Critical Environmental Concerns in Wine Production An Integrative Review

Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Review
Critical environmental concerns in wine production: an integrative

review
Katherine L. Christ*, Roger L. Burritt
Centre for Accounting, Governance and Sustainability, School of Commerce, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 9 January 2013
Received in revised form
24 March 2013
Accepted 3 April 2013
Available online 19 April 2013
Despite the wine industrys reputation as being environmentally safe, prior research has shown the
cultivation of wine grapes and production of wine to be associated with a large number of environmental
concerns. The present study utilised an integrative literature review to investigate key areas of environmental concern currently faced by organisations in the global wine industry. Concerns discussed
include water use and quality, the generation and management of organic and inorganic waste streams,
energy use and the production of greenhouse gas emissions, chemical use, land use issues and the impact
on ecosystems. The review reveals current practice within wine organisations to be largely unexplored
and inadequate. Practice is characterised by a lack of the quantitative environmental data required if the
industry is to bring about lasting environmental improvement to operational processes, products, and
towards economically and environmentally improved performance.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Wine industry
Environmental management
Viticulture
Wine production
Sustainable wine
1. Introduction
Recent years have seen mounting interest in research into
environmental management in high prole dirty industries
(Handeld et al., 2005). Growing interest in carbon dioxide emissions reduction has recently broadened the number of industries
which are seen to pollute and require better environmental management (Kauffmann and Tbar Less, 2010; Ratnatunga and
Balachandran, 2009). Some industries portray a clean and green
image yet their environmental implications remain under
researched. Wine production, one of the worlds oldest industries
(Pretorius, 2000), is one industry for which environmental issues
have gone largely unexplored (Barber et al., 2009; Marshall et al.,
2005). While the industry is often promoted with idyllic images
that depict sweeping green vistas (Delmas and Grant, 2010), the
cultivation of wine grapes and production of wine are far from
environmentally benign activities (Gabzdylova et al., 2009).
Although subject to less political and media scrutiny when
compared with other industries such as chemicals and mining, there
remain many environmental issues with which wine producers
have to contend (Ene et al., 2013; Marshall et al., 2005). The industry
inuences the physical environment within which it operates and at
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 61 410 468 523; fax: 61 8 830 20992.

E-mail addresses: chrkl002@mymail.unisa.edu.au (K.L. Christ), roger.burritt@
unisa.edu.au (R.L. Burritt).
0959-6526/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.007
the same time its future viability is inextricably linked to environmental impacts and conditions (Schaltegger and Burritt, 2000).1
Given the economic and cultural signicance attributed to wine
production across many of the worlds regions, it is vital that
research be undertaken to understand and minimise the negative
environmental impacts associated with the industrys activities.
Such effort is crucial to ensuring the industry remains economically
and environmentally sustainable, both now and in the future. In
order to encourage further research and provide a foundation for
understanding environmental management in the global wine industry, the present article will utilise an integrative literature review
to investigate the key areas of environmental concern currently
facing wine producing organisations.
The remainder of this paper is arranged as follows. Section 2
discusses the lack of extant academic efforts in the area of winerelated environmental management research. Section 3 discusses
the methods used in this study. This is followed by Section 4 which
offers a detailed integrative literature review concerning the key
areas of environmental impact associated with wine production at
the vineyard and processing levels. This section also incorporates a
number of sub-sections in which areas of environmental concern
1
While the production of wine undoubtedly impacts the physical environment
paradoxically the environment in which the grapes are grown is also of utmost
importance in determining the quality of the wine produced. It can be argued,
therefore, wine producers have an inherent interest to engage with and promote
sound environmental management principles.
K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242
are individually addressed. Section 5 addresses the life-cycle issues

associated with wine-related environmental management. Section
6 contains discussion, while Section 7 summarises and concludes
the paper while also offering suggestions for future research based
on the evidence presented in Sections 4 and 5.
2. The environmental impact of wine production e the need

for an academic contribution
Despite being associated with a large number of environmental
ills, the wine industry has traditionally been subject to a lesser
amount of regulatory attention when compared to organisations
operating in other manufacturing settings (Ene et al., 2013;
Gabzdylova et al., 2009; Marshall et al., 2005). Russell and
Battaglene (2007) suggest this situation may be testament to the
fact wine has generally been considered an environmentally safe
product (also see Ruggieri et al., 2009). However, while past misconceptions may extend the industry a degree of protection from
excessive regulation and public scrutiny, they also present a
conundrum for industry participants when assessing the merits of
environmental management; ignore the environmental consequences of their activities, or take action and risk drawing attention
to the negative environmental impacts associated with industry
undertakings (Warner, 2007). Notwithstanding the aforementioned discussion, evidence suggests regulators from around the
world are becoming increasingly aware of the environmental implications of wine production and industry associations are
responding through the development of proactive environmental
initiatives that appear to be designed to support environmental
self-regulation (Cordano et al., 2010; Pullman et al., 2010;
Silverman et al., 2005).2 Recent years have also seen proactive
environmental efforts emanate from a limited number of individual
organisations; however, it can be argued these efforts are the
exception as opposed to the rule.
As alluded to in the previous paragraph, to date efforts to
improve the environmental performance of wine organisations
have been largely driven from within the industry itself (Cordano
et al., 2010). While such action would appear to be a step in the
right direction, it has been argued the effectiveness of current
programs is largely unconrmed and subject to debate (Hughey
et al., 2005; Silverman et al., 2005). While industry associations
appear to be maintaining a focus on industry-wide environmental
improvement, a lack of information on specic areas of environmental concern is creating a large amount of confusion for individuals working at the coalface. Improving knowledge within the
aforementioned area is an undertaking with which academic
research has great potential to assist.
The last ten years have seen a burgeoning effort given to
investigating environmental management within wine organisations; however, it can be argued this body of research remains
disjointed and underdeveloped. Hitherto academic outputs have
ranged from a limited number of generic studies that explore
environmental management within and across different regions
(e.g. Gabzdylova et al., 2009; Marshall et al., 2010), to other studies
that offer scientic evidence in support of innovations designed to
address specic areas of environmental concern (e.g. the land lter
technique for wastewater treatment proposed by Christen et al.
2
Examples of such initiatives include the Entwine Australia program, Sustainable
Winegrowing New Zealand, the Code of Sustainable Winegrowing Practices in the
USA, the Integrated Production of Wine Scheme in South Africa, and other more
generic programs such as ISO 14001 which are popular across the Old World wine
regions of Europe (Knowles and Hill, 2001; Marshall et al., 2010; Warner, 2007;
Winemakers Federation of Australia, 2012).
233
(2010)). However, within this literature a holistic summary of the

environmental problems facing wine producers is yet to be offered
and a number of these issues remain poorly understood. By
providing a summary of wine-related environmental concerns it is
hoped the current paper will afford a foundation for other academics, thereby encouraging further engagement with winespecic environmental research which is required if effective
industry-wide environmental solutions are to be realised. Hence,
this paper will utilise an integrative literature review in an attempt
to address the following question: (RQ1) What are the key areas of
environmental concern currently facing the global wine industry? The
next section will discuss the method used to answer this question.
3. Research method
In order to understand the environmental concerns currently
facing the global wine industry, an integrative literature review was
conducted. An integrative literature review requires the author to
present and summarise the current state of knowledge on a topic
(Neuman, 2006, p. 112) and to provide a synthesis, in this case
leading to identication of a research agenda that ows logically
from the critical analysis of the literature (Torraco, 2005, p. 363).
Literature for inclusion in the review is gleaned from the following
databases: Science Direct, EBSCO, Emerald Management Plus,
JSTOR, ProQuest, SpringerLink, Taylor and Francis and Wiley
Interscience. Keywords employed in initial database searches
included: environmental management, environmental impact,
and environmental concern. These items were combined in
various forms with the following wine-specic search terms: wine
industry, viticulture, wine production, winegrape growing
and oenology. Database search tools were set to order references
based on relevance to these search terms.
Articles in which the wine industry was the specic research
concern were read in full with individual areas of environmental
concern documented and tabulated against relevant references.
This process continued until a saturation point was reached at
which no new information or additional insight was forthcoming.
The literature was then critically analysed in line with each of the
key areas identied using the method outlined above. The process
described facilitated a clearer understanding of the environmental
concerns currently facing the global wine industry. This understanding incorporated not only new insights, but also areas in
which knowledge is decient.
However, while every effort has been made to ensure the
following review provides a balanced and unbiased description of
the current situation, it also comes with a caveat. Although desirable to include a cross-section of evidence from a variety of wine
regions, limited academic publications across a number of areas
meant this was not always possible and, where necessary, academic
literature has been supplemented with government and industrybased reports, as well as commissioned and non-commissioned
studies conducted by independent research bodies. In addition,
while the extant literature contains many examples of research
projects concerned with technological and scientic advances that
may be able to improve specic areas of environmental concern
within the global wine industry, such studies are not elaborated
further here. The main reason is, as noted by Devesa-Rey et al.
(2011, p. 2333), that wine organisations often encounter difculty
in transferring scientic research ndings into actual practice. It
would appear that what seems feasible within a laboratory or
controlled environment, and in the presence of experienced researchers, will often encounter difculties in the face of the commercial realities of contemporary business. This is by no means to
discount or discourage wine-related scientic and technological
research, and indeed further study investigating the diffusion of
234
technological innovation within the wine industry would be a

worthy pursuit, however, such forms of innovation were not of
concern to the present study in which commercial realities in the
face of environmental concern were the primary interest.
The next section will introduce the key areas of environmental
concern currently faced by wine industry participants. This discussion leads into a number of sub-sections in which individual
areas will be addressed independently in line with the research
question presented in Section 2.
4. Specic areas of environmental concern
Drawing on established literature the main areas of environmental concern currently facing wine organisations are able to be
summarised as follows:

Water e use and quality.

Solid waste e organic and inorganic.
Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.
Chemical use.
Land use issues.
The impact on ecosystems.
(Gabzdylova et al., 2009, p. 993 Barber et al., 2009; Forbes et al.,

2009; Knowles and Hill, 2001; Pullman et al., 2010).
The environmental concerns listed above can be further categorised according to the stage of the supply chain in which they
occur: viticulture, winemaking or distribution. Previous research
has found the wine industry to be distinguished by short, vertically
integrated supply chains with many organisations involved with
the management of both vineyards and winemaking operations
(Silverman et al., 2005; Somogyi et al., 2010). This not only exposes
winery managers to production concerns associated with
manufacturing activities, but also the land management issues that
accompany agricultural pursuits. As a result the environmental issues facing wine organisations are incredibly complex and likely to
vary in scope and scale according to the specic activities in which
individual organisations engage and the geographic location in
which they are undertaken. As a result, while viticulture and
winemaking may appear relatively homogeneous, primary areas of
environmental concern are likely to vary between organisations
and across regions necessitating the development of individual
environmental strategies and approaches (Herath et al., 2013).
The following section will discuss each of the aforementioned
areas of environmental concern in greater detail. However, while
there is much to learn from studies that focus on specic environmental impacts and individual areas are discussed here for ease
of understanding, it should be emphasised most of the environmental problems facing wine organisations are inherently interrelated suggesting environmental sustainability at the industry and
enterprise levels will only ever be truly achieved when a holistic
approach is taken.
4.1. Water
Despite being a key input required at the vineyard and winery
levels, evidence suggests the production of wine can also have a
signicant impact on the quantity and quality of current water
resources (Gabzdylova et al., 2009). Although the quantities
required for individual operations will vary according to geographic
location, the organisations size and the production methods
employed, with global demand for water expected to increase, the
onus is on organisations from all sectors to ensure practices used
are the most efcient and effective in light of all available options
(Ene et al., 2013; Goesch et al., 2007). While many wine regions
have gone to great lengths to promote the use of water efcient

irrigation methods such as drip lines and partial root-zone drying
techniques, the rate at which water resources can be used will still
vary both between and within locations thereby preventing the
development of meaningful benchmarks based on the number of
litres used per tonne of grapes produced (Chaves et al., 2007;
Herath et al., 2013; Keller, 2010). However, notwithstanding the
regional difference in resource availability, evidence from diverse
sources suggests water use in wine operations often falls short of
best practice with many managers unaware how water is used
within their operations. For example, in a South African study
conducted in 2005, Sheridan et al. conclude that if asked to report a
volume 80% of winery managers would underreport the amount of
water used in their operations by an average of 60%. Australian
evidence is equally concerning with Kumar et al. (2009) reporting
around 5% of Australian wineries are still using over 8 L of water
within the winery itself to produce a single bottle of wine despite
reported best practice being 0.4 L.
Further to the above, it is not only water use that is of environmental concern to winery operators. Indeed, the cultivation of wine
grapes and production of wine are also associated with a large
number of water quality issues (National Land & Water Resources
Audit, 2008). Sources of potential concern include contamination
of surface and groundwater sources (e.g. increased salinity and nitrate levels), issues associated with contaminated run-off, leaching
of chemical timber preservatives used in vineyard trellising, and
inappropriate treatment and disposal of wastewater generated
during the winemaking process (Barber et al., 2009; Lansbury and
Beder, 2005; Marshall et al., 2005; Musee et al., 2007). The latter is
of particular concern given the potentially damaging composition of
this output and the management of wastewater streams has
attracted a large amount of research attention, largely from within
the engineering disciplines (for example see Musee et al., 2007).
International evidence based on existing practice suggests up to
70% of a winerys total water intake is destined to become wastewater (Knowles and Hill, 2001). Although the generation of
wastewater is not unique to winemaking, the composition of
winery wastewater makes it especially difcult to manage. The
wastewater produced in wineries is low pH, high in both sulphides
and sodium,3 with a high organic content (Knowles and Hill, 2001;
Mosse et al., 2011; Taylor, 2006). Furthermore, disposal of winery
wastewater onto land or into water courses without appropriate
treatment carry signicant environmental risks (Gabzdylova et al.,
2009; Knowles and Hill, 2001).
The primary sources of wastewater contamination within
winemaking facilities include chemical residues (primarily from
cleaning operations) and lost product (grape juice and wine)
(Mosse et al., 2011). Although industry associations publish
guidelines to assist members with wastewater management, evidence suggests a large number of wineries are still falling short of
best practice. For example, it has been suggested many wineries are
seemingly unaware how much product is lost to wastewater within
the winery itself (OBrien and Colby, 2008). Rough estimates reported from Australia suggest the accumulated value of such loss
may amount to millions of dollars per facility per annum (Mosse
et al., 2011). International studies also suggest wineries are not
well informed when it comes to understanding the stages of production at which wastewater contamination and generation occur.
For example, Kumar et al. (2009) report 40% of the wastewater
generated in Australian wineries to be the result of bottling on site.
However, only 1% of this studys respondents reported they
3
The latter is most problematic where sodium based cleaners are used in the
winery (see Mosse et al., 2011).
believed bottling to be a major source of wastewater generation.

Furthermore, studies demonstrate many wineries fail to collect
data on efuent quality and the processes responsible for wastewater production (Frost et al., 2007; Sheridan et al., 2005). In light
of such evidence it is not surprising many wineries are failing to
meet best practice benchmarks. After all, as argued by OBrien and
Colby (2008) and Staniskis and Stasiskiene (2006): you cant
manage what you dont measure.
Evidence suggests there is much potential for wineries to benet
from cleaner production. In a Canadian study, Taylor (2006, p. 606)
reported a large Ontario winery was able to achieve a 30% reduction
in water consumption, a 6% increase in wine yield and a 30% decrease
in the time required to chill the wine product all through applying
basic principles synonymous with cleaner production. Cleaner production has also been promoted to the Australian industry as a
means by which wastewater management is able to be improved
(Frost et al., 2007; Grape and Wine Research and Development
Corporation, 2011). Such potential has also been demonstrated in a
Romanian context with Ene et al. (2013) reporting on a study in
which it was found water minimisation efforts within the winery
itself had potential to reduce total wastewater volume by up to 7%.
Nonetheless, while available literature suggests a number of
methods by which winery managers can address their wastewater
concerns, promotional efforts are often confounded by a lack of
specic scientic information, especially regarding wastewater
treatment and disposal options (Hanran-Smith and Gibberd, 2009),
and the inability to provide generalised, prescriptive guidance that
applies to all organisations (Grismer et al., 1999; Kumar et al.,
2008). However, notwithstanding the gaps in current knowledge,
it is desirable for wineries to limit potential problems through
methods aimed at restricting and containing product loss and
chemical contamination within the winery itself (Ene et al., 2013;
Oliver et al., 2008).
Summarising the above discussion, available evidence suggests
water use and management are important concerns for winemaking
operations and ensuring the appropriate management of current
resources is an important undertaking required to safeguard environmental sustainability of the global wine industry. Yet despite
being cited by numerous sources as highly important to the longterm viability of individual enterprises and the industry as a whole
(Alonso, 2010; Broome and Warner, 2008), the evidence outlined
above demonstrates there are many opportunities for improved
water management. As the consequences associated with global
climate change become more acute, it has been suggested extreme
weather events, including prolonged drought conditions, will
become more common (Herberger, 2012). With competition for
water resources expected to become increasingly erce, it is
important the wine industry take steps to safeguard its position by
nding ways to engage members in more efcient and effective
water management. While industry associations have initiated a
number of projects aimed at addressing these issues, there is also
substantial potential for academic research to contribute to the
development of sustainable industry-wide solutions.
4.2. Solid waste
The generation of organic and other solid waste streams has been
documented as among the most important issues facing the global
wine industry as it moves to improve the environmental performance of its members (Alonso, 2010; Barber et al., 2010; Hughey
et al., 2005; Walsdorff et al., 2005). While evidence suggests some
wineries are starting to adopt waste minimisation strategies, these
efforts have generally been implemented on an ad hoc basis and, as a
result, are often ineffective (Musee et al., 2007). Further confounding efforts to improve wine-related waste management is the lack of
235
quantiable data collected by winery operators (Musee et al., 2007).

Nonetheless, research is being undertaken in this area and a greater
understanding of waste generation and management within winemaking facilities is beginning to emerge.
As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the winemaking process results in two types of solid efuent: organic waste and inorganic waste. The following discussion will consider each of these
categories within separate sections.
The generation of organic waste is an unavoidable consequence
associated with the winemaking process. Organic waste constitutes
one of the main efuents generated by winemaking activities and
includes by-products such as grape marc, lees, pomace, stalk and
dewatered sludge, all of which can result in strong odours and
require appropriate treatment before disposal (Ruggieri et al.,
2009). While some organic waste streams have demonstrated
reuse potential, others exhibit little or no economic value and are
often disposed of into landll or incinerated (Devesa-Rey et al.,
2011; Ruggieri et al., 2009). As with wastewater organic waste
management is complicated by the lack of uniformity in waste
streams produced throughout the year with the majority of efuent
generated during the harvest period (Bustamante et al., 2008;
Ruggieri et al., 2009; Sort et al., 2004).
While recent years have seen growing interest in developing
new markets for organic winery waste and associated by-products,
most research efforts are still in the development phase and opportunity exists to further knowledge in this area (Bustamante
et al., 2008; Devesa-Rey et al., 2011).4 However, notwithstanding
the lack of current knowledge it is important wineries take steps to
minimise the production of organic waste where possible and do
not engage in disposal methods that result in undesirable environmental impacts. A rst step towards furthering knowledge in
this area would be to ensure winery managers understand where
organic waste is produced within their facilities and encourage the
collection of data regarding all organic waste streams. As noted by
Musee et al. (2007, p. 421), in order to generate comprehensive
strategies for waste reduction it is important winery managers
understand when, how and why different kinds of wastes are
generated. Such information will allow opportunities for improved
waste management to be identied and evaluated.
While available evidence suggests some winery managers have
been successful in dealing with organic waste streams via reuse,
composting and associated methods, attempts to manage the ow
of inorganic waste appear less effective. The inorganic waste
generated by wineries includes heavy and bulky packaging materials, used chemical containers, disused pallets and broken and
disused trellising (Gabzdylova et al., 2009). As with organic waste
streams, evidence suggests landll and incineration are popular
choices for the disposal of inorganic waste where such forms of
disposal are legally permissible (Gabzdylova et al., 2009; Knowles
and Hill, 2001; Sort et al., 2004). However, other studies report
wineries to have attained limited success with solid waste management through recycling programs, although it can be argued a
number of areas require further improvement (Environmental
Protection Authority, 2004, 2002; Silverman et al., 2005;
Walsdorff et al., 2005). While the larger body of generic literature
suggests recycling and waste minimisation to be intrinsically linked
to improved economic performance, limited wine-specic literature has failed to support these ndings (Forbes and De Silva, 2012;
Pullman et al., 2010). However, with the increased focus by
4
Readers interested in obtaining a further understanding of current options for
the reuse of organic winery waste are advised to consult Arvanitoyannis et al.
(2006) and Devesa-Rey et al. (2011) who each provide comprehensive reviews of
this topic.
236
governments from around the world on improving the environmental performance of business entities, it can be argued organisations that fail to seek out opportunities for waste minimisation
may have such practices forced upon them through the enactment
of stricter laws and industry-specic regulation (Devesa-Rey et al.,
2011; Saint-Ges and Blis-Bergouignan, 2009).
In summary, it can be argued there are numerous economic and
environmental incentives for wine industry participants to improve
current approaches to waste management. In addition to obvious
environmental benets, anecdotal evidence suggests waste
reduction may decrease overall production costs (Environmental
Protection Authority, 2004; Pullman et al., 2009). As markets for
winery waste become increasingly viable, it is in the interests of
industry participants to monitor waste streams to ensure the future
feasibility of by-product capture. Although not certain at present, it
is anticipated future events will see the creation of new markets for
winery waste that may increase the economic viability of wine
producing organisations. This suggests improved waste management within the wine industry has potential to be economically and
environmentally benecial.
4.3. Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

Evidence suggests an intrinsic link between the climate in
which wine grapes are grown and the ultimate quality of the wine
produced (Webb et al., 2008, p. 99). As a consequence the wine
industry is expected to be especially vulnerable to the impacts
associated with global climate change.
Although not readily appreciated, wine production consumes
large amounts of energy and generates a sizeable quantity of
greenhouse gas. Evidence suggests it takes approximately 2,618 GJ
of energy to process one tonne of grapes into the nished product
and for every standard bottle of wine produced, between 0.41 kg
and 1.6 kg of CO2 is released into the atmosphere5 (Ardente et al.,
2006; Jones, 2003; Smyth and Russell, 2009). Wine distribution
and post-production logistics are also carbon intensive, due in part
to the reliance on heavy and bulky forms of packaging (Barber,
2010; Cholette and Venkat, 2009). Indeed, research has shown
wine itself comprises just half the weight and under 40% of the
volume of a case of twelve 750 mL glass bottles (Cholette and
Venkat, 2009, p. 1402). In addition research has found postproduction logistics to be responsible for around 50% of the CO2
generated within the wine supply chain (Colman and Pster, 2009;
Point et al., 2012). The information presented above suggests that in
order for industry associations to minimise the greenhouse gas
emissions generated by members activities, it may be necessary to
extend consideration beyond the vineyard and winery, and instead
assess carbon emissions for the entire supply chain.
With evidence demonstrating potential for increased temperatures to decimate a large number of wine regions (Jones et al., 2005;
Webb et al., 2008), industry associations from a number of countries recently joined to establish an initiative that would allow their
members a greater understanding of the carbon intensity of their
own operations. The culmination of this effort was the Wine Industry Greenhouse Gas Accounting Calculator released in 2007
(OBrien and Colby, 2008; Waye, 2008). The calculator is an Excel
based program that is freely available via the Internet to all industry
participants. Although the calculator is primarily concerned with
5
The amount of CO2 reported as being associated with each bottle of wine
produced is expected to vary according to the amount of information included in
the calculation. For example, a life-cycle approach would increase the amount of
CO2 reported, whereas the inclusion of carbon sequestration to grapevines would
be expected to reduce it.
Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, it also explicitly considers indirect

outcomes through the separate calculation of selected Scope 3
items (Forsyth et al., 2008). The last provision was designed, in part,
to ensure the calculator would satisfy the requirements of the then
proposed British Standard PAS 2050 on greenhouse gas reporting
(Forsyth et al., 2008). This document was eventually published in
October 2008, and further revised in 2011, and takes a life-cycle
approach by requiring greenhouse gas emissions be calculated for
the entire length of the product supply chain (British Standards
Institution, 2011; James, 2012; Sinden, 2009).
With extant research consistently demonstrating the potentially
devastating consequences of global warming for a number of the
worlds wine regions (Jones et al., 2005; Webb et al., 2008), it is likely
the future will see the wine industry continue to maintain a proactive stance on initiatives aimed at reducing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. However, reporting and understanding energy
use and emissions via tools such as the Wine Industry Greenhouse
Gas Accounting Calculator is one thing, whether this knowledge
changes the activities undertaken in organisations is another.
Therefore ensuring winery operators have access to additional information and tools that allow them to assess different options will
be an important step if the industry is to ultimately succeed in
reducing the energy use and carbon footprint of its members.
4.4. Chemical use
In an apparent departure from the traditional winemaking and
viticultural activities commonly associated with the Old World wine
regions of Europe, evidence suggests contemporary wineries have
become increasingly reliant on chemically derived products and
processes in the pursuit of quality and competitive advantage
(Ruggieri et al., 2009). Yet despite its status as common practice the
use of chemicals is associated with a large number of social and
environmental concerns that extend beyond the individual business
(Carson, 1962). Wineries use chemicals to address agricultural
concerns related to viticultural pursuits, as well as for sanitation and
cleaning in the winemaking facility itself (Gabzdylova et al., 2009).
The following section will consider each of these areas
independently.
As with other forms of agricultural pursuit, chemical vineyard
inputs include synthetic fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides
(Forbes et al., 2009; Marshall et al., 2010). In addition, although
outlawed in an increasing number of countries, some regions also
allow the use of chemically treated timber as a source of vineyard
trellising which can lead to localised leaching of heavy metals into
soil and groundwater sources (Costley, 2011).
The use of chemical products in vineyards has been linked to
numerous environmental concerns including the contamination of
surface and groundwater sources, contaminated run-off, loss of soil
fertility, reduction in bee populations, spray drift, as well as negative impacts on local habitats and neighbouring properties (Broome
and Warner, 2008; Gabzdylova et al., 2009; Hughey et al., 2005).
Furthermore, inappropriate use of chemical products can devastate
the vineyards natural defence network by damaging populations of
natural predators that would usually keep the original pest at bay.
As the numbers of natural predators begin to decrease, vineyard
owners may nd the original pesticide or herbicide is less effective
leading to a dependence on stronger chemicals or the need for
additional applications (Pimentel, 2009; Pimentel et al., 1992). This
not only exacerbates the original problem but increases the risk of
more serious environmental consequences.
Silverman et al. (2005, p. 152) report that in 1998 over
15.4 106 kg of pesticides were applied to wine grapes in California alone (Department of Pesticide Regulation, 1998). It is further
suggested, when compared to other forms of commercial crop, the
level of chemical use in viticulture is disproportionate to the total

area planted to vines (Forbes et al., 2011; Saint-Ges and BlisBergouignan, 2009). For example, Forbes et al. (2011, p. 81) report
on a study undertaken for the Pesticide Action Network Europe in
2008 which suggests that despite occupying only 3% of European
cropland, the wine industry is responsible for 15% of all synthetic
pesticide applications. Based on such evidence it is reasonable to
question the effectiveness of current regimes. Furthermore, while
excessive chemical use is associated with numerous environmental
concerns, evidence suggests the external purchase of chemical
products is also expensive with potential to signicantly increase
total input costs per tonne of grapes produced (Alonso, 2010;
Environmental Protection Authority, 2004; Forbes et al., 2009;
Martinson and Hawk, 2009).
Although there are natural products and techniques available to
assist wineries in overcoming the negative environmental impacts
associated with agrochemical use, many managers have expressed
a preference for synthetic alternatives citing factors such as cost,
time and ease of application (Gabzdylova et al., 2009; Olmstead,
2009). While accepting some natural methods may be labour
intensive, potential benets in terms of yield and vine health
should not be overlooked.
Paradoxically, research suggests it may only be when viticulturists adopt natural approaches that the benets associated with
such activities will become truly apparent. The last point is clearly
demonstrated in a study by Alonso (2010, p. 165) in which a winery
owner is quoted as follows: We found the less we spray the less we
have to spray. Because it is all working with the environment, it
works economically as well (also see Silverman et al., 2005). The
above suggests a signicant challenge for future research will be
quantiably nding ways to articulate the economic and environmental benet associated with natural approaches to viticulture
and wine-related land management.
As previously mentioned, while vineyard management is at the
forefront of debate concerning chemical use within wine operations, a large number of chemicals are also used within the winery
itself. Contemporary wineries use chemicals for cleaning activities,
sanitation, bottle washing, and also as a preservative in the wine
itself. Commonly used chemicals include caustic soda, citric acid,
sulphur, peroxitane, chlorine and clean skin (Gabzdylova et al.,
2009, p. 993; Musee et al., 2007; Sheridan et al., 2005; Silverman
et al., 2005).
When chemicals are used for cleaning and sanitation, they
inevitably end up as non-product output or waste. Within wineries
such chemicals directly impact the quantity and quality of wastewater requiring treatment before disposal (Frost et al., 2007;
Walsdorff et al., 2005). Not only do these waste streams present
numerous forms of environmental threat, they also have potential
to put downward pressure on the nancial bottom-line which is
counter to the interests of individual enterprise and the industry as
a whole (Musee et al., 2007).
Evidence suggests many wineries are engaged in inefcient
practice that will increase the need for chemical inputs and negatively impact the amount and quality of waste produced (Frost
et al., 2007; Musee et al., 2007). Musee et al. (2007) clearly
demonstrate that simple process changes can reduce, not only the
amount of chemicals required, but also the amount of non-product
output and increase potential reuse options when waste streams
are unavoidable. This suggests there are many opportunities for
wineries to benet from good housekeeping activities (also see
Ene et al., 2013; Oliver et al., 2008). However, given Sheridan et al.
(2005) found many wineries fail to keep data on chemical use, it is
possible winery managers may not appreciate how chemicals
impact their operations. Bringing this information together and
nding simple ways to model the relationship between winery
237
practice and associated economic and environmental performance

may be required if winery managers are to recognise the interconnected nature of their operations and nd economically and
environmentally sustainable outcomes.
4.5. Land use issues
Notwithstanding widely held views that associate wine production with environmentally safe practice, the global wine industry is coming under increasing pressure from community
groups regarding land use issues. Wine and its marketing are
strongly focused on space and place (Overton, 2010, p. 753). Recent
years have seen the rapid expansion of many winegrowing regions
and the associated hypothecation of place to the industry and its
products. This is especially true of New World regions including
Australia, the USA and New Zealand (Marshall et al., 2005; Pullman
et al., 2010; Taplin and Breckenridge, 2008). However, concerns are
raised about the destruction of local habitats, loss of biodiversity,
localised pollution and contamination, the impact on neighbouring
properties and market values of land (Barber et al., 2009; Marshall
et al., 2005; Overton, 2010; Pullman et al., 2010; Tee et al., 2007).
These concerns are often exacerbated by the close proximity of
wine operations to local communities (Sinha and Akoorie, 2010)
and the substitution of water intensive vineyards for other activities such as dryland farming operations (Environmental Protection
Authority, 2003).
Despite data suggesting global wine production has exceeded
demand for the last decade (Flint and Golicic, 2009), there is also
evidence that a number of wine regions are still seeking to expand
their activities. For example, in March 2013 the Tasmanian government announced plans to invest $AU1.2 million to increase the
Tasmanian wine industry by 400% in the next ten years (Bolger,
2013). There is also evidence from New Zealand and the United
States of America that wineries in the Marlborough and Napa Valley
regions are seeking to expand their operations (Jensen, 2013;
ORegan, 2012). Such expansion may increase tensions with local
communities and may result in negative publicity directed towards
the industry. Thus it is important wine organisations be able to
tangibly demonstrate their commitment to environmental sustainability and preserving the local landscape if they are to maintain good relations with local communities and minimise areas of
potential conict which is in the interests of both individual organisations and society as a whole (Alonso and Northcote, 2008;
Barber et al., 2010; Marshall et al., 2005).
4.6. The impact on ecosystems
Recent years have seen increasing interest given to the impact
wine producing activities have on local ecosystems. An ecosystem
can be dened as a dynamic complex of plant, animal and microorganism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit (Convention on Biological Diversity,
2013). Galbreath (2011, p. 421) suggests the activities undertaken
in the global wine industry are dependent on ecosystem services
such as naturally puried water, enriched soils, and a stable climate.
Therefore it is important organisations engaged in wine production
participate in activities that seek to work with and preserve the
ecosystems in which they operate.
Zucca et al. (2009) identied ecosystem management as an
important area that must be addressed if sustainable wine production is to be realised. Ecosystem management transcends most
areas of environmental concern already discussed including the use
of chemicals at the vineyard and processing levels, the destruction
of local habitats for grape cultivation, failure to maintain an
adequate level of biodiversity within vineyard environments, and
238
inadequate disposal of winery wastes, especially wastewater, onto

land or into water courses without appropriate consideration for
how such disposal may impact the interrelationships between local
ora and fauna.
The above point is clearly demonstrated in the paper of Pimentel
(2009) which, although not wine-specic, offers a synthesis of the
environmental and economic costs of pesticide use in the United
States of America. Areas of potential concern include surface and
groundwater contamination, animal poisonings, the destruction of
benecial natural predators and parasites, bee poisonings and
reduced pollination, shery losses, negative effects on wild bird
populations and the destruction of microorganisms and invertebrates required to maintain the health and production potential of soil structures. Given the excessive levels of agrochemical
use identied in Section 4.4, there is signicant potential for
ecosystem damage associated with the activities undertaken by a
large number of wine producing organisations. Furthermore, the
literature demonstrates irrigation of grapevines may exacerbate
these problems by carrying excess agrochemicals into riparian
ecosystems (Colman and Pster, 2009).
Notwithstanding the discussion presented above, industry associations from select wine regions are taking steps to minimise the
ecological disturbance created by their members activities. These
efforts are largely concerned with increasing the biodiversity surrounding vineyard and winery sites and natural approaches to land
management. Of particular interest is creating a polyculture within
the vineyard as opposed to the monoculture that characterises a
large number of conventional operations (Olmstead, 2009).
Monocultures are problematic in that they destroy rather than
enhance biodiversity (McEwan and Bek, 2009, p. 263), and are
characterised by an increase in pest outbreaks and the incidence of
disease (Olmstead, 2009). Indeed, as noted by Manandhar et al.
(2010, p. 337) and also alluded in Section 4.5, land use issues are
among the primary determinants of ecosystem vulnerability. It is
important, therefore, that wine producing organisations nd ways
to minimise the level of ecosystem disturbance brought about by
their activities.
Ways in which wine organisations can protect the ecosystems in
which they operate include establishing native plant refugia
within or near vineyards (Olmstead, 2009, p. 30), the use of cover
crops between rows of vines, and the use of integrated pest management techniques (Marshall et al., 2005; Ohmart, 2009;
Silverman et al., 2005). Although it can be argued the tangible
benet associated with some of these activities will be difcult to
quantify physically or observe in the short term, anecdotal evidence
suggests such action will substantially improve the organisations
environmental performance by providing habitats for native animals, reducing the amount of chemical applications required by
attracting benecial insects and natural predators to the site,
increasing the sites biodiversity, protecting soil and local water
sources from contamination threats associated with excessive
agrochemical use, reducing erosion, and reducing the amount of
irrigation required by providing a groundcover that is also a living
form of mulch (Abbona et al., 2007; Marshall et al., 2005). In
addition, Colman and Pster (2009) suggest allowing cover crops to
grow and planting hedgerows, trees and shrubs around vineyards
and winery sites will also benet the organisation by increasing the
amount of carbon sequestration thereby reducing the organisations carbon footprint. However, as with many other areas in the
wine specic literature, knowledge in this eld remains underdeveloped and the literature would benet from additional research
designed to bring about a greater understanding of how different
combinations of activities undertaken to preserve ecosystem
integrity can be used to bring about tangible forms of economic and
environmental improvement.
5. Life-cycle issues and wine-related environmental

management
Thus far the discussion presented has been primarily concerned
with differing areas of environmental impact currently facing wine
organisations at the vineyard and processing levels. However, given
the increased focus on cradle to grave approaches to environmental management this review would not be complete without a
section in which the environmental impacts of wine production are
explicitly considered for the entire supply chain. In recent years
there has been an increased focus in wine-specic academic literature concerning life-cycle approaches to environmental management (Flint and Golicic, 2009; Ruggieri et al., 2009). Life-cycle
assessment (LCA) involves assessing the environmental implications associated with a product from initial extraction [of raw
materials and upstream supplies] to nal disposal (Mann et al.,
2010, p. 204). This concept was briey introduced in Section 4 in
which Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions were discussed. The
purpose of the current section is to extend this discussion and offer
an explicit consideration of life-cycle environmental concerns
currently facing the global wine industry.
The literature now contains several examples of studies in
which various environmental impacts of wine production have
been assessed over the entire supply chain. A study of particular
note is that of Point et al. (2012) who assessed the life-cycle impacts
associated with a single 750 mL bottle of wine produced in Nova
Scotia, Canada. Across all impact categories assessed the researchers found vineyard activities and consumer shopping
[made] the largest relative contributions [with] bottle manufacture,
winery activities, and transport of wine to retail [contributing] the
bulk of the remaining [environmental] impacts (Point et al., 2012,
p. 14). In addition, approximately 50% of the vineyard-level
toxicity-related impacts were associated with the manufacture of
steel posts and the use of chemical timber preservatives on vineyard trellising (Point et al., 2012, p. 14). Soosay et al. (2012, p. 71)
also report on an Australian study in which it was found trellising
systems were the single largest contributor of [greenhouse gas]
emissions in the value chain. However, it is also suggested that as
consumers attach no value to this item, there is little incentive for
growers to develop energy efcient alternatives. Similarly in a European study Ardente et al. (2006) discovered the production of
glass bottles and packaging materials to be responsible for around
half of the energy consumption associated with the winemaking
process. This last point is especially concerning in light of research
that has shown the majority of wine bottles are made from virgin
glass (Barber, 2010; Colman and Pster, 2009). What the abovementioned discussion serves to demonstrate is that unless a cradle
to grave approach to environmental management is taken
knowledge concerning the environmental impacts associated with
wine production will essentially remain incomplete.
However, while the wine industry undoubtedly has an impact
on the physical environment that extends beyond the vineyard and
winery levels, it is unlikely the near future will see an increase in
the use of LCA techniques in the majority of the worlds wineries. As
noted by Camilleri (2009) in his discussion of LCA and supply chain
management at the Yalumba wine company in Australia, it is very
costly and time consuming to compile the information required for
a full LCA putting the technique out of reach for a large number of
organisations (also see Ardente et al., 2006). Furthermore, the
heterogeneous nature of wine production across facilities and regions means that, while the generation of information about industry averages is theoretically possible, meaningful comparison
across different facilities would not be of practical use (Ardente
et al., 2006). In addition temporal changes to climatic conditions
can affect the environmental impacts associated with specic wine
products over time which may also confound attempts to undertake benchmarking activities at the intraorganisational level.
Nonetheless, even where a full LCA is not practical there remain
many options for organisations within the wine industry to work
together to optimise supply chain management with a view to
shared economic and environmental benet. An example of such
activity can be seen in a South Australian Environmental Protection
Authority (EPA) study in which the Yalumba wine company
collaborated with the EPA and ten suppliers with varied operations
to undertake an eco-efciency driven project aimed at optimising
environmental activities within this network of organisations
(Environmental Protection Authority, 2004).6 At the end of the rst
year this collaborative effort resulted in tangible benets equivalent to $AU 86,500 with the majority of participants attaining some
form of economic improvement. In addition, numerous environmental benets arose including reduced energy use, increased efciency, reduction in waste disposal to landll, reduced water use
and a reduction in the amount of chemical sprays used by the grape
growers (Environmental Protection Authority, 2004).
The discussion presented above serves to demonstrate several
points. First, environmental concerns are not necessarily conned
to individual organisations and attempts to manage the environmental impacts associated with the wine industry will, in the long
term, require a broader perspective informed by LCA and supply
chain management techniques. Second, there are many opportunities for collaboration in the wine industry with potential to
produce tangible, shared economic and environmental improvements. Finally, industry associations and regulators may need to
provide the means to facilitate such collaboration if the industry is
to make meaningful inroads towards becoming environmentally
sustainable.
6. Discussion
The previous two sections introduced the myriad of environmental issues currently facing wine organisations around the
world. However, the aforementioned evidence also suggests that, to
date, the need to address areas of environmental concern has been
met with a mixed level of commitment and success at the organisational level. While it can be argued widely-held views that link
environmental conditions to wine quality provide a powerful
incentive for winery managers from all regions, and regardless of
their organisations size, to engage in proactive forms of environmental management, it would appear this logic does not always
prevail (Marshall et al., 2010). One possible explanation for this
discrepancy may be that, despite the positive attitude towards
sustainably produced wine on the part of many winemakers, the
relationship between environmentally sustainable practice and
ultimate wine quality remains tenuous. For example, as noted by
Pullman et al. (2010, p. 48) in discussing the benets of environmentally sustainable wine: thus far it has been difcult to
demonstrate the positive effects of sustainability in the product. As
a result markets for green wine remain underdeveloped and
additional research investigating the relationship between environmentally friendly activities and the quality of the end product
may be required (Marshall et al., 2005). In addition, as suggested by
Zucca et al. (2009, p. 193), it will also be important to develop
appropriate programs that help the consumer [to be able to]
identify and distinguish [sustainable wine] products.
6
Organisations involved included Yalumba, a wine producer; a capsule manufacturer; a label manufacturer; a cork supplier; a nursery products supplier; a
refrigeration services company; a wine bladder manufacturer; a distiller; two grape
growers; and a wine maker (Environmental Protection Authority, 2004).
239
Not unlike empirical evidence reported from other sectors,

research suggests managers in the wine industry are unlikely to
engage in environmentally proactive scientic and technological
initiatives if they perceive the benet to be obtained from such
activities fails to justify the time and cost required to implement
them (Cambra-Fierro and Ruiz-Bentez, 2011; Knowles and Hill,
2001; Szolnoki et al., 2011; Tee et al., 2007; Yiridoe and Marett,
2004). Although anecdotal evidence suggests there are many opportunities for wine-related operations to benet economically
from improved environmental outcomes (Ene et al., 2013), the lack
of quantiable data collected on areas of environmental concern as
identied in Section 4 would appear such that any attempt to undertake cost-benet analysis would be at risk of producing inaccurate results and may give rise to awed conclusions. Be it water
use or the management of solid waste ows, the evidence presented in Section 4 suggests many industry-specic environmental
efforts are being implemented on an ad hoc basis and are often
grounded in informal estimates. This summation is consistent with
a Californian study reported by Silverman et al. (2005) in which it
was found while Californian wineries report success in the recycling and reuse of production inputs, many fail to measure, monitor
or audit the actual environmental activities undertaken within
their facilities. An EPA audit of South Australian wineries conducted
in 2002 also observed environmental monitoring to be an area in
which many wineries needed to improve (also see OBrien and
Colby, 2008; Mann et al., 2010).
If we accept the argument presented by Walsdorff et al. (2005,
p. 69) that sound environmental management decisions in the
wine industry must be based on reliable records retrieved from
consistent monitoring it is perhaps not surprising many authors
have questioned the effectiveness of current practice (also see
California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance, 2011; Delmas and
Grant, 2010; Hayward et al., 2002; Mann et al., 2010; OBrien
and Colby, 2008; van Schoor, 2005). For example, OBrien and
Colby (2008, p. 34) suggested wine losses in wineries are not
known because they are not measured and they speculated energy
losses are similarly unknown: Despite accepted wisdom that
refrigeration plants are expensive and consume substantial
amounts of electricity, little data is available showing just how
much electricity they use. If the wine industry wants to be prepared for the introduction of the Federal Governments [carbon
tax] it needs better data on what carbon emissions it produces,
where they occur and how they could be reduced. In addition,
Knowles and Hill (2001), among others, suggest industry-specic
environmental programs are often insufcient as they fail to
demonstrate actual improvements in environmental performance
and are at best vulnerable to criticism and, at worst, accusations of
greenwashing. From a management perspective it can be argued
the absence of quantitative data would make it difcult, if not
impossible, to recognise and assess opportunities for improved
performance and monitor long run progress towards the end goal
of environmental sustainability (also see Kennedy/Jenks
Consultants, 2008). Yet there is evidence the situation is slowly
improving. Under the California Sustainable Winegrowing
Alliances (2011, p. 1) performance metrics project growers and
vintners will at last be provided with tools to measure, manage
and track their use of natural resources emanating from a pilot
project in mid-2012.
Further to the above, although recent years have seen many
winemakers express an interest in environmentally proactive
practice and isolated examples of environmental innovation can be
found in most regions, the process of sustainable wine production
is exceedingly complex and requires a large number of trade-offs
(Camilleri, 2008; Pullman et al., 2009; Yiridoe and Marett, 2004).
As summarised by Ohmart (2009, p. 8):
240
If you can dene sustainable winegrowing for yourself and

decide on which practices to implement using a sustainability
yardstick, the next challenge is to be able to assess what impact
they have on your nances, the quality of your crop, the environment, your workers and the surrounding community.
While Ohmarts (2009) comment specically referred to vineyard operations, the process of implementing environmentally
sustainable practice at the winery level can be equally daunting.
Indeed, prior research suggests the process of environmental
management is often a source of signicant confusion for industry
participants (Knowles and Hill, 2001; Pullman et al., 2009; Szolnoki
et al., 2011). When combined with perceptions that associate
environmental practice as costly and time-consuming (Hughey
et al., 2005; Knowles and Hill, 2001; Tee et al., 2007), it is
possible the level of environmental complexity may be partially
responsible for results reported by Marshall et al. (2010) who found
winery managers positive attitudes regarding the benets of
improved environmental management were not associated with an
overall increase in environmentally proactive activities. This supposition is also consistent with the evidence on individual areas of
environmental concern presented in Section 4.
The complexity introduced in the previous paragraph is further
complicated by variation in regional conditions which necessitate
individual approaches to environmental management. The importance of context-specic environmental solutions is supported in
the extant literature. For example, an Argentinian study by Abbona
et al. (2007) found vineyard practices that were ecologically sustainable in one setting became unsustainable when applied to
another setting in which geographic conditions differed (also see
Herath et al., 2013). What this means is that environmental guidance within the wine industry will, of necessity, always be general
and be likely to lack the level of prescription preferred by managers.
As such, while governments and industry associations can provide
assistance in developing environmental management guidelines, it
is unlikely these will be implemented to the same degree between
individual organisations as differences in organisational activities
and geographic conditions will always be such as to render uniformity of action impossible. What will become important, therefore, is ensuring winery and vineyard managers understand the
principles of sound environmental management, develop skills to
be able to assess their situation and implement solutions and
production changes as appropriate to their own circumstances. This
makes it even more important to ensure managers have access to
environmental information and tools that will enable them to
formulate the solutions that are best for them.
Determining the appropriate policy mix required to encourage
winery and vineyard operators to engage with environmental information is a challenge for future research. However, given the
largely heterogeneous nature of environmental management in
wine operations it may be prudent for regulators and industry associations to work in a collaborative way to ascertain the most
appropriate method of achieving economically and environmentally sustainable solutions for both the wine industry and the
community in which it operates. The following section will
conclude this paper while also offering a number of suggestions for
future research.
7. Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to identify and provide a synthesis
relating to the key areas of environmental concern currently facing
the global wine industry. Drawing on extant evidence the following
areas were identied and discussed: water use and quality issues,
the production and management of organic and inorganic solid
waste streams, energy use and the generation of greenhouse gas

emissions, the use and management of chemicals in the vineyard
and winery, land use issues and the impact on ecosystems. The
literature reviewed suggests, although some wineries and regions
are achieving limited success with one or more of these areas, on
the whole environmental management across many of the worlds
wine regions is currently inadequate. The evidence also suggests
many organisations are failing to collect data on the environmental
implications associated with their activities. However, actual evidence on the types of environmental information collected and
how this information is used by wine organisations is sparse.
Therefore, future research should be developed to investigate the
types of environmental information collected by wineries and how
this information is used. While it is accepted environmental solutions will vary between organisations, this information is required
to provide a benchmark for the current level of environmental
commitment and management across wine organisations. Such
studies could be conducted both within regions and across regions.
Although complicated by regional peculiarities, it will also be
important to assess how the use of environmental information
impacts environmental outcomes within organisations and how
the use of different types of environmental information can best be
promoted and improved. Such effort would benet from investigation concerning barriers, or the perception of barriers, to the
collection and use of such information within wine organisations.
In addition it will be important to consider how wine organisations
can be supported to improve their environmental performance
including what mechanisms can be used to encourage the use of
environmental information by wine organisations, the types of
support winery and vineyard operators require in order to engage
in the collection and use of environmental information, and what
tools can be used to improve environmental performance within
individual organisations and the industry as a whole.
Further to the above, with select academics now advocating
environmental research move beyond physical issues to take a
more holistic view of sustainable action, it can be argued this line of
investigation would also benet from the incorporation of social
issues and impacts in the long term. It would likewise be interesting to investigate how the wine culture inherent in different
countries and regions affects actions impacting on the physical
environment, as well as the overall level of environmental activity
and response. Finally, the literature would benet from studies
designed to obtain a greater understanding of the interplay between economic and environmental performance given these two
areas were identied in Sections 4e6 as largely interconnected.
While it can be argued this article presents more questions than
it answers, answers to these questions will be required if sustainable industry-wide environmental solutions for the global wine
industry are to be realised. For too long academic research has
ignored the environmental implications of wine production, yet
there is great potential for academics to develop information and
solutions that can be used to improve the environmental performance of wine organisations.
Although every effort has been made within this composition to
provide a comprehensive yet compact synthesis of the environmental concerns facing wine producers, the recommendations
made herein must be viewed in light of several limitations. First,
while this article offers coverage of the main areas of environmental concern currently faced by wine-related organisations, it is
not possible to cover every issue within the connes of a single
article. Environmental management in vineyards and wineries is
extremely complex and certain issues, such as increased salinity,
while also important, are not covered in detail. In addition, while it
is possible to make recommendations based on available evidence
the literature in this area is still underdeveloped and there may be
gaps in the arguments presented. However, as the literature on

wine-related environmental management continues to develop in
terms of scope and scale, the shortcomings in current knowledge
will begin to be resolved. Lastly, it was not the intention of this
article to present all wine organisations as environmental pariahs.
There are many environmental champions in practice and examples of comprehensive environmental management and innovation
do exist. However, the wine industry does face a large number of
environmental issues that hitherto have gone largely ignored, by
the media, by regulators, by consumers, and sometimes by the
winery operators themselves. What was intended by this integrative literature review was to draw attention to this fact and highlight the potential for academic research in this area.
In conclusion, by addressing the research question posed at the
beginning of this paper, the purpose was not in itself to provide the
means of improving environmental performance in the global wine
industry, but rather to highlight the main areas of environmental
concern and encourage research in this as yet under-researched
eld of increasing environmental importance. If the global wine
industry is to remain sustainable, its members must continue to
address and improve their environmental performance. When all is
said and done available evidence suggests an environmentally
healthy wine industry makes economic and environmental sense
and that is something we can all drink to.
References
Abbona, E.A., Sarandn, S.J., Marasas, M.E., Astier, M., 2007. Ecological sustainability
evaluation of traditional management in different vineyard systems in Berisso,
Argentina. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 119, 335e345.
Alonso, A.D., 2010. How green are small wineries: Western Australias case. Brit.
Food J. 112, 155e170.
Alonso, A.D., Northcote, J., 2008. Small winegrowers views on their relationship
with local communities. J. Wine Res. 19, 143e158.
Ardente, F., Beccali, G., Cellura, M., Marvuglia, A., 2006. POEMS: a case study of an
wine-producing rm. Environ. Manage. 38, 350e364.
Arvanitoyannis, I.S., Ladas, D., Mavromatis, A., 2006. Potential uses and applications
of treated wine wastes: a review. Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 41, 475e487.
Barber, N., 2010. Green wine packaging: targeting environmental consumers. Int.
J. Wine Business Res. 22, 423e444.
Barber, N., Taylor, C., Strick, S., 2009. Wine consumers environmental knowledge
and attitudes: inuence on willingness to purchase. Int. J. Wine Res. 1, 59e72.
Barber, N., Taylor, D.C., Deale, C.S., 2010. Wine tourism, environmental concerns,
and purchase intention. J. Travel Tourism Marketing 27, 146e165.
Bolger, R., March 2013. Mixed Feelings over Wine Industry Vision, vol. 5. The
Examiner.
British Standards Institution, 2011. PAS 2050: Specication for the Assessment of
the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services. BSI, London.
Broome, J.C., Warner, K.D., 2008. Agro-environmental partnerships facilitate sustainable wine-grape production and assessment. Calif. Agr 62, 133e141.
Bustamante, M.A., Moral, R., Paredes, C., Prez-Espinosa, A., Moreno-Caselles, J.,
Prez-Murcia, M.D., 2008. Agrochemical characterisation of the solid byproducts and residues from the winery and distillery industry. Waste. Manag.
28, 372e380.
California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance, 2011. California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance News. Winter 2011.
Cambra-Fierro, J., Ruiz-Bentez, R., 2011. Sustainable business practices in Spain: a
two-case study. Eur. Bus. Rev. 23, 401e412.
Camilleri, C.S., 2008. Sharing Yalumba: communicating Yalumbas commitment to
sustainable winemaking. Corp. Comm. Int. J. 13, 18e41.
Camilleri, C.S., 2009. The life cycle paradigm as an intrinsic component of supply
network and value analysis: a contribution to strategic dialogue at the Yalumba
wine company. In: Paper Presented at the 6th Annual Conference on Life Cycle
Assessment e Sustainability Tools for a New Climate, Melbourne, Australia, 16e
19 February 2009.
Carson, R., 1962. Silent Spring. Houghton-Mifin, Boston.
Chaves, M.M., Santos, T.P., Souza, C.R., Ortuo, M.F., Rodrigues, M.L., Lopes, C.M.,
Maroco, J.P., Pereira, J.S., 2007. Decit irrigation in grapevine improves wateruse efciency while controlling vigour and production quality. Ann. Appl.
Biol. 150, 237e252.
Cholette, S., Venkat, K., 2009. The energy and carbon intensity of wine distribution:
a study of logistical options for delivery wine to consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 17,
1401e1413.
Christen, E.W., Quayle, W.C., Marcoux, M.A., Arienzo, M., Jayawardane, N.S., 2010.
Winery wastewater treatment using the land lter technique. J. Environ.
Manag. 91, 1665e1673.
241
Colman, T., Pster, P., 2009. Red, White and Green: the cost of greenhouse gas
emissions in the global wine trade. J. Wine Res. 20, 15e26.
Convention on Biological Diversity, 2013. Ecosystem Approach. http://www.cbd.int/
ecosystem (accessed 21.03.13.).
Cordano, M., Marshall, R.S., Silverman, M., 2010. How do small and medium enterprises do green? A study of environmental management programs in the
U.S. wine industry. J. Bus. Ethics 92, 463e478.
Costley, D., 2011. CCA timber posts a toxic issue for industry. The Aust. New Zealand Grapegrower Winemaker 564, 33e36.
Delmas, M.A., Grant, L.E., 2010. Eco-labeling strategies and price-premium: the
wine industry puzzle. Bus. Soc. 20, 1e39.
Department of Pesticide Regulation, 1998. California Annual Pesticide Use Report.
Sacremento, California. http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/pur/pur98rep/comrpt98.
pdf (accessed 28.11.12.).
Devesa-Rey, R., Vecino, X., Varela-Alende, J.L., Barral, M.T., Cruz, J.M., Moldes, A.B.,
2011. Valorization of winery wastes vs. the costs of not recycling. Waste. Manag.
31, 2327e2335.
Ene, S.A., Teodosiu, C., Robu, B., Volf, I., 2013. Water footprint assessment in the
wine making industry: a case study for a Romanian medium size production
plant. J. Clean. Prod. 43, 122e135.
Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) South Australia, August 2002. Wineries
and the Environment: an Audit of the Environmental Management Performance of SA Wineries. (Adelaide, South Australia).
Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) South Australia, 2003. State of the
Environment Report 2003 e Land. Adelaide, South Australia.
Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) South Australia, July 2004. Greening the
Supply Chain: Greener Business Alliance Project Report. Adelaide, South
Australia.
Flint, D.J., Golicic, S.L., 2009. Searching for competitive advantage through sustainability: a qualitative study in the New Zealand wine industry. Int. J. Phys.
Distrib. Logist. Manag. 39, 841e860.
Forbes, S.L., Cohen, D.A., Cullen, R., Wratten, S.D., Fountain, J., 2009. Consumer attitudes regarding environmentally sustainable wine: an exploratory study of
the New Zealand marketplace. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 1195e1199.
Forbes, S.L., Cullen, R., Cohen, D.A., Wratten, S.D., Fountain, J., 2011. Food and wine
production practices: an analysis of consumer views. J. Wine Res. 22, 79e86.
Forbes, S.L., De Silva, T., 2012. Analysis of environmental management systems in
New Zealand wineries. Int. J. Wine Business Res. 24, 98e114.
Forsyth, K., Oemcke, D., Michael, P., 2008. Greenhouse Gas Accounting Protocol for
the International Wine Industry. Version 1.1. Provisor Pty Ltd and Yalumba
Wines, Glen Osmond, South Australia.
Frost, P., Kumar, A., Correll, R., Quayle, W., Kookana, R., Christen, E., Oemcke, D.,
2007. Current practices for the winery wastewater management and its reuse:
an Australian industry survey. Wine Ind. J. 22, 40e48.
Gabzdylova, B., Raffensperger, J.F., Castka, P., 2009. Sustainability in the New Zealand wine industry: drivers, stakeholders and practices. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 992e
998.
Galbreath, J., 2011. To what extent is business responding to climate change? Evidence from a global wine producer. J. Bus. Ethics 104, 421e432.
Goesch, T., Hone, S., Gooday, P., 2007. Groundwater Management: Issues Affecting
the Efcient Allocation of Groundwater, vol. 14. Australian Commodities,
pp. 201e211.
Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation, 2011. Winery Wastewater
Management and Recycling: Business Fundamentals. Grape and Wine Research
and Development Corporation, Adelaide, South Australia.
Grismer, M.E., Carr, M.A., Shepherd, H.L., 1999. Fermentation industry. Water Environ. Res. 71, 805e812.
Handeld, R., Sroufe, R., Walton, S., 2005. Integrating environmental management
and supply chain strategies. Bus. Strat. Environ. 14, 1e19.
Hanran-Smith, G., Gibberd, M., 2009. Improved industry capacity for wastewater
management by small wineries in the Margaret River wine region. Unpublished
Report. Winewatch, Curtin University, Western Australia.
Hayward, D.J., Bezuidenhout, S., Lorenzen, L., Barnardt, C.A., 2002. Practical environmental management in the South African wine industry. In: Paper Presented
at the Biennial Conference of the Water Institute of Southern Africa (WISA).
Durban, South Africa, 19e23 May 2002.
Herath, I., Green, S., Singh, R., Horne, D., van der Zijpp, S., Clothier, B., 2013. Water
footprinting of agricultural products: a hydrological assessment for the water
footprint of New Zealand wines. J. Clean. Prod. 41, 232e243.
Herberger, M., 2012. Australias millennium drought: impacts and responses. In:
Gleick, P.H. (Ed.), The Worlds Water Volume 7: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources. Pacic Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and
Society, pp. 97e125.
Hughey, K.F.D., Tait, S.V., OConnell, M.J., 2005. Qualitative evaluation of three
environmental management systems in the New Zealand wine industry.
J. Clean. Prod. 13, 1175e1187.
James, K., 2012. An investigation of the relationship between recycling paper and
card and greenhouse gas emissions from land use change. Resour. Conservat.
Recycl 67, 44e55.
Jensen, P., 2013. Grape Source Rules Divide Wine Industry. Napa Valley
Register.com. http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/grape-source-rulesdivide-wine-industry/article_d6358a8e-678a-11e2-b837-0019bb2963f4.html
(accessed 20.03.13.).
Jones, G.V., White, M.A., Cooper, O.R., Storchmann, K., 2005. Climate change and
global wine quality. Climatic Change 73, 319e343.
242
Jones, K., 2003. Australian Wine Industry: State of the Environment 2003. South
Australian Wine Industry Association Inc., Australia.
Kauffmann, C., Tbar Less, C., 2010. Transition to a low-carbon economy: public
goals and corporate practices. In: 10th OECD Roundtable on Corporate Responsibility, 30 Junee1 July 2010, Paris, France.
Keller, M., 2010. Managing grapevines to optimise fruit development in a challenging environment: a climate change primer for viticulturists. Aust. J. Grape
Wine Res. 16 (Suppl. S1), 56e69.
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2008. Comprehensive Guide to Sustainable Management of Winery Wastewater and Associated Energy. The Wine Institute, California, USA.
Knowles, L., Hill, R., 2001. Environmental initiatives in South African wineries: a
comparison between small and large wineries. Eco-management and Auditing
8, 210e228.
Kumar, A., Correll, R., Kookana, R., 2008. Winery wastewater workshops translate
research into practice. Wine Ind. J. 23, 60e63.
Kumar, A., Frost, P., Correll, R., Oemcke, D., 2009. Winery Wastewater Generation,
Treatment and Disposal: a Survey of Australian Practice. CSIRO Land and Water
Report. 17 March 2009, Glen Osmond, South Australia.
Lansbury, N., Beder, S., February 2005. Treated Timber, Toxic Time-bomb: the Need
for a Precautionary Approach to the Use of Copper Chrome Arsenate (CCA) as a
Timber Preservative. University of Wollongong.
Manandhar, R., Odeh, I.O.A., Pontius Jr., R.G., 2010. Analysis of twenty years of
categorical land transitions in the Lower Hunter of New South Wales, Australia.
Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 135, 336e346.
Mann, J.C., Abramczyk, M.L., Andrews, M.R., Rothbart, J.A., Small, R.M., Bailey, R.R.,
2010. Sustainability at Kluge Estate vineyard and winery. In: Crowther, K.G.
(Ed.), Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Systems and Information Engineering
Design Symposium. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, pp. 203e208.
Marshall, R.S., Akoorie, M.E.M., Hamann, R., Sinha, P., 2010. Environmental practices
in the wine industry: an empirical application of the theory of reasoned action
and stakeholder theory in the United States and New Zealand. J. World Bus 45,
405e414.
Marshall, R.S., Cordano, M., Silverman, M., 2005. Exploring individual and institutional drivers of proactive environmentalism in the US wine industry. Bus. Strat.
Environ. 14, 92e109.
Martinson, T., Hawk, J., 2009. VineBalance: sustainable viticulture for New York. In:
Striegler, R.K., Allen, A., Bergmeier, E., Harris, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Symposium on Sustainability in Vineyards and Wineries. University of Missouri
Extension, pp. 34e40.
McEwan, C., Bek, D., 2009. The political economy of alternative trade: social and
environmental certication in the South African wine industry. J. Rural Stud. 25,
255e266.
Mosse, K.P.M., Patti, A.F., Christen, E.W., Cavagnaro, T.R., 2011. Review: winery
wastewater quality and treatment options in Australia. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res.17,
111e122.
Musee, N., Lorenzen, L., Aldrich, C., 2007. Cellar waste minimization in the wine
industry: a systems approach. J. Clean. Prod. 15, 417e431.
National Land & Water Resources Audit, 2008. Signposts for Australian Agriculture
e the Australian Wine Industry. NLWRA, Canberra.
Neuman, W.L., 2006. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, sixth ed. Pearson Education, Boston.
OBrien, V., Colby, C., 2008. Energy e if its not measured, it doesnt exist! Wine Ind.
J. 20, 28e34.
ORegan, S., 27 November 2012. Wine Industry Urged to Be Vigilant. Marlborough
Express.
Ohmart, C., 2009. Sustainable winegrowing: what is it and where does it come
from? In: Striegler, R.K., Allen, A., Bergmeier, E., Harris, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of
the Symposium on Sustainability in Vineyards and Wineries. University of
Missouri Extension, pp. 7e24.
Oliver, P., Rodrguez, R., Udaquiola, S., 2008. Water use optimization in batch industries. Part 1: design of the water network. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1275e1286.
Olmstead, M., 2009. The greening of Pacic Northwest vineyards. In:
Striegler, R.K., Allen, A., Bergmeier, E., Harris, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Symposium on Sustainability in Vineyards and Wineries. University of Missouri
Extension, pp. 27e33.
Overton, J., 2010. The consumption of space: land, capital and place in the New
Zealand wine industry. Geoforum 41, 752e762.
Pimentel, D., 2009. Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides
primarily in the United States. In: Peshin, R., Dhawan, A.K. (Eds.), Integrated Pest
Management: Innovation-development Process. Springer, pp. 89e111.
Pimentel, D., Acquay, H., Biltonen, M., Rice, P., Silva, M., Nelson, J., Lipner, V.,
Giordano, S., Horowitz, A., DAmore, M., 1992. Environmental and economic
costs of pesticide use. BioScience 42, 750e760.
Point, E., Tyedmers, P., Naugler, C., 2012. Life cycle environmental impacts of wine
production and consumption in Nova Scotia, Canada. J. Clean. Prod. 27, 11e20.
Pretorius, I.S., 2000. Tailoring wine yeast for the new millennium: novel approaches
to the ancient art of winemaking. Yeast 16, 675e729.
Pullman, M.E., Maloni, M.J., Carter, C.R., 2009. Food for thought: social versus
environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes. J. Supply.
Chain. Manag. 45, 38e54.
Pullman, M.E., Maloni, M.J., Dillard, J., 2010. Sustainability practices in food supply
chains: how is wine different? J. Wine Res. 21, 35e56.
Ratnatunga, J.T.D., Balachandran, K.R., 2009. Carbon business accounting: the
impact of global warming on the cost and management accounting profession.
J. Account. Audit. Finance 24, 333e355.
Ruggieri, L., Cadena, E., Martinez-Blanco, J., Gasol, C.M., Riervadevall, J., Gabarrell, X.,
Gea, T., Sort, X., Snchez, A., 2009. Recovery of organic wastes in the Spanish
wine industry. Technical, economic and environmental analyses of the composting process. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 830e838.
Russell, A., Battaglene, T., March 2007. Trends in Environmental Assurance in Key
Australian Wine Export Markets. Winemakers Federation of Australia.
Saint-Ges, V., Blis-Bergouignan, M., 2009. Ways of reducing pesticides use in
Bordeaux vineyards. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 1644e1653.
Schaltegger, S., Burritt, R.L., 2000. Contemporary Environmental Accounting e Issues, Concepts and Practice. Greenleaf Publishing, Shefeld, UK.
Sheridan, C.M., Bauer, F.F., Burton, S., Lorenzen, L., 2005. A critical process analysis of
wine production to improve cost, quality and environmental performance.
Water Sci. Tech. 51, 39e46.
Silverman, M., Marshall, R.S., Cordano, M., 2005. The greening of the California wine
industry: implications for regulators and industry associations. J. Wine Res. 16,
151e169.
Sinden, G., 2009. The contribution of PAS 2050 to the evolution of international
greenhouse gas emission standards. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 14, 195e203.
Sinha, P., Akoorie, M.E.M., 2010. Sustainable environmental practices in the New
Zealand wine industry: an analysis of perceived institutional pressures and the
role of exports. J. Asia. Pac. Bus 11, 50e74.
Smyth, M., Russell, J., 2009. From graft to bottle e analysis of energy use in viticulture and wine production and the potential for solar renewable technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev. 13, 1985e1993.
Somogyi, S., Gyau, A., Li, E., Bruwer, J., 2010. Enhancing long-term grape grower/
winery relationships in the Australian wine industry. Int. J. Wine Business Res.
22, 27e41.
Soosay, C., Fearne, A., Dent, B., 2012. Sustainable value chain analysis e a case study
of Oxford Landing from vine to dine. Supply. Chain. Manag. 17, 68e77.
Sort, X., Gea, T., Artola, A., Snchez, A., 2004. Composting in the Catalonia wine
industry. BioCycle 45, 50e51.
Staniskis, J.K., Stasiskiene, Z., 2006. Environmental management accounting in
Lithuania: exploratory study of current practices, opportunities and strategic
intents. J. Clean. Prod. 14, 1252e1261.
Szolnoki, G., Bosman, J., Samara, O., Iselborn, M., Ferrington, A., Tari, K., Egea, N.G.,
2011. A cross-cultural comparison of sustainability in the wine industry. In:
Paper Presented at the 6th AWBC International Conference, Bordeaux Management School, 9e10 June 2011.
Taplin, I.M., Breckenridge, S.R., 2008. Large rms, legitimation and industry identity: the growth of the North Carolina wine industry. Soc. Sci. J. 45, 352e360.
Taylor, B., 2006. Encouraging industry to assess and implement cleaner production
measures. J. Clean. Prod. 14, 601e609.
Tee, E., Boland, A.-M., Medhurst, A., 2007. Voluntary adoption of Environmental
Management Systems in the Australian wine and grape industry depends
on understanding stakeholder objectives and drivers. Aust. J. Exp. Agr 47,
273e283.
Torraco, R.J., 2005. Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples.
Hum. Resource. Dev. Rev. 4, 356e367.
van Schoor, L.H., 2005. Guidelines for the Management of Wastewater and Solid
Waste at Existing Wineries. Winetech, South Africa.
Walsdorff, A., van Kraayenburg, M., Barnardt, C.A., 2005. A multi-site approach
towards integrating environmental management in the wine production industry. Water Sci. Tech. 51, 61e69.
Warner, K.D., 2007. The quality of sustainability: agroecological partnerships and
the geographic branding of California winegrapes. J. Rural Stud. 23, 142e155.
Waye, V., 2008. Carbon Footprints, food miles and the Australian wine industry.
Melbourne J. Int. Law 9, 271e300.
Webb, L.B., Whetton, P.H., Barlow, E.W.R., 2008. Climate change and winegrape
quality in Australia. Clim. Res. 36, 99e111.
Winemakers Federation of Australia (WFA), 2012. EntWine Australia e Resources.
http://www.wfa.org.au/entwineaustralia/resources.aspx (accessed 26.08.12.).
Yiridoe, E.K., Marett, G.E., 2004. Mitigating the high cost of ISO 14001 EMS standard
certication: lessons from agribusiness case research. Int. Food Agribusiness
Manage. Rev. 7, 37e62.
Zucca, G., Smith, D.E., Mitry, D.J., 2009. Sustainable viticulture and winery practices
in California: what is it, and do customers care? Int. J. Wine Res. 2, 189e194.

Critical Environmental Concerns in Wine Production An Integrative Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Critical Environmental Concerns in Wine Production An Integrative Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

Critical environmental concerns in wine production: an integrative

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 61 410 468 523; fax: 61 8 830 20992.

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

are individually addressed. Section 5 addresses the life-cycle issues

2. The environmental impact of wine production e the need

(2010)). However, within this literature a holistic summary of the

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

technological innovation within the wine industry would be a

Water e use and quality.

(Gabzdylova et al., 2009, p. 993 Barber et al., 2009; Forbes et al.,

have gone to great lengths to promote the use of water efcient

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

believed bottling to be a major source of wastewater generation.

quantiable data collected by winery operators (Musee et al., 2007).

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

4.3. Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, it also explicitly considers indirect

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

level of chemical use in viticulture is disproportionate to the total

practice and associated economic and environmental performance

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

inadequate disposal of winery wastes, especially wastewater, onto

5. Life-cycle issues and wine-related environmental

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

Not unlike empirical evidence reported from other sectors,

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

If you can dene sustainable winegrowing for yourself and

waste streams, energy use and the generation of greenhouse gas

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

gaps in the arguments presented. However, as the literature on

K.L. Christ, R.L. Burritt / Journal of Cleaner Production 53 (2013) 232e242

You might also like