Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Aspect juridiques des terroirs

Aspect juridiques des terroirs

Abstract

Le “terroir” est dans tous les discours, les articles, les étiquettes et les publicités. Le voca­ble est en situation d’utilisation euphorique. Indiscutablement l’emploi historique est agri­cole, puis viticole, mais il n’est jamais juridique.
Pourtant le concept de terroir a certainement un lieu avec les produits typiques qui en sont issus et qui sont réglementés. La même observation peut être faite pour les autres produits agricoles bruts ou transformés, voire les denrées alimentaires qui bénéficient d’une appella­tion d’origine protégée ou d’une indication géographique protégée au sens du Règlement (CEE) n° 2081/92 du 14 juillet 1992. De quoi parle-t-on lorsqu’on utilise le mot “terroir” et quelle peut être la place de ce concept dans le droit de la vigne et du vin?
L’étymologie est latine: terroir vient de “terra”, mais la sémantique est plus nuancée. Dans l’ancien français “terroir” s’applique à une terre de grande qualité, mais aussi au territoire exploité par une communauté rurale dont l’activité délimite le terroir en question. Le terroir désigne tout à la fois une spécificité agronomique (un terroir à fraises, un terroir à asperges … ) et la sphère d’activité d’un village, puis progressivement le terroir désigne seule­ment un lieu dont les caractéristiques naturelles donnent aux produits qui en sont issus leur typicité.
Historiquement l’usage du mot terroir, dans son application viticole, remonte aux XVIIème et XVIIIème siècles, moment aussi des premières délimitations (Chianti, Porto).
Le chemin de la connaissance empirique, puis scientifique, des terroirs a presque trois siè­cles. Quels sont les apports et les concepts des spécialistes de la viticulture?
Les responsables professionnels ont parlé de terroir en même temps que naissait l’appella­tion d’origine: “Une appellation d’origine est l’adéquation de cépages à un terroir. Un terroir, c’est un sol et les facteurs climatiques dont la conjonction donne une aire de production ..” pour le ministre français de l’agriculture Joseph Capus en 1935. Le baron Le Roy va dans le même sens “.. aussi célèbre que soit une commune, tous les terrains qui la composent ne sont pas aptes à produire des vins réputés”, une délimitation doit être faite fondée sur la nature géologique du terrain, ses caractères géographiques et son profil hydrique.
Le lien terroir-appellation d’origine est évident mais non empreint d’automaticité. L’étude des terroirs est une recherche des meilleures conditions possibles de production des vins. Progressivement le nombre de paramètres étudiés devient de plus en plus important dans la perspective d’une dichotomie: facteurs naturels – facteurs humains tirée de la définition de l’appellation d’origine définie par l’Arrangement de Lisbonne en 1958. A cet égard on peut relever qu’il y a pas totale unanimité parmi les scientifiques dans la qualification facteurs naturels-facteurs humains et dans leur interactivité.
Dans un premier temps on peut légitimement penser que le mot terroir s’applique exclu­sivement aux facteurs naturels de l’appellation d’origine. Mais la période récente montre abondamment le lien entre le terroir-facteurs naturels et les facteurs humains. Le produit final est la réponse, le miroir, du dialogue des facteurs naturels et des facteurs humains. Une “approche intégrée” du terroir viticole se dessine.
Pour d’autres produits agricoles ou denrées alimentaires on comprend bien que les travaux ne sont pas encore aussi nombreux et aussi approfondis. Il faut aussi noter que la relation facteurs naturels-facteurs humains est une relation qui peut être totalement déséquilibrée en privilégiant les uns ou les autres.
Par ailleurs terroir et appellation d’origine ne sont pas nécessairement liés, Une appellation d’origine est vraisemblablement fondée sur un terroir, mais un terroir peut exister en dehors d’un produit d’appellation d’origine.
Un produit désigné par une indication géographique peut être issu d’un terroir, si un effort de délimitation et d’adéquation des plantations a été réalisé. Un vin de table à indication géo­graphique au sens du droit communautaire (vin de pays en France; indication géographique typique en Italie) peut être issu d’un terroir.
A l’abondance scientifique viticole répond une faiblesse juridique apparente. Le mot “ter­roir” n’a pas de signification juridique particulière, c’est un nom commun pratiquement en libre usage.
Les textes nationaux et communautaires n’emploient pratiquement jamais le mot terroir. Partout il n’est question que “d’aire de production” ou de “zone de production”, sauf pour le Règlement (CEE) n° 3302/90 de la Commission du 15 novembre 1990 fixant les modalités d’application relatives aux transferts de droits de replantation de superficies viticoles qui définit le ” .. terroir de potentialités variétales .. “comme ” .. l’unité de milieu naturel, caractérisée par des données géomorphologiques, pédologiques et climatiques, pour laquelle il est fait un classement d’aptitude variétale”.
Les points de contact terroir-droit de la vigne et du vin apparaissent plus ou moins nom­breux. Néanmoins quand des efforts de distinctivité d’un produit, vin ou autre, sont réalisés le droit reprend sa place. Quand il y a terroir plus ou moins scientifiquement affirmé les pro­fessionnels qui désignent leur produit par le nom géographique du lieu de production souhaitent, dans leur intérêt et celui des consommateurs, réserver ce nom au produit élaboré dans une “région déterminée” pour les vins, dans une “zone de production” pour les autres produits agricoles. Progresser dans le sens de la définition des terroirs implique des procé­dures juridiquement définies de délimitation (I) et entraîne la volonté de protection des ter­roirs (II).

DOI:

Publication date: March 2, 2022

Issue: Terroir 1998

Type: Article

Authors

JACQUES AUDIER

Professeur à la Faculté de droit et de science politique d’Aix-Marseille.
Conseiller chargé des questions juridiques de l’Office International de la Vigne et du Vin. Membre du comité scientifique AOP-IGP auprès de la Commission européenne.

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 1998

Citation

Related articles…

Modeling island and coastal vineyards potential in the context of climate change

Climate change impacts regional and local climates, which in turn affects the world’s wine regions. In the short term, these modifications rises issues about maintaining quality and style of wine, and in a longer term about the suitability of grape varieties and the sustainability of traditional wine regions. Thus, adaptation to climate change represents a major challenge for viticulture. In this context, island and coastal vineyards could become coveted areas due to their specific climatic conditions. In regions subject to warming, the proximity of the sea can moderate extremes temperatures, which could be an advantage for wine. However, coastal and island areas are particular prized spaces and subject to multiple pressures that make the establishment or extension of viticulture complex.
In this perspective, it seems relevant to assess the potentialities of coastal and island areas for viticulture. This contribution will present a spatial optimization model that tends to characterize most suitable agroclimatic patterns in historical or emerging vineyards according to different scenarios. Thanks to an in-depth bibliography a global inventory of coastal and insular vineyards on a worldwide scale has been realized. Relevant criteria have been identified to describe the specificities of these vineyards. They are used as input data in the optimization process, which will optimize some objectives and spatial aspects. According to a predefined scenario, the objectives are set in three main categories associated with climatic characteristics, vineyards characteristics and management strategies. At the end of this optimization process, a series of maps presents the different spatial configurations that maximize the scenario objectives.

A blueprint for managing vine physiological balance at different spatial and temporal scales in Champagne

In Champagne, the vine adaptation to different climatic and technical changes during these last 20 years can be seen through physiological balance disruptions. These disruptions emphasize the general grapevine decline. Since the 2000s, among other nitrogen stress indicators, the must nitrogen has been decreasing. The combination of restricted mineral fertilizers and herbicide use, the growing variability of spring rainfall, the increasing thermal stress as well as the soil type heterogeneity are only a few underlying factors that trigger loss of physiological balance in the vineyards. It is important to weigh and quantify the impact of these factors on the vine. In order to do so, the Comité Champagne uses two key-tools: networking and modelization. The use of quantitative and harmonized ecophysiological indicators is necessary, especially in large spatial scales such as the Champagne appellation. A working group with different professional structures of Champagne has been launched by the Comité Champagne in order to create a common ecophysiology protocol and thus monitor the vine physiology, yearly, around 100 plots, with various cultural practices and types of soil. The use of crop modelling to follow the vine physiological balance within different pedoclimatic conditions enables to understand the present balance but also predict the possible disruptions to come in future climatic scenarios. The physiological references created each year through the working group, benefit the calibration of the STICS model used in Champagne. In return, the model delivers ecophysiology indicators, on a daily scale and can be used on very different types of soils. This study will present the bottom-up method used to give accurate information on the impacts of soil, climate and cultural practices on vine physiology.

Exploring resilience and competitiveness of wine estates in Languedoc-Roussillon in the recent past: a multi-level perspective

The Languedoc-Roussillon wineries are facing a decline in wine yields particularly PGI yields due to many factors. Climate change is just ones, but is expected to increase in the future. There is also structurally a large heterogeneity of yield profiles among terroirs, varieties and strategies. This work investigates the link between yield, competitiveness and resilience to explore how resilient winegrowers have been in the recent past. To this end two approaches have been combined; (i) an accountancy database analysis at estate scale and (ii) municipality level competitiveness analysis. A new resilience indicator that characterizes the capacity of an estate to absorb yield variation is also defined. The FADN database between 2000 and 2018 of ex-Languedoc-Roussillon (France) and other data are used to analyse the current situation and the past evolution of competitiveness and resilience by type of estate (type of farm: PGI and/or PDO & type of commercialization: bulk and/or bottles). The net margin, which defines competitiveness, is not correlated to yield for all types but depends on the type of commercialization and the level of specialisation. The resilience indicator shows that the net margin of estates specialized in PGI is particularly sensitive to yield declines. We also show that price evolutions seem to compensate the effect of yield losses for the majority of types. Municipality scale analysis shows the links between local pedoclimate, yield, commercialization strategies and price. Overlapping a PDO with a PGI does not always increase a municipality’s PGI competitiveness. It is difficult to make links between causes and effects due to the complexity of the wine production system. Production diversification may be a solution. Resorting to the two level of analysis helps resolving the data gap that is necessary to explore the links between yield and economic performance of the wine estates in the long term.

Ecophysiological performance of Vitis rootstocks under water stress

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.

Under-vine management effects on grapevine production, soil properties and plant communities in South Australia

Under-vine (UV) management has traditionally consisted of synthetic herbicide use to limit competition between weeds and grapevines. With growing global interest towards non-synthetic chemical use, this study aimed to capture the effects of alternative UV management at two commercial Shiraz vineyards in South Australia, where the sole management variables were UV management since 2016. In adjacent treatment blocks, cultivation (CU) was compared to spontaneous vegetation (SV) in McLaren Vale (MV), and herbicide was compared to SV in Eden Valley (EV). Soil water infiltration rates were slower and grapevine stem water potential was lower in CU compared to SV in MV, with the latter having a plant community dominated by soursob (Oxalis pes-caprae) during winter; while in EV, there was little separation between the treatments. Yields were affected at both sites, with SV being higher in MV and HE being higher in EV. In MV, the only effect on grape must was a lower 13C:12C isotope ratio in CU, indicating greater grapevine water stress. In the grape must at EV, SV had higher total soluble solids, total phenolics, anthocyanins, and yeast available nitrogen; and lower pH and titratable acidity. Pruning weights were not affected by the treatments in MV, while they were higher in HE at EV. Assessments revealed that the differing soil types at the two sites were likely the main determinants of the opposing production outcomes associated with UV management. In the silty loam soil of MV, the higher yields in SV were likely due to more plant-available water, as a potential result of the continuous soil bio-pores formed by winter UV vegetation. Conversely, in the loamy sand soils of EV with a lower cation exchange capacity, the lower yields and pruning weights in SV suggest the UV vegetation competed significantly with the grapevines for available water and nutrients.