Global Climate Change Sustainability and Some Challenges For Grape and Wine Production

https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2015.
31 Published online by Cambridge University Press

Journal of Wine Economics, Volume 11, Number 1, 2016, Pages 181–200
doi:10.1017/jwe.2015.31
Global Climate Change, Sustainability, and Some Challenges

for Grape and Wine Production*
Hans R. Schultz a
Abstract
Grapevines are cultivated on six out of seven continents, between latitudes 4° and 51° in the
Northern Hemisphere and between latitudes 6° and 45° in the Southern Hemisphere across
a large diversity of climates (oceanic, warm oceanic, transition temperate, continental, cold
continental, Mediterranean, subtropical, attenuated tropical, and arid climates).
Accordingly, the range and magnitude of environmental factors differ considerably from
region to region and so do the principal environmental constraints for grape production.
The type, number, and magnitude of environmental constraints are currently undergoing
changes due to shifts in climate patterns already observed for the past and predicted for the
future. These changes are already affecting grape composition with observed changes in
sugar and acidity concentrations. As with other components such as polyphenols or aroma
compounds, their relationships to environmental changes are more difficult to quantify. In
general, one can divide the expected climatic changes during the grape-ripening period into
two scenarios: warmer and dryer and warmer and moister, with different responses for red
and white grape varieties. The production challenges within this broad separation are vastly
different, and the strategies to ensure a sustainable product need to be adapted accordingly.
The economic impact of these changes is difficult to assess. An in-depth analysis is necessary
to construct relevant scenarios and risk analysis for individual regions and to quantify the
costs and/or benefits of regional climate developments. (JEL Classifications: Q1, Q54)
Keywords: Climate change, viticulture, varietal suitability.
I. Introduction
The issue of climate change in the public is largely focused on rising air temperatures
and changes in precipitation patterns, yet the array of climatic regions used for grape
production worldwide will cause very different challenges depending on the area
* Special thanks are due to Dr. Helga Hassemer-Schwarz and Andreas Ehlig, formerly of the “Deutsche
Wetterdienst”, Geisenheim, for compiling the input files and running the soil mineralization model.
a
Geisenheim University, von-Lade-Str. 1, 65366 Geisenheim, Germany; e-mail: Hans.Reiner.Schultz@
hs-gm.de
© American Association of Wine Economists, 2016

https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2015.31 Published online by Cambridge University Press
182 Global Change, Sustainability, and Some Challenges for Grape and Wine Production
under consideration, the varieties under cultivation, and the type of production in
mind (i.e., table grapes, sparkling wine, still wine, etc.).
Whereas problems of low winter temperatures have limited grape cultivation in the
past in areas with continental climates in Eastern Europe, Asia, and North America,
low temperatures during the growing season in general have prevented the extension
of grape-growing regions beyond approximately the 12 °C temperature isotherm
(April–October, Northern Hemisphere; October–April, Southern Hemisphere)
(Jones et al., 2005a). The effects of hot temperatures, on the contrary, are less
clear with respect to the distribution of grapevine cultivation areas. In general, the
22 °C temperature isotherm is considered limiting for wine grape production
(Jones, 2007; Schultz and Jones, 2010), but many areas in the tropics are much
warmer than this (Tonietto and Carbonneau, 2004), and detrimental effects of
high temperatures may be largely mitigated if water supply is sufficient and/or
humidity high.
Within the existing production areas, water shortage is probably the most domi-
nant environmental constraint (Williams and Matthews, 1990), and even in moder-
ate temperate climates, grapevines often face some degree of drought stress during
the growing season (Sadras et al., 2012). Yet too much moisture during some devel-
opmental phases such as maturity may actually pose a greater risk in some areas.
Because of its climate dependence, the future of the grape and wine industry is
closely linked to predicted changes in climatic factors (temperature, precipitation,
carbon dioxide [CO2] concentration, etc.); therefore, future developments may
alter many aspects of grapevine cultivation, from regions to quality (Hannah
et al., 2013; Moriondo et al., 2013; Santos et al., 2012; Roehrdanz and Hannah,
2016; Ferrise et al., 2016; van Leeuwen and Darriet, 2016).
II. Challenges
There are a multitude of challenges ahead depending on the viticultural region.

Several will be presented in this article.
A. Variability and Trends in Evapotranspiration and Precipitation: Global Is

≠ Regional
Climate change effects on the terrestrial water cycle show regional differentiated
patterns. Although temperature is increasing in many world grape-growing regions
(Hannah et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2005b; Schultz and Jones, 2010; Webb et al.,
2012), precipitation patterns can differ vastly between regions and can show sub-
stantial temporal variations (between and within years; IPCC, 2014). From rising
temperatures, it is mostly assumed that the water-holding capacity of the atmosphere
will increase in the future as a function of the Clausius-Clapeyron law (Krysanova
Hans R. Schultz 183
et al., 2008), which predicts an increase in the saturation vapor pressure of the atmo-
sphere of 6%–7% per degree Celsius warming. As a consequence, a simultaneous in-
crease in potential evapotranspiration (evaporation of water from the soil and
transpiration of water from plants, ET0) is assumed, which will alter soil and
plant water relations. However, the large spatial and temporal variability in precip-
itation patterns between regions precludes generalizations in predicted consequences
with respect to soil and plant water status development. Especially the temporal var-
iability may mask longer-term trends in the development of ET0 and consequently
soil and plant water status (van Leeuwen, Pieri, and Vivin, 2010; Gambetta,
2016). Additionally, the focus on the developments within a growing season
(spring to summer) in many studies may miss decisive effects occurring during the
“off season” (winter to early spring) but having substantial carryover effects into
the season.
Figure 1 shows observed (calculated according to Penman-Monteith) and predict-

ed changes in ET0 during the growing season (May–October), which in agrome-
teorological terms is defined as the “hydrological summer” (Figure 1a), and the off
season (November–April), which is the “hydrological winter” (Bormann, 2011)
(Figure 1b) for the temperate wine-growing region of the Rheingau (Germany;
50.0° N, 8.0° E), from 1958 until 2060 (Schultz and Hofmann, 2015). To smooth
out temporal variability, 10-year running mean values were used. There is a clear in-
crease in the difference between ET0 and precipitation rate during the growing
season already observed during the past 55 years, and this development will continue
in the future as predicted using a regionalized version of the STAR II model of the
Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Figure 1a; (Orlowsky et al., 2008) (Figure 1a).
Despite a “natural” focus on the developments within the growing season, changes
in the water budget during the off season might also become very important
(Figure 1b). Regardless of the fact that during winter and spring precipitation
rates are exceeding ET0, the “gap” between these two factors determining the soil
water balance is decreasing and will be even more so in the future, irrespective of pro-
jected increases in precipitation rate (IPCC, 2014) (Figure 1b). This suggests that for
this particular region winter precipitation will eventually be matched by winter
ET0 with important consequences for the amount of water stored in the soils at
the beginning of the growing season. It may also have consequences for the use of
cover crops during the winter.
Obvious from Figure 1 are the cyclic patterns of both potential evapotranspiration
(ET0) and precipitation rates, both for the period of observation and the projections
until 2060. These cycles may be related to solar cycles, which have been made partly
responsible for the warming during the first half of the last century but not during the
second half (Stott et al., 2003). However, there is some uncertainty on whether these
cycles do continue to have an impact on the temporal development of warming on
earth and consequently on evaporation (Stott et al., 2003), but the data do show that
variability and the development of extremes will become more likely despite cyclic
variations (Figure 1; IPCC, 2014). These cycles have an important effect on how
Figure 1
Observed and Simulated Precipitation and Potential Evapotranspiration (ET0)
Notes: Observed and Simulated Precipitation and Potential Evapotranspiration for the hydrological summer (May–October) (a) and the
hydrological winter (November–April) (b) for Geisenheim in the Rheingau grape-growing region (Germany, 50.0° N, 8.0° E; 92 m above
sea level) (meas., measured; sim., simulated). Data show 10-year running mean values. Potential evapotranspiration rates for the observed
time period (1958–2013) were calculated according to Penman-Monteith. Simulations were conducted with the STAR II model of the
Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact using the medium realization run (Orlowsky, Gerstengarbe, and Werner, 2008). Source: Adapted
from Schultz and Hofmann (2015).
climate change is perceived by humans because these cycles can somewhat mask
long-term trends (when precipitation is increasing or ET0 is decreasing for several
years) or on the contrary suggest a speedup in these trends (Figure 1).
Aside from Mediterranean-type, low summer rainfall climates with a more or less
continuous decline in water availability over most of the growing season, temporary
water deficits also commonly occur in temperate, summer rainfall regions, specifi-
cally on vineyard sites with shallow soils and low water-holding capacity (i.e., van
Leeuwen, Pieri, and Vivin, 2010). As compared with an irrigated vineyard situation
in moderate or even hot climates, the natural cycles of stress and relief can be much
Hans R. Schultz 185
more pronounced albeit completely unpredictable in frequency, duration, and

severity in these areas and are naturally part of the “terroir” and the year-to-year var-
iation in wine quality.
B. Air Temperature
It is difficult to draw clear relationships between climatology and vine performance or
wine quality because obviously the ecophysiological adaptation and buffering capacity
is large. How observed warming has impacted on yield formation is difficult to assess
because cultivation practices, plant material, and production goals have changed sub-
stantially over the past 100 years, and there are only a few examples of a more exten-
sive analysis on yield development (i.e., Bock et al., 2013; Lobell et al., 2007; Webb
et al., 2012). The data of Bock et al. (2013) from Germany go back to 1805 and
suggest substantial yield increases since about 1910. There was a good correlation
to temperature, but simultaneous developments in cultivation practices, plant protec-
tion measures, and in particular plant material have probably also played a substantial
role. Less dramatic were observed yield effects over a much shorter time period in
California (Lobell et al., 2007), and Webb et al. (2012) reported decreasing yields
for some regions in Australia in recent years, which may be more impacted by
water availability than temperature. Water may actually be the decisive factor for pos-
itive or negative yield development in the future (Garcia de Cortazar Atauri, 2006).
Certainly, climatic variables affect grape composition, as evidenced by long-term
increases in temperature in the past being implicated in altered fruit composition
(mainly increase in sugar concentration and a decrease in acidity) in Europe,
North America, and Australia (Duchêne and Schneider, 2005; Petrie and Sadras,
2008; Schultz, 2000; Schultz and Jones, 2010; Urhausen et al., 2011; Webb et al.,
2012; Wolfe et al., 2005); however, there may be counteracting effects if different
regions with a different climatic matrix are compared. In some cases, changes in cul-
tivation practices and consumer demand may have contributed more to the increase
in sugar concentration at harvest than changes in the climate (Alston et al., 2011).
Although many studies have used temperature summations to predict shifts in the
varietal spectrum (i.e., Hannah et al., 2013; Kenny and Harrison, 1992), these ap-
proaches do not incorporate factors such as day–night variations, sunshine hours,
or water availability, which are cofactors in quality formation, and they additionally
neglect possible mitigation strategies through cultivation methods. Using upper tem-
perature thresholds (which are not really known) to predict varietal shifts (Hannah
et al., 2013) may result in erroneous scenarios (van Leeuwen et al., 2013).
Different varieties will respond differently to warming. For example, an increase in

temperature from 20 °C to 30 °C increased the weight of bunch primordia (pre-
formed inflorescences in the latent winter buds) fourfold in Riesling, but Shiraz
was unaffected (Dunn, 2005). Shiraz also showed very little response in basic yield
components in a 2 °C to 4 °C warming experiment (Sadras and Soar, 2009). In prin-
ciple, red varieties appear to tolerate warm conditions better than white varieties.
Sadras et al. (2007) found contrasting responses for red and white varieties across 24
Australian wine regions. There was a positive correlation of quality ratings and daily
mean regional temperature for red but not for white wines, whereas the apparent
influence of temperature on vintage variability was strong for white wines but irrel-
evant for red wines. However, when wine score data were correlated with the average
growing season temperature (October to April), there was a negative trend for red
and white wines in some of the analyzed regions (Hayman et al., 2009).
When sensory traits of berries from different varieties were compared in a

warming study, a clear distinction between red and white varieties was not apparent.
Moreover, a white variety such as Chardonnay responded favorably to an increase in
temperature (Sadras, Moran, and Bonada, 2013). Jones et al. (2005a) analyzed the
vintage ratings of Sotheby’s from all major wine regions worldwide between 1950
and 1999 and found that most quality ratings were improved, but that there might
be some temperature thresholds that would cause a decline in quality.
Heat waves may also trigger quite diverse responses in terms of grape composi-
tion. Pillet et al. (2012) showed that the raffinose oligosaccharide pathway was acti-
vated in grape berries after simulated heat stress leading to the formation of
galactinol from sucrose, yet we do not know if this has any sensory impact on wine.
The economic consequences of climate change for the wine industry on a global
scale are difficult to predict because variability between regions is large and the
process of change is nonlinear (example given in Figure 1) (Ashenfelter and
Storchmann, 2016). For example, Ashenfelter and Storchmann (2010) tried to
model the effects of climate change on the quality, prices, and land value in the
Mosel Valley based on solar radiation but from an economist’s viewpoint. They con-
cluded that an increase in temperature will increase quality as well as price and land
value, thus corroborating, for the quality aspect, the analysis by Jones et al. (2005a).
However, comparing past quality ratings with temperature (as in Jones et al., 2005a)
and modeling the future require quite different hypotheses, and the underlying as-
sumptions in the study by Ashenfelter and Storchmann (2010) seem too simplistic
in some cases. For example, deeper soils were rated of lesser importance for
quality, but for white wines, water-holding capacity is a key factor in aroma forma-
tion (contrary to red wines). Thiol concentration, an important flavor group for
Riesling and Sauvignon blanc, is reduced by water deficit (Peyrot des Gachons
et al., 2005; Schüttler et al., 2011), and 1,1,6-Trimethyl-1,2-dihydronaphtalene
(TDN), the compound responsible for petrol flavors in wines produced from
Riesling grapes (main variety in the Mosel Valley), increases with temperature
during the berry-ripening phase (Marais, van Wyk, and Rapp, 1992) but is rated neg-
ative for wine quality. Additionally, steep slopes, which are favored in this analysis,
not only have higher incoming solar radiation but also show, as a result of this, much
higher evapotranspiration rates, which for a slope of 30° results in an increase of
water use of approximately 25% (Hofmann, Lux, and Schultz, 2014). This had pos-
itive effects in the past, where ET0 rates were lower (see Figure 1) to avoid a surplus
of water, specifically during the ripening phase when sloping effects are largest
Hans R. Schultz 187
Figure 2
Temperature Development during the Growing Season (Average Temperature April–October,
Northern Hemisphere; October–April, Southern Hemisphere) for Three Grape-Growing
Regions with a Reputation for High-Quality Riesling Wines
Sources: The data are 5-year running mean values for Geisenheim in the Rheingau region, Germany (50.0° N, 8.0° E; altitude 92 m above sea
level [a.s.l.]), from the Deutsche Wetterdienst (German Weather Service) database. The data for the Australian regions, Mount Barker (MB),
Western Australia (WA; −34.6° S, 117.6° E; altitude 300 m a.s.l.), and Adelaide Hills (−35.1° S, 138.8° E; altitude 360 m a.s.l.), are from the
Commonwealth of Australia, Bureau of Meteorology. Additional available data are shown for Lenswood (1967–1999), a classical Riesling
area in the Adelaide Hills that does not have a long historic weather record but is situated at a higher altitude (480 m), to show the similarity
with the long-term records from the weather station at lower altitude.
(Hoppmann, 2010). However, a future climate may have exactly the opposite impact.
Ashenfelter and Storchmann (2010) also penalized a greater altitude difference
between the river and the vineyard in question in terms of quality due to an increase
in day–night temperature amplitude. There is no clear scientific basis for such an as-
sumption, because cool nights reduce carbon use by respiration and thus retain the
carbon pool as molecular background for aroma and color formation (Pirie and
Mullins, 1980) and the “cool night index” is part of the classification of positive
climate criteria for the evaluation of wine regions (Tonietto and Carbonneau,
2004). However, altitude may have a negative effect on photosynthesis (due to
lower day temperatures) as long as day temperatures are near the lower limit of
the optimum (Schultz, 2000). Other analyses came to a completely different conclu-
sion, albeit for a generally much warmer environment. White et al. (2006) predicted a
decrease in “premium wine production” of 81% by the end of the current century for
the U.S. wine regions due to the projected increases in temperature, and Hannah
et al. (2013) suggested that many classical wine-growing regions will lose a large per-
centage of their grape-producing vineyards due to the combined effects of tempera-
ture and water deficit. This is in agreement with the general conclusion of
Ashenfelter and Storchmann (2016) that increased warming may increase the
number of good vintages in cold climate wine regions and simultaneously decrease
the number of good vintages in hot climate growing regions, but the thresholds are
difficult to define.
Basically, the underlying assumptions about the suitability of a certain climate for
grapevine cultivation, or more precisely the cultivation of different varieties, are deci-
sive for the outcome. These assumptions have been partly based on erroneous criteria
about the suitability of different varieties under certain temperature scenarios. We do
know the lower limit in growing season temperature for many grape varieties (e.g.,
Huglin, 1978; Jones, 2006), but we do not know the upper limit. Both the tempera-
ture summation index of Huglin (1978) and the figure published by Jones (2006) on
the suitability of grapevine varieties as a function of temperature have been misused
to predict the “nonsuitability” of a particular variety when growing season temper-
atures (in future climate scenarios) exceed the given values of the current production
areas (e.g. Hannah et al., 2013). In terms of quality and suitability, van Leeuwen
et al. (2013) have clearly demonstrated that growing season temperatures in this
century have already surpassed the presumed upper limit of suitability in Jones
(2006) for key varieties in the Rheingau (Germany), Burgundy (France), and
Rhone (France) grape-growing regions without detrimental effects on quality.
Figure 2 shows an example for the growing season temperature development

(average temperature between April and October for the Northern Hemisphere
and between October and April for the Southern Hemisphere) over the past 130
years for three grape-growing regions with a reputation for the variety Riesling,
one in the Northern Hemisphere (Rheingau, Germany) and two in the Southern
Hemisphere (Mount Barker, Western Australia, and Adelaide Hills, South
Australia). Because long-term weather data are not always available from stations
directly within grape-growing regions, additional data from Lenswood, a known
Riesling area in the Adelaide Hills, are added for the available period from 1967
to 1999 to show the similarity with the other chosen Adelaide Hills station. It is
obvious that despite growing the same variety, average temperatures during the
season show substantial differences between all three grape-growing regions and
that the Australian regions have surpassed the 17 °C threshold of Riesling suitability
given in the Jones (2006) chart for the past 20 years. The key factor is our missing
knowledge of varietal plasticity with respect to environmental variables (Sadras
et al., 2012) and the lack of capacity to integrate the effects of these factors on
fruit composition and subsequently on wine quality. The warming trend in general
was more dominated by increases in night than day temperatures confirming obser-
vations from other areas (Nemani et al., 2001), but the degree of change was highly
dependent on the month in question (data not shown).
To extend the given example of a cross-regional comparison, Figure 3 shows the

day–night temperature amplitude of the same German and Australian “Riesling”
areas during the 3 months relevant for berry ripening (August to October for the
Northern Hemisphere and February to April for the Southern Hemisphere). It is
clear that cross-regional differences are large and also that climatic trends seem to
be different with respect to this environmental parameter over the past 130 years.
Hans R. Schultz 189
Figure 3
Development of Day–Night Temperature Differences for the 3 Months Relevant for Ripening
(August–October, Northern Hemisphere; February–April, Southern Hemisphere) for Three
Grape-Growing Regions with a Reputation for High-Quality Riesling Wines in Germany and
Australia
Note: For additional information on sites, see Figure 2. Sources: The data are 10-year running mean values for Geisenheim based on data
provided by the Deutsche Wetterdienst (German Weather Service). The data for the Australian regions are from the Commonwealth of
Australia, Bureau of Meteorology.
Day–night temperature difference is largest in the Adelaide Hills, between 13 °C to

16 °C in February and March (equivalent to August and September in the Northern
Hemisphere), as compared with Geisenheim, where day–night differences are
between 9 °C and 12 °C (Figure 3a and 3b). Additionally, it seems that the daily
temperature amplitude has more or less continuously decreased in Geisenheim,

whereas the Southern Hemisphere data suggest a larger variability and also a
trend to an increase in amplitude during the past 30 to 40 years (Figure 3).
It seems logical that the “flavor shape” of wines from different regions will be dif-
ferent (Iland et al., 2011) given that enzyme activity in the fruit is related to temper-
ature. Kliewer and Torres (1972) showed that an increase in day–night temperature
difference may improve coloration for red grapes as long as daily maximum temper-
atures are not too high, and Hale and Buttrose (1974) confirmed these findings. It
seems possible, however, that conditions such as warmer days and cooler nights
(thus higher day–night temperature differences) have a similar effect as cooler
days and warmer nights (thus lower day–night temperatures) as long as the time
periods within the optimum range are similar, yet we are lacking data on this for
white grapes (Haymann et al., 2009; Winter, Lowe, and Bulleid, 2007).
Several studies have shown that grapevine phenology has significantly advanced in
many wine-growing regions in the past as a response to warming trends such as those
shown in Figure 2 (i.e., Duchêne and Schneider, 2005; Jones et al., 2005b) and will
continue to shift forward in time with the main ripening period occurring at much
higher temperatures (Webb, Whetton, and Barlow, 2007). It is also clear that the
changes that occurred over the past 130 years within each region were not larger
in magnitude than the existing differences between these regions (Figures 2 and
3). Because they all grow the same variety, there seems to be a significant potential
for acclimation and plasticity (Sadras et al., 2007), which would have to be included
in any economic analysis and “speculation” on varietal suitability and thus sustain-
ability in the future.
C. Soil Temperature
Soil temperature has increased at least at a rate similar to air temperature over the
past more than 100 years (Figure 4; Böhme and Böttcher, 2011). A relatively
unique time series of soil temperatures down to 12 m depth since 1889 reveals that
soil temperatures in the upper 1 m profile have increased by approximately 2 °C to
3 °C between April and August as compared with the beginning of data collection
(Böhme and Böttcher, 2011). Higher temperature in combination with an increased
propensity yet variable spatial distribution of heavy rainfall events (Feldmann et al.,
2013) seems to have already increased the risk for the development of rot (Botrytis
cinerea) in some areas and will most likely continue to do so.
When the patterns in temperature and precipitation during the grape-ripening

phase over the period from 1955 to 2014 for the Rheingau area are analyzed, it
becomes clear that 14 of the last 15 vintages had a warmer maturation period
than the median over the 59 years in question and that 10 of these vintages had
average and above-average precipitation rates during berry maturation and only
4 were drier than the median. This indicates the increased risk for the development
Hans R. Schultz 191
Figure 4
Observed Trends in Soil Temperature at Different Soil Depths between 1889 and 2007 at
Potsdam, Germany as Compared to Air Temperature
Notes: Measurements were conducted continuously with the same techniques. Asterisks indicate different levels of significance over eleven
10-year periods (***1%, **10%, *20%). Source: Adapted from Böhme and Böttcher (2011).
of B. cinerea in recent years, which can also be quantified using a soil nitrogen (N)
model, capable of simulating the mineralization rates of different soil types depend-
ing on soil characteristics (i.e., organic matter content, water-holding capacity, pore
size distribution, etc.), precipitation rates, and other climate variables such as air
temperature and solar radiation (Schaller et al., 1994a, 1994b). Comparing the sim-
ulated rates of N mineralization during the growing season for 30-year periods since
1961 shows increasing rates over the past 50 years with substantial differences
between soils (Figure 5). This analysis suggests that modifications in temperature
and water relations in some vineyard sites have already had a substantial impact
on the release of N, which might have increased the risk for bunch rot development
on these sites already. Nevertheless, a recent study on warming effects on microbial
communities in temperate vineyard soils, which would be involved in N mineraliza-
tion, did not find substantial changes (Corneo et al., 2014).
D. CO2 Concentration
Aside from the fact that increasing CO2 concentrations will impact on global tem-
perature, CO2 itself is generally beneficial to plant growth, although the response
strongly varies between species (Long et al., 2004). For grapes, the increase in
CO2 concentration has been calculated to have a significant positive effect on
yield (Adams, Wu, and Houston, 2003). Because stomata are sensitive to CO2 but
photosynthesis increases in response to it, increased biomass production at
Figure 5
Simulated Cumulative Maximum Nitrogen (N) Mineralization over the Season
Notes: Using an “average year” (mean of 30 years) for the periods 1961–1990, 1971–2000, and 1981–2010 for two vineyard sites with soils with
average organic matter content for Geisenheim, Germany. Results for a dry sandy/loam soil (a) and for a clay soil with good water-holding
capacity (b). Simulations were conducted with a model developed by Schaller et al. (1994a, 1994b).
reduced water losses is expected (Long et al., 2004), but a concomitant rise in tem-
perature may still increase the water use of many crops (Adams, Wu, and Houston,
2003). The concomitant rise in water-use efficiency may be exacerbated depending
on the degree of stomatal closure and considering that the respiration rate may
also be suppressed by elevated CO2 (eCO2). However, studies on individual leaves
may not be representative of whole plant field experiments, and the need to study
the effects of eCO2 and temperature in combination is necessary albeit experimental-
ly challenging. Despite a pressing need to gain more information, CO2 responses
beyond those of the photosynthetic apparatus and associated physiology and metab-
olism such as quality aspects of agricultural commodities have only attracted limited
attention (Feng, Li, and Cheng, 2014), yet the necessity for an increase in global food
production and the high added-value potential specifically for special crops (horti-
cultural products including grapes and wine) warrants a closer look at their CO2 re-
sponse profile.
Few studies have investigated the response of grapevines to CO2 outdoors, either
in small free air CO2 enrichment systems (Bindi et al., 1995; Bindi et al., 2001) or in
open-top chambers (Gonçalves et al., 2009), but these could only describe the impact
of eCO2 concentration in the absence of rising air temperature. Nevertheless, the
generally predicted increase in biomass was confirmed, yet the effects on water con-
sumption remained unclear (Bindi et al., 1995; Bindi et al., 2001). These experiments
also showed that fruit sugar concentration should increase and acidity levels
decrease under eCO2 (Bindi, Fibbi, and Miglietta, 2001); however, the response of
other components contributing to the flavor and aroma of grapes was heterogeneous
Hans R. Schultz 193
and indicated a significant “chamber effect,” with plants grown outside responding
differently than plants in open-top chambers with or without eCO2 (Gonçalves et al.,
2009).
A more recent series of studies investigated the effects of shorter-term exposures to

eCO2 (700 ppm) in combination with changes in the temperature and water regime
on small potted plants in a greenhouse (Salazar-Parra et al., 2010, 2012a, 2012b).
Similar to the results of Bindi, Fibbi, and Miglietta (2001), eCO2 decreased malic
acid and, in combination with elevated temperature, also total anthocyanins in
well-watered plants (Salazar-Parra et al., 2010) and caused less oxidative damage
under water deficit (Salazar-Parra et al., 2012a), yet expected differences in photo-
synthetic rate disappeared with time under eCO2 (Salazar-Parra et al., 2012b). It cur-
rently remains unknown how long-term exposure to eCO2 (i.e., years) would affect
grapevines as perennial plants.
Another area, which needs to receive more attention, is the effect of global
warming and increase in ambient CO2 concentration on plant–pathogen interac-
tions. Recent results have shown that these interactions can be modified and could
lead to an increase in insect aggressiveness (DeLucia et al., 2008), population
biology, and the sequence of potential epidemics (Garrett et al., 2006). The basis
for these modifications lies within the potential modification of the genome of micro-
organisms and/or insect pathogens or the expression patterns of genes (Travers et al.,
2007). Thus, there is a potential threat to agricultural productions systems that goes
well beyond the mere spread of diseases into areas where these have not been known
previously due to global warming.
E. Nitrous Oxide, Methane, and the Carbon Budget of Vineyards

An additional challenge will be the largely missing information about how much vi-
ticultural production systems contribute to the release of nitrous oxide and methane,
two of the most potent greenhouse gases (Carlisle et al., 2010), or how these systems
could be adapted to become less of a source for these gases or even a sink (at least for
methane that seems a possibility; Dalal et al., 2003). Equally largely unknown are
strategies to improve the carbon budget of vineyards, so far in most cases not includ-
ed in carbon budget protocols (Carlisle, Steenwerth, and Smart, 2006). These topics
require long-term research strategies, and the importance of beginning to gather in-
formation has been realized in some grape-growing areas such as California (Carlisle
et al., 2010; Steenwerth and Belina, 2008). To elucidate the complex interactions
between compounds and management will be a challenging task, but results are ur-
gently needed. Carlisle et al. (2010) have formulated research goals in particular with
respect to the following:
1. Factors relating to the production of nitrous oxide, such as N leaching/volatili-
zation; fertilization amount, timing, and method; and the interactions with man-
agement practices (including irrigation).
2. Factors relating to vineyard carbon sequestration such as vine biomass, cover

crop biomass, and soil carbon storage capacity, because this information is
absent from carbon budget protocols in the wine sector.
3. Factors relating to vineyard short- to medium-term floor management such as
cover crops and tillage.
4. Factors relating to vineyard long-term management effects on carbon sequestra-
tion and the interactions with other greenhouse gas emissions.
5. Factors relating to methane production and uptake.
F. Carbon and Water Footprint of the Wine Industry

An additional challenge for the wine industry is more related to the management of
natural resources in the production chain for wine and the resulting carbon or
water footprints. Whereas the carbon footprint for entire regions has been
roughly estimated (examples for the Champagne and Bordeaux regions) and
some strategies devised to reduce it, the water footprint is an issue that will
affect agriculture in general. Water management is no longer an issue restricted
to individual countries or river basins. Even a continental approach is not suffi-
cient. The water footprint of Europe—the total volume of water used for producing
all commodities consumed by European citizens—for example has been signifi-
cantly externalized to other parts of the world (Hoekstra and Chapagain, 2008).
Rising food demand and growing water scarcity (IPPC, 2014) will put increasing
pressure on agriculture, which is currently using up approximately 70% of the
world’s freshwater resources.
Currently, issues such as the amount of water imported by a country through
products (including the direct input of water used for its production and the indi-
rect water used for services around this product [transport or packaging]) are
emerging in the context of water-neutral production budgets of countries or sus-
tainability strategies of supermarket chains. Spain, for instance, is exporting 189
million m3 of water per year to the United Kingdom alone captured in products
related to grape production (Chapagain and Orr, 2008). These calculations and
budgets are beginning to have impacts on production strategies in the wine indus-
try, with the first signs appearing in California and Australia. Additionally, the
water issue cannot be seen as strictly independent from other climate-related prob-
lems, because the release of nitric oxide and CO2 from agricultural land contributes
significantly to the “greenhouse effect,” and because this release depends on soil
water content, irrigation management, and organic matter content (Avrahami
and Bohannan, 2009). For grape production, however, we have currently only
very limited information on the contribution and/or possible management strate-
gies of these effects, another significant challenge for future research (Herath
et al., 2013; Lamastra et al., 2014).
Hans R. Schultz 195
III. Conclusion
Changes in climate factors specifically in the 1980th of the last century have already
had a variety of impacts on the global wine industry. However, predictions about
future developments vary largely depending on the region and resulting challenges
vary accordingly. Aside from issues on water and temperature and their impact on
fruit composition and yield, questions on vineyards as possible sinks or sources of
greenhouse gases and/or cultivation methods to mitigate possible negative effects
need to be resolved.
References
Adams, R.M., Wu, J., and Houston, L.L. (2003). The effects of climate change on yields and
water use of major California crops. In Climate Change and California. Sacramento, CA:
California Energy Commission. Appendix IX.
Alston, J.M., Fuller, K.B., Lapsley, J.T., and Soleas, G. (2011). Too much of a good thing?
Causes and consequences of increases in sugar content of California wine grapes.
Journal of Wine Economics, 6(2), 135–159.
Ashenfelter, O., and Storchmann, K. (2010). Using hedonic models of solar radiation to assess
the economic effect of climate change: The case of Mosel Valley vineyards. Review of
Economics and Statistics, 92(2), 333–349.
Ashenfelter, O., and Storchmann, K. (2016). Climate change and wine: A review of the eco-
nomic implications. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1), 105–138.
Avrahami, S., and Bohannan, B.J.M. (2009). N2O emission rates in a California meadow soil
are influenced by fertilizer level, soil moisture and the community structure of ammonia-
oxidizing bacteria. Global Change Biology, 15(3), 643–655.
Bindi, M., Fibbi, L., Gozzini, B., Orlandini, S., and Miglietta, F. (1995). Experiments on the
effects of increased temperature and/or elevated concentrations of carbon dioxide on
crops. Mini free air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE) experiments on grapevine. In
Harrison, P.A., Butterfield, R.E., and Downing, T.E. (Eds.), Climate Change and
Agriculture in Europe: Assessment of Impacts and Adaptations. Research Report
No. 9. Oxford: Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, 125–137.
Bindi, M., Fibbi, L., Lanini, M., and Miglietta, F. (2001). Free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) of
grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.): I. Development and testing of the system for CO2 enrichment.
European Journal of Agronomy, 14(2), 135–143.
Bindi, M., Fibbi, L., and Miglietta, F. (2001). Free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) of grapevine
(Vitis vinifera L.): II. Growth and quality of grape and wine in response to elevated CO2
concentrations. European Journal of Agronomy, 14(2), 145–155.
Bock, A., Sparks, T.H., Estrella, N., and Menzel, A. (2013). Climate-induced changes in
grapevine yield and must sugar content in Franconia (Germany) between 1805 and
2010. PLoS ONE, 8(7), e69015. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069015.
Böhme, M., and Böttcher, F. (2011). Bodentemperaturen im Klimawandel: Auswertungen der
Messreihe der Säkularstation Potsdam. Klimastatusbericht des Deutschen Wetterdienstes,
85–90.
Bormann, H. (2011). Sensitivity analysis of 18 different potential evapotranspiration models
to observed climatic change at German climate stations. Climatic Change, 104, 729–753.
Carlisle, E., Smart, D., Williams, L.E., and Summer, M. (2010). California Vineyard
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Assessment of the Available Literature and Determination of
Research Needs. San Francisco, CA: California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance.
Carlisle, E.A., Steenwerth, K.L., and Smart, D.R. (2006). Effects of land use on soil respira-
tion: Conversion of oak woodlands to vineyards. Journal of Environmental Quality, 35(4),
1396–1404.
Chapagain, A., and Orr, S. (2008). UK Water Footprint: The Impact of the UK’s Food and
Fibre Consumption on Global Water Resources. Vol. 1. Godalming, UK: World Wildlife
Fund.
Corneo, P.E., Pellegrini, A., Cappellin, L., Gessler, C., and Pertot, I. (2014). Moderate
warming in microcosm experiment does not affect microbial communities in temperate
vineyard soils. Microbial Ecology, 67(3), 659–670.
Dalal, R.C., Wang, W., Robertson, G.P., and Parton, W.J. (2003). Nitrous oxide emission from
Australian agricultural lands and mitigation options: A review. Australian Journal of Soil
Research, 41(2), 165–195.
DeLucia, E.H., Casteel, C.L., Nabity, P.D., and O’Neill, B.F. (2008). Insects take a bigger bite
out of plants in a warmer, higher carbon dioxide world. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(6), 1781–1782.
Duchêne, E., and Schneider, C. (2005). Grapevine and climatic changes: A glance at the sit-
uation in Alsace. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 25(1), 93–99.
Dunn, G.M. (2005). Factors that control flower formation in grapevines. In de Garis, K.,
Dundon, C., Johnstone, R., and Partridge, S. (Eds.), Transforming Flowers to Fruit:
Proceedings of a Seminar Held in Mildura, Victoria, 29 July 2005. Adelaide, South
Australia, Australia: Australian Society for Viticulture and Oenology, 11–18.
Feldmann, H., Schädler, G., Panitz, H.-J., and Kottmeier, C. (2013). Near future changes of
extreme precipitation over complex terrain in Central Europe derived from high resolution
RCM ensemble simulations. International Journal of Climatology, 33(8), 1964–1977.
Feng, G.-Q., Li, Y., and Cheng, Z.-M. (2014). Plant molecular and genomic responses to
stresses in projected future CO2 environment. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 33(2–
3), 238–249.
Ferrise, R., Trombi, G., Moriondo, M., and Bindi, M. (2016). Climate change and grapevines:
A simulation study for the Mediterranean basin. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1),
88–104.
Gambetta, G. (2016). Water stress and grape physiology in the context of global climate
change. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1), 168–180.
Garcia de Cortazar Atauri, I. (2006). Adaptation du modèle STICS à la vigne (Vitis vinifera
L.): Utilisation dans le cadre d’une étude d’impact du changement climatique à l’échelle
de la France. PhD dissertation, ENSA Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Garrett, K.A., Dendy, S.P., Frank, E.E., Rouse, M.N., and Travers, S.E. (2006). Climate
change effects on plant disease: genomes to ecosystems. Annual Review of
Phytopathology, 44, 489–509.
Gonçalves, B., Falco, V., Moutinho-Pereira, J., Bacelar, E., Peixoto, F., and Correia, C. (2009).
Effects of elevated CO2 on grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.): Volatile composition, phenolic
content, and in vitro antioxidant activity of red wine. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry, 57(1), 265–273.
Hale, C.R., and Buttrose, M.S. (1974). Effect of temperature on ontogeny of berries of Vitis
vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon. Journal of the American Society of Horticultural
Science, 99(5), 390–394.
Hans R. Schultz 197
Hannah, L., Roehrdanz, P.R., Ikegami, M., Shepard, A.V., Shaw, M.R., Tabor, G., Zhi, L.,
Marquet, P.A., and Hijmans, R.J. (2013). Climate change, wine, and conservation.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110
(17), 6907–6912.
Hayman, P.T., McCarthy, M.G., Soar, C.J., and Sadras, V.O. (2009). Addressing the
tension between the challenge of climate change and the adaptive capacity of the
wine grape industry. In Sadras, V.O., Soar, C.J., Hayman, P.T., and McCarthy, M.G.
(Eds.), Managing Grapevines in Variable Climates: The Impact of Temperature.
Urrbrae, South Australia, Australia: South Australian Research and Development
Institute, 186–206.
Herath, I., Green, S., Singh, R., Horne, D., van der Zijpp, S., and Clothier, B. (2013). Water
footprinting of agricultural products: A hydrological assessment for the water footprint of
New Zealand’s wines. Journal of Cleaner Production, 41, 232–243.
Hoekstra, A.Y., and Chapagain, A.K. (2008). Globalization of Water: Sharing the Planet’s
Freshwater Resources. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hofmann, M., Lux, R., and Schultz, H.R. (2014). Constructing a framework for risk analyses
of climate change effects on the water budget of differently sloped vineyards with a
numeric simulation using the Monte Carlo method coupled to a water balance model.
Frontiers in Plant Science, 5, 645. doi:10.3389/fpls.2014.00645.
Hoppmann, D. (2010). Terroir: Wetter, Klima, Boden. Stuttgart, Germany: Ulmer.
Huglin, P. (1978). Nouveau mode d’evaluation des possibilités héliothermiques d’un milieu
viticole. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie d’Agriculture de France, 64(13), 1117–1126.
Iland, P., Dry, P., Proffitt, T., and Tyerman, S. (2011). The Grapevine: From the Science to the
Practice of Growing Vines for Wine. Adelaide: Patrick Iland Wine Promotions.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts,
Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of
Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jones, G.V. (2006). Climate and terroir: Impact of climate variability and change on wine. In
Macqueen, R.W., and Meinert, L.D. (Eds.), Fine Wine and Terroir: The Geoscience
Perspective. Geoscience Canada Reprint Series No. 9. St. John’s, Newfoundland:
Geological Association of Canada, 1–14.
Jones, G.V. (2007). Climate change: Observations, projections, and general implications for
viticulture and wine production. Economics Department Work Paper No 7. Walla
Walla, WA: Whitman College.
Jones, G.V., Duchene, E., Tomasi, D., Yuste, J., Braslavska, O., Schultz, H., Martinez, C.,
et al. (2005b). Changes in European winegrape phenology and relationships with
climate. In Proceedings XIV GESCO Symposium, Geisenheim, Germany, Vol. 1, 55–61.
Jones, G.V., White, W.A., Cooper, O.R., and Storchmann, K. (2005a). Climate change and
global wine quality. Climate Change, 73(3), 319–343.
Kenny, G.J., and Harrison, P.A. (1992). The effects of climate variability and change on grape
suitability in Europe. Journal of Wine Research, 3(3), 163–183.
Kliewer, W.M., and Torres, R.E. (1972). Effect of controlled day and night temperatures on
grape coloration. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 23(2), 71–77.
Krysanova, V., Buiteveld, H., Haase, D., Hattermann, F.F., van Niekerk, K., Roest, K.,
Martinez-Santos, P., and Schlüter, M. (2008). Practices and lessons learned in coping
with climatic hazards at the river-basin scale: Floods and drought. Ecology and Society,
13(2), 32.
Lamastra, L., Suciu, N.A., Novelli, E., and Trevisan, M. (2014). A new approach to assessing
the water footprint of wine: An Italian case study. Science of the Total Environment, 490,
748–756.
Lobell, D.B., Cahill, K.N., and Field, C.B. (2007). Historical effects of temperature and pre-
cipitation on California crop yields. Climatic Change, 81, 187–203.
Long, S.P., Ainsworth, E.A., Rogers, A., and Ort, D.R. (2004). Rising atmospheric carbon
dioxide: Plants FACE the future. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 55, 591–628.
Marais, J., van Wyk, C.J., and Rapp, A. (1992). Effect of sunlight and shade on norisoprenoid
levels in maturing Weisser Riesling and Chenin blanc grapes and Weisser Riesling wines.
South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 13(1), 23–31.
Moriondo, M., Jones, G.V., Bois, B., Dibari, C., Ferrise, R., Trombi, G., and Bindi, M. (2013).
Projected shifts of wine regions in response to climate change. Climatic Change, 119, 825–
839.
Nemani, R.R., White, M.A., Cayan, D.R., Jones, G.V., Running, S.W., Coughlan, J.C., and
Peterson, D.L. (2001). Asymmetric warming over coastal California and its impact on
the premium wine industry. Climate Research, 19, 25–34.
Orlowsky, B., Gerstengarbe, F.-W., and Werner, P.C. (2008). A resampling scheme for regional
climate simulations and its performance compared to a dynamical RCM. Theoretical and
Applied Climatology, 92(3), 209–223.
Petrie, P.R., and Sadras, V.O. (2008). Advancement of grapevine maturity in Australia
between 1993 and 2006: Putative causes, magnitude of trends and viticultural consequenc-
es. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 14(1), 33–45.
Peyrot des Gachons, C., Van Leeuwen, C., Tominaga, T., Soyer, J.-P., Gaudillère, J.-P., and
Dubourdieu, D. (2005). Influence of water and nitrogen deficit on fruit ripening and
aroma potential of Vitis vinifera L. cv Sauvignon blanc in field conditions. Journal of
the Science of Food and Agriculture, 85(1), 73–85.
Pillet, J., Egert, A., Pieri, P., Lecourieux, F., Kappel, C., Charon, J., Gomès, E., Keller, F.,
Delrot, S., and Lecourieux, D. (2012). VvGOLS1 and VvHsfA2 are involved in the heat
stress responses of grapevine berries. Plant and Cell Physiology, 53(10), 1776–1792.
Pirie, A.J.G., and Mullins, M.G. (1980). Concentration of phenolics in the skin of grape
berries during fruit development and ripening. American Journal of Enology and
Viticulture, 31(1), 34–36.
Roehrdanz, P.R., and Hannah, L. (2016). Climate change, California wine, and wildlife
habitat. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1), 69–87.
Sadras, V.O., Moran, M.A., and Bonada, M. (2013). Effects of elevated temperature in
grapevine. I. Berry sensory traits. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 19(1),
95–106.
Sadras, V.O., Schultz, H.R., Girona, J., and Marsal, J. (2012). Grapevine. In Steduto, P.,
Hsiao, T.C., Fereres, E., and Raes, D. (Eds.), Crop Yield Response to Water. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Irrigation and Drainage Paper
No. 66. Rome, Italy: FAO, 460–485.
Sadras, V.O., and Soar, C.J. (2009). Shiraz vines maintain yield in response to a 2–4 °C in-
crease in maximum temperature using an open-top heating system at key phenostages.
European Journal of Agronomy, 31(4), 250–258.
Sadras, V.O., Stevens, R.M., Pech, J.M., Taylor, E.J., Nicholas, P.R., and McCarthy, M.G.
(2007). Quantifying phenotypic plasticity of berry traits using an allometric-type ap-
proach: A case study on anthocyanins and sugars in berries of Cabernet Sauvignon.
Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 13, 72–80.
Hans R. Schultz 199
Salazar-Parra, C., Aguirreolea, J., Sánchez-Díaz, M., Irigoyen, J.J., and Morales, F. (2010).
Effects of climate change scenarios on Tempranillo grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) ripening:
Response to a combination of elevated CO2 and temperature, and moderate drought.
Plant and Soil, 337, 179–191.
Salazar-Parra, C., Aguirreolea, J., Sánchez-Díaz, M., Irigoyen, J.J., and Morales, F. (2012a).
Climate change (elevated CO2, elevated temperature and moderate drought) triggers the
antioxidant enzymes’ response of grapevine cv. Tempranillo, avoiding oxidative damage.
Physiologia Plantarum, 144(2), 99–110.
Salazar-Parra, C., Aguirreolea, J., Sánchez-Díaz, M., Irigoyen, J.J., and Morales, F. (2012b).
Photosynthetic response of Tempranillo grapevine to climate change scenarios. Annals of
Applied Biology, 161(3), 277–292.
Santos, J.A., Malheiro, A.C., Pinto, J.G., and Jones, G.V. (2012). Macroclimate and viticultur-
al zoning in Europe: Observed trends and atmospheric forcing. Climate Research, 51(1),
89–103.
Schaller, L., Jagoutz, H., Berthold, G., Emde, K., Lohnertz, O., and Hoppmann, D. (1994a).
Bewirtschaftungssystem und Nitratbildung in Rebflächen. Teil 1: Grundlage für die
Erarbeitung eines Simulationsmodells. Geisenheimer Berichte, Band 16a. Geisenheim,
Germany: Ges. zur Förderung der Forschungsanst. Geisenheim.
Schaller, L., Jagoutz, H., Berthold, G., Emde, K., Lohnertz, O., and Hoppmann, D. (1994b).
Bewirtschaftungssystem und Nitratbildung in Rebflächen. Teil 2: Parameterschätzung und
Umsetzung zu einem Düngeberatungsmodell. Geisenheimer Berichte, Band 16b.
Geisenheim, Germany: Ges. zur Förderung der Forschungsanst. Geisenheim.
Schultz, H.R. (2000). Climate change and viticulture: A European perspective on climatology,
carbon dioxide and UV-B effects. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 6(1),
2–12.
Schultz, H.R., and Hofmann, M. (2015). The ups and downs of environmental impact on
grapevines: Future challenges in temperate viticulture. In Géros, H., Chaves, M.M.,
Medrano Gil, H., and Delrot, S. (Eds.), Grapevine in a Changing Environment: A
Molecular and Ecophysiological Perspective. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 18–37.
Schultz, H.R., and Jones, G.V. (2010). Climate induced historic and future changes in
Viticulture. Journal of Wine Research, 21(2–3), 137–145.
Schüttler, A., Gruber, B., Thibon, C., Lafontaine, M., Stoll, M., Schultz, H., Rauhut, D., and
Darriet, P. (2011). Influence of environmental stress on secondary metabolite composition
of Vitis vinifera var. Riesling grapes in cool climate region – water status and sun exposure.
In Proceedings of the Oenologie 2011, 9e Symposium International d’Oenologie, Bordeaux,
France, 65–70.
Steenwerth, K., and Belina, K.M. (2008). Cover crops and cultivation: Impacts on soil N dy-
namics and microbiological function in a Mediterranean vineyard agroecosystem. Applied
Soil Ecology, 40(2), 370–380.
Stott, P.A., Jones, G.S., and Mitchell, J.F.B. (2003). Do models underestimate the solar con-
tribution to recent climate change? Journal of Climate, 16, 4079–4093.
Tonietto, J., and Carbonneau, A. (2004). A multicriteria climatic classification system for
grape-growing regions worldwide. Agriculture and Forest Meteorology, 124(1–2), 81–97.
Travers, S.E., Smith, M.D., Bai, J., Hulbert, S.H., Leach, J.E., Schnable, P.S., Knapp, A.K.,
et al. (2007). Ecological genomics: Making the leap from model systems in the lab to
native populations in the field. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5(1), 19–24.
Urhausen, S., Brienen, S., Kapala, A., and Simmer, C. (2011). Climatic conditions and their
impact on viticulture in the Upper Moselle region. Climatic Change, 109(3), 349–373.
van Leeuwen, C., Pieri, P., and Vivin, P. (2010). Comparison of three operational tools for the
assessment of vine water status: Stem water potential, carbon isotope discrimination mea-
sured on grape sugar and water balance. In Delrot, S., Medrano, H., Or, E., Bavaresco, L.,
and Grando, S. (Eds.), Methodologies and Results in Grapevine Research. Berlin: Springer,
87–106.
van Leeuwen, C., Schultz, H.R., Garcia de Cortazar-Atauri, I., Duchêne, E., Ollat, N.,
Pieri, P., Bois, B., et al. (2013). Why climate change will not dramatically decrease viticul-
tural suitability in main wine-producing areas by 2050. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America PNAS, 110(3), E3051–E3052. doi:
10.1073/pnas.1307927110.
van Leeuwen, C., and Darriet, P. (2016). Impact of climate change on viticulture and wine
quality. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1), 150–167.
Webb, L.B., Whetton, P.H., and Barlow, E.W.R. (2007). Modelled impact of future climate
change on the phenology of grapevines in Australia. Australian Journal of Grape and
Wine Research, 13(3), 165–175.
Webb, L.B., Whetton, P.H., Bhend, J., Darbyshire, R., Briggs, P.R., and Barlow, E.W.R.
(2012). Earlier wine-grape ripening driven by climatic warming and drying and manage-
ment practices. Nature Climate Change, 2, 259–264.
White, M.A., Diffenbaugh, N.S., Jones, G.V., Pal, J.S., and Giorgi, F. (2006). Extreme heat
reduces and shifts United States premium wine production in the 21st century.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103
(30), 11217–11222.
Williams, L.E., and Matthews, M.A. (1990). Grapevine. In Stewart, B.A., and Nielsen, D.R.
(Eds.), Irrigation of Agricultural Crops. Agronomy Monograph No. 30. Madison, WI :
American Society of Agronomy, 1019–1055.
Winter, E., Lowe, S., and Bulleid, N. (2007). Bunchzone temperature monitoring throughout
ripening and grape and wine quality of Shiraz in NE Victoria. Australian Viticulture, 11,
48–53.
Wolfe, D.W., Schwartz, M.D., Lakso, A.N., Otsuki, Y., Pool, R.M., and Shaulis, N.J. (2005).
Climate change and shifts in spring phenology of three horticultural woody perennials in
northeastern USA. International Journal of Biometeorology, 49(5), 303–309.

Global Climate Change Sustainability and Some Challenges For Grape and Wine Production

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Global Climate Change Sustainability and Some Challenges For Grape and Wine Production

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2015.

31 Published online by Cambridge University Press

Global Climate Change, Sustainability, and Some Challenges

Keywords: Climate change, viticulture, varietal suitability.

© American Association of Wine Economists, 2016

There are a multitude of challenges ahead depending on the viticultural region.

A. Variability and Trends in Evapotranspiration and Precipitation: Global Is

Figure 1 shows observed (calculated according to Penman-Monteith) and predict-

more pronounced albeit completely unpredictable in frequency, duration, and

Different varieties will respond differently to warming. For example, an increase in

When sensory traits of berries from different varieties were compared in a

Figure 2 shows an example for the growing season temperature development

To extend the given example of a cross-regional comparison, Figure 3 shows the

Day–night temperature difference is largest in the Adelaide Hills, between 13 °C to

temperature amplitude has more or less continuously decreased in Geisenheim,

When the patterns in temperature and precipitation during the grape-ripening

A more recent series of studies investigated the effects of shorter-term exposures to

E. Nitrous Oxide, Methane, and the Carbon Budget of Vineyards

2. Factors relating to vineyard carbon sequestration such as vine biomass, cover

F. Carbon and Water Footprint of the Wine Industry

You might also like