Is Environmental Sustainability Also “Economically Efficient”? The Case of the “SOStain” Certification for Sicilian Sparkling Wines
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Italy’s Wine Sector, with a Focus on Sparkling Wines
1.2. Spumante Production in Sicily
1.3. The New Common Agricultural Policy for the Wine Sector and SOStain
1.4. Sustainability Voluntary Product Certifications, “VIVA” and “SOStain”
- Q1:
- Are environmentally sustainable production practices also economically sustainable?
- Q2:
- How much of the green transition is possible without penalizing competitiveness?
- Q3:
- Are winemakers ready for the green transition?
- Q4
- Are consumers aware of the additional efforts and costs borne by companies supporting ethical choices?
- Q5
- To what extent would wine consumers be willing to pay a premium price for certified environmentally friendly wines?
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Analysis 1
2.2.1. Sampling Design
2.2.2. Questionnaire and Survey
2.3. Analysis 2
2.3.1. Sampling Design
2.3.2. Questionnaire and Survey
2.3.3. Multidimensional Scaling
2.4. Analysis 3
2.4.1. Focus Group (FG)
2.4.2. Running the Focus Groups
- (1)
- Blind sensory test: The participants tasted the five Spumante wines guided by the sommelier.
- (2)
- Discussion: During the tasting, the participants could discuss and express their opinions about the sparkling wines tasted as well as tell about their previous experiences, e.g., consumption methods, reasons for consumption, frequency of consumption, importance of celebrative consumption, places of purchase, occasions/opportunities for consumption, prices, etc. In this step, the moderator who supervised the discussion encouraged the participants.
- (3)
- Evaluation: At the end of the sensorial tasting, the consumers were requested to fill a questionnaire in which they had to assign a score to the two sensory attributes chosen for evaluating the sparkling wines tasted, plus an overall judgment.
- (4)
- Discussion and completion of the questionnaire: After the evaluation, the participants were required to indicate an ideal price (chosen among five different ranges of pre-coded prices) for the tasted sparkling wines, based on their sensory judgment. Finally, the participants had to select the most suitable selling place for each Spumante among five different places (wine shops, wine bars, supermarkets, etc.), as well as their preferred consumption occasion/opportunity for these types of wines basing on their sensory taste.
- (5)
- Non-blinded sensory test and presentation of wines: The sommelier explained the reason for the sensorial differences among the five Spumante wines based on their territory of origin. The moderator talked about Sicilian sparkling wines and their typical sensorial traits, which allow for different combinations with food. Moreover, the moderator explained in depth the SOStain certification standards, values, costs for producers, and benefits for the environment, highlighting the ethical value of this type of voluntary certification.
- (6)
- Discussion, evaluation, and completion of the questionnaire: Opinions regarding the ideal price of the product, the suitable place of purchase, and the preferred occasion for consumption were gathered. Moreover, the participants were asked about their beliefs with regard to environmentally friendly practices and their previous experiences with consumption of/purchasing these types of food products. In particular, any change of opinion with regard to the SOStain-certified Spumante was investigated, as well as any new consumption intention based on their opinion about this type of certification and regardless the sensory tastes—but obviously discussing the “taste” variable.
- (7)
- Evaluation: At the end of discussion, the participants were asked to score the sensory attributes of the tasted wines again and provide an overall judgment plus possible changes in purchasing intention or willingness to pay.
3. Results
3.1. Results of Analysis on Wine Producers (AN1)
3.1.1. Producer Profiles
3.1.2. Multidimensional Scaling—Winemakers
3.2. Results of Consumer Survey (AN2)
3.2.1. Consumer Insight
3.2.2. Multidimensional Scaling—Consumers
3.3. Focus Group (AN3)
3.3.1. Phase 1 Blind Sensory Test
3.3.2. Phase 2 Sensory Test and Focus Group Opinions after Discussion of SOStain Certification
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ismea-Istituto di Servizi per il Mercato Agricolo Alimentare. Available online: https://www.ismeamercati.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/3525#MenuV (accessed on 4 May 2022).
- ISTAT–Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. Available online: https://www.istat.it/it/files//2021/01/IWP_8-2020.pdf (accessed on 4 May 2020).
- Corsi, A.; Mazzarino, S.; Pomarici, E. The Italian wine industry. In The Palgrave Handbook of Wine Industry Economics; Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 47–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prescott, C.; Pilato, M.; Bellia, C. Geographical indications in the UK after Brexit: An uncertain future? Food Policy 2020, 90, 101808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Universo Food. Available online: www.universofood.net (accessed on 4 April 2020).
- Ingrassia, M.; Altamore, L.; Bacarella, S.; Bellia, C.; Columba, P.; Chironi, S. Influence of coherent context for positioning distinctive and iconic Sicilian sparkling wines: Effect of a sensorial experience on a Gulet. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 2022, 32, 144–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2289. “Laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the presentation of the content of the CAP Strategic Plans and on the electronic system for the secure exchange of information”; Official Journal of the European Union; 2021. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R228 (accessed on 8 March 2022).
- European Commission. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en (accessed on 8 March 2022).
- European Commission. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/new-cap-2023-27/key-policy-objectives-new-cap_en (accessed on 8 March 2022).
- Cagliero, R.; Licciardo, F.; Legnini, M. The Evaluation Framework in the New CAP 2023–2027: A Reflection in the Light of Lessons Learned from Rural Development. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pulina, P. La Valutazione delle Politiche per lo Sviluppo Rurale nella Prospettiva Post 2020 (Evaluating Rural Development Policies in the Post-2020 Perspective); Agriregionieuropa 2018; p. 52. Available online: https://agriregionieuropa.univpm.it/it/content/article/31/52/la-valutazione-delle-politiche-lo-sviluppo-rurale-nella-prospettiva-post-2020 (accessed on 10 November 2020).
- European Commission. The Future of Food and Farming–For a Flexible, Fair and Sustainable Common Agricultural Policy; EU Publications Office: Luxembourg, 2007; Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_4841 (accessed on 10 November 2020).
- Oosterveer, P.; Adjei, B.E.; Vellema, S.; Slingerland, M. Global sustainability standards and food security: Exploring unintended effects of voluntary certification in palm oil. Global Food Secur. 2014, 3, 220–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Auld, G.; Gulbrandsen, L.H.; McDermott, C.L. Certification schemes and the impacts on forests and forestry. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2008, 33, 187–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henson, S.; Humphrey, J. Understanding the complexities of private standards in global agri-food chains as they impact developing countries. J. Dev. Stud. 2010, 46, 1628–1646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ponte, S.; Gibbon, P.; Vestergaard, J. Governing through Standards: Origins, Drivers and Limitations; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Mol, A.P.; Oosterveer, P. Certification of markets, markets of certificates: Tracing sustainability in global agro-food value chains. Sustainability 2015, 7, 12258–12278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- DeFries, R.S.; Fanzo, J.; Mondal, P.; Remans, R.; Wood, S.A. Is voluntary certification of tropical agricultural commodities achieving sustainability goals for small-scale producers? A review of the evidence. Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 033001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schaltegger, S.; Burritt, R. Measuring and managing sustainability performance of supply chains, Review and sustainability supply chain management framework. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2014, 19, 232–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingrassia, M.; Bacarella, S.; Columba, P.; Altamore, L.; Chironi, S. Traceability and labelling of food products from the consumer perspective. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2017, 58, 865–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collins, R.; Dent, B. Value chain management and postharvest handling. In Postharvest Handling; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2022; pp. 319–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baiano, A. An overview on sustainability in the wine production chain. Beverages 2021, 7, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbo, C.; Lamastra, L.; Capri, E. From environmental to sustainability programs: A review of sustainability initiatives in the Italian wine sector. Sustainability 2014, 6, 2133–2159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Italiano, G. Ministero della Transizione Ecologica. Available online: https://www.mite.gov.it/pagina/il-programma-viva-la-sostenibilita-nella-vitivinicoltura-italia-0 (accessed on 1 October 2021).
- Fondazione SOStain. Available online: https://www.fondazionesostainsicilia.it/ (accessed on 31 March 2022).
- Tasca D’Almerita Wines. Available online: https://www.tascadalmerita.it/en/ (accessed on 17 May 2022).
- Planeta Wines. Available online: https://planeta.it/en/ (accessed on 17 May 2022).
- Cantine Settesoli. Available online: https://www.cantinesettesoli.it/en/ (accessed on 17 May 2022).
- Cantine Terre di Noto. Available online: https://www.terredinoto.it/ (accessed on 17 May 2022).
- Mancuso, T.; Arfo, S.; Di Mauro, M.; Matarazzo, A.; Froio, A.P. Application of SOSTAIN to Wine Sector in Sicily as Sustainability Management Tool. J. Biomed. Res. Environ. Sci. 2022, 2766, 2276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asioli, D.; Wongprawmas, R.; Pignatti, E.; Canavari, M. Can information affect sensory perceptions? Evidence from a survey on Italian organic food consumers. AIMS Agric. Food 2018, 3, 327–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chironi, S.; Bacarella, S.; Altamore, L.; Columba, P. Ingrassia, Study of product repositioning for the Marsala Vergine DOC wine M. Int. J. Entrep. Small Bus. 2017, 32, 118–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelly, N.; Kelliher, F.; Power, J.; Lynch, P. Unlocking the niche potential of senior tourism through micro-firm owner-manager adaptive capability development. Tour. Manag. 2020, 79, 104081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingrassia, M.; Altamore, L.; Columba, P.; Bacarella, S.; Chironi, S. The wine routes in Sicily as a tool for rural development: An exploratory analysis. In Proceedings of the X International Agriculture Symposium, Agrosym, Jahorina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 3–6 October 2019; Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2019; pp. 1785–1792. [Google Scholar]
- Ingrassia, M.; Sgroi, F.; Tudisca, S.; Chironi, S. Study of Consumer Preferences in Regard to the Blonde Orange Cv. Washington Navel “Arancia Di Ribera PDO”. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2017, 23, 799–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergamini, D.; Bartolini, F.; Prosperi, P.; Brunori, G. Explaining regional dynamics of marketing strategies: The experience of the Tuscan wine producers. J. Rural. Stud. 2019, 72, 136–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Novara, A.; Favara, V.; Novara, A.; Francesca, N.; Santangelo, T.; Columba, P.; Gristina, L. Soil carbon budget account for the sustainability improvement of a mediterranean vineyard area. Agronomy 2020, 10, 336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ingrassia, M.; Bellia, C.; Giurdanella, C.; Columba, P.; Chironi, S. Digital Influencers, Food and Tourism—A New Model of Open Innovation for Businesses in the Ho. Re. Ca. Sector. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Meara, L.; Turner, C.; Coitinho, D.C.; Oenema, S. Consumer experiences of food environments during the Covid-19 pandemic: Global insights from a rapid online survey of individuals from 119 countries. Glob. Food Secur. 2022, 32, 100594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brown, B.L.; Hendrix, S.B.; Hedges, D.W.; Smith, T.B. Multivariate Analysis for the Biobehavioral and Social Sciences: A Graphical Approach; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Andriani, S.; Pratiwi, D.D.; Ariawan, F.; Murtianto, Y.H.; Yustinaningrum, B. Analysis of Consumers’ Perception at the Food Court of Lampung Walk by Using Multidimensional Scaling Approach. Al-Jabar: J. Pendidik. Mat. 2018, 9, 209–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Morgan, D.L. Living within blurry boundaries: The value of distinguishing between qualitative and quantitative research. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2018, 12, 268–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lobe, B.; Morgan, D.L. Assessing the effectiveness of video-based interviewing: A systematic comparison of video-conferencing based dyadic interviews and focus groups. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2021, 24, 301–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neuninger, R.; Mather, D.; Duncan, T. Consumer’s scepticism of wine awards: A study of consumers’ use of wine awards. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 35, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altamore, L.; Ingrassia, M.; Chironi, S.; Columba, P.; Sortino, G.; Vukadin, A.; Bacarella, S. Pasta experience: Eating with the five senses—A pilot study. AIMS Agric. Food 2018, 3, 493–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chironi, S.; Sortino, G.; Allegra, A.; Caviglia, V.; Ingrassia, M. Consumer assessment on sensory attributes of fresh table grapes Cv ‘Italia’ and ‘red globe’ after long cold storage treatment. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2017, 58, 421–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panico, T.; Caracciolo, F.; Furno, M. Analysing the consumer purchasing behaviour for certified wood products in Italy. For. Policy Econ. 2022, 136, 102670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charters, S.; Spielmann, N.; Babin, B.J. The nature and value of terroir products. Eur. J. Mark. 2017, 51, 748–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingrassia, M.; Altamore, L.; Bacarella, S.; Columba, P.; Chironi, S. The wine influencers: Exploring a new communication model of open innovation for wine producers—A netnographic, factor and AGIL analysis. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020, 6, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mastroberardino, P.; Calabrese, G.; Cortese, F.; Petracca, M. Social Commerce in the Wine Sector: An Exploratory Research Study of the Italian Market. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, D.; Hao, S.; Mu, W.; Shi, J.; Feng, J. Chinese consumers’ selection of wine purchasing channels: Influence of demographic characteristics, perceived value factors, social factors and wine knowledge. Br. Food J. 2021. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bindi, L.; Conti, M.; Belliggiano, A. Sense of Place, Biocultural Heritage, and Sustainable Knowledge and Practices in Three Italian Rural Regeneration Processes. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tobias, M.M.; Myles, C.C. Wine, culture and environment: A study of the Sierra (Nevada) Foothills American Viticultural Area. In The Routledge Handbook of Wine and Culture; Routledge: London, UK, 2022; pp. 99–109. [Google Scholar]
- Williams, S.; Schaefer, A. Small and medium-sized enterprises and sustainability: Managers’ values and engagement with environmental and climate change issues. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2013, 22, 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Flagstad, I.; Hauge, Å.L.; Johnsen, S.Å.K. Certification dissonance: Contradictions between environmental values and certification scheme requirements in small-scale companies. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 358, 132037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, X.; Chau, K.Y.; Tang, Y.M.; Iqbal, W. Business ethics and irrationality in SME during COVID-19: Does it impact on sustainable business resilience? Front. Environ. Sci. 2022, 10, 132037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trigo, A.; Silva, P. Sustainable Development Directions for Wine Tourism in Douro Wine Region, Portugal. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Wang, J.; Han, D.; Lv, S.; Chen, M.; Yin, S. The interaction relationships among agricultural certification labels or brands: Evidence from Chinese consumer preference for fresh produce. International Food and Agribusiness. Manag. Rev. 2022, 25, 211–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez, L.M.C.; Mollá-Bauzá, M.B.; Gomis, F.J.D.C.; Poveda, Á.M. Influence of purchase place and consumption frequency over quality wine preferences. Food Qual. Prefer. 2006, 17, 315–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piracci, G.; Boncinelli, F.; Casini, L. Wine consumers’ demand for social sustainability labeling: Evidence for the fair labor claim. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 2022. [CrossRef]
- Sarkar, J.G.; Sarkar, A.; Sreejesh, S. Developing responsible consumption behaviours through social media platforms: Sustainable brand practices as message cues. Inf. Technol. People 2022. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fagioli, F.F.; Gallesio, G.; Viganò, E. Wineries communication strategies. A text mining analysis. Wine Econ. Policy 2022. Just Accepted. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sortino, G.; Allegra, A.; Inglese, P.; Chironi, S.; Ingrassia, M. Influence of an evoked pleasant consumption context on consumers’ hedonic evaluation for minimally processed cactus pear (Opuntia ficus-indica) fruit. Acta Hortic. 2016, 1141, 327–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altamore, L.; Bacarella, S.; Columba, P.; Chironi, S.; Ingrassia, M. The Italian consumers’ preferences for pasta: Does environment matter? Chem. Eng. Trans. 2017, 58, 859–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bellia, C.; Columba, P.; Ingrassia, M. The Brand–Land Identity of Etna Volcano Valley Wines: A Policy Delphi Study. Agriculture 2022, 12, 811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buerke, A.; Straatmann, T.; Lin-Hi, N.; Müller, K. Consumer awareness and sustainability-focused value orientation as motivating factors of responsible consumer behavior. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2017, 11, 959–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bălan, C. How does retail engage consumers in sustainable consumption? A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2020, 13, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ritch, E.L. Consumers interpreting sustainability: Moving beyond food to fashion. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2015, 43, 1162–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaulieu, N.D. Quality information and consumer health plan choices. J. Health Econ. 2002, 21, 43–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruggeri, G.; Mazzocchi, C.; Corsi, S.; Ranzenigo, B. No More Glass Bottles? Canned Wine and Italian Consumers. Foods 2022, 11, 1106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lazzarini, G.A.; Visschers, V.H.; Siegrist, M. How to improve consumers’ environmental sustainability judgements of foods. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 198, 564–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pomarici, E.; Sardone, R. EU wine policy in the framework of the CAP: Post-2020 challenges. Agric. Food Econ. 2020, 8, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerini, F.; Fantechi, T.; Contini, C.; Casini, L.; Scozzafava, G. Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet and COVID-19: A Segmentation Analysis of Italian and US Consumers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pomarici, E.; Corsi, A.; Mazzarino, S.; Sardone, R. The Italian Wine Sector: Evolution, Structure, Competitiveness and Future Challenges of an Enduring Leader. Ital. Econ. J. 2021, 7, 259–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cobelli, N.; Chiarini, A.; Giaretta, E. Enabling factors for adopting sustainable, organic wine production. TQM J. 2021, 33, 1572–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zarbà, C.; Chinnici, G.; La Via, G.; Pecorino, B.; D’amico, M. Regulatory elements on the circular economy: Driving into the agri-food system. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthews, A. The new CAP must be linked more closely to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Agric. Food Econ. 2020, 8, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingrassia, M.; Bacarella, S.; Altamore, L.; Sortino, G.; Chironi, S. Consumer acceptance and primary drivers of liking for small fruits. Acta Hortic. 2018, 1194, 1147–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, A.; Roy, M. A study of consumers’ willingness to pay for green products. J. Adv. Manag. Sci. 2016, 4, 211–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalogeras, N.; Valchovska, S.; Baourakis, G.; Kalaitzis, P. Dutch consumers’ willingness to pay for organic olive oil. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 2009, 21, 286–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Canio, F.; Martinelli, E. EU quality label vs organic food products: A multigroup structural equation modeling to assess consumers’ intention to buy in light of sustainable motives. Food Res. Int. 2021, 139, 109846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pappalardo, G.; West, G.H.; Nayga, R.M.; Toscano, S.; Pecorino, B. The effect of a UNESCO world heritage site designation on willingness to pay to preserve an agri-environmental good: The case of the dry stone walls in Mt. Etna. Land Use Policy 2022, 114, 105972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morgan, D.L. Robert Merton and the History of Focus Groups: Standing on the Shoulders of a Giant? Am. Soc. 2021, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halliday, M.; Mill, D.; Johnson, J.; Lee, K. Let’s talk virtual! Online focus group facilitation for the modern researcher. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2021, 17, 2145–2150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Kallas, Z. Meta-analysis of consumers’ willingness to pay for sustainable food products. Appetite 2021, 163, 105239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, B.; Dholakia, N. Firms enabling responsible consumption: A netnographic approach. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2022, 40, 289–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mastroberardino, P.; Calabrese, G.; Cortese, F.; Petracca, M. Sustainability in the wine sector: An empirical analysis of the level of awareness and perception among the Italian consumers. Br. Food J. 2020, 122, 2497–2511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broccardo, L.; Zicari, A. Sustainability as a driver for value creation: A business model analysis of small and medium entreprises in the Italian wine sector. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 259, 120852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acampora, A. Sustainability experiences in the wine sector: Toward the development of an international indicators system. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 3791–3805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lovec, M.; Šumrada, T.; Erjavec, E. New CAP Delivery Model, Old Issues. Intereconomics 2020, 55, 112–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
n. | Companies Associated with the SOStain Foundation | Timeframe for Accession * | Dimension ** |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Alessandro di Camporeale 1 | Recent accession | Small |
2 | Assuli 1 | Recent accession | Small |
3 | Aziende Agricole Planeta 1,3 | Early accession | Big |
4 | Cantina Settesoli 1,3 | Early accession | Big |
5 | Cantina Sociale Paolini 1 | Recent accession | Big |
6 | Cantina Sociale Petrosino1 | Recent accession | Big |
7 | Cantine Colomba Bianca 1,3 | Recent accession | Big |
8 | Cantine Europa 1,3 | Recent accession | Big |
9 | Cantine La Vite 1 | Recent accession | Big |
10 | Carlo Pellegrino 1,3 | Recent accession | Small |
11 | Castellucci Miano 1,3 | Recent accession | Big |
12 | Conte Tasca D’Almerita 1,3 | Early accession | Big |
13 | Cottanera 1,3 | Recent accession | Small |
14 | Cusumano 1,3 | Early accession | Big |
15 | CVA Canicattì 1 | Recent accession | Big |
16 | Domaine en Sicile 2,3 | Recent accession | Small |
17 | Le Casematte 1 | Recent accession | Small |
18 | Nicosia 1,3 | Recent accession | Big |
19 | Nosio 2,3 | Recent accession | Small |
20 | Principe di Corleone 1,3 | Recent accession | Small |
21 | Solsicano 2,3 | Recent accession | Small |
22 | Tenuta di Donnafugata 1,3 | Early accession | Big |
23 | Tenuta di Fessina 1 | Recent accession | Small |
24 | Tenuta Gorghi Tondi 1 | Recent accession | Small |
25 | Tenute Rapitalà 1 | Recent accession | Big |
26 | Terre di Noto 1 | Early accession | Small |
n. | Motivations to Join the SOStain Foundation | Difficulties Encountered in Complying with the SOStain Specifications | Which Practice Generate the Highest Costs | Where the Economic Benefits Are Most Reflected | Where the Added Value Is Mostly Allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | MOT_Environmental Protection | D_Sustainable vineyard MGM 1 by Specification | C_Sustainable vineyard MGM 1 by Specification | ReflPosEffect_Environmental Sustainability | AValue_Brand Name |
2 | MOT_Focus on Sustainability | D_Use of natural preparations | C_Use of natural preparations | ReflPosEffect_Economic Sustainability | AValue_Winery production |
3 | MOT_Increase Visibility | D_Maintain natural biodiversity | C_Maintain natural biodiversity | ReflPosEffect_Sustainable land management | AValue_Product line |
4 | MOT_Commercial Advantage | D_Use of Ecofriendly materials | C_Use of Ecofriendly materials | ReflPosEffect_Nutritional Sustainability | AValue_Single wine |
5 | MOT_Achieve common goals | D_Use of regional grapes | C_Use of regional grapes | ReflPosEffect_Social Sustainability | AValue_Only Fine wines |
6 | D_Application of VIVA indicators | C_Application of VIVA indicators | |||
7 | D_Energy Efficient Technologies | C_Energy Efficient Technologies | |||
8 | D_Reduce bottle weight | C_Reduce bottle weight | |||
9 | D_Prepare annual report | C_Prepare annual report | |||
10 | D_No pesticides’ residues | C_No pesticides’ residues |
n. | Meaning of the SOStain Logo | Reason Why a Winemaker Joins the SOStain Program | What Practice a Winemaker Should Apply | Where the Most Added Value for the Winery Is |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | M_Environmental Sustainability | R_Increase Visibility | A_ Sustainable vineyard MGM 1 by Specification | AV_Brand Name |
2 | M_Economic Sustainability | R_Commercial Advantage | A_Use of natural preparations | AV_Winery production |
3 | M_Sustainable land management | R_Achieve common goals | A_Maintain natural biodiversity | AV_Product line |
4 | M_Nutritional Sustainability | R_Environmental Protection | A_Use of Ecofriendly materials | AV_Single wine |
5 | M_Social Sustainability | R_Focus on Sustainability | A_Use of regional grapes | AV_Only Fine wines |
6 | A_Reducing environmental impacts | |||
7 | A_Energy Efficient Technologies | |||
8 | A_Reduce glass consumption | |||
9 | A_Prepare annual report | |||
10 | A_No pesticide residues |
Focus Group | Participants | Gender and Age Range | Education and Employment 1 | Frequency of Consumption 1 | Main Occasions/Opportunities for Consumption 1 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group 1 | 10 | 4 males and 6 females. Age: two 19–30-year-olds; two 31–40-year-olds; four 41–50-year-olds; two >51-year-olds | The number of participants for each category was identified in order to reflect the same % values of the balanced sample of consumers extracted for AN 2 | The number of participants for each category was identified in order to reflect the same % values of the balanced sample of consumers extracted for AN 2 | The number of participants for each category was identified in order to reflect the same % values of the balanced sample of consumers extracted for AN 2 |
Group 2 | 10 | 6 males and 4 females. Age: two 19–30-year-olds; two 31–40-year-olds; four 41–50-year-olds; two >51-year-olds | The number of participants for each category was identified in order to reflect the same % values of the balanced sample of consumers extracted for AN 2 | The number of participants for each category was identified in order to reflect the same % values of the balanced sample of consumers extracted for AN 2 | The number of participants for each category was identified in order to reflect the same % values of the balanced sample of consumers extracted for AN 2 |
n. | Sparkling Wine | Producer | Cultivar | Production Method | Alcohol Content | Designation of Origin (Denominazione di Origine Controllata—DOC) | Average Price | Fancy Name |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Castellucci-Miano | Castellucci-Miano | Catarratto 100% | Charmat | 12% | Sclafani DOC | 15€ | Sun |
2 | Terzavia | De Bartoli | Grillo 100% | Metodo classico | 11.5% | DOC Sicilia | 24€ | Land |
3 | Brut Metodo Classico Sicilia DOC—“SOStain” certified | Planeta | Carricante 100% | Metodo classico | 12.5% | DOC Sicilia | 19€ | Sea |
4 | Muller Turgau Brut | Fazio | Muller Turgau 100% | Charmat | 10.5% | Etna DOC | 9€ | Air |
5 | Spumante Test | Ferrari | Chardonnay 100% | Metodo classico | 12.5% | Trento DOC | 18€ | Moon |
Socio-Demographic Variables | Sample Characteristics | % Values |
---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 47.1% |
Male | 50.8% | |
Not declared | 2.1% | |
Range of age | 18–29 | 52.9% |
30–49 | 21.4% | |
50–59 | 18.2% | |
>60 | 7.5% | |
Education * | Diploma | 32.8% |
University degree | 46.8% | |
Higher than degree | 16.7% | |
Other | 3.7% | |
Type of employment * | Student | 43% |
Unemployed | 7% | |
Entrepreneur/Freelancer | 20% | |
Employee/Manager/Academic | 28% | |
Retired | 2% | |
Frequency of wine consumption * | Daily | 20% |
1/3 times per week | 55% | |
Few times per month | 20% | |
Rarely on special occasions | 5% | |
Main occasions/opportunities for consumption * | At home (during meals or aperitifs) | 60% |
Outside: wine shop, wine bar, restaurant, spare time with friends, etc. | 35% | |
Only during special occasions: holidays, celebrations, etc. | 5% |
Price Ranges | Producers | Consumers | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Wine in General | Spumante Wine | Wine in General | Spumante Wine | |
EUR 5–8 | 33.2% | 6.7% | 3.2% | 2.7% |
EUR 9–12 | 40% | 33.3% | 27.3% | 17.1% |
EUR 13–16 | 13.2% | 20% | 30.5% | 28.9% |
EUR 17–20 | 6.7% | 20% | 11.8% | 28.3% |
More than EUR 20 | 6.7% | 20% | 9.6% | 23% |
Do not know | - | - | 17.6% | - |
Variables | Phase 1—Blind Sensory Test | Phase 2—Sensory Test with Description of Spumante Wine Characteristics and SOStain Certification | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sea (Muller Turgau Brut) | Sun (Castellucci-Miano) | Air (Planeta SOStain Certified) | Land (Terzavia) | Moon (SP Test) | Muller Turgau Brut (Sea) | Castellucci-Miano (Sun) | Planeta SOStain Certified (Air) | Terzavia (Land) | SP Test (Moon) | |
Visual aspect | 20% | 70% | 90% | 36% | 90% | 20% | 70% | 84% | 24% | 100% |
Taste | 22% | 72% | 90% | 28% | 96% | 22% | 72% | 90% | 22% | 96% |
Average price (EUR/bottle) | 10€ | 20€ | 20€ | 10€ | 25€ | 10€ | 20€ | 24€ | 10€ | 20€ |
Overall judgment | 20% | 82% | 84% | 28% | 96% | 16% | 82%% | 92% | 10%6 | 98% |
Purchasing intention | 20% | 78% | 80% | 24% | 98% | 20% | 78% | 98% | 20 | 98% |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ingrassia, M.; Chironi, S.; Lo Grasso, G.; Gristina, L.; Francesca, N.; Bacarella, S.; Columba, P.; Altamore, L. Is Environmental Sustainability Also “Economically Efficient”? The Case of the “SOStain” Certification for Sicilian Sparkling Wines. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7359. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127359
Ingrassia M, Chironi S, Lo Grasso G, Gristina L, Francesca N, Bacarella S, Columba P, Altamore L. Is Environmental Sustainability Also “Economically Efficient”? The Case of the “SOStain” Certification for Sicilian Sparkling Wines. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7359. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127359
Chicago/Turabian StyleIngrassia, Marzia, Stefania Chironi, Giuseppe Lo Grasso, Luciano Gristina, Nicola Francesca, Simona Bacarella, Pietro Columba, and Luca Altamore. 2022. "Is Environmental Sustainability Also “Economically Efficient”? The Case of the “SOStain” Certification for Sicilian Sparkling Wines" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7359. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127359