Western Farm Press, Sustainability matters to wine consumers

May 16, 2013   Back to Top

Two research studies sponsored by Wine Institute indicate that the sustainable and eco-friendly attributes of wine are important considerations when making purchasing decisions among key segments of wine consumers as well as the wine trade. The research findings, presented at a Communicating Sustainability Workshop in San Francisco, indicate that eco-conscious wine consumers and the trade are interested in information about sustainable and environmentally friendly practices in wineries and vineyards.

For the consumer research, Wine Institute was a sponsor of the Natural Marketing Institute's 11th annual LOHAS (Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability) Consumer Trends Database, which quantifies the size of the consumer market for environmentally and socially responsible products and specifically segmented adult wine consumers. Among the key findings were that 34% of wine consumers across all segments of the survey consider environmental/sustainable attributes when making wine purchases. Also, 66% of these wine consumers said they identify the eco-friendly, sustainable attributes of wine at the point of purchase via labels and information on the shelf or in store. Of the LOHAS consumers – the greenest segment of consumers who describe themselves as active stewards of the environment and buyers of eco-friendly, socially responsible products – 43% reported purchasing wine in the past three months, higher than the general adult population, and 52% of LOHAS consider the environmental attributes of their wine selections compared to 34% of all wine consumers.

Wine Institute also partnered with PE INTERNATIONAL, Inc., a sustainability consulting firm, to conduct a phone/online survey of 59 trade respondents. Trade survey respondents included major retail and restaurant chains as well as distributor, regional and individual operations. Across all of trade segments, 37% said sustainable attributes were frequently or very frequently a factor in wine selection while 86% indicated that they were at least occasionally a factor in wine selection. Most respondents said they relied on winery marketing materials or testimony to identify wines with sustainable attributes, followed closely by third-party certification seals/statements and information on wine labels. Most respondents identified customer requests as well as their own personal and/or organizational values as reasons for selecting wines with sustainable attributes.

"Many consumers and the trade are showing interest in sustainably grown and produced wines," said Robert P. (Bobby) Koch, President and CEO of Wine Institute. "With 1,800 California winegrape growers and winemakers participating in the California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance (CSWA) program, representing more than 70 percent of the state's wine acreage and case production, it's clear that we are committed to sustainable practices."

"Consumers with sustainable lifestyles are significantly more likely to drink wine, according to the LOHAS research," said Allison Jordan, Executive Director of the California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance. "As an industry, and as individual producers, we have an opportunity to communicate our sustainable practices to consumers in a meaningful way."

Speakers representing the wine trade at the Communicating Sustainability Workshop echoed the findings of the research. "Thirty percent of the wines we offer are sustainable, organic or biodynamic," said Emily Wines, MS, Director of Wines, Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants, speaking at the workshop. "Customers care about sustainability and they look to retailers and restaurateurs to do the research and make those wines available."

Putting a seal, logo or information about sustainable practices on the wine bottle was encouraged by all workshop trade speakers including Peter Granoff, MS, Ferry Plaza Wine Merchant, and Matthew Colling, CSW, Key Account Specialist with American Wines & Spirits. This sentiment is supported by the majority of respondents to the trade survey who indicated that sustainability certification programs are helpful (71%), as are seals on bottles (81%). The survey also revealed that Biodynamic (63%), USDA Organic (53%) and California Certified Sustainable Wine (CCSW-Certified) (49%) are the certifications most frequently associated with wines offered by the trade responding to the survey.

A summary of the trade and consumer surveys sponsored by Wine Institute can be downloaded here.

As the fourth largest wine producer worldwide, California is a global leader in sustainable winegrowing practices. Through participation in the California Sustainable Winegrowing Program, the state has one of the most widely adopted sustainable winegrowing programs in the world in terms of wine acreage and case production. Certified California Sustainable Winegrowing and other statewide and regional programs such as Bay Area Green Business Program, Fish Friendly Farming, Lodi Rules, Napa Green and Sustainability in Practice (SIP) play an important role in the California wine community's efforts to produce high quality wine that is environmentally sound, socially equitable and economically feasible. To learn more, visit:www.discovercaliforniawines.com/sustainable-winegrowing.

FSRMagazine.com, Sustainable Sonoma

February 6, 2013   Back to Top

Sustainable Sonoma

FEBRUARY 6, 2013

Growing Produce, California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance Issues Report

January 23, 2013   Back to Top

StepIntoSustainability.com, Step Into Your Learning Curve

December 4, 2012   Back to Top

Step Into Your Learning Curve

Press Democrat, 4 Videos Highlight Energy Efficiency

June 24, 2012   Back to Top

4 videos highlight energy efficiency

The California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance has launched a video series on energy efficiency and sustainable winegrowing case studies.

The first four videos highlight efficiency, water conservation, green building design and the benefit of PG&E rebate and incentive programs to help pay for facility improvements. The videos show how Jordan Vineyard & Winery, Korbel Champagne Cellars, Imagery Estate Winery and LangeTwins Family Winery & Vineyards increased the sustainability of their operations, reduced their energy and water use and saved money.

WineWisdom.com, Sustainability on the Move

April 26, 2012   Back to Top

Sustainability on the Move

A shorter version of this article was first published in Drinks Business magazine, January 2012.

The necessary mantra that sustainability is a journey not a destination is becoming manifest. And to prove that enterprises are taking continuous steps of improvement along this journey requires measurement, reporting, traceability and improvement action plans, often accompanied by independent certification.

In wine, the new world leads the field, and while some schemes are fresh out of the blocks, others have been around the blocks a few times, toning themselves up each time, getting more producers involved and getting them better involved.

Measuring the starting baseline of where producers are at is arguably the hugest undertaking. The Chilean wine industry took three years’ work building up to the January 2011 launch of their certified, voluntary code. Elena Carretero, Santa Rita’s vice president of corporate affairs and sustainability, and director of Wines of Chile’s sustainability programme said “we went through the whole process of wine making: in the vineyard, the winery, the supply chain. We put a minimum score to pass the certification process.” But, she emphasised, only after a baseline has been measured can improvements subsequently be targeted, so it is early days for the Chilean code. It’s been a slow start, said Carretero “and we have 35 to 40 [producers] in the process, and we hope to have the first 10-12 certified by the end of 2011.”

It is a small, but significant, first step, especially for a country considered a ‘viticultural paradise’, where the standard may not be as high as other countries which have more experience and measurement. Nonetheless, said Carretero said “we want to start from the beginning, and to be comprehensive for all our wineries. We need to start from a level that is not so high. Then we can get higher.”

Balancing the carrot against the stick is tricky, even in a country such as South Africa, which has a long and normalised history of measurement and recording, even before the country introduced its certified Integrated Production of Wine(IPW) programme in 1998.

The Cape’s voluntary scheme is well adopted, with several evolutions: South Africa leads the industry in biodiversity conservation, with more hectares conserved for biodiversity than are under vine. Given that the Cape Floral Kingdom, a biodiversity hotspot, accounts for 0.5% of the African continent’s area and 20% of its flora, this is an important achievement, via the Biodiversity and Wine Initiative (BWI) scheme, which has existed since 2004.  In 2006, BWI guidelines were added into IPW as an extra voluntary step.

More recently, said Su Birch, CEO of Wines of South Africa, is the addition “in 2011 of a carbon footprint calculator. The wineries, via IPW, are being encouraged to calculate their current usage as a base and to compare their progress year on year. IPW will collect all the inputs and work out an industry norm relative to size and area so wineries can evaluate themselves against peers and against best practice.”

In the previous year, the sustainability seal was introduced, and as part of this, said Daniël Schietekat, IPW manager “we’ve developed an electronic database and link with SAWIS [industry data collection, dissemination; administrates Wine of Origin scheme] to speed up and improve traceability.”  The benefits of this are clear as the IPW scheme implements new government policies and legislation, including “the new pesticide management policy, the national climate change and the national waste management strategies.”

As well as incorporating additional elements of sustainability, it’s getting tougher to achieve IPW certification. From 2012, the pass mark will be 65%, having been 60% in 2010, 55% in 2009, and 50% in 2008.  And producers wanting to include BWI in their IPW certification must achieve 70%.

To use the sustainability seal every link in the production chain – farm, cellar, bottler – must register and comply with IPW guidelines, so 100% of fruit in any wine, even if bought and blended from many different growers, must be IPW-accredited to use the sustainability seal. Use of the sustainability seal is running at around 85%.

By comparison, the figure for Australia’s more recent scheme,Entwine Australia (environment and wine), currently requires 85%.

The Aussies have been uncharacteristically bashful about their sustainability work. Entwine, explained Jonathan Green, natural resources manager at the Winemakers’ Federation of Australia, is “an accreditation program for sustainable vineyards and wineries. When both are members the winery is permitted to market wine as sustainably produced.“ It’s voluntary, and members must also provide an annual report on resource use optimisation, waste handling, biodiversity achievements and carbon emissions.  Continuous improvement is a mandated part of certification, “each year you need to demonstrate a new efficiency” he added.

The system was launched in 2009, evolving out of the 2004 national sustainability good practice guidelines and checklists into an annual survey and accreditation programme. Green said “we’re at the data collection phase at the moment – how much water, energy, fuel etc., and how that varies between operation and wine region.” Once regional baselines are understood, he said they’ll “be better placed to set performance goals for the year”, saying, without a trace of irony, “if we’d set a water reduction target last vintage we’d definitely have met it that year”, though this may not be helpful every year in true sustainability terms.  “It’s easier to set a quantitative goal” for carbon emissions, he said “which will be significant given that “we are about to see a carbon tax move into law in Australia.”

Among other things, a review of the standard during 2011 resulted in a new criterion requiring growers, where they use them, to consider using chemicals less hazardous to beneficial organisms, and those with a lower environmental impact. Soil protection measures have broadened to include improved organic matter and fertility.  And “by the end of 2011” Green said “we’ll provide members with a performance report, for example on your property you created this amount of carbon emission. The average in your region was x”, to encourage improvement.  But he added “Australian regions are very different, with different environmental challenges.  In setting an Australia sustainability standard, it needs to be very flexible.”

In the meantime, membership so far accounts for less than 20% of Australia vineyards and 40% of production. Green said “some are undertaking the certification process and finding it a walk in park, saying we’ve being doing it for 20 years. Others are finding it difficult, which means we’re getting it about right.” And at the moment it’s a watching brief “and we’ll review the certification standard again early in 2012 to ensure it incorporates best available scientific knowledge on sustainability practices.”

It is neighbouring New Zealand, which since 1997, has been on the sustainability journey the longest of any wine-producing nation, with Sustainable Wine Growing New Zealand (SWNZ). Philip Manson, science and innovations manager for New Zealand Winegrowers said “changes have been incremental, and the thing that’s changed the most is people’s engagement, their understanding of the importance of sustainability [despite] some who are still dragging the chain.”

A quite revolutionary impetus came in 2007, with a policy change by Winegrowers.  Manson said “in the early 2000s our involvement sat at 50-55% of the vineyard area, right through the period of vineyard expansion, so our engagement wasn’t growing proportionately.  In 2007 the Winegrowers board decided that by 2012 New Zealand would be ‘100% sustainable’.” They stated that to take part in industry activities, including Winegrowers’ international marketing events, by 2010 producers had to be accredited by an independently audited environmental programme, such as SWNZ, ISO14001 or organic/biodynamic.

With “that orange-coloured, carrot-shaped stick, our membership took off” said Manson. Effectively growers “can’t sell grapes without being accredited to a programme, it’s become a condition of supply.  It’s created some tension, but it’s been a major step forward.”  Between 2007 and 2011, membership by vineyard acreage more than doubled to reach 95% of the total vineyard area, in a time frame when the vineyard area increased by over 130%. Membership by winery number increased fourfold, reaching 95% of production.

Another step change came a year later when the annual scorecards moved to a fully electronic system, and it moved to a ‘good agricultural practice’ approach, with scorecards weighted to ‘major must-dos’, ‘minors’ and ‘recommended’. Members must achieve 100% of the majors, and 80% of the minors.

Reporting both biodiversity enhancement and water use were made ‘must-dos’ in 2009, though, said Manson “we have a lot of water in New Zealand compared with other wine producing areas, but availability is starting to become more of an issue, in terms of what happens to water quality downstream.” And while limits are set with pesticides, including having achieved the elimination of organophosphates over time, water measurements are more about getting users to understand their usage relative to the regional average, with the aim of using water more efficiently.  Indeed, said Manson “one winery’s use was so high, that they subsequently found a water leak.”

In 2012, measuring and reporting energy use will also fall into the ‘must-do’ category.

With their more robust electronic database, Manson said the next step is greater data management, with the intention to invest in some rigorous analysis now that they have two and sometimes three years worth of data on some measurements. Manson said to expect much more noise from New Zealand in the next six to twelve months.

Engagement rather than compliance is the persistent theme for California’s Sustainable Winegrowing Program (SWP). SWP has always been a self-assessment workbook. There are no minimum standards, but plenty of education and best practice toolkits for self-improvement.  Allison Jordan, executive director of the California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance explained “the idea is that you enter where you are, and the workbook provides guidance regarding how to make improvements in all areas, starting from your own baseline.”

And, she added, between 2004 (the baseline reporting) and 2009 (the latest report), “we showed improvement in 60% of the 227 criteria” in the workbook.  After focused education, she said, we “increased grower performance for 35 of the 38 IPM criteria, for seven out of seven energy efficiency vineyard criteria, and seven of ten energy efficiency criteria.” This resulted in enough electricity savings to power a community of 8,500 for a year (55m kwh), and to remove 30,000 tons of CO2 emissions.

Since the programme’s launch in 2002, self assessments have been completed that cover about 70% of California’s vineyard acreage and 65% of the state’s production.

The workbook was given a major overhaul in 2006, with the addition of an air quality chapter, and expanded soil erosion criteria.  It is undergoing another major review and gap analysis of every criterion to address new regulations and new resources. Jordan said “we expect to have the new workbook completed by the middle of 2012.”

A major step in January 2010 saw the introduction of optional third party certification, for which 58 criteria, and improvement of others, must be met. In its first 22 months, some 11% of California’s vineyard acreage has been certified to Certified California Sustainable Winegrowing standards. Jordan reported “the certification programme has led to significant improvements in the wineries and vineyards that are certified.” And, she added “these pre-requisite criteria will be revisited over time, and may become more stringent, or include more pre-requisites over time.”

Next on the agenda for the California wine industry, said Jordan is the recent commencement of “a full life cycle analysis that includes electricity, fossil fuel use, and packaging and distribution.”

As the three goalposts of environmental, economic and social equity sustainability necessarily keep moving, such evolving overarching sustainability programmes are gradually incorporating some of the ‘single-issue’ initiatives, such as LCA GHG emissions, organic/biodynamic, carbon neutral and water footprints. Increasingly robust data will ensure the trek can be tracked transparently.

EatDrinkBetter.com, New Water, Energy, GHG Online Metrics Tools for Sustainable Winegrowing

March 21, 2012   Back to Top

New Water, Energy, GHG Online Metrics Tools for Sustainable Winegrowing

The following letter was sent to the National Geographic Editor in response to the May 2009 article on the "Toll of Wine."

May 28, 2009   Back to Top

I am writing in response to the menacing title and erroneous graphic portraying the "Toll of Wine" in the May 2009 issue of National Geographic. This graphic depicts the carbon intensity of shipping wine from various global wine regions to key U.S. cities and bases its data on a seriously flawed, two-year-old working paper that is filled with untested assumptions, has not been peer reviewed, and does not accurately reflect the complexities of greenhouse gas emissions in the wine sector. Research on a science-based Life Cycle Analysis for wine is underway but this graphic, as well as the paper on which it is based, misleads consumers into believing that foreign imports are somehow more environmentally-friendly than California wines.

This distortion of fact is particularly unfortunate given the ground-breaking work by California wineries and vineyards to tackle the issue of GHG emissions by working to improve air quality and energy efficiency, along with other sustainable winegrowing practices from ground to bottle, through the California Sustainable Winegrowing Program (http://www.sustainablewinegrowing.org/). This statewide program guides California''s wineries and winegrape growers to adopt an integrated system for their operations based on tested "best practices" in alternative energy, packaging, transportation, production and farming practices to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) footprints in the state with the most stringent environmental laws in the country.

California vintners and growers are taking their carbon footprint seriously and have partnered with the international wine community to create an International Greenhouse Gas Protocol and Accounting Tool (www.wineinstitute.org/ghgprotocol). In addition, we are working with scientists to better understand the carbon balance of wineries and vineyards, including how vines, soil and broader vineyard ecosystems may benefit the environment by sequestering carbon. For instance, we worked with leading agriculture and climate scientists at UC Davis on a comprehensive review of state of the science in 2008 (visit http://www.sustainablewinegrowing.org/publications.php).

We''re confident that U.S. consumers can add "environmental track record" to many other reasons for choosing California wines, including quality, diversity, value, and significant contributions to local, state, and federal economies through jobs, taxes, charitable donations and tourism.

Sincerely,

Allison Jordan
Executive Director
California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance