Transforming grapes into wine may be defined as a human, cultural endeavour. As stated by Tim Patterson and John Buechsenstein, ‘grapes could not make themselves into wine without human assistance and intervention’ (2018: 32). Even so-called natural wines that are made with as little human influence as possible require oversight. And human initiation is needed to operate machinery used in the processing of grape juice into wine. Clearly, humans are largely responsible for crafting wine; yet, they are hardly the only ones implicated in its production (see Arceño 2020a).
This article considers both vignerons (winegrowers) and the vines in their care as key participants of the winegrowing system and mediators of place-based identity. Vignerons oversee vine-to-wine transformations by way of producing artisanal, place-based wines from their own grape harvests, while vines grow in landscapes of human and environmental interactions (see Unwin 1991). Concurrently, landscapes are constantly undergoing change and are ‘continuously sensed’ (Willow 2011: 265); they are not static, and their meanings undergo constant negotiation. Wines – the outcome of social and ecological co-creation made possible through yeasts’ conversion of sugar into alcohol – may express the very time and space from which they originate. Like other geographically situated goods, they can be tangible symbols of locality that help define particular spaces as meaningful places (Beriss 2019; see also Adger et al 2011).
But what happens as factors that influence aspects of a wine's identity – such as its taste, smell and colour – change? How and to what extent are practices and behaviours changing as a result? And what may be said of the wines that currently express locales that are in states of change? Drawing on my fieldwork in the eastern French winegrowing region of Alsace, it comes down to the French concept of terroir, which I use as a framework for analysing changes, responses and adaptations occurring in the sensory world created by its linkages.
I take the position that ways of knowing occur in and through the sensorium, that is, the totality of sentient beings’ sensory faculties. In times of change – climatic or otherwise (economic, legislative; see Teil 2020a) – one knows things are changing because those changes are seen, smelled, heard, tasted and/or felt (Arceño 2020b). Climate change in particular compels us to rethink what we once knew at quicker rates, as its effects continue to alter landscapes. Here, I turn to situated knowledges (Haraway 1988) borne of Alsatian winegrowers’ experiences with their vines and the greater social-ecological networks within which both are embedded. The complicated nexus of vignerons’ historical, cultural, financial, political and other contexts influences what they consider to be changing and how they decide to address those changes. Moreover, their attunement to their vines and the sensory cues of additional non-human others are predicated on years of experience caring for the former (see Krzywoszynska 2016).
Indeed, vignerons’ relationships to a given space allow them unique opportunities to convey moments of ‘dysplacement’ (Jackson 2011), as they remain both emplaced and displaced by sensorial changes in their environments (on emplacement, see Pink 2015; on tasting displacement, see Gross 2018). By this, I do not mean to suggest that winegrowers experience the same kind of alienation from their landscapes as Deborah Jackson (2011) writes of Aamjiwnaang First Nation members, who have had to contend with air pollution and a changing smellscape that indexes a profound sense of loss. Rather, I employ her concept as a way to bring attention to how winegrowers articulate experiences of place that differ from the norm because of changing sensory stimuli. As embodied and emplaced individuals, winegrowers are able to talk about forms of change in their respective landscapes and within the context of winegrowing that index attitudes toward changing place-based identities over time.
Digging Deeper: Defining Terroir and the Taste of Place
At the root of my conversations with winegrowers was terroir and the wines that express it. The International Organisation of Vine and Wine defines terroir as:
a concept which refers to a space upon which a collective knowledge of interactions between an identifiable physical and biological environment and applied vitivinicultural practices is developed, which confers distinctive characteristics to the products originating from this space. [It also] includes specific characteristics of soil, topography, climate, landscape, and biodiversity. (Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin [OIV] 2010: np)
In addition to terroir providing a basis for establishing identities for the product, producer and the place from which they originate (Arceño 2020c; see also Beriss 2019), it is necessary to recognise terroir's role as a multivocal (Turner 1977; cf. Ulin 2013) framework for analysing processes of response and adaptation. On the one hand, terroir denotes (protected) geographic designations of origin. On the other hand, it references various influences that connote, imply or even amplify a sense of place for the vigneron, their vines and their resultant wines. To wit, terroir ‘refers to the totality of the social-ecological system as indicative of place, rather than solely the physical space upon which grapes are grown, harvested, and processed’ (Arceño 2021: 118–119).
Talking about terroir was also important for elucidating how winegrowers communicated sensory qualities of finished wines, which were often framed in reference to the terroir system that produced it. Such place-based distinctiveness is codified through the French naming system known as the Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée (AOC). The visual cue ‘AOC’ signifies the item comes from a given site and that certain traditions have been maintained to produce an item of consistent quality and taste (Bérard and Marchenay 2006). Those who do not adhere to AOC guidelines cannot claim it under a geographically indicated name (Beverland 2006; Guy 2003; Salolainen 1993).
This does not mean that the rules themselves cannot change. In the long-standing history of Champagne (the drink) as a geographically indicated product, for example, AOC regulations governing what can be called Champagne and from where it may originate have been revised for optimisation and quality improvement. This includes planting density, when wines may be bottled and press yields (Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne [CIVC] nd). In 2008, France's Institut National de l'Origine et de la Qualité (INAO), which oversees geographical indications of place-based goods, even redrew the delimitation of Champagne's boundaries in response to global demand for Champagne (Sandford 2008). Today's Champagne winegrowers continue to respond quickly to decreases in acidity that have followed a 1.1°C increase in the region over the past three decades, whereby according to the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne's Director of Communications Thibaut Le Mailloux, ‘the ultimate goal is to keep the style of the wine’ (Morton 2019: np).
Of course, adapting to such changes is nothing new (Neethling et al 2017). Adaptation spurs innovation (Zilberman et al 2018), as it challenges how we understand human–nature relationships (Cassidy 2012; Riechers et al 2020). Given wine grapes’ sensitivity to environmental changes (Holland and Smit 2010; Jones and Webb 2010; Mosedale et al 2016), global climate change has forced winegrowers and other agro-ecological producers of place-based goods to acknowledge that traditional practices and definitions are no longer secure or stable. As recently as 2018, the INAO even approved inclusion of new varietals better suited for changing environments (Pomranz 2018).
From such structural challenges to adjusting day-to-day practices, the pages that follow invite a fundamental rethinking of terroir. This should be viewed not in terms of its composition but rather in terms of sensory bonds between and among its various components, all of which contribute to the goût du terroir or ‘taste of place’ (Trubek 2008: 2). My goal is thus to operationalise terroir, demonstrating how sensory cues produced and consumed by winegrowing participants help maintain and (re)define meanings attributed to a given space. In so doing, I illustrate how vignerons and the vines become responders to and agents of change in contexts of uncertainty.
Case Study: Alsatian Vignerons and Vines
The period 1972–2002 recorded increasing temperatures throughout Alsatian vineyards (Duchêne and Schneider 2005; Duchêne et al 2010). And when I conducted fieldwork from June 2018 to April 2019, mentions of global warming, dry soils and concerns over drought also registered often in my conversations with vignerons. The climatic situation in Alsace is notable, given that one of its well-known grape varietals, riesling, is ‘considered by growers to be the finest variety’ (Robinson and Harding 2015: 16), while gewurztraminer has ‘evolved’ to be the most distinctive (Wilson 1998: 90). In many respects, they are materially and symbolically important to Alsace's gastronomic identity (at minimum). Neither can be simply relocated or necessarily replaced with other varietals, as they are otherwise tethered to the geographic locale of their cultivation by place-based naming laws.
With that said, winegrowers representing 13 different wineries contributed to my comprehension of Alsace's winegrowing landscape. In addition to at least one primary contact (defined as someone who fully participated in my walking and semi-directed interviews) per winery, I also worked with some of their family members, employees and/or volunteers. I initially selected six wineries through a combination of purposive, convenience and snowball sampling. These wineries comprised my core sample and are located within Alsace's winegrowing capital of Colmar, which included the winery of the Grand Est-Colmar centre of the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA) where I was based, and the neighbouring commune of Wettolsheim. In spring 2019, I grew my network to include seven wineries located outside of these areas. I remain in contact with my informants, checking in via email or Facebook for updates and/or to review manuscript extracts prior to publication.
When using the term winery, I refer to the physical location where a winegrowing site's grapes are crushed and turned into wine, which may be located far from the vineyards themselves. With that in mind, distance and means of transportation from my apartment or office space in Colmar were correlated with the amount of time I spent at each winery and the kinds of research activities I could complete. Because the core wineries were either walkable or bikeable, I visited them more frequently (21 times in total, with the INRA accounting for a third of these visits). I travelled by bus or train to visit the others, meeting once with all of them but Famille Hugel (Riquewihr), which I visited a second time. Core or not, many of the actual vineyards were located in neighbouring communes or cities, where I often needed to travel by car in order to visit them.
All of the winegrowers I worked with belong to winegrowing families that have produced wine for decades, if not centuries or multiple generations. The family of Nicolas Haeffelin of the Domaine Viticole de la Ville de Colmar, for example, has had a winemaker or grape grower in each generation since 1560. Many of the winegrowers may be best described as vignerons récoltants or independent winegrowers, as I described them earlier. Others identify as artisan vignerons or artisan négociants. They purchase others’ grapes under contract to supplement their own harvests and then ferment the grapes and market their production under their own label. In either case, the winegrowers I worked with respect terroir and the value it provides their wines.
How wineries are identified means access to or exclusion from various local or regional syndicates, which aim to promote their members’ interests (for an overview of Alsatian winegrowing professional organisations, see Bouard 2011). As independent winegrowers, Domaine Karcher and Domaine Schoffit (both based in Colmar) belong to the Syndicat des Vignerons Indépendents d'Alsace (SYNVIRA). On the other hand, négociant Arthur Metz (Marlenheim), for which Nicolas is also its winemaker, is a member of the Groupement des Producteurs-Négociants du Vignoble Alsacien (GPNVA). Importantly, everyone participates in the larger network supported by the Conseil Interprofessionnel des Vins d'Alsace (CIVA), which focuses on the promotion of Alsace wines; wineries pay a small percentage of their sales to CIVA for marketing costs. Additional syndicates include the Association des Viticulteurs d'Alsace (which focuses globally on Alsatian winegrowers and associated laws and regulations), the Syndicat des Producteurs de Crémant d'Alsace (which focuses on those who produce Alsace's sparkling wine), and local syndicates that seek to defend named appellations. Finally, less formalised structures include the Jeunes Vignerons d'Alsace and the DiVINes d'Alsace.
While the ultimate goals of the aforementioned groups are to advance and promote Alsatian wines, as well as to support and give voice to (specific) Alsatian winegrowers, the institutional and professional structures in the region highlight its diversity when it comes to both complementary and competing interests. This diversity is further evident when considering varying levels of engagement and participation in syndicate activities, associations promoting organic and/or biodynamic practices, relative attachments to AOC structures (see Fassier-Boulanger 2019), and mixed responses to agro-ecological and climate change. This final point has been exemplified by a series of foresight exercises conducted by the Long-term Adaptation to Climate Change in Viticulture (LACCAVE) project throughout France, including in Alsace (Ollat and Touzard 2020), as well as in research among winegrowers in France's Loire Valley who belong to different technical and trade networks (Thiollet-Scholtus et al 2020).
While organisational networks are not of chief concern in this article, what I mean to underscore are the various social influences that inform vignerons’ decision-making. The aforementioned studies indicate a wide range of adaptive responses to various forms of change, which I contend are a result (at least in part) of the social – as well as cultural and technical or trade – capital (Aldecua et al 2017; see also Faccin et al 2017) that emerges from these networks. Participation in certain ones may perhaps influence winegrowers’ sensitivity or even ability to respond accordingly to change, environmental or otherwise, due to the support structures or barriers inherent in the social, cultural and/or technical organisations of which they are a part. Consequently, these create differentiated relationships with the environment, as winegrowers’ worldviews and practices are shaped or influenced accordingly (see Pineau 2019; Teil et al 2011).
Further levels of naming distinction exist within and outside Alsace. They may be of/from Alsace, but they are often also of/from single geologically and climatically defined parcels of land (lieux-dits [localities]). The winegrowers I have worked with produce at least one wine from grapes grown in one of Alsace's 51 Grand Crus. More often than not, these even more delimited lieux-dits known for their consistency and unique terroirs are located along the slopes of the Vosges Mountains. A feature of Grand Cru wines is their typicité (typicality or typicity; see Robinson and Harding 2015), or the qualities perceived as emblematic of a varietal and its point of origin.
Only nine varietals (eight white and one red) are recognised as AOC grapes in Alsace: gewurztraminer, riesling, muscat, pinot gris, pinot blanc, sylvaner, chasselas, auxerrois, and pinot noir, the first four of which are typically approved to grow on Grand Cru sites in Alsace. Wines produced from grapes harvested in these spaces, and which fulfil all other requirements, such as production methods and final composition, are protected under the AOC Grand Cru label (CIVA nd). As it might be surmised, regulatory specificities of such distinctions shape the integrity of the naming system. They also interface with social and cultural limits regarding adaptive practices in the midst of change. Unlike in the United States, where naming conventions and legal recognitions of place are not as regulated as in France and the rest of Europe (Chen 1996: 30), Alsatian winegrowers must contend with the reality that they cannot grow anything else if they want to receive the economic and social benefits that come with indicating their wines under the AOC label.
What is more, there exists a curiosity in Alsace that wine labels tend to feature the cépage (grape variety), rather than the name of the physical locale (see Lin 2015; Puckette 2019), as is practised elsewhere throughout the country. Having said that, Jean-Michel Deiss of Domaine Marcel Deiss (Bergheim) was the only winegrower I interviewed who focuses on the expression of a distinct terroir through what is referred to as complantation or the mixing of grapes from a single terroir. The Domaine's labels are indicative of an appellation and not a single varietal as is more common in the region. If the grapes that can be grown in Alsatian vineyards are intrinsically limited by naming laws, then it would seem options for adaptation come down to caring for those grapes so they can remain in place or advocating changes that permit growing other grapes under a protected name. This contrasts with other regions where different varietals could be more easily planted, since the location (rather than the composition) of those grapes may matter more.
Conducting Multisensory Research with Vignerons
If meanings of place are ordered and understood by what we perceive through our senses (Rodaway 2013), it would logically follow that we should consider sensory changes within a given space and what they mean for the people, products and place linked to that space. In order to analyse how vignerons make sense of their changing relationships to place as their winegrowing landscapes undergo change, I used various methodological approaches to co-create with my winegrowing informants embodied and emplaced ethnographic knowledge with attention to the sensorium and through the senses (Jackson 2018; see also Pink 2015; Stoller 1989), whereby the body and its senses become mediums of human experience (Sunderland et al 2012). As I intend to use it here, the sensorium provides a context for understanding sensory stimuli and how winegrowers (and to an extent non-human others) respond to them.
Conducting interviews throughout Alsace allowed for a comparative analysis that enabled me to better interpret the region's various terroirs and practices. I conducted walking and semi-directed interviews with my primary winegrower contacts. Among the core group, interviews averaged over two hours; outside of it, interviews were longer, since I did not visit them as frequently. I used walking interviews (Evans and Jones 2011) to explore how winegrowers relate to their winegrowing sites, inclusive of vines and wines in various stages of growth and fermentation, whereas semi-directed interviews (Hubert 2004) helped me focus on perceptions of and attributions to environmental change, responses to those changes and conceptualisations of terroir. Both interviews allowed me to learn about vignerons’ relationships to their winegrowing landscapes in ways that were more meaningful than if we had been stationary and did not have the sensory cues of their vineyards, wine cellars and tasting rooms to prompt our discussions. Additionally, I conducted less structured interviews with those who were more familiar with certain winegrowing tasks and were thus able to speak in depth on those specific contexts (i.e. viticulteurs [grape growers] spoke more of the vineyard, while vintners [winemakers] spoke more of the wine cellar they oversaw).
Being able to experience the sensorial qualities of wines and winegrowing complemented my interview data. Tasting wines produced at each site provided opportunities to learn more of winegrowers’ approaches to and perspectives of their craft, as well as how they articulated terroir expression through their wines (e.g. minerality from the soil, acidity lost or gained from the growing season, or freshness or smokiness coming from the natural environment; see also Arceño 2020b). In addition to myriad dégustations (tastings) and photo reviews of images I took on walking tours or during literal fieldwork, I conducted participant observations with winegrowers and/or their employees. These quotidian practices included pruning, harvesting, bottling and bow training, a process of arching cordons that is emblematic to certain winegrowing regions such as Alsace. Developing a connection to Alsatian soils, vines and wines through these immersive and repeated encounters assisted my ability to connect with winegrowers’ own experiences more than if I were to have relied solely on interview transcripts. Finally, I attended local and regional wine events in Colmar and Strasbourg to enrich my data pool. At these events, I met other winegrowers, tasted their wines, and briefly talked to them about terroir and perceptions of environmental change. I conducted all communications in French, except for one complete interview in English, and interview translations are my own, with support from Happy Scribe's beta translation software and Google Translate.
My multisensory ethnographic approach generated aural, gustatory, haptic, olfactory and/or visual data in the form of sensory stimuli produced by human and non-human participants of the winegrowing system and transformed by the environment. Tracing their production, as well as the consumption of those stimuli – inclusive of their reception, interpretation and subsequent response thereto by sentient beings (Jackson 2018; see also Arceño 2020b) – allowed me to identify emergent relationships between and among winegrowing actors. The subsequently produced and then consumed sensory stimuli in response to the initial stimuli continues what Tom Jackson calls the ‘ceaseless process of adaptation through experience’ (2018: 63). And it is through analysing these experiences that I have been able to identify who (or what) is part of the winegrowing system itself, as indicated in the following section (see also Arceño 2020a), and to whom or what it is they may be responding. This has since led me to recognise conceptions of change as perceived and felt through the senses and, based on multiple influences (e.g. past experience, ongoing research, suggestions by fellow winegrowers), responded to through action (i.e. behavioural responses or adaptation to those changes). To put it another way, my engagement with the senses generates different ways of knowing and identifying ways in which we might know differently (see also Pink 2013).
Participants of the Winegrowing System
In the process of my research, I identified three groups of participants of the winegrowing system that produce sensory stimuli (sensu Jackson 2018): human life, non-human life and non-living materials (Table 1). Sentient beings (human and non-human life) consume the produced signals, interpreting their meaning and using it to inform their decision-making and to respond accordingly.
A non-exhaustive list of Alsatian winegrowing participants
Human life | Non-human life | Non-living materials |
---|---|---|
Winegrowers | Grapes, vines | Posts |
Family members, workers | Wildlife (birds, boars) | Trellis wires |
Volunteers, consumers | Fungi (botrytis, esca) | Electrical fencing |
Lawmakers (appellations) | Yeast (natural, artificial) | Chemical agents |
Researchers (INRA, climate scientists, anthropologists) | Soil microbes | Weather conditions |
Source: Arceño (2021: 125).
An important message to decipher out in the vineyards and among the vines is whether or when grapes are ready to be harvested. Sensory stimuli include the visual or vocal presence of wildlife (e.g. les étorneaux [European starlings] or les sangliers [wild boars]) that seek ripened grapes, for which winegrowers might have canons at the ready to try and scare them away or wire fencing to keep them at bay, protecting the grapes and vines in the process. Winegrowers may also search for the much-prized botrytis, which is necessary to produce small batch wines known as Sélection de Grains Nobles. Also referred to as noble rot, this fungus grows on grapes under certain climatic conditions and helps concentrate the flavour of the grape itself. If present, botrytis adds value to the finished wine due to its relatively limited quantity in the field, as does the winegrower who must pick the infected grapes by hand.
Having to mend or replace visibly weakened trellis wires signals an overabundance of last year's crops, which potentially indicates a need to cut back on the number of grape clusters. And dry soils align with expectations for drought throughout the region and the need for winegrowers to alter their pruning habits or interrow plantings. Before bringing me to a parcel that needed winter pruning, Maurice Barthelmé of Domaine Albert Mann (Wettolsheim) showed me some photos taken the previous October of the diverse crops that were planted between the vines, recounting:
It's a mix, you see, which was planted in August. This is what we saw – different plants, radishes, different things which were grown in the vineyard. And each plant has a purpose. There are those which are good for the bees, plants for honey. (7 February 2019)
Planting a diversity of vegetation alongside the vines serves multiple purposes. They become food sources for other wildlife, and the roots hold the soil together and aerate it, while also retaining moisture in this otherwise dry region. On a similar note, Nathan Muller of Charles Muller et Fils (Tranheim) experiments with his family's vineyard designs, paying particular attention to planting density. He explains:
The advantage of this density is that during the critical period (July and August), it's actually quite dry. The vine needs water, it's not a great plant at this point. So, if there's a lot of grass, it's still going to suffer from the drought. Whereas with a high density, what's going on? There's a bit of a pergola effect. The foliage, in fact, gives shade in the air and you can actually see it under a tree. The plants underneath will vegetate in the shade. They won't grow fully because they don't have sun. In fact, they won't transpire [or consume more water]. (31 March 2019)
Another message presented to winegrowers is regarding whether the vines are getting sick and experiencing a maladie de bois (wood disease), which may potentially impact different parts of the plant. The presence of l'esca, another type of fungus, is a common concern that spells doom as it eats away at the vine's trunk. L'esca was one of the first issues I came across when I started walking among Alsatian vineyards. Speaking with Gilles Schoepfer of Jean-Louis Schoepfer in Wettolsheim:
MA: What is l'esca?
G: It's a mushroom that gets into the veins of the plant and obstructs, that is, it clogs the vein and therefore the sap can't get through. For example, this trunk is dying. We'll see a lot of [infected vines] as we go down.
MA: And is l'esca a new thing? Or has it been here over the past few years?
G: It's been about 15 years, but it's covering more surface area and [affecting] more and more vine trunks. (16 July 2018)
The presence of l'esca also may be signalled by characteristic yellow and dark red splotches on the leaves (see Mustacich 2015). Such a cue tells the winegrower that something is wrong, that is, it is dying, and concurrently that in order to limit the spread of l'esca they need to watch over nearby plants that can also get infected. The time taken to recognise the role of a ‘new’ participant in the system (the l'esca) is notably more than a decade, which means that significant regular time has to be invested and familiarity with the system is required. This recognition of sensory stimuli produced by multiple participants within the system coincides with an understanding that each one is a contributor engaged in (or potentially hostile to) the overall success of the system of place-based production. Without the presence of these stimuli, the system reads as being different and changed from what it used to be.
Responding to Changes in Alsatian Landscapes
Across Alsace's vineyard landscape, individuals noticed changes on both social and ecological fronts – regardless of whether anyone is clearly convinced that environmental changes are spurring cultural changes (or vice versa). Social changes include changes in winegrowing practices and the technology used to aid in efficiency and time management (such as electronic or automated equipment). For Jacques Sipp of Sipp Mack (Hunawihr), 30 years of winegrowing have seen the move from a once industrial push for volume and a doubling of today's harvest totals to cutting more of the arches to limit grape quantity. Today's goal is to make something ‘of terroir and making a product with identity rather than a mass production’ (2 April 2019).
Winegrowers also contend with the effects of a diversifying and ever-expanding global market. This includes considering how to craft a distinct identity through how their wines are labelled. There had long been resistance from members of Famille Hugel against participating in the Grand Cru system, given concerns of how they could possibly be distinguished within such a large system. In more recent years, the identity of Famille Hugel's best wines has been marked through socio-linguistic cues in a way reminiscent of Basque producers’ use of Euskara (see Lesh 2020). Thirteenth-generation winegrower Marc-André Hugel explained his family's upcoming entry into the system:
For 30 years, we resisted the Grands Crus d'Alsace system because we had judged it as too large and too numerous. . . . In order to make rarer wines that are also of the best quality, it is necessary to be more exclusive, like it is being done in Burgundy, Bordeaux and Champagne. . . . The new generation succeeded in convincing other members of the family to evolve and to, as we say in French, d'appeler un chat un chat (call a spade a spade). That is, call out Grand Cru Schoenenbourg; and so we did under the Hugel Jubilée label and have done for the past 25 years. That had been the largest strategic move when I entered the business in 2015; in 2015, we decided to make Grand Cru wines. The 2015 vintage [with that label] will arrive on the market in 2022 or 2023. In the meantime, we are using the term ‘Grossi Laue’, which is Grand Cru in the Alsatian dialect. It's also a little bit of a provocation. So, we are going to use the Alsatian dialect for five vintages and then we will return to using Grand Cru. And so, that was one of the biggest moves, to declare – to call a spade a spade – to adapt our terroirs by name. (6 March 2019)
In emphasising the importance of place and identity in the naming and labelling of their wines, Famille Hugel's considerations of terroir and Grand Cru distinction have added bearing on other vine-to-wine decisions. For example, grapes grown on further delimited parcels may be harvested and produced together and then sold under a separate name, which increases the overall value of the wine by virtue of its smaller and more specified production.
On the environmental front, it is difficult to ignore warming temperatures in a region where gewurztraminer and riesling – as cool-weather grapes – have been dominant. During a post-harvest walking tour, Nicolas, who also toured me around Maison Klipfel (Barr), pointed out dying or dead riesling trunks that became susceptible to the heat, as well as wood disease, in Colmar:
There are no longer any leaves on this trunk and that one. For the vineyard employees, it's currently very visual because we have all the leaves on one [healthy] trunk, and we have nothing left on the other. So, here we'll put on a coloured ribbon on [the dead trunk]. We know that the trunk is dead and that we can remove it. There is no discussion. . . . A particularity here is that we'll go by with a small tractor with a trailer, and because all the wood is sick, we will burn everything. . . . I don't put the wood on the ground [or else the disease might spread], so it all goes in the trailer and we burn everything at the end of the day. You see, riesling is really the varietal that suffered the most, [because of] the wood diseases – esca, eutypiosis, erinosis – and water stress that further accentuates the effect. [And global warming] has another effect. (17 October 2018)
Marked differences in temperature often translate to gustatory imbalances regarding sugar content and acidity, as well as what can be grown in the region and how long winegrowers permit fermentation. This is especially evident through the notion of précocité, or the earlier timing of grape maturity, which often results in changes to winegrowers’ scheduling plans and differing work hours to accommodate volunteers or workers when they would otherwise be on summer holiday. In considering changes to the overall wine profiles à la typicité, Jean-Michel shared:
This is a particular case, because the French vineyard has gained on average eight to ten days of precocity in 40 years. And Alsace has gained 26 days. Today, I am harvesting on average 26 days earlier than when I started in 1973. It's another world, another planet, another solar system. It's no longer raining. Over the past 40 years, Alsace has been sliding to the south and is slightly above Lyon, so that's important to understand. It obviously impacts the typicity of the wines. It's funny because at the same time that we had this shift to the south, we tried to give the consumer the exact opposite message, that is to say that wines have never been so acidic, so refreshing. (30 March 2019)
Winegrowers are finding ways to adapt and innovate in response to perceived changes in their respective landscapes, though adapting to change certainly is not anything new (Teil 2020b). Winegrowers spoke about returning to ancestral practices or applying principles that were more natural or organic, such as growing vines every other row to promote nutrients and increase air circulation, adjusting leaf cutting or planting trees to promote shade over grape clusters, and limiting the number of clusters to develop on the vine to reduce water stress. In other cases, such as during warm years, the addition of tartaric acid may be approved to increase acidity and mitigate perceived imbalances in taste.
A more contentious solution facing winegrowers (and their syndicates) is the addition of another winegrowing system participant – water – by way of irrigation. When I began my research in 2018, winegrowers had begun discussions on whether to permit irrigation as a countermeasure to drought concerns (though activity has since lessened with more stable weather). Those I spoke with about the unlawful practice of irrigation were against it, as doing so would potentially impact the quality of the grapes: the grapes get bigger because they take in water, but the overall quality is lowered because the excess water dilutes the flavours. The overproduction of grapes and wine would flood the economic market and negatively affect it. As exemplified here, it becomes necessary to consider the ripple effects of introducing and/or adapting to change throughout the entire system.
Whereas social and ecological changes continue to bring their challenges, they are offering newer opportunities for growth and innovation. Researchers are continuing to develop varietals that can better withstand changing environmental pressures without increased chemical usage, while some winegrowers are experimenting with blended wines and clones. Though it can never be Grand Cru (at least for now), others are experimenting with pinot noir – the only red grape varietal authorised under the AOC Alsace label – and are finding success as the vineyards continue getting warmer. As Gilles Karcher of Domaine Karcher (Colmar) shared as we discussed differences between pinot noirs from Alsace and Burgundy:
There are clients who say they do not want pinot noir from Alsace because it is too light, but that's not true. It's getting warmer and warmer. This is beneficial for pinot noir. The ’90s and early 2000s weren't good for pinot noir because it wasn't very warm, and it was too cool. But now, it's becoming hot. That gives [the grapes the conditions for] very good maturity, and we are able [to produce it . . .], and there are certain winegrowers who persist in wanting to do so. They say, we are in Alsace, we're not in Burgundy. We make Alsatian pinot noir, not Burgundian pinot noir. . . . Frankly, we are lucky. On one side, global warming isn't good, but on the other it's better. With the recent global warming, our wines in Alsace seem to be the same as those in Burgundy, with a more voluminous body and something more interesting. (22 October 2018)
Vignerons and Vines as Agents of Change
In responding to various forms of change, winegrowers become mediators or agents of change, insofar as they continue to change or at least influence the dynamics of the vineyard setting of which they are a part. Vines and non-human others as recipients and responders to those changes become situated as system participants who likewise change conditions (not necessarily consciously) for human and other non-human activity, which in turn instigate consequential change.
Emerging from these interactions are attributes, traditions and identities (including sensory stimuli) that index the very spaces as places from which system participants originate. Alsatian vignerons, vines and the place-based wines that winegrowers produce are linked to physical spaces in and throughout Alsace that are challenged by the ongoing evolution of social and ecological conditions. Amid such changes, there is room to innovate while trying to preserve heritage and related cultural practices that coalesce around otherwise stable identities. Alexandre Schoffit of Colmar-based Domaine Schoffit, which has many of its vineyards planted in the volcanic soils of the Grand Cru Rangen de Thann, shared that:
When you tend to have slightly warmer and drier summers, the competition with the ground is much more important than before. This is why we are changing the orientation of the trellising. . . . The idea is not to tear the trunks, because the age of the trunks is important. The vines are in place, the roots are in place. The quality is there, so we don't want to break any of that. We just want to change the direction of the vine [rows] so that we can descend with a winch to be able to better plough the soil. (24 October 2018)
Given current naming regulations and pressures like climate change, winegrowers like Alexandre, winegrowing syndicates and those who oversee regulations are faced with a series of choices with respect to terroir and a system that allows for specific varietals or configurations to be identifiable as Grand Cru or Alsatian. Returning to past practices, pushing the bounds of current ones, or introducing innovations (such as planting pinot noir or installing equipment to ease winegrower burden) requires vignerons to become agents of that change, as they work with others to reconfigure the identity of the system itself or perhaps create something new altogether. This may include redefining what is accepted as ‘Alsatian’ per labelling laws; introducing new vegetation to retain water or different methods to keep vines cooler as it gets hotter; or helping the vines to adapt themselves, as researchers like Geneviève Teil (2020b) have suggested. A key provocation is whether it will be too late in the end. Knowing that it is necessary to adapt, how and when should one act?
As noted earlier, vignerons are not a monolithic group, and the social and ecological networks they are a part of influence their sensitivity to various forms of change, as well as their decision-making and the range of options afforded to them. In Alsace, for example, winegrowers may choose to instead/also prune less to allow the leaves to act as a natural shade for developing grapes, or they could reduce the number of grape clusters that develop on a single vine to redirect energy output. Though the seasonally timed cultural task of l'arcure happens after winter pruning and before budbreak, wetter weather facilitates this process, as cordons become more pliable. Winegrowers may feasibly wait for appropriate weather conditions. Influences such as climate change and the responses of non-human others therefore compound the complexity of individual behaviours, which may spur earlier than expected development and affect the predictability of when or how the winegrower or vine will respond in situ.
Winegrowers’ senses of when and how to adapt are equally unpredictable and complex, as various network relationships are in constant flux. Reflecting on his perspective of human–environment interaction, Bruno Schloegel of Clément Lissner (Wolxheim) offered that:
It's really up to us to change things collectively. It's not for me alone to debate pleasure and responsibility, aesthetics, ethics. It's really important, especially with regard to living things. That was the page blanche I had written [in 2000]. . . . Everyone understands what it is to be human and to share the planet in an intergenerational sense, but also in a geographical sense. Because today, we've finally understood that everything is interdependent. . . . This is the referential change of taste. This notion of terroir, it corresponds to a change in the way of seeing things. It has to be compatible with the stakes of the moment. (31 March 2019)
What counts as a stake and how one might relate to the environment is site specific and influenced by the web of relationships existing within one's environment. Cognisant of the vines and non-human others with which winegrowers are entangled, conceptions of not only what has changed but also how one might respond to that change differ. Terroir remains multivocal forevermore, whereby there is no singular perception thereof on the basis of set factors like sun, soil, time, wind and water. Rather, and as a social and environmental product, the proverbial taste of place is influenced to varying degrees by the very concept of change: changing climatological conditions, economic transactions and winegrowing policies, among others. All of this complicates the construction of terroir as the dynamic system that it is, the expression of which is often mediated by winegrowers whose narratives of space and place travel through the vine and are embedded into the wine. The ways in which winegrowers understand these relationships, and the place-based identities that emerge as a result, become part and parcel of how they explain the influence of terroir in their wines and the role (if any) of vines in mediating and/or expressing change over time.
Conclusion: Of Vignerons and Vines
Citing again Patterson and Buechsenstein, ‘as with most human concepts born of observation and recognition, terroir does not technically exist unless it is perceived. … Terroir, in other words, must be communicated: its message is meaningless if it is not received and appreciated’ (2018: 32). For Marion Demossier (2011, 2018), and unlike individuals who only grow grapes or purchase someone else's to make wine under their own label, the vigneron is an important mediator – or at least a communicator – of terroir expression. It is not only constructed from the physical environment within which grapes are grown and harvested but more so the co-production of natural and human influences situated in place (see Lesh and Lally 2020). Terroir is not merely something inherently derived of the natural environment, or something to be taken for granted, but something that is created (i.e. mediated) through the physical and illusory work of the vigneron.
Especially in times of uncertainty, winegrowers participate in forms of cultural change that may be read as liminal acts (see Howard-Grenville et al 2011), as they respond to the changes brought about by stochastic weather patterns, unstable markets, regulatory groups and the like. By this, I mean to suggest that winegrowers are situated in ongoing transitionary periods of change – from planted vine to finished wine, and from what once was to what is yet to come – in a temporal space characterised by ‘heightened reflexivity’, to borrow from Victor Turner (Howard-Grenville et al 2011: 525). These changes may include deciding when or how to shift harvest dates, choosing varietals to experiment with, engaging consumers in new formats and even contemplating whether they should forego participation in one system in favour of another. In this last case, for example, winegrowers may consider producing non-AOC wines from Alsace to become competitive in a global market, which could in turn challenge and compel changes to pre-existing structures. Whatever their path, winegrowers are straddling spaces of uncertainty and change when it comes to (re)defining terroir and place-based narratives (Arceño 2020c). At the same time, we cannot ignore the role of vines and other non-humans (see Sayes 2014) in the network of active participants that, together, define place-based identity.
Vignerons (versus their verdant counterparts) – as mediators whose embodied, sensorial experiences inform conceptions of the taste of place – are able to more audibly ‘transform, translate, distort, and modify the meaning [here, of terroir] or the elements they are supposed to carry’ (Latour 2005: 39), which is why I have focused mainly on them in this article. That said, the sensory stimuli produced and consumed by vines complicate the narratives indicative of the wines produced from their yields. They, too, respond to the stimuli of human, non-human, and non-living others (e.g. birds, fungi and heat), as they produce grapes that are subsequently turned into wine and interpreted by winegrowers and other consumers through terroir. In response to increasing heat, for example, a vine might produce grapes with more sugar than normal, challenging notions of taste that might otherwise be expected. Such a perspective is important as we consider the role of (human) artisans within and outside of Alsace who produce place-based goods in an age of ongoing anthropogenic change, as well as the role of non-human and non-living others in the production of such goods.
Terroir products are more than just reflections of social meanings of ‘quality’ or symbols of place-based identity (e.g. ‘Alsatian-ness’). They are results of sensory relationships that are constantly being negotiated by human and non-human mediators responding to perceived change. As relationships between and among participants of the winegrowing system continue to change at varying rates, the sensorium becomes the site where making sense of and responding to sensory stimuli, as well as reconceptualising terroir, takes place.
Acknowledgements
The Ohio State Department of Anthropology (Larsen and Salt Travel Awards) and Office of International Affairs (Academic Enrichment Grant) funded the first two phases of my research in Alsace, while the Embassy of France in the United States's Chateaubriand Humanities and Social Sciences ‘Make Our Planet Great Again’ Fellowship funded the third phase. I would like to thank the editorial staff of Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale, article referees, and previous commenters and reviewers of my original manuscript, as well as Drs. Anna Willow, Brianne Herrera, Mark Moritz, Nick Kawa and Philip Armstrong, and members of the Human-Environment Learning Lab, for their advisory input throughout this process. Finally, I would like to thank all of the Alsatian winegrowers I was privileged to work with, for welcoming this researcher from Ohio into their vineyards, wine cellars and tasting rooms to learn about terroir and the taste of place.
References
Adger, W. N., J. Barnett, F. S. Chapin III and H. Ellemor 2011. ‘This must be the place: underrepresentation of identity and meaning in climate change decision-making’, Global Environmental Politics 11: 1–25.
Aldecua, M. J. F., Y. Vaillant, E. Lafuente, and J. M. Gómez. 2017. ‘The renaissance of a local wine industry: the relevance of social capital for business innovation in DOQ El Priorat, Catalonia’, Wine Economics and Policy 6: 136–145.
Arceño, M. A. 2020a. ‘On winegrowers and more-than-human workers in Ohioan and Alsatian vineyards’, Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment 43: 36–46.
Arceño, M. A. 2020b. ‘Walking, talking, and tasting with winegrowers in central Ohio and eastern France: sensorial approaches to making sense of climate change’, Practicing Anthropology 42: 27–32.
Arceño, M. A. 2020c. ‘Variability and change: terroir and the place of climate among central Ohio winegrowers’, Anthropology of Food S14.
Arceño, M. A. 2021. ‘Changing [vitivini]cultures in Ohio, USA, and Alsace, France: an ethnographic study of terroir and the taste of place’, PhD thesis, The Ohio State University.
Bérard, L. and P. Marchenay 2006. ‘Local products and geographical indications: taking account of local knowledge and biodiversity’, International Social Science Journal 58: 109–116.
Beriss, D. 2019. ‘Food: location, location, location’, Annual Review of Anthropology 48: 61–75.
Beverland, M. 2006. ‘The “real thing”: branding authenticity in the luxury wine trade’, Journal of Business Research 59: 251–258.
Bouard, P. 2011. ‘L'organisation professionnelle du vignoble d'Alsace’, Revue d'Alsace 137: 135–149.
Cassidy, R. 2012. ‘Lives with others: climate change and human–animal relations’, Annual Review of Anthropology 41: 21–36.
Chen, J. M. 1996. ‘A sober second look at appellations of origin: how the United States will crash France's wine and cheese party’, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 5: 29–64.
Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne [CIVC] nd. ‘Terroir & appellation: Champagne appellation’, Comité Champagne website (https://www.champagne.fr/en/terroir-appellation/appellation/appellation-origine-controlee-aoc) Accessed 29 March 2021.
Conseil Interprofessionnel des Vins d'Alsace [CIVA] nd. ‘The grand crus: the terroirs, their expressions’, Vins d'Alsace website (https://www.vinsalsace.com/en/grands-crus) Accessed 7 July 2020.
Demossier, M. 2011. ‘Beyond Terroir: territorial construction, hegemonic discourses, and French wine culture’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 17: 685–705.
Demossier, M. 2018. Burgundy: the global story of terroir. New York: Berghahn Books.
Duchêne, E. and C. Schneider 2005. ‘Grapevine and climatic changes: a glance at the situation in Alsace’, Agronomy for Sustainable Development 25: 93–99.
Duchêne, E., F. Huard, V. Dumas, C. Schneider and D. Merdinoglu 2010. ‘The challenge of adapting grapevine varieties to climate change’, Climate Research 41: 193–204.
Evans, J. and P. Jones 2011. ‘The walking interview: methodology, mobility and place’, Applied Geography 31: 849–858.
Faccin, K., D. Genari and J. Macke 2017. ‘Interorganisational social capital and innovation: a multiple case study in wine producers networks in Serra Gaúcha’, RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação 14: 52–66.
Fassier-Boulanger, S. 2019. ‘L'AOC ne ferait-elle plus rêver? Quand des vignerons y renoncent pour mieux valoriser leurs terroirs’, Pour 237–238: 283–295.
Gross, J. 2018. Tasting displacement: reflections on freshness, in C. Counihan and S. Højlund (eds.), Making taste public: ethnographies of food and the senses, 199–206. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Guy, K. M. 2003. When Champagne became French: wine and the making of a national identity. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.
Haraway, D. 1988. ‘Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective’, Feminist Studies 14: 575–599.
Holland, T. and B. Smit 2010. ‘Climate change and the wine industry: current research themes and new directions’, Journal of Wine Research 21: 125–136.
Howard-Grenville, J., K. Golden-Biddle, J. Irwin and J. Mao 2011. ‘Liminality as cultural process for cultural change’, Organization Science 22: 522–539.
Hubert, A. 2004. Qualitative research in the anthropology of food: a comprehensive qualitative/quantitative approach, in H. Macbeth and J. MacClancy (eds.), Researching food habits: methods and problems, 41–54. New York: Berghahn Books.
Jackson, D. D. 2011. ‘Scents of place: the dysplacement of a first nations community in Canada’, American Anthropologist 113: 606–618.
Jackson, T. 2018. ‘Multisensory ethnography: sensory experience, the sentient body and cultural phenomena’, PhD thesis, University of Leeds.
Jones, G. V. and L. B. Webb 2010. ‘Climate change, viticulture, and wine: challenges and opportunities’, Journal of Wine Research 21: 103–106.
Krzywoszynska, A. 2016. ‘What farmers know: experiential knowledge and care in vine growing’, Sociologia Ruralis 56: 289–310.
Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the social: an introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lesh, K. 2020. ‘Translations of terroir: constructing and marketing a sense of place in the Basque Country’, Anthropology of Food S14.
Lesh, K. and A. E. Lally (eds.) 2020. ‘Contesting terroir: new anthropological imaginations of the taste of place’, Anthropology of Food S14.
Lin, J. 2015. ‘Alsace, where French and German cultures converge’, Grape Collective website 7 September 2015 (https://grapecollective.com/articles/alsace-where-french-and-german-cultures-converge#) Accessed 5 July 2020.
Morton, A. 2019. ‘“We are already producing champagne in a climate that's different from our fathers”: Just-Drinks speaks to the Comite Champagne’, Just-Drinks website. (https://www.just-drinks.com/interview/we-are-already-producing-champagne-in-a-climate-thats-different-from-our-fathers-just-drinks-speaks-to-the-comite-champagne_id129459.aspx) Accessed 29 March 2021.
Mosedale, J. R., K. E. Abernethy, R. E. Smart, R. J. Wilson and I. M. D. Maclean 2016. ‘Climate change impacts and adaptive strategies: lessons from the grapevine’, Global Change Biology 22: 3814–3828.
Mustacich, S. 2015. ‘A dire threat to grapevines’, Wine Spectator website 18 August (www.winespectator.com/articles/a-dire-threat-to-grapevines-51972) Accessed 15 July 2020.
Neethling, E., T. Petitjean, H. Quénol and G. Barbeau 2017. ‘Assessing local climate variability and winegrowers’ adaptive processes in the context of climate change’, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 22: 777–803.
Ollat, N. and J.-M. Touzard 2020. ‘The wine industry confronted by climate change – LACCAVE Project – Horizon 2050’, HAL INRAE, doi:10.15454/ar8r-s466.
Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin [OIV] 2010. ‘Resolution OIV/VITI 333/2010: Definition du “Terroir” Vitivinicole’, OIV website (http://www.oiv.int/public/medias/382/viti-2010-1-fr.pdf). Accessed 15 July 2020.
Patterson, T. and J. Buechsenstein 2018. Wine and place: a terroir reader. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Pineau, C. 2019. La corne de vache et le microscope: le vin ‘nature’, entre sciences, croyances et radicalités. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
Pink, S. 2013. ‘Engaging the senses in ethnographic practice’, The Senses and Society 8: 261–267.
Pink, S. 2015. Doing sensory ethnography, 2nd edn. London: SAGE.
Pomranz, M. 2018. ‘France changes AOC rules to allow grapes that can withstand climate change’, Food & Wine website (https://www.foodandwine.com/news/france-wine-grapes-climate-change-aoc-rules) Accessed 29 March 2021.
Puckette, M. 2019. ‘Understanding Alsace wine (w/maps)’, Wine Folly website (https://winefolly.com/deep-dive/alsace-wine-map) Accessed 5 July 2020.
Riechers, M., Á. Balázsi, D. Abson and J. Fischer 2020. ‘The influence of landscape change on multiple dimensions of human–nature connectedness’, Ecology and Society 25: 3.
Robinson, J. and J. Harding (eds.) 2015. The Oxford companion to wine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rodaway, P. 2013. Sensuous geographies: body, sense and place. London: Routledge.
Salolainen, M. 1993. ‘The marketing of Champagne: the way forward’, International Journal of Wine Marketing 5: 15–26.
Sandford, A. 2008. ‘French change rules to exploit the huge bucks to be made from fizz’, The Guardian 14 March (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/mar/14/fooddrinks.france) Accessed 29 March 2021.
Sayes, E. 2014. ‘Actor-Network Theory and methodology: just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency?’, Social Studies of Science 44: 134–149.
Stoller, P. 1989. The taste of ethnographic things: the senses in anthropology. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Sunderland, N., H. Bristed, O. Gudes, J. Boddy and M. Da Silva 2012. ‘What does it feel like to live here? Exploring sensory ethnography as a collaborative methodology for investigating social determinants of health in place’, Health & Place 18: 1056–1067.
Teil, G. 2020a. ‘Les vignerons seraient-ils climato-sceptiques? Les effets du changement climatique analysés par les vignerons dans les appellations d'origine protégée d'Anjou et d'Alsace’, Cahiers Agricultures 29. doi:10.1051/cagri/2019030.
Teil, G. 2020b. ‘L'Adaptation aux évolutions récentes des vins vue par des vignerons d'AOP. Enquête en Anjou et Alsace (France)’, Cahiers Agricultures 29. doi:10.1051/cagri/2020009.
Teil, G., S. Barrey, P. Floux and A. Hennion 2011. Le vin et l'environnement. Paris: Presses des Mines.
Thiollet-Scholtus, M., M. A. Arceño, M. Valduga and F. Sarrazin 2020. ‘Typing winegrower profiles to ease agro-ecological change in viticulture practices in the Loire Valley, France’, The Journal of Wine Research 31: 265–282.
Trubek, A. 2008. The taste of place: a cultural journey into terroir. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Turner, V. 1977. ‘Process, system, and symbol: a new anthropological synthesis’, Daedalus 106 (3): 61–80.
Ulin, R. C. 2013. Terroir and locality: an anthropological perspective, in R. E. Black and R. C. Ulin (eds.), Wine and culture: vineyard to glass, 67–84. London: Bloomsbury.
Unwin, T. 1991. Wine and the vine: an historical geography of viticulture and the wine trade. London: Routledge.
Willow, A. 2011. ‘Conceiving Kakipitatapitmok: the political landscape of Anishinaabe anticlearcutting activism’, American Anthropologist 13: 262–276.
Wilson, J. E. 1998. Terroir: The Role of Geology, Climate, and Culture in the Making of French Wines. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Zilberman, D., L. Lipper, N. McCarthy and B. Gordon 2018. Innovation in response to climate change, in L. Lipper, N. McCarthy, D. Zilberman, S. Asfaw and G. Branca (eds.), Climate smart agriculture: building resilience to climate change, 49–74. New York: Springer.