Vol. 12 No. 2 (2023)
Original Research Article

The agroecological challenges in the wine sector: perceptions from European stakeholders

PDF
  • Caetano Beber,
  • Léa Lecomte,
  • Isabel Rodrigo,
  • Massimo Canali,
  • Alexandra Seabra Pinto,
  • Eugenio Pomarici,
  • Eric Giraud-Heraud,
  • Stéphanie Pérès,
  • Giulio Malorgio
Caetano Beber
Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna.
Léa Lecomte
Univ. Bordeaux, Bordeaux Sciences Agro
Isabel Rodrigo
Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa
Massimo Canali
Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna
Alexandra Seabra Pinto
Instituto Nacional de Investigação Agrária e Veterinária
Eugenio Pomarici
Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry, Università di Padova
Eric Giraud-Heraud
Univ. Bordeaux, INRAE, BSE, UMR 6060, ISVV
Stéphanie Pérès
Univ. Bordeaux, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, BSE, UMR 6060, ISVV
Giulio Malorgio
Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15244

Published 2023-12-31

Keywords

  • wine economics,
  • wine sustainable innovations,
  • stakeholders’ perception,
  • agroecological transition,
  • organic certification,
  • resistant varieties
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Beber, C., Lecomte, L., Rodrigo, I., Canali, M., Seabra Pinto, A., Pomarici, E., Giraud-Heraud, E., Pérès, S., & Malorgio, G. (2023). The agroecological challenges in the wine sector: perceptions from European stakeholders. Wine Economics and Policy, 12(2), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15244

Copyright (c) 2023 Caetano Beber, Léa Lecomte, Isabel Rodrigo, Massimo Canali, Alexandra Seabra Pinto, Eugenio Pomarici, Eric Giraud-Heraud, Stéphanie Pérès, Giulio Malorgio

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This article explores the issues surrounding the agroecological transition in the European wine industry, focusing on reducing pesticide use, developing organic certification and using genetic research in relation to resistant grape varieties. The study distinguishes between stakeholders from the wine industry, institutions and the agricultural research sector. The findings consistently identify the agroecological transition as a priority, particularly in terms of pesticide reduction. However, variations exist in the views of the surveyed stakeholders. French and Portuguese stakeholders emphasise the role of market and societal pressures as drivers of the transition, while Italian producers do not. Professionals in France and Portugal express doubts about achieving pesticide reduction through changes in practices, while others stress the importance of regulatory constraints. The research also highlights industry challenges such as decreased consumption due to health awareness and the need for social responsibility. Resistant grape varieties are seen as a viable solution, especially for the development of organic production, but market acceptability remains a significant hurdle. The study sheds light on stakeholder perspectives and challenges, thus contributing to a better understanding of priorities in the European wine industry’s pursuit of sustainable practices.

PDF

References

  1. F. Droulia and I. Charalampopoulos, “Future Climate Change Impacts on European Viticulture: A Review on Recent Scientific Advances,” Atmosphere, vol. 12, no. 4, 495 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12040495.
  2. C. van Leeuwen and P. Darriet, “The Impact of Cli-mate Change on Viticulture and Wine Quality,” J. Wine Econ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 150–167 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2015.21.
  3. C. L. Beber, M. Padilla, M. Razès, F. Fort, and J.L. Rastoin, “Sustainability of processed foods supply chain: Social, economic and territorial performance,” BIO Web Conf., vol. 7, p. 03009 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20160703009.
  4. European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European parliament and of the council COM(2018) 392 final - 2018/0216 (COD), 2018.
  5. European Commission, Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system COM(2020)381 - EU monitor. 2020 (accessed 21 January 2022. https://www.eumonitor.eu/9353000/1/j9vvik7m1c3gyxp/vl8tofp7dtuc
  6. E. Pomarici and R. Sardone, “Is a new EU wine policy coming? The unexpected role of regulatory measures,” Wine Econ. Policy, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 75–82 (2022). https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-13189.
  7. E. Pomarici and R. Sardone, “EU wine policy in the framework of the CAP: post-2020 challenges,” Agric. Food Econ., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 17 (2020). htt-ps://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-020-00159-z.
  8. R. Vecchio, E. Pomarici, E. Giampietri, and M. Borrello, “Consumer acceptance of fungus-resistant grape wines: Evidence from Italy, the UK, and the USA,” PLOS ONE, vol. 17, no. 4, p. e0267198 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267198.
  9. E. Pomarici and R. Vecchio, “Will sustainability shape the future wine market?,” Wine Econ. Policy, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2019.05.001.
  10. E. Parga-Dans, R. Vecchio, A. Annunziata, P. Alonso González, and R. Otero Enríquez, “A Certification for Natural Wine? A Comparative Analysis of Consumer Drivers in Italy and Spain,”Wine Econ. Policy (2023). https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-12890.
  11. K. L. Christ and R. L. Burritt, “Critical environmental concerns in wine production: an integrative review,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 53, pp. 232–242 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.007.
  12. K. Hauck and G. Szolnoki, “German Consumers’ Perceptions of Organic Wine A Qualitative Approach,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 18, p. 7729 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187729.
  13. A. Mariani and A. Vastola, “Sustainable winegrowing: current perspectives,” Int. J. Wine Res., vol. 7, pp. 37–48 (2015). https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWR.S68003.
  14. N. Teschner and D. E. Orenstein, “A transdisciplinary study of agroecological niches: understanding sustainability transitions in vineyards,” Agric. Hum. Va l u e s (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-021-10220-2.
  15. F. Varia, D. Macaluso, I. Agosta, F. Spatafora, and G. Dara Guccione, “Transitioning towards Organic Farming: Perspectives for the Future of the Italian Organic Wine Sector, Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 5, p. 2815 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052815.
  16. R. Sardone, S. De Leo, D. Longhitano, and R. Henke, “The new CAP and the challenge of sustainability: a synthetic indicator for the Italian wine sector,” Wine Econ. Policy (2023). https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-13468.
  17. D. Iacobucci and G. A. Churchill, Marketing research: Methodological foundations, 11th ed. TN: Earlie Lite Books, Inc, Nashville, 2015.
  18. J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson, Multivariate data analysis: Seventh edition. 2017.
  19. C. Mircioiu and J. Atkinson, “A Comparison of Parametric and Non-Parametric Methods Applied to a Likert Scale,” Pharmacy, vol. 5, no. 2, Art. no. 2 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy5020026.
  20. M. P. M. Meuwissen, R. B. M. Huirne, and J. B. Hardaker, “Risk and risk management: an empirical analysis of Dutch livestock farmers,” Livest. Prod. Sci., vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 43–53, (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(00)00247-5.
  21. S. Alvarez, W. Paas, K. Descheemaeker, P. Tittonell, and J. Groot, “Typology construction , a way of dealing with farm diversity: General guidelines for Humidtropics”. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen University (2014).
  22. European Commission, Database Eurostat” (2022). https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do
  23. C. L. Beber, R. da Rosa Couto, P.E. Lovato, J.-P. Guillemin, B. Nicolardot, R.B. Schenato, J.J. Comin “Comparative agroenvironmental risks of pesticides in different cropping systems: application of the IPhy indicator,” Environ. Earth Sci., vol. 77, no. 14 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7698-6.
  24. M. Borrello, L. Cembalo, and R. Vecchio, “Consumers’ acceptance of fungus resistant grapes: Future scenarios in sustainable winemaking,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 307, p. 127318 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127318.
  25. K. Pedneault and C. Provost, “Fungus resistant grape varieties as a suitable alternative for organic wine production: Benefits, limits, and challenges,” Sci. Hortic., vol. 208, pp. 57–77 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.03.016.
  26. European Commission, Study on the status of new genomic techniques under Union law and in light of the Court of Justice ruling in Case C-528/16. COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT SWD(2021) 92 final, 2021. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8285-2021INIT/en/pdf
  27. E. Zini et al., “R-Loci Arrangement Versus Downy and Powdery Mildew Resistance Level: A Vitis Hybrid Survey,” Int. J. Mol. Sci., vol. 20, no. 14, p. 3526 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20143526.