ItalianWine of Wineries

GIANFRANCO TEMPESTA
MONICA FIORILO - MAURO CATENA

 

2.3. Statistical series of the DOs

To see the latest update of the tables, reload the frame by clicking the right button of your mouse, select “reload frame” for Google and “this frame” > “reload frame” for Mozilla Firefox.

FIG1The data for the current work, summarised in table 10.2, enable us to follow the development of the different DOs, recognised with Presidential or Ministerial Decrees within the “Wine” sector. They come from different sources, such as ISTAT, AGEA, FEDERDOC, UIV, ISMEA, Valoritalia and other certification bodies.

The statistical series are often not comparable, as they vary with different volumes according to the sources; discrepancies are easily observable and highlighted in the diagram. For the period 2012-2013, the series compare potential DO wine with that “certified” by the appointed controlling bodies.

The same can be said for vineyard surface area, which ranges from “registered”, to “reference”, to “equivalent”, to “claimed”, to “certified”; the latter is certainly the most reliable as it defines a real “use” of the DO by the bottler and therefore a real valorisation of the wine released for consumption.

It should be noted that, at times, bottling is preceded by several years of ageing and therefore the data are not comparable (Brunello, Barolo, Chianti etc., etc.).

On the other hand, the surface areas in the various registers should be considered indicative, as the same vineyard may be claimed several times.

It is clear how regions with a structured viticulture that is historically recognised by both the domestic and foreign market, maintain a collection of DOs consolidated over time; viticulture that identifies Italy with wines of excellence, like: Barolo, Brunello di Montalcino, Chianti Classico, Soave, Valpolicella, etc.

The altered and new standard of living, changes in social values and good commercial policies have opened up new areas and potential for viticulture that, although already known, still has the chance to expand with growing volumes and “exploits” rarely seen in the history of world viticulture; an example of this is the above-mentioned astonishing success of Prosecco wine, which is also much-appreciated by the new generations and which has seen an expansion in surface area of over 300% from 2000 to 2015.

Weak regional viticulture and DOs with insufficient critical mass (Calabria, Basilicata, Campania, Sardinia, Molise, Umbria, Marche, Lazio, Liguria) are obliged to create an aggregation network of Designations; it is the only way to acquire an image on the market and protect the territory and tradition.

Some Italian regions, despite the extensive vineyard surface area, do not have important and established DOs because they have directed their policy towards PGIs or commodity wines, for instance Apulia and Sicily.

In conclusion, it is thought that the future of the DOs will be determined by the degree of awareness achieved by vinegrowers conscious of the fact that only the protection of typicity, represented by the territory, their work and their decisions, can give that capital gains that is recognised in the “goodwill”, the value of the collective brand (identifiable with the Designation of Origin).

Important data are provided on production in hectolitres for each region and DO, with the relative diagrams highlighting the trend lines. Also the surface areas declared in the relative vineyard registers for the period 2000-2013 are reported, to act as a guide to the development of the different Designations.

For the regions in northern Italy, AGEA data – except for Liguria and Val d’Aosta – are higher than ISTAT ones, as the former include wines, musts and RCGM from other regions.

In central Italy the production figure is higher than the AGEA one, probably because production is lower than that actually declared.

Nelle regioni del sud – meno Puglia e Sicilia –i dati ISTAT sono superiori a quelli AGEA in quanto includono l’autoconsumo.

In the southern regions – except Apulia and Sicily – the ISTAT data are higher than AGEA, because they include personal consumption.

Apulia and Sicily are difficult to interpret.

 

fu

logo

 

GIANFRANCO TEMPESTA
MONICA FIORILO

Lettura critica:
PAOLO ANTONIAZZI

Torna all'inizio della pagina

De Vulpe et Uva. Copyright © 2013. All Rights Reserved

Copyright (c) De Vulpe et Uva - All rights reserved - Disegnato da: Freddy Fiorilo Email: ffiorilo@gmail.con
POWERED BY: VIVAIO ENOTRIA