You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Sustainability
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open Access

25 June 2022

The Impact of COVID-19 on Consumers’ Motives in Purchasing and Consuming Quality Greek Wine

,
,
,
and
1
Laboratory of Food Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece
2
Department of Informatics and Computer Engineering, University of West Attica, Egaleo Park Campus, Ag. Spyridonos Str., 12243 Athens, Greece
3
Laboratory of Food Chemistry, Biochemistry and Technology, Department of Food Science and Nutrition, School of the Environment, University of The Aegean, Metropolitan Ioakeim 2, 81400 Lemnos, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability2022, 14(13), 7769;https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137769
This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Food
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

In the rising post COVID-19 period the world is different not only from the economic point of view but also from the social and cultural point, including the selection of goods, and foods by the “new” customers. Wine is a major daily drink worldwide, affecting the lives of consumers worldwide. The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on consumers’ motives for quality wine, namely the Greek wine and the local Samos’ Greek wine, assessing possible changes in their wine habits effecting current and future wine production, consumption, and sustainable regional development. Consumers’ motives were tested using variables of wine purchase and consumption (such as place of purchase, money spent, amount consumed, accompaniment meals), and preference for quality wine (such as traditional, appearance, organoleptic, sustainable, general characteristics). A self-response questionnaire survey was carried out in January and February 2022 on a sample of 1493 participants through the Google platform. Basic statistical tools, combined with cross and Chi-square tests were used in order to analyze the collected data. The results show interesting changes in consumers’ motives in the new rising global era. The participants buy less from supermarket (−4.2%), more via online (+1.8%) and equally from other places, the majority one bottle per month spending 10 to 20 euros today. They consume less wine (−5.1%), the majority one bottle per month, preferable at home (+6%), with friends (+1.6%), rather than at the restaurant (−8.2%), the club/bar (−8.9%), the night club (−5.8%), or during celebration (−3.2%). They continue to prefer the “red with red, white to white” accompaniments with meals. They select quality wines based on the conventional variables with emphasis to the taste (94.5%), aroma (83.9%), value for money (72.8%). The participants expressed similar motives for the quality Samos’ wines. However, even though they are aware of its high quality (92.9%), only 53% of them have tasted them, and fewer are consuming then occasionally (32.3%). Our findings indicate that the sustainability, and growth of the quality wine in the new socioeconomic era, should focus on the easy access (including on line), the consumption at home, with friends and family, keeping the same preferences between different kinds of wine with the different meals for the consumers.

1. Introduction

At the intersection of the COVID-19 pandemic and the global economy, numerous issues pose challenges to scholars and policy makers [], such as economic, environmental, and societal []. Philip Kottler, the pioneer of marketing, distinguishes five types of the new consumers (the anti-consumers) namely the Climate activists, the Degrowth activists, the Life simplifiers, the Food choosers, and the Conservation activists []. Food sector faces critical issues, such as the safety, the waste, the security, the 4.0 industry of foods, and the nutritional concerns of the products []. The global food production and supply need to move at the consumption site. Information Technologies of any kind, and the redefinition of consumption are the modern approaches in the coming environment []. Quality, nutrition, natural resources of the foods are what the consumer is searching for his protection, the environment and the regional economies [,]. These changes contribute to adapting to new norms for foods and drinks for consumer’s motives, perceptions and decision making. These norms, when identified and accepted by the local producers, will contribute to the sustainability of their regional economies, since they will increase local food productions and consumption. The aim of this paper is to identify such “new” changes by the consumers for quality wines providing thus practical directions for the producers for sustainable, permanent local development in the new, post COVID-19 era already under way.

Literature Review

Consumers’ wine choice is more complex [], and it will become more complicated in the future. It is one of the most differentiated products on the food market []. The quality is connected with the place of origination [] being different among vintages and wine produces []. Consumer determining factors change according to the range of wine characteristics, supporting a hierarchical scale of wines, as the quality increase or decrease []. Consumers have to deal with many different cues on wine labels []. The main selection drivers are the country of origin and the region of production []. Variety of grapes [], cost [], and branding [] are key parameters for wine selection. Sustainability has also become a key issue for the consumers and the industry []. The certifications show new selection criteria for the wine of consumers []. The consumers’ preference for organic wines is heterogenous []. However, are not yet fully understood the organic labeling effects, the perception of quality, and the support for the claimed benefits []. Increased interest is also recorded for organic wines with no added sulfites []. Consumers also prefer the wine produced with hand—harvested grapes, without interconnection with the organic wines []. Personal values are also influencing consumers’ behavior shaping the choice drivers for wine []. Emotions also play a role to consumers’ choice for wine categorizing them in four groups: “emotionally unattached”, “negatives”, “contented circumspects” and “wine lovers” []. The “wine lovers” is the most attractive segment due to their strong wine emotional bonds. Innovative wine attributes such as “canned wine”, “alcohol—free wine” and “vegan wine” are still least important to consumers []. Finally, recent study shows that consumers express a positive perception in terms of corporate social responsibility performance of wine such as “health and food safety”, “sustainable agricultural practices”, “air pollution”, with least important “energy consumption”, “sustainable packaging”, and “fair trade” [].
Greece is a country with a long tradition, where viticulture and wine production are integral element for many regions of Greece that continue to develop in parallel with the cultural heritage of each region [,]. Throughout the long history of Greek wine, the vine-wine relationship is inextricably tied to all residents of Greece, from one end of the country to the other []. The Greek wine history goes back a long way since the ancient years, in terms of vine production and timeless production of wines. The beginnings of viticulture in Greece transcend historical times and are lost in the mists of time. Since then vineyard and wine accompany Greeks until today without interruption. The cultivation of vine is one of the most basic crops of Greece reaching up to 49.502 hectares (ha) in 2019, according to data of Hellenic Statistical Authority (ELSTAT) [], as compared to 45.177 hectares in 2016. In Table 1 the distribution per region is shown as well. Wines, being traditional products, have geographical and traditional indicators in the E.U. for the promotion and protection of the names of quality food stuffs, their origin, and authenticity (e.g., PDO: protected designation of origin, PGI: protected geographical indication, TGI: traditional specialty guaranteed) []. Greece has incorporated the provisions of the Regulation in the National Legislation with Ministerial Decree (3321/145849) issued by the Hellenic Ministry of Food & Agricultural Development since 2006 []. The registered Greek wines by the different types in each Greek region are shown in Table 1, reaching up to 33 PDOs, and 116 PGIs. There are no TGIs registered Greek wines up to now.
Table 1. Distribution of the recognized Greek wines and the wine production between the different regions of Greece.
Among the quality Greek wines Samos’ wine is the most important, well known brand worldwide, because of its unique worldwide origin of grapes (muscat of Samos), the unique wine products, and by far the highest percentage of export (50%). Samos island is famous for its quality wines (sweet, semi dry, dry, natural), produced from white muscat grapes [] by the United Winemaking agriculture Cooperation of Samos (UAWC of Samos) [], are famous worldwide, with long tradition since 1932. They are famous for their unique aroma, taste and specialty such as the sweet Samos labels Vin Douc, Nectar, Grand Cru, Anthemis (4 PDOs) and white muscat labels (2 PGIs) Samos produced 6.505 tones of wine from 1031.7 ha of wine vineyard cultivation in 2019, last year of available statistics [] with 2000 number of holdings. It is for all these reasons that the specific quality wine was selected as part of our overall consumer’s study presented below.
Wine is an important product for the Greek economy and its sustainable future development for both agriculture and industry, with a shift towards the bottling of superior quality wine and its export as well as a closer collaboration between companies in the sector [,]. Consumer preference is influenced by many factors making difficult for Greek companies in the industry to formulate promotion strategies and tactics []. In literature there are very few studies from the long past on consumers motives and perception for the Greek wines such as loyalty determinants [], preferences for cask wine [], response for quality wines [], motives for organic wine [], willingness for origin label [], and evaluation for product certification, geographic association, traceability [].
In order to identify consumers’ characteristics beyond the COVID-19 period for Traditional Foods (TFs) we have initiated recently a wide research effort covering different aspects of the subject matter. Our initial findings prove that the “new” consumers trust the TFs as safe, healthy, sustainable, authentic and tasty []. They consider traceability regarding questions on package information, on food itself, quality, production process, and personal information important for the purchase of TFs []. Their attitudes and perceptions regarding TFs remain high, therefore, with high expectations of growth in the coming “new normality” [].
We have shown the importance of wine for the consumers, and for the regional economies as part of their TFs vital for the development and growth []. Quality wines, like the rest of TFs, have the potential to become the drink of selection for the citizens, the anti-consumers. The scope of this research is to evaluate the factors connected with the consumers’ motives for the quality Greek wine in order to identify the data required to ensure its future, growth and development in the new era. To accomplish the scope, according to the literature on the parameters of consumers’ preference, perceptions, attitudes for wine [,,,], the work examines the following three determinants of consumers’ motives and preference on Greek wine in the post COVID-19 period:
(I)
Consumers’ motives for the purchase and consumption of Greek wine. This involves data regarding place of purchase (including online), place of consumption, quantities purchased and consumed before and after COVID-19, as well as consumption preference on the combination of meals with different kinds of wines (red, white, rose etc.)
(II)
Consumers’ preference for quality Greek wine. This involves data regarding traditional parameters, organoleptic parameters, appearance, sustainability, and general characteristics.
(III)
Consumers’ preference and knowledge of the Samos’ Greek wine. This involves data regarding preference for specific kinds of wine, consumption, place of purchase (including on line), and knowledge of the Samos’ wines available, their export capacity, quality, organoleptic and taste characteristics, together with knowledge regarding the island of Samos, and its agricultural products.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Collection and Sample Characterization

This survey was based on a questionnaire prepared to investigate the information that influence consumers’ motives and preference on Greek wine influenced by the COVID-19 period. The questionnaire was built up in four parts and it is presented in Table S1 in the supplement section. Each question was created in such a way that it could provide the best possible information for each section. The parts were built up using a similar previous study []. The first part included questions about the social-demographic characteristics of the respondents, specifically, gender, age, level of education, civil state, job situation, and permanent residency in different parts of Greece. The second part consisted of ten questions designed to assess the motives on purchase and consumption of Greek wine in the post COVID era. The third part included five questions focused on the participants’ preference of choice for quality Greek wine. Finally, the fourth part, consisted of ten questions searching information about the knowledge and preference of the “Samos’ Wines”, one of the most famous quality Greek wines. To guarantee the quality of the data obtained through the application of the questionnaire, this was pretested with 50 respondents. This phase was pivotal to ensure that the questions were clear and understandable, so that respondents could answer them easily. The research was carried out using electronic questionnaires as it was easier to distribute and collect during the semi-lockdown period. The distribution method chosen was by e-mail, as similarly performed in recent papers investigating consumer behaviors [,,]. A snowball method was used in order to obtain a large number of participants []. The sample of the population is very well distributed, since it included a wide range of ages, civil states, levels of education etc. and were familiar with the new technologies.
A higher rate for female respondents recorded at 63.9% is similar to the observation by other papers as well [,,,], leading to the conclusion that women respond more willingly to food-related surveys as they are primarily involved in the household organization. The research questionnaire was created through the Google Platform and the Google Forms function due to the ability of direct export of the results to an Excel sheet for further processing. The geographical context for the present study was all the Greek regions, divided in five parts. Respondents received e-mails explaining the purpose of the research and the importance of their participation, while there was an attached link that led to the electronic form of the questionnaire. Responses were anonymous and no personal information was collected or correlated with any of the responses to ensure the protection of participants.
The survey took place during the period January–February 2022, at the decline of the pandemic, and consisted of 1493 participants.

2.2. Data Analysis

The exploratory analysis of the data was achieved through basic statistical tools. The survey was prepared in Greek and divided into four parts, as above detailed:
Part I. Sociodemographic data.
Part II. Purchase and consumption of Greek wine in the post COVID-19 era.
Part III. Preference of choice for quality Greek wine in the post COVID-19 era.
Part IV. Knowledge and preference of “Samos’ Wines” in post COVID-19 era.
The sociodemographic characteristics were collected in the first part of the questionnaire (six questions-one dichotomous, one ordinal variable and four nominal variables). The second part recorded information concerning the purchase and consumption motives of participants (ten questions-three ordinal variables, one dichotomous and four multiple choices with each response considered as dichotomous variables). The third part consisted of five questions (ordinal variables) recording the preference of choice for quality wine of the participants and finally the fourth part (ten questions- three multiple choices with each response considered as dichotomous variables, six dichotomous and one ordinal variable) recorded information about the knowledge and preference of “Samos’ Wines”.
Analytical data was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 25.0, IBM Corp. Armonk, NY, USA), as described by Skalkos et al. []. The Cramer’s V coefficient used in the ch2 tests, ranging from 0 to 1, can be interpreted as follows: V ≈ 0.1 weak association, V ≈ 0.3 moderate association, and V ≈ 0.5 or over, strong association. In all the tests performed, the level of significance considered was 5% (p < 0.05).

3. Results

Table 2 presents the sociodemographic characteristics of the participants in the survey.
Table 2. Sociodemographic characterization of the sample.
Regarding the spatial distribution, participants were 21.0% permanent residents of west Greece, 42.1% of central Greece (including the capital Athens), 23.8% residents of north Greece, 8.9% residents of the Greek islands, and 4.2% of south Greece, leading to a wide geographical distribution. The majority of the participants were aged between 18–25, 46–55, and 56+ years (41.8%, 22.3%, and 15.7% respectively), while the other age groups, 26–35, and 36–45, were the least represented (10.2% and 10.1%, respectively). Regarding the level of education, most of the participants had higher education (university, 87.4%), while the employment status category was dominated by employed (52.0%), and students (41.7%) participants. Regarding the civil state of the participants, 39.0% were married, 55.4% single, 4.8% were divorced and only 0.8% were widows. It is worth mentioning that there was a significant percentage of young participants by 41.8% (students, at the age of 18–25) in the study which gives a better prospective, value to the results obtained, since the new generation shows better the trends of the future.
Table 3 presents the participants’ motives on purchase and consumption of Greek wine. The results show that the majority of the participants before the pandemic of COVID-19 often purchased wine from supermarket (51.6%) and wine cellars (31.7%), while the online purchase was not very popular (3.6%). These results seem to differ slightly in the post COVID-19 era as the often purchase from supermarket decreased to 47.4% and the online purchase increased slightly (5.4%). Regarding the quantities and the money spent for wine per month, one bottle (47.7%) and 10–20 euros (34.4%) were the most popular answers.
Table 3. Participants’ motives on purchase and consumption of Greek wine.
The 55.1% of the participants consume less wine today compared to the period before the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of preference of meals with wine meat (67.6%) and cheese (50.8%) are the most preferable accompaniment meals, while in terms of preference of wines with the red (54.5%) and white (57.4%) wines are the most preferable in general. Specifically, red wine is the most preferable accompaniment for meat (69.1%) and white for fish (69.0%), chicken (43.5%) and cheese (31.9%). The majority of the participants, today consume wine at home (76.1%) with friends (71.7%) as compared to the pro-COVID-19 period where they consumed wine more frequently at the restaurants (74.5%) with friends (70.1%).
The results of the chi-square test presented in Table 4 showed that there were significant differences between consumers’ motives on purchase and consumption of Greek wine. As can be seen from Table 4, regarding the place of purchase of wine before and after the COVID-19 pandemic many associations were found between civil state and residency, while the number of bottles purchased aw well as the money spent for that reason seem to be affected by mainly by age, gender, and civil state. On the other hand, the kind of wine purchased and the type of food which accompanies this kind of wine affected by age, gender, civil state, and job situation. Finally, a significant association were found between the place of wine consumption before and after the COVID-19 pandemic and age, gender, civil state, and job situation.
Table 4. Associations between motives on purchase and consumption of Greek wine and the sociodemographic variables.
Table 5 represents the frequencies concerning preference of choice for quality Greek wine in the post-COVID-19 era. Participants find relatively important the price (36.2%), the grapes’ variety (38.0%), the geographical origin (31.2%) and the existence of quality certificates (30.7%) for the selection of a quality wine. The organoleptic parameters that seem to affect the selection of wine are taste (60.4%-very much), aroma (43.3%-much) and sweetness (35.8%-much). However, the appearance parameters are of medium level of concern for the selection of wine: a beautiful bottle (34.3%), a beautiful label (35.4%), description and other data (34.4%) and size of the bottle (31.1%). Similarly, the sustainable characteristics also seem to be of medium level of concern for the selection of wine: organic wine (32.3%), without alcohol (30.1%), without sulfur (26.2%), environmentally friendly packaging (31.4%) and awards (33.3%). On the other hand, the importance of some general characteristics varies on the level of concern regarding the selection of wine: rational money value (47.9%-much), uniqueness (35.3%-much), added value for the production area (32.5%-medium) and modern (30.3%-medium).
Table 5. Frequencies regarding the preference of choice for quality Greek wine in the post-COVID-19 era.
The results of the chi-square test presented in Table 6, showed that there were significant differences between consumers’ motives on preference of choice for quality Greek wine in the post-COVID-19 era. Regarding the parameters of selection quality Greek wine, traditional and organoleptic parameters were found to be associated by age, level of education, and civil state, while gender, age, level of education, civil state, and job situation were found to be associated with appearance and sustainable characteristics.
Table 6. Associations between preference of choice for quality Greek wine and the sociodemographic variables.
In this part of questionnaire, residency played minor role in consumers’ motives on preference of choice for quality Greek wine.
Table 7 represents the frequencies concerning the knowledge and preference of the “Samos’ Wines” in the post-COVID-19 era. Participants seem to know certain kinds of Samos’ wines, i.e., red (49.0%), white (69.5%) and semisweet (49.5%) and the same kinds of wine they would buy today (red-28.8%, white-44.2% and semisweet-36.3%), from supermarket most preferable (48.5%). However, the majority of the participants do not consume Samos’ wine (67.7%), do not know of any Samos’ winery (79.9%) and haven’t visited Samos Island (75.2%) even though they have tasted its wines (53.9%), have great respect for their quality (92.2%), and they know that they are exported in significant quantities (55.9%). Finally, participants’ knowledge in Samos’ local agricultural products is adequate since they know that the island is producing wines (64.6%), olive oil (12.4%) and raisins (11.7%) mostly.
Table 7. Frequencies regarding the knowledge and preference of the Samos’ wines in the post-COVID-19 era.
The results of the chi-square test that showed significant differences between consumers’ knowledge and preference of the “Samos’ Wines” in the post-COVID-19 are presented in Table 8.
Table 8. Associations between knowledge and preference of the “Samos’ Wines” wine and the sociodemographic variables.
In this part of questionnaire level of education did not associate with any of consumers’ knowledge and preference parameters, while there was a significant association between age, civil state, job situation, and residency with the majority of the parameters tested.

4. Discussion

In this research the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on consumers’ motives for quality wine, specifically the Greek wine is investigated for the first time. As a reference quality wine the famous Samos’ quality Greek wine was chosen as part of the study for comparison reasons, since it is a typical Greek wine with relatively high recognition by the Greek consumers, and abroad [,]. The sociodemographic characteristics of the participants of the survey exhibited a suitable distribution between the different categories. similar to other recent reports [], with an increased percentage of young participants for better future prospective of the results obtained.
Regarding the places for purchasing wine before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, the supermarket remains the place of choice for the majority of participants, however, they prefer to buy wine today more via on line (+1.8%), less from super market (−4.2%), and equally from wine cellar, and local winery-producer (Table 3). The results of the chi-square test, shown in Table 4, indicate that there are significant differences with weak association however varying from V = 0.082 to V = 0.188, regarding places of purchase of wine before and after the pandemic for most of the demographic variables. Similar results regarding consumers’ preference for the supermarkets and the wine shops, with the least preferred the e-shops for the purchase of wine are reported by similar studies conducted over the last decade. American generation Y most often buy wine in stores (liquor, grocery) and wine shops, at least on internet []. Similarly, young Moldova consumers buy wine most often in super markets, then the neighboring shops and specialized wine shops []. The most common places for wine purchase are wine shops and supermarkets for Check consumers too [].
Regarding the consumption of wine participants consume less wine today (−5.1%), the majority one bottle per month, spending 10–20 euros as shown in Table 3. The results of the chi-square test, presented in Table 4, indicate that there are significant differences with moderate association only for “age” regarding the bottles of wine and the money spend per month (V = 0.284/0.250), and for “job situation” regarding the same questions (V = 0.280/V = 0.245), while for the rest of the sociodemographic variable the significant differences were with weak association varying from V = 0.052 to V = 0.207 for all questions. Studies on frequency and intensity of alcohol consumption, as well as cost of purchase so far have been conducted in order to study the health concerns of the extensive consumption and purchase rather than normal dietary frequency [,,]. Therefore, the results of the existing studies are not comparable with our findings.
Regarding the participants’ preference for wine with accompaniment meals and vice versa, they prefer to drink red and white wine compared to other kinds, more preferable with meat and cheese, and specifically red wine with meat, and white wine with fish, chicken and cheese in the order of less preference. The results of the chi—square test, presented in Table 4, indicate that there is strong association for “age” regarding the accompaniment of fish (V = 0.452), and for “job situation” semisweet wine consumption, and accompaniment of fish (V = 0.421/0.393), while for all other sociodemographic variables a weak association was recorded. Once again recent studies on food and wine pairing are in the framework of diets such as the Mediterranean diet and health []. Nevertheless, our results agree with the literature concept of harmony crystallized in this adage: “red with red, white with white” []. An alternative explanation for the general pairing of “red with red” has been proposed as well []. In accordance to our findings too, white wines are perceived to be more balanced in flavor with a range of cheeses than red or specialty wines [].
Overall, the participants have increased the consumption of wine at home (+6%), and with friends (+1.6%), while have significantly decreased the consumption at the restaurant (−8.2%), the club/bar (−8.9%), and to a less extend at the nigh club (−5.8%), and during celebration (−3.2%). The results of the chi-square test, shown in Table 4, indicate that there are significant differences with weak association however varying from V = 0.065 to V = 0.274, regarding the places of consumption of wine before and after the pandemic for all demographic variables. A recent study examined the drinking location of wine with the amount consumed in 17 countries in order to identify their interconnection []. It was found that where people drink wine and the type of wine they drink, affected the amount of alcohol reported to reach different stages of intoxication.
Regarding, the participants preference for quality Greek wine in terms of the traditional parameters the variety of grapes (55.9%) and the price (53.1%) were chosen as equally important much and very many parameters, while the existence of quality certificates (49.5%), the geographical origin (45.1%), and the year of production (30.4%) were followed in their preference (Table 5). The results of the chi-square test, shown in Table 6, indicate that there are significant differences with weak association for selected sociodemographic variables and choice parameters with weak association from V = 0.072 to V = 0.141.
The participants in terms of organoleptic wine selections chose by far the taste (94.5%) as the most important, followed by the aroma (83.9%), the sweetness (61.3%) and the habit (35.6%) much and very many parameters (Table 5), with the chi-square test indicating once again significant differences with weak association for the sociodemographic variables varying from V = 0.074 to V = 0.291 (Table 6).
In terms of the appearance parameters the order of wine selection as much and very much preference by the participants was brand name first (46.3%), label data second (41.5%), size of bottle third (36.6%), bottle appearance fourth (31.9%) and label appearance last (28.6%) as shown in Table 5. In terms of the sustainable characteristics the order of selection by the participants was similar among the different parameters with wine awards (42.6%), organic wines (38.1%), environmental package (35.9%), without sulfur (31.5%) and last without alcohol (18.7%) as shown in Table 5. Finally, in terms of the general wine characteristics the value for money (72.8%) exceeded by far the rest selection parameters namely unique and special (48.7%), timeless and modern (41.8%), added value for the region (39.8%), and with a myth (19.5%) as much and very much choice by the participants (Table 5). The chi-square test for the selection preference of choice parameters for quality wine, as shown in Table 6, indicate significant differences with weak association for all sociodemographic variables. The results presented above for the quality wine choices by the consumers are in accordance with those results recorded recently, but before the pandemic, in literature by others too. These are for the traditional parameters of our findings such as the region of origin [], the variety of grapes [], the price [], and the quality certificates [], and for the sustainability parameters [,], the organic [], without alcohol [], and without sulfite []. Furthermore for the organoleptic parameters of our findings similar results are recorded too [,], and for the appearance parameters such as brand name [], and labeling [].
Regarding the participants knowledge and preference of the Samos’ quality wines even though they believe by far that they are quality wines (92.9%), even though not all of them have tasted them (53.9%) and fewer are consuming them (32.3%). They would buy the Samos’ wines more from supermarket, and wine cellar and to a certain extent, similarly to other wines too, via online. The majority of the participants haven’t visited the island of Samos (75.2%), and don’t know the Samos’ wineries, even though they have a broad knowledge of the agricultural products the island is producing, including the variety of wines. The results of the chi-square test, presented in Table 8 indicate significant differences with weak association for the sociodemographic variables except with moderate associations for “age” regarding the consumption of Samos’ wine, and the visit to Samos (V = 0.343/0.350), and “civil state” regarding tasting any of the Samos’ wines (V = 0.420). Our findings regarding local (Samos) wines are in accordance with recent published data. Italian consumers interviewed recently expressed their willingness to buy and consume local Italian wines [], and in another study the majority of consumers expressed their willingness to pay for local muscadine wine [].
Overall, our generic findings indicate major changes in consumers preference for quality wine in the post COVID era, as compared with the pre-COVID times in the following sections:
  • In the consumption of less wine overall today
  • In the consumption at home with friends and family (rather than outside, in bars restaurants and elsewhere)
  • In the easy access for purchasing including on line (rather than the conventional purchase from the supermarket)
Contrary, our findings indicate that the consumers’ selection criteria for quality wine such as organoleptic characteristics, association with meals, appearance, quality labels remain the same today as before. The same is true for their strong preference for local quality wines of their own territory or their own country such as the Greek or the Italian labels.
These findings for wine consumption agree with the bigger picture in terms of the changes recorded in food consumption after the pandemic. For example an increased food consumption at home, cooked, is considered popular these days, especially natural/organic quality food []. At the same time the essential aspects of food choice, health, quality and safety are increasingly being taken into account [].

5. Conclusions

This research work explores the consumers’ motives to buy and consume quality Greek wines in the new post COVID-19 era. The study applied the two main determinants on wine motives namely the purchase and consumption and the quality of wine in the Greek consumers’ mind in order to identify the variables that predicted their preference for information regarding the quality wines in this global new economic era. To this purpose an online survey was used to a sample of 1493 participants with gender, age, education, civil state, employment, and permanent residency across Greece balanced at the time of the survey conducted in January and February 2021. The pandemic, currently at the sunset phase, has changed consumers’ mind and preferences, which is leading to changes of their selection of foods and drinks in an unexplored way so far. With a relevant degree of uncertainty, it is believed that people will be more selected on food and drinks, especially the new generation of anti-consumers. purchasing them in a personalized way, with focus on the environmental, health, safety effects, personal interest etc.
In order to evaluate the possible regional originalities and characteristics of the consumers’ evaluation on the quality wines a regional quality wine, namely the Samos’ wine (from the corresponding Greek island) was used at the end of the same survey with the same participants. The results showed that customers perceived this quality wine as such, even though they don’t know it well, have tasted, but are not consuming it, preferring to buy the white wine mostly. The participants have a fair knowledge of the Samos Island and its products including the wines
In the study more women, educated, and employed participants, together with a significant number of young students took place in the survey, even though the number of responses obtained is considered adequate. This can be considered a limitation of the study, even though the number of young students can be considered an advantage for the study since it gives a long in the future prospective of the obtained results. Another limitation of the study is the use of the Greek quality wine and Greek participants, without the use of wines and participants from other countries as well.
This is the first study to understand the impact of the COVID-19 period to the consumers’ motives for quality wine, highlighting which aspects are more relevant for the selections, the purchase, and the consumption of the wine from the consumers’ point of view. The important, generic results of our finding described above can be used as an important road map for the sustainable growth of the business sector in the new economy. For example, the consumers’ preference for home wine consumption, especially in view of the new tendency for “home office” should direct the wine industry to develop a new, re-generated market for “home wine” ordered on line, and delivered instantly like the fast food section. At the same time the industry, based on our findings, should stick to the same quality parameters developed so far for good wine. Thus the papers’ contribution to the regional sustainability becomes vital from the local wineries’, and cultivation of grapes point of view.
Despite the importance of our findings, additional studies are needed in order to investigate further the parameters of consumers’ motives for quality wine in the post COVID-19 period, and the long-lasting effects and adaptations behavior to the “new normality”. The findings will contribute further to the main objective which is the integration of quality local wine into the daily food consumption in the countries where there is the potential for increased local production such as Greece. Further studies should expand in two different directions: studying wines and consumers’ motives for them of other countries EU primarily, either themselves or in comparison, and studying the concept of motives for quality Greek wine in depth investigating other pieces of information for these products perceived positively by the consumers.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su14137769/s1, Table S1: Questionnaire consumers’ motives in purchasing Greek quality wine. In the Post COVID-19 era.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization. supervision. methodology D.S.; writing—original draft preparation. D.S. and I.S.K.; investigation. N.R.; review and editing. D.S., C.Y. and H.C.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received partial funding by the “nutriwine” ERDF-North Aegean region funded program (BAP2-0060608) of the United Winemaking Agricultural Cooperative (UWAC) of Samos.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Deardorff, A.V.; Kim, S.; Chung, C. The Global Economy after Covid-19: Challenges and Policy Resolutions. SSRN Electron. J. 2021, 24, 305–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yu, Z.; Razzaq, A.; Rehman, A.; Shah, A.; Jameel, K.; Mor, R.S. Disruption in global supply chain and socio-economic shocks: A lesson from COVID-19 for sustainable production and consumption. Oper. Manag. Res. 2021, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kotler, P. The Consumer in the Age of Coronavirus. J. Creat. Value 2020, 6, 12–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Galanakis, C.M. The Food Systems in the Era of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Crisis. Foods 2020, 9, 523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Galanakis, C.M.; Rizou, M.; Aldawoud, T.M.S.; Ucak, I.; Rowan, N.J. Innovations and technology disruptions in the food sector within the COVID-19 pandemic and post-lockdown era. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 110, 193–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ceniti, C.; Tilocca, B.; Britti, D.; Santoro, A.; Costanzo, N. Food Safety Concerns in “COVID-19 Era”. Microbiol. Res. 2021, 12, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Olaimat, A.N.; Shahbaz, H.M.; Fatima, N.; Munir, S.; Holley, R.A. Food Safety During and After the Era of COVID-19 Pandemic. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Di Vita, G.; Caracciolo, F.; Brun, F.; D’Amico, M. Picking out a wine: Consumer motivation behind different quality wines choice. Wine Econ. Policy 2019, 8, 16–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Maicas, S.; Mateo, J.J. Sustainability of Wine Production. Sustainability 2020, 12, 559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ferreira, C.; Lourenço-Gomes, L.; Pinto, L.M.C. Region of origin and perceived quality of wine: An assimilation-contrast approach. Wine Econ. Policy 2021, 10, 57–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hennyeyová, K.; Janšto, E.; Šilerová, E.; Stuchlý, P. Influence of Key Performance Indicators in Marketing on the Financial Situation of Wine Producers Using ICT. AGRIS Online Pap. Econ. Inform. 2021, 13, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Todd, M.J.; Kelley, K.M.; Hopfer, H. USA Mid-Atlantic Consumer Preferences for Front Label Attributes for Local Wine. Beverages 2021, 7, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Valentin, D.; Valente, C.; Ballester, J.; Symoneaux, R.; Smith, I.; Bauer, F.F.; Nieuwoudt, H. The Impact of “Wine Country of Origin” on the Perception of Wines by South African and French Wine Consumers: A Cross-Cultural Comparison. Foods 2021, 10, 1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Zamzami, L.; Andrini, A.; Budiyati, E. Consumer preferences for a new variety of grapes (Vitis vinifera) paras 61. Ann. Biol. 2020, 36, 159–162. [Google Scholar]
  15. Schäufele, I.; Hamm, U. Wine consumers’ reaction to prices, organic production and origins at the point of sale: An analysis of household panel data. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2018, 35, 261–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Galli, F.; Boger, C.A.; Taylor, D.C. Rethinking Luxury for Segmentation and Brand Strategy: The Semiotic Square and Identity Prism Model for Fine Wines. Beverages 2019, 5, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Capitello, R.; Sirieix, L. Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainable Wine: An Exploratory Study in France and Italy. Economies 2019, 7, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Moscovici, D.; Rezwanul, R.; Mihailescu, R.; Gow, J.; Ugaglia, A.A.; Valenzuela, L.; Rinaldi, A. Preferences for eco certified wines in the United States. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2020, 33, 153–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lu, L.; Chi, C.G.-Q.; Zou, R. Determinants of Chinese consumers’ organic wine purchase. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 31, 3761–3778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Maesano, G.; Di Vita, G.; Chinnici, G.; Gioacchino, P.; D’Amico, M. What’s in organic wine consumer mind? A review on purchasing drivers of organic wines. Wine Econ. Policy 2021, 10, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. D’Amico, M.; Di Vita, G.; Monaco, L. Exploring environmental consciousness and consumer preferences for organic wines without sulfites. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 120, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Dominici, A.; Boncinelli, F.; Gerini, F.; Marone, E. Consumer preference for wine from hand-harvested grapes. Br. Food J. 2019, 122, 2551–2567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Corsi, A.M.; Modroño, J.I.; Mariel, P.; Cohen, J.; Lockshin, L. How are personal values related to choice drivers? An application with Chinese wine consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 86, 103989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Calvo-Porral, C.; Lévy-Mangin, J.-P.; Ruiz-Vega, A. An emotion-based typology of wine consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 79, 103777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Stanco, M.; Lerro, M.; Marotta, G. Consumers’ Preferences for Wine Attributes: A Best-Worst Scaling Analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Stanco, M.; Lerro, M. Consumers’ Preferences for and Perception of CSR Initiatives in the Wine Sector. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Markopoulos, T. On Macedonian and Thracian Greek Wines. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev. 2020, 13, 37–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Anastasiadis, F.; Alebaki, M. Mapping the Greek Wine Supply Chain: A Proposed Research Framework. Foods 2021, 10, 2859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Paschalidis, C.D.; Papakonstantinou, L.D.; Sotiropoulos, S.S.; Petropoulos, D.P.; Taskos, D.G.; Paschalidis, D.C.; Chamurliev, G.O. Dynamic development of the winery sector in Greece. Magarach Vinograd. I Vinodel. 2021, 214–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. The Greek Statistics Authority. 2022. Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/en/statistics/-/publication/SPG06/- (accessed on 1 March 2022).
  31. Certificates of specific character for agricultural products and food ststus. Off. J. Eur. Union L 2082/1992 1992, 9–14.
  32. Greek Traditional Products (PDO-PGI-TSG). Hellenic Ministry of Agricultural Development and Food. 2021. Available online: http://www.minagric.gr/index.php/el/for-farmer-2/2012-02-02-07-52-07 (accessed on 16 November 2021).
  33. Lanaridis, P.; Salaha, M.-J.; Tzourou, I.; Tsoutsouras, E.; Karagiannis, S. Volatile compounds in grapes and wines from two Muscat varieties cultivated in Greek islands. OENO One 2002, 36, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. United Winemaking Agricultural Cooperative (UWAC) of Samos. 2022. Available online: www.samoswine.gr (accessed on 1 May 2022).
  35. Papathanasiou, S.; Koutsokostas, D.; Balios, D.; Eriotis, N. Winemaking Sector in Greece. Int. J. Corp. Financ. Account. 2019, 6, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  36. Vlachos, V.A. A macroeconomic estimation of wine production in Greece. Wine Econ. Policy 2017, 6, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Vlachvei, A.; Notta, O.; Efterpi, T. Branding Strategies in Greek Wine Firms. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2012, 1, 421–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Krystallis, A.; Chrysochou, P. An exploration of loyalty determinants in Greek wine varieties. EuroMed. J. Bus. 2010, 5, 124–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chrysochou, P.; Corsi, A.M.; Krystallis, A. What drives Greek consumer preferences for cask wine? Br. Food J. 2012, 114, 1072–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Botonaki, A.; Tsakiridou, E. Consumer response evaluation of a greek quality wine. Food Econ. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. C 2004, 1, 91–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Fotopoulos, C.; Krystallis, A.; Ness, M. 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 Qual. Prefer. 2003, 14, 549–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Skuras, D.; Vakrou, A. Consumers’ willingness to pay for origin labelled wine: A Greek case study. Br. Food J. 2002, 104, 898–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Dimara, E.; Skuras, D. Consumer evaluations of product certification, geographic association and traceability in Greece. Eur. J. Mark. 2003, 37, 690–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Skalkos, D.; Kosma, I.S.; Vasiliou, A.; Guine, R.P.F. Consumers’ Trust in Greek Traditional Foods in the Post COVID-19 Era. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Skalkos, D.; Kosma, I.S.; Chasioti, E.; Bintsis, T.; Karantonis, H.C. Consumers’ Perception on Traceability of Greek Traditional Foods in the Post-COVID-19 Era. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Skalkos, D.; Kosma, I.; Chasioti, E.; Skendi, A.; Papageorgiou, M.; Guiné, R.P.F. Consumers’ Attitude and Perception toward Traditional Foods of Northwest Greece during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 4080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Skalkos, D. Traditional Foods in Europe: Perceptions & Prospects in the New Business Era. Mod. Concepts Dev. Agron. 2021, 8, 787–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hauck, K.; Szolnoki, G. German Consumers’ Perceptions of Organic Wine—A Qualitative Approach. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Schaefer, R.; Olsen, J.; Thach, L. Exploratory wine consumer behavior in a transitional market: The case of Poland. Wine Econ. Policy 2018, 7, 54–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Schäufele, I.; Hamm, U. Consumers’ perceptions, preferences and willingness-to-pay for wine with sustainability characteristics: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 147, 379–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sogari, G.; Corbo, C.; Macconi, M.; Menozzi, D.; Mora, C. Consumer attitude towards sustainable-labelled wine: An exploratory approach. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2015, 27, 312–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Van Rijswijk, W.; Frewer, L.J.; Menozzi, D.; Faioli, G. Consumer perceptions of traceability: A cross-national comparison of the associated benefits. Food Qual. Prefer. 2008, 19, 452–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Palmieri, N.; Perito, M.A.; Macrì, M.C.; Lupi, C. Exploring consumers’ willingness to eat insects in Italy. Br. Food J. 2019, 121, 2937–2950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Palmieri, N.; Suardi, A.; Pari, L. Italian Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Eucalyptus Firewood. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Palmieri, N.; Perito, M.A.; Lupi, C. Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: Some hints from Italy. Br. Food J. 2020, 123, 109–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Palmieri, N.; Perito, M.A. Consumers’ willingness to consume sustainable and local wine in Italy. Ital. J. Food Sci. 2020, 32, 222–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. De Leeuw, A.; Valois, P.; Ajzen, I.; Schmidt, P. Using the theory of planned behavior to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behavior in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions. J. Environ. Psychol. 2015, 42, 128–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Pappalardo, G.; Lusk, J.L. The role of beliefs in purchasing process of functional foods. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 53, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Chinnici, G.; D’Amico, M.; Pecorino, B. A multivariate statistical analysis on the consumers of organic products. Br. Food J. 2002, 104, 187–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Giampietri, E.; Verneau, F.; Del Giudice, T.; Carfora, V.; Finco, A. A Theory of Planned behaviour perspective for investigating the role of trust in consumer purchasing decision related to short food supply chains. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 64, 160–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Petrescu-Mag, R.; Vermeir, I.; Petrescu, D.; Crista, F.; Banatean-Dunea, I. Traditional Foods at the Click of a Button: The Preference for the Online Purchase of Romanian Traditional Foods during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chrysochou, P.; Krystallis, A.; Mocanu, A.; Lewis, R.L. Generation Y preferences for wine: An exploratory study of the US market applying the best-worst scaling. Br. Food J. 2012, 114, 516–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Stanciu, S.; Neagu, T. The factors influencing consumers’ behaviour on wine consumption in the Moldovan wine market. Risch Contemp. Econ. 2014, 1, 406–418. [Google Scholar]
  64. Němcová, J.; Staňková, P. Factors influencing consumer behaviour of Generation Y on the Czech wine market. E+M Èkon. A Manag. 2019, 22, 145–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Heckley, G.; Jarl, J.; Gerdtham, U.-G. Frequency and intensity of alcohol consumption: New evidence from Sweden. Eur. J. Health Econ. 2016, 18, 495–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Codling, S.; Mantzari, E.; Sexton, O.; Fuller, G.; Pechey, R.; Hollands, G.J.; Pilling, M.; Marteau, T.M. Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of wine: A randomized controlled cross-over trial. Addiction 2020, 115, 2280–2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Taylor, N.; Miller, P.; Coomber, K.; Livingston, M.; Scott, D.; Buykx, P.; Chikritzhs, T. The impact of a minimum unit price on wholesale alcohol supply trends in the Northern Territory, Australia. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 2021, 45, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Minzer, S.; Estruch, R.; Casas, R.; Ding, C.; O’Neill, D.; Bell, S.; Stamatakis, E.; Britton, A.; Zatońska, K.; Psikus, P.; et al. Wine Intake in the Framework of a Mediterranean Diet and Chronic Non-Communicable Diseases: A Short Literature Review of the Last 5 Years. Molecules 2020, 25, 5045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Blake, A.A. Flavour Perception and the Learning of Food Preferences. Flavor Percept. 2004, 15, 172–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ronca, G.; Palmieri, L.; Maltinti, S.; Tagliazucchi, D.; Conte, A. Relationship between iron and protein content of dishes and polyphenol content in accompanying wines. Drugs Under Exp. Clin. Res. 2003, 29, 271–286. [Google Scholar]
  71. King, M.; Cliff, M. Evaluation of ideal wine and cheese pairs using a deviation-from-ideal scale with food and wine experts. J. Food Qual. 2005, 28, 245–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Davies, E.L.; Cooke, R.; Maier, L.J.; Winstock, A.R.; Ferris, J.A. Where and What You Drink Is Linked to How Much You Drink: An Exploratory Survey of Alcohol Use in 17 Countries. Subst. Use Misuse 2021, 56, 1941–1950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yoncheva, T.; Haygarov, V.; Dimitrov, D. Study of weather conditions infl uence on the grapes quality and some technological practices on the chemical composition, aromatic profi le and organoleptic characteristics of white wines. Bulg. J. Agric. Sci. 2019, 25, 1151–1160. [Google Scholar]
  74. Haverila, M.; Haverila, K.; Twyford, J.C. Identification of key variables and constructs in the context of wine tasting room: Importance-performance analysis. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2020, 33, 80–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Everett, C.; Jensen, K.; Boyer, C.; Hughes, D. Consumers’ willingness to pay for local muscadine wine. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2018, 30, 58–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Güney, O.I.; Sangün, L. How COVID-19 affects individuals’ food consumption behaviour: A consumer survey on attitudes and habits in Turkey. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 2307–2320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Tariga, J.N.; Nolasco, D.P.; Barayuga, S.J.R. Food consumption habits of consumers in the Philippines: Changes amidst the pandemic. Int. J. Public Health Sci. 2021, 10, 662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Impacts of Harvesting Age and Pricing Schemes on Economic Sustainability of Cassava Farmers in Thailand under Market Uncertainty
Previous
Effects of Soil Properties and Tree Species on Root–Soil Anchorage Characteristics
Next