GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 Application of GiESCO “bio-metaethics” charter in practice: the “direct” involvement of vine grower, winemaker, society

Application of GiESCO “bio-metaethics” charter in practice: the “direct” involvement of vine grower, winemaker, society

Abstract

On the basis of a direct agreement between the GiESCO and the vine grower, the winemaker and the consumers (individual; company; public or private organizations), the communication on the content of the charter can be done as follows:

• Commitment to respect the basic rules of the GiESCO “BIO – MetaEthics” charter.

1/ Put Mankind in the depth of all concerns in a universal context: (grower, consumer, citizen, work valuing, education, security)

2/ Insure minimum impact on environment by optimizing cultivation technics: (maximum of natural biodegradable products, friendly practices, short channels, renewable energies, terroir sustainability)

3/ Warrant transparency and evaluation of all operations: (traceability of the production line, complete analyses of the products, use of secure scientific methods, wide communication)

• Specific choices made by the vine grower, the winemaker and the consumer (individual; company; public or private organizations) respecting the basic rules.

A precise example is taken in North – East of Italy where activities were conducted in a farm located both in the hillside in the well-known ‘terroir’ of Prosecco area, and in the flat area, and differently managed according to the location.

It has been verified with successful application, that this ” Charter of Direct Sustainability BIO – MetaEthics” can be used anywhere, in conventional or otherwise certified companies (for example: “Organic”, “VIVA”, …), in which the producers want to “certify” their particular characteristics such as:

1-the use of original, innovative, sustainable technics referring to 4.1C guide:

1.1-training systems and winter pruning systems such as: “Prosecco of Prosecco 4.1 C”, “Prosecco of Cartizze

4.1C”, “Prosecco-Latnik 4.1C”, which, among other things, allow not to be damaged by wild boar, roe deer, deer, birds, … and this without altering natural life;

1.2-management of the soil, of the grass, of the plant for example: 1.2.1-completely replacing chemical weeding with perennial grasses without mowing or mowing the grass, but only when and where objectively

“4.1C” this cannot be avoided, 1.2-2-eliminating or drastically reducing interventions on the ground and on the plant such as shoot positioning, topping and edging, for example in companies certified by known Italian certifications that do not include these aspects, 1.2.3-setting a phytosanitary defense applicable anywhere, also, in populated areas;

2-valuing and further personalizing the existing certifications, for example by certifying “GiESCO BIO -MetaEthics” insisting on the use of resistant varieties and the absence of copper residues in companies already certified “Organic”.

Obviously, the “Charter of Direct Sustainability BIO – MetaEthics” of the GiESCO fits the “Direct 4.1C Certification” and also the relative “Direct Guarantee 4.1C”: technical, economic, environmental, social, existential, ethical.

DOI:

Publication date: September 28, 2023

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Poster

Authors

Giovanni CARGNELLO1, Alain CARBONNEAU2

1 Conegliano Campus 5.1C
2 Montpellier SupAgro, IHEV, Montpellier (France)

Contact the author

Keywords

sustainability 4.1CC, new direct certification 4.1CC

Tags

GiESCO | GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Adaptation et expression de l’encépagement et mode de conduite en différents terroirs de la région du Douro/vin de Porto

Ce travail a pour objet l’analyse des résultats agronomiques obtenus sur trois unités expérimentales du Centre d’Etudes Vitivinicoles du Douro (CEVDouro), localisées dans des écosystèmes différenciés de la Région du Douro/Vin de Porto, à différentes altitudes (130, 330 et 520 mètres) et à des expositions diversifiées (SE, N et W).

Combined abiotic-biotic plant stresses on the roots of grapevine

In the 19th century, devastating outbreaks of phylloxera (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae Fitch), almost brought European viticulture to its knees. Phylloxera does not only take energy in form of sugars from the vine, but also affects the up- and down- regulations of genes, acts as a carbon sink and reprograms the physiology of the grapevines, including nutrient uptake and the defense system [1]. A key trait of rootstocks is the ability to perform well under high lime conditions as about 30 % of the land surface has calcareous soil. Iron deficiency not only causes the well-known problems of lime-induced chlorosis and stunted growth, but also affects the entire plant metabolism.

VALORIZATION OF GRAPE WINE POMACE USING PULSED ELECTRIC FIELDS (PEF) AND SUPERCRITICAL CO₂ (SC CO₂) EXTRACTION

Wine grape pomace quantitatively and qualitatively represents the most important fraction of wine waste. Namely, this by-product makes ~ 20% of the total mass of vinified grapes, and it is characterized with high concentrations of polyphenolic antioxidants, as well as grape seed oil. Hence, valorization of wine pomace, as an alternative to traditionally employed disposal, has drown considerable interest in recent years. Earlier studies were mostly focused on the extraction of phenolics, while mechanisms enhancing the extraction of lipid fraction from grape pomace, as well as their impact on the grape seed oil quality are far less investigated.

How to develop strategies of adaptation to climate change based on a foresight exercise?

Prospective studies raise a real intellectual interest for those who contribute to them or take cognizance of it. But they are often considered too difficult to operationalize

The legal concept of “cultural heritage” to refurbish the wine sector’s priorities

Following the latest oiv global report (april 26, 2024), the prevailing perception of wine consumption finds itself undergoing one of its most challenging adjustments. It’s plausible to anticipate a shift in the scope of pdo wines towards more human-centered products (wells and stiefel, 2019), necessitating the entire sector to adapt strategies to public interest patterns (touzeau, 2010: 17-31). Previously, a dominant notion of cultural property underscored the value of wine regions; the primary interest revolved around estate owners and retailers, along with vigneron tales.