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…

Climate and the evolving mix of grape varieties in Australia’s wine regions

The purpose of this study is to examine the changing mix of winegrape varieties in Australia so as to address the question: In the light of key climate indicators and predictions of further climate change, how appropriate are the grape varieties currently planted in Australia’s wine regions? To achieve this, regions are classified into zones according to each region’s climate variables, particularly average growing season temperature (GST), leaving aside within-region variations in climates. Five different climatic classifications are reported. Using projections of GSTs for the mid- and late 21st century, the extent to which each region is projected to move from its current zone classification to a warmer one is reported. Also shown is the changing proportion of each of 21 key varieties grown in a GST zone considered to be optimal for premium winegrape production. Together these indicators strengthen earlier suggestions that the mix of varieties may be currently less than ideal in many Australian wine regions, and would become even less so in coming decades if that mix was not altered in the anticipation of climate change. That is, grape varieties in many (especially the warmest) regions will have to keep changing, or wineries will have to seek fruit from higher latitudes or elevations if they wish to retain their current mix of varieties and wine styles.

Postveraison shoot trimming in Tannat and Merlot: preliminary results on yield components, plant balance and berry composition

There is currently a trend towards the production of wines with low alcohol content. To achieve this, grapes with low sugar content must be used. There are techniques at the vineyard level that can delay ripening and avoid excessive sugar accumulation without, a priori, affecting the final polyphenol content. Postveraison shoot trimming (PVST) is experimentally evaluated for these purposes, but its impact under Uruguayan climatic conditions with high interannual variability is not known. The aim of this work is to assess the PVST in Tannat and Merlot cultivars and their impact on yield components, plant balance and berry primary composition. In this study, two commercial vineyards of 10 years old Tannat and Merlot (grafted on SO4) at Canelones Department were selected. During the 2020-201 growing season, grapevines were submitted to PVST when grapes reached 15º Brix. In a randomized block, trimmed (T) and control (C) plants were evaluated with three repetitions each cultivar. Evaluation of the evolution of primary berry composition during ripening, measurement of yield components and plant balance were performed. For both cultivars, PVST did not affect yield components. Merlot reached 5.4 kg per plant and Tannat 7.1 kg, with not statistical significance between treatments. However, statistical differences were observed in terms of plant balance. In Merlot Ravaz Index reached a difference of 5.3 (12.0 in T and 6.7 in C) meanwhile Tannat reached 3.5 of statistical difference (13.7 in T and 10.2 in C). The tendency to imbalance for the treated plants had an impact on the final grape composition. Merlot grapes showed statistical difference in final total acidity (0.3 g of difference between treatments) while treatments impact final sugar content on Tannat grapes (10.0 g of difference between treatments). Further studies are needed to assess the impact of different canopy management techniques in our conditions.

An analytical framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine involving the functional and Bayesian exploration of farm data time series synchronized using an eGDD thermal index

Climate influence on grapevine physiology is prevalent and this influence is only expected to increase with climate change. Although governed by a general determinism, climate influence on grapevine physiology may present variations according to the terroir. In addition, these site-specific differences are likely to be enhanced when climate influence is studied using farm data. Indeed, farm data integrate additional sources of variation such as a varying representativity of the conditions actually experienced in the field. Nevertheless, there is a real challenge in valuing farm data to enable grape growers to understand their own terroir and consequently adapt their practices to the local conditions. In such a context, this article proposes a framework to site-specifically study climate influence on grapevine physiology using farm data. It focuses on improving the analysis of time series of weather data. The analytical framework includes the synchronization of time series using site-specific thermal indices computed with an original method called Extended Growing Degree Days (eGDD). Synchronized time series are then analyzed using a Bayesian functional Linear regression with Sparse Steps functions (BLiSS) in order to detect site-specific periods of strong climate influence on yield development. The article focuses on temperature and rain influence on grape yield development as a case study. It uses data from three commercial vineyards respectively situated in the Bordeaux region (France), California (USA) and Israel. For all vineyards, common periods of climate influence on yield development were found. They corresponded to already known periods, for example around veraison of the year before harvest. However, the periods differed in their precise timing (e.g. before, around or after veraison), duration and correlation direction with yield. Other periods were found for only one or two vineyards and/or were not referred to in literature, for example during the winter before harvest.

Frost risk projections in a changing climate are highly sensitive in time and space to frost modelling approaches

Late spring frost is a major challenge for various winegrowing regions across the world, its occurrence often leading to important yield losses and/or plant failure. Despite a significant increase in minimum temperatures worldwide, the spatial and temporal evolution of spring frost risk under a warmer climate remains largely uncertain. Recent projections of spring frost risk for viticulture in Europe throughout the 21st century show that its evolution strongly depends on the model approach used to simulate budburst. Furthermore, the frost damage modelling methods used in these projections are usually not assessed through comparison to field observations and/or frost damage reports.
The present study aims at comparing frost risk projections simulated using six spring frost models based on two approaches: a) models considering a fixed damage threshold after the predicted budburst date (e.g BRIN, Smoothed-Utah, Growing Degree Days, Fenovitis) and b) models considering a dynamic frost sensitivity threshold based on the predicted grapevine winter/spring dehardening process (e.g. Ferguson model). The capability of each model to simulate an actual frost event for the Vitis vinifera cv. Chadonnay B was previously assessed by comparing simulated cold thermal stress to reports of events with frost damage in Chablis, the northernmost winegrowing region of Burgundy. Models exhibited scores of κ > 0.65 when reproducing the frost/non-frost damage years and an accuracy ranging from 0.82 to 0.90.
Spring frost risk projections throughout the 21st century were performed for all winegrowing subregions of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté under two CMIP5 concentration pathways (4.5 and 8.5) using statistically downscaled 8×8 km daily air temperature and humidity of 13 climate models. Contrasting results with region-specific spring frost risk trends were observed. Three out of five models show a decrease in the frequency of frost years across the whole study area while the other two show an increase that is more or less pronounced depending on winegrowing subregion. Our findings indicate that the lack of accuracy in grapevine budburst and dehardening models makes climate projections of spring frost risk highly uncertain for grapevine cultivation regions.

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.