IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i6p5252-d1098571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the Carbon Footprint of Conventional and Organic Vineyards in Northern Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Isabella Ghiglieno

    (Agrofood Research Hub, Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Land, Environment and Mathematics, University of Brescia, Via Branze, 43, 25123 Brescia, Italy)

  • Anna Simonetto

    (Agrofood Research Hub, Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Land, Environment and Mathematics, University of Brescia, Via Branze, 43, 25123 Brescia, Italy)

  • Luca Facciano

    (Agrofood Research Hub, Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Land, Environment and Mathematics, University of Brescia, Via Branze, 43, 25123 Brescia, Italy)

  • Marco Tonni

    (Sata Agronomist Consultants, Piazza della Loggia 5, 25121 Brescia, Italy)

  • Pierluigi Donna

    (Sata Agronomist Consultants, Piazza della Loggia 5, 25121 Brescia, Italy)

  • Leonardo Valenti

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, University of Milan, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Gianni Gilioli

    (Agrofood Research Hub, Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture, Land, Environment and Mathematics, University of Brescia, Via Branze, 43, 25123 Brescia, Italy)

Abstract

The carbon footprint is an index used to assess the impact of an activity in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Viticulture contributes to greenhouse gas emissions due to the use of fuels, fertilizers and pesticides, and the consequent soil erosion. Organic viticulture differs from conventional viticulture, mainly because of the absence of synthetic products, the soil tillage, and the level of organic carbon in the soil. The purpose of the study was to determine the actual differences between conventional and organic vineyard management in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, comparing multiannual data from 25 wineries in northern Italy. No statistically significant differences were found between the overall mean values of conventional and organic management. In organically farmed vineyards, a higher incidence of fuel consumption was observed, while in conventionally farmed vineyards higher emissions were observed, due to the use of such products as pesticides and fertilizers. No differences were found between the two management systems in terms of emissions resulting from direct fertilizing. Further assessment of the potential sequestration of organic fertilizer would be necessary.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabella Ghiglieno & Anna Simonetto & Luca Facciano & Marco Tonni & Pierluigi Donna & Leonardo Valenti & Gianni Gilioli, 2023. "Comparing the Carbon Footprint of Conventional and Organic Vineyards in Northern Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-14, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5252-:d:1098571
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5252/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5252/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vassilis Litskas & Athanasia Mandoulaki & Ioannis N. Vogiatzakis & Nikolaos Tzortzakis & Menelaos Stavrinides, 2020. "Sustainable Viticulture: First Determination of the Environmental Footprint of Grapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Chiara Corbo & Lucrezia Lamastra & Ettore Capri, 2014. "From Environmental to Sustainability Programs: A Review of Sustainability Initiatives in the Italian Wine Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-27, April.
    3. Florian Ahrens & Johann Land & Susan Krumdieck, 2022. "Decarbonization of Nitrogen Fertilizer: A Transition Engineering Desk Study for Agriculture in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-24, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zixun Guo & Zhimei Gao & Wenbin Zhang, 2023. "Accounting and Decomposition of Energy Footprint: Evidence from 28 Sectors in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-24, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Inmaculada Carrasco & Juan Sebastián Castillo-Valero & Carmen Córcoles & Marcos Carchano, 2021. "Greening Wine Exports? Changes in the Carbon Footprint of Spanish Wine Exports," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Darcen Esau & Donna M. Senese, 2022. "Consuming Location: The Sustainable Impact of Transformational Experiential Culinary and Wine Tourism in Chianti Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, June.
    3. Francisco Jesús García-Navarro & Raimundo Jiménez-Ballesta & Jesús Antonio López Perales & Caridad Perez & Jose Angel Amorós & Sandra Bravo, 2023. "Sustainable Viticulture in the Valdepeñas Protected Designation of Origin: From Soil Quality to Management in Vitis vinifera," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Paola Masotti & Andrea Zattera & Mario Malagoli & Paolo Bogoni, 2022. "Environmental Impacts of Organic and Biodynamic Wine Produced in Northeast Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Simone Magni & Mino Sportelli & Nicola Grossi & Marco Volterrani & Alberto Minelli & Michel Pirchio & Marco Fontanelli & Christian Frasconi & Monica Gaetani & Luisa Martelloni & Andrea Peruzzi & Miche, 2020. "Autonomous Mowing and Turf-Type Bermudagrass as Innovations for An Environment-Friendly Floor Management of a Vineyard in Coastal Tuscany," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-12, May.
    6. José António Martins & Ana Marta-Costa & Maria Raquel Lucas & Mário Santos, 2024. "Sustainability in Mountain Viticulture: Insights from a Case Study in the Portuguese Douro Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Sara Bertorelli & Stella Gubelli & Valentina Bramanti & Ettore Capri & Lucrezia Lamastra, 2023. "How Does the Wine Sector Perform and Communicate Sustainability? The Italian Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-12, August.
    8. Norman Hendrik Riedel & Miroslav Špaček, 2022. "Challenges of Renewable Energy Sourcing in the Process Industries: The Example of the German Chemical Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-19, October.
    9. María Carmen García-Cortijo & Juan R. Ferrer & Juan Sebastián Castillo-Valero & Vicente Pinilla, 2021. "The Drivers of the Sustainability of Spanish Wineries: Resources and Capabilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-12, September.
    10. Antonis A. Zorpas & Maria K. Doula & Mejdi Jeguirim, 2021. "Waste Strategies Development in the Framework of Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-5, December.
    11. F.J. Cristófol & Elena Cruz-Ruiz & Gorka Zamarreño-Aramendia, 2021. "Transmission of Place Branding Values through Experiential Events: Wine BC Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-21, March.
    12. Eugenio Pomarici & Alessandro Corsi & Simonetta Mazzarino & Roberta Sardone, 2021. "The Italian Wine Sector: Evolution, Structure, Competitiveness and Future Challenges of an Enduring Leader," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 7(2), pages 259-295, July.
    13. Manuela D’Eusanio & Bianca Maria Tragnone & Luigia Petti, 2022. "From Social Accountability 8000 (SA8000) to Social Organisational Life Cycle Assessment (SO-LCA): An Evaluation of the Working Conditions of an Italian Wine-Producing Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-10, July.
    14. Veronica Sanda Chedea & Ana-Maria Drăgulinescu & Liliana Lucia Tomoiagă & Cristina Bălăceanu & Maria Lucia Iliescu, 2021. "Climate Change and Internet of Things Technologies—Sustainable Premises of Extending the Culture of the Amurg Cultivar in Transylvania—A Use Case for Târnave Vineyard," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-28, July.
    15. Hanna Górska-Warsewicz & Sylwia Żakowska-Biemans & Maksymilian Czeczotko & Monika Świątkowska & Dagmara Stangierska & Ewa Świstak & Agnieszka Bobola & Julita Szlachciuk & Karol Krajewski, 2018. "Organic Private Labels as Sources of Competitive Advantage—The Case of International Retailers Operating on the Polish Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-28, July.
    16. Nicola Casolani & Emilio Chiodo & Lolita Liberatore, 2023. "Continuous Improvement of VIVA-Certified Wines: Analysis and Perspective of Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, January.
    17. Moritz Wagner & Peter Stanbury & Tabea Dietrich & Johanna Döring & Joachim Ewert & Carlotta Foerster & Maximilian Freund & Matthias Friedel & Claudia Kammann & Mirjam Koch & Tom Owtram & Hans Reiner S, 2023. "Developing a Sustainability Vision for the Global Wine Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, July.
    18. Ilaria Zambon & Andrea Colantoni & Massimo Cecchini & Enrico Maria Mosconi, 2018. "Rethinking Sustainability within the Viticulture Realities Integrating Economy, Landscape and Energy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, January.
    19. Marzia Ingrassia & Stefania Chironi & Giuseppe Lo Grasso & Luciano Gristina & Nicola Francesca & Simona Bacarella & Pietro Columba & Luca Altamore, 2022. "Is Environmental Sustainability Also “Economically Efficient”? The Case of the “SOStain” Certification for Sicilian Sparkling Wines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-26, June.
    20. Gloria Luzzani & Erica Grandis & Marco Frey & Ettore Capri, 2021. "Blockchain Technology in Wine Chain for Collecting and Addressing Sustainable Performance: An Exploratory Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5252-:d:1098571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.