Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Territoire, terroir et marché du vin à la production

Territoire, terroir et marché du vin à la production

Abstract

Les travaux visant à comprendre les relations entre un terroir, au sens agronomique, et les caractéristiques physico-chimiques des raisins ou du vin sont aujourd’hui nombreux, comme en témoigne le programme de ce colloque. Mais pour un économiste, la question centrale reste de savoir comment le terroir peut intervenir dans la construction de la valeur économique du vin et dans la différenciation de ses prix. L’effet terroir est-il reconnu par le consommateur final ou n’est-il qu’une variable d’ajustement interne aux systèmes de production ? A travers quels indicateurs cet effet terroir peut-il être géré par les différents opérateurs de la filière ? En définitive ne vaut-il pas mieux invoquer un “effet territoire” que peuvent construire les acteurs, et dont le terroir serait une des composantes possibles ? Pour développer ces questions, nous reviendrons d’abord sur les mécanismes de création de la valeur dans la filière viti-vinicole, pour proposer un cadre d’analyse permettant de relier les transactions au territoire et à sa composante terroir. Plutôt que de reprendre l’exemple des vins AOC, pour lesquels le terroir est largement mis en avant dans la construction de la qualité, nous avons préféré confronter notre analyse théorique au marché des Vins de table et de Pays à la production. En effet, dans ce marché se construit également une différenciation liée au territoire en parallèle ou en complément à une différenciation liée aux cépages. Deux approches différentes de ce marché seront présentés : une analyse statistique sur les contrats d’achat ONIVINS ; une série d’enquêtes auprès des opérateurs de la filière en Languedoc Roussillon.

DOI:

Publication date: March 25, 2022

Issue: Terroir 1996

Type : Poster

Authors

D. Boulet (1), J.M. TOUZARD (2)

(1) Institut Supérieur de la Vigne et du Vin – INRA ESR Montpellier
(2) INRA SAD Montpellier
2, place P. Viala 34060 Montpellier France

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 1996

Citation

Related articles…

CLIMATE CHANGE EFFECT ON POLYPHENOLS OF GRIGNOLINO GRAPES (VITIS VINIFERA L.) IN HILLY ENVIRONMENT

Current changes of ecoclimatic indicators may cause significant variation in grapevine phenology and grape ripening. Climate change modifies several abiotic factors (e.g. temperature, sunlight radiation, water availability) during the grapevine growth cycle, having a direct impact on the phenological stages of the grapevine, modulating the metabolic profile of berries and activating the synthesis and accumulation of diverse compounds in the skin of berries, with consequences on the composition of the grapes. The influence exerted by different meteorological conditions, during three consecutive years (2020-2022) on secondary metabolites such as the polyphenolic profile of Grignolino grapes was investigated. The samples were collected from three vineyards characterized by different microclimatic conditions mainly related to the vineyard aspect and to a different age of the plants.

Impact of yeast derivatives to increase the phenolic maturity and aroma intensity of wine

Using viticultural and enological techniques to increase aromatics in white wine is a prized yet challenging technique for commercial wine producers. Equally difficult are challenges encountered in hastening phenolic maturity and thereby increasing color intensity in red wines. The ability to alter organoleptic and visual properties of wines plays a decisive role in vintages in which grapes are not able to reach full maturity, which is seen increasingly more often as a result of climate change. A new, yeast-based product on the viticultural market may give the opportunity to increase sensory properties of finished wines. Manufacturer packaging claims these yeast derivatives intensify wine aromas of white grape varieties, as well as improve phenolic ripeness of red varieties, but the effects of this application have been little researched until now. The current study applied the yeast derivative, according to the manufacture’s instructions, to the leaves of both neutral and aromatic white wine varieties, as well as on structured red wine varieties. Chemical parameters and volatile aromatics were analyzed in grape musts and finished wines, and all wines were subjected to sensory analysis by a tasting panel. Collective results of all analyses showed that the application of the yeast derivative in the vineyard showed no effect across all varieties examined, and did not intensify white wine aromatics, nor improve phenolic ripeness and color intensity in red wine.

Evaluation of the effect of regulated deficit irrigation on Vitis vinifera Cabernet-Sauvignon physiological traits and final fruit composition

Climate change establishes challenges, as well as opportunities for many sectors, and markedly the wine sector.

Agronomic and oenological behavior of the minority Mandón variety on two rootstocks in the D.O. Arribes

A large population of vines of the Mandón minority red variety (synonymous with Garró) has been located in old vineyards of the D.O. Arribes (Zamora and Salamanca) to conserve and recover this minority variety. The wines made with this variety are characterized by their good structure and color, interesting harmony, an excellently low pH, with high acidity, as well as complex aromas of blue fruits and a marked and expressive minerality.

How different SO2 doses impact amino acid and volatile profile of white wines

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is a well-established preservative in the wine industry. Its ability to act in different stages of the process as an antioxidant and an antiseptic as main characteristics makes it versatile. However, the need for its reduction or even its replacement has been increasing by the regulatory authorities as well as by the final consumer. To understand the impact of SO2 during ageing on volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and amino acids (AAs) profiles, two white wines (one varietal and one blend) were aged under the same conditions, in the presence of different doses of SO2. After fermentation (t=0), 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 mg/L of SO2 were applied, wines were kept over lees for 3 months (t=3), then were bottled after 3 (t=6) and 9 (t=12) months.