Does terroir matter? Apparently not…

Posted on | December 16, 2005

Following on from a few contributions in our Forum over at Fine Wine I was prompted to do some additional research and came across a paper - Natural endowments, production technologies and the quality of wines in Bordeaux. Does terroir matter? by two French academics published in August 2005. By taking into account the critical assessments made by Robert Parker, Bettane Desseauve, Broadbent and auction prices of wines sold at auction house Christie’s between 1980 and 1992, the authors hope to show whether there is a correlation between the so-called ‘endowments’ (e.g. soil, exposure, exposure (sun) - what people often term as ‘terroir’ and/or wine-makers influence and if so, how they interplay.

At the heart of their thesis is whether ‘terroir’ plays a role or whether it is simply the "the right combination of weather, vines, technology and chemistry which are sufficient." Weather is undoubtedly responsible for the vertical distinction amongst wines and the correlation between the scores of Broadbent and Parker are at 0.75 when comparing the vintages whereas only "equal to 0.47 only when they come to rank 48 châteaux of the same region, over the same years." [Spearman rank].

The authors thus looked at the wines of the Haut-Mèdoc, which includes vineyards such as Mouton-Rothschild, Latour, Lafite-Rothschild and Margaux. They then compiled a database of some one hundred characteristics of these Château. The authors then applied some complicated mathematical forumlae to regress the multiplicity of factors and produce their results. I must say that the paper is complicated to understand. It’s not a question of reading through it quickly. But the conclusion is unmistakeable and surprising:

"It may be tempting to conclude that the wine-making technology has become so sophisticated that it can completely shade the effect of terroir, and that vines can be grown in almost any place, as long as the weather permits, and the right combination of vines is made. The French "terroir" legend does obviously not hold, at least in the Haut-Mèdoc region, which is probably one of the most famous in the world."

They go on to say:

"This does not mean that a wine with a Saint Estèphe taste can be grown in Napa Valley or in Chile, but that wines of comparable quality can be. Since the taste of a wine is a horizontal quality, some consumers will prefer the Saint Esthephe, others will prefer a wine from Chile, but they will agree that both are good wines."

In other words the authors, I think, are claiming that based on the evidence of their work on this region and the variation in tasting scores from different critics and a variation in auction prices, there is not an overall perception of quality. My interpretation of their paper is thus: the role of man combined with the manner in which the grapes are processed and the wine is made conceals the terroir sufficiently for it to be meaningless as a concept.

A full copy of their thesis (in pdf format) can be downloaded from ECARES, Universitè Libre, Brussels. Click HERE.

QED? Let me know.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.