Vol. 13 No. 2 (2024)
Original Research Article

Wine law, sustainable innovation and the emergence of a wine constitution

PDF
  • Tilman Reinhardt,
  • Yasmine Ambrogio,
  • Laura Springer,
  • Maximilian Tafel
Tilman Reinhardt
Faculty of Life Sciences: Food Nutrition and Health, University of Bayreuth, Fritz-Hornschuch-Str. 13, 95326 Kulmbach
Yasmine Ambrogio
Faculty of Life Sciences: Food Nutrition and Health, University of Bayreuth, Fritz-Hornschuch-Str. 13, 95326 Kulmbach
Laura Springer
Faculty of Life Sciences: Food Nutrition and Health, University of Bayreuth, Fritz-Hornschuch-Str. 13, 95326 Kulmbach
Maximilian Tafel
Department of Landscape Planning and Nature Conservation, Hochschule Geisenheim University, Von-Lade-Str.1, 65366 Geisenheim
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-16041

Published 2024-08-01

Keywords

  • wine regulation,
  • innovation systems,
  • fungus-resistant grape variety,
  • de-alcoholised wine,
  • digital labelling

How to Cite

Reinhardt, T., Ambrogio, Y., Springer, L., & Tafel, M. (2024). Wine law, sustainable innovation and the emergence of a wine constitution. Wine Economics and Policy, 13(2), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-16041

Copyright (c) 2024 Tilman Reinhardt, Yasmine Ambrogio, Laura Springer, Maximilian Tafel

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

Innovation is essential for addressing the current challenges of the wine sector and ensuring its sustainable future. Law plays a pivotal role in fostering and disseminating innovation. At the same time, innovations can present legislators with significant challenges and cause legal disruption. This paper evaluates the innovativeness of European Wine Law in light of the ongoing sustainability transformation. The focus of EU regulations is wine quality and authenticity, mainly through the protection of Geographical Indications (GIs). In Regulation (EU) 2021/2117, the EU legislator recently introduced new rules on fungus-resistant grape varieties, de-alcoholised products, and digital labelling. We describe the effects of these rules on the respective innovation systems and assess how, vice versa, these innovations exert disruptive pressure on wine law. While the legal framework shows remarkable flexibility, a reconfiguration seems necessary at the level of GIs. The sustainability transformation implies an openness to innovation even for traditional producers. Regulatory Sandboxes in GI product specifications could allow for more experimentation without compromising heritage. A wine constitution could guide the transformation towards a more resilient and sustainable wine system.

PDF

References

  1. J. Von Braun, K. Afsana, L. O. Fresco, and M. H. A. Hassan, Science and Innovations for Food Systems Transformation. Springer Cham, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15703-5_1.
  2. M. P. Hekkert, M. J. Janssen, J. H. Wesseling, and S. O. Negro, ‘Mission-oriented innovation systems’, Environ Innov Soc Transit, vol. 34, pp. 76–79, Mar. 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.011.
  3. G. Cecere, S. Mancinelli, and M. Mazzanti, ‘Waste Prevention and Social Preferences: The Role of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations’, SSRN Journal, 2013, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2273477.
  4. N. Cortez, ‘Regulating Disruptive Innovation’, SSRN Journal, 2014, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2436065.
  5. G. Meloni, K. Anderson, K. Deconinck, and J. Swinnen, ‘Wine Regulations’, AEPP, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 620–649, Dec. 2019, https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppz025.
  6. J. M. Alston and D. Gaeta, ‘Reflections on the Political Economy of European Wine Appellations’, Ital Econ J, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 219–258, Jul. 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40797-021-00145-4.
  7. S. Castriota and M. Delmastro, ‘The Economics of Collective Reputation: Evidence from the Wine Industry’, Am J Agric Econ, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 469–489, Mar. 2015, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aau107.
  8. T. Reinhardt and Y. Ambrogio, ‘Geographical Indications and Sustainable Viticulture: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives’, Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 23, Art. no. 23, Jan. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316318.
  9. S. Ponte, ‘Bursting the bubble? The hidden costs and visible conflicts behind the Prosecco wine “miracle”’, Journal of Rural Studies, vol. 86, pp. 542–553, Aug. 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.002.
  10. G. Belletti, A. Marescotti, J. Sanz-Cañada, and H. Vakoufaris, ‘Linking protection of geographical indications to the environment: Evidence from the European Union olive-oil sector’, Land Use Policy, vol. 48, pp. 94–106, Nov. 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.05.003.
  11. M. Huysmans, ‘Exporting protection: EU trade agreements, geographical indications, and gastronationalism’, Rev Int Polit Econ, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 979–1005, May 2022, https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1844272.
  12. A. Detry, ‘GI Protection against Evocation in the EU - Assessment of the CJEU’s Interpretation and Comparison with Reputed European Trademark Protection’, SSRN Journal, 2022, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4266440.
  13. J. A. Schumpeter, The theory of economic development; an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1934.
  14. S. Pfotenhauer, ‘From “More Innovation” to “Better Innovation”?’, Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, vol. 9, Dec. 2023, https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2023.1365.
  15. A. Bergek, M. Hekkert, and S. Jacobsson, ‘Functions in innovation systems: A framework for analysing energy system dynamics and identifying goals for system-building activities by entrepreneurs and policymakers’, in Innovation for a Low Carbon Economy-Economic, Institutional and Management Approaches.
  16. J. Köhler et al., ‘An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions’, Environ Innov Soc Transit, vol. 31, pp. 1–32, Jun. 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004.
  17. E. Pomarici, R. Sardone (2022). Is a new EU wine policy coming? The unexpected role of regu- latory measures. Wine Economics and Policy 11(2): 75-82. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-13189.
  18. J. Casanova-Gascón et al., ‘Behavior of Vine Varieties Resistant to Fungal Diseases in the Somontano Region’, Agronomy, vol. 9, no. 11, p. 738, Nov. 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9110738.
  19. M. Rienth et al., ‘Modifications of Grapevine Berry Composition Induced by Main Viral and Fungal Pathogens in a Climate Change Scenario’, Front Plant Sci, vol. 12, 2021, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.717223.
  20. 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, Aug. 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.03.016.
  21. 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, Jul. 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127318.
  22. B. V. Sivčev, I. L. Sivčev, and Z. Z. Ranković-Vasić, ‘Natural process and use of natural matters in organic viticulture’, J Agric Sci (Belgrade), vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 195–215, 2010, https://doi.org/10.2298/JAS1002195S.
  23. 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, Apr. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267198.
  24. S. Sillani, F. Marangon, G. Gallenti, S. Troiano, F. Nassivera, and M. Carzedda, ‘Designation and Certification Strategies for Fungus-Resistant Grape Wines: An Exploratory Study in Italy’, Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 22, Art. no. 22, Jan. 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214871.
  25. C. Kiefer and G. Szolnoki, ‘Consumer Acceptance of Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties—An Exploratory Study Using Sensory Evaluation Tests among Consumers in Germany’, Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 13, Art. no. 13, Jan. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310664.
  26. F. Mailly, L. Hossard, J.-M. Barbier, M. Thiollet-Scholtus, and C. Gary, ‘Quantifying the impact of crop protection practices on pesticide use in wine-growing systems’, Eur J Agron, vol. 84, pp. 23–34, Mar. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2016.12.005.
  27. I. Schäufele and U. Hamm, ‘Consumers’ perceptions, preferences and willingness-to-pay for wine with sustainability characteristics: A review’, J Clean Prod, vol. 147, pp. 379–394, Mar. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.118.
  28. J. Brunin et al., ‘Do individual sustainable food purchase motives translate into an individual shift towards a more sustainable diet? A longitudinal analysis in the NutriNet-Santé cohort’, Clean Responsible Consum, vol. 5, p. 100062, Jun. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2022.100062.
  29. L. Nesselhauf, R. Fleuchaus, and L. Theuvsen, ‘What about the environment?A choice-based conjoint study about wine from fungus-resistant grape varieties’, Intcelo J Wine Bus Res, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 96–121, Jan. 2019, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-09-2018-0049.
  30. E. Celotti, R. Valent, and E. Bellantuono, ‘Varietà resistenti e tocai friulano-Incontro (possibile) fra tradizione e innovazione’, IL CORRIERE VINICOLO N. 33 VITE 19 Ottobre 2020. Accessed: May 19, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://air.uniud.it/handle/11390/1195835?mode=full
  31. L. Liguori, D. Albanese, A. Crescitelli, M. Di Matteo, and P. Russo, ‘Impact of dealcoholization on quality properties in white wine at various alcohol content levels’, J Food Sci Technol, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 3707–3720, Aug. 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-019-03839-x.
  32. Y. G. Akyereko, F. D. Wireko-Manu, F. Alemawor, and M. Adzanyo, ‘Effects of Production Methods on Flavour Characteristics of Nonalcoholic Wine’, J Food Qual, vol. 2021, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2021, https://doi.org/ 10.1155/2021/3014793.
  33. K. L. Fuchs, J. Lian, L. Michels, S. Mayer, E. Toniato, and V. Tiefenbeck, ‘Effects of Digital Food Labels on Healthy Food Choices in Online Grocery Shopping’, Nutrients, vol. 14, no. 10, p. 2044, May 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14102044.
  34. I. Sánchez Recarte, ‘20231019 CEEV Letter to J. Wojciechowski - Wine labelling and QR-codes’, Oct. 19, 2023.
  35. K. Schober, R. Balling, T. Chilla, and H. Lindermayer, ‘European Integration Processes in the EU GI System—A Long-Term Review of EU Regulation for GIs’, Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 3, p. 2666, Feb. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032666.
  36. P. Corsinovi and D. Gaeta, ‘Managing the Quality Wines beyond Policies and Business Strategies’, RCBR, vol. 4, no. 1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.15640/rcbr.v4n1a3.
  37. D. Mehta, ‘EU proposal on CRISPR-edited crops is welcome — but not enough’, Nature, vol. 619, no. 7970, pp. 437–437, Jul. 2023, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02328-8.
  38. E. Fisher, E. Scotford, and E. Barritt, ‘The Legally Disruptive Nature of Climate Change: Climate Change and Legal Disruption’, MLR, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 173–201, Mar. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12251.
  39. L. F. Clark and W. A. Kerr, ‘Climate change and terroir: The challenge of adapting geographical indications’, J World Intellect Prop, vol. 20, no. 3–4, pp. 88–102, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12078.
  40. M. F. Cardell, A. Amengual, and R. Romero, ‘Future effects of climate change on the suitability of wine grape production across Europe’, Reg Environ Change, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 2299–2310, Dec. 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-019-01502-x.
  41. R. Töpfer and O. Trapp, ‘A cool climate perspective on grapevine breeding: climate change and sustainability are driving forces for changing varieties in a traditional market’, Theor Appl Genet, vol. 135, no. 11, pp. 3947–3960, Nov. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-022-04077-0.
  42. E. Duchêne, ‘How can grapevine genetics contribute to the adaptation to climate change ?’, OENO One, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 113–124, 2016, https://doi.org/10.20870/oeno-one.2016.50.3.98.
  43. S. Romeo Lironcurti, F. Demaria, R. D’Annolfo, and R. Sardone, ‘Consumer Evaluations of and Attitudes towards New Genome Editing Techniques: An Italian Case Study’, Agriculture, vol. 14, no. 1, Art. no. 1, Jan. 2024, https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14010051.
  44. E. Vandecandelaere et al., ‘The Geographical Indication Pathway to Sustainability: A Framework to Assess and Monitor the Contributions of Geographical Indications to Sustainability through a Participatory Process’, Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 14, Art. no. 14, Jan. 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147535.
  45. J. Simpson, ‘Cooperation and Conflicts: Institutional Innovation in France’s Wine Markets, 1870–1911’, Bus Hist Rev, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 527–558, Oct. 2005, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007680500081435.
  46. F. N. Schulz, ‘Strukturanalyse des deutschen Marktes für entalkoholisierte Weine – Kleine Nische mit großer Zukunft?’, Berichte über Landwirtschaft - Zeitschrift für Agrarpolitik und Landwirtschaft, Nov. 2023, https://doi.org/10.12767/buel.v101i3.482.