New Zealand at the Forefront of Sustainable Viticulture

A pheromone insect trap in a Pichon Comtesse Lalande vineyard, Bordeaux

Water management, both in the vineyard and the winery is another. This might include restricting irrigation to necessity, typically for establishing new vines, or in drought. The vines need for water may also be managed by planting on rootstocks better adapted to dry farming and more drought resistant. Wineries have systems for minimisation and proper management of wastewater, which increasingly involves some degree of recycling.

Moving from sustainable viticulture to organics is a natural progression that reflects a deepening understanding of and commitment to a healthy environment. Organic viticulture eliminates synthetic pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers, and focuses on maintaining and improving soil health through composting, cover crops and natural soil amendments. It also includes minimal winemaking interventions. By 2020 Bordeaux had seen a 43% increase in vineyard land either certified organic of in conversion, despite the challenges of a humid Atlantic climate and disease pressures like powdery mildew. Usually (but not always) the move to organic viticulture involves formal certification. This typically includes a conversion period when “non-organic inputs” cease and the land recovers, an organic management plan (OMP) which details soil health, pest controls and so on, annual audits from certified auditors to ensure compliance, and certification marks. In New Zealand the leading vineyard certification is BioGro. Currently 16% of NZ wineries hold organic certification. There is an EU-wide certification called Euro-Leaf which ensures organic practices and traceability under EU regulations and within the EU there are also national programs – for example in France it is called AB (Agriculture Biologique). It is not uncommon to see both EU and national certification marks used.

BioGro certified vineyards in Martinborough: Ata Rangi and Dry River

Within the move to organics we can see “biodynamic viticulture” as both a subset of organic but also as a deeper and more holistic development of sustainability. Originally based on the philosophy of Rudolf Steiner in the 1920s, biodynamics views the vineyard as a self-sustaining organism, as outlined in the table below.

Jancis once described biodynamics as a mostly good practice in need of a theory that made sense, and this caveat has resonated with me personally. Perhaps my own discomfort with some of the more mystical (and even wacky) aspects of Steiner’s philosophy is reflected in the fact that quite a number of vineyards have embraced many of the practices of biodynamics but not full certification, Kuhling-Gillot in the Rheinhessen comes to mind. In Italy, an attempt to give biodynamics methods legal recognition was blocked by outraged scientists with one Nobel-winning physicist declaring it akin to witchcraft!

Nevertheless, biodynamics is becoming more widely embraced – I think immediately of Chateau Palmer in Margaux, of Dr Burkin- Wolf in Germany’s Pfalz, Yangarra in Australia, Millton, Rippon and Felton Road here in New Zealand.

Any discussion of biodynamics cannot avoid mention of La Renaissance des Appellations, a global movement of biodynamic winegrowers founded in 2001 by Nicolas Joly of Clos de La Coulee Serrant in the Lore Valley fame. This association champions authentic, terroir-driven wines that reflect with integrity their origin, made with minimal intervention and maximum respect for nature. There are three key elements as follows:

• Biodynamic Foundation: Members must practice biodynamics, treating the vineyard as a living organism and aligning farming with lunar and cosmic rhythms.

• Purity & Transparency: Wines must be free from synthetic additives, excessive manipulation, and industrial winemaking techniques.
• Expression of Place: The goal is to let the vineyard speak—through native yeasts, healthy soils, and unaltered fermentation.

The membership criteria is rigorous, requiring:

• Organic Certification for the entire estate (minimum 3 years).

• Biodynamic Practice for at least 2 years (Demeter or Biodyvin certification is encouraged but not mandatory).
• Strict Winemaking Standards:
  • No reverse osmosis, wood chips, or synthetic additives.
  • No sterile filtration or cryo-extraction.
  • Only wild yeasts and natural fermentation.
  • Manual harvesting and massal selection (not clonal).

Membership has grown to over 230 producers across 13 countries including New Zealand (Millton, Seresin), Italy, Germany, Chile and the US.

Alongside and in step with the growth in biodynamics is the growing focus on regenerative viticulture, which like biodynamics goes beyond the avoidance of harm to seek the active restoration of ecosystems. Over the years I have observed how once pooh-poohed biodynamic assertions about life in the soil have found compelling scientific evidence – notably the discovery of the role of mycorrhizal fungi which colonise plant roots and extend their filaments deep into the soil, taking sugars from the plants in exchange for improved access to water and nutrients. One of the most fascinating discoveries is the way these fungi connect multiple plants underground which can even allow healthy plants to transfer nutrients water and chemical signals to distressed plants. Such discoveries compel us to change our methods. Where a desire to harmful weed-spraying once pointed us to rely on more mechanical means of weed-control like ploughing, now we know that ploughing disrupts those mycorrhizal networks, and so we might instead graze sheep between the rows in the winter. But beyond methods, these discoveries compel us to recognise that the vineyard is a living connected organism. Where we once may have thought of the “weeds” between the rows as “competitors” for nutrients, regenerative agriculture forces us to reconsider the very concept of “weed”.

Regenerative viticulture then can be seen as going beyond organic and biodynamic principles and drawing on the latest science to actively improve the vineyard ecosystem. The core principles may be summarised as follows:

🌿 Core Principles of Regenerative Viticulture

• Minimize Soil Disturbance
  • Avoid deep tillage to preserve soil structure and microbial life.
  • Encourage no-till or low-till practices to maintain carbon sequestration.
• Keep Living Roots in the Soil
  • Maintain cover crops year-round to feed soil organisms and prevent erosion.
  • Promote symbiotic relationships between vines and other plants.
• Maximize Biodiversity
  • Plant native grasses, wildflowers, and hedgerows to attract beneficial insects and birds.
  • Integrate trees or shrubs (agroforestry) to create layered ecosystems.
• Integrate Animals
  • Use sheep, chickens, or ducks to graze, fertilize, and control pests naturally.
  • Animal presence enhances nutrient cycling and soil vitality.
• Build Organic Matter
  • Apply compost and mulch to enrich soil fertility and water retention.
  • Encourage fungal networks and microbial diversity for healthy vine nutrition.
• Reduce Chemical Inputs
  • Eliminate synthetic fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides.
  • Rely on natural pest control, companion planting, and microbial resilience.

• Water Stewardship

• • Use efficient irrigation systems like drip irrigation.
  • Capture and store rainwater; improve soil’s water-holding capacity.
• Holistic Vineyard Management
  • Treat the vineyard as a living organism, not just a production unit.
  • Align practices with seasonal rhythms and long-term ecological goals.

Inter-row cropping with wildflowers at Fromm Vineyard in Marlborough

In 2022 Jancis’s essay competition focused on regenerative viticulture and a contribution from New Zealand’s own Toby Buck of the renowned Te Mata Estate provides an excellent illustration of the application of regenerative practices in the vineyard. WWC22 – Tobias Buck | Jancis Robinson

Yet for all of the above we have neglected some of the critical human elements of sustainable viticulture. We need also to consider the owners, the workers, the neighbours, the customers, the entire community! Sustainability goes beyond the natural environment and factors in the human as part of a multi-dimensional sustainable system. This is often depicted as the intersection of the three E circles: Environment, Equity (social) and Economic. We have necessarily focused on the environment, but the people are also important. I read recently of a case prosecuted in Champagne where migrant workers were kept in sub-standard housing and poorly fed – this can scarcely be considered any more sustainable than the American minimum wage! Sustainable Human Resource practices are critical. For one thing, we can’t isolate these human elements from the environmental. Whilst several environmental factors contribute to the growing problem of vine trunk disease, in my local Martinborough, it is also evident that a big part of the problem was bad pruning resulting from a combination of poor training of contract pruners combined with a piece rate payment system that encouraged speed of work over vine care. This illustrates the dynamic interaction of these elements – unsustainable people practice leads to unsustainable environmental practice and in turn unsustainable economics due to the need to replace diseased vines. And while sustainability must involve creation of an excellent product which increasingly requires solid environmental credentials if consumers are willing to pay sufficient for the enterprise to turn a profit, customer experience also extends into that equation. Where so much of wine production is commodified, customers will pay more for a premium product with a story to tell from people they have a meaningful connection with.

The human side of sustainability is perhaps less well-discussed than the environmental, but no less significant. As Jancis summarises: “winegrowers of the world are generally being terrific at one of the three pillars of sustainability, concern for the environment”. But economic sustainability – not so much. Winegrowing faces rising costs, taxation and tariffs, with stiff competition and a declining global market, such that it is very difficult or many producers to make a profit. In these circumstances it is too tempting to shore up profits at the expense of the labour force, paying them poorly and providing poor working conditions. Perhaps this is the new frontier of sustainability and perhaps the most challenging. Meeting legal minimum wage standards may not be enough if those standards do not allow workers acceptable living standards. Privatising the profits whilst socialising the costs is an all-too-common business practice. But can forcing workers to rely on food stamps to survive truly be considered sustainable?

The challenge is particularly acute with seasonal migrant labour. Vineyard work is quite seasonal. The combination of seasonality and minimum wage is often unattractive to local labour and a high degree of dependence on seasonal migrant labour has become the industry norm globally.  Migrant labour is so much more vulnerable to exploitation, particularly where such labour is contracted by specialist management companies equipped to handle the increasingly onerous visa bureaucracy rather than hired directly by the producer.

Migrant labour in the vineyard under NZ’s Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) scheme is a key element in NZ’s wine export success

In New Zealand we have legislation to prevent migrant worker exploitation, but it has not always prevented it from happening. In 2019 a labour hire company called Double Seven Services which provided workers to Marlborough vineyard was prosecuted for serious breaches of employment standards including making migrants pay to get their jobs and paying unlawful piece rates below minimum wage. Around the same time, ICM Horticultural Contracting was prosecuted in the Hawkes Bay for failing to pay vineyard migrant workers from Papua New Guinea. These cases have led to the incorporation of People as one of the six core focus areas for the SWNZ programme and requires members to complete annual submissions about employment practices, demonstrate compliance with NZ labour standards and undergo independent audits.  The articulation of the current state in the 2025 report remains however conventionally focussed on employer needs.

Adoption of social sustainability still lags the environmental and economic focus globally. Jancis reports that the Sustainable Wine Roundtable has been benchmarking the various (40+) sustainability standards that exist in the industry globally and finds them distinctly light on labour issues. I am heartened accordingly that in New Zealand we seem to also be making progress in this critical development of sustainable viticulture. And as a New Zealand Māori who grew up disconnected from my Māori roots and has worked overseas for much of my life it is also as heartening as it is fascinating to discover that our concept of kaitiakitanga -guardianship incorporates people as well as environment, expressed as manaakitanga, the uplifting of the mana of those around us through generosity, empathy and kindness. For a Māori immersed in the world of wine, to be committed to sustainable viticulture is to be a true kaitiaki (guardian) who practices manaakitanga. Manaakitanga is the human heart of kaitiakitanga. And while La Renaissance des Appellations emphasises terroir as part of its sustainability lens, our concept of tūrangawaewae, literally “a place to stand” expands that lens to emphasise not simply what the land gives to the wine but what the land gives to the people and how they reciprocate. This in turn becomes part of the story of the wine to engage and connect with customers in a way that is not simply a transaction for a commodity but a journey into whanaungatanga, an expression of family ties that extends yes, even to customer relationships built around those shared experiences of wine based on mutual respect and collective responsibility for sustainability, transforming commerce into a community of shared experience.