4.7 Article

The integration of quality and safety concerns in the wine industry: the role of third-party voluntary certifications

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 112, Issue -, Pages 267-274

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.026

Keywords

Quality management systems; Third party voluntary certifications; Wineries

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over the past few years, public attention has focused on the quality and safety control, traceability, and environmental issues surrounding food products. Several mandatory public standards and private voluntary schemes worldwide have been developed to address these concerns. Using survey data, this paper analyses the key factors affecting the adoption of voluntary quality standards in the wine industry and the existence of a relationship between the adoption of voluntary quality standards and economic performance, measured in terms of labour productivity and marketing behaviour. The survey involved 89 cellars, of which 68 were non-certified and 21 had one or more food quality certifications. Using the data collected, an index based on Euclidean distances was constructed to compare economic performance between certified and non-certified firms. The findings provide evidence that internal motivations drive entrepreneurs to adopt voluntary standards and that wineries adopting voluntary standards exhibit better economic performance than non-certified wine firms. From a managerial viewpoint, these results suggest that although the adoption of voluntary quality certifications does not have a direct effect in terms of a labour productivity increase, it entails a business management improvement. For policymakers, the results suggest a need to develop policies and establish more stable financial assistance for the internationalisation of wine firms, thereby supporting them through this transition. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available