Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T14:50:43.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Varietal Intensities and Similarities of the World's Wine Regions*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2012

Kym Anderson
Kym Anderson
Affiliation:
Wine Economics Research Centre, School of Economics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia, e-mail:kym.anderson@adelaide.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines empirically two distinguishing aspects of the world's wine regions: their degree of specialization in certain varieties, as measured by a varietal intensity index; and their similarity with the varietal mix of other regions, as measured by a varietal-based regional similarity index. Twelve of the most important wine-producing countries, that together account for all but one-eighth of the world's winegrapes, are included in the analysis. The data refer to circa 2000 (or 1999 for EU member countries, since that is their most recent census data). These indexes provide a baseline against which to compare more recent and future vintages. They will be especially useful as producers and regulators respond at varying speeds to the impacts of climate changes, in addition to market developments, on the optimal location of production of different varieties around the world. (JEL Classifications: D24, L66, Q13, Q15)

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Wine Economics , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , Spring 2010 , pp. 270 - 309
Copyright
Copyright © American Association of Wine Economists 2010

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.)

References

Alston, J.M., Andersen, M.A., James, J.S. and Pardey, P.G. (2010). Persistence Pays: U.S. Agricultural Productivity Growth and the Benefits from Public R&D Spending. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alston, J.M., Norton, G.W. and Pardey, P. (1998). Science under Scarcity: Principles and Practice for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting. London: CAB International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K. (2009). Terroir rising? Varietal and quality distinctiveness of Australia's wine regions. Enometrica, 2(1), 9–27.Google Scholar
Gladstones, J. (1992). Viticulture and Environment. Adelaide: Winetitles.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 92–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, J. (2004). Varietal Wines. Sydney: Harper Collins.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
OIV (undated). International List of Vine Varieties and Their Synonyms. Paris: Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin (International Organisation of Vine and Wine).Google Scholar
Robinson, J. (1986). Vines, Grapes and Wines: The Wine Drinker's Guide to Grape Varieties. London: Mitchell Beasley.Google Scholar
Wittwer, G. and Anderson, K. (2004). The Global Wine Statistical Compendium, 1961 to 2003. Adelaide: Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation for CIES and CoPS. Re-published in 2009 by the University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide, and freely available as an e-book at www.adelaide.edu.au/press/titles/globalwineGoogle Scholar