IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aep/anales/4621.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Explaining Wine Scores Through Stochastic Frontier Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ferro Gustavo
  • Gatti Nicolás

Abstract

Experts give scores to wines, which are quality proxies for marketers and buyers. The production of wine quality is explained by a set of observable objective attributes, plus another set of unobservable and subjective (sensory) features, and randomness. We use a Stochastic Frontier Approach (SFA) to understand whether objective and subjective (sensory) characteristics of wines explain the differences in wine scores. We estimate a wine quality stochastic frontier production function, using a database of 1800 top-scored wines, in an 18 years-window encompassing objective determinants (price, production, year, grape, country, etcetera), being sensory aspects related to wine grading unobservable. We find that the variables included explain half of the “efficiency” in attaining scores and our results suggest that sensory variables may have a role in explaining inefficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferro Gustavo & Gatti Nicolás, 2022. "Explaining Wine Scores Through Stochastic Frontier Analysis," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4621, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    • Handle: RePEc:aep:anales:4621
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://aaep.org.ar/works/works2022/4621.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lecocq, Sébastien & Visser, Michael, 2006. "What Determines Wine Prices: Objective vs. Sensory Characteristics," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 42-56, April.
    2. Fried, Harold O. & Tauer, Loren W., 2019. "Efficient Wine Pricing Using Stochastic Frontier Models," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 164-181, May.
    3. Cao, Jing, 2014. "Quantifying Randomness Versus Consensus in Wine Quality Ratings," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 202-213, August.
    4. Bodington, Jeffrey, 2017. "Disentangling Wine Judges’ Consensus, Idiosyncratic, and Random Expressions of Quality or Preference," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 267-281, August.
    5. Lindley, Dennis V., 2006. "Analysis of a Wine Tasting," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 33-41, April.
    6. Ashton, Robert H., 2017. "Dimensions of Expertise in Wine Evaluation," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 59-83, February.
    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. Barberà, Salvador & Bossert, Walter & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2023. "Wine rankings and the Borda method," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 122-138, May.
    2. Oczkowski, Edward, 2019. "The relation between Australian wine show results and prices," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 60(2), July.
    3. Gergaud, Olivier & Ginsburgh, Victor & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2021. "Wine Ratings: Seeking a Consensus among Tasters via Normalization, Approval, and Aggregation," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 321-342, August.
    4. Richard Carew & Wojciech J. Florkowski, 2010. "The Importance of Geographic Wine Appellations: Hedonic Pricing of Burgundy Wines in the British Columbia Wine Market," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 58(1), pages 93-108, March.
    5. Stefan Seifert & Christoph Kahle & Silke Hüttel, 2021. "Price Dispersion in Farmland Markets: What Is the Role of Asymmetric Information?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(4), pages 1545-1568, August.
    6. Shirong Zhao & Jeremy Losak, 2024. "Two-tiered stochastic frontier models: a Bayesian perspective," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 85-106, April.
    7. Nicolas G鲡rd Vaillant & François-Charles Wolff, 2013. "Understanding how experts rate cigars: a ‘havanometric’ analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 99-109, January.
    8. Catherine Haeck & Giulia Meloni & Johan Swinnen, 2019. "The Value of Terroir: A Historical Analysis of the Bordeaux and Champagne Geographical Indications," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 598-619, December.
    9. Todd M. Schmit & Bradley J. Rickard & John Taber, 2013. "Consumer Valuation of Environmentally Friendly Production Practices in Wines, considering Asymmetric Information and Sensory Effects," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 483-504, June.
    10. Daisung Jang & Do-Yeong Kim, 2013. "Seeing Something New," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(3), pages 21582440135, August.
    11. Delmas, Magali A. & Gergaud, Olivier & Lim, Jinghui, 2016. "Does Organic Wine Taste Better? An Analysis of Experts' Ratings," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 329-354, December.
    12. Monica Fait & Antonio Iazzi & Paola Scorrano, 2014. "La brand experience nelle strategie commerciali delle imprese vitivinicole," ECONOMIA E DIRITTO DEL TERZIARIO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(2), pages 285-304.
    13. Festa, Giuseppe & Cuomo, Maria Teresa & Metallo, Gerardino & Festa, Antonio, 2016. "The (r)evolution of wine marketing mix: From the 4Ps to the 4Es," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1550-1555.
    14. repec:lic:licosd:40818 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Dubois, Magalie, 2021. "The market for wine quality evaluation: evolution and future perspectives," Working Papers 321855, American Association of Wine Economists.
    16. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Stathis Klonaris & Georgia Papoutsi, 2016. "Do good things come in small packages? Willingness to pay for pomegranate wine and bottle size effects," Working Papers 2016-2, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    17. Swinnen, J. & Meloni, G. & Haeck, C., 2018. "What is the Value of Terroir? Historical Evidence from Champagne and Bordeaux," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277221, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Jean Desrochers & J. Francois Outreville, 2013. "Uncertainty, Ambiguity and Risk Taking: an experimental investigation of consumer behavior and demand for insurance," ICER Working Papers 10-2013, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    19. Outreville, J. François, 2017. "Wine Production In Québec: A Restatement," Working Papers 253852, American Association of Wine Economists.
    20. Guenter Schamel & Anna Ros, 2021. "Indicators of Individual Wine Reputation for Friuli Venezia Giulia," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 7(2), pages 323-339, July.
    21. Pavese, Piermassimo & Zanola, Roberto, 2008. "Autochthon vs. blended wines: Do objective and sensory characteristics matter?," POLIS Working Papers 107, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • L66 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Food; Beverages; Cosmetics; Tobacco

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aep:anales:4621. 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: Juan Manuel Quintero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeppea.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.