relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/18051/ title: Fachtagung Bioweinbau 2008 subject: Processing, packaging and transportation subject: Viticulture subject: Regulation description: Tätigkeitsbericht Fachkommission Biovin 2007/8. ORWINE EU-Projekt: Schlussfolgerungen aus Richtlinien-Analyse für Bio-Weinbau und erste Vorschläge für Vinifikations-Rechtlinien der EU und Schweizer Bio-Verordnung. Wie und wie weit sollen und können wir die SO2 –Zugaben in Bioweinen reduzieren? Einige Beispielresultate aus den Labor-und On-Farm Versuchen des EU-ORWINE-Projekts. Verwendung von Zusatzstoffen für die Vinifizierung von biologischen Weinen. Verwendung von Zusatzstoffen für biologische Weinbereitung. Aspekte der Mikrobiologie bei der biologischen Weinbereitung. Falscher Rebenmehltau: Rückblick Saison 2007 und Suche nach Kupfer-Ersatzmitteln. TOPiwi: Prüfung widerstandfähiger, nachhaltig produzierbarer Rebsorten zur Erzielung erstklassiger Weine mit hoher Kundenakzeptanz. Besorderheiten bei der Kelterung von Piwi-Sorten. Vinifikation von PIWI-Sorten: Erfahrungen. publisher: Forschungsinstitut für biologischen Landbau FiBL contributor: Häseli, Andreas date: 2008 type: Proceedings type: NonPeerReviewed format: application/pdf language: de identifier: /id/eprint/18051/1/haeseli-etal-2008-bioweinbau.pdf identifier: Häseli, Andreas (Ed.) (2008) Fachtagung Bioweinbau 2008. Forschungsinstitut für biologischen Landbau FiBL, CH-Frick, FiBL Tagungsband. Proceedings of Fachtagung Bioweinbau 2008, Olten, Schweiz, 05.März 2008. relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/14211/ title: Organic viticulture and wine-making: development of environment and consumer friendly technologies for organic wine quality improvement and scientifically based legislative framework (EU-ORWINE). Involved in Workpackages 2-5. Lead of WP4: On-farm application and testing on innovative methods subject: Crop health, quality, protection subject: Viticulture subject: Biodiversity and ecosystem services description: Das Projekt EU-ORWINE befasst sich mit der Entwicklung umwelt- und verbraucherfreundlicher Herstellungsverfahren und rechtlicher Grundlagen. Der biologische Weinbau ist ein bedeutender Zweig der biologischen Landwirtschaft. Dennoch fehlen bislang in der EU Verordnung 2092/91, welche die rechtliche Grundlage des biologischen Landbaus darstellt, Richtlinien für die biologische Weinherstellung und für eine entsprechende Kennzeichnung von biologisch erzeugtem Wein. Dies führte dazu, dass eine beträchtliche Menge biologisch erzeugten Weines konventionell vermarktet werden muss. Darüber hinaus sind die in mehreren EU-Ländern von biologischen Anbauverbänden entwickelten privaten Standards zur Weinherstellung heterogen hinsichtlich erlaubter Zusatz- und Hilfsstoffe und deren Höchstmengen. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist es das Ziel des EU-Projektes ORWINE, rechtliche Rahmenbedingung für biologisch erzeugten Wein zu schaffen sowie Produktionsverfahren und Qualität biologischen Weines zu verbessern. Projeklaufzeit: 38 Monate (Kick-off Meeting Februar 2006, Udine) Projektziele: Identifizierung und Evaluierung derzeitiger Verfahren der biologischen Weinherstellung sowie deren Einflüsse auf Umwelt und Weinqualität. Identifikation von Nachfragemotiven biologischen Weines und des Marktbedarfs zur Entwicklung bedarfsorientierter Kennzeichnung und Kommunikationsstrategien. Entwicklung innovativer und dem Konzept des Biologischen Landbaus entsprechender Weinherstellungsverfahren unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Reduzierungsmöglichkeiten des Schwefeleinsatzes bei der Weinherstellung zur Verbesserung der Qualität von biologischem Wein. Prüfung innovativer Weinherstellungsverfahren und deren Umsetzbarkeit auf Betrieben. Entwicklung eines Leitfadens für eine gute fachliche Praxis der biologischen Weinherstellung und von Empfehlungen für eine um Weinherstellungsrichtlinien erweiterte EU Verordnung unter Partizipation von Interessenvertretern. type: Project description type: NonPeerReviewed identifier: {Project} Organic viticulture and wine-making: development of environment and consumer friendly technologies for organic wine quality improvement and scientifically based legislative framework (EU-ORWINE). Involved in Workpackages 2-5. Lead of WP4: On-farm application and testing on innovative methods. [Ökologischer Weinbau und Kelterung (EU-ORWINE).] Runs 2006 - 2009. Project Leader(s): Weibel, Franco; Lévite, Dominique and Stolz, Hanna, Forschungsinstitut für biologischen Landbau (FiBL), CH-Frick . relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/17221/ title: Neue Regeln für Biowein. Suche nach geeigneten Kompromissen creator: Schmid, Otto subject: Values, standards and certification subject: Viticulture description: Die Herstellung von Ökowein wird zukünftig europaweit einheitlich geregelt werden – und zwar bereits ab der Traubenernte 2010. Im Folgenden soll der Stand der Diskussion aufgezeigt und beschrieben werden, wie die Empfehlungen des EU-Forschungsprojekts Orwine in den neuen Regelungen berücksichtigt wurden. publisher: Oekom Verlag date: 2010 type: Journal paper type: NonPeerReviewed format: application/pdf language: de identifier: /id/eprint/17221/1/schmid-2010-OEL_154_2_p15-17.pdf identifier: Schmid, Otto (2010) Neue Regeln für Biowein. Suche nach geeigneten Kompromissen. Ökologie & Landbau, 154 (2/2010), pp. 15-17. identifier: urn:ISSN:1015-2423 relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/17944/ title: Grosse Chance verpasst – Biowein-Regelung für Europa creator: Schmid, Otto creator: Weibel, Franco subject: Viticulture subject: Regulation description: Die EU Kommission hat im Juni 2010 entschieden, vorerst auf eine EU-weite Regelung für Biowein zu verzichten. Damit wurde eine grosse Chance verpasst für eine einheitliche und konsumentenfreundliche Regelung. Die Regelung hätte auch die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit europäischer Ökoweine gegenüber Konkurrenzprodukten aus Übersee verbessert. Was ist passiert, wie geht es nun weiter? Im EU-Forschungsprojekte ORWINE (2006-2009; www.orwine.org) hat ein europäisches Konsortium von sieben Forschungsinstituten und unter Einbezug von der Produktion, Handel und Konsumentinnen Grundlagen für die Erarbeitung von Kellerrichtlinien entwickelt. Auf dieser Basis hat die EU Kommission im Dezember 2009 einen Regelungsvorschlag entwickelt. Welches sind die Erkenntnisse von ORWINE? publisher: Variajura Verlagsgesellschaft mbH date: 2010 type: Journal paper type: NonPeerReviewed format: application/pdf language: de identifier: /id/eprint/17944/1/schmid-weibel-2010-biorecht.pdf identifier: Schmid, Otto and Weibel, Franco (2010) Grosse Chance verpasst – Biowein-Regelung für Europa. BIORecht (3), pp. 170-171. relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/21092/ title: Grundlagen für eine zukünftige EU-Regelung creator: Schmid, Otto creator: Weibel, Franco creator: van der Meer, Markus creator: Lévite, Dominique creator: Hofmann, Uwe subject: Viticulture subject: Regulation description: Bio-Wein im Sinne der EU-Gesetzgebung gab es bisher nicht, doch das wird sich mit der Aufnahme der Bio-Weinbereitung in die neue EU-Öko-Verordnung bald ändern. Das EU-Forschungsprojekt ORWINE lieferte hierfür wissenschaftliche Grundlagen. date: 2009 type: Journal paper type: NonPeerReviewed format: application/pdf language: de identifier: /id/eprint/21092/1/schmid-etal-2009-oel-151_3-p44-45.pdf identifier: Schmid, Otto; Weibel, Franco; van der Meer, Markus; Lévite, Dominique and Hofmann, Uwe (2009) Grundlagen für eine zukünftige EU-Regelung. Ökologie & Landbau, 151 (3), pp. 44-45. identifier: urn:ISSN:1015-2423 relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/13974/ title: Consumer attitudes and expectations of organic wine creator: Stolz, Hanna creator: Schmid, Otto subject: Markets and trade subject: Viticulture description: Within the European Union-funded research project ORWINE (Organic viticulture and wine-making) a qualitative consumer study was carried out in 2006 in the four case study countries Italy, France, Germany and Switzerland. The aim of the study was to identify consumers’ attitudes and expectations of organic wine. In all case study countries, organic wine has a positive image regarding grape production and wine processing. Furthermore, organic wine is perceived as being healthier compared to conventional wine. However, regarding the sensorial quality, organic wine still faces image problems, although the taste image has improved. Consumers expect that organic wine is healthy, pure and naturally produced. A majority are sceptical of using sulphites and other additives and processing aids in organic wine processing. If organic wine processing is regulated on EU-level, consumers will expect that these rules governing organic wine fit with the image and expectations of organic wine being a “natural” and healthy product, which obtains as much as possible the original attributes and quality. date: 2008 type: Conference paper, poster, etc. type: NonPeerReviewed format: application/pdf language: de identifier: /id/eprint/13974/1/stolz-schmid-2008-IFOAM_WineCongress_Consumer_study-final_paper.pdf identifier: Stolz, Hanna and Schmid, Otto (2008) Consumer attitudes and expectations of organic wine. Paper at: Organic wine and viticulture conference, Levizzano near Modena, Italy, June 18-20, 2008. relation: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/10608/ title: Organic viticulture and wine-making: development of environment and consumer friendly technologies for organic wine quality improvement and scientifically based legislative framework. Deliverable: D 2.7 Public report about first round qualitative consumer research and market needs creator: Stolz, Hanna creator: Schmid, Otto subject: Markets and trade subject: Consumer issues description: This survey of consumers’ perceptions and expectations regarding organic wine and viticulture in the selected case study countries of Italy (IT), France (FR), Germany (DE) and Switzerland (CH) was conducted within the framework of the EU research project ORWINE (Organic viticulture and wine-making: development of environment and consumer friendly technologies for organic wine quality improvement and scientifically based legislative framework). The objectives of the study were to investigate consumers’ knowledge and expectations regarding organic wine and viticulture, their preferences regarding different labelling concepts, and their perceptions regarding sulphites and/or the use of other additives. Consumers’ perceptions of organic table grapes and of more general aspects of organic viticulture, e.g. environmental impacts, were also investigated. Two target groups were identified for the study, namely organic consumers and quality wine consumers. The method chosen to achieve the study’s objectives was the qualitative market research method of focus group discussion. The main findings of the consumer study are that consumers purchase wine according to geographical origin, grape variety and price. The price is often a benchmark for consumers regarding the quality of the wine on offer, even though some consumers doubt whether cheap wines are automatically poor quality wines or, conversely, whether expensive wines are always high quality wines. Regarding the image of organic wine, it may be described as highly positive in terms of production and processing, with the main emphasis on the issue of pesticide treatments, which are prohibited in organic grape production. Organic wine, in contrast to conventional wine, is expected to come from small-scale production facilities. In addition, organic wines are considered to be purer wines with no additives or harmful residues compared with conventional wines. Thus, they are also considered as healthier and more salubrious by those consumers with experience of organic wine. Nevertheless, organic wine has a rather poor image regarding taste. One group of consumers is disappointed because they see no additional benefits regarding taste and think that organic wines taste worse than conventional wines in some cases, mainly due to too much acidity. Only very few consumers stated that they appreciate the more individual taste of organic wine. The consumer study indicates clearly that communication strategies have to take account of this negative image regarding taste in particular. However, one problem is that wine shops, which are visited to purchase high quality wines, do not usually offer organic wines. Thus, consumers tend to believe that no organic premium wines exist. Consumer acceptance of a limited range of additives and processing aids commonly used in conventional wine processing was also investigated. Here, the emphasis was on acceptance of sulphites, wood chips, selected bacteria, yeasts and enzymes, as well as gelatines. Levels of acceptance of specific additives and processing aids in organic wine processing differ between consumers. Four strategies were identified in this regard: 1) ban substances that are a danger to health, regardless of whether they are necessary for making a good wine; 2) prohibit additives or processing aids which affect wine flavour and/or its naturalness or tradition, or 3) allow the same substances to be used as in conventional production, but introduce lower thresholds for organic wine than for conventional wine, and introduce a declaration of their use in organic wine processing. None of these three strategies seems to be the appropriate one. However, a combination of the strategies would match most consumers’ interests. Clear contrasts to organic wine should be established here, especially in relation to critical and harmful substances. This would imply a threshold for sulphites as long as no alternatives are found. Wood chips should be forbidden or their use openly declared. Enzymes, yeasts and bacteria should not be genetically modified but derived by natural means. Labelling requirements were also investigated. Four different strategies were identified: 1) a complete list of ingredients, additives and processing aids and methods to appear on the label with an indication of the quantities of additives and processing aids; 2) a reduced list of ingredients with the declaration of specific additives and processing techniques; 3) a declaration of those substances which were not used, and 4) no declaration other than the organic label which stands for unambiguous cellar regulations. The first suggestion would be the most transparent solution. However, it would entail unfair competition between conventional and organic wine if conventional wines were not subject to the duty of declaration. Besides this, a complete list would be too much for consumers and wine bottle tabs alike. The second strategy is aimed at informing consumers about organic wine processing methods, but the problem of unfair competition still exists if only organic wine has the duty of declaration. A declaration of those substances not used is probably a good way to inform consumers and to communicate the benefits of organic farming at the same time. Thus, this labelling concept is beneficial in terms of improving the marketing potential of organic wine. The last solution does not imply an unfair competitive situation for organic wine; however, consumers would need to take action themselves to find out the differences between organic and conventional wine. They would have to research which regulations are behind the organic label. This would certainly entail too much effort for some consumers if the benefits of organic wine are not clearly communicated. The consumer survey has identified the most relevant areas, which have to be considered, when regulating wine in the European Union. These are on one hand the use of additives and processing aids and on the other hand the labelling. If in the EU regulation for organic food and farming, or in European community rules, organic wine is taken up, consumers are expecting rules which fit to their expectations towards organic wine as being a “natural” product, which is as little as possible alternated. Therefore, the list of additives and processing has to be short. Additives are in general not a problem if no risk can be associated with them, e.g. the use of egg based additives or gelatine might be further restricted to plant-based sources and not animal derived substances. Consumers must be ensured that with the regulation the use of yeast and bacteria do not have a risk of GMO-contamination. Regarding the use of sulphites, the results can be interpreted in 2 ways: either set a maximum level, which ensures no health risks but guarantees a good wine. There was no clear indication from the consumer study, that sulphites should be completely banned for organic wine production (with few exceptions), although for most consumers sulphites were seen as critical. However, a lower maximum sulphite level might be a solution, which committed organic consumers would understand, although the exact level will not be so important. The second solution would be to forbid sulphites. Regarding labelling, consumers want to know where the wine is coming. The new proposed draft for a new EU regulation for organic food and farming will be more demanding regarding labelling the origin, in particular if the products come from the EU or non EU areas. Although the requirement of labelling the origin is in the interest of the wine producer, it is clear that in particular for organic wine transparency regarding the origin is even more important than for non-organic wine. Regarding the use of wood chips two ways could be considered: the exclusion or the labelling of their use. Other issues like restrictions of specific processing methods could not be clearly extracted from this consumer research. Therefore this seems for the time-being not a priority area for the EU commission, when regulating organic wine. Regarding the private organic wine sector, producers should reinforce their presence at wine awards to prove the premium quality of their products and organize wine tasting events in order to improve contact to consumers and direct sales. Besides, the presence of organic wines in specialized wine shops should be reinforced. Wine makers should further work on the sensorial quality of organic wines. Retailers should provide more information at the point of sale (leaflet, homepage, label) with information about the producer as well as about production and processing methods applied and the “terroir” of origin. Furthermore, wine tasting events at the point of sale would give consumers the opportunity to try organic wines. Besides, the organic label should not be at the front of the wine bottle as long organic wine has a negative quality image. The consumer survey has also shown two areas, where also research could contribute with further research: Research which contributes to reduce the use of additives and processing aids corresponds to the expectation of many consumers. This does include lowering the level of the use of additives and especially sulphites, as researched in the ORWINE project. Although the health aspect was of second priority many consumers in the survey linked organic production with health attributes. Further research on health promoting substances such as secondary metabolites, e.g. resveratrol, would for them be of interest. Advisory services should support wine producers and processors to improve the taste of their wines, by providing better knowledge about the different inter-acting factors regarding the production of high quality wines. To conclude, the survey has shown interesting fields of action for policy makers, producers and their organizations, retailers as well as research. date: 2007 type: Report type: NonPeerReviewed format: application/pdf language: de identifier: /id/eprint/10608/1/stolz-schmid-2007-ORWINE_d2.7_consumers_research.pdf identifier: Stolz, Hanna and Schmid, Otto (2007) Organic viticulture and wine-making: development of environment and consumer friendly technologies for organic wine quality improvement and scientifically based legislative framework. Deliverable: D 2.7 Public report about first round qualitative consumer research and market needs. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL, CH-5070 .