Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T05:18:54.159Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating the Demand for Wine Using Instrumental Variable Techniques*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2012

Steven S. Cuellar  and
Ryan Huffman
Steven S. Cuellar
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Sonoma State University, 1801 East Cotati Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928, Tel. (707) 664–2305, email: Steve.Cuellar@Sonoma.edu (contact author)
Ryan Huffman
Affiliation:
Research Economist, Sonoma Research Associates, Glen Ellen, CA 95442, Tel. (707) 320–9153, email: huffman.ryan@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The demand for wine is generally estimated on an aggregate level as a single commodity. However, as recent history shows us, the demand for wine not only varies considerably by varietal, but also by price point within each varietal. As a result, although estimates of the demand for wine may be beneficial to the wine industry as a whole, they provide little benefit to individual wine producers. Using scan data of purchases from US retail chain stores, this paper uses store keeping unit (sku) level data to overcome the limitations of prior research on the demand for wine by providing estimates for the demand for wine by varietal and price point. We also provide estimates of own price effects, income effects by color, varietal and price segment. Problems of endogeneity inherent in demand estimation are corrected by utilizing a novel instrumental variable technique using grape prices as the instrument. (JEL Classification: C23, D12)

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Wine Economics , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , Winter 2008 , pp. 172 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © American Association of Wine Economists 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baltagi, B. and Griffin, J.M. (1995). A dynamic model for liquor: the case for pooling. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(3) 545–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltagi, B. and Griffin, J.M. (2002). Rational addiction to alcohol: panel data analysis of liquor consumption. Health Economics, 11, 485–491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buccola, S.T. and VanderZanden, L. (1997). Wine demand, price strategy and tax policy. Review of Agricultural Economics, 19(2), 428–440.Google Scholar
Bureau of Economic Analysis (2002–2005). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. Data extracted from the Bureau of Economics Analysis web site: www.bea.gov.Google Scholar
California Department of Food and Agriculture (2000–2006). Final Grape Crush Report. Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
Costanigro, M., McCluskey, J.J. and Mittelhammer, R.C. (2007). Segmenting the wine market based on price: hedonic regression when different prices mean different products. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58(3), 454–466.Google Scholar
Folwell, R.J. and Baritelle, J.L. (1978). The U.S. wine market. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rep. ESCS-2.Google Scholar
Gomberg-Frederickson Report (2005). Gomberg-Frederickson Wine Industry Consultants, 231 Ware Road, Suite 823, Woodside, CA 94062–4538.Google Scholar
Grossman, M., Chaloupka, F.J. and Sirtalan, I. (1998). An empirical analysis of alcohol addiction results from the monitoring the future panels. Economic Inquiry, 36(1), 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, J. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251–1271.Google Scholar
Heien, D. and Pomelli, G. (1989). The demand for alcoholic beverages: economic and demographic effects. Southern Economic Journal, 55, 759–770.Google Scholar
Nelson, J.P. (2003). Advertising bans, monopoly, and alcohol demand: testing for substitution effects using state panel data. Review of Industrial Organization, 22, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar