Market segmentation in wine tourism: A comparison of approaches

Abstract

In an attempt to approach wine tourism as a form of consumer behaviour, a substantial amount of research has focused on the demand-side, exploring the consumers who travel to wine regions. Despite the fact that there is no single, stereotypical "wine tourist", some distinctive characteristics regarding demographics, motivations or wine lifestyle can be drawn from literature. Several authors have recently addressed this issue and developed various wine tourist typologies, on the basis both of socio-economic and psychographic data. The objective of this paper is to provide a better understanding of the wine tourist, taking into account the different approaches for profiling and segmentation that have been used in recent studies.

Full text

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
MARKET SEGMENTATION IN WINE TOURISM:
A COMPARISON OF APPROACHES
Maria Alebaki
1
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Olga Iakovidou
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
In an attempt to approach wine tourism as a form of consumer behaviour, a
substantial amount of research has focused on the demand-side, exploring the
consumers who travel to wine regions. Despite the fact that there is no single,
stereotypical “wine tourist”, some distinctive characteristics regarding
demographics, motivations or wine lifestyle can be drawn from literature. Several
authors have recently addressed this issue and developed various wine tourist
typologies, on the basis both of socio-economic and psychographic data. The
objective of this paper is to provide a better understanding of the wine tourist,
taking into account the different approaches for profiling and segmentation that
have been used in recent studies.
Keywords: wine tourism, consumers, market segmentation
JEL Classification: L83, M1, O1
INTRODUCTION
Wine is an essential component for wine tourism development, since
a set of tourism attracting enterprises can be built around it. However, as
Mitchell (2004:13, in Mitchell, 2006) asserts: “there is more to… wine
tourism than the simple consumption of a beverage (albeit a hedonistic
pursuit)…this experience is not limited to the senses and emotions
associated with the wine alone”. Hall (1996) and Macionis (1996) (in
Hall et al., 2000:3) define wine tourism from consumers’ perspective as
“visitation to vineyards, wineries, wine festivals and wine shows for
which grape wine tasting and/or experiencing the attributes of a grape
wine region are the prime motivating factors for visitors”. The above
definition suggests that beyond wine and viticulture, wine tourism is
“marked” by the whole wine region and its attributes, often referred as
123
© University of the Aegean. Print ISSN: 1790-8418, Online ISSN: 1792-6521

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
“winescape” (Peters, 1997, cited in Hall et al., 2000). Three components
constitute the winescape: the presence of vineyards, the wine production
activity and the wineries where the wine is produced and stored (Telfer,
2001).
Hall & Mitchell (2002:69, cited in Sparks, 2007) discuss the concept
of “tourist terroir” in order to describe “the unique combination of the
physical, cultural and natural environment (that) gives each region its
distinctive tourist appeal”. In fact, someone who engages in wine-related
tourism, seeks for an overall tourism experience, which offers a regional
“bundle of benefits” (Getz & Brown, 2006), such as the rural landscape
and the appealing environment (de Blij, 1983:4), cultural heritage,
festivals, romance and relaxation, exploration, (Carmichael, 2005),
socialising, communing with other people, hospitality, meeting the
winemaker, or learning about wine (Alant & Bruwer, 2004; Charters &
Ali-Knight, 2000; Dodd, 1995). Authenticity, regional culture and
gastronomy are closely linked to wine tourism. As Simon states: “Where
vines flourish, McDonalds seldom does. Good authentic food is surely a
prerequisite for any wine-orientated holiday, and wine and food grow up
together in these [wine producing] regions” (Simon, 2001:6, in Boniface,
2003:132). For all the above reasons, wine tourism has been recognised
as a form of agricultural tourism, rural tourism, cultural tourism,
industrial tourism and special interest tourism (Yuan et al., 2005).
Getz (2000) argues that wine tourism should be examined from three
major perspectives: wine producers, tourism agencies and consumers.
Getz & Brown (2006) comment: ‘‘Wine tourism is, simultaneously a
form of consumer behaviour, a strategy by which destinations develop
and market wine-related attractions and imagery, and a marketing
opportunity for wineries to educate and to sell their products directly to
consumers”. Thus, understanding wine-related consumer behavior is vital
and can achieve marketing benefits (Yuan et al., 2006; Dodds & Butler,
2010). Towards this direction, market segmentation is significant for wine
tourism operators in terms of product development and marketing
purposes (Mitchell et al., 2000; Williams & Kelly, 2001) as it provides an
understanding of wine tourists and their behaviour.
Market segmentation has been defined as … “the process of dividing
a market into distinct subsets of consumers with common needs or
characteristics and selecting one or more segments to target with a distinct
marketing mix” (Schiffman et al., 2001:54, cited in: Bruwer et al., 2002).
Usually, market segmentation is based on socio-economic variables
(gender, age, income, educational level). However, in wine tourism
literature several psychographic variables are used as criteria for
124

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
segmenting. Thus, motivations, lifestyle, interests, values, personality, etc
can give useful information in order to have a better insight into who
exactly the wine tourist is (Galloway et al., 2008; Gronau & Kaufmann,
2009). Besides, as Bruwer et al. (2002) state, visitors with similar
demographics may present considerable differences concerning their
attitudes, lifestyle and wine consumer behaviour.
Through the process of market segmentation, answers for a variety of
questions regarding the consumers of wine tourism maybe drawn: Do
they consider a distinct group with specific characteristics compared to an
average traveller in rural areas or urban centers? Does wine constitute the
main reason for visiting a grape wine region? Does wine tourism apply to
only one specific type of consumers? A wine lover may visit a winery
with his friends, or family, who do not share the same interest in wine.
Moreover, there is a variety of reasons for visiting a wine region, such as
the rural setting, which may not be directly and exclusively related to
wine consumption. All these considerations engage both academics and
wine tourism stakeholders to further research.
Within this context, the objective of this paper is to provide a useful
insight into the types of visitors engaged in wine tourism as well as to
identify their specific characteristics. In particular, a comparison of
approaches concerning wine tourism profiling and segmentation is
provided. Identifying similarities and differences among wine tourists,
both in Europe and in the New World countries has practical implications
for both national and regional tourism authorities in order to meet
customer needs and to improve customer service.
SKETCHING A GENERAL PROFILE OF THE WINE TOURIST
Approximately two thirds of wine tourism literature comes from
Australia and New Zealand, while a large amount of research comes from
Canada and the USA (Mitchell & Hall, 2006). Research in relation to
wine tourists is well developed, despite the fact that studies on wine
tourism policy and economics are in early stage (Goldberg & Merdy,
2006). However, only after 1995 academics began to focus on the wine
tourist, while it is important to stress that in many cases information has
been gathered from the wineries’ perspective (supply – side research)
rather than from the wine tourism consumers themselves (Mitchell et al.,
2000; Tassiopoulos et al., 2004). Moreover, a substantial amount of
research deals with winery visitors and their relationship with special
issues concerning specific tourism products or services and does not
investigate wine tourists in general (Williams & Kelly, 2001).
125

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
Descriptions that refer to wine tourists before 1995 vary and in some
cases are not flattering. Spawton (1986:57 in Macionis & Cambourne,
1998:42) describes them as “mobile drunks”, McKinna (1987:85 in
Macionis & Cambourne, 1998:42) refers to wine tourist as “the passing
tourist trade who thinks a ‘winery crawl’ is just a good holiday”, while, a
milder description that has been given is “wine connoisseur” (Edwards,
1989 in Macionis & Cambourne, 1998:42). Folwell & Grassel (1995:14,
in Mitchell et al., 2000) give some more information about the wine
tourist’s profile, arguing that the visitor of wineries in Washington state
during the late of 1980’s is “middle-aged with an above average income”.
Dodd (1995) asserts that a winery visitor is generally of higher
educational level and income comparing to an average traveller.
According to the South Australian Tourism Commission (1997, in
Charters & Ali-Knight, 2002), wine tourism appeals to “couples with no
children and those with higher education and incomes in professional
occupations”. Mitchell et al. (2000), after a preview of the existing
literature mainly basing on studies in Australia, New Zealand and the
U.S.A., arrive at the following description: “(the wine tourist) is usually
30-50 years of age, in the moderate to high income bracket and comes
from within or in close proximity to the wine region itself”. More
recently, Treloar et al. (2004), pinpoint several similarities in previous
studies regarding the winery visitor, which they describe as
“predominantly female, generally university or higher educated and with
a slightly higher than average income...usually domestic or intrastate
traveller who has some experience with wine or wine education”.
In Australia, as Charters & Ali-Knight (2000) state, the winery visitor
in Margaret River and Swan Valley is mainly female (53,7%), young
(under 47 years old) and comes from the metropolitan area of Perth.
Likewise, O’Neill & Palmer (2004) suggest that the winery visitor in
Western Australia is female, young (under 44 years of age), with a
managerial or professional occupation, well-educated and comes from
Australia. More recently, O’ Neill & Charters (2006) also come to the
same conclusion, describing winery visitors in Margaret River as “mainly
young females, who are highly educated”.
According to the New Zealand Ministry of Tourism (2007, cited in
McDonnell & Hall, 2008), wine tourists in New Zealand are international
and domestic visitors, aged 15 years old and over, who visit a winery at
least once when travelling in New Zealand. Moreover, between 2001 and
2006, international visitors increased in an annual average growth rate of
16%. During the same period, the number of domestic visitors has been
almost cut in half. Similarly, while in 1999 there was a low percentage of
126

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
international tourists who lived overseas (16%) (Mitchell, 1999, cited in
Alonso et al., 2007b), a recent research (Alonso et al., 2007b), indicates
almost 20% growth in international tourist numbers. The above
considerations emphasise the enormous potential of wine tourism
development in New Zealand
Research carried out in Texas (Kolyesnikova et al., 2007) suggests
that wine tourists are young females (less than 51 years old), in high
levels of education and occupation that usually belongs to the following
categories: professional/technical (engineers, architects, lawyers, doctors
etc) and executive/managerial (accountants, managers, administrators
etc). Carmichael (2005), while investigating the winery visitors’
characteristics in Niagara region, Ontario-Canada, states that the
Canadian winery visitor’s profile is quite similar compared to the general
winery visitor’s profile, as described in the New World countries. In
particular, visitors in Canadian wineries are mainly couples, middle –
aged, highly educated, high income and professional workers. The
majority of visitors are domestic travellers coming from regions in close
proximity to the wine area.
Brown & Getz (2005) explored wine consumers’ attitudes concerning
wine tourism in Calgary of Canada. Specifically, the links between wine
preferences and propensity to travel to specific wine regions were
investigated. The above research is consistent to Carmichael’s (2005)
findings in the same country. In fact, winery visitors in Canada were
found to be mainly females, middle-aged (average age: 49 years),
married, highly educated and with higher incomes. A third study in
British Columbia, conducted by Williams & Kelly (2001), describes wine
tourists as: “of a middle income, moderately well educated and females,
empty nester, baby boomers”.
In South Africa, results of a research carried out by Tassiopoulos et
al. (2004) suggest that wine tourists are mostly females, young (less than
35 years), single, without children and with a professional occupation.
Also, they are usually day-trip tourists and travel in a party of 2.1 persons.
Only 9.1% of them are international, while they mainly come from Cape
Town metropolitan area. More recently, Tassiopoulos & Haydam (2006)
argued that wine tourism in South Africa includes day trips and wine
tourists use their own mode of transport.
Winemaking activity has a long tradition in Europe and over 60% of
all world wine is produced there. Furthermore, France is the world’s
number one destination. However, research concerning the wine tourist’s
profile and characteristics is relatively inchoate (Charters & Carlsen,
127

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
2006; Machlouzarides, 2010). A review from four European countries
(France, Italy, Spain and Greece) is presented in the current article.
Wine tourists in France usually visit wine regions in winter months
and less frequently during the summer season (May to September). Wine-
related holidays are usually short-term. Thus, wine tourism applies mainly
in domestic travellers, who prefer to organise their vacation out of the
main summer season. Contrarily, foreign visitors are more likely to be
attracted in the summer season, because holiday is longer and wine can be
mixed with other tourist activities (Frochot, 2000:79). According to
another research in Alsace (Waller, 2006), only 40% of visitors stay
overnight. Guzman et al. (2008) found that a typical wine tourist in
Southern Spain is between 50-59 years old, middle/high income and
usually travels with family. According to Gatti & Maroni (2004), the wine
tourist in Italy is mainly young, foreign male. In addition, female wine
tourists in Italy are usually younger than male. As Gatti (2001) states:
“Foreign tourists are usually the most organised ones. They take
advantage of specialised magazines and guides on Italy”.
As far as Greece is concerned, there is a lack of official data
regarding wine tourism. However, according to a relative research
conducted by the Association of “the Greek Women of Wine”
(Triantafyllou – Pitsaki, 2005) and based on winemakers’ perceptions,
this form of tourism so far seems to apply particularly to the domestic
market. In fact, domestic travellers constitute more than 70% of the total
number of winery visitors in Northern, Central and South Greece, while
their common characteristic is their strong interest in wine. It is important
to point out that there is a high percentage of international winery visitors
in the insular regions and that results to an increased percentage of
international tourists at a national level. However, it is possible that
visitation to islands is a part of an organised vacation in the framework of
mass tourism. Thus, a winery tour seems to be a collateral activity.
Sketching the winery visitors’ socio-economic profile in Greece, based on
a recent study in the Macedonia region, Alebaki & Iakovidou (2006)
argue that the average winery visitor is male, young, has high levels of
education and medium-high income, is either civil servant or employee
and comes from urban centers in close proximity to the wine region.
An extensive literature has suggested that demographic variables
have a great impact on wine tourism behaviour (Bruwer, 2002a; Mitchell,
2002; Treloar et al., 2004). Dodd & Bigotte (1997), using cluster analysis,
segmented visitors in Texas wineries on the basis of age and income. It
was found that younger respondents were more critical of their winery
experience and rated service quality in winery as the most important
128

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
factor of visitor satisfaction. Charters & Fountain (2006) found evidence
that while older people give an emphasis to the product itself, for younger
wine tourists the overall experience and the received services are more
important than the quality of wine. Alonso et al. (2007a) pinpointed
differences among different age groups of winery visitors in New Zealand
in several dimensions, such as wine knowledge, product involvement and
winery expenditures. Specifically, it was found that older visitors have
greater wine knowledge as well as interest in wine than younger
respondents, and although they earn lower incomes, they have higher
expenditures at the winery.
WINE TOURIST’S PSYCHOGRAPHICS: MOTIVATIONS AND
WINE LIFESTYLE
As discussed, a deep comprehension of the nature of the wine tourists
and their needs is a precondition for a successful marketing of the wine
tourism destination and product (Macionis & Cambourne, 1998, cited in
Mitchell et al., 2000). Thus, as wine tourism development has been
increasingly international, one of the major themes expressed in literature
was the need to better understand the nature of wine tourist (Brown &
Getz, 2005). Many researchers have proposed a wide range of segments,
based on demographic, socio-economic and psychographic
characteristics, with important implications for wine tourism product
development. As Charters & Ali-Knight (2002) admonish: “...in practical
terms (that is for the winery), segmentation maybe the most important
aspect of the wine tourist as a consumer, but - in order to be possible- it is
necessary to consider briefly the motivation of visitors to wine regions”.
Kay (2003) states that there are four main theoretical approaches to
tourist motivation, each of these being based upon earlier motivation
theories from other consumer behaviour research: needs-based
motivation, value-based motivation, benefits sought or realised and
expectancy theory based motivation. In addition to the above approaches,
another approach distinguishes motivations into push and pull factors.
Pull factors (or external motivations) draw the visitor to the winery and
include general characteristics or activities of the winery (wine tasting and
buying, tours, eating at the winery and rural setting). Push factors are
internal motivations that drive an individual to visit the winery
(socialising, learning about wine, relaxation and meeting the winemaker)
(Mitchell et al., 2000; Yuan et al., 2005).
Getz and Brown (2006) point out that the experience of wine tourism
includes three core dimensions, which they label the “core wine product”,
129

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
the “core destination appeal’’, and the ‘‘cultural product’’. These
findings are supported by Sparks (2007), who proposed the following
three dimensions: the “destination experience”, the “core wine
experience” and the “personal development”. While “destination
experience” and “core wine experience” are pull factors, “personal
development” is considered to be an internal motivation (push factor) and
is strongly related to the desire to seek information about wine.
A basic distinction between wine tourists based on motivations was
introduced by Johnson (1998:15, in Galloway et al., 2008). Using as a
main criterion the purpose of the visit, he distinguishes two types of wine
tourists: The “specialist winery tourist” and the “generalist” visitor. The
first type refers to someone who “visits a vineyard, winery, wine festival
or wine show for the purpose of recreation and whose primary motivation
is a specific interest in grape wine or grape wine-related phenomen”,
while the second type includes those that are primarily motivated to visit
a wine region for other reasons. Wine tourists’ motivations were also the
basis for the segmentation applied by Gatti & Maroni (2004), who
conducted a more recent study in Italy. Using Multiple Correspondence
Analysis (MCA), they classified wine tourists into four distinct groups: 1)
The “Professional”, 2) the “Cultured”, 3)the “Enthusiastic” and 4) the
“Wine Tourist by Change”.
In an attempt to segment winery visitors in the Macedonia region,
Alebaki & Iakovidou (2006), used two-step cluster analysis, based both
on demographics and winery visitors’ motivations. The findings showed
four distinct types of visitors who engage wine tourism in Greece: 1) the
“Wine lovers”, who are usually highly educated and high income and
whose prime objectives for visiting the area are: visiting the winery,
meeting the winemaker and learning more about wine and wine making,
2) the “Neophytes”, who are mainly low- income students with a special
interest in wine and visiting the winery is their major incentive, 3) the
“Occasional Wine Tourists”, who are not interested in learning about
wine, but are attracted by the local gastronomy and 4) The “Hangers-on”,
who are not interested in wine or wine making, they are not wine
consumers in general and for them, a vineyard or a winery is just another
tourist attraction. It is of utmost importance to be stressed, that for the
‘hangers-on’, the membership of a winery in the project: “Wine Roads of
Northern Greece” is an important factor and can become a motive for
visiting it.
Wine tourism researchers have also demonstrated a strong interest in
wine lifestyle as a characteristic which can be used in segmentation. The
latter includes wine interest, wine cellaring behaviour and wine club
130

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
participation (Alonso et al., 2007b; Mitchell et al., 2000). For instance,
lifestyle components, such as wine knowledge, motivations and wine
behaviour were used as a basis for segmenting the wine tourists in Italy.
According to the Movimento del Turismo del Vino, four groups emerge:
1) The “Professional”, 2) the “Impassioned Neophyte”, 3) the “Hanger-
on” and 4) the “Drinker” (Coriglano, 1996). Following the same
approach, Macionis & Cambourne (1998:44, in Cambourne & Macionis,
2000:88), used data from a previous research in Australia (Roy Morgan
Holiday Tracking Research, 1996) in order to create a “wine tourism
portfolio”. The latter classifies wine tourists into ten “value segments”,
using as criteria socio-economic variables as well as values, beliefs and
the general lifestyle. According to Cambourne & Macionis (2000:89), the
groups: “Visible Achievers”, “Socially Aware”, “Traditional Family Life”
and “Young Optimists” constitute the majority of winery visitors and
“appear to be the most appropriate target markets for wine tourism
marketers and practitioners”.
Knowing the level of interest in wine of wine tourists is of high
importance (Mitchell et al., 2000: 124). Therefore, using the interest in
wine as criterion, Ali-Knight & Charters (1999) segmented wine tourists
in two categories: the “Casual Tourists”, who just want to taste wine and
nothing else and the “Sophisticated Drinkers”, who seek to gather as
much information as they can about the product. However, it should be
mentioned that this study is supply-focused and is based on the
winemakers’ perceptions. This “intuitional approach”, has been also
adopted by Hall (1996, cited in Hall & Macionis, 1998). The
segmentation, using as a basis both tourists’ motivations and their interest
in wine, resulted in three primarily segments: 1) The “Wine Lover” (who
is similar to the “Specialist” of Johnson’s typology), 2) the “Wine
Interested” and 3) the “Curious Tourist”.
Charters & Ali-Knight (2002) built upon Hall’s typology and
approached the issue from a demand –side (consumer perceptions). They
segmented wine tourists on the basis of their lifestyle (wine knowledge,
interest in wine motivations for visiting the wine region). Five groups
emerged: 1) The “Wine Lover”, who has a desire to seek education about
wine, 2) the “Connoisseur” (which is a sub-set of the wine lover), 3) the
“Wine Interested” and 4) the “Wine Novice” (correspondingly to the
curious tourist). They also added a small group that consists of the
“Hangers-on”. The same study proposes a model that consists of three
dimensions: purpose of visit, general tourist motivation and relationship
to other tourist activities.
131

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
In some cases, it is asked from wine tourists to classify themselves
regarding their knowledge about wine (“Advanced”, “Intermediate” or
“Basic”) (Maddern & Colledge, 1996). However, according to Charters &
Ali-Knight (2002), “the problem with knowledge is that it is only
suggestive of the respondent’s motivation as a wine tourist and it is
difficult to quantify”. Therefore, O’Mahony et al. (2006) use as a criterion
the involvement in the wine product category and classify wine tourists in
three segments: 1) the “Committed Consumer”, 2) the “Traditional
Consumer” and 3) the “Uninvolved Consumer”.
A part of research (Bruwer, 2002b; Houghton, 2001, 2008; Juan et
al., 2005, 2006; Weiler et al., 2004) was focused exclusively on the
characteristics of a particular group of wine tourists: those who attend
wine festivals. The latter have been defined by Yuan et al. (2005) as “a
special occasion that attendees actively engage in for the satisfaction of
their interest in wine and/or for the entertainment made available by other
leisure activities”. For instance, Houghton (2008) used Hall’s (1996)
classification as a basis for distinguishing distinct wine festival
customers’ types. The study, based on K-Means cluster analysis
suggested that wine festivals attract many different types of visitors and
there is the same possibility to attract “… a serious wine drinker along
with a novice”. Cluster analysis that has also been used by Juan et al.
(2006) on the basis of motivations, produced three distinct groups named
as: the “Wine Focusers”, the “Festivity Seekers” and the “Hangers-on”
(who showed no interesting in anything at the festival). Each category
includes visitors who emphasise in different activities or products when
attending a festival.
CONCLUSIONS
The first conclusion that arises from this study results from the
examination of the wine tourist’s demographics. In particular, when wine
tourists between “Old” and “New World” countries are compared,
distinctive differences concerning gender are evident. In the New World
countries, the typical wine tourist is usually female, while in Europe it
appears to be a male. The above consideration is highly important,
because, as Mitchell & Hall (2001b) state, there are differences between
wine tourists in terms of gender. For example, female wine tourists tend
to attract more easily from wine bottles/ labels (i.e. packaging), share the
winery’s wine with others and make post winery visit wine purchases. As
Mitchell & Hall (2001a) also report: “Females were also around twice as
likely to enjoy elements of the ambience of the winery, including the
132

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
inviting or relaxed nature of a winery, socialising with friends at the
winery and sunny weather and alfresco dining”. This result has important
implications for the wine tourism stakeholders, as they can develop and
diversify their products and strategies successfully, according to the needs
and expectations of each target group, taking into consider gender
differentiation. Contrarily, common demographic characteristics of wine
tourists seem to be their age, educational level and income. Most of
research supports the assumption that wine tourists are young, highly
educated and have high - income. These findings are of particular
importance, as income is one of the most obvious predictors of wine
consumption and is used by wineries to target certain visitor groups
(Dodd & Bigotte, 1997).
Generally, there is a perspective that “…the ideal wine tourist is
male, professional and middle –aged, because they will spend most”
(Charters & Carlsen, 2006). However, although younger wine tourists
have limited knowledge about wine compared to older ones, they may be
more important in the long term. Thus, greater attention needs to be paid,
because high satisfaction from the whole wine tourism experience can
help in terms to bring them back for return visits (Roberts & Sparks,
2006), create a demand in the long term for specific brands, and built
customer loyalty towards individual wineries and their wines (Getz,
2000).
Market segments that have been identified should be valuable to wine
tourism operators since they can constitute specific targets for wineries or
wine tourism destinations. Each group of visitors can, albeit in a different
level, contribute in wine tourism development. There are distinct market
segments (i.e. the “Occasional Wine Tourists” or the “Hangers – on”),
for whom a winery visit is not the primarily motivation for visiting the
wine region. These types of tourists may visit a winery out of obligation
because their friends or family want to go. Therefore, they are not
particularly profitable for wineries and they have less commercial
potential. Nevertheless, they can contribute to rural tourism development
in general, as they take part in a variety of activities in the wine region. In
this case, a great emphasis should be given in promoting the attraction of
the whole destination. However, for the “Wine Lovers” and the
“Neophytes” (which can be potential wine lovers under the right
circumstances), the winery appears to be an important determinant of
visitation. Furthermore, a winery visit may provide a competitive
advantage both for the destination and local wines, creating not only
profit for wine enterprises but also opportunities for the development of
the regional grape and wine sector.
133

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
It is significant to note that research findings have to be dealt with
caution and extractions of generalised conclusions without taking into
account both different approaches and dissimilarities in tourism structure
among countries should be avoided. It has already been suggested that
wine tourists are not a single and culturally homogeneous group (Charters
& Fountain, 2006; Dritsaki, 2009). For example, there are wine tourists in
Italy who are quite different compared with South African wine tourists.
Also, according to European research, wine tourists in Europe can be
broadly categorised into three groups: “Formal wine tourists”, “Tourists
with an acknowledged interested in wine” and “General Tourists”.
However, a “Formal Wine Tourist” in Europe, usually travels in an
organised tour. On the contrary, in the New World countries such as
Australia and New Zealand, a highly educated wine tourist is less possible
to travel in an organised tour compared with the “Wine Interested” or the
“Wine Curious”. As expectations and experiences of wine tourism vary
from region to region, intercultural differences among wine tourists as
well as their influence on wine tourism behaviour should be taken into
consideration (Charters & Ali-Knight, 2000; Charters & Ali-Knight,
2002; Charters & Carlsen, 2006).
Given the “shifting nature of the wine tourist in various places”
(Charters & Ali-Knight, 2002), there is a need for more quantitative
research to be carried out, especially in the European countries, including
data from several wine regions, in order to further investigate the factors
that influence on wine tourist’s characteristics, motives and preferences.
At last, even in cases where research is focused on the demand-side (wine
tourists’ perceptions), it is necessary to obtain data from broader samples
(Sparks, 2007) and different locations and not only by sampling winery
visitors or studying consumers at the cellar door. Therefore, more
research is needed to gain a fuller understanding of wine consumers in
general (Getz and Brown, 2006).
REFERENCES
Alant, K. & Bruwer, J. (2004). Wine tourism behaviour in the context of
motivational framework for wine regions and cellar doors. Journal of Wine
Research, Vol. 15, No.1, pp.27-37.
Alebaki, M. & Iakovidou, O. (2006). Wine tourism and the characteristics of
winery visitors: The case of Wine Roads of Northern Greece. Paper
presented at the 9th Pan-Hellenic Congress of Greek Association of
Agricultural Economists. Athens, Greece, 2-4 November 2004. (in Greek).
134

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
Ali-Knight, J. & Charters, S. (1999). Education in a Western Australian wine
tourism context. International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 11, No.1,
pp.7-18.
Alonso, A, Fraser, R.A. & Cohen, D.A. (2007a). Does age matter? How age
influences the winery experience. International Journal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 1, No.2, pp.131-138.
Alonso, A., Fraser, R.A. & Cohen, D.A. (2007b). Investigating differences
between domestic and international winery visitors in New Zealand.
International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 19, No.2, pp.114-
126.
Brown, G. & Getz, D. (2005). Linking wine preferences to the choice of wine
tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43, No.3, pp.266-
276.
Boniface, P. (2003). Tasting Tourism: Travelling for Food and Drink (New
Directions in Tourism Analysis). Aldershot, Ashgate.
Bruwer, J. (2002a). Marketing wine to Generation X consumers through the cellar
door. The Australian and New Zealand Grapegrower and Winemaker.
Vol. 467, pp.67-70.
Bruwer, J. (2002b). Wine and food events: a golden opportunity to learn more
about wine consumers. The Australian and New Zealand Wine Industry
Journal, Vol. 1, No.3, pp.92-99.
Bruwer, L., Li, E. & Reid, M. (2002). Segmentation of the Australian Wine
Market Using a Wine-Related Lifestyle Approach. Journal of Wine
Research, Vol. 13, No.3, pp.217-242.
Cambourne, C. & Macionis, N. (2000). Meeting the Winemaker: wine tourism
product development in an emerging wine region. In C.M. Hall, E.
Sharples, B. Cambourne & N. Macionis (Eds.) Wine Tourism Around the
World, Development, Management and Markets, Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
Carmichael, B. (2005). Understanding the wine tourism experience for winery
visitors in the Niagara region, Ontario, Canada. Tourism Geographies,
Vol.7, No.2, pp.185-204.
Charters, S. & Ali-Knight, J. (2000). Wine tourism – a thirst for knowledge?
International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 12, No.3, pp.70-81.
Charters, S. & Ali-Knight, J. (2002). Who is the wine tourist? Tourism
Management, Vol. 23, No.3, pp.311-319.
Charters, S. & Carlsen, J. (2006). Conclusion : The future of wine tourism
research, management and marketing. In J. Carlsen & S. Charters (Eds.)
Global Wine Tourism: Research Management and Marketing, London:
CABI Publishing.
Charters, S. & Fountain, J. (2006). Younger wine tourists : a study of generational
differences in the cellar door experience. In J. Carlsen & S. Charters (Eds.)
Global Wine Tourism: Research Management and Marketing, London:
CABI Publishing.
Corigliano, M.A. (1996). Enoturismo: caratteristiche della domanda, strategie di
offerta e aspetti territoriali e ambientali. Milano, Franco Angeli.
135

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
Blij, H.J.D. (1983). Wine: a Geographic Appreciation. Totowa, Rowman &
Allanheld.
Dritsaki, C. (2009). The life cycle of agro tourist enterprises. Tourismos, Vol. 4,
No.2, pp. 149-154.
Dodd, T.H. (1995). Opportunities and pitfalls of tourism in a developing wine
industry. International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 7, No.1, pp.5-16.
Dodd, T.H. & Bigotte, V. (1997). Perceptual differences among visitors to
wineries. Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 35, No.3, pp.46-51.
Dodds, R. & Butler, R. (2010). Barriers to implementing sustainable tourism
policy in mass tourism destinations. Tourismos, Vol. 5, No.1, pp. 35-54.
Edwards, F. (1989). The marketing of wine from small wineries: managing the
intangibles. International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 1, No.1, pp.14-
17.
Folwell, R.J. & Grassel, M.A. (1995). How tasting rooms can help sell wine. In
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of
Arizona (Eds.) Direct Farm Marketing and Tourism Handbook, Arizona,
The University of Arizona: Department of Agricultural and Resource
Economics.
Frochot, I. (2000). Wine tourism in France: A paradox? In M. Hall, L. Sharples,
B. Cambourne, & N. Macionis (Eds.) Wine Tourism Around the World:
Development, Management and Markets, Oxford: Butterworth–
Heinemann.
Galloway, G., Mitchell, R., Getz, D., Crouch G. & Ong, B. (2008). Sensation
seeking and the prediction of attitudes and behaviours of wine tourists.
Tourism Management, Vol. 29, No.5, pp.950-966.
Gronau, W. & Kaufmann, R. (2009). Tourism as a stimulus for sustainable
development in rural areas: A Cypriot perspective. Tourismos, Vol. 4,
No.1, pp. 83-96.
Gatti, S. (2001). Experiences of oenological tourism in Italy: the Nobile di
Montepulciano wine route in Tuscany. Paper presented at the 73rd EAAE
Seminar. Faculty of Economics, University of Ancona. Ancona, Italy, 28 -
30 June 2001.
Gatti, S. & Maroni, F. (2004). A profile of wine tourists in some Italian region
vineyards: an application of the multiple correspondence analysis. Paper
presented at the Vineyard Data Quantification Society (VDQS) Colloque,
Oenometrics XI, Dijon, France: 21-22 May 2004.
Getz, D. (2000). Explore Wine Tourism: Management, Development,
Destinations. New York, Cognizant.
Getz, D. & Brown, G. (2006). Critical success factors for wine tourism regions: A
demand analysis. Tourism Management, Vol. 27, No.1, pp.146–158.
Goldberg, M.A. & Murdy, J. (2006). Wine tourism after the direct shipment
revolution: implications and a proposed methodological framework.
International Business and Economics Research Journal, Vol. 5, No.2,
pp.1-10.
136

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
Hall, C.M. (1996). Wine tourism in New Zealand. In G. Kearsley (Eds.)
Proceedings of Tourism Down Under II: A Tourism Research Conference,
Dunedin: Centre for Tourism, University of Otago.
Hall, C.M. & Macionis, N. (1998). Wine tourism in Australia and New Zealand.
In R. Butler, M. Hall and J. Jeckins (Eds.) Tourism and Recreation in
Rural Areas, England: Wiley.
Hall, C.M., & Mitchell, R. (2002). The tourist terroir of New Zealand wine: the
importance of region in the wine tourism experience. In A. Montanari
(Eds.) Food and Environment: Geographies of Taste, Rome: Societa
Geografica Italiana.
Hall, C.M., Johnson, G., Cambourne, B., Macionis, N., Mitchell, R.D. & Sharples,
L. (2000). Wine tourism: An introduction. In C.M. Hall, L. Sharples, B.
Cambourne and N. Macionis (Eds.) Wine Tourism Around the World,
Development, Management and Markets, Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
Houghton, M. (2001). The Propensity of Wine Festivals to Encourage Subsequent
Winery Visitation. International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 13,
No.3, pp.32-41.
Houghton, M. (2008). Classifying wine festival customers: Comparing an
inductive typology with Hall's wine tourist classification. International
Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 2, No.1,
pp.67-76.
Johnson, G.R. (1998). Wine tourism in New Zealand: A national survey of
wineries 1997. Unpublished Diploma in Tourism Dissertation, Otago,
New Zealand, University of Otago.
Kay, P. (2003). Consumer motivation in a tourism context: continuing the work of
Maslow, Rokeach, Vroom, Deci, Haley and others. Paper presented at the
ANZMAC 2003 Conference. University of South Australia, Adelaide,
Australia, 1-3 December 2003.
Kolyesnikova, N., Dodd, T. & Laverie, D.A. (2007). Gratuity purchasing at
wineries: An investigation of the determining factors. International
Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 19, No.4, pp.239-256.
Lopez-Guzmán, T., Millán Vázquez, G. & Caridad y Ocerín, J.M. (2008).
Análisis econométrico del enoturismo en España. Un estudio de caso.
Estudios y Perspectivas en Turismo, Vol. 17, No.1, pp.98-118.
Machlouzarides, H. (2010). Destination marketing through a utility business
model: The case of Cyprus. Tourismos, Vol. 5, No.2, pp. 161-177.
Macionis, N. (1996). Wine tourism in Australia. In G. Kearsley (Eds.)
Proceedings of Tourism Down Under II: A Tourism Research Conference.
Dunedin, Centre for Tourism: University of Otago.
Macionis, N. & Cambourne, B. (1998). Wine tourism: just what is it all about?
Wine Industry Journal, Vol. 13, No.1, pp.41-47.
Maddern, C., & Golledge, S. (1996). Victorian Wineries Tourism Council Cellar
Door Survey. Melbourne, Victorian Wineries Tourism Council.
137

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
McDonnell, A. & Hall, C.M. (2008). A framework for the evaluation of winery
servicescapes: a New Zealand case. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio
Cultural Pasos, Vol. 6, No.2, pp.231-247.
McKinna, D. (1987). Developing Marketing Strategies for Wines. In P.F. Hayes
(Eds.) Proceedings of the Grapes and Wine–The Business End Conference
(18-19 August 1987), Hyatt on Collins, Melbourne, Victorian Wine
Industry Association.
Ministry of Tourism of New Zealand. (2007). Tourist Activity: Wine Tourism.
New Zealand series B. Wellington, Ministry of Tourism.
Mitchell, R. (1999). New Zealand Winery Visitors’ Survey. National Summary
Report. Centre for tourism, University of Otago, pp.1-10.
Mitchell, R. (2002). The generation game: generation X and baby boomer wine
tourism. In C.W. Glen (Eds.), New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality
Research Conference Proceedings, Rotorua:
Waiariki Institute of
Technology.
Mitchell, R. (2004). Scenery and Chardonnay: A visitor perspective of the New
Zealand winery experience. Unpublished Phd Thesis. Otago, New
Zealand: University of Otago.
Mitchell, R. (2006). Influences on post-visit wine purchase (and non-purchase) by
New Zealand winery visitors. In J. Carlsen and S. Charters (Eds.) Global
Wine Tourism: Research Management and Marketing, London: CABI
Publishing.
Mitchell, R. & Hall, C.M. (2001a). The influence of gender and region on the
New Zealand winery visit. Tourism Recreation Research, Vol. 26, No.2,
pp.63-75.
Mitchell, R. & Hall, C.M. (2001b). Lifestyle behaviors of New Zealand winery
visitors: wine club activities, wine cellars and place of purchase.
International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 13, No.3, pp.82-94.
Mitchell, R. & Hall, C.M. (2006). Wine tourism research: the state of play.
Tourism Review International, Vol. 9, No.4, pp.307-332.
Mitchell, R., Hall, C.M. & McIntosh, A. (2000). Wine Tourism and Consumer
Behaviour. In C.M. Hall, L. Sharples, B. Cambourne and N. Macionis
(Eds.) Wine Tourism Around the World, Development, Management and
Markets, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
O’Mahony, B., Hall, J., Lockshin, L., Jago., L. & Brown, G. (2006).
Understanding the impact of wine tourism on post-tour purchasing
behaviour. In J. Carlsen and S. Charters (Eds.) Global Wine Tourism:
Research Management and Marketing, London: CABI Publishing.
O’Neill, M.A., & Palmer, A. (2004). Wine production and tourism: Adding
service to a perfect partnership. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 45, No.3, pp.269-284.
O’Neill, M.A. & Charters, S. (2006). Survey timing and visitor perceptions of
cellar door quality. In J. Carlsen & S. Charters (Eds.) Global Wine
Tourism: Research Management and Marketing, London: CABI
Publishing.
138

TOURISMOS: AN INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF TOURISM
Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2011, pp. 123-140
UDC: 338.48+640(050)
Peters, G.L. (1997). American Winescapes: The Cultural Landscapes of
America’s Winecountry (Geographies of Imagination). USA, Westview
Press.
Roberts, L. & Sparks, B. (2006). Enhancing the wine tourism experience: the
customers’ viewpoint. In J. Carlsen and S. Charters (Eds.) Global Wine
Tourism: Research Management and Marketing, London: CABI
Publishing.
Roy Morgan Holiday Tracking Research. (1996). Roy Morgan Value Segments.
Melbourne, Roy Morgan.
Schiffman, L., Bednall, D., Cowley, E., O’Cass, A., Watson, Jj. & Kanuk, L.
(2001). Consumer Behavior (2nd ed.). Sydney, Prentice-Hall.
Simon, J. (2001). Treading the true grape trail. Sunday Times, December 23,
Section 4.
Sparks, B. (2007). Planning a wine tourism vacation? Factors that help to predict
tourist behavioural intentions. Tourism Management, Vol. 28, No.5,
pp.1180-1192.
Spawton, T. (1986). Understanding wine purchasing: knowing how the wine
buyer behaves can increase sales. The Australian and New Zealand Wine
Industry Journal, Vol. 1, No.2, pp.54-57.
South Australian Tourism Commission. (1997). SATC Corporate Plan 1998-
2003. Adelaide, SATC.
Tassiopoulos, D. Muntsu, N. & Haydam, N. (2004). Wine tourism in South
Africa: a demographic and psychographic study. Journal of Wine
Research, Vol. 15, No.1, pp.51-63.
Tassiopoulos, D. & Haydam, N. (2006). Wine tourists in South Africa: a
demographic and psychographic study. In J. Carlsen & S. Charters (Eds.)
Global Wine Tourism: Research Management and Marketing, London:
CABI Publishing.
Telfer, D.J. (2001). From a wine tourism village to a regional wine route: An
investigation of the competitive advantage of embedded clusters in
Niagara, Canada. Tourism Recreation Research, Vol. 26, No.2, pp.23-33.
Treloar, P., Hall, C.M. & Mitchell, R.D. (2004). Wine Tourism and the generation
Y market: any possibilities? Paper presented at the CAUTHE 2004
Conference. Brisbane, Queensland, Australia: 10-13 February 2004.
Triantafyllou - Pitsaki, M.E. (2005). Promoting Greek wine through foreign
visitors in Greece. Paper presented at the 1st Conference of Greek Wine.
Diaselo Conference Center, Metsovo: 1-3 July 2005. (in greek).
Yuan, J., Cai, L., Morrison, A. & Linton, S. (2005). An analysis of wine festival
attendees’ motivations: a synergy of wine, travel and special events?
Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 11, No.1, pp.41-58.
Yuan, J., Jang, S., Cai, L., Morrison, A. & Linton, S. (2006). Analysis of
Motivational and Promotional Effects of a Wine Festival. In J. Carlsen and
S. Charters (Eds.) Global Wine Tourism: Research Management and
Marketing, London: CABI Publishing.
Waller, D. (2006). Wine Tourism: the case of Alsace, France. Unpublished Master
Thesis. Dorset, United Kingdom: Bournemouth University
139

Maria Alebaki & Olga Iakovidou
140
Weiler, B., Truong, M. & Griffiths, M. (2004). Visitor Profiles and Motivations
for Visiting an Australian Wine Festival. Paper presented at the
International Wine Tourism Conference. Margaret River, Australia, 2-5
May 2004.
Williams, P. & Kelly, J. (2001). Cultural wine tourists: product development
considerations for British Columbia’s resident wine tourism market.
International Journal of Wine Marketing, Vol. 13, No.3, pp.59-77.
SUBMITTED: JUNE 2010
REVISION SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 2010
ACCEPTED: OCTOBER 2010
REFEREED ANONYMOUSLY
Maria Alebaki (mariale@agro.auth.gr) is a Phd Candidate at the
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Department of Agricultural
Economics, 541 24, Greece.
Olga Iakovidou (olg@agro.auth.gr) is a Professor at the Aristotle
University of Thessaloniki, Department of Agricultural Economics, 541
24, Greece.