IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ere/journl/v44y2025i2id289.html

Disposición de los consumidores mexicanos a pagar por vinos

Author

Listed:
  • Carla Zulema Jauregui García

    (Universidad Autónoma Chapingo)

  • Anastacio Espejel García

    (Universidad Autónoma Chapingo)

  • Ariadna Isabel Barrera Rodríguez

    (Universidad Autónopingoma Chapingo)

  • Arturo Hernández Montes

    (Universidad Autónoma Chapingo)

  • Landy Hernández Rodríguez

    (Universidad Autónoma Chapingo)

Abstract

Objetivo: Evaluar la funcionalidad del método de valoración contingente en consumidores mexicanos aplicado a vinos e identificar factores con influencia significativa. Método: Se realizó una encuesta por internet evaluando la disposición a pagar de vino con protección de origen, mexicano, de Parras, importado, sustentable y producido tradicionalmente, mediante el método de valoración contingente a 615 consumidores mexicanos de vino. Resultados: La valoración contingente permitió obtener regresiones logísticas ordenadas significativas empleando la disposición a pagar del vino como variable dependiente y cinco grupos de variables independientes. Los factores con mayor influencia en la disposición a pagar en vinos fueron aspectos socioeconómicos, preferencias de consumo y aseveraciones de compra. Limitaciones: Al no tener contacto directo con el encuestado, se limita la obtención y verificación de información. Principales hallazgos: El método de valoración contingente permitió explorar los factores que influyen en la disposición a pagar de vino, delimitando los nichos de mercados pertinentes para el producto.

Suggested Citation

  • Carla Zulema Jauregui García & Anastacio Espejel García & Ariadna Isabel Barrera Rodríguez & Arturo Hernández Montes & Landy Hernández Rodríguez, 2025. "Disposición de los consumidores mexicanos a pagar por vinos," Ensayos Revista de Economía, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, vol. 44(2), pages 183-208, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ere:journl:v:44:y:2025:i:2:id:289
    DOI: 10.29105/ensayos44.2-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ensayos.uanl.mx/index.php/ensayos/article/view/289
    File Function: Abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ensayos.uanl.mx/index.php/ensayos/article/download/289/428
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.29105/ensayos44.2-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernabeu, Rodolfo & Olmeda, Miguel & Diaz, Monica, 2005. "Estructura de preferencias de los consumidores de vino y actitudes hacia los vinos con Denominacion de Origen. El caso de Castilla-La Mancha," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(09), pages 1-24.
    2. Cranfield, John A.L. & Magnusson, Erik, 2003. "Canadian Consumer's Willingness-To-Pay For Pesticide Free Food Products: An Ordered Probit Analysis," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 6(4), pages 1-18.
    3. James Murphy & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Hypothetical Bias in a Provision Point Mechanism?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 327-343, March.
    4. David Hoyos & Petr Mariel, 2010. "Contingent Valuation: Past, Present and Future," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(4), pages 329-343.
    5. Wuyang Hu & Michele M. Veeman & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2005. "Labelling Genetically Modified Food: Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Value of Information," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(1), pages 83-102, March.
    6. Rousseau, Sandra & Vranken, Liesbet, 2013. "Green market expansion by reducing information asymmetries: Evidence for labeled organic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 31-43.
    7. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    8. Sethuraman, Raj & Kerin, Roger A. & Cron, William L., 2005. "A field study comparing online and offline data collection methods for identifying product attribute preferences using conjoint analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(5), pages 602-610, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sung-Min Kim & Ju-Hee Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2020. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Substituting Natural Gas with Renewable Methane: A Contingent Valuation Experiment in South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    3. Gabriela Mundaca, 2024. "Economic valuation of environmental and health impacts from mining: the case of Peru," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 2415-2441, January.
    4. Meise, Jan Niklas & Rudolph, Thomas & Kenning, Peter & Phillips, Diane M., 2014. "Feed them facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 510-519.
    5. Wu, Linhai & Wang, Shuxian & Zhu, Dian & Hu, Wuyang & Wang, Hongsha, 2015. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 121-136.
    6. Damian Tago & Henrik Andersson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Pesticides and Health: A Review of Evidence on Health Effects, Valuation of Risks, and Benefit-Cost Analysis," Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, in: Preference Measurement in Health, volume 24, pages 203-295, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    7. Stavroula Tsigou & Stathis Klonaris, 2018. "Factors affecting farmers’ WTP for innovative fertilizer against soil salinity," Working Papers 2018-3, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    8. Duke, Joshua M. & Borchers, Allison M. & Johnston, Robert J. & Absetz, Sarah, 2012. "Sustainable agricultural management contracts: Using choice experiments to estimate the benefits of land preservation and conservation practices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 95-103.
    9. Khachatryan, Hayk & Wei, Xuan & Rihn, Alicia, . "Effects of pollinator related information on consumer preference for neonicotinoid labeling," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(6).
    10. Eija Pouta & Eero Liski & Annika Tienhaara & Kauko Koikkalainen & Antti Miettinen, 2021. "Ecosystem-Based Food Production: Consumers′ Preferred Practices and Willingness to Buy and Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-15, April.
    11. Vásquez-Lavín, Felipe & Carrasco, Moisés & Barrientos, Manuel & Gelcich, Stefan & Ponce Oliva, Roberto D., 2021. "Estimating discount rates for environmental goods: Are People’s responses inadequate to frequency of payments?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Patrik Sieber & Jan Melichar, 2014. "Ekonomické hodnocení hluku ze silniční dopravy: studie podmíněného hodnocení [The Economic Valuation of Road Traffic Noise: The Contingent Valuation Study]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2014(6), pages 824-849.
    13. Clive L Spash, 2008. "The Contingent Valuation Method: Retrospect and Prospect," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-04, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    14. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Ryan, Anthony M. & Spash, Clive L., 2011. "Is WTP an attitudinal measure? Empirical analysis of the psychological explanation for contingent values," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 674-687.
    16. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    17. Malin Jonell & Beatrice Crona & Kelsey Brown & Patrik Rönnbäck & Max Troell, 2016. "Eco-Labeled Seafood: Determinants for (Blue) Green Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-19, September.
    18. Pepermans, Guido, 2011. "The value of continuous power supply for Flemish households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7853-7864.
    19. Haesun Park-Poaps & Tae-Im Han, 2025. "The Roles of Perceived Threat, Organic Trust, and Consumer Effectiveness in Organic Consumption Across Different Organic Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-15, March.
    20. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Kragt, Marit E. & Gibson, Fiona L., 2016. "What carbon farming activities are farmers likely to adopt? A best–worst scaling survey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 29-37.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ere:journl:v:44:y:2025:i:2:id:289. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Revistas UANL (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ensayos.uanl.mx/index.php/ensayos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.