Next Article in Journal
Dose Effect of Drinking Water Nitrate on Health, Feed Intake, Rumen Fermentation and Microbiota, and Nitrogen Excretion in Holstein Heifers for a Sustainable Water Use
Previous Article in Journal
Multiple Recycling of Wood–Plastic Recycled Composite (WPRC): Developing a Method to Evaluate the Degree of Degradation of Used WPRC
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 20
10.3390/su16208813
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Exploring Portuguese Consumers’ Behavior Regarding Sustainable Wine: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior

by
Sara Sousa
1,2,*,
Elisabete Correia
1,2 and
Clara Viseu
1,2,3
1
Polytechnic University of Coimbra, Rua da Misericórdia, Lagar dos Cortiços, S. Martinho do Bispo, 3045-093 Coimbra, Portugal
2
Research Center for Natural Resources, Environment and Society (CERNAS), Polytechnic University of Coimbra, Bencanta, 3045-601 Coimbra, Portugal
3
CEOS.PP Coimbra, Polytechnic University of Coimbra, 3045-093 Coimbra, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(20), 8813; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208813
Submission received: 3 September 2024 / Revised: 3 October 2024 / Accepted: 8 October 2024 / Published: 11 October 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Tools for Assessing Sustainable Products)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Although consumption is the cornerstone of economic growth, it is unquestionably one of the main reasons for the current degradation of the planet. Hence, it is necessary to understand consumers’ different perceptions and behaviors regarding sustainable goods, as the solution will inevitably involve changing behaviors and promoting more sustainable consumption. In light of the challenges posed by sustainability within the wine sector, namely issues related to climate change, chemical exposure, and the availability of water and energy, and considering the industry’s substantial environmental and social impacts, it is important to understand the factors influencing wine consumer behavior. This research explores sustainable wine consumption in Portugal. Based on a sample of 197 valid responses, collected in an online survey that took place from March 20 to April 30 of 2024, and applying the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) framework, the current study found that consumers’ intention to consume sustainable wine is influenced by their attitudes, subjective norms, and sustainability awareness. Regarding the individuals’ consumption of sustainable wine, this behavior is influenced by the intention to consume this wine, and by consumers’ perceived behavioral control. The results also concluded that individuals’ intention to consume sustainable wine is significantly different across marital status, professional occupation, level of education, and age. With these valuable insights, this study aimed to increase the available information on sustainable wine consumption, allowing different stakeholders, namely political decision makers, to develop and implement more efficient measures to promote sustainable wine consumption.

1. Introduction

Nowadays, the agri-food system and market lie in the middle of an interconnection of global economic, social, and environmental problems as the world faces critical sustainability challenges such as climate change, resource scarcity, population growth, food insecurity and malnutrition, and biodiversity loss [1,2,3]. Being aware of the seriousness of these issues, many firms operating in the agri-food industry have been incorporating the key principles of environmental, economic and social sustainability into their production frameworks [4,5,6].
In the agri-food system, given its economic and cultural significance, wine plays a key role. The wine industry has experienced an intense evolution in the last few years as a consequence of several factors, namely the considerable increase in market competition [7,8], with new emergent markets, and the continuous changes in consumers’ behavior, one of which is the increasing attention to products’ sustainability, including to that of wines. This notion is based on the bibliographic sources [9,10]. Furthermore, as highlighted by some authors, e.g., [11,12], the growing competition in the wine sector has encouraged all actors in this industry, from the vineyard to the supermarket, to develop more efficient wine marketing strategies to increase their sales and loyalty from consumers.
Although traditional viticultural procedures involve the application of herbicides and pesticides to control diseases and insects [13,14], the wine industry has been developing more initiatives with the aim of making its practices more sustainable and to increase the quality of its products [15]. Among many companies in the wine sector, an increasing concern and commitment to the community’s well-being and to the promotion of balanced consumption has been observed [16]. The European Union (EU) is the world’s largest wine producer, but the adoption of sustainability initiatives has been slow [17]. Located in the southwest corner of Europe, with just over 92,000 square kilometers, Portugal has a long history in the production and commercialization of wine and, similar to what is happening worldwide, the sustainability issues have been raising some serious concerns [17,18].
The wine sector in Portugal is closely associated with the country’s cultural heritage, representing a key socioeconomic sector, with particular importance in the rural areas. The Portuguese wine market is competitive, with about half of the production attributed to small and medium-sized producers associated in cooperatives [19]. In 2021, Portugal was the 10th largest producer worldwide and the 10th largest wine exporter by volume, exporting mainly to the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Brazil, and Canada [7,8,20]. With grapes occupying around 15 per cent of arable land, Portugal is also known for its diversity of grape types, with approximately 300 varieties, and numerous geographical indications and protected designations [18].
On the consumer’s side, there is an evident behavior change with consumers increasingly making purchasing decisions based not only on the attributes of the product but also on its impacts on the environment and society [21]. Based on the analysis of 34 research papers, Schäufele and Hamm [22] concluded that a considerable number of consumers worldwide stated having positive perceptions regarding sustainable production and a willingness to pay (wtp) a premium for sustainable wine. Taking consumers’ concerns about sustainability into account could, therefore, not only be a challenge, but an opportunity for the wine sector.
Global wine consumption has been decreasing since 2018, a trend also observed in the EU. In the specific case of Portugal, between 2021 and 2022, there was a 14.3% increase in consumption, followed by a 9.2% decrease in 2023. Despite these fluctuations, Portugal continues to have the highest per capita consumption of wine in the world, with 67.9 L, surpassing France (46.9 L), Italy (43.2 L) and Spain (23.6 L) [20]. In these southern European countries, wine has a significant cultural value, being an integral part of gastronomy, often enjoyed during meals and celebrations. This cultural significance, combined with its role in the local economy, makes national wine more accessible and preferred by Portuguese consumers [18]. Furthermore, the wine sector is essential for the country’s economic, social and environmental sustainability, particularly for that of rural societies, which encourages all stakeholders to promote greater sustainability in this sector [17]. In addition to proposing to collect information about wine consumption habits in Portugal, this research study aims to delve deeper into the individuals’ intention and behavior regarding the consumption of sustainable wine, through the application of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Its conceptual model considers that individuals’ behavioral decisions are directly influenced by their intentions, which, in turn, can be influenced by their attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control [23].
It is observed that, despite the growing importance attributed to sustainability, there are a limited number of studies delving into sustainability in the wine sector [24,25], particularly from the consumer’s perspective. As stressed by Moscovici and Reed [26], more research is needed into the consumer perspective of wine sustainability. Hence, this paper aims to contribute to filling this research gap and mainly answer the following research question: what is the influence of consumers’ attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and sustainability awareness on their intention and consumption behavior regarding sustainable wine?
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. After introducing the research subject, Section 2 reviews the scientific literature and explores some of the main concepts. Then, Section 3 is devoted to the theoretical framework and research hypotheses. In Section 4, a detailed description of the questionnaire design and sample profile is presented. Then, in Section 5, the main results are presented and discussed. The paper ends with the main conclusions along with some limitations that we intend to overcome in future research.

2. Key Concepts and Literature Review

2.1. Sustainability

In order to understand the sustainability in the wine sector, it is crucial to clarify first the concept of sustainability itself. Over the course of time, the concept has acquired a multidisciplinary connotation that covers sectors as far apart as economics, science, technology, and management, and involves them both in the present moment as well as the future [27].
Sustainability is a concept that has gained particular relevance in recent decades. In 1987, the United Nations (UN) Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [28], p. 43. According to the UN [29], there are currently more than a hundred developing countries seeking different paths and strategies to meet their development needs, with the serious threat of climate change negatively affecting future generations.
Several authors contributed to a clearer definition of the concept. According to Thomas [30], sustainability focuses on human activities and their ability to satisfy individuals’ needs without depleting the available productive resources. Hák et al. [31] have stressed that changing the global society, environment and economy to a sustainable one is one of the most challenging tasks facing man today as it is to be done within the context of the current carrying capacity of the planet. Delicado et al. [32] underline that, despite conceptual debates that tend to focus on the ecological dimension, sustainability is not limited to this dimension, and it includes three pillars of equal importance: sociocultural, economic, and governance. In the context of sustainability, the notion of justice regarding the use and conservation of the planet resources is also important: justice between different people of the current generation—intragenerational justice; and justice between people of different generations—intergenerational justice [33,34,35,36]. As stressed by Spijkers [37], planet Earth is a valuable and irreplaceable resource, used by past generations, presently being used by current generations and it is expected to be used by future generations. The goal is to find a balance between intragenerational equity—all individuals, whether rich or poor, of the current generation, and intergenerational equity—people of today and tomorrow. Nevertheless, particular attention must be given to those of the future generations since they have no voice but have the same rights.

2.2. Sustainable Wine

More and more often, the concept of sustainability is used in the wine industry, and it is increasingly evident that this is the path that wine firms must take to meet the goals defined by Agenda 2030 and to maintain a high level of competitiveness in both national and international markets [27]. Wine is not an inherently sustainable product, being associated with different adverse environmental impacts [38]. From the vineyard to the consumer’s glass, there are several sustainability challenges. As stressed by Rocha and Nodari [39], until the drink is ready to consume, there is a succession of stages, namely conserving, aging, bottling, labeling, and transport, among others, revealing that the wine is unquestionably the result of human action, and as such, sustainability can be challenged in any of these stages. For instance, the production, storage, and distribution of wine have a significant carbon footprint, and several practices in vineyards such as the use of excessive amounts of fertilizers and other agrochemicals, soil compaction, and air and sound pollution are far from being sustainable [38,40]. And, in the winery, there are considerable energy demands for storing wine, operating equipment (e.g., temperature control, air conditioning, lighting, and pumping), and cleaning practices that can produce large volumes of wastewater [17,41,42]. Additionally, the production, use, and distribution of wine glass bottles, as well as consumers’ purchasing trips, also have environmental impacts, namely by contributing to excessive energy demand, and GHG emissions [43,44].
The introduction of environmentally sustainable practices in the vineyard and winery is quite advantageous, allowing for a reduction in energy and water consumption, the maintenance of soil health, and the protection of air and water quality [27,38]. Moreover, it improves relationships between workers and communities, preserves local ecosystems, and optimizes the economic viability of wineries. A sustainable wine sector involves several practices that are not only environmentally friendly but also socially equitable and that aim to sustain a productive and economically competitive sector [27]. Social and economic concerns have been raised around working conditions, economic and cultural considerations, and consumer safety and health [45]. Social considerations such as improving social justice, human rights, and fair trade can also enhance sustainability, as well as improve operational feasibility to lower costs and improve sales [46]. Nevertheless, achieving these goals requires concrete interventions at all the different stages of the wine bottle life: from grape cultivation to wine production, through bottling and distribution, and into consumers’ houses. Despite the lack of legislation in the EU for the wine sector that regulates the use of the term ‘sustainability’, there are voluntary standards that give a detailed explanation of the environmental, social, and economic standards that should be met along the wine production chain for a company to declare that they are working towards sustainability [27]. Sometimes, this implies that consumers have to be willing to pay a price premium to cover investments in governance and infrastructure for sustainability or to cover increased production costs [47]. The adoption of techniques and practices that promote greater sustainability can in fact constitute a valuable tool in the competitiveness of companies in the wine industry, representing an important driver of different economic, social and environmental benefits [27,40,48,49]. Additionally, brand reputation has the potential to increase sales among environmentally aware customers, as well as improve their perception of the value and wtp for sustainable wines [27,50,51,52]. Besides being sustainable, wine companies must be able to communicate their sustainable practices to the consumer [53].

2.3. Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainable Wine

In recent years, in the wine sector, consumers have shown increased interest in sustainability. Background research has shown that consumers generally appreciate the idea of “sustainable winemaking”, but they do not know much about it, its meaning or its processes [54]. Research also reveals that, despite the generally positive perception and awareness of sustainable wines, it does not translate into significant consumer demand [55]. Price and quality remain the main factors influencing wine choice, but, in future, sustainable aspects may become important attributes and consumers might be willing to pay a higher price [56]. In some studies, e.g., [22,57,58], the authors concluded that consumers are generally interested in, and they also reveal preferring, wines produced in an environmentally friendly or socially responsible way. Nevertheless, it is also observed that consumers have the perception that the wine sector is already green, creating a barrier to the establishment of sustainability in this sector [59,60]. Part of the problem is the lack of clear information about sustainable practices in the wine sector. Studies have suggested that consumers are confused by systems of environmentally friendly labeling and are doubtful about “green” claims [55]. In a study conducted by Ginon et al. [57], the authors evaluated wine consumers’ perception of 14 logos currently used in France to indicate environmentally sustainable production. The research found that the many logos are confusing for consumers, and they are responsible for a decrease in the credibility of some logos. In this context, wine marketers should be more careful with their marketing and communication strategies to better promote their products. Consumers need to have access to complete and clear information, particularly regarding environmental sustainability, to make responsible purchasing decisions.

2.4. Research on Sustainable Wine

Table 1 presents the most recent research developed on sustainable wine consumption behavior. The selected studies were published worldwide in the last decade, more precisely from 2014 to 2024, and, through the application of different methodologies, their purpose was to focus on consumers’ behavior regarding wine with sustainability characteristics.
By analyzing the information presented in Table 1, it is observed that the number of scientific research studies focusing on sustainability issues in the wine sector in Portugal are quite limited: only Nave et al. [72] and Trigo et al. [17] focus on sustainable wine consumption in the Portuguese context. Knowing the importance of the wine sector in Portugal, it is crucial to develop more scientific studies addressing sustainability in this sector, both from a production and consumption perspective. Regarding the methodology, it is also observed that the TPB is not widely used, despite its unquestionable importance and usefulness in analyzing consumer behavior. Only two authors use this theory to focus on the consumption of wine with sustainable attributes: in Calistan et al. [69], the authors apply the TPB to explain organic wine consumption behavior, while in Sabina del Castillo et al. [70], the authors focus the influence of ethnocentrism in local wine consumption. In this context, the present research study fills a scientific gap in terms of research, by using the TPB to study consumer behavior regarding sustainable wine in Portugal, an EU country in which the wine sector has considerable importance both in economic and cultural terms.

3. Theoretical Framework and Research Hypotheses

3.1. Theory of Planned Behavior

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), developed by social psychologists, is a socio-cognitive model widely employed as a tool to explain a variety of behaviors. In this model, the individual’s intention to adopt a specific behavior plays a key role in determining a certain type of behavior and, according to the TPB, is influenced by the following variables: attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control [23,75]. Each of these variables influences the individual’s intention and/or behavior. Attitude is a positive or negative belief in a particular behavior; the subjective norm is an individual’s engagement with a certain behavior due to social pressure; and perceived behavioral control informs whether an individual’s motivation is influenced by his/her perception of the level of difficulty or simplicity of a specific behavior [23,75,76,77]. Despite its unquestionable validity, the supposed predictive effectiveness of the TPB has been the target of harsh criticism, due to the reduced number of explanatory variables [78,79,80]. Hence, many researchers developed extended theoretical models, including additional variables to increase the efficiency of its predictive capacity [81,82].
The TPB has been used worldwide to study the individual’s consumption behavior regarding different products and services. Nevertheless, as observed in Table 1, few studies developed in the last decade apply this methodology in the study of sustainable characteristics of wine. Calistan et al. [69] confirm the TPB as a valid model to explain the organic wine consumption behavior. The research findings specifically indicate that attitude exerts the strongest direct impact on intention, along with an indirect influence on organic wine consumption behavior, while perceived behavioral control demonstrates the lowest impact. Sabina del Castillo et al. [70] extended the TPB and included consumer profile personality (ethnocentric and cosmopolitan) in the model. The results obtained with the models of the two previous studies confirm, among other things, the strong influence of attitude on intention, and prove that intention is a decisive and important factor in substantial behavior related to local wine. However, the results differ for other factors, such as perceived behavioral control and subjective norms. Sabina del Castillo et al. [70] found that attitude, perceived behavioral control, subjective norms, and ethnocentric personality have a positive influence on the intention to consume local wine, with attitude having the most significant effect.
With the purpose of studying sustainable wine consumption behavior, this research paper applied an extended TPB model (see Figure 1). The influence of consumers’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics on their intention to consume sustainable wine was also analyzed, although as in previous studies, these elements are not directly included in the TPB model [83].

3.2. Research Hypotheses

Considering previous studies, e.g., [69,70], it is expected that the three TPB primary factors (attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control) impact the intentions and actions of sustainable wine consumers. An individual’s attitude encompasses their favorable or unfavorable viewpoints regarding people, events, objects, or behaviors. These attitudes indicate preferences and lead to positive or negative intentions regarding consumer behavior [84]. Attitude towards sustainable wine consumption refers to an individual’s positive or negative assessment of consuming sustainable wine. Consumers who view sustainable wine favorably are more inclined to intend to consume it. Many consumers associate sustainable products with superior quality and health benefits. As stressed by Sánchez-Bravo et al. [85], consumers consider that a sustainable product is environmentally friendly, healthier, with few chemicals, and have better quality. Sustainably produced wine can be seen as a healthier and more ethical option, providing a favorable evaluation of its consumption. Furthermore, recognizing and highlighting the positive aspects of sustainable wine, such as environmental advantages and social responsibility, can bolster consumers’ attitudes toward selecting sustainable wine products [86]. Based on the aforementioned, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). 
Consumers’ attitudes have a positive influence on their intention to consume sustainable wine.
Subjective norms reflect an individual’s interpretation of the social pressures exerted to either conform to or diverge from specific behaviors. They encapsulate an individual’s perception of the expectations and beliefs of others regarding their conduct [75,87]. Subjective norms denote the perceived social pressure or influence from others concerning consuming sustainable wine. Consumers may be swayed by family, friends, or peers’ viewpoints when making wine consumption decisions. Social norms that endorse sustainability, such as appreciating eco-friendly practices and ethical production, can positively influence consumers’ intentions to opt for sustainable wine [86]. Marketing approaches that emphasize social approval and support for sustainable wine consumption can reinforce subjective norms favoring sustainable choices. Hence, according to these insights, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 2 (H2). 
Consumers’ subjective norms have a positive influence on their intention to consume sustainable wine.
Perceived behavioral control pertains to an individual’s assessment of their capacity to engage in a specific behavior [75]. This assessment is influenced by control beliefs, reflecting an individual’s sense of control over a behavior based on their perception of its complexity [88]. Perceived behavioral control pertains to consumers’ beliefs regarding their capability to effectively engage in sustainable wine consumption. Factors like the availability of sustainable wine options, knowledge about sustainable wine, and perceived obstacles or facilitators can impact consumers’ perceived control over choosing sustainable wine [86]. Taking into account these contributions, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 3 (H3). 
Consumers’ perceived behavior control has a positive influence on their intention to consume sustainable wine.
The TBP theory posits that perceived behavioral control also directly influences behavior. A limited number of studies have examined this relationship in the context of wine consumption, providing evidence in support of the theory [89,90]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 4 (H4). 
Consumers’ perceived behavioral control has a positive influence on their sustainable wine consumption behavior.
Besides analyzing the influence of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, this research study develops an extended TPB model, proposing to understand if the individual’s sustainability awareness influences their intention to consume sustainable wine. Sustainability awareness has been identified in research as an important positive driver of pro-environmental intention and behavior, influencing people’s consumption behavior and leading consumers to scrutinize modern agricultural practices to ensure ongoing sustainability, e.g., [83,91,92]. In this study, we consider sustainability awareness as the sustainability knowledge and recognition of sustainability practices, such as those used by winemakers that are environmentally friendly and socially equitable. Demonstrating an understanding and appreciation of sustainability practices can serve as a strong indication of a heightened awareness and commitment to sustainable principles. As consumers become more concerned and aware of sustainability issues, they are presumably more prone to acting responsibly and tend to look for products that reflect their concerns [83,93]. This could include choosing wines produced with sustainable practices. Considering all these insights, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 5 (H5). 
Consumers’ sustainability awareness has a positive influence on their intention to consume sustainable wine.
According to the TPB, intention plays a crucial role in influencing specific behaviors. Intention serves as a mediator between attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control, and reflects a consumer’s motivation and commitment to perform a behavior. The stronger the intention, the more inclined an individual is to engage in a particular behavior [75]. In the literature focused on wine consumption, multiple studies have illustrated a significant association between intention and wine consumption, e.g., [89,90]. Calistan et al. [69] provided evidence of a strong relation between intention and the behavior of consuming organic wine. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 6 (H6). 
Consumers’ intentions have a positive influence on their sustainable wine consumption behavior.
Based on the research and conclusions presented in the literature above, Figure 1 presents the extended TPB model with the research hypotheses to guide the study.
Sustainability 16 08813 g001
Figure 1. Extended TPB model.
Figure 1. Extended TPB model.
Sustainability 16 08813 g001
Moreover, we analyze if an individual’s socioeconomic and demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, age, marital status, occupation, education, residence, income) influence their intention to consume sustainable wine. In fact, several research studies have suggested that various demographic factors can have a significant impact on shaping attitudes and behavioral intentions toward sustainable wine [73]. Schäufele and Hamm [22] have summarized several supporting studies, indicating that women, individuals with higher incomes, and urban consumers tend to have more pronounced behavioral intentions towards wines with sustainability characteristics. However, some studies have failed to find these relationships, e.g., [94], justifying additional research.

4. Materials and Methodology

4.1. Questionnaire Design

To collect accurate and current information on Portuguese consumer behavior regarding sustainable wine, a questionnaire was conducted from March 20 to April 30 of 2024. It is important, however, to highlight that the final version results are derived from an accurate process of formulating and testing, to obtain clear and precise questions easily understood by all the respondents, regardless of their age, gender, education, and income. A good research question forms the backbone of good research, which in turn is crucial in providing valid information about a research problem [95,96,97]. Therefore, after a detailed review of the existing scientific literature on the subject, the first provisional version of the questionnaire was obtained. This version was then presented, individually, to 10 voluntary respondents, with different socioeconomic characteristics, all over 18 years old who, under the “think aloud” technique, had the task to think aloud as they answer the presented questionnaires, verbalizing out loud all thoughts that would normally be private and silent. It is important to underline that the participants do not have to explain the reasons for their thoughts, but just give the information on their thoughts. This methodology allows the collection of direct data on the ongoing thinking process of respondents as they answer the different questions [98,99,100,101].
With this qualitative methodology, it was possible to identify the following problems in the provisional version of the questionnaire:
(i)
It was too long, with too many questions, and it was observed that, after a while, respondents began to feel tired and bored;
(ii)
Some questions were confusing and unclear;
(iii)
The questions were asked without any distinction between those who consume and those who buy, but those who consume are not always those who buy the wine.
After this stage, a new version of the questionnaire was created, with fewer questions, clearer questions, and with a clear distinction between purchasing and wine consumption behavior. Items for measuring the constructs were adapted from prior studies. Attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, intentions, and behavior were operationalized by three items and adapted from Caliskan et al. [69] and Sabina del Castillo et al. [70]. The items operationalizing sustainability awareness were adapted from Putri and Rosa [102], Pickering and Best [103], Sogari et al. [65], and Bonn et al. [104]. A five-point Likert scale, where 1 represents “strongly disagree” and 5 represents “strongly agree”, was utilized in the research. The application of the Likert scale is highly recommended by researchers due to its ability to mitigate respondent frustration while also positively influencing both response rate and quality [105].
For this study, we employed a convenience sampling method to collect data through questionnaires, distributed via email and social media channels, following previous studies [60,65,66]. Although convenience sampling does not guarantee perfect representativeness, measures were taken to improve the diversity of respondents by reaching a wide demographic audience across Portugal. Participation in various subgroups was encouraged, including, for example, different genders, education levels, and income levels, to better reflect the population. Incomplete questionnaires were eliminated, resulting in a valid sample of 197 respondents. Kline [106] suggests that a sample of 100 to 200 responses is considered medium and adequate for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), particularly when dealing with parsimonious models. Given that the proposed model is parsimonious, we believe that the 197 valid responses collected are sufficient for the intended analyses.

4.2. Sample Socioeconomic Description

Of the total of 197 respondents, all over 18 years of age who agreed to answer the questionnaire anonymously and voluntarily, 115 are women and 82 are men. The average age of the interviewees is 35 years old, with the youngest interviewee being 18 years old and the oldest being 78 years old. A large number of the respondents are single, with 107 individuals, and those married or in a civil union total 70 individuals. Regarding professional occupation, 93 are workers, 64 are students and 29 are working students. The sample is composed of 92 graduates, 49 with secondary education, 28 with masters, and 20 with doctorates. Most respondents, more precisely 127 individuals, reside in urban areas, and 70 individuals reside in rural areas. Finally, concerning income, 83 respondents consider that they receive an income above the national average (1500 euros for the year 2024), 67 consider that they receive an income equal the national average, and 47 individuals consider that they receive an income below the national average. Figure 2 represents the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the sample of respondents to the questionnaire in this study.

4.3. Sample Wine Consumption and Purchase Description

Regarding wine consumption behavior, regardless of whether it is sustainable or not, most respondents are characterized by consuming red wine (45.2%), followed by white wine (31.5%), with fortified wines (2%) being the least consumed. Most respondents declare consuming wine only a few times a year (43.1%), particularly on special occasions (80.7%), and in the company of family (74.6%) and friends (81.7%). Regarding the purchasing behavior of respondents, the majority declare that the wine they consume is bought by family and friends (62.5%), with only 37.5% buying the wine they consume: 23.4% state that their monthly expenditure on wine purchasing is less than 10 euros, 15.7% incur a monthly expenditure between 10 and 19 euros, and 65.1% buy wine in super and hypermarkets. It is also important to highlight that the majority (57.9%) consider that their level of wine knowledge is very weak, or weak. Figure 3 highlights the main characteristics of the sample in terms of their wine consumption and purchasing behavior.

5. Results and Discussion

Data analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 28) for descriptive statistics and the R software version 4.1.1 for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). SEM is a multivariate statistical technique used to evaluate complex relationships among multiple variables simultaneously. It allows for the testing of theoretical models by assessing both direct and indirect effects, thereby providing a comprehensive understanding of the structural relationships within the data.
First, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was applied to verify the dimensionality of constructs and to establish convergent and discriminant validity. This study was confirmed to be of confirmatory nature and then, the structural model was estimated and validated with the covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach. In fact, the model is supported by a well-established theory, the TPB, which justifies the use of the CB-SEM approach. The main results associated with the estimation of the structural model are presented, namely the strengths of the paths and their statistical significance. To study the effect of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics on intention, and since the data do not follow normal distributions, non-parametric tests were performed, namely the Mann–Whitney test and the Kruskal–Wallis test.

5.1. Reliability and Validity

In the measurement model, several latent variables such as attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behavior control, sustainability, intention, and behavior are considered. Table 2 shows the survey items contained in the questionnaire which validated. The CFA was performed to assess measurement model validity, and its results indicated that the model fits the empirical data well (RMSEA = 0.078, CFI = 0.918, and TLI = 0.900). In addition, the chi-square normalized by degrees of freedom should be less than five, which is also the case (χ2/df = 2.187).
To reach convergent validity, the factor loadings and average variance extracted (AVE) values must fulfill certain criteria. In this study, all the measurement items present high loadings (above 0.65). The AVE indicator varies between values of 0.663 and 0.747, thus exceeding the recommended value of 0.50 [107]. An AVE of 0.50 or higher indicates the construct explains 50 percent or more of the indicators’ variance that make up the construct. To examine internal consistency reliability, one of the measures used is composite reliability (CR), and values between 0.70 and 0.95 range from satisfactory to good. From Table 3, it can be concluded that CR assumes values from 0.855 to 0.935, indicating higher levels of reliability. Cronbach’s alpha is another measure of internal consistency reliability, which assumes the same thresholds as the CR. The information presented in Table 3 shows that all values of Cronbach’s alpha are above the recommended value of 0.7. In conclusion, the results suggest a high reliability of the scales [107].
To analyze the discriminant validity, a rigorous test is to compare the AVE values for any of the constructs with the square of the correlation estimate between these two constructs [107]. Table 4 displays the square root of AVE for each construct, represented by bold diagonal numbers while other values indicate the correlation between the corresponding constructs. As the diagonal value in bold is higher than the values in its row and column, discriminant validity is achieved.

5.2. Structural Model Analysis

Overall, the model included a satisfactory level of explanatory power for behavior, as about 49.2% of the total variance in consumption behavior was explained by the consumption intention. The research hypotheses were tested, and the detailed results are reported in Table 5. Attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and sustainability were expected to be positively associated with intention, and in turn, intention and perceived behavioral control were expected to be positively associated with behavior. The results indicate that attitudes have a positive and significant influence on intention to consume sustainable wine (β = 0.280; t-statistics = 3.969), subjective norms significantly affect intention (β = 0.309; t-statistics = 4.095), and sustainability awareness also has a significant positive influence on intention (β = 0.242; t-statistics = 3.546). Therefore, the hypotheses H1, H2, and H5 are validated, at a 0.05 significance level (p-value < 0.05). However, the impact of perceived behavioral control on intention is not significant (β = −0.056; t-statistics = −0.883). Thus, hypothesis H3 is not supported. Likewise, the results show that intention has a positive and significant influence on behavior (β = 0.855; t-statistics = 7.746), and perceived behavioral control also presents a significant positive impact on behavior (β = 0.181; t-statistics = 2.281). These results support the hypotheses H4 and H6, at a 0.05 significance level (p-value < 0.05). Finally, looking at the effect of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, non-parametric tests indicated that intention is significantly different across marital status (H(2) = 10.185; p-value = 0.006), professional occupation (H(2) = 14.059; p-value = 0.001), level of education (H(4) = 9.88; p-value = 0.041), and age (H(5) = 18.359; p-value = 0.003). The analysis revealed that divorced participants have higher intentions to consume sustainable wine than the married (or in a civil union) participants, followed by single participants. Regarding professional occupation, workers seem to have higher intentions to consume sustainable wine than other participants. The results also suggest that participants with a higher level of education have slightly higher intention to consume sustainable wine, and that older participants have a higher intention of consuming sustainable wines. In this study, the gender, the area of residence (rural/urban) and the income have no significant influence on the intention to consume sustainable wine (for gender, z = −1.90; p-value = 0.058; for area of residence, z = −1.59; p-value = 0.112; for income, H(2) = 3.438; p-value = 0.179).

5.3. Discussion

The findings of this study reveal that individuals’ intentions to consume sustainable wine are mainly influenced by attitudes and subjective norms. This aligns with previous research on wine consumption, where attitudes have consistently emerged as the primary factor influencing consumption intention, e.g., [69,89,108,109]. Likewise, in Sabina del Castillo et al. [70]’s study, attitudes were found to be the main determinant of the intention to consume local wine. Additionally, Calistan et al. [69]’s study found that consumer’s attitudes exerted the greatest impact on the intention to consume organic wine, while perceived behavioral control had the least impact.
The finding that attitude is not the most influential factor in this research suggests that many consumers may not fully appreciate the benefits of consuming sustainable wine or may not prioritize sustainability. To address this, wineries and marketers should devise strategies that emphasize the environmental, social, quality, and health advantages of sustainable wine [60,86]. Pomarici and Vecchio [58] and Sogari et al. [60] highlight the need for the wine industry to implement effective marketing initiatives that support consumers’ ability identify sustainable products. Certification logos encompassing environmental, social, and economic aspects of vineyards and wineries can serve as a tool to communicate sustainable practices in the wine market. However, consumer knowledge of these logos appears to be limited. Therefore, efforts by organizations and companies to promote these logos could be crucial in raising awareness of sustainable wines. Additionally, educational campaigns aimed at enhancing interest and understanding of sustainability issues could contribute to a more positive attitude towards sustainable wine consumption. Authors such as Ruzgys and Pickering [110] and Francesca et al. [111] suggest that providing precise information regarding the impact of consumer behavior on sustainability, and fostering empathy for wine workers or the environment, may effectively induce changes in attitudes. Furthermore, the influence of social media in raising awareness about sustainability and promoting sustainable behavior among consumers should not be underestimated, especially for wineries. Therefore, these companies should enhance their ability to communicate their sustainability efforts through social media [60]. It seems that subjective norms also significantly influence sustainable wine consumption intentions, which aligns with the conclusions of several studies focusing on local wine consumption (e.g., [108,109,112]) and organic wine consumption [69]. As van Zanten [110] pointed out, wine consumption often occurs within social contexts, which likely explains the substantial influence of others on consumption intentions and, consequently, the findings related to subjective norms. It is noteworthy that the vast majority of respondents in this study claim to consume wine in the company of family and friends.
Results also indicate that while perceived behavioral control positively influences sustainable wine consumption, it does not seem to influence consumption intention. This contrasts with the results of other studies. For example, Sabina del Castillo et al. [70] identified a positive relationship between perceived behavioral control and intention as well as the behavior of consuming local wine. Furthermore, as highlighted by Silva et al. [113] and Agnoli et al. [89] in their application of the TPB to wine consumption, it was noted that perceived behavioral control is less influential on intention when compared to attitudes and subjective norms. This finding is consistent with the conclusions drawn by Caliskan et al. [69] in their research on the consumption behavior of organic wine. Some researchers argue that perceived behavioral control is closely associated with the concept of risk and that most wine consumers are highly sensitive to various risks—psychological, functional, and economic [89]—which could translate into lower values for this variable. To mitigate these risks, consumers often seek information from diverse sources to navigate the complexities of wine consumption [89]. Therefore, providing more information about these products and producers and facilitating access to this information can enhance consumers’ perceived behavioral control, thereby increasing their likelihood of choosing sustainable wines [70,89]. Additionally, making sustainable wines available in various sales channels and addressing potential barriers can further contribute to an increase in consumers’ perceived behavioral control.
Factors such as the strong susceptibility of the wine sector to the impacts of climate change and the fact that the industry has been held responsible for negative impacts on the ecosystem or surrounding communities are pointed out as important for the growing awareness of sustainability in the wine sector [17,45]. This has led to the implementation of sustainability practices by wineries. Based on our research, well-informed consumers who value these practices are more inclined to engage in more sustainable wine consumption. Similar findings have been reported in other studies of sustainable products (e.g., [102,114]). Therefore, it is important to explore methods of increasing awareness and boosting the likelihood of increasing the intention to consume sustainable wines. This could involve implementing communication strategies on the part of companies, policymakers, and other important players in the sector to enhance understanding of sustainability issues and encourage the disclosure of sustainable initiatives and practices by wine companies.
As proposed by the TPB, the findings from this study validate the significant impact of intention on sustainable wine consumption behavior. These results support the conclusions of Capitello et al. [112], Maksan et al. [90], Caliskan et al. [69], and Sabina del Castillo et al. [70]. Additionally, it appears that the intention to consume sustainable wine varies significantly based on socioeconomic and demographic factors such as marital status, professional occupation, level of education, and age. Marketers should consider these findings when shaping their marketing strategies. While Silva et al. [113] found no such variations when analyzing age and educational level, our study revealed that older participants demonstrated a greater intention to consume sustainable wine. The lower consumption of wine by younger consumers may be due to the negative perception of wine compared to other beverages, with wine being viewed as unfashionable and more closely associated with older individuals [113]. Additionally, there is a widespread assumption that wine consumption increases with age [113]. Conversely, individuals with higher levels of education may possess a better understanding of the issues related to sustainable wine, leading to differences in intention.

6. Conclusions

This research study developed an extended model of the TPB to understand consumers’ intention and behavior regarding the consumption of sustainable wine. Besides analyzing the influence of consumers’ attitudes, perceived behavioral control and subjective norms, the TPB extended model incorporates sustainability awareness and considers the role of the consumers’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics on their intention to consume sustainable wine, providing a comprehensive analytical framework. The achieved results reveal that consumers’ attitudes, subjective norms, and sustainability awareness influence their intention to consume sustainable wine. It is also observed that that intention to consume sustainable wine varies according to certain individuals’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, particularly marital status, professional occupation, level of education, and age. The results also suggest that sustainable wine consumption behavior is influenced by the consumers’ intention and perceived behavioral control. This study offers valuable insights into the factors that influence consumers’ behavior regarding sustainable wine by developing an expanded TPB framework, providing a constructive approach to better understand consumer choices. This research contributes to a deeper comprehension of sustainability in the wine industry from the consumer’s point of view, which is an area that has received little attention in previous research. The findings could be instrumental in guiding the development and implementation of strategies and actions by wineries, policymakers, and other industries to promote the intention and consumption of sustainable wines. Nevertheless, this study is not free from limitations that must be acknowledged in order for them to be overcome in future research. One of the limitations is this study being based on responses obtained in a questionnaire disseminated only among residents in Portugal. In the future, it would be interesting to develop a questionnaire disseminated in different countries on different continents, in order to collect responses from consumers with different cultures and perceptions. Another limitation is the consideration and analysis of a small number of variables. In fact, although the study extended the TPB model to include the respondents’ sustainability awareness and socioeconomic characteristics, it would be important to include more variables that eventually influence the individuals’ intention and consumption of sustainable wine to improve the predictive value of the model. Finally, the study presents a limitation regarding the use of self-reported data by participants, which may introduce some bias, since respondents may, deliberately or not, give answers that align with socially acceptable standards, but do not portray their reality. In future research, it is our intention to complement consumer responses with accurate data on sustainable wine consumption, such as real purchasing data provided by wine producers and sellers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.S. and E.C.; methodology, S.S. and E.C.; software, C.V.; validation, C.V.; formal analysis, S.S. and E.C.; investigation, S.S., E.C. and C.V.; resources, S.S., E.C. and C.V; data curation, C.V.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S., E.C. and C.V.; writing—review and editing, S.S., E.C. and C.V.; visualization, S.S., E.C. and C.V.; supervision, S.S., E.C. and C.V.; project administration, S.S., E.C. and C.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting this study’s findings are available from the authors upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the support provided by Coimbra Business School|ISCAC and CERNAS—Research Center for Natural Resources, Environment and Society.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. FAO. The State of Food and Agriculture 2023. In Revealing the True Cost of Food to Transform Agrifood Systems; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nguyen, T.T.; Grote, U.; Neubacher, F.; Rahut, D.B.; Do, M.H.; Paudel, G.P. Security risks from climate change and environmental degradation: Implications for sustainable land use transformation in the Global South. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2023, 63, 101322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sousa, R.d.; Bragança, L.; da Silva, M.V.; Oliveira, R.S. Challenges and Solutions for Sustainable Food Systems: The Potential of Home Hydroponics. Sustainability 2024, 16, 817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Borsellino, V.; Schimmenti, E.; El Bilali, H. Agri-Food Markets towards Sustainable Patterns. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Çakmakçı, R.; Salık, M.A.; Çakmakçı, S. Assessment and Principles of Environmentally Sustainable Food and Agriculture Systems. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Castillo-Díaz, F.J.; Belmonte-Ureña, L.J.; López-Serrano, M.J.; Camacho-Ferre, F. Assessment of the sustainability of the European agri-food sector in the context of the circular economy. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2023, 40, 398–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. OIV. State of the World Vine and Wine Sector 2021: April 2022; International Organisation of Vine and Wine: Paris, France, 2022; Available online: https://www.oiv.int (accessed on 2 September 2024).
  8. OIV. World Wine Production Outlook: OIV First Estimates. 2022. Available online: https://www.oiv.int/press/severe-drought-and-extreme-heat-pose-new-threat-wine-production (accessed on 31 October 2022).
  9. Chen, L.-C.; Kingsbury, A. Development of wine industries in the New-New World: Case studies of wine regions in Taiwan and Japan. J. Rural. Stud. 2019, 72, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fuentes-Fernández, R.; Martínez-Falcó, J.; Sánchez-García, E.; Marco-Lajara, B. Does Ecological Agriculture Moderate the Relationship between Wine Tourism and Economic Performance? A Structural Equation Analysis Applied to the Ribera del Duero Wine Context. Agriculture 2022, 12, 2143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pereira, L.; Santos, R.; Sempiterno, M.; Costa, R.L.d.; Dias, Á.; António, N. Pereira Problem Solving: Business Research Methodology to Explore Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Santos, V.; Dias, A.; Ramos, P.; Madeira, A.; Sousa, B. Mapping the wine visit experience for tourist excitement and cultural experience. Ann. Leis. Res. 2021, 26, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Springmann, M.; Clark, M.; Mason-D’Croz, D.; Wiebe, K.; Bodirsky, B.L.; Lassaletta, L.; de Vries, W.; Vermeulen, S.J.; Herrero, M.; Carlson, K.M.; et al. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature 2018, 562, 519–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dumitriu, G.D.; Teodosiu, C.; Cotea, V.V. Management of Pesticides from Vineyard to Wines: Focus on Wine Safety and Pesticides Removal by Emerging Technologies; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021; pp. 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Merli, R.; Preziosi, M.; 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]
  16. Dias, A.; Sousa, B.; Santos, V.; Ramos, P.; Madeira, A. Wine Tourism and Sustainability Awareness: A Consumer Behavior Perspective. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Trigo, A.; Fragoso, R.; Marta-Costa, A. Sustainability awareness in the Portuguese wine industry: A grounded theory approach. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2022, 20, 1437–1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. da Silva, A.L.; Fernão-Pires, M.J.; Bianchi-de-Aguiar, F. Portuguese vines and wines: Heritage, quality symbol, tourism assets. Ciência Téc. Vitiv. 2018, 33, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Swiatkiewicz, O. The Wine Sector Management in Portugal: An Overview on Its Three-Dimensional Sustainability. Manag. Sustain. Dev. Sibiu 2021, 13, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. OIV. State of the World Vine and Wine Sector in 2023: April 2024; International Organisation of Vine and Wine: Paris, France, 2024; Available online: https://www.oiv.int (accessed on 2 September 2024).
  21. Sellers-Rubio, R.; Nicolau-Gonzalbez, J.L. Estimating the willingness to pay for a sustainable wine using a heckit model. Wine Econ. Policy 2016, 5, 96–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Schäufele, I.; Hamm, U. Organic wine purchase behaviour in Germany: Exploring the attitude-behaviour-gap with data from a household panel. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 63, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ajzen, I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action-Control: From Cognition to Behavior; Kuhl, J., Beckmann, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1985; pp. 11–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ferrara, C.; De Feo, G. Life Cycle Assessment Application to the Wine Sector: A Critical Review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Trigo, A.; Silva, P. Sustainable Development Directions for Wine Tourism in Douro Wine Region, Portugal. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Moscovici, D.; Reed, A. Comparing wine sustainability certifications around the world: History, status and opportunity. J. Wine Res. 2018, 29, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sgroi, F.; Maenza, L.; Modica, F. Exploring consumer behavior and willingness to pay regarding sustainable wine certification. J. Agric. Food Res. 2023, 14, 100681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. WCED. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  29. UN. Academic Impact: Sustainability. 2023. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/academic-impact/sustainability (accessed on 3 December 2023).
  30. Thomas, C.F. Naturalizing Sustainability Discourse: Paradigm, Practices and Pedagogy of Thoreau, Leopold, Carson and Wilson. Ph.D. Thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA, 2015. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/79576433.pdf (accessed on 10 December 2023).
  31. Hák, T.; Janoušková, S.; Moldan, B. Sustainable development goals: A need for relevant indicators. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 60, 565–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Delicado, A.; Domingos, N.; Sousa, L. Introduction. In Changing Societies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. iii. The Diverse Worlds of Sustainability; Delicado, A., Domingos, N., de Sousa, L., Eds.; Imprensa de Ciências Sociais: Lisbon, Portugal, 2018; pp. 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Aragão, A. Desenvolvimento Sustentável em tempo de crise e em maré de simplificação. Fundamento e limites da proibição do retrocesso ambiental [Sustainable Development in times of crisis and in tide of simplification. Foundation and limits of prohibition of the environmental setback]. In Estudos em Homenagem ao Prof. Doutor José Joaquim Gomes Canotilho; Coimbra Editora: Coimbra, Portugal, 2012; Volume IV. [Google Scholar]
  34. Emas, R. The Concept of Sustainable Development: Definition and Defining principles, Brief for GSDR; Global Sustainable Development Report; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mendes, L.F. A Justiça Intergeracional [Intergenerational Justice]. Master’s Thesis, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal, 2016. Volume 523. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/31403 (accessed on 2 September 2024).
  36. Menash, J.; Enu-Kwesi, F. Implications of environmental sanitation management for sustainable livelihoods in the catchment area of Benya Lagoon in Ghana. J. Integr. Environ. Sci. 2019, 16, 23–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Spijkers, O. Intergenerational Equity and the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Baiano, A. An Overview on Sustainability in the Wine Production Chain. Beverages 2021, 7, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Rocha, C.P.V.; Nodari, E.S. Winemaking, Environmental Impacts and Sustainability: New Pathways from Vineyard to Glass? Historia Ambiental Latinoamericana Y Caribeña (HALAC). Rev. Solcha 2020, 10, 223–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bandinelli, R.; Acuti, D.; Fani, V.; Bindi, B.; Aiello, G. Environmental practices in the wine industry: An overview of the Italian market. Br. Food J. 2020, 122, 1625–1646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zacharof, M.P. Grape Winery Waste as Feedstock for Bioconversions: Applying the Biorefinery Concept. Waste Biomass Valorization 2017, 8, 1011–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Borsato, E.; Zucchinelli, M.; D’Ammaro, D.; Giubilato, E.; Zabeo, A.; Criscione, P.; Pizzol, L.; Cohen, Y.; Tarolli, P.; Lamastra, L.; et al. Use of multiple indicators to compare sustainability performance of organic vs. conventional vineyard management. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 711, 135081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Point, E.; Tyedmers, P.; Naugler, C. Life cycle environmental impacts of wine production and consumption in Nova Scotia, Canada. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 27, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Neto, B.; Dias, A.C.; Machado, M. Life cycle assessment of the supply chain of a Portuguese wine: From viticulture to distribution. Int. J. Life Cycle Ass. 2013, 18, 590–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Flores, S.S. What is sustainability in the wine world? A cross-country analysis of wine sustainability frameworks. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 2301–2312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gbejewoh, O.; Keesstra, S.; Blancquaert, E. The 3Ps (Profit, Planet, and People) of Sustainability amidst Climate Change: A South African Grape and Wine Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sellers, R. Would you pay a price premium for a sustainable wine? The voice of the Spanish Consumer. Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 2016, 8, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Martínez-Falcó, J.; Sánchez-García, E.; Marco-Lajara, B.; Georgantzis, N. The interplay between competitive advantage and sustainability in the wine industry: A bibliometric and systematic review. Discov. Sustain. 2024, 5, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Montalvo-Falcón, J.V.; Sánchez-García, E.; Marco-Lajara, B.; Martínez-Falcó, J. Sustainability Research in the Wine Industry: A Bibliometric Approach. Agronomy 2023, 13, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Valenzuela, L.; Ortega, R.; Moscovici, D.; Gow, J.; Alonso Ugaglia, A.; Mihailescu, R. Consumer Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Wine—The Chilean Case. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. 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]
  52. Vecchio, R.; Annunziata, A.; Dans, E.P.; González, P.A. Drivers of consumer willingness to pay for sustainable wines: Natural, biodynamic, and organic. Org. Agric. 2023, 13, 247–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Broccardo, L.; Truant, E.; Dana, L.-P. The sustainability orientation in the wine industry: An analysis based on age as a driver. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2023, 30, 1300–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zucca, G.; Smith, D.; Mitry, D.J. Sustainable viticulture and winery practices in California: What is it, and do customers care? Int. J. Wine Res. 2009, 1, 189–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Forbes, S.L.; Cohen, D.A.; Cullen, R.; Wratten, S.D.; Fountain, J. Consumer attitudes regarding environmentally sustainable wine: An exploratory study of the New Zealand marketplace. J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 17, 1195–1199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Appleby, C.; Costanigro, M.; Thilmany, D.; Menke, S. Measuring consumer willingness to pay for low-sulfite wine: A conjoint analysis. Am. Assoc. Wine Econ. Work. Pap. Econ. 2012, 117, 1–37. [Google Scholar]
  57. Ginon, E.; Gastòn, A.; Laboissière, L.H.E.S.; Brouard, J.; Issanchou, S.; Deliza, R. Logos indicating environmental sustainability in wine production: An exploratory study on how do Burgundy wine consumers perceive them. Food Res. Int. 2014, 62, 837–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Pomarici, E.; Vecchio, R. Millennial generation attitudes to sustainable wine: An exploratory study on Italian consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 66, 537–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. De Salvo, M.; Capitello, R.; Begalli, D. How CS can be used for gaining info about consumers and the market? In Case Studies in the Wine Industry, 1st ed.; Santini, C., Cavicchi, A., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2018; ISBN 9780081009444. [Google Scholar]
  60. Sogari, G.; Mora, C.; Menozzi, D. Factors driving sustainable choice: The case of wine. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 632–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Rahman, I.; Stumpf, T.; Reynolds, D. A Comparison of the Influence of Purchaser Attitudes and Product Attributes on Organic Wine Preferences. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2014, 55, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. 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]
  63. Bonn, M.A.; Kim, W.G.; Kang, S.; Cho, M. Purchasing Wine Online: The Effects of Social Influence, Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and Wine Involvement. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2015, 25, 841–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. 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]
  65. Sogari, G.; Pucci, T.; Aquilani, B.; Zanni, L. Millennial Generation and Environmental Sustainability: The Role of Social Media in the Consumer Purchasing Behavior for Wine. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Capitello, R.; Sirieix, L. Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainable Wine: An Exploratory Study in France and Italy. Economies 2019, 7, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. 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]
  68. Tait, P.; Saunders, C.; Dalziel, P.; Rutherford, P.; Driver, T.; Guenther, M. Estimating wine consumer preferences for sustainability attributes: A discrete choice experiment of Californian Sauvignon blanc purchasers. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 233, 412–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Caliskan, A.; Celebi, D.; Pirnar, I. Determinants of organic wine consumption behavior from the perspective of the theory of planned behavior. Int. J. Wine Res. 2021, 33, 360–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Sabina del Castillo, E.J.; Díaz Armas, R.J.; Gutiérrez Taño, D. An Extended Model of the Theory of Planned Behaviour to Predict Local Wine Consumption Intention and Behaviour. Foods 2021, 10, 2187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Lerro, M.; Yeh, C.H.; Klink-Lehmann, J.; Vecchio, R.; Hartmann, M.; Cembalo, L. The effect of moderating variables on consumer preferences for sustainable wines. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 94, 104336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Nave, A.; Laurett, R.; Do Paço, A. Relation between antecedents, barriers and consequences of sustainable practices in the wine tourism sector. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2021, 20, 100584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Pickering, G. Consumer engagement with sustainable wine: An application of the Transtheoretical Model. Food Res. Int. 2023, 174 Pt 1, 113555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Rui, M.; Rosa, F.; Viberti, A.; Brun, F.; Massaglia, S.; Blanc, S. Understanding Factors Associated with Interest in Sustainability-Certified Wine among American and Italian Consumers. Foods 2024, 13, 1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Conner, M.; Armitage, C.J. Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review and avenues for further research. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1998, 28, 1429–1464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. King, T.; Dennis, C. Unethical Consumers: Deshopping Behaviour Using the Qualitative Analysis of Theory of Planned Behaviour and Accompanied (de) Shopping. Qual. Mark. Res. 2006, 9, 282–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Teo, T.; Zhou, M.; Noyes, J. Teachers and technology: Development of an extended theory of planned behaviour. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2016, 64, 1033–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wang, S.; Fan, J.; Zhao, D.; Yang, S.; Fu, Y. Predicting consumers’ intention to adopt hybrid electric vehicles: Using an extended version of the theory of planned behavior model. Transportation 2016, 43, 123–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Karimy, M.; I Zareban, I.; Araban, M.; Montazeri, A. An extended theory of planned behavior (TPB) used to predict smoking behavior amng a sample of Iranian medical students. Int. J. High Risk Behav. Addict. 2015, 4, e24715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Si, H.; Shi, J.-G.; Tang, D.; Wen, S.; Miao, W.; Duan, K. Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior in Environmental Science: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Tommasetti, A.; Singer, P.; Troisi, O.; Maione, G. Extended Theory of Planned Behavior (ETPB): Investigating Customers’ Perception of Restaurants’ Sustainability by Testing a Structural Equation Model. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yuriev, A.; Dahmen, M.; Paillé, P.; Boiral, O.; Guillaumie, L. Pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 155, 104660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Blackwell, R.D.; Miniard, P.W.; Engel, J.F. Consumer Behavior; Thomson South-Western: Mason, OH, USA, 2006; p. 774. ISBN 9780324271973. [Google Scholar]
  85. Sánchez-Bravo, P.; Chambers, V.E.; Noguera-Artiaga, L.; Sendra, E.; Chambers, E.E., IV; Carbonell-Barrachina, A.A. Consumer understanding of sustainability concept in agricultural products. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 89, 104136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Taghikhah, F.; Voinov, A.; Shukla, N.; Filatova, T. Exploring consumer behavior and policy options in organic food adoption: Insights from the Australian wine sector. Environ. Sci. Policy 2020, 109, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Finlay, K.A.; Trafimow, D.; Moroi, E. The Importance of Subjective Norms on Intentions to Perform Health Behaviors. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1999, 29, 2381–2393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Al-Swidi, A.; Mohammed Rafiul Huque, S.; Haroon Hafeez, M.; Noor Mohd Shariff, M. The role of subjective norms in theory of planned behavior in the context of organic food consumption. Br. Food J. 2014, 116, 1561–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Agnoli, L.; Capitello, R.; Begalli, D. Behind intention and behaviour: Factors influencing wine consumption in a novice market. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 660–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Maksan, M.T.; Kovačić, D.; Cerjak, M. The influence of consumer ethnocentrism on purchase of domestic wine: Application of the extended theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 2019, 142, 104393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Wijekoon, R.; Sabri, M.F. Determinants That Influence Green Product Purchase Intention and Behavior: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Choi, D.; Johnson, K.K.P. Influences of environmental and hedonic motivations on intention to purchase green products: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019, 18, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Cerri, J.; Testa, F.; Rizzi, F. The more I care, the less I will listen to you: How information, environmental concern and ethical production influence consumers’ attitudes and the purchasing of sustainable products. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 175, 343–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Brugarolas, M.; Martinez-Carrasco, L.; Bernabeu, R.; Martinez-Poveda, A. A contingent valuation analysis to determine profitability of establishing local organic wine markets in Spain. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2010, 25, 35–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Kishore, J.; Vasundhra, S.; Anand, T. Formulation of a Research Question. Ind. J. Med. Spec. 2011. Available online: http://www.ijms.in/articles/2/2/formulation-of-a-research-question.html (accessed on 3 September 2024). [CrossRef]
  96. Sandberg, J.; Alvesson, M. Ways of constructing research questions: Gap-spotting or problematization? Organization 2011, 18, 23–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Bryman, A. The Research Question in Social Research: What is its Role? Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2007, 10, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Ericsson, K.A.; Simon, H.A. Verbal reports on thinking. In Introspection in Second Language Research; Faerch, C., Kasper, G., Eds.; Multilingual Matters, Ltd.: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1987; pp. 24–53. [Google Scholar]
  99. Harte, J.M.; Westenberg, M.R.M.; van Someren, M. Process models of decision making. Acta Psychol. 1994, 87, 95–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Gilhooly, K.J.; Fioratou, E.; Anthony, S.H.; Wynn, V. Divergent thinking: Strategies and executive involvement in generating novel uses for familiar objects. Br. J. Psychol. 2007, 98, 611–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Ryan, M.; Watson, V.; Entwistle, V. Rationalising the ‘irrational’: A think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses. Health Econ. 2009, 18, 321–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Putri, C.H.; Rosa, A.D.E. Impact of Sustainability Awareness in Fashion on Purchase Intention: Mediating Variable of Sustainability Commitment. J. Bus. Manag. Soc. Stud. 2023, 3, 146–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Pickering, G.J.; Best, M. An exploration of consumer perceptions of sustainable wine. J. Wine Res. 2023, 34, 232–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Bonn, A.; Allott, T.; Evans, M.; Joosten, H.; Stoneman, R. Peatland restoration and ecosystem services: An introduction. In Peatland Restoration and Ecosystem Services: Science, Policy and Practice. Ecological Reviews; Bonn, A., Allott, T., Evans, M., Joosten, H., Stoneman, R., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Ahmed, N.; Li, C.; Khan, A.; Qalati, S.A.; Naz, S.; Rana, F. Purchase intention toward organic food among young consumers using theory of planned behavior: Role of environmental concerns and environmental awareness. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2021, 64, 796–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  107. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed.; Cengage: Boston, MA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  108. St James, M.; Christodoulidou, N. Factors influencing wine consumption in Southern California consumers. Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 2011, 23, 36–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. van Zanten, R. Drink Choice: Factors Influencing the Intention to Drink Wine. Int. J. Wine Mark. 2005, 17, 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Ruzgys, S.; Pickering, G.J. Gen Z and sustainable diets: Application of The Transtheoretical Model and the theory of planned behaviour. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 140300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Francesca, A.; Massari, S.; Francesca, R.; Domenico, D. Empathy, food systems and design thinking for fostering youth agency in sustainability: A new pedagogical model. In Transdisciplinary Case Studies on Design for Food and Sustainability; Woodhead Publishing: Sutton, UK, 2021; pp. 197–216. [Google Scholar]
  112. Capitello, R.; Agnoli, L.; Begalli, D. Determinants of consumer behaviour in novice markets: The case of wine. J. Res. Mark. Entrep. 2015, 17, 110–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Silva, A.P.; Figueiredo, I.; Hogg, T.; Sottomayor, M. Young adults and wine consumption a qualitative application of the theory of planned behavior. Br. Food J. 2014, 116, 832–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Garanti, Z. Impact of sustainability awareness and attitudes on intention to purchase sustainable fashion clothing: Mediating role of sustainability commitment. Pazarlama Pazarlama Araştırmaları Derg. 2020, 13, 29–48. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 16 08813 g002
Figure 2. Respondents’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics.
Figure 2. Respondents’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics.
Sustainability 16 08813 g002
Sustainability 16 08813 g003
Figure 3. Respondents’ behavior.
Figure 3. Respondents’ behavior.
Sustainability 16 08813 g003
Table 1. Studies focusing on consumer’s behavior regarding wine with sustainability characteristics.
Table 1. Studies focusing on consumer’s behavior regarding wine with sustainability characteristics.
AuthorsCountryMethodologyMain Conclusions
Ginon et al. [57]FranceOnline survey
127 respondents 		There are considerable differences in the way consumers perceive logos. These do not convey a message about environmental sustainability, reaffirming the necessity to provide consumers with proper information on environmental sustainability.
Pomarici & Vecchio [58]Italy Online survey
500 respondents		When analyzing Millennials’ interest and wtp for wines with certain labels certifying ethical, social and environmental attributes, it is observed that labels related to social features show the greatest interest. Residing in urban areas, being female, and older increases the likelihood of purchasing sustainable wines.
Rahman et al. [61]USAOnline survey and sensory evaluation
224 respondents		Despite theoretical evidence reinforcing that wine consumers’ purchase decisions are influenced by whether a wine is organic and by personal attitudes, it is observed that taste overwhelmed the other influences in respondents’ wine selection.
Sogari et al. [62]ItalyOnline survey
495 respondents		The cluster analysis confirms the existence of different consumer segments named as well-disposed; not interested; skeptical; and adverse. Also, consumers with a positive attitude regarding sustainable wine and stronger beliefs on environmental protection have higher wtp for sustainable wine.
Bonn et al. [63]USAFace-to-face survey
Unknown number of respondents		Consumer perceptions of wine producers’ sustainable practices affect their decision making on organic wine. Moreover, consumer’s attitudes on organic wine attributes related to price, health, and environment have important effects on behavioral intentions. Also, consumers who trust wine retailers are more likely to engage in positive results.
D’Amico et al. [64]ItalyFace-to-face survey
201 respondents		Environmental consciousness and curiosity lead consumers to pay a higher price for organic wines, while naturalness and origin designation are the characteristics positively related to the wtp a premium price for organic wines.
Sogari et al. [65]Italy Online survey
2597 respondents		The greater the importance the consumer attributes to the product/process dimension of environmental sustainability, the higher the self-selection in market segments. Social media has the power to increase sustainability awareness, influencing the consumer’s wine purchasing behavior.
Capitello & Sirieix [66]France & Italy Online survey
210 Italian and 148 French respondents		Consumers involved with wine are more able to evaluate product-attribute associations for sustainable wines than ethically minded consumers who are not involved with wine. Sustainable wine marketers should pay more attention to the consumer involvement with wine.
Di vita et al. [67]ItalyOnline survey
1200 respondents		The wine consumption determinants vary according to each range of wine quality and hence support a hierarchical scale of quality wines. Consumers’ motivation progressively changes as the wine quality scales increase or decrease. Regarding bulk wine consumption, it is closely associated to wine tourism and the intention to purchase locally produced wines.
Tait et al. [68]USAOnline survey
766 respondents		The presence of sustainability attributes may influence the Sauvignon blanc choice and consumers have a relevant positive wtp for many of these attributes. Price is the main attribute, and wtp significantly varies depending on where a wine is made, and the critical score a wine receives.
Caliskan et al. [69]TurkeyTPB
Online survey
317 respondents		Individuals’ attitude has the strongest impact on intention and indirect effect on organic wine consumption. Subjective norms also have a significant impact on intention and organic wine consumption. Perceived behavioral control has the least impact, focusing on a person’s perceived convenience and challenges in carrying out a behavior.
Sabina del Castillo et al. [70]Canary
Island 		TPB
Online survey
762 respondents		There is a relationship between intention and perceived behavioral control. Additionally, the ethnocentric personality has a positive influence, and the cosmopolitan personality has a negative influence. The personal norm and place identity are also related to attitudes regarding such behavior.
Lerro et al. [71]Italy & German Experimental session and online survey
93 Italian and 85 German respondents		Sustainability allows for the possibility of a premium, despite the fact that its full potential can only be achieved for producers satisfying consumers’ sensory expectations. Consumers’ involvement with sustainable wine offers the potential for an above average premium. Consumers with a high level of sustainability concerns have a high wtp for wine sustainability characteristics.
Nave et al. [72]PortugalPrimary data from 103 Portuguese wine tourism companiesInternal and external pressures influence the adoption of sustainable practices in wine tourism, which can result in benefits for companies in this sector. It is also concluded that even if some barriers are perceived by entrepreneurs, they tend to persist adopting sustainable practices in wine tourism.
Valenzuela et al. [50]Chile Online survey
526 respondents		Most respondents have already purchased wines with ecological certification and intend to buy wines with ecological certification in the future, particularly organic and sustainable wines. A significant percentage of respondents revealed a wtp a premium price, ranging between 5 and 16 US dollars and more, for organic and sustainable wines.
Trigo et al. [17]PortugalFace-to-face interviews with leading wine specialists
33 respondents		Sustainability perception by the Portuguese wine sector can be sliced into three core domains of concern that resemble the so-called ESG factors. It is suggested that the approaches that go beyond ESG factors, by integrating social, environmental, and corporate governance with political orientations, are adopted.
Sgroi et al. [27]Italy Online survey
528 respondents		Consumers are not very aware of sustainability and this lack of awareness regarding sustainable wine is, at least in part, attributable to confusion within the industry.
Pickering [73]Canada Online survey
727 respondents		Consumers are changing regarding sustainable wine, as the development of education and sustainable certification initiatives are important. It is observed that wine involvement and sustainability cues in wine purchase are the most consistent predictors of both action and inaction, while age, taste expectation, and perceived quality are predictive for some behaviors in sustainable wine consumption.
Rui et al. [74]USA & ItalyOnline survey
1000 USA and 1250 Italian respondents		There is a deeper relationship between demographics and interest in sustainability-certified wine among US consumers than Italian consumers. The link patterns between consumers’ wine-buying behavior and interest in sustainable wine are similar for the two countries. In particular, consumers who buy wine weekly have a keen interest, and those who buy wine sporadically have no or little interest.
Martínez-Falcó et al. [48]WorldBibliometric and systematic reviewIt provides an analysis of how sustainable practices may be integrated into winemaking, which is to the determinant of industry practitioners. To encourage sustainable practices in the wine industry, it is essential to promote innovation, technology, policies and collaborative strategies among different stakeholders, namely researchers, industry professionals and policy makers.
Table 2. Measurement items included in the questionnaire.
Table 2. Measurement items included in the questionnaire.
Latent VariablesItems
Attitudes (ATT)ATT1: I believe that consuming sustainable wine contributes to protecting the environment.
ATT2: I think it is essential for wine producers to adopt sustainability initiatives/practices.
ATT3: I think it is very important that consumers value sustainability in their wine consumption decisions.
Subjective Norms (SN)SN1: My family thinks I should always choose to consume sustainable wine.
SN2: Most of the people I care about consume sustainable products.
SN3: My closest friends think I should consume sustainable wine.
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC)PBC1: If I want to, I can consume sustainable wine.
PBC2: I think it is easy for me to consume sustainable wine.
PBC3: It is essentially up to me whether I consume sustainable wine.
Sustainability Awareness (SUS)SUS1: It is very important that the wine I consume be produced without the use of artificial inorganic fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides.
SUS2: It is very important to the environment that the wine I consume be produced with minimal use of water and energy.
SUS3: It is very important that the wine I consume be produced in a form that supports the local economy and local communities.
SUS4: It is very important that the wine I consume be produced by a company that respects human rights.
SUS5: It is very important that the wine I consume be produced by a company that promotes health and safety conditions for workers.
SUS6: It’s very important that the wine I consume be produced by a company that contributes to the economy and improves the lives of society in general.
Sustainable Wine Consumption Intention (INT)INT1: I intend to consume sustainable wine soon.
INT2: I drink sustainable wine whenever I can, and I intend to continue doing so.
INT3: I really want to drink sustainable wine.
Sustainable Wine Consumption Behavior (BEH)BEH1: I usually consume sustainable wine.
BEH2: I prefer sustainable wine to conventional wine.
BEH3: For the last six months, I have been drinking sustainable wine.
Table 3. Reliability and convergent validity measures.
Table 3. Reliability and convergent validity measures.
Latent VariablesItemsLoadingAVECRCronbach’s Alpha
Attitudes (ATT)ATT10.8560.7470.8990.897
ATT20.894
ATT30.842
Subjective Norms (SN)SN10.8130.6840.8670.866
SN20.859
SN30.814
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC)PBC10.8570.7020.8760.876
PBC20.880
PBC30.785
Sustainability Awareness (SUS)SUS10.6890.7090.9350.935
SUS20.762
SUS30.840
SUS40.897
SUS50.943
SUS60.895
Sustainable Wine Consumption Intention (INT)INT10.7970.6630.8550.853
INT20.813
INT30.831
Sustainable Wine Consumption Behavior (BEH)BEH10.9010.6830.8630.844
BEH20.659
BEH30.880
Table 4. Measurement results of discriminant validity.
Table 4. Measurement results of discriminant validity.
ATTSNPBCSUSTINTBEH
ATT0.865
SN0.4290.827
PBC0.4260.5100.838
SUST0.4770.4430.4500.812
INT0.6000.5580.3690.5520.814
BEH0.2460.5800.3890.4690.6800.827
Note: Bold numbers in diagonal are the square roots of AVE.
Table 5. Structural path estimates.
Table 5. Structural path estimates.
PathCoefficient t-Statisticsp-Value
H1: ATT ⟶ INT 0.2803.9690.000
H2: SN ⟶ INT 0.3094.0950.000
H3: PBC ⟶ INT−0.056−0.8830.377
H5: SUS ⟶ INT0.2423.5460.000
H6: INT ⟶ BEH0.8557.7460.000
H4: PBC ⟶ BEH0.1812.2810.023
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sousa, S.; Correia, E.; Viseu, C. Exploring Portuguese Consumers’ Behavior Regarding Sustainable Wine: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8813. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208813

AMA Style

Sousa S, Correia E, Viseu C. Exploring Portuguese Consumers’ Behavior Regarding Sustainable Wine: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability. 2024; 16(20):8813. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208813

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sousa, Sara, Elisabete Correia, and Clara Viseu. 2024. "Exploring Portuguese Consumers’ Behavior Regarding Sustainable Wine: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior" Sustainability 16, no. 20: 8813. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208813

APA Style

Sousa, S., Correia, E., & Viseu, C. (2024). Exploring Portuguese Consumers’ Behavior Regarding Sustainable Wine: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability, 16(20), 8813. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208813

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop