wein.plus
Attention
You are using an old browser that may not function as expected.
For a better, safer browsing experience, please upgrade your browser.

Log in Become a Member

The German Winegrowers' Association has cleared the way for the legal "Grosses Gewächs" (Grand Cru) and "Erste Gewächs" (Premier Cru). VDP President Steffen Christmann explains why the new rules are a "milestone" for him - and what dangers he still sees.

You spent more than three years negotiating the VDP's positions for Erste and Grosse Gewächse, the German categories for Grand Cru and Premier Cru in France, in the working group of the German Winegrowers' Association. How satisfied are you with the result?

Christmann: When I look back 20 years, I have to say that an incredible amount has changed and a great deal of insight has been gained. In this respect, I wouldn't use the word "negotiation" at all. First of all, we wanted to communicate the facts and circumstances surrounding the Great Growth to those involved. What has happened in the VDP over the past 20 years? How do classifications work in France, Alsace and Burgundy? How did they come about? Most members of the association's committees were unaware of this. We also realised that it made sense to invite colleagues from Alsace and Austria. The exchange with Alsace was particularly fruitful for us.

Why?

Christmann: The winegrowers from there explained to us why they now need to make adjustments in order to make their Grand Cru system a success. Their rules, which were rated as "strict" by the DWV working group, are now considered to be in urgent need of reform in Alsace - because they were defined far too generously.

What effect has that had?

Christmann: The discussion has made it clear to us in the VDP: when we talk about classification, it should never be just about the creditworthiness of the vineyard. It is only the prerequisite for a wine's reputation. If we didn't understand this basis and tried to evaluate all vineyards in Germany in terms of their potential, it would have been an endless endeavour. We would have had to evaluate a great many vineyards where no one would ever have attempted to produce a great wine. But we can assume that there are still vineyards that sleep like Sleeping Beauty and that someone will come and kiss them awake at some point. But as long as that doesn't happen, we don't need to concern ourselves with these areas.

A winegrower says: "I have a great vineyard". How does he get his Grosses Gewächs with the new rules of the wine regulations?

Christmann: It's not just about the Grosses Gewächs, but also about First Growths and, at the top, Grand Growths, building on the reputation from the bottom. First of all, what the German Winegrowers' Association has unanimously decided must be incorporated into the Wine Ordinance by the Federal Ministry with the approval of the federal states. After that, the protection associations of the regions must take up the issue and each form a committee consisting of producers who have experience in this area and experts who will determine the respective regional framework conditions for the growths.

It will be many years before the Große Gewächse can be bottled not only by VDP wineries, as is the case here, but also by other wineries.

VDP - Peter Bender

So from members of the VDP.

Christmann: In any case. On the Moselle, it could also be a winegrower from the Großer Ring. Only they are producers who are familiar with the product. However, other winegrowers and specialists as well as external experts can also be involved. They will draw up a catalogue of criteria that measures the reputation and market significance of a proposed Erste Gewächs or Grosses Gewächs in qualitative and quantitative terms in accordance with the Wine Ordinance.

Price, quantity and wine ratings will play a role in the future

In what form will the origin play a role? With the Bordeaux principle, the winegrower must produce a traditionally high-quality wine at a high price. Or are you pursuing a geographically precise classification as in Burgundy, for example?

Christmann: We want a combination of Bordeaux and Burgundy. It is a two-stage process: Firstly, the suitability of the vineyard for a First Growth or Grand Cru is determined in the abstract. This is followed by individual recognition of the winemaker's reputation and ability. The regional committee will carefully draft the rules and regulations as a basis for this. On this basis, winegrowers can apply for a site to be classified. It is assessed by a panel of experts and geographically delineated. The winegrower then has the option of producing a Erstes Gewächs or Großes Gewächs in it. But before they are allowed to do so, they must have produced such wines for a few years and submit an individual application as a wine estate on this basis - and prove their reputation and market significance. Reputation, price, quantity and wine ratings play a role here. In addition, a tasting of at least five vintages must be included in the approval process.

Organising all this in detail is a project for the next ten to 15 years.

Christmann: A project of the century like this takes time. It is very important for the overall process that we have decelerated and significantly tightened up the issue. And if a region puts a lot of effort into it and works intensively on the topic, it can also go faster - if we can agree that it is done properly.

Up to now, the conservation organisations have mostly been preoccupied with themselves. Are they now to be given the task of drawing up detailed regulations?

Christmann: Everyone agrees that it should be done by those who have experience with it and not by winegrowers who consider completely different wines with a different background to be their profession. The EU principle that the producers of a product determine the rules is extremely important to us. And that's why it makes sense for the protection organisation to appoint the members of the committee that draws up and shapes these rules, but that the members naturally understand something about it.

How do you intend to standardise the rules with these structures?

Christmann: They are not supposed to be standardised. The Kaiserstuhl needs different rules than the Saar. However, I think it would make a lot of sense to set up a national committee to coordinate and approve the regional regulations. But we don't have that on the agenda at the moment.

Why not?

Christmann: It is a long, painstaking process and we will continue to gain new insights that need to be incorporated. It is perhaps also an advantage that we have the opportunity to juxtapose many rules and provide a contemporary response. In Burgundy, for example, the two-tier system we have developed does not exist. Anyone who owns a plot in a Grand Cru vineyard can produce a wine that belongs to the highest category by birth - without the wine itself having to be particularly good. In reality, there will always be something to disagree about. But that doesn't mean we should give up on it.

An institution must be created that handles classification neutrally

The committee members should recognise or reject every vineyard applied for?

Christmann: No, it's not like that. Ultimately, an institution must be created that deals with this topic neutrally. The impression must not be created that winegrower A rejects the application for recognition from his neighbour winegrower B and keeps competition at bay. That must not happen.

Is this an institution that already exists and to which you want to transfer responsibility? Or does it need to be newly established?

Christmann: At the moment, there is no institution in Germany that could take on this task. It has to be newly established, for example as a German INAO.

This means that the "Große Gewächs" will become a generational project.

Christmann: If you are determined, it can be done more quickly. But we believe it is important to give everyone involved in this process the opportunity to contribute with the necessary care and breadth of discussion.

It sounds as if what you see as the success of the negotiations has only prevented the worst.

Christmann: I think that's wrong. From the outset, our classification endeavours were aimed at the final transfer to an official system. A private-sector classification system, i.e. one that the producers themselves create, cannot be recognised in the wider world in the same way as a more neutral, official, state classification system. The only question is whether the time was ripe for this. In this respect, it was an effort to convey all our experiences and considerations from the past 30 years to our colleagues in fast-forward. As the VDP, we have achieved something that we find almost astonishing. A classification is not taken seriously because we award it to each other, but only when it is supported by a review and standards are set that cannot simply be met. However, what we have done over the past 25 years has turned this situation on its head.

Why is that?

Christmann: People trust the private classification more than an official one. The VDP has created something that has an extremely high reputation. Even if you criticise one aspect or another, most observers agree that it is very reliable. Twenty-five years ago, it would never have occurred to anyone that state regulation harboured the risk of softening. It would have been assumed that the state would be stricter than the private sector. That's why the VDP's path was based on the conviction that it would only be complete when it was transformed into a state, generally binding regulation. Some of the concerns we had at the beginning of this process three years ago have been resolved. That is a milestone. But we also recognise the dangers. We know that another challenge awaits us around the next corner. There are many parameters that are still open.

Read more:

Related Magazine Articles

View All
More
More
More
More
More
More
More
More
More
More

EVENTS NEAR YOU

PREMIUM PARTNERS