IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aieacp/124120.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumers perception of nanotechnologies in the Italian wine sector

Author

Listed:
  • Casolani, Nicola
  • Chiodo, Emilio
  • Fantini, Andrea

Abstract

La ricerca sulla percezione dell’impiego delle nanotecnologie nei diversi settori industriali ha importanti riflessi in termini economici e politici; nel settore agroalimentare esistono numerosi dibattiti sull’impiego delle nanotecnologie: la regolamentazione normativa è oggetto di discussione da parte di scienziati e comitati tecnici; anche l’opinione pubblica avrà un ruolo determinante in questo processo. Obiettivo del presente lavoro è di esaminare l’accettazione delle’uso delle nanotecnologie nei consumatori di vino; l’indagine è stata effettuata su un campione di consumatori abruzzesi ed utilizzando come prodotto di riferimento la più importante denominazione di origine a livello regionale, il Montepulciano d’Abruzzo Doc. Il settore vitivinicolo abruzzese è stato preso come interessante modello, perché radicato nella tradizione e costretto a confrontarsi con il dualismo “tradizione - innovazione tecnologica” legato alle possibili applicazioni nano-tecnologiche. Per questo motivo sono stati analizzati attributi legati al metodo di produzione (tradizionale o attraverso l’applicazione delle nanotecnologie) e attributi del prodotto quali il contenuto alcolico, il contenuto calorico e il contenuto di solfiti, che mettono in gioco gli aspetti salutistici del prodotto ma anche quelli edonistici e di “naturalità”. Lo studio ha analizzato le preferenze dei consumatori, applicando la tecnica della conjoint analysis, e tentato di classificare i consumatori di vino in base alle attitudini verso l’uso delle nanotecnologie attraverso una regressione logistica. Sono state considerate sia le attitudini verso le nanotecnologie sia le abitudini di consumo

Suggested Citation

  • Casolani, Nicola & Chiodo, Emilio & Fantini, Andrea, 2012. "Consumers perception of nanotechnologies in the Italian wine sector," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124120, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aieacp:124120
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.124120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/124120/files/Chiodo_Casolani_Fantini_Le%20nanotecnologie%20nel%20settore%20alimentare%20uno%20studio%20sulla%20percezione.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.124120?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. Henson, Spencer, 1995. "Demand-side constraints on the introduction of new food technologies: The case of food irradiation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 111-127, April.
    2. Nathalie Stampfli & Michael Siegrist & Hans Kastenholz, 2010. "Acceptance of nanotechnology in food and food packaging: a path model analysis," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 353-365, April.
    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. Greehy, Grainne & McCarthy, Mary & Henchion, Maeve M. & Dillon, Emma J. & McCarthy, Sinead, 2011. "An Exploration of Irish Consumer Acceptance of Nanotechnology Applications in Food," 2011 International European Forum, February 14-18, 2011, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 122006, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    2. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan, 2011. "Using a Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit Consumers’ WTP for Health Risk Reductions Achieved By Nanotechnology in the UK," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108950, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Gaynor, Joe & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Jaenicke, Edward C., 2002. "Retail Meat Managers' Profitability Expectations For Irradiated Red Meats," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19793, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. He, Senhui & Fletcher, Stanley M. & Rimal, Arbindra, 2004. "Factors Affecting Consumer Negative Perceptions About Beef Irradiation," 2004 Annual Meeting, February 14-18, 2004, Tulsa, Oklahoma 34672, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Rosaria Lombardo & Eric J. Beh & Luis Guerrero, 2019. "Analysis of three-way non-symmetrical association of food concepts in cross-cultural marketing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(5), pages 2323-2337, September.
    6. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Anne Marike Lokhorst, 2016. "The Key Role of Experiential Uncertainty when Dealing with Risks: Its Relationships with Demand for Regulation and Institutional Trust," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1615-1629, August.
    7. He, Senhui & Fletcher, Stanley M. & Rimal, Arbindra, 2005. "Unwillingness to Consume Irradiated Beef and Unwillingness to Pay for Beef Irradiation," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 36(1), pages 1-8, March.
    8. Erdem, Seda, 2018. "Who do UK consumers trust for information about nanotechnology?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 133-142.
    9. Zingg, Alexandra & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "People’s willingness to eat meat from animals vaccinated against epidemics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 226-231.
    10. Jing Zhang & Guoyu Wang & Deming Lin, 2016. "High support for nanotechnology in China: A case study in Dalian," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 115-127.
    11. Anetta Barska & Julia Wojciechowska-Solis & Joanna Wyrwa & Janina Jędrzejczak-Gas, 2023. "Practical Implications of the Millennial Generation’s Consumer Behaviour in the Food Market," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Watanabe Masahide & Kawata Yukichika, 2017. "What Extent of Welfare Loss is Caused by the Disparity between Perceived and Scientific Risks? A Case Study of Food Irradiation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, February.
    13. Eamonn M. McAlea & Martin Mullins & Finbarr Murphy & Syed A.M. Tofail & Anthony G. Carroll, 2016. "Engineered nanomaterials: risk perception, regulation and insurance," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 444-460, April.
    14. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 289-313, September.
    15. Aisha Egolf & Christina Hartmann & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "When Evolution Works Against the Future: Disgust's Contributions to the Acceptance of New Food Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1546-1559, July.
    16. Viscecchia, Rosaria & De Devitiis, Biagia & Carlucci, Domenico & Nardone, Gianluca & Santeramo, Fabio, 2018. "On Consumers' Acceptance of Nanotechnologies: An Italian Case Study," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 9(4), August.
    17. Rongting Zhou & Dong Wang & Ahmad Nabeel Siddiquei & Muhammad Azfar Anwar & Ali Hammad & Fahad Asmi & Qing Ye & Muhammad Asim Nawaz, 2019. "GMO/GMF on Social Media in China: Jagged Landscape of Information Seeking and Sharing Behavior through a Valence View," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-19, December.
    18. Elisa Pirlea & Mihai Anghel-Badescu, 2022. "Difficulties and Opportunities in Online Promoting and Selling Agri-Food Products," Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(1), pages 676-684, September.
    19. Edward C. Jaenicke & R. Wesley Harrison & Kimberly L. Jensen & Paul M. Jakus, 2006. "Follow the leader? Adoption behavior in food retailers' decision to offer fresh irradiated ground beef," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 547-568.
    20. Katherine A McComas & John C. Besley, 2011. "Fairness and Nanotechnology Concern," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1749-1761, November.

    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:ags:aieacp:124120. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aieaaea.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.