
Spearman's rho
Proportion organic grocery
Correlation Coefficient
shopping
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Proportion organic wine
Correlation Coefficient
purchase quantity
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Proportion
organic wine
organic grocery
purchase
shopping
quantity
1,000 .
,541
**
,000 84
84
**
1,000
,541
,000 . 84
84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
204
Appendix 48: Analysis of underlying factors for H1 – proportion organic groceries Danish aggregated Proportion organic grocery shopping * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Proportion organic grocery
0-25%
shopping
Count % within Proportion organic
female
Total
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
33,3%
46,2%
39,3%
4
7
11
36,4%
63,6%
100,0%
26,7%
53,8%
39,3%
4
0
4
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
26,7%
,0%
14,3%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
13,3%
,0%
7,1%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
grocery shopping % within Gender 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
Total
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
205
Proportion organic grocery shopping * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Proportion organic grocery
0-25%
shopping
Count % within Proportion organic
>35
Total
8
3
11
72,7%
27,3%
100,0%
38,1%
42,9%
39,3%
9
2
11
81,8%
18,2%
100,0%
42,9%
28,6%
39,3%
3
1
4
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
14,3%
14,3%
14,3%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
grocery shopping % within Age 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
Total
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
206
German aggregated Proportion organic grocery shopping * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Proportion organic grocery
0-25%
shopping
Count % within Proportion organic
female
Total
15
12
27
55,6%
44,4%
100,0%
46,9%
23,1%
32,1%
9
22
31
29,0%
71,0%
100,0%
28,1%
42,3%
36,9%
6
14
20
30,0%
70,0%
100,0%
18,8%
26,9%
23,8%
2
4
6
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
6,3%
7,7%
7,1%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
grocery shopping % within Gender 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
Total
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Gender
207
Proportion organic grocery shopping * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Proportion organic grocery
0-25%
shopping
Count % within Proportion organic
>35
Total
21
6
27
77,8%
22,2%
100,0%
33,3%
28,6%
32,1%
23
8
31
74,2%
25,8%
100,0%
36,5%
38,1%
36,9%
16
4
20
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
25,4%
19,0%
23,8%
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
grocery shopping % within Age 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
Total
Count % within Proportion organic grocery shopping % within Age
208
Appendix 49: Analysis of underlying factors for H1 – proportion organic wine Danish aggregated Proportion organic wine purchase quantity * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Proportion organic wine
0-25%
purchase quantity
Count % within Proportion organic
female
Total
11
9
20
55,0%
45,0%
100,0%
73,3%
69,2%
71,4%
2
4
6
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
13,3%
30,8%
21,4%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase quantity % within Gender 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
Total
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
209
Proportion organic wine purchase quantity * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Proportion organic wine
0-25%
purchase quantity
Count % within Proportion organic
>35
Total
14
6
20
70,0%
30,0%
100,0%
66,7%
85,7%
71,4%
6
0
6
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
28,6%
,0%
21,4%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
14,3%
3,6%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase quantity % within Age 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
Total
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
210
German aggregated Proportion organic wine purchase quantity * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Proportion organic wine
0-25%
purchase quantity
Count % within Proportion organic
female
Total
16
24
40
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
50,0%
46,2%
47,6%
7
15
22
31,8%
68,2%
100,0%
21,9%
28,8%
26,2%
5
7
12
41,7%
58,3%
100,0%
15,6%
13,5%
14,3%
4
6
10
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
12,5%
11,5%
11,9%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase quantity % within Gender 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
Total
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Gender
211
Proportion organic wine purchase quantity * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Proportion organic wine
0-25%
purchase quantity
Count % within Proportion organic
>35
Total
27
13
40
67,5%
32,5%
100,0%
42,9%
61,9%
47,6%
19
3
22
86,4%
13,6%
100,0%
30,2%
14,3%
26,2%
10
2
12
83,3%
16,7%
100,0%
15,9%
9,5%
14,3%
7
3
10
70,0%
30,0%
100,0%
11,1%
14,3%
11,9%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase quantity % within Age 26-50%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
51-75%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
76-100%
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
Total
Count % within Proportion organic wine purchase quantity % within Age
212
Appendix 50: Hypothesis test for H2 Danish aggregated Correlations Frequency
Spearman's rho
Frequency organic wine
Correlation Coefficient
purchase
Sig. (2-tailed)
organic wine
Health
purchase
Awareness
1,000 .
,448
N Health Awareness
,149
28
28
Correlation Coefficient
,149
1,000
Sig. (2-tailed)
,448 .
N
28
28
German aggregated Correlations Frequency
Spearman's rho
Frequency organic wine
Correlation Coefficient
purchase
Sig. (2-tailed) N
Health Awareness
organic wine
Health
purchase
Awareness
1,000 .
,038 ,728
84
84
Correlation Coefficient
,038
1,000
Sig. (2-tailed)
,728 .
N
84
84
213
Appendix 51: Analysis of underlying factor for H2 – health awareness Danish aggregated Health Awareness * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Health Awareness
low
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
6,7%
23,1%
14,3%
13
10
23
% within Health Awareness
56,5%
43,5%
100,0%
% within Gender
86,7%
76,9%
82,1%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender Count % within Health Awareness % within Gender high
Total
Total
1
% within Health Awareness
middle
female
Count
Count % within Health Awareness % within Gender
Health Awareness * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Health Awareness
low
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
4
0
4
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
19,0%
,0%
14,3%
16
7
23
% within Health Awareness
69,6%
30,4%
100,0%
% within Age
76,2%
100,0%
82,1%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age Count % within Health Awareness % within Age high
Total
Total
1
% within Health Awareness
middle
>35
Count
Count % within Health Awareness % within Age
214
Danish personal Health Awareness * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Health Awareness
middle
high
Count
Total
0
1
1
% within Health Awareness
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
6
4
10
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
100,0%
80,0%
90,9%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count % within Health Awareness % within Gender
Total
female
Count % within Health Awareness % within Gender
Health Awareness * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Health Awareness
middle
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
5
5
10
% within Health Awareness
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Age
83,3%
100,0%
90,9%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
Total
Total
1
% within Health Awareness
high
>35
Count
Count % within Health Awareness % within Age
215
German aggregated Health Awareness * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Health Awareness
Low
middle
Count
1
5
% within Health Awareness
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
12,5%
1,9%
6,0%
3
2
5
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
9,4%
3,8%
6,0%
25
49
74
% within Health Awareness
33,8%
66,2%
100,0%
% within Gender
78,1%
94,2%
88,1%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
% within Gender
Total
Total
4
% within Health Awareness
High
female
Count
Count % within Health Awareness % within Gender
Health Awareness * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Health Awareness
Low
Count
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
6,3%
4,8%
6,0%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
3,2%
14,3%
6,0%
57
17
74
% within Health Awareness
77,0%
23,0%
100,0%
% within Age
90,5%
81,0%
88,1%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age Count % within Health Awareness % within Age High
Total
Total
4
% within Health Awareness
middle
>35
Count
Count % within Health Awareness % within Age
216
German personal Health Awareness * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Health Awareness
high
Count % within Health Awareness % within Gender
Total
% within Gender
Total
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count % within Health Awareness
female
Health Awareness * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Health Awareness
high
Count % within Health Awareness % within Age
Total
Count % within Health Awareness % within Age
>35
Total
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
217
Appendix 52: Analysis of underlying factors for H2 – purchasing frequency organic wine Danish aggregated Frequency organic wine purchase * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Frequency
at least once per week
Count
organic wine
% within Frequency organic
purchase
wine purchase % within Gender 2-3 times per month
female 1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
6,7%
7,7%
7,1%
13
12
25
52,0%
48,0%
100,0%
86,7%
92,3%
89,3%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
>35
Total
Count % within Frequency organic
Total
wine purchase % within Gender once per month or less
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Gender
Total
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Gender
Frequency organic wine purchase * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Frequency
at least once per week
Count
organic wine
% within Frequency organic
purchase
wine purchase % within Age 2-3 times per month
Count % within Frequency organic
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
9,5%
,0%
7,1%
18
7
25
72,0%
28,0%
100,0%
85,7%
100,0%
89,3%
wine purchase % within Age once per month or less
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Age
218
Total
Count % within Frequency organic
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase % within Age
German aggregated Frequency organic wine purchase * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Frequency
at least once per week
Count
organic wine
% within Frequency organic
purchase
wine purchase % within Gender 2-3 times per month
Count % within Frequency organic
female
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,1%
,0%
1,2%
9
19
28
32,1%
67,9%
100,0%
28,1%
36,5%
33,3%
22
33
55
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
68,8%
63,5%
65,5%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase % within Gender once per month or less
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Gender
Total
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Gender
219
Frequency organic wine purchase * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Frequency
at least once per week
Count
organic wine
% within Frequency organic
purchase
wine purchase % within Age 2-3 times per month
Count % within Frequency organic
>35
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
1,6%
,0%
1,2%
22
6
28
78,6%
21,4%
100,0%
34,9%
28,6%
33,3%
40
15
55
72,7%
27,3%
100,0%
63,5%
71,4%
65,5%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
wine purchase % within Age once per month or less
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Age
Total
Count % within Frequency organic wine purchase % within Age
220
Appendix 53: Analysis of further factor for H2 – wine consumption frequency Danish aggregated Regular wine consumption * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Regular wine
Daily
consumption
Count % within Regular wine
female
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,7%
,0%
3,6%
7
7
14
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
46,7%
53,8%
50,0%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
6,7%
7,7%
7,1%
6
4
10
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
40,0%
30,8%
35,7%
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
7,7%
3,6%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
consumption % within Gender at least once per week
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
several times per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
less than once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
Total
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
221
Regular wine consumption * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Regular wine
Daily
consumption
Count % within Regular wine
>35
Total
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
14,3%
3,6%
10
4
14
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
47,6%
57,1%
50,0%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
9
1
10
90,0%
10,0%
100,0%
42,9%
14,3%
35,7%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
4,8%
,0%
3,6%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
consumption % within Age at least once per week
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
several times per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
less than once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
Total
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
222
German aggregated Regular wine consumption * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Regular wine
Daily
consumption
Count % within Regular wine
female
Total
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
6,3%
5,8%
6,0%
12
17
29
41,4%
58,6%
100,0%
37,5%
32,7%
34,5%
11
27
38
28,9%
71,1%
100,0%
34,4%
51,9%
45,2%
4
2
6
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
12,5%
3,8%
7,1%
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
9,4%
5,8%
7,1%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
consumption % within Gender at least once per week
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
several times per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
less than once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
Total
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Gender
223
Regular wine consumption * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Regular wine
Daily
consumption
Count % within Regular wine
>35
Total
0
5
5
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
23,8%
6,0%
19
10
29
65,5%
34,5%
100,0%
30,2%
47,6%
34,5%
34
4
38
89,5%
10,5%
100,0%
54,0%
19,0%
45,2%
6
0
6
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
9,5%
,0%
7,1%
4
2
6
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
6,3%
9,5%
7,1%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
consumption % within Age at least once per week
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
several times per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
less than once per month
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
Total
Count % within Regular wine consumption % within Age
224
Appendix 54: Hypothesis test for H3a&b Danish personal H3a1
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Security Value Domain *
Excluded
Percent 7
63,6%
N
Total
Percent 4
36,4%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
Gender
Report Security Value Domain Gender
N
Male
5
1,00
female
2
3,00
Total
7
1,00
dimension1
Median
225
H3a2
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Universalism Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 6
54,5%
N
Total
Percent 5
45,5%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Gender
Report Universalism Value Domain Gender
N
Median
Male
3
1,00
Female
3
2,00
Total
6
1,00
dimension1
226
H3b1
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Achievement Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 5
45,5%
N
Total
Percent 6
54,5%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Gender
Report Achievement Value Domain Gend N Median er male
2
1,50
fema
3
2,00
5
2,00
le Total
227
H3b2
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Power Value Domain *
Excluded
Percent 2
18,2%
N
Total
Percent 9
81,8%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
Gender
Report Power Value Domain Gender
N
Median
Male
1
1,00
female
1
1,00
Total
2
1,00
dimension1
228
German personal H3a1
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Security Value Domain *
Excluded
Percent 8
72,7%
N
Total
Percent 3
27,3%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
Gender
Report Security Value Domain Gender
N Median
Male
3
2,00
female
5
2,00
Total
8
2,00
dimension1
229
H3a2
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Universalism Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 10
90,9%
N
Total
Percent 1
9,1%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Gender
Report Universalism Value Domain Gender
dimension1
N
Median
male
3
2,00
female
7
2,00
10
2,00
Total
230
H3b1
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Achievement Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 4
36,4%
N
Total
Percent 7
63,6%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Gender
Report Achievement Value Domain Gender
dimension1
N
Median
male
1
1,00
female
3
1,00
Total
4
1,00
231
H3b2
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Power Value Domain *
Excluded
Percent 1
9,1%
N
Total
Percent 10
90,9%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
Gender
Report Power Value Domain Gender
dimension1
N
Median
female
1
1,00
Total
1
1,00
232
Appendix 55: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – general safety need & risk aversion Danish aggregated General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
Female
Total
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
20,0%
23,1%
21,4%
5
5
10
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
38,5%
35,7%
7
5
12
58,3%
41,7%
100,0%
46,7%
38,5%
42,9%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Gender Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
233
General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
>35
Total
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
14,3%
42,9%
21,4%
7
3
10
70,0%
30,0%
100,0%
33,3%
42,9%
35,7%
11
1
12
91,7%
8,3%
100,0%
52,4%
14,3%
42,9%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Age Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
234
Danish personal General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
Female
Total
3
0
3
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
50,0%
,0%
27,3%
2
2
4
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
40,0%
36,4%
1
3
4
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
16,7%
60,0%
36,4%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Gender Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
>35
Total
0
3
3
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
60,0%
27,3%
2
2
4
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
40,0%
36,4%
4
0
4
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
66,7%
,0%
36,4%
6
5
11
& Risk Aversion % within Age Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
Total
Count
235
% within General Safety Need
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Age
German aggregated General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
Female
Total
11
12
23
47,8%
52,2%
100,0%
34,4%
23,1%
27,4%
14
13
27
51,9%
48,1%
100,0%
43,8%
25,0%
32,1%
7
27
34
20,6%
79,4%
100,0%
21,9%
51,9%
40,5%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Gender Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
>35
Total
15
8
23
65,2%
34,8%
100,0%
23,8%
38,1%
27,4%
23
4
27
85,2%
14,8%
100,0%
36,5%
19,0%
32,1%
& Risk Aversion % within Age Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
236
High
Count % within General Safety Need
25
9
34
73,5%
26,5%
100,0%
39,7%
42,9%
40,5%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Age Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
German personal General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
Female
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
12,5%
18,2%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
33,3%
12,5%
18,2%
1
6
7
14,3%
85,7%
100,0%
33,3%
75,0%
63,6%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Gender Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Gender
237
General Safety Need & Risk Aversion * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 General Safety Need & Risk
Low
Aversion
Count % within General Safety Need
>35
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
20,0%
16,7%
18,2%
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
20,0%
16,7%
18,2%
3
4
7
42,9%
57,1%
100,0%
60,0%
66,7%
63,6%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
& Risk Aversion % within Age Middle
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
High
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
Total
Count % within General Safety Need & Risk Aversion % within Age
238
Appendix 56: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – social status Danish aggregated Social Status * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Social Status
Low
middle
High
Total
Count
female
Total
6
6
12
% within Social Status
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
40,0%
46,2%
42,9%
4
3
7
% within Social Status
57,1%
42,9%
100,0%
% within Gender
26,7%
23,1%
25,0%
5
4
9
% within Social Status
55,6%
44,4%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
30,8%
32,1%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Gender
Social Status * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Social Status
low
middle
high
Total
Count
>35
Total
8
4
12
% within Social Status
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Age
38,1%
57,1%
42,9%
6
1
7
% within Social Status
85,7%
14,3%
100,0%
% within Age
28,6%
14,3%
25,0%
7
2
9
% within Social Status
77,8%
22,2%
100,0%
% within Age
33,3%
28,6%
32,1%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Age
239
Danish personal Social Status * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Social Status
Low
middle
High
Total
Count
female
Total
3
2
5
% within Social Status
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
50,0%
40,0%
45,5%
1
2
3
% within Social Status
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
% within Gender
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
2
1
3
% within Social Status
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Gender
Social Status * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Social Status
Low
middle
High
Total
Count
>35
Total
3
2
5
% within Social Status
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
% within Age
50,0%
40,0%
45,5%
2
1
3
% within Social Status
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Age
33,3%
20,0%
27,3%
1
2
3
% within Social Status
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
% within Age
16,7%
40,0%
27,3%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Age
240
German aggregated Social Status * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Social Status
Low
middle
high
Total
Count
female
Total
15
29
44
% within Social Status
34,1%
65,9%
100,0%
% within Gender
46,9%
55,8%
52,4%
7
18
25
% within Social Status
28,0%
72,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
21,9%
34,6%
29,8%
10
5
15
% within Social Status
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
31,3%
9,6%
17,9%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Gender
Social Status * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Social Status
low
middle
high
Total
Count
>35
Total
34
10
44
% within Social Status
77,3%
22,7%
100,0%
% within Age
54,0%
47,6%
52,4%
20
5
25
% within Social Status
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
% within Age
31,7%
23,8%
29,8%
9
6
15
% within Social Status
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
% within Age
14,3%
28,6%
17,9%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Age
241
German personal Social Status * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Social Status
Low
Middle
High
Total
Count
female
Total
1
3
4
% within Social Status
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
37,5%
36,4%
2
4
6
% within Social Status
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
% within Gender
66,7%
50,0%
54,5%
0
1
1
% within Social Status
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Gender
Social Status * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Social Status
Low
Middle
High
Count
Total
2
2
4
% within Social Status
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Age
40,0%
33,3%
36,4%
2
4
6
% within Social Status
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
% within Age
40,0%
66,7%
54,5%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Social Status % within Age
Total
>35
Count % within Social Status % within Age
242
Appendix 57: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – environmental aspects Danish aggregated Environmental Aspects * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Environmental Aspects
low
Count % within Environmental
female
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
6,7%
7,7%
7,1%
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
13,3%
23,1%
17,9%
12
9
21
57,1%
42,9%
100,0%
80,0%
69,2%
75,0%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Aspects % within Gender middle
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Gender
high
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Gender
Total
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Gender
243
Environmental Aspects * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Environmental Aspects
low
>35
Count % within Environmental
Total
1
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
5
0
5
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
23,8%
,0%
17,9%
15
6
21
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
71,4%
85,7%
75,0%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Aspects % within Age middle
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Age
high
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Age
Total
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Age
Danish personal Environmental Aspects * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Environmental Aspects
low
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
0
1
1
% within Environmental Aspects
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
5
4
9
% within Environmental Aspects
55,6%
44,4%
100,0%
% within Gender
83,3%
80,0%
81,8%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
high
Total
Total
1
% within Environmental Aspects
middle
female
Count
Count
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Gender
244
Environmental Aspects * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Environmental Aspects
low
middle
Count
1
1
% within Environmental Aspects
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
5
4
9
% within Environmental Aspects
55,6%
44,4%
100,0%
% within Age
83,3%
80,0%
81,8%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
% within Age
Total
Total
0
% within Environmental Aspects
high
>35
Count
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Age
German aggregated Environmental Aspects * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Environmental Aspects
low
middle
high
Total
Count
female
Total
4
2
6
% within Environmental Aspects
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
12,5%
3,8%
7,1%
11
6
17
% within Environmental Aspects
64,7%
35,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
34,4%
11,5%
20,2%
17
44
61
% within Environmental Aspects
27,9%
72,1%
100,0%
% within Gender
53,1%
84,6%
72,6%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Gender
245
Environmental Aspects * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Environmental Aspects
low
Count
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
13
4
17
% within Environmental Aspects
76,5%
23,5%
100,0%
% within Age
20,6%
19,0%
20,2%
47
14
61
% within Environmental Aspects
77,0%
23,0%
100,0%
% within Age
74,6%
66,7%
72,6%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
high
Total
Total
3
% within Environmental Aspects
middle
>35
Count
Count
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Age
German personal Environmental Aspects * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Environmental Aspects
middle
Count
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
66,7%
,0%
18,2%
1
8
9
% within Environmental Aspects
11,1%
88,9%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
100,0%
81,8%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
Total
Total
2
% within Environmental Aspects
high
female
Count
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Gender
246
Environmental Aspects * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Environmental Aspects
middle
high
Total
Count
>35
Total
1
1
2
% within Environmental Aspects
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Age
20,0%
16,7%
18,2%
4
5
9
% within Environmental Aspects
44,4%
55,6%
100,0%
% within Age
80,0%
83,3%
81,8%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Environmental Aspects % within Age
247
Appendix 58: Analysis of further factor for H3a&b – origin German aggregated Origin * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Origin
Low
Count
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
6,3%
5,8%
6,0%
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
9,4%
5,8%
7,1%
27
46
73
% within Origin
37,0%
63,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
84,4%
88,5%
86,9%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender Count % within Origin % within Gender High
Total
Total
2
% within Origin
Middle
female
Count
Count % within Origin % within Gender
Origin * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Origin
Low
Count
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
6,3%
4,8%
6,0%
6
0
6
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
9,5%
,0%
7,1%
53
20
73
% within Origin
72,6%
27,4%
100,0%
% within Age
84,1%
95,2%
86,9%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age Count % within Origin % within Age High
Total
Total
4
% within Origin
Middle
>35
Count
Count % within Origin % within Age
248
German personal Origin * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Origin
Low
Middle
High
Total
female
Count
Total
0
1
1
% within Origin
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
,0%
12,5%
9,1%
1
1
2
% within Origin
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
12,5%
18,2%
2
6
8
% within Origin
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
66,7%
75,0%
72,7%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Origin % within Gender
Origin * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Origin
Low
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
20,0%
,0%
9,1%
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
40,0%
,0%
18,2%
2
6
8
% within Origin
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
% within Age
40,0%
100,0%
72,7%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age Count % within Origin % within Age High
Total
Total
1
% within Origin
Middle
>35
Count
Count % within Origin % within Age
249
Danish aggregated Origin * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Origin
Low
Middle
High
Total
female
Count
Total
2
3
5
% within Origin
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
13,3%
23,1%
17,9%
5
7
12
% within Origin
41,7%
58,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
53,8%
42,9%
8
3
11
% within Origin
72,7%
27,3%
100,0%
% within Gender
53,3%
23,1%
39,3%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Origin % within Gender
Origin * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Origin
Low
Middle
High
Total
Count
>35
Total
3
2
5
% within Origin
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
% within Age
14,3%
28,6%
17,9%
10
2
12
% within Origin
83,3%
16,7%
100,0%
% within Age
47,6%
28,6%
42,9%
8
3
11
% within Origin
72,7%
27,3%
100,0%
% within Age
38,1%
42,9%
39,3%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Origin % within Age
250
Danish personal Origin * Gender Crosstabulation Gender Male Origin
Low
Middle
High
Total
female
Count
Total
1
1
2
% within Origin
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
1
3
4
% within Origin
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
16,7%
60,0%
36,4%
4
1
5
% within Origin
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
66,7%
20,0%
45,5%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Origin % within Gender
Origin * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Origin
Low
Middle
High
Total
Count
>35
Total
1
1
2
% within Origin
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Age
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
3
1
4
% within Origin
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
% within Age
50,0%
20,0%
36,4%
2
3
5
% within Origin
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
% within Age
33,3%
60,0%
45,5%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Origin % within Age
251
Appendix 59: Hypothesis test for H4a&b Danish aggregated
Case Processing Summary Cases Valid N Gender * Role of Labels
Missing
Percent 28
N
100,0%
Total
Percent 0
N
,0%
Percent 28
100,0%
Gender * Role of Labels Crosstabulation Role of Labels Low Gender
Male
Count
Total
2
12
15
Expected Count
1,1
3,2
10,7
15,0
% within Gender
6,7%
13,3%
80,0%
100,0%
50,0%
33,3%
60,0%
53,6%
3,6%
7,1%
42,9%
53,6%
-,1
-1,2
1,3
Count
1
4
8
13
Expected Count
,9
2,8
9,3
13,0
% within Gender
7,7%
30,8%
61,5%
100,0%
50,0%
66,7%
40,0%
46,4%
3,6%
14,3%
28,6%
46,4%
Residual
,1
1,2
-1,3
Count
2
6
20
28
Expected Count
2,0
6,0
20,0
28,0
% within Gender
7,1%
21,4%
71,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
7,1%
21,4%
71,4%
100,0%
% of Total Residual
% within Role of Labels % of Total
Total
high
1
% within Role of Labels
female
middle
% within Role of Labels % of Total
252
Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value
df
sided)
a
2
,514
Likelihood Ratio
1,342
2
,511
Linear-by-Linear
,685
1
,408
Pearson Chi-Square
1,331
Association N of Valid Cases
28
a. 4 cells (66,7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is ,93.
Symmetric Measures Asymp. Std. Value Nominal by Nominal
Error
a
b
Approx. T
Approx. Sig.
Phi
,218
,514
Cramer's V
,218
,514
Interval by Interval
Pearson's R
-,159
,189
-,823
,418
c
Ordinal by Ordinal
Spearman Correlation
-,190
,186
-,989
,332
c
N of Valid Cases
28
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis. b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis. c. Based on normal approximation.
Correlations Gender Spearman's rho
Gender
Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N
Role of Labels
Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N
1,000 .
Role of Labels -,190 ,332
28
28
-,190
1,000
,332 . 28
28
253
German aggregated Case Processing Summary Cases Valid N Gender * Role of Labels
Missing
Percent 83
N
Total
Percent
98,8%
1
N
1,2%
Percent 84
100,0%
Gender * Role of Labels Crosstabulation Role of Labels low Gender
Male
Count
Total
11
16
32
Expected Count
2,7
10,0
19,3
32,0
% within Gender
15,6%
34,4%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Role of Labels
71,4%
42,3%
32,0%
38,6%
6,0%
13,3%
19,3%
38,6%
2,3
1,0
-3,3
2
15
34
51
Expected Count
4,3
16,0
30,7
51,0
% within Gender
3,9%
29,4%
66,7%
100,0%
28,6%
57,7%
68,0%
61,4%
2,4%
18,1%
41,0%
61,4%
-2,3
-1,0
3,3
7
26
50
83
Expected Count
7,0
26,0
50,0
83,0
% within Gender
8,4%
31,3%
60,2%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
8,4%
31,3%
60,2%
100,0%
Residual Count
% within Role of Labels % of Total Residual Total
high
5
% of Total
female
middle
Count
% within Role of Labels % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value
df
sided)
a
2
,119
Likelihood Ratio
4,186
2
,123
Linear-by-Linear
3,737
1
,053
Pearson Chi-Square
4,255
Association N of Valid Cases
83
a. 2 cells (33,3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2,70.
254
Symmetric Measures Asymp. Std. Value Nominal by Nominal
Error
a
b
Approx. T
Approx. Sig.
Phi
,226
,119
Cramer's V
,226
,119
Interval by Interval
Pearson's R
,213
,109
1,967
,053
c
Ordinal by Ordinal
Spearman Correlation
,194
,110
1,778
,079
c
N of Valid Cases
83
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis. b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis. c. Based on normal approximation.
Correlations Gender Spearman's rho
Gender
Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N
Role of Labels
1,000 .
Role of Labels ,194 ,079
84
83
Correlation Coefficient
,194
1,000
Sig. (2-tailed)
,079 .
N
83
83
255
Appendix 60: Analysis of underlying factor for H4a&b – role of label Danish aggregated Role of Labels * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Role of Labels
Low
Count
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
6,7%
7,7%
7,1%
2
4
6
% within Role of Labels
33,3%
66,7%
100,0%
% within Gender
13,3%
30,8%
21,4%
12
8
20
% within Role of Labels
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
80,0%
61,5%
71,4%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
High
Total
Total
1
% within Role of Labels
Middle
female
Count
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Gender
Role of Labels * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Role of Labels
Low
Count
1
2
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
4,8%
14,3%
7,1%
4
2
6
% within Role of Labels
66,7%
33,3%
100,0%
% within Age
19,0%
28,6%
21,4%
16
4
20
% within Role of Labels
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
% within Age
76,2%
57,1%
71,4%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
High
Total
Total
1
% within Role of Labels
Middle
>35
Count
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Age
256
Danish personal Role of Labels * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Role of Labels
Low
Count
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
1
1
2
% within Role of Labels
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
4
4
8
% within Role of Labels
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
66,7%
80,0%
72,7%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
High
Total
Total
1
% within Role of Labels
middle
female
Count
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Gender
Role of Labels * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Role of Labels
Low
middle
High
Total
Count
>35
Total
0
1
1
% within Role of Labels
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
1
1
2
% within Role of Labels
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Age
16,7%
20,0%
18,2%
5
3
8
% within Role of Labels
62,5%
37,5%
100,0%
% within Age
83,3%
60,0%
72,7%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Age
257
German aggregated Role of Labels * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Role of Labels
Low
Middle
High
Total
Count
female
Total
5
2
7
% within Role of Labels
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
% within Gender
15,6%
3,9%
8,4%
11
15
26
% within Role of Labels
42,3%
57,7%
100,0%
% within Gender
34,4%
29,4%
31,3%
16
34
50
% within Role of Labels
32,0%
68,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
50,0%
66,7%
60,2%
32
51
83
38,6%
61,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Gender
Role of Labels * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Role of Labels
Low
Count
2
7
71,4%
28,6%
100,0%
7,9%
10,0%
8,4%
19
7
26
% within Role of Labels
73,1%
26,9%
100,0%
% within Age
30,2%
35,0%
31,3%
39
11
50
% within Role of Labels
78,0%
22,0%
100,0%
% within Age
61,9%
55,0%
60,2%
63
20
83
75,9%
24,1%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Age
High
Total
Total
5
% within Role of Labels
Middle
>35
Count
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Age
258
German personal Role of Labels * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Role of Labels
middle
High
Total
Count
female
Total
1
4
5
% within Role of Labels
20,0%
80,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
33,3%
57,1%
50,0%
2
3
5
% within Role of Labels
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
% within Gender
66,7%
42,9%
50,0%
3
7
10
30,0%
70,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Gender
Role of Labels * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Role of Labels
middle
High
Total
Count
>35
Total
4
1
5
% within Role of Labels
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
% within Age
80,0%
20,0%
50,0%
1
4
5
% within Role of Labels
20,0%
80,0%
100,0%
% within Age
20,0%
80,0%
50,0%
5
5
10
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Count
Count % within Role of Labels % within Age
259
Appendix 61: Hypothesis test for H5a&b Danish personal H5a
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Hedonism Value Domain *
Excluded
Percent 9
81,8%
N
Total
Percent 2
18,2%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
Age
Report Hedonism Value Domain Age
N
Median
<35
5
2,00
>35
4
4,00
Total
9
2,00
260
H5b1
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Universalism Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 6
54,5%
N
Total
Percent 5
45,5%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Age
Report Universalism Value Domain Age
N
Median
<35
4
1,50
>35
2
1,00
Total
6
1,00
261
H5b2
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Benevolence Value Domain
Percent 11
100,0%
Excluded N
Total
Percent 0
,0%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Age
Report Benevolence Value Domain Age
N
Median
<35
6
1,00
>35
5
2,00
Total
11
2,00
262
German personal H5a
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Hedonism Value Domain *
Excluded
Percent 9
81,8%
N
Total
Percent 2
18,2%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
Age
Report Hedonism Value Domain Age
N
Median
<35
5
4,00
>35
4
2,00
Total
9
2,00
263
H5b1
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Universalism Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 10
90,9%
N
Total
Percent 1
9,1%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Age
Report Universalism Value Domain Age
N
Median
<35
4
1,00
>35
6
2,00
Total
10
2,00
264
H5b2
Case Processing Summary Cases Included N Benevolence Value Domain
Excluded
Percent 9
81,8%
N
Total
Percent 2
18,2%
N
Percent 11
100,0%
* Age
Report Benevolence Value Domain Age
N
Median
<35
5
1,00
>35
4
1,00
Total
9
1,00
265
Appendix 62: Analysis of further factor for H5a&b – enjoyment of food & wine Danish aggregated Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Enjoyment of Food & Wine
middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
female
Total
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
13,3%
23,1%
17,9%
13
10
23
56,5%
43,5%
100,0%
86,7%
76,9%
82,1%
15
13
28
53,6%
46,4%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Gender high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Enjoyment of Food & Wine
middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
>35
Total
4
1
5
80,0%
20,0%
100,0%
19,0%
14,3%
17,9%
17
6
23
73,9%
26,1%
100,0%
81,0%
85,7%
82,1%
21
7
28
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Age high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
266
Danish personal Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Enjoyment of Food & Wine
middle
Count
female
Total
0
1
1
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
20,0%
9,1%
6
4
10
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
100,0%
80,0%
90,9%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Enjoyment of Food & Wine
middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
>35
Total
1
0
1
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
16,7%
,0%
9,1%
5
5
10
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
83,3%
100,0%
90,9%
6
5
11
54,5%
45,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Age high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
267
German aggregated Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Enjoyment of Food & Wine
low
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
female
Total
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
6,3%
,0%
2,4%
16
19
35
45,7%
54,3%
100,0%
50,0%
36,5%
41,7%
14
33
47
29,8%
70,2%
100,0%
43,8%
63,5%
56,0%
32
52
84
38,1%
61,9%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Gender middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
268
Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Enjoyment of Food & Wine
low
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
>35
Total
2
0
2
100,0%
,0%
100,0%
3,2%
,0%
2,4%
26
9
35
74,3%
25,7%
100,0%
41,3%
42,9%
41,7%
35
12
47
74,5%
25,5%
100,0%
55,6%
57,1%
56,0%
63
21
84
75,0%
25,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Age middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
269
German personal Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Gender Crosstabulation Gender male Enjoyment of Food & Wine
middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
female
Total
3
2
5
60,0%
40,0%
100,0%
100,0%
25,0%
45,5%
0
6
6
,0%
100,0%
100,0%
,0%
75,0%
54,5%
3
8
11
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Gender high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Gender
Enjoyment of Food & Wine * Age Crosstabulation Age <35 Enjoyment of Food & Wine
middle
Count % within Enjoyment of Food &
>35
Total
2
3
5
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
40,0%
50,0%
45,5%
3
3
6
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
60,0%
50,0%
54,5%
5
6
11
45,5%
54,5%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
Wine % within Age high
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
Total
Count % within Enjoyment of Food & Wine % within Age
270
