Welcome : Profile : News : Services : Corporate Social Responsibility : Speeches : Political Watch : Helpdesk : Location

Ensuring Product Integrity

Australian & New Zealand Grapegrower & Winemaker Journal - May 2004

By Kellie Tranter & Stephen Lowe

Anecdotal evidence abounds of the practice of a few unscrupulous winemakers yielding to the temptation of appropriating, for their own benefit, the outstanding product of smaller vineyards whose harvest yield is entrusted to them for processing.  The end result for the grapegrower is a diluted or corrupted vintage and the effective loss or devaluation of the fruits of his or her labour.

The possibility of dilution or substitution also raises a number of legal issues.  From the point of view of any winemaker engaging in such unscrupulous practices, it involves the committing of criminal offences as well as breaches of contract between the winemaker and the grower.

From the grower's point of view, however, substitution of grapes from alternative sources may involve the grower, quite unwittingly, in breaches of state and federal consumer protection laws designed to ensure that goods correspond with the descriptions under which they are sold.

Of greater concern to the industry as a whole, however, is the need for its customers - wholesale and retail, local and international - to have absolute confidence in the integrity of its product.  With the proliferation in Australia of boutique and smaller vineyards many of which have produced outstanding wines and acquired international reputations, it is essential that consumers have absolute confidence in the identity of the product they buy as the uncorrupted output of the vineyard from which the label proclaims it comes.

The critical importance of product integrity is amply demonstrated by the French appellation controlee and Italian denominazione di origine controllata systems of ensuring that a produce purchaser can have confidence that the product originates from the source identified on its label.

The development during the 1970s and 1980s by Dr Chris Somers (UV Index) of The Australian Wine Research Institute of a new spectral method for determining an individual wine 'signature' provides the Australian wine industry with an opportunity to implement a system of unparalleled excellence in achieving a similar result to the European certification systems, but with an even higher level of product confidence.  Because a 'signature', once identified, remains constant throughout the winemaking process and can be identified in the final product it provides a virtually foolproof system for protecting the small producer who finds it necessary to outsource his or her winemaking from any risk of product tampering.

The effective use of Somer's 'signature' as a quality guarantee system requires only that a benchmark sample be taken early in the winemaking process.  For the system to be effective as a guarantee of the source of the wine it thus requires that the grapes that are delivered to the winemaker be kept under physical observation from the time they leave the grower's premises until the benchmark sample is taken.

In the case of red wine the benchmark sample should be taken from the must after the entire quantity of the variety being processed has been crushed and de-stemmed.  In the case of white wine the benchmark sample should be taken after pressing.

It is only necessary to keep the product under physical observation until the benchmark sample is taken as that sample contains the 'signature' that should appear in the final product.  It is, of course, possible and sometimes desirable to take further samples at different stages of the production process; although they are not necessary for the quality guarantee, any of those samples may be used to confirm the identity of the product being processed with that which originated from the vineyard.

The beauty of this system lies firstly in its scientific security and secondly in the relative ease of administering it.  The only critical requirement is actual physical supervision of the grapes from vineyard to sample.  In the ordinary course the timeframe should be no more than 8-10 hours and the inconvenience to the grower, or alternatively the costs of employing an outside observer, should be minimal.

From a legal point of view the only step that needs to be taken to permit this system to be implemented is for all grapegrowers who outsource their wine production to ensure that their contract with the winemaker contains provisions regulating the winemaker's authority to mix raw materials and specifically authorising the grower or a duly appointed agent to be physically present when the grapes are delivered and while they are being crushed and de-stemmed (and, in the case of white wine, while the juice is extracted), until the benchmark sample can be taken.  The contract should authorise the taking of the benchmark sample.

Winemaking contracts typically contain provisions for winemakers to deal with small parcels of grapes by admixing or amalgamating them with other product at the discretion of the winemaker.  Of greater concern for quality control and product authenticity is the often unqualified discretion the contract gives to the winemaker to deal with ullage and other volume losses by topping up by what may be a significant percentage of volume.  These provisions need to be looked at carefully and may need to be grower's product; certainly with terms of the contract should regulate the winemaker's discretion to allow the grower a right to participate in decisions affecting his or her product.

There is no obvious reason why the inclusion of contractual terms along those lines should cause objections to be raised by any reputable winemaker.  Our view is that appropriately drafted clauses should become a standard provision in all winemaking contracts.  If that were to occur then all the small wineries would have the opportunity of participating in a system of scientifically guaranteeing the integrity of their product.  We also believe that the availability of a scientific guarantee would enhance the reputation for quality and reliability of the industry as a whole.

Whether or not the grower took advantage of the entitlement to take a sample or went on to have the final product compared with the benchmark and thus have independent confirmation of the authenticity of the product is entirely a matter for the individual grower.  However, what is essential, in our view, is for all growers to have a legally enforceable right to choose to participate in this simple task of incorporating the appropriate provisions in the winemaking contract and, if the grower wishes, incurring the comparatively small cost of having the benchmark 'signature' sample taken.