GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 First company results and for the territory on the application of the “bio-Métaéthique 4.1c” in italy. Cultural, socio-economic, technical and productive aspects

First company results and for the territory on the application of the “bio-Métaéthique 4.1c” in italy. Cultural, socio-economic, technical and productive aspects

Abstract

In this work the first results obtained in the application of the “Charter of Sustainability Universal Holistic MetaEthic 4.1C” or “Sustainability BIO-MétaÉthique 4.1CC” of GiESCO (Carbonneau, Cargnello, 2017) will be exposed “Direct Certification and Direct Warranty of Sustainability 4.1C” applied in about twenty structures located in the hills and in the plain of the of Italy (North East).
The application of the ” Charter of the Sustainability Universal Holistic MetaEthics 4.1C” or “Sustainability BIO-MétaÉthique 4.1CC” of GiESCO was shared by more than 65% of compilers of the charter and this without any specific communication to the interviewees. This sharing rose more than 95% if the compilers of the form were titled or well-off and with a correct and appropriate communication and allowed us to overcome the imposition of sector limited protocols, unsustainable according to the “Viticulture Bio-MétaÉthique 4.1CC”, inconsistent with the main objective of the same certification, not applicable and/or difficult to apply anywhere.
We cite as an example the eco-friendly, organic and biodynamic viticulture we were able to eliminate the conflict of interests, unacceptable bureaucracy, unacceptable direct and indirect costs, the “confusion” in relation to “Sustainability”, “Certification”, “Guarantee” , to simplify the system and to identify and/or create peculiarities “Sustainable 4.1C”. We also contribute to the indexed harmonic growth “4.1C”: cultural, moral, civil, relational, “Policy” “MetaEthics 4.1C”, ethics, existential, social, occupational, environmental, economic, technical , as well as the growth of the self: choice, determination, responsibility, declaration, control, discipline, and the growth of process and product, rationalizing and containing costs “MetaEthically 4.1C”.
Important is also to make sure that everyone and everything are directly responsible for the role that is right and put their face directly. Hence the acronym of this certification: “CartaBIOSOSDIR4.1C of the Face” or “Let’s Put All the Face 4.1C” or “Certification by putting the Face” or “Certification of the Face 4.1C” or “Certification from the Face” or “Face Certification”, between a “Company BIO-MétaÉthique 4.1C” compared to a “Conventional Company”: the cost containment has fluctuated between 4% and 21% with peaks exceeding 25%.
The buyers willingness to pay more the wine has fluctuated between 6% and 21% with peaks of over 35%. The increase in total profit ranged from 9% to 21% with peaks that duplicated it.

DOI:

Publication date: September 21, 2023

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Poster

Authors

Giovanni CARGNELLO1*, Gianni TEO1,2, Ruggero LUNARDELLI1, Giuseppe COFFELE1, Giorgio CECCHETTO1, Cesare FERRETTI1, Sergio FORNO1, Valerio BORTOLIN1, Lionello DA RIOS1, Daniele GIGANTE1, Stefano LUNARDELLI1, Sasha RADICON1, Edi KANTE1, Andrej SKERLJ1, Andrej BOLE1, Alessio PICININ1, Antonio KININGER1, Davide DANAU1, Marco RUPEL1, Renzo BONA1, Franco GIACOMIN1, Ivan RONCHI1, Gianmaria RIVA1, Danilo FERRARO1, Francesco DONATI1, Luigino BARISAN1,2, Matteo MASIN1,2, Claudio BONGHI1,2, Cristian BOLZONELLA2, Stefano SCAGGIANTE2

1 Conegliano Campus 5.1C, Conegliano (Italy)
2 University of Padua – Seat of Conegliano, Treviso (Italy)

Contact the author

Keywords

first results BioMétaÉthique sustainability 4.1CC, company, territory, BIO – MétaÉthique 4.1C district

Tags

GiESCO | GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Updating the Winkler index: An analysis of Cabernet sauvignon in Napa Valley’s varied and changing climate

This study aims to create an updated, agile viticultural climate index (similar to the Winkler Index) by performing in-depth analyses of current and historical data from industry partners in several major winegrowing regions. The Winkler Index was developed in the early twentieth century based on analysis of various grape-growing regions in California. The index uses heat accumulation (i.e. Growing Degree Days) throughout the growing season to determine which grape varieties are best suited to each region. As viticultural regions are increasingly subject to the complexity and uncertainty of a changing climate, a more rigorous, agile model is needed to aid grape growers in determining which cultivars to plant where. For the first phase of this study, 21 industry partners throughout Napa Valley shared historical phenology, harvest, viticultural practice, and weather data related to their Cabernet sauvignon vineyard blocks. To complement this data, berry samples were collected throughout the 2021 growing season from 50 vineyard blocks located throughout 16 American Viticultural Areas that were then analyzed for basic berry chemistry and phenolics. These blocks have been mapped using a Geographic Information System (GIS), enabling analysis of altitude, vineyard row orientation, slope, and remotely sensed climate data. Sampling sites were also chosen based on their proximity to a weather station. By analyzing historical data from industry partners and data specifically collected for this study, it is possible to identify key parameters for further analysis. Initial results indicate extreme variability at a high spatial resolution not currently accounted for in modern viticultural climate indices and suggest that viticultural practices play a major role. Using the structure of data collection and analyses developed for the first phase, this project will soon be expanded to other wine regions globally, while continuing data collection in Napa Valley.

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.

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.

Impact of changes in pruning practices on vine growth and yield

A gradual decline in vineyards has been observed over the past twenty years worldwide. This might be explained by the climate change, practices change or the increase of dieback diseases. To increase the longevity of vines, we studied the impact of different pruning strategies in four adult and four young vineyards located in France and Spain. In France, vineyards were planted with Cabernet franc on 3309C while Spanish trials were planted with Tempranillo grafted on 110R. Vegetative expression, yield, quality of berries and wood vessels conductivity were measured. The distribution of vegetative expression, yield and berry composition between primary and secondary vegetation were quantified. Finally, tomography was used to evaluate the implication of the treatments on sap flows.
First results show that i) the respectful pruning leads to an increase of 30 to 50% more secondary shoots than the aggressive pruning in France and between 15 and 20% in Spain, ii) there is no major effect on the yield over the first two years following the implementation of the new pruning practices, although the proportion of clusters from suckers is higher on the respectful pruning method. On young vines, the development of the trunk according to a respectful pruning leads to a loss of harvest 2 years after planting. This is due to the removal, on the future trunk, of the green suckers which carrying bunches. This operation carried out in spring rather than during winter pruning, would promote a better leaf / fruit balance when the plant comes into production, and could lead to better hydraulic conduction in the vessels of the trunk. Maintaining these trials for several years will provide more robust data to assess the impact of these practices on the vines over the long term.

Aromatic maturity is a cornerstone of terroir expression in red wine

Harvesting grapes at adequate maturity is key to the production of high-quality red wines. Enologists and wine makers define several types of maturity, including technical maturity, phenolic maturity and aromatic maturity. Technical maturity and phenolic maturity are relatively well documented in the scientific literature, while articles on aromatic maturity are scarcer. This is surprising, because aromatic maturity is, without a doubt, the most important of the three in determining wine quality and typicity (including terroir expression). Optimal terroir expression can be obtained when the different types of maturity are reached at the same time, or within a short time frame. This is more likely to occur when the ripening takes place under mild temperatures, neither too cool, nor too hot. Aromatic expression in wine can be driven, from low to high maturity, by green, herbal, fresh fruit, ripe fruit, jammy fruit, candied fruit or cooked fruit aromas. Green and cooked fruit aromas are not desirable in red wines, while the levels of other aromatic compounds contribute to the typicity of the wine in relation to its origin. Wines produced in cool climates, or on cool soils in temperate climates, are likely to express herbal or fresh fruit aromas; while wines produced under warm climates, or on warm soils in temperate climates, may express ripe fruit, jammy fruit or candied fruit aromas. Growers can optimize terroir expression through their choice of grapevine variety. Early ripening varieties perform better in cool climates and late ripening varieties in warm climates. Additionally, maturity can be advanced or delayed by different canopy management practices or training systems.