IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eab/microe/22401.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Having Customers Share The Perception Of Quality Differences - One Century Of Debates About Quality Assessments On The French Wine Market

Author

Listed:
  • Geneviève Teil

    (Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research)

Abstract

The wine market is a pretty paradoxical research object for the economical and marketing studies. In France alone, every year, hundreds of thousands of new brand differentiated products are marketed. How can so many brands survive to any rationalization process? One could think this situation to be tied to a kind of French paradox, but the number of wine brands is also increasing in all wine producing countries whether old, like Spain or new as US. Furthermore whereas most of the market theories explain the existence of markets thanks to the happy meeting of a demand with a corresponding supply, how could we explain the growth of the so called quality wine market, where it is so difficult to find two drinkers, even to expert drinkers, agreeing about the quality of a wine, ruining therefore the possibility of existence of any demand. The wine market is an interesting field case that helps us revise some of our most widely shared hypothesis on the empirical functioning of the markets. Which are the market procedures sustaining the happy encounter between a drinker and a wine? Is it the wine quality? Is it its a good product signalisation? Are there social distinctive processes? Is it a general opacity of the market? Is it the good adjustment to the consumers taste? In order to disentangle this complicated question and explain how consumer-product agreements are managed in order to perform sales and, at a larger scale, a market, this communication will draw back the evolution of the wine market in France during the last century. During this period, faced with repeated crisis, the wine market actors did not stand without reaction. Next to the limitation of the production, the wine quality emerged as a major stake during all the 20th century. In order to help its recognition, it became first labelled with origin denomination labels. But soon, new difficulties led to reconsider the quality labels efficiency. During the period considered, each new crisis brought in the same way critics of the old measures and new solutions. So, difficulties after difficulties, ever larger collectives proposed and set up ever more adapted procedures for the marketing of the wines. So the 20th century has seen the coming out of a series of procedures aimed at facilitating the quality recognition of the wines. But step by step, the authors acknowledged as able to define quality were changing, such as quality itself, and new market organisations appeared. Nevertheless, far from sweeping away the old procedures, the new solutions cohabited with them making the wine market appear today as a complex multilayered sandwich of market procedures that fostered the development of a market of hundred of thousands of wine

Suggested Citation

  • Geneviève Teil, 2007. "Having Customers Share The Perception Of Quality Differences - One Century Of Debates About Quality Assessments On The French Wine Market," Microeconomics Working Papers 22401, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:eab:microe:22401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eaber.org/node/22401
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    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. Assaf Razin & Efraim Sadka & Chi-Wa Yuen, 1999. "An Information-Based Model of Foreign Direct Investment: The Gains from Trade Revisited," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 6(4), pages 579-596, November.
    2. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. König, Philipp J. & Pothier, David, 2018. "Safe but fragile: Information acquisition, sponsor support and shadow bank runs," Discussion Papers 15/2018, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    4. Alessandro Morselli, 2024. "The Conventionalist Approach in the Analysis of Unemployment," HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND POLICY, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2024(2), pages 149-161.
    5. Ritu Agarwal & Michelle Dugas & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & P. K. Kannan, 2020. "Emerging technologies and analytics for a new era of value-centered marketing in healthcare," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 9-23, January.
    6. repec:cdl:agrebk:qt08c456vk is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Yaofeng Fu & Ruokun Huang & Yiran Sheng, 2017. "Labor Contract Law -An Economic View," Papers 1702.03977, arXiv.org.
    8. Eunsoo Kim & Suyon Kim & Jaehong Lee, 2021. "Do Foreign Investors Affect Carbon Emission Disclosure? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-14, September.
    9. Frédéric Gannon & Vincent Touzé, 2006. "Insurance and Optimal Growth," Post-Print halshs-00085181, HAL.
    10. Veronica Guerrieri & Robert Shimer, 2018. "Markets with Multidimensional Private Information," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 250-274, May.
    11. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse, 2025. "Malleability of Preferences for Honesty," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 135(667), pages 982-998.
    12. Andrea Attar & Thomas Mariotti & François Salanié, 2020. "The Social Costs of Side Trading," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(630), pages 1608-1622.
    13. Tahir Andrabi & Jishnu Das & Asim Ijaz Khwaja, 2017. "Report Cards: The Impact of Providing School and Child Test Scores on Educational Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(6), pages 1535-1563, June.
    14. Cowling, Marc & Ughetto, Elisa & Lee, Neil, 2018. "The innovation debt penalty: Cost of debt, loan default, and the effects of a public loan guarantee on high-tech firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 166-176.
    15. Kirsten Foss & Nicolai Foss, 2001. "Theoretical isolation in contract theory: suppressing margins and entrepreneurship," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 313-339.
    16. Haizhou Huang & Chenggang Xu, 1999. "Financial Institutions, Financial Contagion, and Financial Crises," CID Working Papers 21, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    17. Frankel, Jeffrey A & Schmukler, Sergio L, 2000. "Country Funds and Asymmetric Information," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(3), pages 177-195, July.
    18. Björn Vollan & Karla Henning & Deniza Staewa, 2017. "Do campaigns featuring impact evaluations increase donations? Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 500-518, October.
    19. Jitender Singh, 2016. "Quality of Public Goods, Public Policy and Human Development: A State-wise Analysis," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 10(2), pages 215-235, August.
    20. Alessandro Spiganti, 2022. "Wealth Inequality and the Exploration of Novel Alternatives," Working Papers 2022:02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    21. Pietro Tebaldi, 2015. "Estimating Equilibrium in Health Insurance Exchanges: Analysis of the Californian Market under the ACA," Discussion Papers 15-012, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • L66 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Food; Beverages; Cosmetics; Tobacco

    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:eab:microe:22401. 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: Shiro Armstrong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaberau.html .

    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.