Content uploaded by J. François Outreville
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by J. François Outreville on Nov 06, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Wine consumption and culture: A cross-country analysis
Lara Agnoli
Burgundy School of Business - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Rue Sambin, Dijon, France
lara.agnoli@bsb-education.com
J. François Outreville*
Burgundy School of Business - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Rue Sambin, Dijon, France
jeanfrancois.outreville@bsb-education.com
* Corresponding author
This is the pre-final version. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in
accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.
Forthcoming in Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy
Submitted on 15 December 2019
Accepted on 13 September 2020
First published: 25 October 2020 https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13097
Editor in Charge: Graig Gundersen
JEL Classification: G22, E44, O16.
Key words: Wine consumption, Culture, Religion, Governance
Abstract
The main objective of this paper is to investigate how national culture and sociopolitical
environment influence the level of wine consumption in a representative panel of countries. Culture
is defined as the consumption practices related to economic, social, cultural aspects and institutional
factors. A single equation analysis is based on a cross section of countries representing 90% of wine
consumption in the world for the period 2003-2017. In order to draw a final model explaining wine
consumption through the cultural peculiarities of a country and to avoid multicollinearity among
independent variables, a Principal Component Analysis is performed and a random-effects GLS
regression model is applied to determine the set of cultural variables which are the most significant
in affecting wine consumption.
1. Introduction
The demand for wine, beer or other alcoholic beverages has been widely examined in the literature.
Fogarty (2010) presents a survey of this literature and found more than 100 papers estimating
demand elasticities. The demand for wine could be considered within the context of the consumer’s
lifetime allocation process. Within this framework, demand is attributed to a person’s desire to
consume wine at the present period or to invest in wine for future consumption. The consumer
2
maximizes lifetime utility subject to the expected income over an individual’s lifetime, a vector of
prices and expected returns on investments. Following this approach, it is therefore not surprising
that wine is studied as a consumer good or as an investment or even as a substitute to traditional
financial assets (Le Fur and Outreville, 2019). Under this hypothesis, standard instantaneous utility
functions (concave in consumption) will generate relatively flat consumption demand over the life
cycle and the maximization of the utility function of the consumer will be dependent on a set of
factors that impact on the consumers’ subjective discount for consumption.
Consumer’s subjective apprehension and risk behavior is related to many factors that could be
regrouped under demographic or geographic (family, location), institutional (political and legal) and
social and cultural variables (education, religion, cultural distance). In other words, the level of
national income can explain peoples’ ability to afford products while cultural traits and the
sociopolitical environment influence peoples’ attitudes and behavior. Thus, the main objective of
this paper is to investigate how national culture influences wine consumption levels.
Cultural influences on consumer behavior and consumption can be summarized in purchase
behavior, decision making, and responses to pricing aspects (Craig and Douglas, 2005). Many
studies have taken into account the influence of culture in the field of food choices (for example,
Penz, 2006; Cervellon and Dubé, 2005; Bartels and Reinders, 2010). All these studies aim to
understand choices, behaviors, and beliefs in relation to culture. Only a few studies have
investigated wine consumption across cultures, with most of them focusing on a comparison of
developed countries (Hall et al., 1997; Mouret et al., 2013) or Western and Eastern cultures (Jiang,
2011; Do et al., 2009). Other studies have analyzed social, cultural, and societal reactions of
drinking practices including wine (Heath, 1995; Room, 2013; Mitchell, 2016).
Literature concerning wine consumption behavior suggests that buying preferences and
consumption of wine and beer are similar to that of food (Lockshin and Corsi, 2012, for a survey).
Most of the recent papers are based on surveys of consumers and attribute the purchasing decisions
to some cultural factors such as the perceived risk, gender, age, education, race or religion (for
example Hussain et al., 2007; Camillo, 2012; Somogyi et al., 2011; Xu and Zeng, 2014; Outreville
and Desrochers, 2016; Pape et al., 2017).
There is an important cross-cultural variation in the way people behave when they drink but along
with the globalization of world economy, the drinking culture is changing. Convergence of alcohol
consumption may occur through channels like foreign trade. Recent studies are considering the role
of culture and cultural distance in gravity models of wine trade and flows (Pinilla and Serrano,
2008; Bianco et al., 2013; Ferto et al., 2013, Balogh, 2017; Bargain et al, 2017; Bouet et al., 2017;
Cardebat and Figuet, 2019). However, as far as we are aware, there are no earlier economic and
econometric studies analyzing how cultural factors could be relevant in the analysis of the
determinants of wine consumption levels across countries and the evolution of demand.1
This study attempts to explore the socio-cultural factors behind wine consumption patterns in a
representative panel of countries. The analysis highlights that the cultures more prone to wine
3
consumption and to increase wine consumption are modern, developed and rich cultures,
characterized by efficient, effective and democratic governments and with high degree of digital
adoption, urban population and education.
The outline of the paper is as follows. Section II reviews the definition of culture considered in the
paper. Section III discusses the related descriptive statistics. The following sections present the
empirical analysis of the relationship between wine consumption and cultural aspects related to
each country.
2. A review of the definition of culture
In the last 30 years, important work on national culture has been conducted in social science
disciplines (Creanza et al., 2017). This work has been criticized for being too simplistic as culture is
too complex a phenomenon to be captured in a few dimensions. In the words of Alesina and
Giuliano (2015: 899) “Defining culture is an arduous task” and culture has been defined in
hundreds of ways depending on the dominant theoretical perspective and methodological approach
taken (Leung et al., 2005; Cantwell and Verbeke, 2006; Kirkman et al., 2006; Guiso et al., 2007;
Beugelsdijk et al., 2017; Falk et al., 2018).2 Reuter (2011) proposed a comprehensive review of the
definition of culture in economics, finance, psychology, international management, political
sciences and sociology. Our purpose is not to find a new definition but to classify the approaches in
two broad categories as suggested by Reuter (2011).
The dimensionalist approaches can be traced back to Hofstede (1980, 1984, and 2001) and
Schwartz (1992, 1994). They are based on value-statements collected from individuals, in a large-
scale survey. These value-statements are averaged by country and provide indices that characterize
quantitative, and time-invariant, cultural characteristics, for each country. Other approaches
generally use the concept of “culture” in combination with a number of institutional characteristics
by country. These non-dimensionalist approaches assimilate culture with other concepts, such as the
institutional environment (Knack and Keefer, 1995 and 1997), the quality of the legal and
regulatory environment (La Porta et al., 1997, 1998), the quality of corporate governance
(Kaufmann et al., 2000) but also the influence of religions, language and education (Henderson and
Milhouse, 1987; Hill, 2005).
The “cultural distance” approach initially proposed by Kogut and Singh (1988) is mainly used in
international business studies to examine the impact of culture when looking at trade and
investments flows. The hypothesis is that, as the cultural difference between two countries increase,
trade or foreign direct investment decreases. Countries where entry would entail the least
information costs are those most likely to be chosen as host countries. These costs could stem from
geographic, cultural, institutional and economic differences (Ghemawat, 2001; Bevan and Estrin,
2004; Bevan et al., 2004). When examining investments stocks rather than flows, distance effects
are conflated with level effects (Brouthers et al., 2016; Harzing and Pudelko, 2016; Beugelsdijk et
al., 2018) and cultural differences based on level effects is usually a preferred approach. However,
debate still exist over how to theorize and operationalize culture, how stable culture is, which
4
cultural factors influence organizational decisions, and whether cultural effects are dominated by
other institutional factors (Aggarwal et al., 2012; Siegel et al., 2013).
2.1 Dimensionalist approaches
The tentative measurement of national culture, with indices, can be traced back to Hofstede (1980).
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are related to “power distance” which refers to the degree of
inequality among people; “individualism/collectivism” which measures the degree to which people
in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than members of a same group; “masculinity” to
evaluate the impact of gender differences in a country; and “uncertainty avoidance/tolerance for
ambiguity” which assess the degree of preference for known situations. A fifth (and last) cultural
dimension is introduced in a later stage by Hofstede (2001): long-term orientation. Hofstede found
that there is a value, dominant in Northeastern Asia, which cannot be described by his original four
dimensions. A new measure, called long-term orientation, measures perseverance and thrift,
personal stability, respect for tradition, honor of ancestors, and duty of financial support of parents.
Building on Hofstede (1980, 1984), Schwartz (1992, 1994) propose a complementary approach
oriented by three polarizations: “mastery/harmony” which values the active efforts of people to
change their surroundings and get ahead of others; “egalitarianism/hierarchy” which emphasizes the
commitment to help improve the welfare of other people rather than imposing the legitimacy of
hierarchical roles; and “conservatism/autonomy” which compares values primarily concerned with
security, conformity, and tradition to an emphasis on self-direction and own interests. A comparison
of Schwartz’s indices with those of Hofstede is available in Schwartz (2004), Drogendijk and
Slangen (2006) and Schwartz (2006).
Much cross-cultural work in social science disciplines has used country as the basic unit of analysis
but culture may be validly conceptualized at the national level. New original factors emerge from
research on the role of genetics. Bargain et al. (2017) develop the role of genetics in explaining the
taste preferences and the impact on wine trade flows. Another path of the economic literature
presents new type of data on cultural preferences measures (Falk et al., 2018) like patience, risk
taking, altruism or trust which are similar to Schwartz measures but unfortunately not compared to
existing measures.
2.2 Non-dimensionalist approaches
Non-dimensionalist cultural variables are classified into the impact of the cultural environment
(religion, urbanization, population growth, wealth distribution and education), the degree of
digitalisation and the quality of the institutional environment, i.e. efficiency factors (government
effectiveness, rule of law, voice and accountability) and governance factors (political stability and
corruption). For example, Dow and Karunaratna (2006) use the general level of education,
language, political systems and religion to measure cultural effects. On the other hand, it is
suggested by institutional theorists, that a country’s institutional environment represented by
corruption perception, political risk and the legal environment influence traditional investments
motivations (Rottig, 2016; Dikova and Brouthers, 2016).
5
Another important variable in characterizing modern cultures is given by the digital adoption. The
degree of digitalization of a society influences the way people live, communicate, look for
information and buy, with a huge impact on the wine industry (Szolnoki et al., 2016). Wine
industry, like all the others, has undergone big changes connected with digitalization, with a
relevant impact on consumption (Viana, 2016; Galati et al., 2017). Consumers buy wine online,
look for information on their Smartphone Apps, attend wine tastings online, and follow wine
influencers on social media to increase their knowledge (Dolan et al., 2017; Pucci et al., 2019;
Mastroberardino et al., 2019).
Religion has always been a major factor in the clustering of countries (Ronen and Shenkar, 1985).
The study conducted by Holt et al. (2006) analyses the relation between religion affiliation and
alcohol consumption in the US States, highlighting that states with high Catholic adherents tend to
have higher drinking rates that countries with higher affiliation to the Evangelical Protestant
doctrine. Wine consumption is part of Catholic culture, becoming a symbol during religious rituals,
and it is banned by Muslim cultures (Charters, 2006). Starting from these assumptions, we would
expect therefore that wine consumption in a country is positively or negatively correlated with
religion, depending on the dominant religion in the country.
Population dynamics have a strong impact on cultures, and as highlighted by Anderson and Wittwer
(2015), they influence wine consumption. Economies with a higher share of urban to total
population are expected to have higher levels of wine consumption because urbanization simplifies
the distribution of these products.
Concerning education and culture, the demand for wine may also differ according to the cultural
environment and more specifically the level of human capital endowment. The level of education is
generally hypothesized to be positively related to wine consumption (Gallup surveys in North
America, Dewald, 2003).
Government regulations obviously affect consumption as well (Meloni and Swinnen, 2010). In each
country, the government imposes the minimum drinking age. It can further impose consumption
taxes, restrictions on the days, times and locations of sales or regulate advertising (Meloni et al.,
2019; Marks, 2015). Recent research in psychology and sociology has also established a connection
between political beliefs and consumer behaviors (Yakovlev and Guessford, 2013).
The governance of a country, namely the traditions and institutions which exercise authority, also
plays a relevant role. Bianco et al. (2013) conclude that wine flows can be basically explained by
the importer countries’ economic and political characteristics. There has been a surge of interest in
the consequences of governance for development and how a country risk could have an impact on
global investment strategies. A country risk may include several factors such as a pure political risk,
access to finance and capital markets, credit rating, or sovereign risk. Corruption is commonly
defined as the abuse of public office for private gain. Governance is a much broader notion, which
is defined as the traditions and institutions that determine how authority is exercised in a particular
6
country. This includes (1) the process by which governments are selected, held accountable,
monitored, and replaced; (2) the capacity of governments to manage resources efficiently and
formulate, implement, and enforce sound policies and regulations; and (3) the respect of citizens
and the state for the institutions that govern economic and social interactions among them
(Kaufmann, 2003).
3. Data sources
In this paper, wine consumption is measured as the natural logarithm for country i in the year t. Per-
capita consumption is expected to respond positively to changes in income measured by per-capita
GDP. In the first step of the analysis, the sample includes from 185 to 79 countries, according to the
availability of information. In the final model, 72 countries are analyzed, representing about 90%
of wine consumption in the world. Figure 1 shows per capita consumption of wine for these
countries. The highest wine consuming countries still lie in the Old World, where wine is part of the
everyday life by tradition (Lai, 2019). Some countries from the New World also register high per
capita consumption, especially from Australasia. A third block of countries emerges, recently
identified by scholars and marketers as the “Third World of Wine” or the “New, New World of
Wine”, including China, Russia, and countries in North Africa, which are playing an increasingly
important role in the international wine scene (Aleixandre et al., 2016; Anderson and Pinilla, 2018;
Li et al., 2018; Banks and Overton, 2010).
Figure 1 – Per capita consumption of wine, 2017
Source: our elaboration from Euromonitor International (2018) data
Country specific variables are related to either cultural, institutional or efficiency and governance
factors (Table 1).
7
In particular, this paper analyses wine consumption in different countries as related to:
- cultural environment: religion, urbanization, education, population growth, digital adoption
and wealth distribution;
- cultural distance: adopting the cultural dimensions by Hofstede (2001), Power distance,
Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty avoidance, Long-term orientation. We decided to
introduce only this dimensionalist approach in our analysis, as these dimensions are
extensively used in literature to explain behaviors of people belonging to a same culture,
more than human values developed by Schwartz and more affected by generational and
personal inputs.
- efficiency factors: government effectiveness, rule of law, voice and accountability.
- governance: political stability, control of corruption and corruption perception.
Table 1 – Variables adopted in the research
Variable
Measure
Source
Years
N. of
countries
Wine per-capita consumption
Litres
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2017
193
Wine production
000 tonnes
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2017
193
Per-capita GDP
euros, real GDP, 2017 prices
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2017
193
Urban population
% of population living in urban areas
United Nations
Population Division
(UNPD)
From 2003 to
2017
193
Gini index
From 0 (perfect equality) to 100
(maximum inequality)
United Nations
Development
Programme
2013
154
Population growth rate
Negative if decreasing, positive if
increasing
The World Bank
and Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2017
159
Religion
% of population affiliated to the religion
Pew Research
Center
2010
193
Cultural dimensions
(Hofstede, 1984)
Index from 0 (low) to 100 (high)
Hofstede Insights
2017
96
Education index
From 0 (low education) to 1 (high
education)
United Nations
Development
Programme
2013
169
Digital adoption index
From 0 (no adoption) to 1 (full adoption)
The World Bank
2016
159
Control of corruption index
From -2.5 to 2.5. The higher the index, the
less the corruption
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2016
186
Corruption perceptions index
From 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very
clean)
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2017
161
Government effectiveness
index
From -2.5 to 2.5. The higher the index, the
higher the effectiveness.
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2016
186
Political Stability and
Absence of
Violence/Terrorism Index
From -2.5 to 2.5. The higher the index, the
higher the stability.
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2016
186
Rule of Law Index
From -2.5 to 2.5. The higher the index, the
higher the performance.
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2016
186
Voice and Accountability
Index
From -2.5 to 2.5. The higher the index, the
participation.
Euromonitor
International
From 2003 to
2016
186
8
Some country specific variables, like cultural dimensions, vary across countries but they are
assumed to be invariant across time for a given country. It is important to note that national cultural
differences have remained fairly stable over time. For example, data from the World Value Survey,
a study of 65 countries reflecting 75% of the world’s population, showed a remarkable resilience of
distinctive cultural values even after taking into account the far-reaching cultural changes caused by
modernization and economic development (Inglehart and Backer, 2000). Tables 2 and 3 show
descriptive statistics for the analyzed longitudinal variables and time-invariant variables.
Table 2 - Descriptive statistics, longitudinal variables
2003
2017
Mean
SD
min
max
mean
SD
min
max
Wine per-capita consumption
7.8
11.6
0.1
59.8
7.7
9.9
0.1
47.1
Wine production
138.4
603.9
0.0
4,749.1
159.9
691.4
0.0
5,209.7
Per-capita GDP
9,494.0
15,909.2
31.0
121,698.2
15,849.1
23,134.2
288.8
158,670.5
Urban population
58.2
24.2
13.1
100.0
62.2
23.7
13.1
100.0
Gini index
41.8
9.2
25.8
65.8
41.6
8.3
24.0
67.7
Population growth rate
1.4
1.3
-1.5
6.5
1.2
1.1
-2.1
4.7
Control of corruption indexa
0.0
1.0
-1.7
2.4
0.5
1.0
-1.8
2.3
Corruption perceptions index
42.8
23.3
13.0
97.0
43.2
19.2
9.0
89.0
Government effectiveness indexa
0.1
1.0
-2.3
2.3
0.9
1.0
-2.1
2.2
Political stability indexa
0.1
1.0
-2.4
1.7
0.1
0.9
-2.9
1.5
Rule of law indexa
0.1
1.0
-1.8
2.0
0.1
1.0
-2.2
2.0
Voice and accountability indexa
0.1
1.0
-2.2
1.9
0.9
1.0
-2.1
2.1
a data about 2017 are not available when writing this paper, descriptive statistics refer to 2016 data.
Table 3 - Descriptive statistics, time-invariant variables
mean
SD
min
max
Religion
- Buddhism
3.6
14.3
0.0
96.9
- Christianism
61.8
36.0
0.1
99.0
- Hinduism
2.2
9.5
0.0
80.7
- Muslim
19.4
33.0
0.0
99.0
- Other religions
4.1
9.9
0.3
76.1
- Unaffiliated
9.0
13.5
0.1
76.4
Cultural dimensions (Hofstede, 1984)
- Power distance
63.3
20.7
11.0
100.0
- Individualism
39.4
22.3
6.0
91.0
- Masculinity
47.7
19.0
5.0
100.0
- Uncertainty avoidance
63.9
21.8
8.0
100.0
- Long-term orientation
44.0
23.3
7.0
100.0
Education index
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.9
Digital adoption index
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.9
4. Empirical results
Several papers have been written in the area of applied demand analysis for wine, beer and spirits
(Gallet, 2007; Fogarty, 2010; Nelson, 2013). Many of these studies are based on a single-equation
estimation of demand for aggregate or disaggregate alcoholic beverages (for example Owen, 1979;
Tsolakis et al., 1983; Angulo et al., 2001; Chang et al., 2002; Dewald, 2003).3
9
This study applied random-effects GLS regression models to study the relation between wine
consumption and cultural variables characterizing different countries in the period 2003-2017. The
Breusch-Pagan Lagrange multiplier test determined the random-effects GLS regression model as
more suitable than the OLS regression for this analysis. The Hausman test confirms the suitability
of the random-effects GLS regression compared to the fixed-effect regression. Differently than the
fixed-effect model, the random-effects model allows for the estimation of relationship between
variables when independent variables are both longitudinal and time invariant, like in our sample.
We propose a step-by-step analysis of the relations, instead of an ordinary stepwise regression
analysis, to explore what typologies of cultural variables have a significant correlation with wine
consumption. We finally integrate all significant cultural variables emerged from the step-by-step
analysis into a model, which independent variables are drawn from the application of a Principal
Component Analysis identifying independent latent factors.
We first examine the basic relationship between wine consumption and GDP and wine production
(Table 4). In following steps we introduce dimensionalist and non-dimensionalist cultural variables.
As expected, the income elasticity is positive (Clements and Selvanathan, 1991; Gallet, 2007;
Nelson, 2013). The relationship between wine production and wine consumption is positive but
with a very low coefficient, testifying the increasing interest towards wine consumption by those
countries that are not typically wine producers (Banks and Overton, 2010).
Table 4 - Impact of GDP and production on wine consumption
Coeff.
SE
ln GDP
0.158
***
0.008
Production
0.001
***
0.0001
C
-0.540
***
0.120
sigma_u
1.3025
sigma_e
0.15967
Rho
0.985
Observations
2,727
Groups
185
Wald chi-square
385.01
***
R-square
Within
0.114
between
0.540
overall
0.515
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
In Table 5 we show the relationship between wine consumption and religion as an important aspect
characterizing the cultural environment. Being affiliated to any kind religion has a negative impact
on wine consumption. This result is in line with expectations when considering Islamic, Buddhist
and Hinduist religions, as they ban or discourage alcohol consumption, and with results by Stancu
(2015). Even if wine assumes symbolic meanings in the Catholic religion (Charters, 2006), Catholic
countries also register a decrease in wine consumption. This seems also in contrast with results by
Holt et al. (2006), highlighting a positive relation between Catholic affiliation and alcohol
consumption, but the focus of their study was the sole US market.
10
Table 5 - Impact of religion on wine consumption
Coeff.
SE
ln GDP
0.158
***
0.008
Production
0.001
***
0.0001
Not-affiliated (reference)
Buddhism
-0.064
***
0.010
Christianism
-0.032
***
0.007
Hinduism
-0.076
***
0.018
Muslim
-0.047
***
0.007
Other religions
-0.051
***
0.012
C
2.896
***
0.625
sigma_u
1.165
sigma_e
0.160
Rho
0.982
Observations
2,727
Groups
185
Wald chi-square
508.22
***
R-square
Within
0.1142
Between
0.4297
Overall
0.4163
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
Secondly, we introduced non-dimensional variables having to do with the economic environment of
a country (Table 6). The literature highlights that variables like education, wealth distribution and
population dynamics have a role in shaping cultures (Idris et al., 2012; Inglehart, 1990). Results
show that wine consumption increases as urban population increases in the country. As testified by
many studies in the literature (Charters and Ali-Knight, 2002; Bruwer et al., 2012), wine
consumption is correlated with education level and the more people are educated, the more they
consume wine. Despite variations in the population amount do not affect wine consumption, wealth
distribution does. Wine consumption decreases with the increase of inequality in the country, as
testified by the negative coefficient related to the Gini index (-0.012, in fact, the higher the Gini
index is, the less equality is present in the country).
Table 6 - Impact of economic variables on wine consumption
Coeff.
SE
ln GDP
0.076
***
0.011
Production
0.001
**
0.0001
Urban population
0.198
***
0.002
Education index
5.963
***
0.556
Population growth
-0.007
0.005
Gini index
-0.012
***
0.003
C
-4.579
***
0.382
sigma_u
1.079
sigma_e
0.170
Rho
0.976
Observations
2,097
Groups
143
Wald chi-square
614.95
***
R-square
Within
0.1473
Between
0.6322
Overall
0.6202
11
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
Table 7 introduces the degree of digitalization of the country in the model. It is measured by the
Digital Adoption Index, an indicator developed by the World Bank to measure countries’ digital
adoption as an average of people, government and business digitalization in the country (World
Bank, 2018). The level of adoption of digitalization of a country appears to be positively correlated
with wine consumption. Digitalization favors information and knowledge sharing and facilitates
consumption (Viana, 2016) and highly digitalized countries like South Korea and Singapore testify
this phenomenon.
Table 7 - Impact of digitalization on wine consumption
Coeff.
SE
ln GDP
0.140
***
0.009
Production
0.001
**
0.0001
Digital adoption index
5.959
***
0.574
C
-3.669
***
0.317
sigma_u
1.305
sigma_e
0.170
Rho
0.983
Observations
2,217
Groups
151
Wald chi-square
407.60
***
R-square
Within
0.1051
Between
0.512
Overall
0.4991
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
After testing the non-dimensionalist cultural variables, we introduce dimensionalist cultural
variables into the model. A further step to explain wine consumption in different cultures was to
include the cultural dimensions by Hofstede (2001) (Table 8). Power distance, namely "the extent to
which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and
accept that power is distributed unequally" (Hofstede et al. 2001, p. 98) seems to have no impact on
wine consumption, as well as the degree of "masculinity" in society. High masculine cultures are
driven by competition, achievement and success, low masculine (also known as feminine) cultures
aim at the care of others and wellbeing. This dimension is not significant in predicting wine
consumption, and this is not surprising as wine does not clearly emerge as a feminine or a
masculine beverage according to the literature. Wine has been considered as a feminine beverage
for a long, especially in the New World of Wine, in contrast with countries in the Old World of
Wine for which wine, as an alcoholic beverage, is a matter of men (Spawton, 1990; Mitchell and
Gretorex, 1988). If this dichotomy is mitigating nowadays, this is not yet the case for wine
purchasing: buying wine in the on-trade distribution channels is still considered a masculine task,
while supermarket shopping, including wine, mainly involve women (Lai, 2019; Bruwer and
McCutcheon, 2017; Schamel and Santos-Arteaga, 2018). When considering wine knowledge, it is
12
more exhibited among men, even if women have as much knowledge on wine as their counterparts,
but they lack in confidence (Wine Intelligence, 2018; Thach, 2012).
The more the culture is individualistic, namely characterized by low interdependence among
members, the more wine consumption increases in the analyzed period. This dimension is typically
high in modern societies pursuing personal happiness over social obligations and material
possession over personal values, with an impact on consumption of goods like wine, which can
assume, among the others, also luxury and status symbol connotations (Aliyev and Wagner, 2018;
Ahuvia, 2002; Zhang et al., 2020).
The dimension "Uncertainty avoidance" has to do with the extent to which people in a culture feel
in danger with ambiguous or unknown situations and they have created social norms and
institutions that try to avoid these risks (Hofstede, 2001). The model shows uncertainty avoidance
as having a positive impact on wine consumption. These are kind of cultures that are more prone to
show emotions and less incline to approve diversities and develop high stress and anxiety, which
are conditions that generally stimulate alcohol consumption (McCaul et al., 2017). The dimension
"Long-term orientation" was introduced in the theory in a second time to better describe Eastern
cultures, driven by Confucian values. Cultures with a long term orientation, prone to emphasize
persistence, order relationships by status and save and be thrifty, are experiencing an increase in
wine consumption, testified by the positive sign of the coefficient in our model. This result is in line
with statistics, testifying the rise of the Far East markets among the main wine consuming countries,
driven by China (Anderson and Wittwer, 2015).
Table 8 - Impact of cultural dimensions on wine consumption
Coeff.
SE
ln GDP
0.117
***
0.014
Production
0.001
**
0.0001
Power distance
-0.013
0.009
Individualism
0.038
***
0.008
Masculinity
-0.009
0.006
Uncertainty avoidance
0.026
***
0.006
Long-term orientation
0.017
***
0.006
C
-2.837
***
0.911
sigma_u
1.152
sigma_e
0.180
Rho
0.976
Observations
1,171
Groups
79
Wald chi-square
199.23
***
R-square
Within
0.0578
Between
0.6305
Overall
0.6244
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
13
The last step aims at understanding if the political and institutional environment of a country
influences wine consumption. Six indexes are included in the model with this goal: i) Control of
Corruption, explaining perceptions about the extent to which public power is exercised for private
scopes and interests; ii) Corruption perceptions, which is particularly focused on explaining
political corruption in the country; iii) Government effectiveness, explaining perceptions about the
quality of the government and its capability to formulate and implement policies and deliver public
goods; iv) Political stability and absence of violence/terrorism, describing perception on the
possibility that the government can be undermined or fall because of unconstitutional or violent
actions; v) Rule of law, reflecting citizens’ trust in law and societal rules and their perception of the
quality of the legal system and contract enforcement, property rights, the police, and the courts; vi)
Voice and accountability, capturing perceptions on the level of democracy in a country and freedom
of expression, association and media (Kaufmann et al., 2011; Transparency International, 2011;
Hamilton and Hammer, 2018). Results are presented in Table 9. Two indexes result to be only
slightly significant and have a positive impact on wine consumption: government effectiveness and
political stability and absence of violence and terrorism. According to Outreville (2016), a stable
and efficient political and institutional environment favors foreign investments in wine industry.
These results highlight the positive effects on consumption in the country as well.
Table 9 - Impact of the institutional environment on wine consumption
Coeff.
SE
ln GDP
0.139
***
0.011
Production
0.001
***
0.0001
Control of corruption index
0.025
0.033
Corruption perceptions index
0.001
0.001
Government effectiveness index
0.055
*
0.299
Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism Index
0.028
*
0.016
Rule of Law Index
0.009
0.034
Voice and Accountability Index
0.026
0.028
C
-0.675
***
0.134
sigma_u
1.292
sigma_e
0.164
Rho
0.984
Observations
2,012
Groups
161
Wald chi-square
273.65
***
R-square
Within
0.097
Between
0.524
Overall
0.515
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
In order to draw a final model explaining wine consumption through the cultural peculiarities of a
country and to avoid multicollinearity among independent variables, a Principal Component
Analysis was performed (Table 10). The analysis identified four independent latent cultural factors,
Varimax rotated and with eigenvalues greater than one, summarizing 75% of the total variance.
14
The fist cultural factor is called “Institutional-efficient, modern and developed cultures” (44.5% of
explained variance). It translates into high factor loadings for rich, highly digitalized and educated
countries with a clean, fair, efficient, democratic, and stable institutional environment. These are
also highly individualistic and low in power distance countries.
The second cultural factor is called “Long-term oriented, equal, decreasing in population and atheist
cultures” (15.4% of variance explained). It presents high factor loadings for long-term oriented
countries, which richness is equally distributed and population is not growing and is not affiliated to
any religion.
The third cultural factor is mainly explained by the cultural dimension “Uncertainty avoidance”
with a positive factor loading.
The fourth cultural factor, “Masculine, wine producing cultures”, includes high factor loadings for
countries with high masculine connotations that produce high quantities of wine.
Figure 2 represents the magnitude of these four cultural factors for the analyzed countries.
Table 10 – Latent cultural factors, Varimax rotated matrix
Variables
Cultural factors
Institutional-efficient,
modern and developed
cultures
Long-term oriented,
equal, decreasing in
population and atheist
cultures
Uncertainty
avoiding cultures
Masculine, wine
producing cultures
Control of
corruption
0.958
Corruption
perceptions
0.941
Rule of law
0.939
Government
effectiveness
0.925
CD: Power
distance
-0.831
Voice and
accountability
0.827
ln GDP
0.812
CD:
Individualism
0.775
Digital adoption
index
0.73
Political stability
0.727
Education
0.719
Urban population
0.625
CD: Long-term
orientation
0.885
Population growth
-0.736
Gini index
-0.625
15
Religion
unaffiliated
0.620
CD: Uncertainty
avoidance
0.877
CD: Masculinity
0.778
Wine production
0.603
Explained
variance (%)
44.51
15.4
8.13
6.86
Cumulative
explained
variance (%)
44.51
59.92
68.05
74.91
Note: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy=.892; Bartlett's Test of Sphericity significant. CD=Cultural Dimension
(Hofstede, 1984).
Figure 2 – Countries characterization according to the four identified cultural factors
Note: low scores = 25th percentile and lower, medium scores= 26th percentile to 75th percentile; high= higher than 75th percentile.
These latent cultural factors were finally entered in a random-effects GLS regression as covariates
to explain the trend of wine consumption in the analysed countries. Results are reported in Table 11,
together with results of a fixed-effects GLS regression, to highlight factors affecting time-change in
wine demand.
16
The model highlights that wine consumption tends to increase in the considered time period in
countries characterized by “Institutional-efficient, modern and developed cultures”. Northern
European countries like Denmark, Norway and Sweden result to have very high scores for this
factor, as well as Anglo-Saxon countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand and the USA.
These two groups of countries can be considered as the pioneers of the globalization process in the
wine industry: Northern European countries highly contributed to the expansion of Old World
producers, representing their most important import markets in the first phase of globalization; the
second group of countries belongs to the New World block and they powerfully entered the
international wine scene as feared competitors of the Old World wine producers (Anderson and
Pinilla, 2018). These results confirm the increasingly important role played by both groups of
countries in the nowadays wine consumption market (Euromonitor International, 2018). From the
other side, they highlight that countries that are facing political and economic difficulties are
decreasing their consumption level. This is the case, for example of countries like Bangladesh, Iraq,
Mozambique and Venezuela.
Wine consumption increases also in “Long-term oriented, equal, decreasing in population and
atheist cultures”. Eastern European countries like Czech Republic, Estonia and Slovakia, and Far
East countries like South Korea, Japan, China and Russia register very high scores for this factor.
These are countries defined by the literature as the “Third world of wine” or the “New, new world
of wine”, which increasing importance in the international wine scene is testified by the literature
(Banks and Overton. 2010; Li et al., 2018; Maizza et al., 2017). Middle East countries like Lebanon
and Jordan and African countries like Angola and Nigeria have very low scores for this factor
instead.
Increased consumptions are also registered in “Uncertainty avoiding cultures”. Countries from the
Old World like Greece and Spain are highly characterized by this dimension, together with
countries from the New, New World, like Ukraine. High uncertainty avoiding countries develop
high levels of anxiety for the future and for unknown and unusual situations, and wine seems to
play as an anxiety reliever for these countries (McCaul et al., 2017).
“Masculine, wine producing cultures”, namely countries with high levels of production, competitive
and driven by success, also register an increase in wine consumption. Italy, the USA and China, the
top producers from the three Worlds of Wine, are the top three countries according to this cultural
factor.
The fixed-effects GLS regression shows that the variables that change the most over time,
positively influencing the trend of wine consumption in the analysed countries, are those linked to
institutional-efficient, modern and developed cultures and uncertainty avoiding cultures.
17
Table 11 – Impact of cultural factors on wine consumption
Random-effects GLS regression
Fixed-effects GLS regression
Coeff.
SE
Coeff.
SE
Institutional-efficient,
modern and developed
cultures
0.958
***
0.07
0.658
***
0.089
Long-term oriented, equal,
decreasing in population and
atheist cultures
0.346
***
0.064
0.108
0.098
Uncertainty avoiding cultures
0.359
***
0.075
0.319
***
0.106
Masculine, wine producing
cultures
0.318
***
0.072
0.112
0.109
C
1.27
***
0.123
1.319
***
0.009
sigma_u
1.021
1.427
sigma_e
0.177
0.177
Rho
0.971
0.985
Observations
992
992
Groups
72
72
Wald chi-square
204.37
***
F
15.8
***
R-square
Within
0.062
0.064
Between
0.701
0.649
Overall
0.691
0.639
Note: Significance level at 1%(***), 5%(**) and 10%(*). All models have been estimated with a constant variable C.
5. Conclusion and discussion
This study attempts to explore the socio-cultural factors behind wine consumption patterns in a
representative panel of countries. A step-by-step analysis of the relationship is introduced to
understand what cultural component better explain wine consumption variations. We first examine
the basic relationship between wine consumption and GDP and wine production. In following steps
we introduce non-dimensionalist and dimensionalist cultural variables. Because the dimensionalist
cultural variables are static and as a consequence of Hausman test and the Breusch-Pagan Lagrange
multiplier test, random-effects GLS regressions were estimated for panels from 185 to 72 countries
(depending on the availability of detected information) with data over the period 2003-2017.
The analysis highlights that the cultures more prone to wine consumption and to increase wine
consumption are modern, developed and rich cultures, characterized by efficient, effective and
democratic governments and with high degree of digital adoption, urban population and education.
This description is typical for the countries classified by the World Bank as high-income countries
belonging to the so-called “First World”, and according to the results of this papers, they are also
characterized by individualism and low power distance, following the theory by Hofstede (1980,
1984, 2001).
Increased consumptions are also registered in countries characterized by the willing to avoid
uncertainty, intolerant of unorthodox behaviors and ideas, which develop high anxiety for the
unknown future and characterized by the maintenance of rigid codes of belief and behavior
18
(Hofstede, 2001; McCaul et al., 2017), as well as long-term oriented cultures characterized by
persistence and thrift, registering a decrease in population growth, equal distribution of wealth and
atheism (Anderson and Pinilla, 2018; Hayward et a., 2016).
Wine producing and masculine countries are also registering a positive trend in wine consumption.
These are cultures characterized by male gender roles and focused on values like money, success
and competition, pursuing power, dominance, wealth and material success (Hofstede, 2001). These
are also countries with high level of production. This kind of culture includes not only traditional
producing and consuming countries from the Old World of Wine, but it is increasingly involving
the New World of Wine and the countries identified like the Third World of Wine or the New, New
World of Wine by the literature (Aleixandre et al., 2016; Anderson and Pinilla, 2018; Li et al.,
2018; Banks and Overton, 2010), with China as the most significant example.
The results of the study highlight that dimensionalist and non-dimensionalist cultural values both
concur in influencing wine consumption. Future development of the research could consider the
dynamics in the consumption of the other alcoholic beverages like beer and spirits and the impact of
these two cultural approaches in influencing wine consumption in the different countries, as well as
the impact of other cultural variables conceptualized at the national level rather than at the country
level. Human values developed by Schwartz (2006) or genetics (Bargain et al., 2017) could impact
differently segments of wine consumption according to the different functions that this complex
beverage can play for the buyer.
6. References
Aggarwal, R., Kearney, C. and B. Lucey. 2012. Gravity and Culture in Foreign Portfolio
Investment. Journal of Banking & Finance 36 (2): 525-538.
Ahuvia, A. C. 2002. Individualism/collectivism and cultures of happiness: A theoretical conjecture
on the relationship between consumption, culture and subjective well-being at the national level.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1): 23-36.
Aizenman, J., and E.L. Brooks. 2008. Globalization and taste convergence: The cases of wine and
beer. Review of International Economics 16(2): 217-233.
Aleixandre, J. L., Aleixandre-Tudó, J. L., Bolaños-Pizarro, M. and R. Aleixandre-Benavent. 2016.
Viticulture and oenology scientific research: The Old World versus the New World wine-producing
countries. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3): 389-396.
Alesina, A. and P. Giuliano. 2015. Culture and Institutions. Journal of Economic Literature, 53
(4): 898-944.
Aliyev, F. and R. Wagner. 2018. Cultural influence on luxury value perceptions: Collectivist vs.
individualist luxury perceptions. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 30(3): 158-172.
Anderson, K. and V. Pinilla. 2018. Wine globalization: A new comparative history. Cambridge
University Press.
Anderson, K. and G. Wittwer. 2015. Asia's evolving role in global wine markets. China Economic
Review 3: 1-14.
19
Angulo, A.M., J.M. Gil and A. Gracia. 2001. The demand for alcoholic beverages in Spain.
Agricultural Economics 26(1): 71-83.
Banks, G. and J. Overton. 2010. Old world, new world, third world? Reconceptualising the worlds
of wine. Journal of Wine Research 21(1): 57-75.
Bargain, O., J.M. Cardebat and R. Chiappini. 2017. Wine in the blood? Explaining French Wine
Exports: Gravity. Preferences and Genetics, 11thAnnual AAWE Conference 2017.
Bartels, J., and M.J. Reinders. 2010. Social identification, social representations, and consumers
innovativeness in an organic food context: A cross national comparison. Food Quality and
Preference 21(4): 347-352.
Bentzen, J., Eriksson, T. and V. Smith. 2001. Alcohol consumption in European countries.
Cahiers d’économie et sociologie rurales 60/61: 50-75.
Beugelsdijk, S., T. Kostova and K. Roth. 2017. An overview of Hofstede-inspired country-level
culture research in international business since 2006. Journal of International Business Studies
48(1): 30–47.
Beugelsdijk, S., T. Kostova, V. E. Kunst , E. Spadafora and M. van Essen. 2018. Cultural Distance
and Firm Internationalization: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Implications. Journal of
Management 44(1): 89-130.
Bevan, A.A. and S. Estrin. 2004. The determinants of foreign direct investment into European
transition economies. Journal of Comparative Economics 32 (4): 775–787
Bevan, A., S. Estrin, and K. Meyer. 2004. Foreign investment, location and institutional
development in transition economies. International Business Review 13(1): 43-64.
Bianco, D. A., Boatto, V., Estrella-Orregob, J. and A. Gennari. 2013. Is gravity pushing
Argentinean wine exports? A gravity model applied to Argentinean wine. XX EuAWE
Conference, Talca, Chile.
Bouët, A., C. Emlinger and V. Lamani . 2017. What Determines Exports of Luxury Products? The
Case of Cognac. Journal of Wine Economics 12(1): 37-58.
Brouthers, L. E., Marshall, V. B. and D.L. Keig. 2016. Solving the single-country sample problem
in cultural distance studies. Journal of International Business Studies 47(1): 1–9.
Bruwer, J., Lesschaeve, I. and B.L. Campbell. 2012. Consumption dynamics and demographics of
Canadian wine consumers: Retailing insights from the tasting room channel. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services 19(1): 45-58.
Bruwer, J. and E. McCutcheon. 2017. Marketing implications from a behaviourism perspective of
consumption dynamics and socio-demographics of wine consumers. Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics. 29(3): 519-537.
Camillo, A. 2012. A strategic investigation of the determinants of wine consumption in China.
International Journal of Wine Business Research 24(1): 68-92.
Cantwell, J. and A.Verbeke, A. 2006. A quarter century of Culture’s Consequences: a review of
empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework. Journal of International
Business Studies. 37(2): 285-320.
Cardebat J.M., B. Faye, E. Le Fur and K. Storchmann . 2017. The Law of One Price? Price
Dispersion on the Auction Market for Fine Wine. Journal of Wine Economics 12(3): 302-331.
20
Cardebat, J-M. and J-M. Figuet. 2019. Exports, exchange rate variations and firms reactions: the
case of French wine. Journal of Wine Economics (forthcoming).
Cervellon, M.-C. and L. Dubé. 2005. Cultural influences in the origins of food likings and dislikes.
Food Quality and Preference 16(5): 455–460.
Chang, H.S., G. Griffith and N. Bettington. 2002. Demand for Wine in Australia: Systems versus
Single Equation Approach: Industry applications. Agribusiness Review 10: Paper 9.
Charters, S. (2006), Wine and Society: The Cultural and Social Context of a Drink, Elsevier,
Oxford, UK.
Charters, S. and J. Ali-Knight. 2002. Who is the wine tourist? Tourism management 23(3): 311-
319.
Chueh, K. H., Guilleminault, C. and L.I.N. Chia-Mo. 2019. Alcohol consumption as a moderator of
anxiety and sleep quality. The Journal of Nursing Research, 27(3): e23.
Clements, K. W. and S. Selvanathan. 1991. The economic determinants of alcohol consumption.
Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 35(2): 209-231.
Colen, L., and J. Swinnen. 2016. Economic growth, globalization and beer consumption,
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(1): 186–207.
Craig, C. S. and S. Douglas. 2005. Beyond national culture: Implications of cultural dynamics for
consumer research. International Marketing Review 23(3): 322-342.
Creanza, N., Kolodny, O. and M. W. Feldman. 2017. Cultural evolutionary theory: How culture
evolves and why it matters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). July
25,114 (30): 7782-7789. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1620732114
Dewald, B.W.A. 2003. Wine Consumption in Hong Kong. International Journal of Wine
Marketing 15(1): 54-68.
Dikova, D. and K. Brouthers. 2016. International Establishment Mode Choice: Past, Present and
Future. Management International Review 56(4): 489–530.
Do, V.-B., Patris, B. and D. Valentin. 2009. Opinions on wine in a new consumer country: A
comparative study of Vietnam and France. Journal of Wine Research 20(3): 253–271.
Dolan, R., Conduit, J., Fahy, J. and S. Goodman. 2017. Social media: communication strategies,
engagement and future research directions. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 29(1):
2-19.
Dow, D. and A. Karunaratna. 2006. Developing a multidimensional instrument to measure psychic
distance stimuli. Journal of International Business Studies 37(5): 578-602.
Drogendijk, R. and A. Slangen. 2006. Hofstede, Schwartz, or Managerial Perceptions? The Effects
of Different Cultural Distance Measures on Establishment Mode Choices by Multinational
Enterprises. International Business Review 15(4): 361–380.
Duffy, M. 2001. Advertising in Consumer Allocation Models: Choice of Functional Form. Applied
Economics 33(4): 437-456.
Euromonitor International. 2018. Economies and Consumers Annual Data.
Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Huffman, D. and U. Sunde. 2018. Global Evidence on
Economic Preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics 133(4): 1645–1692.
21
Fertő, I., Pollmann, O., Podruzsik, Sz. 2013. Cultural Similarity, Communication Costs and Wine
Trade in the European Union. VII AAWE Conference, Stellenbosch, South Africa 26-29 June.
Fogarty, J.J. 2010. The demand for beer, wine and spirits: a survey of the literature. Journal of
Economic Surveys 24(3): 428–478.
Galati, A., Crescimanno, M., Tinervia, S. and F. Fagnani. 2017. Social media as a strategic
marketing tool in the Sicilian wine industry: Evidence from Facebook. Wine Economics and Policy,
6(1): 40-47.
Gallet, C.A. 2007. The demand for alcohol: A meta-analysis of elasticities. Australian Journal of
Agricultural and Resource Economics 51(2): 121–135.
Ghemawat, P. 2001. Distance Still Matters: The Hard Reality of Global Expansion. Harvard
Business Review (September): 137-147.
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P. and L. Zingales. 2007. Does culture affect economic outcomes? Journal of
Economic Perspectives 20(2): 23-48.
Hall,J., M. Shaw and I. Doole. 1997. Cross cultural Analysis of Wine Consumption
Motivations. International Journal of Wine Marketing 9(2): 83-92.
Hamilton, A. and C. Hammer. 2018. Can we measure the power of the grabbing hand? A
comparative analysis of different indicators of corruption. The World Bank. Washington, DC.
Harzing, A. W. and M. Pudelko. 2016. Do we need to distance ourselves from the distance
concept? Why home and host country context might matter more than (cultural) distance.
Management International Review 56(1): 1-34.
Hayward, R. D., Krause, N., Ironson, G., Hill, P. C. and R. Emmons. 2016. Health and well-being
among the non-religious: Atheists, agnostics, and no preference compared with religious group
members. Journal of religion and health 55(3): 1024-1037.
Heath, D.B. 1995. An Anthropological View of Alcohol and Culture in International Perspective, in
Heath, D.B., ed., International Handbook on Alcohol and Culture, Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.
Henderson, G. and V. H. Milhouse. 1987. International Business and Cultures: A Human Relations
Perspective, New York: Cummings & Hathaway.
Hill, C.W.L. 2005. International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace, 5th ed., McGraw
Hill Irwin.
Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s consequence. New-York: Sage publications.
Hofstede, G. 1984. Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Hofstede, G.H. 2001. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and
Organizations across Nations. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hofstede Insights. 2018. https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/, last
accessed 09 September 2018.
Holt, J. B., Miller, J. W., Naimi, T. S. and D.Z. Sui. 2006. Religious affiliation and alcohol
consumption in the United States. Geographical review 96(4): 523-542.
Hussain, M., Cholette, S. and R. Castaldi. 2007. Determinants of wine consumption of US
consumers: An econometric analysis. International Journal of Wine Business Research 19(1): 49-
62.
22
Idris, F., Hassan, Z., Ya’acob, A., Gill, S. K. and N.A.M. Awal. 2012. The role of education in
shaping youth's national identity. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 59: 443-450.
Inglehart, R. and W. E. Baker. 2000. Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of
Traditional Values. American Sociological Review 65(1): 19-51.
Jiang, L. 2011. Comparison of the difference between Chinese and Western drinking culture. Asian
Social Science 7(5): 251–257.
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. and P. Zoido-Lobaton. 2000. Governance matters: from measurement to
action. Finance and Development 37(2): 10-13.
Kaufmann, D. 2003. Rethinking governance: empirical lessons challenge orthodoxy.World Bank
Research Paper,World Bank, Washington, DC. Available at www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/.
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. and M. Mastruzzi. 2011. The Worldwide Governance Indicators:
Methodology and Analytical Issues. Hague Journal of the Rule of Law. 3: 220–246.
Kirkman, B. L., Lowe, K. B. and C.B. Gibson. 2006. A quarter century of ‘‘Culture’s
Consequences’’: A review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values
framework. Journal of International Business Studies 37(3): 285–320.
Knack, S., and P. Keefer. 1995. Institutions and Economic Performance: Cross- Country Tests
Using Alternative Institutional Measures. Economic and Politics 7(3): 207-227.
Knack, S., and P. Keefer. 1997. Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country
Investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(4): 1251-1288.
Kogut, B. and H. Singh. 1988. The Effect of National Culture on the Choice of Entry Mode.
Journal of International Business Studies 19(3): 411-432.
Inglehart, R. 2018. Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press, NJ.
Lai, M. B. (2019). Consumer behavior toward wine products. Case Studies in the Wine Industry.
Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition 2019, pp 33-46.
La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1997. Legal Determinants of
External Finance. Journal of Finance 52(3): 1131-1150.
La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1998. Law and Finance. Journal of
Political Economy 106: 1133-1155.
Le Fur, E., & Outreville, J. F. (2019). Fine wine returns: a review of the literature. Journal of Asset
Management, 20(3), 196-214.
Leung, K., R.S. Bhagat, N.R. Buchan, M. Erez and C.B. Gibson. 2005. Culture and international
business: recent advances and their implications for future research. Journal of International
Business Studies 36(4): 357-378.
Li, H., Wang, H., Li, H., Goodman, S., van der Lee, P., Xu, Z. and P. Yang. 2018. The worlds of
wine: Old, new and ancient. Wine Economics and Policy, 7(2): 178-182.
Lockshin, L.and A. M. Corsi. 2012. Consumer behaviour for wine 2.0: A review since 2003 and
future directions. Wine and Economic Policy 1(1): 2-23.
Luna, D. and S. Forquer-Gupta. 2001. An integrative framework for cross-cultural consumer
Behavior. International Marketing Review 18(1): 45-69.
23
Maizza, A., Fait, M., Scorrano, P. and D. Vrontis. 2017. Old, new and third wine regions: a
consumer perspective. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable
Development, 13(5-6): 521-541.
Marks, D. (2015). Wine and Economics: Transacting the Elixir of Life. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Mastroberardino, P., Calabrese, G., Cortese, F. and M. Petracca. 2019. Sustainability in the wine
sector. British Food Journal. 122 (8): 2497-2511.
McCaul, M. E., Hutton, H. E., Stephens, M. A. C., Xu, X. and G.S. Wand. 2017. Anxiety, anxiety
sensitivity, and perceived stress as predictors of recent drinking, alcohol craving, and social stress
response in heavy drinkers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 41(4): 836-845.
Meloni, G. and J. F.M. Swinnen. 2010. The Political Economy of European Wine Regulation,
presented at the Fourth Annual Conference of the American Association of Wine Economists, UC
Davis, California, USA on June 27, 2010.
Meloni, G., Anderson, K., Deconinck, K. and J. Swinnen 2019. Wine Regulations. Applied
Economic Perspectives and Policy, 41(4): 620-649.
Mitchell, L. 2016. Demand for Wine and Alcoholic Beverages in the European Union: A
Monolithic Market? Journal of Wine Economics 11(3): 414–435.
Mitchell, V.W. and M. Greatorex. 1988. Consumer risk perception in the UK wine market.
European Journal of Marketing 22(9): 5-15.
Mouret, M., G. Lo Monaco, I. Urdapilleta and W.V. Parr. 2013. Social representations of wine and
culture: A comparison between France and New Zealand. Food Quality and Preference 30(2): 102-
107.
Nelson, J.P. 2013. Robust demand elasticities for wine and distilled spirits: Meta-analysis with
correction for outliers and publication bias. Journal of Wine Economics 8(3): 294–317.
Nelson, J.P. and J.R. Moran. 1995. Advertising and US Alcoholic Beverage Demand: System-Wide
Estimates. Applied Economics 27(12): 1225-1236.
Outreville, J. F. 2016. Foreign affiliates of the multinational firms in the wine and spirits industry:
location-specific advantages and cultural distance. International Journal of Economics and
Business Research, 12(4): 274-294.
Outreville, J.F. and J. Desrochers. 2016. Perceived risk: an experimental investigation of consumer
behavior when buying wine. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. 15(6): 549- 559.
Owen, A.D. 1979. The demand for wine in Australia, 1955–1977. Economic Record. 55(150): 230–
235.
Pape, S., J. Rössel, P. Schenk and S. Weingartner. 2017. Wine consumption and dimension of
culktural openness, paper presented at the XXIV EuAWE Conference in Bologna, Italy.
Penz, E. 2006. Researching the socio-cultural context: Putting social representations theory into
action. International Marketing Review. 23(4): 418–437.
Pew Research Center. 2018. Religious Composition by Country, 2010-2050
http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/2010/percent/all/, last accessed 09
September 2018.
24
Pinilla, V. and R. Serrano. 2008. The Agricultural and Food Trade in the First Globalization:
Spanish Table Wine Exports 1871 to 1935-A Case Study. Journal of Wine Economics 3(2): 132-
148.
Pucci, T., Casprini, E., Nosi, C. and L. Zanni. 2019. Does social media usage affect online
purchasing intention for wine? The moderating role of subjective and objective knowledge. British
Food Journal 121(2): 275-288.
Reuter, C.H. 2011. A survey of ‘culture and finance. Finance 32(1): 76-152.
Ronen, S.S. and O. Shenkar. 1985. Clustering Countries on Attitudinal Dimensions: A Review and
Synthesis. The Academy of Management Review 10(3): 435-454.
Room, R. 2013. Sociocultural aspects of alcohol consumption. In: Peter Boyle, Paolo Boffetta,
Albert B. Lowenfels, Harry Burns, Otis Brawley, Witold Zatonski and Jürgen Rehm, eds., Alcohol:
Science, Policy, and Public Health, pp. 38-45. Oxford, etc.: Oxford University Press
Rottig, D. 2016. Institutions and emerging markets: effects and implications for multinational
corporations. International Journal of Emerging Markets 11(1): 2-17.
Schamel, G. and F.J. Santos-Arteaga. 2018. Leader Effects and Gender Differences in Sequential
Restaurant Ordering Environments. Journal of Wine Economics. 13(4): 461-468.
Schwartz, S. H. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory and empirical tests
in 20 countries, in M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25) (pp. 1-65).
New York: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S.H. 1994. Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? Journal of
Social Issues 50(4): 19-45.
Schwartz, S.H. 2004. Mapping and interpreting cultural differences around the world. In Vinken
H., Soeters J., and Ester P. (Ed.), Comparing cultures: dimensions of culture in a comparative
perspective. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers
Schwartz, S.H. 2006. A Theory of Cultural Value Orientations: Explication and Applications.
Comparative Sociology 5(2–3): 137–182.
Siegel, J.I., Licht A.N. and S.H. Schwartz. 2013. Egalitarianism, Cultural Distance, and Foreign
Direct Investment: A New Approach. Organization Science 24(4): 1174-1194.
Smith, D. E., and H.S. Solgaard. 2000. The dynamics of shifts in European alcoholic drinks
consumption. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 12(3): 85–109.
Somogyi, S., E. Li, T. Johnson, J. Bruwer and S. Bastian. 2011. The underlying motivations of
Chinese wine consumer behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 23: 473-485.
Spawton, A.L. 1990. Marketing planning for wine. International Journal of Wine Marketing 2(2):
19-31.
Stancu, A. (2015). An analysis of the relation between wine consumption and cultural models.
Economics of Agriculture 62(1): 207-227.
Szolnoki, G., Thach, L., and Kolb, D. (Eds.) 2016. Successful social media and ecommerce
strategies in the wine industry, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Tsolakis, D., P.C. Riethmuller and G. Watts. 1983. The demand for wine and beer. Review of
Marketing and Agricultural Economics 51(2): 131-153.
25
United Nations Development Programme. 2018. Human Development Indeces and Indicators, 2018
Statistical updates, http://hdr.undp.org/en, last accessed 09 September 2018.
United Nations Population Division. 2018. World Urbanization prospects: The 2018 Revision,
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/database/index.shtml, last accessed
09 September 2018.
Viana, N. A. 2016. Digital wine marketing: Social media marketing for the wine industry. In BIO
Web of Conferences (Vol. 7). EDP Sciences.
Wine Intelligence. 2018. Wine consumption and gender: Do women and men approach wine
differently, https://www.wineintelligence.com/downloads/wine-consumption-and-gender-do-
women-and-men-approach-wine-differently/
World Bank. 2018. Population growth, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW, last
accessed 09 September 2018.
World Bank. 2018. Digital Adoption Index, http://wbgfiles.worldbank.org/documents/dec/digital-
adoption-index.html, last accessed 09 September 2018.
Yakovlev, P.A. and W.P. Guessford. 2013. Alcohol Consumption and Political Ideology: What's
Party Got to Do with It? Journal of Wine Economics. 8(3), 335-354.
Zhang, Y., Hawk, S. T., Opree, S. J., de Vries, D. A. and S. Branje. 2020. “Me”,“We”, and
Materialism: Associations between Contingent Self-Worth and Materialistic Values across Cultures.
The Journal of Psychology, 154(5): 386-410.
1 The extent to alcoholic beverage consumption patterns, cross countries analysis has been the
subject of many previous studies. Recent examples include Smith and Solgaard (2000), Bentzen,
Eriksson, and Smith (2001), Aizenman and Brooks (2008), Colen and Swinnen (2016) and Homes
and Anderson (2017).
2 Luna and Forquer-Gupta (2001) provide another framework that integrates and reinterprets
research in cross-cultural consumer behavior.
3 In the demand for alcohol literature the relationship between different system-wide approaches
has been set out in several papers, including Nelson and Moran (1995) and Duffy (2001).
