Application of MCDM using PROMETHEE II for evaluation of wine tourism services

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to apply PROMETHEE II, a multicriteria decision-making method, to evaluate wineries, aiming to support the tourist’s decision regarding an online recommendation system on which wineries to prioritise visiting. Design/methodology/approach This study was divided into four phases: literature review, which aimed to identify a list of criteria related to the quality of services offered by wineries in specialised literature; validation of the categories and criteria with specialists in the field of wine tourism using a questionnaire with questions based on the stage of the research; multicriteria evaluation of wineries using PROMETHEE II method which was adjusted to the model through a pre-test with ten specialist professionals from different states (Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina, Paraná, São Paulo and Pernambuco); and validation of the model with one decision-maker representing each winery in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, and a decision-making expert who is familiar with all the wineries. Findings These findings reveal various scenarios based on different criteria that wine tourists may consider, with emphasis on the terroir of the region, extensive tasting, picnics in the vineyards and improvement in the development of wine tourism with a night harvest. The core of wine tourism services is based on 12 dimensions: waiting for the service, ease of purchase, opening hours, price, winery landscape, variety of products, local cuisine, quality of tasted products, access to the winery, tourist facilities, sustainable products and hygiene installation. Originality/value This research contributes to the literature by demonstrating the applicability of multicriteria tools to solve wine tourism services based on the tourist perspective of the service. Still, this paper proposes that it be applied to other case studies.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.