An alliance of international wine buyers wants to create a larger market for regenerative viticulture. Its collaboration with the Regenerative Viticulture Foundation (RVF) was presented on 20 October 2026 at the Sustainability in Drinks industry event in London. Its stated long-term goal is for ten per cent of the world’s vineyard area to be managed regeneratively by 2035. For winegrowers, however, the immediate concern is less the target figure than the question of what will count as evidence in future – and what the trade will offer in return.
The initiative addresses an economic bottleneck: changing practices takes working time, knowledge and sometimes investment, while environmental changes only become apparent over a longer period. A reliable signal of demand could help growers plan. As yet, however, there is no evidence that the participating buyers are committing to specific volumes or prices, longer contracts or financial support in return.
A definition is still being developed
In viticulture, “regenerative” is not a uniform, universally binding quality label. The RVF describes various certification and verification routes that differ in their criteria, inspection frequency and scope. The California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance also notes that no single definition or standard is yet universally accepted. Its overview treats the approach as site-specific: soil, water, biodiversity, climate and social conditions are among the possible areas of focus; specific practices should be tailored to the individual business.
This matters in vineyards. Cover crops between vine rows, reduced tillage or hedgerows can have different effects depending on the site. What makes sense in a wet region cannot be transferred unchanged to a dry hillside. A simple checklist of practices – such as “cover crops present” – therefore does not yet indicate whether the soil is improving or water infiltration is increasing. Equally, an outcome measurement needs a basis for comparison: the starting point, timeframe, measurement method and climatic conditions must all be taken into account.
What could be measured
The topics compiled by the Californian industry alliance provide an initial technical framework, but do not prescribe a standard for the new buyers’ group. For soil, it lists erosion protection and organic matter, among other factors; for water, efficiency and quality; and for biodiversity, habitats and species diversity. Climate impact and social aspects such as occupational safety and economic viability are also included. Examples of possible evidence include soil analyses, management records and documented measures.
It remains unclear which indicators the international group will select, which thresholds will apply and how often results are to be collected. Equally important is the question of who will verify the information. The RVF points to different models, ranging from self-assessments to external inspections. Without transparent verification, similar terms could describe very different levels of performance; an elaborate audit, on the other hand, can place a disproportionate burden on small businesses.
What the trade offers in return matters
The buyers’ initiative will therefore not be judged on its measurement system alone. What matters to growers is whether buyers actually factor data and transition plans into purchasing decisions. Will there be multi-year supply relationships? Will transition costs be shared? Can producers participate gradually, rather than only being considered once they have reached a demanding target? The announcement published so far contains no binding commitments on these points.
The RVF announced that it would begin working with buyers, producers and experts on a definition, criteria, baselines and metrics in November 2026. Buyers are then to develop their own targets, with implementation planned from 2027. At the editorial cut-off date, these are announced next steps, not finalised requirements. The ten per cent mark for 2035 is likewise a target set by the foundation, not evidence of a market share already achieved.
What German producers need to know now
For German wine estates, this does not yet entail any new obligation. The alliance is neither a legal requirement nor an already established certification scheme. Existing verification systems and regulations remain unaffected; whether and how they will be recognised later is still unclear. Nevertheless, producers can review what existing data they document on soil, cover crops, water, crop protection and working conditions. This is not an attempt to anticipate the future standard, but an assessment of the current position.
The decisive test will come when shared intentions become purchasing rules. A workable framework would need to allow approaches suited to individual sites, demonstrate progress against a robust baseline and organise verification transparently. At the same time, it must hold buyers accountable: those who demand regenerative performance should disclose how it feeds into their range, contract lengths and financing. Only then will additional data collection become a market tool that not only describes change in the vineyard, but also helps support it.
Original reviewed by the editors · 6 November 2026
