Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T09:12:28.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Impact of Climate Change on Viticulture and Wine Quality*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2016

Cornelis van Leeuwen*
Affiliation:
Bordeaux Sciences Agro, ISVV, UMR Ecophysiologie et Génomique Fonctionnelle de la Vigne n° 1287, F-33140 Villenave d'Ornon, France
Philippe Darriet
Affiliation:
Université de Bordeaux, Unité de recherche Œnologie, ESC 1366 INRA, ISVV, F-33140 Villenave d'Ornon, France; e-mail: philippe.darriet@u-bordeaux2.fr.
*
(corresponding author). e-mail: vanleeuwen@agro-bordeaux.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Climate change is a major challenge in wine production. Temperatures are increasing worldwide, and most regions are exposed to water deficits more frequently. Higher temperatures trigger advanced phenology. This shifts the ripening phase to warmer periods in the summer, which will affect grape composition, in particular with respect to aroma compounds. Increased water stress reduces yields and modifies fruit composition. The frequency of extreme climatic events (hail, flooding) is likely to increase. Depending on the region and the amount of change, this may have positive or negative implications on wine quality. Adaptation strategies are needed to continue to produce high-quality wines and to preserve their typicity according to their origin in a changing climate. The choice of plant material is a valuable resource to implement these strategies. (JEL Classifications: Q13, Q54)

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © American Association of Wine Economists 2016 
Figure 0

Figure 1A Harvest Dates in an Estate in Saint-Emilion from 1892 to 2014

Source: ONERC, 2014.
Figure 1

Figure 1B Duration from Véraison to Harvest from 1988 to 2014 from a Block of Cabernet Franc in the Saint-Emilion Area (Bordeaux, France)

Note: The length of the ripening period increased by 20 days over 25 years. An exception to this tendency was 2013, when growers picked relatively early because of Botrytis pressure.
Figure 2

Figure 1C Harvest Dates in Châteauneuf du Pape from 1945 to 2012

Source: ONERC, 2014.
Figure 3

Figure 2 Potential Alcohol Levels, Total Acidity and pH of Grape Juice Just Prior to Harvest in Languedoc from 1984 to 2013

Source: Dubernet laboratory, 11100 Montredon-Corbières.
Figure 4

Figure 3 Modeled Mean Flowering and Harvest Dates

Note: Modeled mean flowering (A) and harvest dates (B) for Merlot in Avignon (avi), Bordeaux (bor), Colmar (col), Dijon (dij) and Toulouse (tou). All towns located in France. RP = Recent Past (1971–2000), NF = Near Future (2020–2050) and DF = Distant Future (2070–2100). Adapted from Pieri (2010).
Figure 5

Figure 4 Level of 5,6-Dihydro-6-Pentyl-2(2H)-Pyranone for Selected Vintages

Note: Level of 5,6-dihydro-6-pentyl-2(2H)-pyranone (called massoia lactone) in wine produced in a Pomerol estate (Bordeaux) for the vintages 1999 to 2008 (Pons et al., 2011).
Figure 6

Figure 5 Evolution of Water Balance from 1952 to 2012 for Saint-Emilion

Note: Evolution of water balance from 1952 to 2012 calculated between April 1 and 3 September 0 for the Saint-Emilion region (France). Water balance model according to Lebon et al. (2003). Parameters: Soil Water Holding Capacity = 0 mm; no stomatal regulation.
Figure 7

Figure 6 Correlation Between Vintage Quality and Water Balance in Saint-Emilion

Note: Correlation between vintage quality in Bordeaux and water balance calculated between April 1 and September 30 for the vintages from 1952 to 2012 in Saint-Emilion (Bordeaux, France). Water balance model according to Lebon et al. (2003). Parameters: Soil Water Holding Capacity = 0 mm; no stomatal regulation. Vintage quality ratings according to Bordeaux wine brokers Tasted and Lawton.
Figure 8

Table 1 Classification of 61 Vintages from Driest to Wettest in Saint-Emilion

Figure 9

Figure 7 3-Sulfanylhexane-1-ol Content in Wine

Note: Wine content in 3-sulfanylhexane-1-ol as modified by water status and grape exposure. (C) Control with high water deficit ; (I) moderately irrigated vines, resulting in mild water deficit ; (IdB) irrigated vines with pre-véraison leaf pulling et (IdV) irrigated vines with leaf pulling at véraison (Schüttler et al., 2011, 2013).
Figure 10

Figure 8 Glutathione Content of Sauvignon Blanc Grape Must at Harvest

Note: Glutathione content of Sauvignon blanc grape must at harvest in two Graves estates (Bordeaux) in vintages from 2002 to 2007 (Pons et al., 2014).