Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:25:59.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Drifting Towards Bordeaux? The Evolving Varietal Emphasis of U.S. Wine Regions*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2015

Julian M. Alston ,
Kym Anderson  and
Olena Sambucci
Julian M. Alston*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Robert Mondavi Institute, Center for Wine Economics, UC Davis, Davis, CA 95616.
Kym Anderson
Affiliation:
Wine Economics Research Centre, School of Economics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005Australia and Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia. e-mail: [email protected]
Olena Sambucci
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, UC Davis, Davis, CA 95616. e-mail: [email protected]
*
e-mail: [email protected] (corresponding author).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In an ever-more-competitive global market, vignerons compete for the attention of consumers by trying to differentiate their product while also responding to technological advances, climate changes and evolving demand patterns. In doing so, they highlight their regional and varietal distinctiveness. This paper examines the extent to which the winegrape varietal mix varies within and among states of the United States and relative to the rest of the world, and how that picture has been evolving. It reports varietal intensity indexes for different regions, indexes of similarity of varietal mix between regions and over time, and price-based quality indexes across regions and varieties within and among the three west-coast States. Broadly speaking, the mix of winegrape varieties in the United States is not very different from that in the rest of the world and, since 2000, it has become even less differentiated and closer to that of France and the world as a whole. But individual U.S. regions vary considerably in the mix of varieties in which they specialize and in the quality of grapes they produce of a given variety; and region-by-variety interactions have complex influences on the pattern of quality and production. We use measures of regional varietal comparative advantage and a Nerlovian partial adjustment model to account for some of the shifting varietal patterns in the U.S. vineyard and in winegrape production. (JEL Classification: D24, L66, Q13)

Keywords

terroirvarietal intensity indexvarietal similarity indexregional quality index
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Wine Economics , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , December 2015 , pp. 349 - 378
Copyright
Copyright © American Association of Wine Economists 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The authors are grateful for meticulous research assistance by Nanda Aryal in compiling the database and indicators, for helpful comments from an anonymous reviewer, Jim Lapsley and participants at the AAWE Conference in Walla Walla WA in June 2014, and for financial assistance from the Australian Grape and Wine Authority (GWRDC Project Number UA 12/08) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number 2011-51181-30635 (the VitisGen project). Views expressed are the authors' alone

References

Alston, J.M., Andersen, M.A., James, S.J., and Pardey, P.G. (2010). Persistence Pays: U.S. Agricultural Productivity Growth and the Benefits from Public R&D Spending. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Alston, J.M., Fuller, K.B., Kaplan, J.D., and Tumber, K.P. (2013). The economic consequences of Pierce's Disease and related policy in the California winegrape industry. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 38, 269–297.Google Scholar
Anderson, K. (2010). Varietal intensities and similarities of the world's wine regions. Journal of Wine Economics, 5(2), 270–309.Google Scholar
Anderson, K. (2013). Which Winegrape Varieties are Grown Where? A Global Empirical Picture. Adelaide: University of Adelaide Press. Available as a free ebook at www.adelaide.edu.au/press/winegrapes/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K. (2014). Changing varietal distinctiveness of the world's wine regions: Evidence from a new global database. Journal of Wine Economics, 9(3), 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K. (2015). Evolving varietal and quality distinctiveness of Australia's wine regions. Working Paper 0115, Wine Economics Research Centre, University of Adelaide, March.Google Scholar
Anderson, K., and Aryal, N.R. (2013). Database of Regional, National and Global Winegrape Bearing Areas by Variety, 2000 and 2010. Available at www.adelaide.edu.au/wine-econ/databases/.Google Scholar
Anderson, K., and Aryal, N.R. (2014). Australian Grape Area and Wine Industry Database, 1843 to 2013. Available at www.adelaide.edu.au/wine-econ/databases/.Google Scholar
Ashenfelter, O., and Storchmann, K. (2016). Climate change and wine: A review of the economic implications. Journal of Wine Economics, 11(1), forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfman, J.H., and Heien, D. (1989). The effects of uncertainty and adjustment costs on investment in the almond industry. Review of Economics and Statistics, 71(2), 263–274.Google Scholar
Eurostat (2013). Basic Vineyard Survey, Available at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database/.Google Scholar
Fegan, P.W. (2003). The Vineyard Handbook: Appellations, Maps and Statistics, revised edition. Springfield IL: Phillips Brothers for the Chicago Wine School.Google Scholar
Fuller, K.B., Alston, J.M., and Sambucci, O.S. (2014). The value of Powdery Mildew resistance in grapes: Evidence from California. Wine Economics and Policy, 3(2), 90–107.Google Scholar
Gaeta, D., and Corsinovi, P. (2014). Economics, Governance, and Politics in the Wine Market: European Union Developments. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 92–116.Google Scholar
Jaffe, A.B. (1986). Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms’ patents profits and market value. American Economic Review, 76(5), 984–1001,Google Scholar
Jaffe, A.B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.Google Scholar
Lapsley, J.T. (1996). Bottled Poetry: Napa Winemaking from Prohibition to the Modern Era. Berkeley. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects. Econometric a, 49(6), 1417–1426.Google Scholar
Olmstead, A.L., and Rhode, P.W. (2010). Quantitative indices of the early growth of the California wine industry. In García Ruiz, José Luis, Andreu, Juan Hernández, Critz, José, José Morilla Ortiz-Villajos, María (eds.), Homenaje a Gabriel Tortella. Madrid: Universidad de Alcala. 271–288.Google Scholar
Robinson, J., Harding, J., and Vouillamoz, J. (2012). Wine Grapes: A Complete Guide to 1,368 Vine Varieties, Including their Origins and Flavours. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Sumner, D.A., Bombrun, H., Alston, J.M., and Heien, D.M. (2004). North America. In Anderson, Kym (ed.), Globalization of the World's Wine Markets, London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Volpe, R., Green, R., and Heien, D. (2011). Estimating the supply elasticity of California wine grapes using regional systems of equations. Journal of Wine Economics 5(2), 219–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
USDA/NASS (2011). Historical Crush Reports. Available at: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Grape_Crush/index.asp Google Scholar
USDA/NASS (2011). Historical Acreage Reports. Available at http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Grape_Acreage/index.asp.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Alston supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Alston supplementary material(File)
File 1.5 MB