Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

The business model and sustainability in the Spanish wine sector

Juan R. Ferrer a, María Carmen García-Cortijo b, *, Vicente Pinilla c,
Juan Sebastián Castillo-Valero b
a
ETSI Agronómica, Alimentaria y Biosistemas, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Av. Puerta de Hierro, nº 2, 4, 28040, Madrid, Spain
b
Instituto de Desarrollo Regional, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Campus Universitario s/n, 02071, Albacete, Spain
c
Universidad de Zaragoza, Department of Applied Economics, and Agro-Food Institute of Aragón (IA2), Gran Vía, 2, 50005, Zaragoza, Spain

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling Editor: Bin Chen The literature on business models and sustainability is vast but fragmented across many studies. This article seeks
to unify the diverse contributions, proposing a sustainable business model archetype. With a sample of 411
Keywords: Spanish wineries and using the Mann-Whitney U test, we have detected a difference between wineries in terms of
Spanish wine industry their sustainability, identifying two business models, one of high sustainability and another of low sustainability.
Business model
The high sustainability business model is based on the ownership of a vineyard, the production of bottled wine,
Sustainability
sales in retail stores, supermarkets or through intermediaries, a better online position than the competition, a
positioning in the premium segment and exports. The business model of a less sustainable winery is based on the
sale of bulk wine in the low-price segment and an unawareness of where the wine is sold.

1. -Introduction
The development of economic activity in the twenty-first century has
incorporated at least two new elements that form a kind of paradigm
that companies should contemplate in their operations: the Business
Model (Ferrer et al., 2020; Ouvrard, 2020), and sustainability (Pomarici
and Vecchio, 2019; UN, 2019).
The Business Model (BM) has emerged as a concept based on the
development of online business (Wirtz et al., 2016; Zott et al., 2011).
There is no exact definition of the concept of the BM, although it is
concerned with how the company creates value for the consumer and
how it is able to appropriate a part of this value for itself (Osterwalder
and Pigneur, 2010; Wirtz et al., 2016). The BM includes elements of
previous theories, such as resources and capabilities and business
strategy, but adds new elements, such as the process of creating and
capturing value (Massa et al., 2017; Zott et al., 2011).
On the other hand, the concept of sustainability emerged for the first
time in 1987, with the Brundtland Report, and seeks social and eco­
nomic progress that ensures a healthy and productive life for human
beings but which does not compromise the capacity of future genera­
tions (Bermejo, 2014; Moscovici and Reed, 2018): “Sustainable develop­
ment has been defined as the development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs.” (UN, 2021). However, a series of ambiguous and distorted def­
initions of the concept have also arisen. Some authors defend that sus­
tainability and development are two antagonistic concepts (Bermejo,
2014; Ruggerio, 2021). Despite these inconsistencies, it has become a
cardinal concept for governments and institutions and the focus of one of
the principal objectives of the United Nations and its 17 Sustainable
Development Goals programme (UN, 2021). In terms of its scope, the UN
defends that “it is crucial to harmonize three core elements: economic
growth, social inclusion and environmental protection”.
Sustainability is, therefore, a concept to which the activities carried
out by human beings should adapt in order to ensure the future of the
next generations. The wine sector, as a large part of the agro-food in­
dustry, faces the challenge of attaining sustainability (De Steur et al.,
2019; Santini et al., 2013).
Furthermore, wine consumers are becoming increasingly interested
in the ecological aspects of the winemaking business. Therefore, the
concept of sustainability and the environmental policies of the com­
panies have a positive influence on the purchasing behaviour of the
consumers (Fiore et al., 2021). However, this sector is characterised by
certain differential elements that bring it closer to the concept of sus­
tainability which have been referred to in different studies. Like all
agricultural activities, it involves the exploitation of the natural envi­
ronment for the production of food or raw materials. Therefore, its

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: juanramon.ferrer@upm.es (J.R. Ferrer), mariacarmen.gcortijo@uclm.es (M.C. García-Cortijo), vpinilla@unizar.es (V. Pinilla), sebastian.
castillo@uclm.es (J.S. Castillo-Valero).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129810
Received 13 August 2021; Received in revised form 12 November 2021; Accepted 22 November 2021
Available online 24 November 2021
0959-6526/© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
J.R. Ferrer et al.
performance is strongly influenced by climate, heatwaves, drought,
frosts, hail, torrential rains, increasing average temperature, etc. (Marx
et al., 2017). Vine growing is frequently developed on land where it is
not possible to cultivate any other crops (Barbosa et al., 2018; Ferrer
et al., 2020). Winemaking helps to maintain the population of rural
areas (Brugerolas et al., 2010) and it is a business with a long historical
tradition in which there is a significant transmission of values (OIV,
2021; Szolnoki, 2013). Furthermore, it is closely related to cultural and
family values (Broccardo and Zicari, 2020; Flores, 2018).
There are very few studies that attempt to measure the sustainability
of the business models in the agro-food industry (Barth et al., 2021).
Moreover, there are very few studies that jointly analyse sustainability
and the BM for the wine industry, with two exceptions: the study by
Broccardo and Zicari (2020) in Italy and the study by Ouvrard et al.
(2020) analysing eleven wineries in Italy and France.
Within this context, the objective of this study is to determine which
type of BM is implemented by those companies more inclined to develop
sustainable policies. Therefore, we seek to verify that the BM can be
contemplated as a driver of sustainability (Ouvrard et al., 2020). To do
this, we will follow the approach to the BM proposed by Casade­
sus-Masanell and Ricart (2010), who understand that the BM contem­
plates the decisions that the company adopts in its value chain and the
consequences that these decisions have on it. This approach has been
taken in previous studies on the BM of the wine sector in Spain (Ferrer
et al., 2020) and in the USA (Ferrer and Villanueva, 2021). We will
analyse elements of the value chain, such as the ownership of the
vineyard, the type of wine made, the packaging, the market segment
targeted, the marketing methods, the relations established by the com­
pany, exports, and their performance. The novelty of this research is that
it analyses the whole value chain and its relationship with sustainability
in the wine sector.
This article is structured as follows. The following section conducts a
literature review and establishes the hypotheses to be verified with our
empirical study; the third section presents the methodology used; the
fourth part discusses the results obtained and the final section draws the
main conclusions.
2. Literature review and hypothesis
2.1. Literature review
2.1.1. Sustainability
For any activity to be considered sustainable it should contemplate
three aspects: economic feasibility, the preservation of the natural
environment and social equity and progress (OIV, 2016). However, the
majority of studies on sustainability do not contemplate all three factors
and focus exclusively on the environmental dimension of sustainability
(Merli et al., 2018; Moscovici and Reed, 2018). This circumstance
generates confusion for both the consumers and the managers of the
companies with respect to how they manage sustainability (Sell­
ers-Rubio and Nicolau-Gonzalbez, 2016; Szolnoki, 2013). One of the
reasons for this lack of clarity regarding what sustainability should
include is derived from the first studies exclusively analysing the envi­
ronmental dimension. However, the principal international organisa­
tions, such as the European Union (EU), the World Bank (BM), the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) reaffirm that
sustainability should encompass all three dimensions: economic, social,
and environmental (Bermejo, 2014).
The winemaking sector is strongly associated with environmental
sustainability due to the fact that it is developed on the soil where plant
life develops and it depends on the climate and its variations. However,
at the same time, it produces a series of negative impacts on the envi­
ronment, including the use of the land, the consumption of water, en­
ergy, pesticides, the generation of wastewater, waste, and the carbon
footprint of its activity and, particularly transport (Ayuda et al., 2020;
2
Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810
Corbo et al., 2014).
At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the wine sector began to
contemplate sustainable practices (De Steur et al., 2019; Gilinsky et al.,
2016) and articles were published that analysed the sustainability of the
sector, the majority mixing the green business, organic, sustainable or
biodynamic concepts (Santini et al., 2013). The winemaking sector has
acknowledged the close connection that it has with sustainability and
the influence that this can have on its future development. In fact, the
extension of the sustainability paradigm and the awareness of its man­
agers led the most important organisation of the sector, the International
Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) to adopt the definition and prin­
ciples of sustainability applied to vitiviniculture. In this respect, since
2004, the OIV has developed, with adaptations in 2008 and 2016, a
series of guidelines for winemaking businesses and contemplates sus­
tainability as the “global strategy on the scale of the grape production and
processing systems, incorporating at the same time the economic sustain­
ability of structures and territories, producing quality products, considering
requirements of precision in sustainable viticulture, risks to the environment,
products safety and consumer health and valuing of heritage, historical,
cultural, ecological and aesthetic aspects.” (OIV, 2021). In one of its most
recent statements, the OIV particularly emphasises the importance of
the sustainable use of water in wine making (OIV, 2021).
2.1.2. The business model
One of the first definitions of the business model was proposed by
Timmers (1998). It states that the BM has three dimensions: 1) the ar­
chitecture of the product or service and how the information flows be­
tween the different actors and their roles, 2) the description of the
potential benefits of the different actors, and 3) a description of the
sources of income. For Christensen et al. (2016) the most renowned
definition appears in the study by Teece (2010): “a business model ar­
ticulates the logic, data, and other evidence that support a value proposition
for the customer, and a viable revenue and cost structure for the company that
delivers that value”. The broadness of the definition has made it difficult
to determine what should be contemplated or omitted when studying
BMs (Christensen et al., 2016; Massa et al., 2017). There are also doubts
regarding the field in which the concept can be applied, whether in the
classification of companies, as an explanatory element of performance
or an element of potential innovation (Foss and Saebi, 2017). Other
authors question whether this is a new concept or simply an evolution of
the classic analysis of business strategy (Massa et al., 2017).
The study of the BM as a strategic positioning element forms the basis
of different studies such as those of Zott and Amit (2007), Casade­
sus-Masanell and Ricart (2010) or Ferrer et al. (2020) which relates BMs
to decisions in the value chain. The design and implementation of the
BM considers the activities that the company carries out and the
connection between these activities. It is made up of two parts: the
concrete actions that the company carries out (decision-making process)
and the consequences of these actions (performance) (Casadesus-Ma­
sanell and Ricart, 2010).
BMs in the wine industry have been studied by various authors
(Ferrer and Villanueva, 2021; Giraud, 2014; Pezzillo et al., 2016), with
different perspectives and scopes, and in different locations (Spain,
France, Italy, U.S.A., Australia). However, studies on the BM and sus­
tainability are rare, although some perceive the BM as a driver of sus­
tainability. Of the little research existing in this respect, we can highlight
the study by Broccardo and Zicari (2020) in Italy of 106 companies and
the influence of the BM of the family or non-family business on sus­
tainability. The study by Ouvrard et al. (2020) on the relationship be­
tween sustainability and BM comprises a qualitative analysis of 11
wineries in France and Italy. This author analyses the business trend
towards sustainability and the level of performance, resources, innova­
tion and value created. This work recommends quantitative studies to
learn more about the relationship between the BM and sustainability.
In order to analyse the BM in this article, the decisions adopted by
the winery in its value chain are studied (Christensen et al., 2016). The
J.R. Ferrer et al.
Fig. 1. Value chain, primary activities and BM.
Source: Adapted by the authors for the wine industry based on Porter (1985).
value chain can be defined as the series of activities that are developed
by the company to design, produce, market, deliver and support its
product to create value for its costumers (Porter, 1985). The activities
can be classified as primary or secondary. The primary activities are
those that are related to the creation of the product, its sale, transfer to
the buyer and after-sales service. Secondary activities are those that
support the primary activities, such as human resources or technological
development (Porter, 1985).
In this study we will focus on the primary activities, following pre­
vious research (Ferrer et al., 2020; Ferrer and Villanueva, 2021). We will
analyse seven elements of the primary value chain: production method,
type of wine made, packaging, market segment, distribution, exports
and network relations (Fig. 1). These seven elements correspond to the
four activities referred to by Porter as primary. Production method, type
of wine made, and packaging would be included in Porter’s inbound
logistics and operations. Meanwhile, market segment, distribution, ex­
ports and network relations would belong to outbound logistics, mar­
keting and sales, and service of Porter’s value chain.
Furthermore, we will analyse the effect that these decisions have on
the sustainability of the company and its performance; a fundamental
component of sustainability.
2.2. Hypothesis
In order to establish hypotheses, we have analysed previous studies
and have related the decisions adopted by the companies throughout
their value chain with their propensity to develop sustainability prac­
tices. The elements of the value chain studied are the following: the use
of the soil to cultivate vines, the type of wine made, whether it is a
varietal wine or not, the type of packaging, the segment targeted, the
distribution and whether it is exported or sold in the domestic market.
Fig. 1 shows the activities of the value chain, central activities, those
analysed in this study and their relationship with the BM.
First, with respect to the production method, we have analysed
whether the wineries had their own vineyard or not. Those wineries that
have their own vineyard are able to implement programmes to reduce
water consumption and chemical exposure. They can manage water and
energy availability or use ecological and biodynamic practices and are,
therefore, closer to achieving sustainability in their operations (Ouvrard
et al., 2020; Pomarici and Vecchio, 2019).
H1. Those wineries with a BM that contemplates the ownership of a
vineyard will be more prone to developing sustainability policies.
Wineries in Spain, on the whole, produce four types of wine: red,
white, rosé and sparkling wine (MAPA, 2020). Consumers express
concern about the sustainability of the wineries and prefer environ­
mentally friendly wine, irrespective of the variety or type. However, in
many cases they are not able to discern these wines because they do not
3
Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810
know the meaning of the different denominations and are not confident
that there is a correlation between the denomination and the sustain­
ability practices of the winery (Flores, 2018; Moscovici and Reed, 2018).
H2. The fact that a winery makes red, white, rosé or sparkling wine is
not decisive for it to be more prone to developing sustainability policies.
H3. The fact that a winery makes varietal or non-varietal wine is not
decisive for it to be more prone to developing sustainability policies.
The wineries that present their product unbottled, marketing bulk
wine or “bag in box” wine, are companies that implement sustainability
practices as they reduce transport costs, emissions and the waste
generated (Santini et al., 2013).
H4. The wineries with a BM that contemplates the sale of bulk wine or
“bag in box” wine will be more prone to developing sustainability pol­
icies than those that market bottled wine.
In order to improve their sustainability, companies must enhance
their technology and innovation. However, it has also been shown that
this improvement is influenced by their capacity to establish ties with
consumers and suppliers, that is, horizontal networks and also with
competitors and institutions (Stasi et al., 2016; De Steur et al., 2019). At
the same time, companies must use different forms of distribution that
are compatible: the HORECA channel (hotels, restaurants and catering),
the food channel, the winery’s direct channel, internet, intermediaries.
In some cases, wineries are unaware of how their product reaches the
consumer (Ferrer et al., 2020). Those that favour differentiation,
avoiding channels with less value added, such as supermarkets, hyper­
markets and superstores will have a greater possibility of developing
sustainability policies.
H5. Those wineries with a BM that contemplates the development of
network relationships will be more prone to developing sustainability
policies.
H6. Those wineries with a distribution that contemplates channels
with a higher value added, avoiding superstores, hypermarkets and
supermarkets will be more prone to developing sustainability policies.
The international market has shown a greater sensitivity to sustain­
able wine in recent years. This favours the entrance into new markets of
wineries that seek to improve the sustainability of their products (Bar­
bosa et al., 2018; Schäufele and Hamm, 2017).
H7. Those wineries with a BM that contemplates the export of their
wines will be more prone to developing sustainability policies.
The managers of the companies and the consumers are aware that
applying sustainability policies has a larger cost for the company, as it
implies acquiring specific resources in technology, innovation and
human resources, which means that they have to charge higher prices
(De Steur et al., 2019; Muñoz et al., 2021). At the same time, the
J.R. Ferrer et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810

Table 1 May 2021 had been given to 32 wineries (FEV, 2021). The association
The socio-demographic features of the 411 respondent companies. Spanish Organic Wine groups together small wineries that make organic
Mean Std. Dev. Min. Max. wine and promotes these wines abroad due to the difficulties encoun­
tered in the domestic market. In May 2021, there were 39 associated
Age (years of operation) 34.59 34.14 1 293
Number of permanent employees 9.53 16.57 0 150 wineries (Spanish Organic Wine, 2021). It seems, therefore, that
Assets (x1000€) 5574 12,061 3.53 59,560 although the first steps have been taken, there is still a long way to go for
Production of wine (hl) 37,073 229,776 0 4,000,000 wine and wineries to be positioned as sustainable and enjoy the ad­
Exports of wine (hl) 16,477 89,940 0 1,200,000 vantages of being recognised as such by the consumer (Sellers-Rubio and
Source: Author’s own elaboration Nicolau-Gonzalbez, 2016).

consumers of the premium market segment are more sensitive to sus­
tainable products and are willing to pay more for them (Pomarici and
Vecchio, 2019; Sellers-Rubio and Nicolau-Gonzalbez, 2016).
H8. Those wineries with a BM that contemplates making wine for the
premium segments will be more prone to developing sustainability
policies.
2.3. Case study. Spanish wine sector
Spain is the country with the largest area of vineyards in the world
with 961 mha in 2020, although in terms of production, it holds third
place with 40.7 mhl after Italy (49.1 mhl) and France (46.6 mhl). It is
also the country with the largest increase in volume produced in 2020
with respect to that of 2019, specifically by 7.0 mhl (+21%) as opposed
to the 1.5 mhl (+3%) of Italy and the 4.4 mhl (+11%) of France.
Furthermore, for Spain, the volume of production in 2020 grew by 8%
with respect to the previous five-year average. In Italy the volume of
production had similar values and in France the increase was +6% (OIV,
2021). With respect to consumption, there has been a strong declining
trend beginning in the mid-1970s, when it reached a maximum of 70 L
per capita, to the present day with 15 L (Fernández and Pinilla, 2018). In
recent years, there has been a reduction in consumption in absolute
terms in Spain from 14mhl in 2000 to 9.6 mhl in 2020. The fall in
consumption has pushed companies to sell the majority of their pro­
duction in foreign markets (Serrano et al., 2018).
Spain’s organic wine is arousing increasing interest due to the efforts
to promote a more sustainable agriculture. The annual growth rate of
Spain’s area of ecological vineyards in 2019 was 7% reaching 121,290
ha, accounting for 13% of the country’s total vineyard area and 26.9% of
the world’s ecological production area. Spain holds the first position in
terms of the area of ecological vineyard, above Italy, France and China.
This type of crop has not stopped growing in recent years, with a sus­
tained expansion of hectares: between 2009 and 2019, the area of
ecological vineyards almost tripled, from 53,958 to 121,279 ha.
Furthermore, the number of wineries making this type of organic wine
has risen from 408 to 1,152, representing 13.9% of total wineries
(Español del Mercado del Vino, 2019).
However, one of the elements which has proved to be relevant for
consumers is the identification of organic or sustainable wine. This has
yet to be fully developed and an example of this are the existing certi­
fications. The Spanish Wine Federation (FEV) grants sustainability
accreditation with the name “Wineries for Climate Protection” which, in
3. Materials and methods
The database used is made up of companies that operate in Spain and
whose economic activity is winemaking (code 1102 of Spain’s National
Registry of Economic Activities, 2009). The data were obtained through
surveys carried out in 2020 and 2021. After sending the questionnaire
via email to the different companies (Ortega, 2010; Spanos and Lioukas,
2001), the authors waited for one month to receive a response and if
during that time none was received a follow-up reminder call was made.
The final sample was made up of 411 valid responses which represents a
rate of response of 14% of 2.977. This is similar to the amount reported
by Baruch and Holtom (2008) for the industrial sector. This number does
not have problems of significance for the statistical results because the
sample error is 0.045 which is considered appropriate for the study.
The companies surveyed were predominantly wineries with exten­
sive experience in the sector, small in size (measured by the number of
workers and their assets), and with 44% of their turnover corresponding
to exports, as we can see in Table 1.
3.1. Dependent variable
As the objective of the study is to identify which type of BM drives or
induces sustainability, a measure of sustainability YSOSTENIBILIDAD, i was
constituted, resulting from the sum of three items YVINOE, i+ YHUELLA, i+
YRSC, i., which are respectively: 1) the making of organic wines in the
winery, YVINOE (Schäufele and Hamm, 2017; Szolnoki, 2013), 2) concern
about the carbon footprint, YHUELLA, (Merli et al., 2018; Pomarici and
Vecchio, 2019), and 3) corporate social responsibility, YRSC (Muñoz
et al., 2021). Each item assessed the interest of the company in this
environmental measure through a Likert scale, where 1 is a low level of
interest and 5 a high level of interest (Table 2).
The variability of YSOSTENIBILIDAD, indicates that the companies show
different degrees of sustainability, the origin of which we will attempt to
determine with the variables of section 3.2.
3.1.1. Independent variables
The variables of the BM that explain the different degrees of sus­
tainability of the wineries are shown in Table 3. They have been chosen
based on the studies analysed in section 2.2.
4. Results
In order to explain the variability of the Sustainability,

Table 2
Description and statistics of the sustainability variable (Grouped variable).
Grouped variable Description Mean Standard Minimum Maximum
deviation

Organic wine The wineries scored their interest in Organic Wine as an environmental measure on a scale of 1–5 3.48 1317 1 5
YVINOE where 1 was a low level of interest and 5 a very high level of interest.
Carbon footprint The wineries scored their interest in the calculation of the carbon footprint on a scale of 1–5 where 1 3.80 1014 1 5
YHUELLA was a low level of interest and 5 a very high level of interest.
Corporate The wineries scored their interest in adopting this measure on a scale of 1–5 where 1 was a low level 3.55 1118 1 5
Responsibility of interest and 5 a very high level of interest.
YRSC,
YSOSTENIBILIDAD, YVINOE, i+ YHUELLA, i+ YRSC, i 10.83 2952 3 15

4
J.R. Ferrer et al.
Table 3
Description of the variables of the business model.
Primary activities Independent variable Description of the independent
variables
INTERNAL Vineyard ownership If the company has its own
LOGISTICS vineyard for production it takes
value 1; 0 otherwise.
OPERATIONS Production of red wine If the company produces red wine
it takes value 1; 0 otherwise.
Production of rosé wine If the company produces rosé
wine it takes value 1; 0 otherwise.
Production of white If the company produces white
wine wine it takes value 1; 0 otherwise.
Production of sparkling If the company produces
wine sparkling wine it takes value 1;
0 otherwise.
Production of varietal If the company produces varietal
wine wine it takes value 1; 0 otherwise.
Production of bulk wine If the company produces bulk
wine it takes value 1; 0 otherwise.
Production of bottled If the company produces bottled
wine wine it takes value 1; 0 otherwise.
INTERNAL Sales in hotels, bars and Takes the value of 1 if the
LOGISTICS restaurants company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
Sales in retail stores, Takes the value of 1 if the
supermarkets, internet. company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
Direct sale to Takes the value of 1 if the
intermediaries company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
Sales on internet Takes the value of 1 if the
platforms company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
Sales in supermarkets Takes the value of 1 if the
and hypermarkets company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
Direct sales of the Takes the value of 1 if the
winery company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
5
Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810
Table 3 (continued )
Primary activities Independent variable Description of the independent
variables
Unaware of where the Takes the value of 1 if the
wine is sold company does not sell in these
places, the value of 2 if it sells
between 0 and 25%, the value of
3 if it sells between 25% and
50%, the value of 4 if it sells
between 50% and 75% and the
value of 5 if it sells more than
75%.
Network resources Takes the value of 1 if the
company has a position that is
much worse than the
competition, the value of 2 if the
position is worse, the value of 3 if
the position is the same, the value
of 4 if it is better and the value of
5 if it is much better than that of
the competition.
MARKETING AND Exports If the company exports its
SALES production it takes value 1;
0 otherwise.
Value If the company produces value
wine (less than €8), it takes the
value 1; 0 otherwise.
Popular premium If the company produces popular
premium wine (between €8 and
€13), it takes the value 1;
0 otherwise.
Premium If the company produces
premium wine (over € 13), it
takes the value 3; 0 otherwise.
ECONOMIC Economic Profitability Takes the value of 1 if
PERFORMANCE (ROA = Return on profitability is less than 1, the
Assets), value of 2 if it is between 5% and
15%, the value of 3 between 15%
and 25%, the value of 4 between
25% and 35%, the value of 5
between 35% and 45% and the
value of 6 if it is over 45%.
Growth of production If production is falling it takes the
value of 1. If it is constant it takes
the value of 2 and the value of 3 if
it is increasing.
YSOSTENIBILIDAD, of the wineries, an independent sample test has been
carried out (Ferrer et al., 2020). For the grouping variable, YSOSTENIBI­
LIDAD, group 1 is distinguished for values with YSOSTENIBILIDAD<10 and
group 2 for values YSOSTENIBILIDAD ≥ 10, as it is the average value of
variable YSOSTENIBILIDAD. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, with a level of
significance below 0.05, shows that the variables to test do not follow a
normal distribution (Table 4, column 2). Therefore, the type of test used
for two independent samples is the Mann-Whitney U test. In the results
of the Mann-Whitney U Test (Table 4, columns 3, 4 and 5), values of
bilateral asymptotic significance lower than 0.05 indicate that there is
no compatibility between the hypothesis of equality of population
means and, therefore, there are differences between the means of the
groups represented. In other words, between companies with a low level
of sustainability YSOSTENIBILIDAD<10 and companies with a high level of
sustainability YSOSTENIBILIDAD ≥ 10. The variables that determine the
difference between the groups (asymptotic significance ≤ 0.05) are: the
ownership of a vineyard by the winery, the production of bulk wine, the
production of bottled wine, the sale to intermediaries, the availability of
better network resources, exports, the target segment of the product
(value, popular premium or premium) and the trend of production. With a
significance of over 0.05, but lower than 0.10, it is worth pointing out
the production of rosé wine, the sale in retail stores or supermarkets and
the unawareness of where the wine is sold.
The highest mean range of each significant variable (Table 4, col­
umns 6 and 7) will determine the influence of this on the variable
J.R. Ferrer et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810

Table 4
Kolmogorov- Smirnov Test, Mann-Whitney U Test and rank-sum test.
Primary activities Independent Statistic of the Asymptotic Mann- Z (4) Asymptotic Rank-sum test of Rank-sum test of
variables Kolmogorov- significance Whitney U significance sustainability <10 sustainability >10
Smirnov Test (1) (bilateral) (2) test (3) (bilateral) (5) (6) (7)

INTERNAL Vineyard ownership 0.511 0.000c 13.839 − 2.470 0.014a 177.80 196.78b
LOGISTICS
OPERATIONS Production of red 0.523 0.000c 14,857.5 − 0.910 0.363 186.58 192.93
wine
Production of rosé 0.378 0.000c 13,965.5 − 1.657 0.098a 178.89 196.30b
wine
Production of white 0.515 0.000c 14,559.5 − 1.346 0.178 184.01 194.06
wine
c
Production of 0.495 0.000 14,374.5 − 1.476 0.140 182.42 194.76
sparkling wine
Production of 0.477 0.000c 14,298 − 1.100 0.271 195.24 185.49
varietal wine
Production of bulk 0.439 0.000c 13,225 − 2.559 0.011a 208.00b 182.91
wine
c a
Production of 0.530 0.000 14,897.5 − 1.955 0.051 187.54 191.78b
bottled wine
EXTERNAL Sales in hotels, bars 0.278 0.000c 12,149 − 1.449 0.147 165.95 182.00
LOGISTICS and restaurants
Sales in retail stores, 0.404 0.000c 10,535.5 − 1.657 0.09a 155.86 171.09b
internet.
Direct sale to 0.217 0.000c 8242 − 2.635 0.008a 135.62 164.02b
intermediaries
Sales on internet 0.360 0.000c 7984 − 1.032 0.302 136.34 145.17
platforms
Sales in 0.263 0.000c 7589 − 0.509 0.611 134.05 138.97
supermarkets and
hypermarkets
Direct sales of the 0.398 0.000c 11,723 − 0.791 0.429 175.78 168.17
winery
c a b
Unaware of where 0.472 0.000 133 − 1.673 0.09 22.00 18.04
the wine is sold
Network resources 0.254 0.000c 12,450 − 2.732 0.006a 166.27 196.93b
MARKETING AND Exports 0.170 0.000c 10,890 − 3.558 0.000a 154.50 196.62b
SALES Value 0,415 0.000c 12,738 − 3.386 0.001a 216.69b 182.03
Popular premium 0.361 0.000c 14,686 − 0.995 0.320 185.10 195.70
Premium 0.502 0.000c 13,578 − 2.995 0.003a 175.55 199.84b
ECONOMIC Economic 0.238 0.000c 10,114 − 1.256 0.209 149.75 162.79
PERFORMANCE Profitability (ROA
= Return on Assets),
Growth trend of 0.259 0.000c 13,227 − 2.166 0.030a 173.02 197.40b
production
a
The hypothesis of an equality of means is rejected.
b
Significant sustainability group.
c
Lillierfors significance correction.

YSOSTENIBILIDAD, differentiating between two groups, that of low sus­ 5. Discussion

tainability (YSOSTENIBILIDAD<10) and that of high sustainability (YSOS­
TENIBILIDAD ≥ 10).
Therefore, the most sustainable companies own their own vineyard,
they do not make any special wines, either varietal or non-varietal, they
make bottled wine (disregarding bulk wine), sell through in­
termediaries, have better network resources, they export, focus on the
premium segment, avoiding the more economic segments, and finally,
they are growing more than the non-sustainable companies although
there is no difference in their economic profitability. These results lead
us to accept Hypotheses H1 (own vineyard), H2 (no specific type of wine
is necessary), H3 (whether a wine is varietal or not is not a determinant
factor), H5 (positive network relationships), H7 (exports) and H8 (pre­
mium segment). On the other hand, we reject Hypotheses H4, as there is
no relationship between the sale of bulk wine and sustainability and also
H6, as no relationship is found between a specific distribution (food,
HORECA or direct sales) and sustainability. Fig. 2 shows the business
models of the sustainable and non-sustainable companies in accordance
with the significance found in the results presented in Table 4.
Sustainability and the BM are two of the basic paradigms explaining
the economic activity of companies in recent years (Ferrer et al., 2020;
Ouvrard et al., 2020). Although the two concepts are fully accepted,
there are large gaps in terms of their application and the elements that
should be considered (Massa et al., 2017; Wirtz et al., 2016). The BM can
be understood as being the model used by the company to create value
and capture part of this value for itself (Amit, 2001), which includes the
decisions that the company adopts throughout its value chain and their
consequences (Casadesus-Masanell and Ricart, 2010). On the other
hand, sustainability is understood as the development able to satisfy the
needs of the present without compromising the capacity of future gen­
erations to satisfy their needs and should harmonize three elements;
economic development, environmental protection and social equity
(UN, 2021). The wine sector has a special relationship with sustain­
ability. It is concerned with biological processes and is particularly
sensitive to the effects of climate change, such as droughts, floods, cold
snaps, heatwaves, etc. However, it also has a clear impact on the envi­
ronment in fundamental aspects, such as the use of land, the use of
water, pesticides, energy and waste (Ayuda et al., 2020; Marx et al.,
2017). Nevertheless, despite being two paradigmatic concepts in the

6
J.R. Ferrer et al.
Fig. 2. BM of a winery.
twenty-first century, there are hardly any studies on the relationship
between the two, except for those of Broccardo and Zicari (2020) and
Ouvrard et al. (2020). This study seeks to determine which BM favours
sustainability, understanding the BM as the series of decisions made by
wineries in their value chain. To do this, following the outline of the
value chain, we have studied a series of business decisions (see Fig. 1): 1)
The production method, 2) the type of wine made, whether it is varietal
or not and its form of presentation, 3) the external relations that the
company has and its method of distribution, and 4) the target markets
and segments. The analysis is complemented with two basic elements of
sustainability, often forgotten in favour of the environmental aspects,
namely, economic growth and the obtaining of positive economic re­
sults. The tendency to be more or less sustainable has been analysed
through the inclination of the winery to make organic products, their
concern for their carbon footprint and CSR.
The results indicate the existence of two different business models
with respect to sustainability. The sustainable model is based on several
factors. The first is crop management which incorporates the manage­
ment of environmental aspects (Ouvrard et al., 2020). Second, com­
panies implementing this model produce bottled wine, disregarding
bulk wine. This may seem contradictory, as the carbon footprint of the
product is increased (Santini et al., 2013), but it favours the destination
of the product in a segment that values sustainability more highly. A
third factor on which this model is based is exports and, finally, in this
model we can find a specialisation in the production of premium wine
(Schäufele and Hamm, 2017; Sogari et al., 2017). On the other hand,
sustainability highlights the need to understand, influence and have
good relationships with the network actors operating in the distribution
and marketing of the product (De Steur et al., 2019 Stasi et al., 2016).
On the other hand, the less sustainable business model does not
include the control of the production phase of the vineyards, it is focused
on the packaging of bulk wine, not for environmental reasons, but in
order to save in distribution costs, targeting segments in which the
making of sustainable wine is not highly valued by the consumer (De
Steur et al., 2019; Pomarici and Vecchio, 2019).
This study has different implications. One novel contribution is that
it enables us to determine which BM, from the point of view of the value
7
Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810
chain, is related to sustainability. In other words, how can the imple­
mentation and monitoring of sustainability policies be favourable within
the winemaking sector. However, the study also highlights that sus­
tainability implies the whole value chain of wine. The companies that
develop sustainability strategies clearly participate in the whole process,
from the planting and winemaking to the choice of markets and distri­
bution. The wineries with a segmented participation, either because
they do not produce or do not analyse and select their possible distrib­
utors or customers, display less sustainable practices. Last, but not least,
we should point out that the companies that develop sustainability
strategies report higher growth are better able to meet the preferences of
the market.
With respect to the theoretical implications, this study confirms the
role that the BM has as a driver of sustainability, an element which has
been noted in the studies by Broccardo and Zicari (2020) and Ouvrard
et al. (2020). This article also reveals that sustainability is attained
through a company’s strategic planning; the same planning that gen­
erates the BM. It is essential, therefore that the management has a desire
to direct the firm towards sustainability. Other studies have indicated
the importance of the management and its involvement in sustainability
(Corbo et al., 2014).
6. Conclusions
Sustainability and the BM are two basic elements of business man­
agement. This is even more the case in the winemaking sector because as
an agricultural activity is involved in the production of wine there is a
strong link with the territory and its conservation. Although sustain­
ability and the BM are two fundamental elements, there are hardly any
studies that relate one with the other, even though a strong connection
exists between them. The objective of this study is to establish which
business model is most likely to lead to the development of sustainability
practices. Based on a study of 411 wineries in Spain, the results conclude
that there is a differentiated business model with a tendency to develop
sustainability policies. A more sustainable BM is based on upstream
integration, it is independent of the type of wine produced (red, white,
rosé, sparkling or varietal or non-varietal), it has greater network
J.R. Ferrer et al.
resources, it markets through intermediaries, it exports and targets a
premium market segment. Therefore, specialisation and market seg­
mentation are important in this respect. However, direct marketing or
the type of wine produced are not significant. Selling wine in bulk is a
disadvantage for adopting sustainability practices.
Finally, the study highlights how the wineries that focus on sus­
tainability are growing more than their competitors and paving the way
towards competitive advantage. This opens up a very interesting horizon
for linking economic sustainability with environmental sustainability in
the commitment to fighting against climate change.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Juan R. Ferrer: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data
curation, Data collection, Writing – original draft, Writing. María Car­
men García-Cortijo: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data
curation, Data collection, Writing – original draft, Writing. Vicente
Pinilla: Visualization, Investigation, Supervision, Validation. Juan
Sebastián Castillo-Valero: Visualization, Investigation, Supervision,
Validation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This study has received financial support from the FEDER- Interreg
SUDOE Project SOE3/P2/F0917, VINCI (Wine, Innovation an Interna­
tional Competitiveness), the Ministry of Science and Innovation of the
Spanish Government (project PGC 2018-095529-B-I00) and by the
Department of Science, University and Knowledge Society of the Gov­
ernment of Aragon (Research Group S55_20R).
References
Amit, R., y Zott, C., 2001. Value creation in e-business. Strat. Manag. J. 22 (6/7),
493–520.
Ayuda, M.I., Esteban, E., Martín-Retortillo, M., Pinilla, V., 2020. The blue water footprint
of the Spanish wine industry: 1935-2015. Water 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/
w12071872, 1872.
Barbosa, F.S., Scavarda, A.J., Sellitto, M.A., Marques, D.I.L., 2018. Sustainability in the
winemaking industry: an analysis of Southern Brazilian companies based on a
literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 192, 80–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2018.04.253.
Barth, H., Ulvenblad, P., Ulvenblad, P., Hoveskog, M., 2021. Unpacking sustainable
business models in the Swedish agricultural sector– the challenges of technological,
social and organisational innovation. J. Clean. Prod. 304, 127004. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127004.
Baruch, Y., Holtom, B.C., 2008. Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational
research. Hum. Relat. 61 (8), 1139–1160. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0018726708094863.
Bermejo, R., 2014. Del desarrollo sostenible según Brundtland a la sostenibilidad como
biomimesis, first ed, Hegoa, Spain.
Broccardo, L., Zicari, A., 2020. Sustainability as a driver for value creation: a business
model analysis of small and medium entreprises in the Italian wine sector. J. Clean.
Prod. 259, 120852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120852.
Casadesus-Masanell, R., Ricart, J., 2010. From strategy to business models and onto
tactics. Long. Range Plan. 43, 195–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2010.01.004.
Christensen, C.M., Bartman, T., Van Bever, D., 2016. The hard truth about business
model innovation. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 58 (1), 31.
Corbo, C., Lamastra, L., Capri, E., 2014. From environmental to sustainability programs:
a review of sustainability initiatives in the Italian wine sector. Sustainability 6 (4),
2133–2159. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6042133.
De Steur, H., Temmerman, H., Gellynck, X., Canavari, M., 2019. Drivers, adoption, and
evaluation of sustainability practices in Italian wine SMEs. Bus. Strat. Environ. 29
(2), 744–762. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2436.
Español del Mercado del Vino, Observatorio, 2019. Estadísticas de producción ecológica.
Available online: https://www.oemv.es/mapa-estadisticas-de-produccion-ecologic
a-2019. (Accessed 23 May 2021).
8
Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810
Federación Española del Vino. Sostenibilidad y responsabilidad. Available online: htt
p://www.fev.es/sostenibilidad-medioambiental-vino/wineries-for-climate-protect
ion/que-es-wfcp_295_1_ap.html. (Accessed 30 May 2021).
Fernández, E., Pinilla, V., 2018. Wine Globalization, first ed. Cambridge University Press,
New York.
Ferrer, J., Villanueva, E., 2021. A managerial survey to discuss wine business models. Int.
J. Wine Bus. Res. 33 (1), 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-10-2019-0057.
Ferrer, J.R., Abella-Garcés, S., Maza-Rubio, M.T., 2020. Human resource practices and
performance in small Spanish wineries, and their evolution with age and size.
Ciência Técnica Vitivinícola 35 (2), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1051/ctv/
ctv20203502107.
Fiore, M., Silvestri, R., Contò, F., Pellegrini, G., 2017. Understanding the relationship
between green approach and marketing innovations tools in the wine sector.
J. Clean. Prod. 142, 4085–4091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.026.
Flores, S.S., 2018. What is sustainability in the wine world? A cross-country analysis of
wine sustainability frameworks. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 2301–2312. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.181.
Foss, N.J., Saebi, T., 2017. Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: how
far have we come, and where should we go? J. Manag. 43, 200–227.
Gilinsky Jr., A., Newton, S.K., Vega, R.F., 2016. Sustainability in the global wine
industry: concepts and cases. Agric. Agric. Sci. Proc. 8, 37–49. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.006.
Giraud, G. (2014). The effect of terroir on wine business model in burgundy: to make
wine or to sell harvest? (No. 1022-2016-81836, pp. 71-75).
MAPA, 2020. Alimentacion. Calidad agroalimentaria, calidad diferenciada.
Denominaciones de origen. Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. htt
ps://www.mapa.gob.es/es/alimentacion/temas/calidad-agroalimentaria/calida
d-diferenciada/. (Accessed 23 January 2021).
Marx, W., Haunschild, R., Bornmann, L., 2017. Climate change and viticulture-a
quantitative analysis of a highly dynamic research field. Vitis: Journal of Grapevine
Research 56 (1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.5073/vitis.2017.56.35-43.
Massa, L., Tucci, C., Afuah, A., 2017. A critical assessment of business model research.
Acad. Manag. Ann. 11, 73–104. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0072.
Merli, R., Preziosi, M., Acampora, A., 2018. Sustainability experiences in the wine sector:
toward the development of an international indicators system. J. Clean. Prod. 172,
3791–3805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.129.
Moscovici, D., Reed, A., 2018. Comparing wine sustainability certifications around the
world: history, status and opportunity. J. Wine Res. 29 (1), 1–25. https://doi.org/
10.1080/09571264.2018.1433138.
Muñoz, R.M., Fernández, M.V., Salinero, Y., 2021. Sustainability, corporate social
responsibility, and performance in the Spanish wine sector. Sustainability 13 (1), 7.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010007.
Organización Internacional de la Viña y el Vino, 2016. Environment and vitiviniculture.
Available online. https://www.oiv.int/en/technical-standards-and-documents/envi
ronment-and-vitiviniculture. (Accessed 18 May 2021).
Organización Internacional de la Viña y el Vino, 2020. Note de conjoncture vitivinicole
mondiale. Available online: https://www.oiv.int/public/medias/7899/oiv-note-de
-conjoncture-vitivinicole-mondiale-2020.pdf. (Accessed 13 May 2021).
Organización Internacional de la Viña y el Vino. Environment and vitiviniculture.
Available online: https://www.oiv.int/en/technical-standards-and-documents/envi
ronment-and-vitiviniculture. (Accessed 18 May 2021).
Ortega, M.J., 2010. Competitive strategies and firm performance: technological
capabilities’ moderating roles. J. Bus. Res. 63 (12), 1273–1281. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.09.007.
Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., 2010. Business Model Generation: A Handbook for
Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. Wiley, New Jersey.
Ouvrard, S., Jasimuddin, S.M., Spiga, A., 2020. Does sustainability push to reshape
business models? Evidence from the European wine industry. Sustainability 12,
2561. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062561.
Pezzillo, M., Esposito, V., Mercurio, L., Martínez, M., 2016. Bridging business model and
inter-organizational coordination mechanisms in the Italian wine industry. Meas.
Bus. Excell. 20 (4), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-08-2016-0043.
Pomarici, E., Vecchio, R., 2019. Will sustainability shape the future wine market? Wine
Economics and Policy 8 (1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2019.05.001.
Porter, M.E., 1985. Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior
Performance. The Free Press.
Ruggerio, C.A., 2021. Sustainability and sustainable development: a review of principles
and definitions. Sci. Total Environ. 786, 147481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2021.147481.
Santini, C., Cavicchi, A., Casini, L., 2013. Sustainability in the wine industry: key
questions and research trends. Agricultural and Food Economics 1 (1), 1–14. https://
doi.org/10.1186/2193-7532-1-9.
Schäufele, I., Hamm, U., 2017. Consumers’ perceptions, preferences and willingness-to-
pay for wine with sustainability characteristics: a review. J. Clean. Prod. 147,
379–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.118.
Sellers-Rubio, R., Nicolau-Gonzalbez, J.L., 2016. Estimating the willingness to pay for a
sustainable wine using a Heckit model. Wine Economics and Policy 5 (2), 96–104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2016.09.002.
Serrano, R., Fernández-Olmos, M., Pinilla, V., 2018. Internationalization and
performance in agri-food firms. Span. J. Agric. Res. 16, 1–16. https://doi.org/
10.5424/sjar/2018162-12206.
Sogari, G., Pucci, T., Aquilani, B., Zanni, L., 2017. Millennial generation and
environmental sustainability: the role of social media in the consumer purchasing
behavior for wine. Sustainability 9 (10), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101911.
Spanish Organic Wine. Available online: https://www.spanishorganicwines.com/es/n
uestrasbodegas2. (Accessed 30 May 2021).
J.R. Ferrer et al.
Spanos, Y.E., Lioukas, S., 2001. An examination into the causal logic of rent generation:
contrasting Porter’s competitive strategy framework and the resource-based
perspective. Strat. Manag. J. 22 (10), 907–934. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.174.
Stasi, A., Muscio, A., Nardone, G., Seccia, A., 2016. New technologies and sustainability
in the Italian wine industry. Agric. Agric. Sci. Proc. 8, 290–297. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.023.
Szolnoki, G., 2013. A cross-national comparison of sustainability in the wine industry.
J. Clean. Prod. 53, 243–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.03.045.
Teece, D., 2010. Business models, business strategy and innovation, Long. Range Plan.,
Volume 43, Issues 2–3, Pages 172-194, 10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003.
United Nations. Available online: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sust
ainable-development-goals/. (Accessed 31 May 2021).
Journal of Cleaner Production 330 (2022) 129810
United Nations. Strategy for sustainability management in the United Nations system,
2020–2030. Available online. https://www.undocs.org/en/CEB/2019/1/Add.1.
(Accessed 10 May 2021).
Wirtz, B.W., Pistoia, A., Ullrich, S., Göttel, V., 2016. Business models: origin,
development and future research perspectives. Long. Range Plan. 49 (1), 36–54.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2015.04.001.
Zott, C., Amit, R., 2007. Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial
firms. Organ. Sci. 18 (2), 181–199.
Zott, C., Amit, R., Massa, L., 2011. The business model: recent developments and future
research. J. Manag. 37 (4), 1019–1042.