IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p5760-d1685140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Footprints of Red Wine Production in Piedmont, Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Ilaria Orlandella

    (Department of Environmental, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, 10129 Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

  • Matteo Cicolin

    (Department of Environmental, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, 10129 Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

  • Marta Tuninetti

    (Department of Environmental, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, 10129 Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

  • Silvia Fiore

    (Department of Environmental, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, 10129 Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

Abstract

Italy is a global top wine producer, with emphasis on high-quality wines. This study investigates the Carbon Footprint (CF), Water Footprint (WF), and Ecological Footprint (EF) of twelve red wine producers in Piedmont, Northern Italy. The analysis was based on a 0.75 L wine bottle as functional unit (FU). Twelve producers were interviewed and given questionnaires, which made it possible to gather primary data for the environmental evaluation that described vineyard and agricultural operations and wine production. The average CF was 0.88 ± 0.3 kg C O 2 e q , with 44% of CF associated with the glass bottle, 20% to the diesel fuel fed to the agricultural machines, 32% to electricity consumption, and 4% to other contributions. The average WF was 881 ± 252.4 L, with 98% Green WF due to evapotranspiration, and 2% Blue and Grey WF. The average EF was 81.3 ± 57.2 global ha, 73% ascribed to the vineyard area and 27% to CO 2 assimilation. The obtained CF and WF values align with existing literature, while no comparison is possible for the EF data, which are previously unknown. To reduce the environmental impacts of wine production, actions like using recycled glass bottles, electric agricultural machines and renewable energy can help. However, high-quality wine production in Piedmont is deeply rooted in tradition and mostly managed by small producers. Further research should investigate the social acceptance of such actions, and policies supporting economic incentives could be key enablers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilaria Orlandella & Matteo Cicolin & Marta Tuninetti & Silvia Fiore, 2025. "Environmental Footprints of Red Wine Production in Piedmont, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-23, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5760-:d:1685140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5760/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5760/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Mariana Guerra & Fátima Ferreira & Ana Alexandra Oliveira & Teresa Pinto & Carlos A. Teixeira, 2024. "Drivers of Environmental Sustainability in the Wine Industry: A Life Cycle Assessment Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Tiago Panizzon & Gregório Bircke Salton & Vania Elisabete Schneider & Matheus Poletto, 2024. "Identifying Hotspots and Most Relevant Flows for Red and White Wine Production in Brazil through Life Cycle Assessment: A Case Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Luigino Barisan & Marco Lucchetta & Cristian Bolzonella & Vasco Boatto, 2019. "How Does Carbon Footprint Create Shared Values in the Wine Industry? Empirical Evidence from Prosecco Superiore PDO’s Wine District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-13, May.
    5. ., 2023. "The EU Common Agricultural Policy," Chapters, in: Animal Welfare Governance in EU Agriculture, chapter 4, pages 108-138, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Emanuele Bonamente & Flavio Scrucca & Francesco Asdrubali & Franco Cotana & Andrea Presciutti, 2015. "The Water Footprint of the Wine Industry: Implementation of an Assessment Methodology and Application to a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Kitzes, Justin & Galli, Alessandro & Bagliani, Marco & Barrett, John & Dige, Gorm & Ede, Sharon & Erb, Karlheinz & Giljum, Stefan & Haberl, Helmut & Hails, Chris & Jolia-Ferrier, Laurent & Jungwirth, , 2009. "A research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1991-2007, May.
    8. Sara Rinaldi & Emanuele Bonamente & Flavio Scrucca & Maria Cleofe Merico & Francesco Asdrubali & Franco Cotana, 2016. "Water and Carbon Footprint of Wine: Methodology Review and Application to a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-17, July.
    9. Giuliana Vinci & Sabrina Antonia Prencipe & Ada Abbafati & Matteo Filippi, 2022. "Environmental Impact Assessment of an Organic Wine Production in Central Italy: Case Study from Lazio," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Luigi Galletto & Luigino Barisan, 2019. "Carbon Footprint as a Lever for Sustained Competitive Strategy in Developing a Smart Oenology: Evidence from an Exploratory Study in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Pier Paolo Miglietta & Domenico Morrone, 2018. "Managing Water Sustainability: Virtual Water Flows and Economic Water Productivity Assessment of the Wine Trade between Italy and the Balkans," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    3. Lisa Pizzol & Gloria Luzzani & Paolo Criscione & Luca Barro & Carlo Bagnoli & Ettore Capri, 2021. "The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in the Wine Industry: The Case Study of Veneto and Friuli Venezia Giulia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Carmen Ferrara & Giovanni De Feo, 2018. "Life Cycle Assessment Application to the Wine Sector: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Despoina Dede & Eleni Didaskalou & Sotirios Bersimis & Dimitrios Georgakellos, 2020. "A Statistical Framework for Assessing Environmental Performance of Quality Wine Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Giovanni Sogari & Tommaso Pucci & Barbara Aquilani & Lorenzo Zanni, 2017. "Millennial Generation and Environmental Sustainability: The Role of Social Media in the Consumer Purchasing Behavior for Wine," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Kastner, Thomas & Kastner, Michael & Nonhebel, Sanderine, 2011. "Tracing distant environmental impacts of agricultural products from a consumer perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1032-1040, April.
    9. Blasi, E. & Passeri, N. & Franco, S. & Galli, A., 2016. "An ecological footprint approach to environmental–economic evaluation of farm results," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 76-82.
    10. Emanuele Bonamente & Franco Cotana, 2015. "Carbon and Energy Footprints of Prefabricated Industrial Buildings: A Systematic Life Cycle Assessment Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-17, November.
    11. Jacek Wysocki, 2021. "Innovative Green Initiatives in the Manufacturing SME Sector in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Kęstutis Biekša & Violeta Valiulė & Ligita Šimanskienė & Raffaele Silvestri, 2022. "Assessment of Sustainable Economic Development in the EU Countries with Reference to the SDGs and Environmental Footprint Indices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-18, September.
    13. Doszhan Baibokonov & Yongzhong Yang & Yunyan Tang & Md Sajjad Hosain, 2021. "Understanding the traditional mares’ milk industry’s transformation into a creative industry: Empirical evidence from Kazakhstan," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 1172-1196, June.
    14. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    15. Wuliyasu Bai & Liang Yan & Jingbo Liang & Long Zhang, 2022. "Mapping Knowledge Domain on Economic Growth and Water Sustainability: A Scientometric Analysis," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(11), pages 4137-4159, September.
    16. Maria Serena Mancini & Mikel Evans & Katsunori Iha & Carla Danelutti & Alessandro Galli, 2018. "Assessing the Ecological Footprint of Ecotourism Packages: A Methodological Proposition," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-37, June.
    17. Wu, Yinyin & Wang, Ping & Liu, Xin & Chen, Jiandong & Song, Malin, 2020. "Analysis of regional carbon allocation and carbon trading based on net primary productivity in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    18. Emmanouil Tziolas & Eleftherios Karapatzak & Ioannis Kalathas & Chris Lytridis & Spyridon Mamalis & Stefanos Koundouras & Theodore Pachidis & Vassilis G. Kaburlasos, 2023. "Comparative Assessment of Environmental/Energy Performance under Conventional Labor and Collaborative Robot Scenarios in Greek Viticulture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Xiaowei Yao & Zhanqi Wang & Hongwei Zhang, 2016. "Dynamic Changes of the Ecological Footprint and Its Component Analysis Response to Land Use in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    20. Luigino Barisan & Marco Lucchetta & Cristian Bolzonella & Vasco Boatto, 2019. "How Does Carbon Footprint Create Shared Values in the Wine Industry? Empirical Evidence from Prosecco Superiore PDO’s Wine District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-13, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5760-:d:1685140. 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.