Evaluation of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector
Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate
Written by Agrosynergie EEIG Agrosynergie November – 2018 Groupement Européen d’Intérêt Economique AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development Directorate C – Strategy, simplification and policy analysis Unit C.4 – Monitoring and Evaluation
E-mail: [email protected]
European Commission B-1049 Brussels
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Evaluation of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate
Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development 2018 EN
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
LEGAL NOTICE The information and views set out in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu).
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019
Catalogue number: KF-04-18-977-EN-N ISBN: 978-92-79-97270-6 doi: 10.2762/09274
© European Union, 2018 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Images © Agrosynergie, 2018
EEIG AGROSYNERGIE is formed by the following companies:
ORÉADE-BRÈCHE Sarl & COGEA S.r.l. 64 Chemin del prat Via Po 102 31320, Auzeville FRANCE 00198 Roma ITALIE Tel. : + 33 5 61 73 62 62 Tel. : + 39 6 853 73 518 Fax : + 33 5 61 73 62 90 Fax : + 39 6 855 78 65 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Represented by: Represented by: Thierry CLEMENT Francesca ANTILICI
This case study was carried out by the following experts : Dr. Udo Bremer, Thomas Gerhards, Dr. Johannes Simons and Nora Simons
Table of contents
1. LIST OF THE LITERATURE AND INTERVIEWS ...... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERVIEWED ORGANISATION AND COMPANIES ...... 1 1.2 DOCUMENTS AND REPORTS COLLECTED ...... 4
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE WINE SECTOR IN GERMANY ...... 5 2.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ...... 5 2.2 STRUCTURE OF THE SECTOR IN RHINELAND-PALATINATE ...... 9 2.3 STATISTICS OF THE WINE SECTOR OF RHINELAND-PALATINATE ...... 10
3. THEME 1: NATIONAL SUPPORT PROGRAMMES ...... 15 3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION ...... 15 3.2 EFFECTS ON THE NSP AT THE LEVEL OF GROWERS ...... 22 3.3 EFFECTS OF THE NSP AT THE LEVEL OF PRODUCERS AND PRODUCTS ...... 30 3.4 EFFECTS OF THE PROMOTION MEASURE ...... 38 3.5 EFFECTS OF THE INFORMATION MEASURE ...... 46 3.6 EFFICIENCY OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE NSP ...... 49 3.7 COHERENCE OF THE NSP ...... 54 3.8 RELEVANCE OF THE NSP ...... 56 3.9 EU ADDED VALUE AND SUBSIDIARITY ...... 60
4. THEME 2: SCHEME OF AUTHORISATIONS OF VINE PLANTINGS ...... 63 4.1 SYNTHESIS OF THE LITERATURE ...... 63 4.2 SYNTHESIS OF THE INTERVIEWS ...... 63 4.3 CONCLUSION OF THE EXPERTS ...... 64
5. THEME 3: WINE PRODUCTS DEFINITION, RESTRICTIONS ON OENOLOGICAL PRACTICES AND AUTHORISED WINE GRAPE VARIETIES ...... 66 5.1 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AT MEMBER STATE AND REGIONAL LEVEL ...... 66 5.2 COMPETITIVENESS DISTORTIONS DUE TO SPECIFIC RULES ON OENOLOGICAL PRACTICES ...... 68 5.3 SYNTHESIS OF THE INTERVIEWS ...... 70 5.4 COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE EXPERT ...... 75
6. THEME 4: EU RULES ON LABELLING AND PRESENTATION ...... 76 6.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE LABELLING RULES APPLIED AT MEMBER STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL ...... 76 6.2 EXISTING NATIONAL DATA ON NON-COMPLIANCE WITH LABELLING RULES ...... 78 6.3 SYNTHESIS OF THE INTERVIEWS ...... 79 6.4 COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE EXPERT ...... 83
7. THEME 5: CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES, MONITORING AND CHECKS ...... 85 7.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RULES ...... 85 7.2 EXISTING NATIONAL DATA ON NON-COMPLIANCE AND WORKLOAD ...... 89 7.3 SYNTHESIS OF THE INTERVIEWS ...... 90
ANNEX 1 – LIST OF THE INTERVIEWS ...... 92
ANNEX 2 - RHINELAND-PALATINATE: GENERAL CRITERIA RESTRUCTURING PHASE 2 (2018) ...... 105
ANNEX 3 - RHINELAND-PALATINATE FUNDING CRITERIA INVESTMENT AND SUPPORT FOR INNOVATION ARTICEL 50 UND 51 DER VERORDNUNG (EG) NR. 1308/2013 FOR PROCESSING PLANTS, INFRASTRUKTURE OF WINE ESTATES AND WINE MARKETERS STAND: JANUAR 2018 ...... 106
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector i
List of tables Table 1: Calculation of German supply balance for sparkling wine ...... 7 Table 2: Vineyard areas in Rhineland-Palatinate (ha) ...... 11 Table 3: Production in Rhineland-Palatinate by wine region (hl) ...... 11 Table 4: Percentage of PDO wine, PGI wine and wine without PDO/PGI in the total production, in Rhineland-Palatinate, by wine region ...... 11 Table 5: Area by variety (ha) in Rhineland-Palatinate ...... 12 Table 6: Number of wine growers in Rhineland-Palatinate (1,000) ...... 13 Table 7: Number of wine growers in Rhineland-Palatinate (1,000)* ...... 13 Table 8: Vineyard Area by gradient in Rhineland-Palatinate, 1998 till 2015 ...... 14 Table 9: industry structure in [MEMBER STATE or REGION] ...... 14 Table 10: Summary: implementing state per measure ...... 15 Table 11: Implementation choices on the information in the Member States measure ...... 16 Table 12: Implementation choices on the promotion on third-country measure ...... 17 Table 13: Implementation choices on the restructuring and conversion of vineyards measure ...... 18 Table 14: Implementation choices on the harvest insurance measure ...... 20 Table 15: Implementation choices on the investments in enterprises measure ...... 20 Table 16: Budget shares, selection dates and application deadlines for investment actions 2017/2018 in Rhineland-Palatinate ...... 21 Table 17: Implementation choices on the innovation in the wine sector measure...... 21 Table 18: Application and approved applications for NSP Restructuring Rhineland-Palatinate 2017 by gradient ...... 22 Table 19: Restructured and converted area per grape variety 2017 ...... 22 Table 20: Net exports of German wine (gross figures, including re-export) ...... 38 Table 21: Net exports of German wine (without re-export) ...... 38 Table 22: German wine exports by quality, packaging and colour ...... 39 Table 23: German net wine export volume by country of destination ...... 40 Table 24: German net wine export value by country of destination ...... 41 Table 25: Calculation of the market share of German wine on key foreign markets ...... 42 Table 26: Rate of achievement of the foreseen expenditures per measures in Mio. Euro ...... 49 Table 27: Rate of achievement of the foreseen expenditures per measures in € ...... 49 Table 28: Summary of information about costs related to the administration and payment of the NSP gathered in interviews without costs of controls ...... 51 Table 29: Summary of effects of the financial parameters ...... 53 Table 30: SWOT analysis of the wine sector ...... 56 Table 31: Description of main local specificities in oenological practices and authorised varieties...... 66 Table 32: Specificities oenological practices of main competing wines ...... 68 Table 33: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance labelling violations 2016...... 78 Table 34: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance overview, 2016 ...... 79 Table 35: Workload for monitoring and checks ...... 89
List of figures Figure 1: Map of the wine growing regions of Germany ...... 7 Figure 2: Expenditure from 2013 to 2017 per measure (in M€) ...... 15 Figure 3: Distribution of the expenditures per measures from 2014 to 2017 ...... 16 Figure 4 Overview on authorities involved in controls ...... 77
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector ii
Glossary
Ø Average ADD The supervision and service administration body of Rhineland-Palatinate in Trier (Aufsichts- und Dienstleistungsdirektion, Mittler zwischen der Landesregierung und der kommunalen Selbstverwaltung) Ar 10 by 10 meters (100 m²) 100 Ar = 1 hectare CAP Common Agricultural Policy COMTRADE United Nations International Trade Statistics Database CMEF Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework CMO Common Market Organisation CN Combined Nomenclature CTR Criterion DLR Service Centre for Rural Areas of Rhineland-Palatinate (Dienstleistungszentrum Länd- licher Raum Rheinland-Pfalz) DWA German Wine Academy DWI German Wine Institute EAGF European Agricultural Guarantee Fund EAFRD European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development EAV European Union added value EC European Commission EEA European Environment Agency EEC European Economic Community EEIG European economic interest group EQ Evaluation question ELER Europäische Landwirtschaftsfonds für die Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums (Euro- pean Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) EU European Union EUROSTAT Statistical Office of the European Commission FADN Farm Accountancy Data Network FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FNVA Farm net value added GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade hl hector litre (100 litres) LUA Landesuntersuchungsamt Rhineland-Palatinate LWK Landwirtschaftskammer Rhineland-Palatinate [Chamber of Agriculture] MIO Million € MS Member State NGO Non-Governmental Organization NSP National Support Programmes OIV International Organisation of Vine and Wine PDO/PGI Protected Designations of Origin (PDO (German g.U. [geschützte Ursprungsbezeich- nung) and Protected Geographical Indications (PGI, German g.g.U.) PO Producer Organisation PPS Purchasing Power Standard RD Rural Development RDP Rural Development Program RDR Rural Development Regulation Prädikatswein German wine category for wines of highest quality. Sub categories are Kabinett, Spätlese, Auslese, Beerenauslese, Trockenbeerenauslese und Eiswein. The quality increases from Kabinett to Eiswein. All Prädikatsweine are categorised as PDO. AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector iii
Qualitätswein / German wine category for wines of high quality. Sub categories are ‘Qualitätswein Quality wine b.A.’ (b.A. = special growing region) All ‘Qualitätsweine’ are categorised as PDO. RMS Tracked crawler type vehicle - special machine used in steep slope vineyards, cater pillar with cable winch for steep vineyards SDG Sustainable Development Goals SME Small and Medium Enterprises SMS Tracked vehicle - special machine used in steep slope vineyards SO Standard Output SPS Single Payment Scheme SSG Special Agriculture Safeguard SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats TEU Treaty on the European Union TFEU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union UAA Utilised Agricultural Area USA United States of America USDA United States Department of Agriculture VAT Value Added Taxes VDP The Association of German Prädikatswein Estates (Verband deutscher Prädikats- weingüter) WBR Forest Valuation Directive (Waldbewertungsrichtlinie) WTO World Trade Organisation
Translations ‘Erzeugerabfüllung‘ [bottled by the producer] ‘Gutsabfüllung‘ [bottled on the estate]
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector iv
1. LIST OF THE LITERATURE AND INTERVIEWS
1.1 Introduction to the interviewed organisation and companies
Verbraucherzentralen Bundesverband (VZBV, The Federation of German Consumer Organisations) The Federation of German Consumer Organisations is a non-governmental organisation acting as an umbrella for 41 German consumer associations. The VZBV represents the interests of consumers in public and vis-à-vis legislators, the private sector and civil society. The goal of the VZBV is to protect and empower consumers. They do this by lobbying and campaigning at na- tional and European levels, by taking collective legal action on behalf of consumers and by ensuring that their message receives broad media coverage. They also provide professional training for the staff of consumer or- ganisations. Consumer advice is provided at a regional level by the 16 consumer centres of the German federal states (Ver- braucherzentralen). One of these centres is located in Rhineland-Palatinate. This centre is the member organi- sation of the VZBV that covers the subject of wine. Still they do not do that extensively, e.g. regarding oenolog- ical practices. Currently wine is not a topic of high priority for the VZBV, except the aspect of labelling.
Federation of German Wine Cellars and Wine Trade (Bundesverband der Deutschen Weinkellereien und des Weinfachhandels e.V.) The Federation of German Wine Cellars and Wine Trade represents the interests of about 180 wineries and vineyard regarding wine trade and export. On the level of the EU, Federal and States in Germany the Federation advocates for a legal framework that allows its members to develop successful und future oriented strategies. The Federation has a twofold objective: (1) influencing the legislation on EU, Federal and States level and (2) to inform its members about everything that is relevant for wineries and wine trade. Besides the representation of interests, the federation provides advice for its members in all questions specifically referring to wine mar- keting on domestic and international markets, labelling provisions, taxes and tariffs. Moreover, non-specific issues like provisions for advertising, certification, logistic, waste disposal or food law are covered by the feder- ation’s consultancy. Good cooperation with all relevant institutions in the wine sector results in a good and effective coordination of the activities. Federation members are diverse. The sizes of their businesses and their activities rang from small wineries that purchase grapes, must or wine and are engaged in direct marketing to companies with a turnover of several million € and several hundreds of employees. The members of the Federation market more than 4 million hl of wine that is about 50 % of the overall production of PDO wine in Germany. Regarding Rhineland Palatinate, the share of the Federation members is even higher and amounts to about 60%.
Bauern- und Winzerverband Rheinland-Nassau e.V. Web: http://www.bwv-net.de/ The Bauern- und Winzerverband represents its members’ overall interests vis-à-vis state institutions and organ- isations. It safeguards and promotes the professional interests of Rhineland-Palatinate wine growers. On na- tional level it cooperates with the Deutscher Weinbauernverband e.V. (dwv, German Winegrowers’ Associa- tion), the Deutsche Bauernverband (German Farmers’ Association) and the Deutsche Raiffeisenverband (Ger- man Raiffeisen Federation) representing German wine growers’ cooperatives. The Bauern- und Winzerverband provides advise and support for its members with regard to all technical ques- tions and provides them with the latest scientific findings by constantly monitoring scientific and technological developments that are relevant to viticulture. The degree of organisation amongst farmers and wine growers is high. The Bauern- und Winzerverband has 17,000 members, farmers as well as wine growers. Members are organised in 1,600 local organisations which are grouped in 14 district associations (Ahrweiler, Bad Kreuznach, Bernkastel-Wittlich, Birkenfeld, Bitburg- Prüm, Cochem-Zell, Daun, Mayen-Koblenz, Rhein-Hunsrück, Rhein-Lahn, Trier-Saarburg, Altenkirchen,
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 1
Neuwied, Westerwald). The Bauern- und Winzerverband is led by a president and represents the interests of its members. There are several associated organisations.1
Wine growers cooperative The wine grower cooperative was founded in the second decade of the 20th century. It has around 100 mem- bers of which 26 active wine growers in total cultivate 130 ha and produce around 1.2 Mio bottles of wine per year. Members are obliged to deliver all grapes. 75% of the overall production is Riesling wine. The cooperative sells its wine mainly within Germany to consumers, restaurants and wine traders, partly through its own online- shop. The wine is not sold via discounters. 45% of its wine is sold at the place of the cooperative and the other quantities are sold through delivery and partner selling points. Exports only play a marginal role. The coopera- tive has 8 full-time and 4 part-time employees, NSP support has been applied for since 2003 - exclusively for (large) investments implemented step-by-step: replacing GPR (GFK) plastic tanks by temperature controlled stainless steel tanks (since 2003), an automatic filling, labelling and packaging line (2010), modern wine press and must treatment processes, a new wine press building (2014). The most recent investment was the modern- ized tasting and selling room (2016) which was supported with a little more than 121,000 €. Support granted by NSP covered 25% to 30% of investment costs. The cooperative is typical of a quality oriented cooperative of the Palatinate region. Due to the investments mentioned above, grapes are pressed very carefully with pneumatic presses. Must flotation and temperature controlled fermentation as well as quality control of the whole production process from vineyard to the end product allow for high quality wines. All grapes are processed and bottled. The cooperation received high-end awards (for the last 8 years the “Staatsehrenpreis” and others) Payment to members considers geographical location of vineyard, variety, maturity and quality of grapes.
Wine grower and producer Family business since generations located in the Mosel region with extremely steep/steep terraces. The overall area is divided into very small land parcels due to traditional heritage system. Professional background: He and his wife started a bachelor program in wine & oenology) but did not complete their studies, because the family situation required their presence and active engagement in and leadership of the business. The owner is member of exclusive “Bernkasteler Ring” marketing. Since 1999, his father initiated land consolidation (re-parcelling) of vineyards and the key vineyard was re- planted in 2005. The restructuring was supported by EU. The winery received NSP funds for vineyard restruc- turing and investments several times, e.g. almost 24,000 € in 2015. In 2018, there is NSP support for invest- ment in a new wine press house, currently under construction. Around 2007 the construction of a tast- ing/selling room was supported by EU.
Wine grower and producer
1 See https://www.bwv-net.de for more details.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 2
timized and efficient mechanized work in the vineyards. Modern technology is used: e.g. pneumatic wine press, stainless steel wine tanks and environmental friendly 2-row tunnel sprayer (little drift & losses, liquid recycling). Most vineyards can be handled with 2-row attachments. The production philosophy is oriented towards quali- ty, therefore the quantity of grapes per ha is limited. The marketing strategy focuses on quality oriented con- sumers within Germany. Export to EU or Third Countries is currently not interesting for the grower. Cultivated varieties are: Riesling, Dornfelder, Pinot Rouge, Scheurebe, Merlot, Shiraz. The owner is not interested in fun- gus resistant varieties (PiWi).
Wine grower and producer
Wine grower and Winery
BLE BLE is a subordinate authority to BMEL. It executes the NSP promotion measures on national level (1.5 million € per year). BLE is also responsible for granting new planting rights.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 3
1.2 Documents and reports collected
. GVBL_19_2_2016_LVO_Aend_LVO_Durchf_Weinrecht-FuenfteLandesverordnungWeingesetz2 . Weinbaurichtlinie_2018 . 170512_Bekanntmachung_Nr_10_17_51 . Das Deutsche Weinmagazin various issues . Die Winzerzeitschrift various issues . Jauch-SPIEGEL-ONLINE2018-03-23 . HektarertragsregelungWeinRheinland-Pfalz-LWK . WeinV_1995 . WeinG_1994Weingesetz3 . Bundesgesetzblatt various issues . ProWein Business Report assesses the International Wine Markets, 2017 . LUA Report 2017 . Financial-and-Economic-Analysis of Development Projects, European Commission 1997 . Information Grundsätze für die Durchführung der Hektarertragsregelung - Erzeugerstufe in Rheinland-Pfalz
2 For the full text see: https://mwvlw.rlp.de/fileadmin/mwkel/Abteilung_9_Weinbau/Weinbau/Dokumente/Pflanzrechtregime/GVBL._19.2.201 6_LVO_Aend_LVO_Durchf_Weinrecht.pdf 3 For the full text see: For the full text see https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/weing_1994/ and https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_BGBl&jumpTo=bgbl115s1207.pdf#__bgbl__%2F%2F *%5B%40attr_id%3D%27bgbl115s1207.pdf%27%5D__1530452388149
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 4
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE WINE SECTOR IN GERMANY
2.1 Background information
In Germany 0.6% of the national UUA is under vines, which amounts to 3.2% of the EU area under vines. 43.9% of the production was exported (in 2016). Germany has 13 official wine growing regions. 100% of these areas are eligible for PDO/PGI. Most of German grapes are grown in low lands. In general, these areas are also suitable for growing other agricultural products. A minor share is grown in steep and very steep slopes. The production costs of grapes from those vineyards are higher due to less possibilities of mechanisation as well as – in general – a smaller size of the vineyards. In steep and very steep slopes grapes are frequently the only agricultural crop that can be grown. Especially in regions where grapes are grown on small wine estates, grape producers also produce wine and, also frequently sell their wine themselves directly to consumers or restaurants. Many wine growers are members of co-operatives. Some co-operatives require from their members to deliver the total production, others allow their members to produce wine and sell it themselves.
Official wine growing region Ahr The wine growing region Ahr got its name from the river Ahr. The wine growing region is also called ‘paradise of red wines’. With less than 600 ha, Ahr is a rather small wine growing region. More than half of the vineyards are planted with Blauer Spätburgunder, predominantly in steep slopes. Riesling and Müller-Thurgau are grown as white wines. Wine growers in this region work in general only part time in their vineyards.
Official wine growing region Baden The wine growing region Baden encompasses almost 16 thousand hectares, of which around 6.5 thousand are planted with red wines. Spätburgunder has the highest share amongst all red wine grapes. Most of vineyards planted with white wine grapes are planted with Müller-Thurgau. It is Germany‘s southernmost wine growing region. It stretches from north of Heidelberg to Meersburg at Lake Constance, thus geological and climatic differences are remarkable. More than 70% of the vineyards are linked to co-operatives. The wine growing region Baden is subdivided in 9 sub-regions: Bergstraße, Bodensee, Breisgau, Kaiserstuhl, Kraichgau, Markgräflerland, Ortenau, Tauberfranken and Tuniberg.
Official wine growing region Franken The wine growing region Franken encompasses more than 6 thousand hectares along the river Main and its confluents. The region stretches from Aschaffenburg and Schweinfurt. More than 80% of all wine is white wine, mainly Müller-Thurgau and Silvaner. Only wine from Franken is eligible for being marketed in ”Bocksbeutel- bottles”.
Official wine growing region Hessische Bergstraße The wine growing region Hessische Bergstraße encompasses around 450 hectares. It stretches from north of Heidelberg between the river Rhine in the West and the Odenwald in the East. The climate is said to be Medi- terranean. Almost 80% of all grapes are for white wines. Riesling is the predominant grape. More than 230 different soil types can be distinguished.
Official wine growing region Mittelrhein [Middle-Rhine] The wine growing region Mittelrhein stretches from Bonn in the North to the Rheingau in the South. Along the river Rhine some wine is grown in steep and very steep slopes. Around 300 hectares of the total vineyard area of around 470 hectares is planted with Riesling.
Official wine growing region Mosel The wine growing region Mosel - formerly called Mosel-Saar-Ruwer - stretches from Luxembourg south of Trier along the river Mosel and its confluents till Koblenz. Here the steepest vineyards of Europe are located. Almost 9 thousand hectares are planted with vine. White wine is predominant and Riesling is the major white wine variety.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 5
Official wine growing region Nahe The wine growing region Nahe is situated between Mosel und Rhein. In its Eastern part it borders on the Rheingau and in the South on Rheinhessen. The total vineyard area adds up to more than 4 thousand hectares, with a red wine share of 25%. One can distinguish 180 different soil types.
Official wine growing region Pfalz [Palatinate] The wine growing region Pfalz encompasses more than 23 thousand hectare of vineyards, around 2/3 of which are planted with white wine grapes. The Pfalz stretches from South of Rheinhessen close to Worms to the Elsaß. Around 25 of all German wine is harvested in the Pfalz. Riesling, Müller-Thurgau (Rivaner), Weißburgunder, Gewürztraminer, Kerner and Scheureben are frequently grown white wine grapes. Spätburgunder and Dornfelder are the most frequently grown red wine ones.
Official wine growing region Rheingau The wine growing region Rheingau stretches for 50 kilometres from Hochheim and Wickeram at the river Main and Lorcham at the river Rhine. The vineyards cover an area of more than 3 thousand hectares. White wine grapes are predominant (around 85%). Among them Riesling and Müller-Thurgau are the most frequently grown varieties. Spätburgunder is the most important red wine grape.
Official wine growing region Rheinhessen The wine growing region Rheinhessen is framed by the rivers Nahe and Rhine - between Bingen, Alzey, Worms Mainz. With more than 26 thousand hectares planted with vine, it is the largest wine growing region of Germa- ny. Almost 70% is planted with white grape vines. Müller-Thurgau (Rivaner) is the most important white wine grape, whereas Dornfelder and Portugieser the dominant red wine ones.
Official wine growing region Saale-Unstrut The wine growing region Saale-Unstrut is located along the river Saale and the river Unstrut, near the cities of Naumburgund and Freyburg. The wine growing region Saale-Unstrut politically belongs to the states of Sach- sen-Anhalt, Thüringen and Brandenburg (Werder). The vineyards cover less than 800 hectares, 75% of which are planted with white wine grapes. Predominant soil type is lacustrine limestone. Climate makes Saale-Unstrut unsuitable for Spät- and Auslesen.
Official wine growing region Sachsen [Saxony] The wine growing region Sachsen stretches for 45 kilometers from von Pillnitz down the River Elbe till Diesbar- Seußlitz. Cities like Radebeul and Meißen are in the middle of the almost 500 hectares of vineyards. Especially around Meißen wine is grown on steep and very steep slopes. Soils are in general deficient in lime. More than 80% of the vineyards are planted with white wine grapes. Mül- ler-Thurgau (Rivaner), Riesling and Weißer Burgunder are the predominant varieties.
Official wine growing region Württemberg Most of the German red wines come from the wine growing region Württemberg. The Swabian vineyards are located between Tübingen in the South and Bad Mergentheim in the North at the slopes of the river Neckar and its confluents. Trollinger, Lemberger, Portugieser, Spätburgunder and Schwarzriesling are the most im- portant red wine grapes of the region that has more than 11 thousand hectare of vineyards; only around 30% planted with white wine grapes. Amongst these Riesling, der Müller-Thurgau (Rivaner), Kerner and Silvaner are the ones the most frequently grown in Württemberg.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 6
Figure 1: Map of the wine growing regions of Germany
German wine growing regions (Vineyard areas stocked with grapes)
Wine statistics in Germany include sparkling wine. However, based on different press releases of the Federal Statistical Office (Statistisches Bundesamt) a supply balance can be calculated. For 2015 the following data are reported: Table 1: Calculation of German supply balance for sparkling wine 2015 TOTAL Million hl*
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 7
2015 Domestic consumption* 3.01 Import 1.21 thereof - Italy 0.73 - Spain 0.25 - France 0.20 Export 0.34. Calculated domestic production 2.14 Domestic consumption covers dutiable sorts of sparkling wine including sparkling fruit wine which amounts for about 3%. Sources: Statistisches Bundesamt, own calculations.4
The Deutsches Weininstitut (DWI, or German Wine Institute) is the German wine industry's marketing organi- zation responsible for the generic promotion of the quality and sales of German wine domestically and abroad. Among other things, this includes press work and public relations; implementation of PR and informative cam- paigns as well as appropriate events; organization of and participation in trade fairs and exhibitions as well as supporting participation in trade fairs and exhibitions; publishing and dissemination of advertising and informa- tive materials; conducting training programs and seminars; conducting market research; and keeping the wine industry informed. Organization At this time, some 40 men and women, under the leadership of the managing director, work in the interest of German wine at the wine institute’s headquarters on "Platz des Weines" in Bodenheim. In addition, there are several “Information Bureaus for German Wine” in the most important export markets. Overall, the wine institute’s work is carried out by four horizontally linked departments. The communication department, directed by Frank Schulz, is the central contact point for all questions related to German wine. Initial contact for domestic and foreign journalists is the press section, headed by Ernst Büscher. The advertising and market research section, headed by Eberhard Abele, handles the coordination of advertising measures; the production of advertising and informative materials; and domestic and foreign mar- ket research. The online and internal communication section is currently “under construction.” The marketing department, directed by Steffen Schindler, develops marketing concepts for the domestic and foreign markets, as well as coordinates and implements appropriate measures. In 2010, the wine institute has 10 external “information bureaus” (Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Great Britain, The Netherlands, Nor- way, Sweden, Switzerland, and the USA). The on and off trade department, directed by Udo Pawliza, that handles cooperation with retail key accounts, the wine (specialised) trade and hospitality industry, develops concepts and measures relevant to these branches. This includes the ongoing and further development of the training programs and seminars offered by the wine institute The administration/central services department, directed by Jens Schneider, handles all matters related to finances and personnel; monitors contributions to the German Wine Fund; procures wines for and maintains the wine institute’s cellar stocks; and takes care of internal services (telecommunication, incoming and out- going mail, etc.). Legal Status The German Wine Institute is part of a network working on behalf of the interests of the German wine industry. Its business operations are supervised by the Deutscher Weinfonds (DWF, or German Wine Fund). The German Wine Fund was established as a legal entity under public law in the federal German wine law of 29 August 1961. It is supported by the wine industry and subject to the statutory supervision of the Federal Minis- try for Nutrition, Agriculture and Consumer Protection. Today, it is subject to the current stipulations of the German wine law.
4 Data base on: https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/zdw/2016/PD16_45_p002pdf.pdf?__blob=publica tionFile, and https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/zdw/2016/PD16_12_p002pdf.pdf?__blob=publica tionFile
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 8
The German Wine Institute was founded in 1949 as a privately operated initiative, a legal entity comparable with a PLC (public limited company - or in German, GmbH) under the name “Deutsche Weinwerbung” (German Wine Promotion). Today’s associates include the German Wine-growers’ Association/Bonn, the Association of German Wine-growers’ Cooperatives /Bonn, the Association of German Wineries (large, commercial winer- ies)/Trier, the German wine specialty trade, and the German Wine Fund. Institutions The highest authority of the German Wine Fund is the administrative board. It consists of 44 members: 18 representatives of wine-growers and cooperatives; 8 representatives of the regional wine promotion boards; 8 representatives of other wine-related organizations; and 10 representatives from the marketing and consumer branches. Fundamental decisions affecting the German Wine Institute are made at the annual meeting. The day-to-day business of the German Wine Fund and the German Wine Institute is handled by a member of the board of the German Wine Fund and/or the managing director of the German Wine Institute. The German Wine Fund and the German Wine Institute are actively involved in the coordination of generic promotion as prescribed by law. The coordination of regional and multiregional measures by Deutsche Wein- werbe GmbH (promotional materials management company) is synergetically and financially efficient. As a partner of the Deutsche Weinakademie (DWA, or German Wine Academy), the German Wine Institute substan- tially supports the academy’s scientific research that pursues the development of legal and social key data related to the themes “wine and society,” “wine and health,” and “wine and quality of life.” The German Wine Academy collects and assesses data, promotes scientific research, and disseminates its findings in various ways. Promotion of Quality Promoting the quality of the wines of Germany’s 13 wine-growing regions by supporting quality competitions and scientific research is a major contribution to marketing. This also includes fostering fair competition and the protection of certain native wine designations domestically and abroad.
Rhineland-Palatinate was chosen as the focus region of this case study. Rhineland-Palatinate is a state of Germany, located in western Germany and covering an area of approximately 20,000 square kilometres and a population of around 4 million inhabitants. Mainz is the state capital and larg- est city, while other major cities include Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Koblenz, Trier, Kaiserslautern, and Worms. Rhineland-Palatinate is Germany's main production region for wine in terms of grape cultivation and wine ex- port. [Source: Wikipedia.org]. Vineyards in Rhineland-Palatinate lie in the northern/continental wine growing zone (zone A). Four of Germa- ny’s thirteen winegrowing areas are located in Rhineland-Palatinate: Ahr, Nahe, Rheinhessen and Pfalz. The winegrowing areas Mittelrhein and Mosel are mainly located in Rhineland-Palatinate but include some vine- yard area in North Rhine-Westphalia (Mittelrhein) and Saarland (Mosel). Rhineland-Palatinate represents 56.4% of the German area under wine, and 1.5% of the EU vineyards. It has 7.1% of its UAA under vines. It is also of interest because of the dichotomy of production conditions, between low land and very steep slopes. In 2015, in Rhineland-Palatinate 64.100 hectares were under vine, 8% of which had a gradient of above 30%. The most important grape variety for making white wine is Riesling and for red wine Dornfelder (for detailed information see Table 31.
2.2 Structure of the sector in Rhineland-Palatinate
Share of different marketing channels for wine originating in Rhineland-Palatinate: Direct Marketing: 15% Co-operatives: 20 % Private wine cellars: 65% There is a lot of structural change in the processing sector. This is due to economies of scale on the one hand and due to the requirements of retailers on the other hand. Retailers prefer suppliers that can offer a wide assortment of wine, sparkling wine and wine mixed beverages originating in domestic as well as in foreign mar- kets. These requirements fuel structural change. Organisational structure of the supply chain and positioning of the wine operators: Supply strategy:
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 9
o The aim of the sector is to produce quality wine. The basic quality is defined by the PDO re- quirements. The whole vineyards in Rhineland-Palatinate are eligible for PDO wine and just a small share of wine is not marketed under PDO, as “Landwein” (PGI) or “Deutscher Wein” (Non-PDO/PGI) or “Grundwein” (Basic wine). o An increasing market orientation during the last 25 or 30 years was coupled with efforts of quality differentiation and market orientation. Against the background of a wide range of va- rieties that are approved under the PDO rules for the wine growing areas, there are opportu- nities for very different wines. This hampers establishing a uniform reputation of the wine based on taste but it allows individual producers to develop their own marketing strategy based on the market segment that they want to address. o Based on the PDO rules some producer groups try to differentiate by defining smaller vine- yard regions than the traditional wine growing areas and to establish higher and differentiat- ing standards. This strategy makes it possible to conduct generic marketing and to establish a uniform reputation for the respective area. Marketing measures can be co-funded by the NSP and joining forces for promotion can increase the visibility of the specific wine. However, splitting the traditional wine growing areas in smaller areas may hamper the development of a uniform positioning and promotion of the sector. o Direct marketing plays a relevant role. The volume is estimated at 10% to 20%. Direct market- ing offers opportunities for a high added value; still it requires a lot of additional activities. Moreover, the strategies of direct marketers may contradict the strategies of companies that choose the retail sector as a marketing channel. o In an nutshell: Based on the PDO quality level there are lots of activities to adapt to market requirements in order to be competitive in a saturated and highly competitive market. Strat- egies of individual companies and wine grower differ. There is a field of tension between a uniform reputation of the wine growing areas and the competition and differentiating strate- gies of the actors in the value chain. Upstream/downstream integration: Integration becomes more and more important. Increasing market orientation is combined with an in- creasing need of coordination within the value chain. In order to be able to offer wide assortment of products with the promoted quality and taste and to guarantee a constant supply to retailers, integra- tion of different steps of the value chain within one company or contracts between companies at dif- ferent steps of the value chain become more and more relevant. Negotiating position inside the supply chain In Germany concentration in as well as the competition on the level of food retailers is very intense. Due to the retail food industry’s market power, pressure is passed on to their business partners, as wine cellars, co-operatives, wine makers and wineries. The buyer power of the retailer is enhanced by the international competition as non-domestic wine companies compete on German markets, too. Potential collaborative networking with other firms. Depending on the region and their contract, wineries that are member of a cooperative have to deliver all or parts of their grapes to the cooperative. Independent wineries can sell their grapes, must or wine to whom they want. Thus, allowing also cooperation with private brokers or export agents. However, the competitive environment, requirements of retailers and reduction of transaction costs lead to an increasing level of collaboration in the sector (see possible upstream/downstream integration). Distribution channels, role of the intermediary markets (retailers, exporters) Independent wineries can use any type of distribution channel. The role of direct marketing is increas- ing. Wine marketers have fewer chances to escape the structural changes of wine sales and the in- creasing competition on their domestic markets. Cooperatives and large wineries undergo a process of concentration. International and German wine retailers are likely to be the losers of the changing mar- ket structures. Relevance of intra and extra EU markets About 450,000 hl of the overall production is exported to EU member states and about 350.000 hl to third countries.
2.3 Statistics of the wine sector of Rhineland-Palatinate
The whole area of Rhineland-Palatinate is eligible for PDO wine.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 10
Table 2: Vineyard areas in Rhineland-Palatinate (ha) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 TOTAL 63966* 64144* 64181* 64097 64118 64174 Ahr n.a. n.a. n.a. 562 563 n.a. Mittelrhein* n.a. n.a. n.a. 450 448 n.a. Mosel n.a. n.a. n.a. 8695 8673 n.a. Nahe n.a. n.a. n.a. 4207 4205 n.a. Rheinhessen n.a. n.a. n.a. 26587 26628 n.a. Pfalz n.a. n.a. n.a. 23621 23590 n.a. * Data about the area in 2012, 2013 and 2014 include the wine area of the Federal State Saarland and North-Rhine West- phalia and Saarland. The area of the two Federal States was 141 ha in 2015, 143 ha in 2016 and 144 ha in 2017. So it seems reasonable to reduce the data in 2012-2015 by about 145 ha. Source: Statistisches Bundesamt
Table 3: Production in Rhineland-Palatinate by wine region (hl) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 PDO (Qualitätwein + Prädikatswein) TOTAL 5007861 4934969 5366598 5169451 5082108 4440657 Ahr 31 732 36 192 45 402 43 596 44 234 42 480 Mittelrhein* 24 241 21 858 26 097 25 408 21 980 20 639 Mosel 951 124 1 002 209 1 203 557 1 051 020 1 014 442 850 681 Nahe 216 742 212 597 229 543 220 139 215 614 170 688 Rheinhessen 2 176 098 2 163 002 2 273 599 2 247 379 2 179 041 1 890 984 Pfalz 1 607 924 1 499 112 1 588 400 1 581 909 1 606 798 1 465 184 PGI** TOTAL 273659 186872 242284 174100 215298 114663 Ahr 2 578 3 143 3 380 3 380 3 939 3 082 Mittelrhein* 953 982 591 591 1 105 1 440 Mosel 64 217 36 452 43 658 43 658 28 384 6 568 Nahe 446 614 3 010 3 010 631 143 Rheinhessen 149 710 102 088 150 563 150 563 140 054 68 704 Pfalz 55 755 43 594 41 082 41 082 41 185 34 725 Wine without PDO/PGI** TOTAL 144859 56994 49911 47852 57342 19497 Ahr 311 128 295 22 47 58 Mittelrhein* 0 4 5 2 26 23 Mosel 22 696 2 696 3 880 4 826 2 692 7 701 Nahe 349 225 111 35 282 163 Rheinhessen 74 381 36 444 35 045 26 874 39 517 5 594 Pfalz 47 122 17 497 10 575 16 093 14 779 5 958 Sources: Statistisches Bundesamt and Statistisches Landesamt Rhineland-Palatinate (Weinbau 2017) 10 hectare of vineyards in Rhineland-Palatinate are not part of a wine growing region
Table 4: Percentage of PDO wine, PGI wine and wine without PDO/PGI in the total production, in Rhineland- Palatinate, by wine region 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 PDO Total 92.3% 95.3% 94.8% 95.9% 94.9% 97.1% Ahr 91.7% 91.7% 92.5% 93.3% 91.7% 93.1% Mittelrhein* 96.2% 95.7% 97.8% 96.9% 95.1% 93.4%
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 11
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Mosel 91.6% 96.2% 96.2% 97.8% 97.0% 98.4% Nahe 99.6% 99.6% 98.7% 99.4% 99.6% 99.8% Rheinhessen 90.7% 94.0% 92.5% 94.4% 92.4% 96.2% Pfalz 94.0% 96.1% 96.9% 96.4% 96.6% 97.3% PGI Total 5.0% 3.6% 4.3% 4.5% 4.0% 2.5% Ahr 7.4% 8.0% 6.9% 7.2% 8.2% 6.8% Mittelrhein* 3.8% 4.3% 2.2% 2.3% 4.8% 6.5% Mosel 6.2% 3.5% 3.5% 4.1% 2.7% 0.8% Nahe 0.2% 0.3% 1.3% 1.4% 0.3% 0.1% Rheinhessen 6.2% 4.4% 6.1% 6.3% 5.9% 3.5% Pfalz 3.3% 2.8% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.3% Wine without PDO/PGI Total 2.67% 1.10% 0.88% 0.89% 1.07% 0.43% Ahr 0.90% 0.32% 0.60% 0.05% 0.10% 0.13% Mittelrhein* 0.00% 0.02% 0.02% 0.01% 0.11% 0.10% Mosel 2.19% 0.26% 0.31% 0.45% 0.26% 0.89% Nahe 0.16% 0.11% 0.05% 0.02% 0.13% 0.10% Rheinhessen 3.10% 1.58% 1.43% 1.13% 1.68% 0.28% Pfalz 2.75% 1.12% 0.64% 0.98% 0.89% 0.40% Source: Statistisches Bundesamt
Table 5: Area by variety (ha) in Rhineland-Palatinate 2012* 2013* 2014* 2015* 2016 2017 Grapes for White Wine Riesling, Weißer 16 471 16 883 17 043 17 184 17 333 17 469 Müller-Thurgau 8 156 7 985 7 944 7 993 7 970 7 795 Ruländer (Burgunder, Grauer) 2 837 3 050 3 302 3 525 3 676 3 840 Burgunder, Weißer 2 651 2 772 2 870 2 978 3 106 3 225 Silvaner, Grüner 3 412 3 342 3 291 3 229 3 159 3 067 Kerner 2 461 2 320 2 234 2 153 2 078 1 981 Chardonnay 1 222 1 323 1 373 1 439 1 533 1 612 Scheurebe 1 292 1 240 1 203 1 183 1 171 1 154 Sauvignon blanc 536 593 632 664 714 854 Bacchus 1 009 963 927 890 860 829 Traminer, Roter (Gewürztramin- 565 582 598 617 643 689 er) Grapes for Red Wine Dornfelder 7 559 7 496 7 392 7 252 7 141 7 057 Spätburgunder, Blauer (einschl. 4 071 4 118 4 170 4 189 4 220 4 232 Samtrot) Portugieser, Blauer 3 522 3 360 3 189 2 972 2 805 2 701 Regent 1 557 1 544 1 522 1 452 1 395 1 363 Saint Laurent 633 626 618 607 595 590 Merlot 459 482 490 500 511 525 Cabernet Sauvignon 294 307 311 312 319 326 Müllerrebe (Schwarzriesling) 256 253 248 244 238 233 Dunkelfelder 259 247 240 226 211 202 * Data about the area in 2012, 2013 and 2014 include the wine area of the Federal State Saarland and North-Rhine West- phalia and Saarland. The area of the two Federal States was 141 ha in 2015, 143 ha in 2016 and 144 ha in 2017. So it seems reasonable to reduce the data in 2012-2015 by about 145 ha. Source: Statistisches Bundesamt
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 12
Table 6: Number of wine growers in Rhineland-Palatinate (1,000) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 8.6 8.5 8.2 7.9 7.49 7.2 Of which PDO/PGI 8.6 8.5 8.2 7.9 7.49 7.2 Source: Statistisches Bundesamt
Data in Table 6 are based on annual representative surveys conducted every year. They cover wine growers with an area of at least 0.5 ha. In contrast to that, the basic survey on winegrowing covers all wine growers and their area. This survey is conducted every 6 years and the latest data are from 2015.
Table 7: Number of wine growers in Rhineland-Palatinate (1,000)* 2009 2015 Wine are from …. to ….. ha Number Wine Number Wine of wine area of wine area growers (ha) growers (ha) Total 13 666 64 233 12 352 64 123 Less than 0.10 913 55 842 49 0.1 - 0.5 3 011 827 2 720 772 0.5 -1.0 1 631 1 189 1 364 979 1.0 - 3.0 2 685 4 970 2 328 4 261 3.0 - 5.0 1 405 5 505 1 214 4 765 5.0 - 10.0 1 927 14 003 1 705 12 436 10.0 - 20.0 1 595 22 057 1 568 21 830 20.0 - 30.0 339 8 105 396 9 411 30.0 and more 160 7 522 212 9 594 Source: Statistisches Bundesamt
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 13
Table 8: Vineyard Area by gradient in Rhineland-Palatinate, 1998 till 2015
Year Total vineyard Vineyard area Vineyard area area gradient >30% gradient >30% ha ha % 1998 66 938 7 137 11% 1999 67 043 6 956 10% 2000 66 677 6 712 10% 2001 65 483 6 233 10% 2002 64 722 5 939 9% 2003 64 212 5 759 9% 2004 63 879 5 517 9% 2005 63 683 5 398 8% 2006 63 623 5 322 8% 2007 63 731 5 307 8% 2008 63 995 5 316 8% 2009 63 995 5 269 8% 2010 63 886 5 179 8% 2011 63 810 5 091 8% 2012 63 842 5 082 8% 2013 64 019 5 075 8% 2014 64 054 5 041 8% 2015 64 100 5 009 8% * WBR = Forest Valuation Directive (Waldbewertungsrichtlinie) Source: Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate
Table 9: industry structure in [MEMBER STATE or REGION] 2008 2014 2018 Wine producers (number) n.a. n.a. n.a. Total n.a. n.a. n.a. - Of which co-operatives n.a. n.a. n.a. Distilleries of wine products (number) n.a. n.a. n.a. Total n.a. n.a. n.a. - Of which co-operatives n.a. n.a. n.a. Data are not available in official statistics. That was confirmed by the representative of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Trier and the Federation of German Wine Cellars and Wine Trade.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 14
3. THEME 1: NATIONAL SUPPORT PROGRAMMES
3.1 Description of the implementation
3.1.1 Overview of the implementation
The entire German NSP is discussed and agreed amongst the BMEL on the national level and the representa- tives of the Federal States (Bundesländer). In Rhineland-Palatinate the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture is in charge of the program. It is the contact administration for the BMEL. Prior dis- cussion with BMEL the Ministry usually consults representatives of the wine sector. The measures of the National Support Programme implemented in the states of Germany are the following: Table 10: Summary: implementing state per measure Eligible measures State [Bundesland] National level, Promotion (Art. 45) Rhineland-Palatinate, Baden-Württemberg (from 2018 onward) Restructuring and conversion of vine- Rhineland-Palatinate, Baden-Württemberg, yards (Art. 46) Bavaria, Hessen, Saxony und Saxony-Anhalt Green harvesting (Art. 47) Not applied at all Mutual funds (Art. 48) Not applied at all Harvest insurance (Art. 49) Saxony Rhineland-Palatinate, Baden-Württemberg, Investments (Art. 50) Bavaria, Hessen, Saxony-Anhalt, Thuringia Innovation in the wine sector (Art. 51) Rhineland-Palatinate, Hessen By-product distillation (Art. 52) Not applied at all
The overall budget of the NSP is of 38 895 000 € per year, on the 2014-2018 programming period. The break- down of the budget has been the following, on the 2014-2017 period: Figure 2: Expenditure from 2013 to 2017 per measure (in M€)
40
35
30 Innovation 19 17 16 25 12 15 By-product distillation
20 Investments in enterprises
15 Green harvesting Restructuration and reconversion 10 17 18 19 19 15 Promotion 5
0 1 1 1 1 2 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: NSP financial monitoring data, provided by DG-AGRI
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 15
Figure 3: Distribution of the expenditures per measures from 2014 to 2017
Promotion 5% Investments in enterprises Restructuration and 46% reconversion 49%
Source: NSP financial monitoring data, provided by DG-AGRI
The following paragraphs provide the provisions set at national level regarding the implementation of the measures selected in the National Support Programme.
3.1.2 Promotion
Table 11: Implementation choices on the information in the Member States measure
Type of aid and 1. (a) Information in the Member States in accordance with Article 45(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 rate of support Consumer information on the internal market
professional organisations, producer organisations, associations of producer organisations, inter-branch organi- Beneficiaries sations and public bodies in the wine sector based in the Federal Republic of Germany
The eligibility criteria comply with the criteria laid down in Article 7 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2016/1149. There are no additional eligibility criteria. An application can only be accepted if all eligibility criteria are met. The aid recipients must have the resources necessary to ensure an effective implementation of the measure. The information must be based on the intrinsic qualities of the wine or its characteristics. The information may not be brand-oriented or encourage the consumption of wine on the grounds of its specific origins Application period 1 September of year n to midnight on 30 April of year n +1 must be matched.
Max. Weighting Max. assessment Criterion as per Article 8 of the Delegated Regulation points % The programme covers both the responsible consump- 2 25 50 tion of wine and the Union rules for protected desig- nations of origin (2 points for a programme which treats both aspects equally, 0 points for a programme which addresses Eligibility and only one aspect.) selection crite- Programme covers several Member States 2 30 60 ria (2 points for a programme which covers several EU markets, 1 point for a programme which covers one Member State.) Programme covers several administrative or wine- growing regions Yes 2 20 40 No 0 Programme covers several PDO or PGIs 5 25 125 (5 points for a programme which covers all designa- tions of origin, 3 points for a programme which covers several PDOs/PGIs, 1 point for a programme which covers one designation of origin.) Any additional criterion? TOTAL 11 100 % 275
National level: entire NSP period Implementation Rhineland-Palatinate: starting 2017 period Baden-Württemberg: starting 2018
Information National level: BLE - model contract regarding the Rhineland-Palatinate Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture management of
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 16
Type of aid and 1. (a) Information in the Member States in accordance with Article 45(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 rate of support Consumer information on the internal market the measure
Table 12: Implementation choices on the promotion on third-country measure
Type of aid and rate 1. (b) Promotion on third-country markets in accordance with Article 45(1)(b) Regulation (EU) No of support 1308/2013 at federal level (BLE) and Rhineland-Palatinate
Beneficiaries are professional organisations, wine producer organisations, associations of wine producer Beneficiaries organisations, temporary or permanent cooperatives of two or more producers, inter-branch organisations or bodies governed by public law specified by a Member State, as well as private companies.
The eligibility criteria comply with the criteria laid down in Article 10 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2016/1149. There are no additional eligibility criteria. An application can only be accepted if all eligibility criteria are met. Funding for measures is only available to enterprises in the wine sector (wineries, recognised producer groups and wine traders) based in Germany which market wines produced in Germany with designations of origin or geographical indications - including in conjunction with traditional terms - on third-country mar- kets, and collaborative promotional organisations and public bodies commissioned to market or promote wine. Proof of a coherent sales plan and marketing plan and the cost-effective, appropriate use of the funding has to be submitted for the third-country markets in question. Application period 1 September of year n to midnight on 30 April of year n +1 must be matched.
Criterion as per Article 11 of the Max. assess- Max. points Weighting % Delegated Regulation ment Eligibility and selec- New beneficiaries who have so far not tion criteria received support under Art. 45 of 2 45 90 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 (11 (1) a) Beneficiaries targeting a new Third Country or new third-country market for which have so far not received 2 35 70 support under Art. 45 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 (11 (1) b) Additional priority criterion SME 2 5 10 Cooperative of several producers 2 15 30 TOTAL 8 100 % 200
Implementation National level: entire NSP period period Rhineland-Palatinate: entire NSP period
Information regarding National level: BLE - model contract the management of the measure Rhineland-Palatinate Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture
BLE is a subordinate authority to BMEL. It executes the NSP promotion measures on national level (1.5 million Euro per year). BLE announces the measures on its webpage and in the ‘Bundesanzeiger’. In the past, an- nouncements were launched at end of August for the subsequent year. BLE receives the requests for funding, checks them, selects the beneficiaries and contracts them. BLE is in charge of the controls and payments. In addition to promotion measures administered by BLE, Rhineland-Palatinate additionally co-funds promotion measures: . 1. (a) Information in the Member States in accordance with Article 45(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 on consumer information on the internal market; . 1. (b) Promotion on third-country markets in accordance with Article 45(1)(b) Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. To be eligible for funding, the minimum eligible costs must exceed 5,000 €. All conditions can be found on the ministries webpage. Additional information is laid down in the Regional decree for the promotion measures in
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 17
Third Countries in the wine sector [Landesverordnung über die Unterstützung von Maßnahmen zur Ab- satzförderung auf Drittlandsmärkten im Weinsektor]. 5 According to the quantitative indicators published be BMEL (Nationales Stützungsprogramm der Bundesrepub- lik Deutschland, March 1st, 2016), the ministry aims at an increased value of German wine exports to Third Countries of (Ø 2014/2018) 389 million €. The exported quantity shall rise (Ø 2014/2018) by 1.24 million hl. 550 projects shall be funded under this measure on national level as well as in Rhineland-Palatinate and Hessen. The envisaged number of NSP projects in the context of responsible wine consumption and PGO/PGI infor- mation is (Σ 2014-2018) 80.
3.1.3 Restructuring and conversion
Table 13: Implementation choices on the restructuring and conversion of vineyards measure
Type of operation n°1
Type of aid and rate of In Rhineland-Palatinate restructuring and conversion of vineyards is funded by up to 50% of the support eligible costs. Several actions are supported with different maximum amounts.
All vineyard operators listed in the Community vineyard register of the respective Länder in accord- Beneficiaries ance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 436/2009 of 26 May 2009 are entitled to submit funding requests. Only vineyards located in the respective Bundesländer are eligible for funding.
The eligibility criteria comply with the criteria laid down in Article 13 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2016/1149. Additional eligibility criteria may be set by the Bundesländer. An application can only be accepted if all eligibility criteria are met. Rhineland-Palatinate will continue to be provided as a specific support measure. The conversion of vineyards to modern cultivation techniques pursuant to Article 46(3)(a), (b) and (d) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 taking climate Eligibility and selection change into account is eligible for funding. criteria In Hessen, restructuring measures planned for steep slopes will be given preferential selection over measures for flat or slightly sloping areas). If the resources available are not sufficient to cover payment of all applications, there may be a percentage reduction of all funding grants which are not selected as preferential. No selection procedure is applied in Baden-Württemberg, Rhineland- Palatinate, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt or Bavaria
Implementation period entire NSP period
The application procedure for restructuring actions is broken down in two phases. In the year before the grubbing-up of the vineyard shall take place or for vineyards for which a re-planting right already exists, an application must be launched. For this 1st phase the time slot is May, 15 till Juli 02, 2018 (in case the measure is planned to be carried out in the context of a land consolidation [to be ap- plied at chamber of agriculture in Bad Kreuznach [Flurbereinigung, Landwirtschaftskammer Rhein- land-Pfalz, Bad Kreuznach] the time slot ends June 15, 2018 already). The vineyards will be visited by agents of the ‘Prüfdienst Agrarförderung‘ that may give its approval for funding through NSP. For Information regarding the vineyards for which this general approval is given, an application in the 2nd phase can be launched. management of the meas- Time slot is January 2nd, till 30th (in combination with land consolidation April 30th. NSP support ure depends on the slope and the intensity of management and ranges from 6,000 € to 32,000 € per hectare. If second hand material is used the support is limited to 6,000 € per hectare. The minimum size is 10 Ar in low lands and 5 Ar in steep and very steep slopes, manual wall steep slopes and traverse terraces. The restructured vineyards are subject to cross compliance regulations for 3 years after payment of support. The Rhineland-Palatinate Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture and its subordinate authorities are responsible for the applications, the on the spot controls and the payments. If the measure is carried out in combination with land consolidation the chamber of agriculture gets involved too.
5 https://mwvlw.rlp.de/fileadmin/mwkel/Abteilung_9_Weinbau/Weinbau/Dokumente/Foerderung/Binnenmarkt/Binnenmarktfoerderun g_Antragsformular_2017.doc https://mwvlw.rlp.de/fileadmin/mwkel/Abteilung_9_Weinbau/Weinbau/Dokumente/Foerderung/Binnenmarkt/Absatzfoerderung_Bin nenmarkt_Ergaenzendes_Merkblatt.pdf Application forms for Third Country Promotion are available on request ([email protected]).
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 18
Table 11: Restructuring and conversion of vineyards projects eligible for funding and maximum support amounts in Rhineland-Palatinate (funding is limited to up to 50% of the eligible costs).
Action €/hectare
Action 31: Improved wire frames in combination with scion/rootstock combination better adjusted to new climate conditions in low lands. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen Drahtrahmenanlage3) in Flachlagen mit 10,000 Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen]
Action 32: Improved wire frames in combination with scion/rootstock combination better adjusted to new climate conditions in slopes. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen Drahtrahmenanlage3) in Steillagen1) mit 19,000 Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen]
Action 34: Improved vineyard management through construction of a modern vineyard in combination with scion/rootstock combination better adjusted to new climate conditions in steep slopes and terraces. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung 21,000 durch Erstellung einer modernen Weinberganlage in Steilst- und Terrassenlagen1)2) mit Anpassung der Edelreis- /Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen]
Action 33: Improved vineyard management through construction of a modern, extensified vineyard in combination with scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung 9,000 einer modernen, extensiv zu bewirtschaftenden Rebanlage4) mit Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen]
Action 41: Improved vineyard management through construction of a modern wire frame vineyard in low lands in combina- tion with scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions after land consolidation. [Verbesserung der 10,000 Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen Drahtrahmenanlage3) in Flachlagen mit Anpassung der Edelreis- /Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen nach durchgeführter Bodenordnung]
Action 42: Improved vineyard management through construction of a modern wire frame vineyard in slopes in combination with scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions after land consolidation. [Verbesserung der 19,000 Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen Drahtrahmenanlage3) in Steillagen1) mit Anpassung der Edelreis- /Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen nach durchgeführter Bodenordnung]
Action 44: Improved vineyard management through construction of a modern wire frame vineyard in steep slopes and ter- races in combination with scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions after land consolidation. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen Weinberganlage in Steilst- und Terrassenlagen1)2) mit 21,000 Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen nach durchgeführter Boden- ordnung
Action 43: Improved vineyard management through construction of a modern, extensified vineyard in combination with scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions after land consolidation. [Verbesserung der Bewirt- 9,000 schaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen, extensiv zu bewirtschaftenden Rebanlage4) mit Anpassung der Edelreis- /Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen nach durchgeführter Bodenordnung]
Action 51: Construction of vineyard traverse terraces with sustainable walls where work is carried out manually in combina- tion with scion/rootstock combination better adjusted to new climate conditions without land consolidation. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer Rebanlage mit langfristig funktionsfähigen Mauern in terrassierten Handarbeitsla- 32,000 gen (Mauersteillagen) mit Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen außerhalb der Flurbereinigung
Action 52: Adjustment of scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions in combination with using existing support structures. [Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedingungen 6,000 bei Weiternutzung der Unterstützungsvorrichtung5)]
Action 62: Adjustment of scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions in combination with using existing support structures after land consolidation. [Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändern- 6,000 den Klimabedingungen bei Weiternutzung der Unterstützungsvorrichtung5) nach durchgeführter Bodenordnung]
Action 53: Improved vineyard management through a change from slope management towards traverse terraces or construc- tion of travers terraces in combination with a modern wire frame vineyard in combination with scion/rootstock combinations better adjusted to new climate conditions outside the support within land consolidation. [Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung 24,000 durch Umstellung von Steillagenbewirtschaftung auf Querterrassierung bzw. Anlegen von Querterrassen mit Erstellung einer modernen Drahtrahmenanlage und Anpassung der Edelreis-/Unterlagenkombination an die sich verändernden Klimabedin- gungen außerhalb der Förderung in der Flurbereinigung]
1) Relevant is the actual gradient of the vineyard measures after finalisation of the measure. [Es gilt die vor Ort gemessene tatsächliche Neigung der Bewirtschaftungseinheit nach Fertigstellung der Maßnahme. 2) In very steep slopes it is eligible to choose - apart from wire frames. ‘Umkehr-, Vertiko- und Trierer-Rad-Erziehung‘ [Neben der Drahtrahmenerziehung können in Steilstlagen auch Umkehr-, Vertiko- und Trierer-Rad-Erziehung gewählt werden.] 3) A modern wire frame spurred cordon system [Spaliererziehung] shows at least 3 wires (1 bend wire and 2 stitching wires). Biegedraht und 2 Heftdrähte). [Eine moderne Drahtrahmenanlage (Spaliererziehung) besitzt mindestens 3 Drähte (1 Biegedraht und 2 Heftdrähte). 4) Single wire trellising education, vineyards with alternating row spaces, average rowspace 2.40 m, maximum 3.00 m are eligible for fund- ing. [Eindrahterziehung, Minimalschnittsysteme, Rebanlagen mit alternierender Zeilenbreite, durchschnittliche Zeilenbreite mindestens 2,40 m, aber höchstens 3,00 m (förderfähige Zeilenbreite)].
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 19
5) The continued used support device encompasses the leaving of old wire frame educations as well as the use of second hand material. [Die Weiternutzung der Unterstützungsvorrichtung umfasst sowohl das Belassen der alten Drahtrahmenanlage als auch die Nutzung von gebrauchtem Material.]
3.1.4 Harvest insurance
Table 14: Implementation choices on the harvest insurance measure
Harvest insurance has only been implemented in Saxony. The maximum amount insured can be 30,000 € per hectare. Up to 50% of the premium are support- Type of aid and rate of ed. In case of insufficient funds a single percentage for acceptance can be applied. support The quantitative targets published by BMEL (Nationales Stützungsprogramm der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, March 1st, 2016) are for the time span (Σ 2014-2018) 25 supported contracts insuring 1,000 hectares.
Beneficiaries are natural and legal persons under private and public law which operate vineyards Beneficiaries within Saxony’s designated wine-growing region.
All insurance contracts which provide for financial compensation for damage caused by frost, hail, ice, rain and/or drought are eligible for funding. Applications for funding of harvest insurance must be lodged with the competent office by 15 May of a given year. All insurance contracts which pro- Eligibility and selection vide for financial compensation for damage caused by frost, hail, ice, rain and/or drought can be put criteria forward for selection. There is no legal entitlement for support for harvest insurance. If the total of eligible applications is higher than the financial means available for the year, a single coefficient will be fixed for the sup- port.
Implementation period Only in Saxony: Entire NSP period
Information regarding the management of the meas- Saxony, https://www.smul.sachsen.de/lfulg/13420.htm ure
3.1.5 Investments in enterprises
Table 15: Implementation choices on the investments in enterprises measure
In Rhineland-Palatinate two levels of investments are supported. Small investments for eligible costs between 10,000 € and 50,000 € and a maximum of 250,000 € between 2014 and 2018 per enter- Type of aid and rate of prise and large investments for eligible costs between 30,000 € and 3 million €. support Support is up to 25% of eligible costs, for prospering estates 15%. Projects aiming at an improve- ment of quality can obtain additional 5%.
Beneficiaries Wineries as well as wine producer organisations and other stakeholders in the wine sector.
Eligibility and selection Annex 1 Table 3 criteria
Implementation period Annex 1 Table 3
Information regarding the management of the meas- Annex 1 Table 3 ure
Investments in enterprises measure In 2015/2016 winegrowers and wineries were supported through 83 projects categorised as ‘big investments’ with a total amount of 6,863,541.00 € and 220 projects, projects categorised as ‘small investments’ with a total amount of 1,271,135.00 €. In the same time span, other actors in the wine sector like wine producer organisa- tions were supported through 37 projects categorised as ‘big investments’ with a total amount of 3,689,834.00 € and 20 projects categorised as ‘small investments’ with a total amount of 184,935.00 €. Investments targeting an improvement in quality were supported with additional 5% of eligible costs. As im- provement in quality are considered: Sorting of grapes (including cost of ground preparation, roofing, sewerage system), temperature control, pressing and, since recently bottling machines for bottles with screw cap and CO2 superimposition, hydrophobic membranes for gas and alcohol management. See Annex 1 Table 3: ‘DE- SCRIPTION OF THE NSP MEASURE: INVESTMENTS IN ENTERPRISES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 50 OF REGU- LATION (EU) NO 1308/2013 IN RHINELAND-PALATINATE’ for details. Increased competitiveness
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 20
The quantitative targets for investments in enterprises measures published by BMEL (Nationales Stützungspro- gramm der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, March 1st, 2016) are in the Federal States concerned (BY, HE, RP) for the time span (Σ 2014-2018) 2.250 wine estates, 3,650 projects, 10,760 hectares of vineyards amongst which 1,180 hectares of steep slopes (>30 %). In addition investments in enterprises measures shall lead on national level to an average size of wine estates of 3 hectares, an increasing share of Prädikatswein to more than 50 % and an increase in production value of 1.2 Mrd. € Under investments in enterprises measure, mergers, co-operations and wine estate enlargement are support- ed only in Baden-Württemberg. The envisaged number of supported wine estates for the time span 2014-2018 is 200. The targeted average size of wine cooperatives is 350 ha and that of wine estates 8 ha. Under investments in enterprises measure, improvement of wine quality is supported in Baden-Württemberg, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia. As quantitative targets 210 supported wine estates (Σ 2014-2018) are envisaged. The number of projects in the cellar and wine-making industry (Σ 2014-2018) is targeted at 240 and the number of supported wooden wine barrels (Σ 2014-2018) at 120. The BMEL supplies the Commission with information showing in detail the demarcation between the NSP funded investment measures and the funding provided under the EAFRD Rural Development Programme pur- suant to Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 from Rhineland-Palatinate, Baden-Württemberg, Hessen, Bavaria, Sax- ony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia. Annex 1 Table 4 shows an overview of how demarcation shall be guaranteed in Rhineland-Palatinate.
Table 16: Budget shares, selection dates and application deadlines for investment actions 2017/2018 in Rhineland-Palatinate Budget by Date of selec- deadline for date tion proce- application dure 40% 20. Dec 17 27. Oct 17 20% 01. Feb 18 01. Dec 18 10% 03. Apr 18 01. Feb 18 10% 01. Jun 18 03. Apr 18 10% 01. Aug 18 01. Jun 18 10% 01. Oct 18 01. Aug 18 40% 03. Dec 18 01. Oct 18
3.1.6 Innovation
Table 17: Implementation choices on the innovation in the wine sector measure
Type of aid and rate of Subsidy, up to 40 % of the eligible investment volume. support
Beneficiaries are producers of the products listed in Part II of Annex VII to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, as well as wine producer organisations and temporary or permanent associations of two or more producers. Beneficiaries Research and development bodies can participate in the project and receive support from the beneficiaries. Industry associations may be involved in the project. The eligibility criteria are the criteria laid down in Article 39 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1149. There are no further additional criteria for funding. An application can only be accepted if all criteria are fulfilled. An expert assessment of the innovative element of the project must be provided by the granting authority before funding can be approved. The concept of ‘innovation’ in this context is a very broad one, whereby the project must involve either a new type of product or a new type of work or production method or service. The promo- tion of innovation also includes the required interdisciplinary transfer of knowledge along the value chain. The assessment can be used as the basis for prioritising applications received. Eligibility and selection Applications can be submitted all year round. criteria Owing to the low uptake of the measure to date, all applications which meet the eligibility criteria are likely to be accepted. However, in order to prioritise applications and give funding preference to the measures with the highest scores, the following priority criteria are applied: Criterion Points
Energy saving 20
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 21
Global energy efficiency 20 Environmentally sustainable processes 20 Knowledge transfer 10 Involvement of research and development agencies 10
Development of new processes and technologies 15
Introduction of new quality products 5
3.1.7 Selection procedure All applications which meet the above conditions can be put forward for selection. The selection is made in descending order depending on the score achieved by the applications. Implementation period Entire NSP period
For Rhineland-Palatinate, www.agrarinfo.rlp.de. Following assessment at six selection dates1), the approvals are Information regarding issued. the management of the measure In Hessen, the up-to-date aid guidelines and application forms are available from the internet portal www.rp- darmstadt.hessen.de/Umwelt/Landwirtschaftfischereiweinbau/weinbau
The quantitative targets for the measure innovation in the wine sector (Development of innovative new prod- ucts, procedures and technology for improved marketability and competitiveness of wine products) for Rhine- land-Palatinate and Hessen as published by BMEL (Nationales Stützungsprogramm der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, March 1st, 2016) is 18 supported projects(Σ 2014-2018).
3.2 Effects on the NSP at the level of growers
3.2.1 Information on the implementation of the restructuring and conversion meas- ure
On average, in the last years, around 95% of NSP vineyard restructuring was supported in low lands and around 5% (~ 60 - 80 ha, p.a.) in slopes and steep slopes. As vineyards in slopes and steep slopes have a share of 8% on Rhineland-Palatinate vineyards, they were underrepresented in this measure. In 2017 the share of supported vineyards in slopes and steep slopes was even lower. 8.3% of all 2017 applications, 4.1% of the acreage and only 3.4% of the approved acreage were categorised as slopes, steep slopes, extensive or walled terraces. In terms of funds, however, slopes, steep slopes, extensive or walled terraces achieved a share of 6.3%. This is still below their share on total Rhineland-Palatinate vineyard acreage (see table 15). Table 18: Application and approved applications for NSP Restructuring Rhineland-Palatinate 2017 by gradi- ent Action Applied for 01/2017 approved 09/2017 No.1) No. of No. of No. Measure Applications hectare hectare Euro vineyards vineyards 31 low lands 1.613 4.862 905 3.961 731 7.310.792 41 107 342 116 286 96 958.196 1.720 5.204 1.021 4.247 827 8.268.988 32 steep slopes 133 303 38 232 26 491.902 42 19 34 13 24 10 191.993 152 337 51 256 36 683.895 34 very steep slopes 23 46 4,5 24 2,4 51.055 44 5 6 1,3 0 0 0 28 52 5,8 24 2,4 51.055 33 extensive 15 27 4,5 24 3,7 33.183 43 1 3 0,4 0 0 0 16 30 4,9 24 3,7 33.183 51 walled terraces 9 22 1,3 19 1,1 34.144 52 used 231 479 90 478 90 538.150 62 14 25 9 25 9 53.325 245 504 99 503 99 591.475 Total 2.170 6.149 1.183 5.073 969 9.662.740
Source: Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 22
Table 19: Restructured and converted area per grape variety 2017 Variety Square meters Findling 1.299 Heroldrebe 1.511 Roter Muskateller 1.810 Malvasier 2.300 Acolon 2.611 Cabernet Cubin 3.083 Arnsburger 3.139 Johanniter 4.199 Pinotin 4.581 Schwarzriesling 4.745 Lemberger 4.923 Reichensteiner 4.957 Cabernet Cortis 5.415 Kanzler 5.595 Siegerrebe 5.620 Helios 5.757 Phoenix 5.908 Regent 5.946 Dunkelfelder 7.891 St. Laurent 8.308 Hibernal 8.425 Schönenburger 8.665 Würzer 9.014 Lemberger 9.661 Blauer Silvaner 10.549 Syrah 11.550 Grüner Veltliner 11.652 Muscaris 12.184 Rieslaner 15.077 Faberrebe 15.773 Souvignier Gris 15.809 Cabernet Dorsa 16.242 Cabernet Mitos 18.595 Cabernet Franc 18.606 Ortega 21.282 Solaris 25.145 Auxerrois 27.436 Morio-Muskat 34.968 Elbling 35.516 Muskateller 40.221 Anbaueignungsversuch rot 41.674 Huxelrebe 55.399 Cabernet Blanc 61.616 Cabernet Sauvignon 72.728 Gelber Muskateller 104.775 Bacchus 114.965 Merlot 115.076 Anbaueignungsversuch weiß 122.834 Portugieser 135.211 Kerner 204.058 Dornfelder 276.169 Scheurebe 299.463 Gewürztraminer 343.241 Spätburgunder 365.410 Silvaner 414.255 Weißburgunder 974.539 Müller-Thurgau 984.120 Sauvignon Blanc 1.081.205 Grauburgunder 1.195.413 Chardonnay 2.065.406 Riesling 3.217.093 Source: Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture
As the entire wine area in Rhineland Palatinate is eligible for PDO wine, most restructured and converted areas are likely to be eligible to the production of PDO/PGI too. We have, however, no detailed information.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 23
The most frequent problems encountered in the field of phase 1 were, according to a presentation of the Rhineland-Palatinate Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture: - 100% of all data laid down by the applicants in their applications are checked by the administration against WBK information. - 5% of applications are checked ex-ante - Disregarding deadlines for application - ALK instead of ALB - Necessity of meaningful drawings The most frequent problems encountered in the field of the announcements of completion were, according to a presentation of the Rhineland-Palatinate Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture: - Wrong announcement of completion - Planting before the approval of funding - False announcement of completion - Recycled / used material and pseudo-used material - NAR und GRU, GRW, management unit - Vineyard not part of application for phase 1 - Non meaningful drawing although access to WIP
3.2.2 Information from the literature
According to the interview partners, various issues of DWS and DDW the following can be stated: . The production potential in terms of quantity and quality In Germany the NSP induced change production potential is not measurable. Too many parameters impact on the production potential. In addition maximum yield for PDO and PGI wines are restricted. Some wine growers changed to lower yielding varieties, expected to yield higher quality, . The changes in the management practices related to the implementation of the NSP measures. All that is known, reduction of labour input plaid a big role. . The competitiveness of wine growers It is assumed that NSP’s impact on the competitiveness of wine growers is positive but no reliable infor- mation was found so far. The wine growers’ income is influenced by too many parameters. In addition to not just undertake an ineligible ‘before after comparison’ one would need to build a model that allows for a ‘with and without’ comparison. . The effect on the income of wine growers It is assumed that NSP’s impact on the income of wine growers is positive but no reliable information was found so far. The wine growers’ income is influenced by too many parameters. In addition to not just un- dertake an ineligible ‘before after comparison’ one would need to build a model that allows for a ‘with and without’ comparison. Own analysis based inter alia on: Manual Financial-and-Economic-Analysis of Development Projects, European Commission 1997, Page 30 ff.
3.2.3 Synthesis of the interviews
IQ 1.1 To what extent did the restructuring and conversion operations supported by the NSP impact the production potential of vineyards, in terms of quantity? In terms of quality? at the level of the region / of the Member State? Synthesis of the opinions: At national level: The aim of the NSP was to improve the management of the vineyards and not to increase production potential. For some measures the rate of support is increased if it is targeted at quality enhance- ment. Opportunities of yield improvement would be limited anyway because of restrictions regarding the max- imum yields. In the Mosel region quantity thresholds are fixed as follows: - 200 hl/ha for base wine (Grundwein) - 150 hl/ha for German Wine and Landwein - 125 hl/ha for Prädikatswein and Qualitätswein.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 24
(Chamber of Agriculture Rhineland-Palatinate, Bad Kreuznach: Information Grundsätze für die Durchführung der Hektarertragsregelung - Erzeugerstufe in Rheinland-Pfalz, 02/2012) However, the interviewed wine growers stated yields well below the restriction thresholds so that they could increase production within the boundaries of the thresholds. For other vine growing regions and production thresholds differ, but still there is room for producers to increase production. The quality has improved along with change in grape varieties and change in management practice. As a rule, these varieties had a lower yield potential than the replaced ones. Greater market orientation had already started in the 90s, and the NSP has alleviated the adjustment to market requirements considerably. This espe- cially holds for wine grown on steep slopes. Beneficiaries confirmed the impact in terms of quality and highlighted the important outputs in terms of mod- ernization/mechanization of the vineyards after ten years of implementation. We can note in particular: - Optimized vine rows enabling 2-row applications, which save time, costs and energy. - Appropriate Riesling clones grafted with appropriate rootstocks that “support the quality philosophy” and are better suited to climate change induced extended dry periods. - Land-consolidation, restructuring of abandoned micro parcels on high slopes. (We know however that what is said to be lower depends on the reference period. In the beginning wine was grown in a 3-row system. Then quantity restrictions were imposed and the cheapest way to comply was grub- bing-up one row in-between two others. This left a row space of 3 meters inappropriate for mechanisation. With NSP the 2-row applications with ~2 m row space were introduced, allowing for more plants per hectare than before but less than in the beginning). Moreover, an increase in quality and as a consequence the adjustment of production to market requirements was achieved by (self-)restrictions on yields. Sorting out low quality grapes before or latest during harvest im- proves quality but lowers must volume. Still, it is not possible to clearly distinguish which part of the develop- ment in the wine sectors is based on the NSP and which part is based on market forces. This can also be proven by statistics showing a decrease of vineyards planted with Müller-Thurgau, a high yield- ing variety. In Rhineland-Palatinate the acreage covered in with this variety decreased from 8,156 hectare in 2012 to 7,795 in 2017. The impact share of NSP on this development can, however, not be isolated, as the development started already before NSP. Detailed answers: . National/regional authorities: The aim of the NSP was to improve the management of the vineyards and not to increase production po- tential. Germany restricted the growth of the wine area to 0.3% per year so that a considerable increase of wine area could not happen. Opportunities of yield improvement are restricted, too, because there are re- strictions regarding the maximum yield for PDO and PGI wine. These limits are relevant as nearly all wine in Germany is PDO or - to a much smaller extend - PGI wine. The quality has improved by a change of grape varieties. As a rule these varieties had a lower yield potential than the replaced ones. Moreover an in- crease in quality and as a consequence the adjustment of production to market requirements was achieved by restrictions to yield. Still it cannot be exactly separated which part of the development in the wine sectors is based on the NSP and which part on market forces. Increasing market orientation already started in the 90s and the NSP has alleviated the adjustment to market requirements considerably. This especially holds for wine growing in steep slopes. . Wine cellars and wine traders: Production potential could not rise because of the restriction regarding additional vineyards. Co-operative Quality has grown significantly while the quantity per hectare remained. However, the cooperatives capac- ity for wine processing and storage has moved in line with the cultivated vineyards from 90 ha in year 2000 to now 130 ha. The NSP supported investment in processing technology improved significantly the quality. Without NSP support these high investments and achievements would not have been possible. . Regional Representatives WineSe NSP is very helpful for the wine growers and wine producers. The focus was more on an increase in quality than an increase in the production potential. . Beneficiaries (growers, producers) : NSP (restructuring and investments) is regarded as very positive and as appropriate for his extremely steep and steep (30-68%) mainly terraces with Riesling vineyards. The initial EU support received was to pioneer restructuring of abandoned and micro parcels of extremely steep vineyards (most probably amongst the steepest vineyards of Europe). The EU support had significant impact both on quantity of har-
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 25
vest as well as quality of wines. Optimized vine rows, the use of appropriate Riesling clones grafted with appropriate rootstocks, equal age of vines and easier handling improved quantity and quality, where he now harvests the benefits after ten years. The winery grew from 4 ha (1996) to today 10.5 ha with three permanent employees. NSP support 2015 was not for his extremely steep vineyards but the restructuring of a steep vineyard near to those. He intends to further extend the cultivated land by a forthcoming land- consolidation process (re-parcelling of small parcels to larger ones) which is supposed to start on the other side of the Mosel River, opposite of his extremely steep vineyards. .
IQ 1.2 Did the NSP measures intend to support changes in the vineyard management practices or foster spe- cific practices (i.e. organic agriculture, low mechanised systems, etc.)? . National authorities: Organic practices were not specifically funded. One focus of the NSP in RP is a specific promotion of steep slope vineyards. With a combination of complementary measures financed by the NSP and the EULLA pro- gram the dramatic decrease of steep slope vineyards in the Mosel could be stopped. The NSP funds measures that allow for a higher level of mechanisation and to reduce costs.
IQ 1.3 To what extent did the NSP resulted in changes in the management practices of vineyards? Which practices were introduced/abandoned? Did those changes have an impact at national or regional level (e.g. acting as role model)? The restructuring program intends to design the vineyards in a way that helps to mechanise wine production. Vineyards are more adjusted to employing machines, in particular vineyards on steep and very steep slopes. In addition, a more uniform standard of vineyards makes it easier to use machines in cooperation. . National/regional authorities: The restructuring program intends to design the vineyards in a way that helps to mechanise wine produc- tion. Vineyards are more adjusted to employing machines. In addition, a more uniform standard of vine- yards makes it easier to use machines in cooperation. In this respects the NSP helped to establish a basis for the reduction of the workload and as a consequence for the reduction of costs. . National/local representatives and producers organisations Wine cellars and wine traders: The NSP alleviated the implementation of technical progress by restructuring the wine area and thus had an influence on the vineyard management. Co-operative The vineyard management itself is not a concern for the cooperative but handled by the members. In case of vineyard restructuring through NSP, they apply themselves as owners and the cooperative is not in- volved. Due to climate change harvesting often happens during relatively warm weather. This was not the case decades ago. Due to the more efficient work flow of the new - NSP supported - wine press house, grapes are accepted from 7 a.m. and the mechanized harvest can take place during very early morning (from 3 a.m.) when grapes are cold. This avoids aroma losses and reduces the negative effects of climate change. . Regional Representatives WineSe NSP enabled the introduction of wire frame educations, replacing the post-type vine ones is to be empha-
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 26
sised. NSP contributions paved the way for (further) mechanisation especially in steep and very steep slopes. The use of SMS or RMS would not have been or at least to a much lesser extent been possible without NSP. In addition adoption to climate change has to be mentioned. With NSP contribution new va- rieties could be introduced quicker as would have been the case without NSP. The conversion of steep slopes in modern vineyards in terraced locations with adaptation of the scion/rootstock combination needs to be mentioned in the context of adoption to the changing climate conditions as well as increasing efficiency. With NSP the improving of manually worked areas (Handlese) was also enabled. One should have in mind that it is just these areas that impact extremely positively on biodiversity. . Beneficiaries (growers, producers) : EU support has changed the vineyard management due to larger size of parcels, allowing investing in a monorack (one-rail transport system for very steep vineyards). Due to the monorack, the transport of goods up and down the terraces became much less difficult (previously only by back-pack walking up and down). His piloting for the re-cultivation of abandoned wine terraces has motivated a good number of oth- er Riesling wine growers to do alike. As a result the cultivated vineyard terraces have grown from 4 ha to recently 12 ha producing one of the best Riesling wines in the world. In addition, the touristic value of the extremely steep vineyard area has tremendously grown (inter alia by additional EU support under EAFRD/ELER, but also due to national as well as international print media and online visibility). Thus multi- plying the number of tourist and wine customers coming to the region. Therefore the re-cultivation of the extremely steep vineyard area had significant positive impact for the whole Mosel area and served as a “beacon”, supported rural development and being today used for public relation work of the entire Mosel region. .
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 27
which has become a costly and challenging problem for wine growers in the Mosel valley and
IQ.1.4 Have the NSP measures impacted the costs of production? The stakeholders attested a positive effect of the measure on the cost of production, related to a reduction of the workload and of the labour fees. However its extent cannot be quantified. The detailed answers are the following: . National/regional authorities: Yes, it reduced costs but it is not known exactly to what extent. The program aimed especially to reduce the workload and by that labour costs. . National/local representatives and producers organisations Wine cellars and wine traders: Yes Cooperative Yes. Reduced production costs due to a more efficient work flow at harvest by using parallel 4 pneumatic wine presses in the 2014 completed wine press house; lower processing and production costs per bottle; improved quality through temperature controlled fermentation; more efficient bottling and packaging. NSP supported investment had significant impact by reducing production costs and improving quality. Regional Representatives WineSe NSP helped to reduce production costs especially by enabling mechanisation. . Beneficiaries (growers, producers) : Yes. Has clearly reduced production costs and stimulated others to make similar investments.
IQ.1.5 Have the NSP measures resulted in a better adaptation of the vineyards structure and management practices to market demands? E.g. in terms of variety, quality While the first objective of the measure was the restructuring for the mechanisation of the vineyard manage- ment, the local authorities and the representatives of the sectors confirmed that a second effect of the pro- gramme has been the change to more market oriented varieties. The beneficiaries confirmed this statement: the programmes helped to reduce the proportion of quantity ori- ented varieties and early maturing varieties, for which the market is very competitive, and they planted varie- ties more oriented toward the actual high-quality market of local wines. Besides, the chosen varieties should be more resilient to climatic events. Detailed answers: . National/regional authorities: Market pressure had forced wine growers to more market orientation already before the NSP entered into force. However, in the context of the restructuring measures it was easier for them to change to more market oriented varieties and to make use of technical progress regarding mechanisation. Moreover, the NSP supported investments in processing companies as well as in wine houses and salesrooms. By that it supported the adaption of the sector to market requirements. This holds true for direct marketing as well as for indirect marketing. Still it cannot be exactly separated which part of the development in the wine sectors is based on the NSP and which part on market forces. . National/local representatives and producers organisations Wine cellars and wine traders: Yes, especially regarding grape varieties. Cooperative Yes, indirectly. The improved cash flow of the cooperative allowed to offer members a 6,000 € contribu- tion per hectare to grubbing up varieties with low consumer demand/price and plant varieties like Pinot
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 28
Gris/Blanc (=Weiß-/Grauburgunder) which are in demand by German consumers. Regional Representatives WineSe NSP enabled the introduction of new varieties that are better adapted to changing climate conditions. Also new varieties that were in demand but could not be grown in Rhineland-Palatinate decades ago could be planted. . Beneficiaries (growers, producers) : Yes, the consumer market for this type of wine can only be the high-end quality and price level at na- tional and international level - able to pay the labour intensive high production costs. Previously this high- end market was not really addressed. Without the joint support of DLR6, public land management, sup- ported by NSP this result would not have been possible. .
IQ 1.6 Have the NSP measures had an impact on the income of wine growers? . National/regional authorities: Yes, but no data are collected so far. Regarding the development of the sector and the measures that have been supported by the NSP, it can be assumed that the NSP made a relevant contribution. However, the effects of the NSP have been amplified by the increasing market orientation during the last decades; or the other way round: The effects of an increasing market orientation have been amplified by the NSP . National/local representatives and producers organisations Wine cellars and wine traders: Yes, by reducing production costs and by higher prices for grapes and wine that is adjusted to market re- quirements. Cooperative Yes. Distribution of cooperative income to members went up from around 9,000 € per hectare in 2012 to 14,000 to 18,000 € per hectare in 2017, which is a growth of 64% to 100%. This allows the members of the cooperative to pay cultivation, harvesting and other costs and have a decent living. The growth stimulates cooperative members investing and restructuring vineyards, to cultivate with quality orientation and to in- terest the young generation and their own children to continue as wine grower. Regional Representatives WineSe We assume that this is the case but have no precise data. The main impact is likely to have occurred through cost reduction. . Beneficiaries (growers) : Significant positive impact on income not only on his family business but also for the region and other wine growers of the area.
6 DLR (Dienstleistungszentrum Ländlicher Raum Rheinland-Pfalz) is a service agency of the Federal State Rhineland- Palatinate.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 29
3.2.4 Conclusion of the expert
. Impact of the NSP on the production potential in terms of quantity and quality The evaluation of the impact of the NSP depends on the reference system. Compared to the past, the impact is low as the growth of the production area is restricted to 0.3% per year in Germany. Comparing the development of the production potential that had been possible without a restriction and with- out the NSP the following points are relevant: - In low lands the wine growing area might have increased and by that the overall production. - In steep and very steep slope areas wine growing decreased considerably in the past. (see table Vine- yard Area by gradient in Rhineland-Palatinate, 1998 till 2015). So, in spite of the NSP, there is unused area. But without the NSP the decrease had been higher. Accordingly the NSP had an impact on the production quantity as it prevented the increase of growing area in low lands and a greater decrease of steep slope wine growing. Regarding quality the NSP helped wine growers to adapt to market conditions. Without the support restructur- ing measures might have been conducted later or not at all. It is not possible to isolate the effect of the NSP from the impact of market pressure. . Impact of the NSP on the vineyard management practices The NSP had a great impact on vineyard management. Subsidies for restructuring considerably reduced work- load by designing the vineyards to the needs of machines. In line with mechanisation production costs de- creased. It seems that this especially holds for steep slope vineyards as investments are high and overall profit- ability is low. Without the support of the NSP the investments might have not been made and production might have been given up. The reduction of workload is not only relevant for costs. It becomes more and more difficult to hire skilled workers. . Impact of the NSP on the competitiveness of wine growers Wine marketing takes place in a value chain and therefore competitiveness results from all steps of the value chain. The NSP has and had influence on the speed that wine growers can adjust to market requirements. It has contributed to implement measures that led to an increasing quality and market orientation. In addition it helped to reduce costs by preparing vineyards for a higher level of mechanisation and to facilitate investments in modern processing technology and marketing. In these respects - quality and costs and marketing - the NSP had an impact on competitiveness of the sector in the region. This is relevant in a very competitive market that is price sensitive even in quality oriented segments. It is the bundle of measures on the wine grower and on the processing level that increased competitiveness. In spite of all the changes regarding competitiveness, steep slope wine growing is furthermore dependent on subsidies. It is supposed that just a few famous wine locations would be able to come along without subsidies.
3.3 Effects of the NSP at the level of producers and products
3.3.1 Effects on the competitiveness key factors of wine producers
3.3.1.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 1.7 Could you please explain what are the current issues encountered by the wine sector in your Member States /region and describe the strategies implemented by the wine producers to address them? . National authorities: - Competitive pressure stemming from a growing internationalisation of the wine market. There are not any barriers for wine imports from MS (there is free market access anyway) and imports from Third Countries do not face relevant trade barriers. In addition, the internationalisation of sourcing of retail- ers improve the chances of suppliers outside the EU. The sector addresses increasing competition with quality improvement, cost reduction and a better marketing. In this context organic wine is a strategy for some wine growers. - Plant protection. Due to growing standards for plant protection products and their application, it be- comes increasingly difficult to cope with plant diseases and plant pests. The sector tries to react by breeding and using resistant varieties. - Climate change. Climate change affects the environment for wine plants and for diseases and pests. Frost damages play an increasing role. Moreover, climate change has an impact on yield potential. The
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 30
sector reacts by adjusting varieties to the changing conditions or by irrigation systems that can be used in case of low temperature to protect plants. - Increasing standards in fertilisation and ground water protection. Wine growers have to adjust to the standards and they do. - Societal expectations regarding environmental sound production. Wine growers try to adjust in order not to be blamed and not to downgrade the image of their products. - Alcohol policy. In the future alcohol policy may more and more restrict promotion of wine and affect the image of wine in a negative way. No strategy was mentioned against this possible development. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Wine cellars and wine traders: Currently competition increases amongst domestic suppliers as well as be- tween domestic and international suppliers on the German market. The same holds for export markets. Competition increases because of demographical change that goes hand in hand with a change of drinking habits. Given that an increase in sales volumes on the saturated German market is very difficult to achieve, export markets are the opportunity to raise sales volumes. The development of export volumes demon- strates the weakness of the German wine sector in export markets. The Brexit will worsen the situation. Still the German wine sector has not succeeded by now to develop a uniform strategy for addressing ex- port markets. The key reasons for that is competition among the 13 wine growing areas as well as compe- tition within the wine growing areas: The winegrowing regions are interested in promoting their own products and not the products of other areas. The regions well-known on export markets (Mosel and areas that contain “Rhine” in their name) prefer a differentiated promotion strategy emphasising the wine areas while other regions favour more general strategies for German wine. Some, especially small wine growers, focus on the domestic markets and on direct marketing while others focus on distribution via retailers or on export markets. But there are negotiations about a uniform strategy and the necessity therefore has been recognised. Cooperative Challenges are (1) Growing market share and purchasing power of supermarkets and discounters who sell most wine in Germany (the cooperative refuses them as customers); (2) imported wines have large market share in Germany and are often low-cost wines produced at low standards; (3) consumer behaviour is changing: instead of constantly buying at their wine estate of confidence, the younger generation is seen as more flexible and volatile; (4) online trade becomes a challenge and a competitor. A chance is seen in consumers who do not only buy but want to taste, discover, feel and experience. Regional Representatives WineSe Climate change is already an issue and it will gain in relevance. Exploiting its chances and minimising its negative impacts will be the challenge for wine growers and wine makers. Another issue is the increasing bureaucracy. Support is necessary for almost all wine growers and wine makers in Rhineland-Palatinate. To apply for these funds is already challenging and to comply with all regulatory requirements during imple- mentation - sometimes differing amongst sources of funding - is another challenge. Additional bureaucrat- ic burdens are feared and should by all means be avoided. Other issues are the new fertiliser ordinance or the General Data Protection Regulation. The wine growers will comply with all the requirements but the compliance will consume more and more working time. . Wine growers / small wineries : Main challenge is insufficient number of young persons interested to work as wine grower/producer and get trained. Traditionally children of wine grower families took over the business - a system which is not functional any more. It has become difficult to find workers in the region. Therefore . employs temporary workers from Romania, who come regularly. Other frame conditions have improved: Image of wine grower’s profession is positive, vineyards are available and affordable in the area (but need restruc- turing), customers’ demand and price is satisfying and low interest on loans. .
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 31
pan/USA) since 20 years and would like to further extend Third Country exports.
7 Jauch” wines are low quality wines that are sold at high prices due to intense promotion. In addition Mr. Jauch is owner of the wine estate Orthegraven which really produces high quality a PDO/PGI wines but these wines are not marketed as “Jauch” wines but as Qualitäts- and Prädikatsweine from Orthegraven.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 32
ties on the input level.
IQ 1.8 Did the actions undertaken by the wine producers with the support of the NSP contribute to improve the competitiveness key factors of EU wine products? Please explain how. . National authorities The focus of the measures of the NSP is on cost reduction and quality improvement. It did not address the dissemination of technical know-how but with investment grants it facilitated technical progress. Moreo- ver the NSP helped producers and processors to create a basis for adjusting to market conditions and to develop new products. But again it is the interplay between entrepreneurship and the NSP that led to posi- tive effects. . Wine cellars and wine traders: The NSP supported structural change as well as the implementation of technical progress. But it did not address sufficiently export promotion which is a key factor for the German wine sector. Moreover, despite of the NSP program the structure of the wine sector is very divers with a lot of different and opposite in- terests of individual actors. . Cooperative Yes. The NSP supported investments reduced production costs and improved quality of wine. The compet- itive position in Germany was strengthened. Export to Member States or Third Countries are not relevant for the cooperative (less than 1% of production). Regional Representatives WineSe Yes. Most of the beneficiaries reduced production costs, started to grow new varieties, increased wine quality, diversified their customers or their income. . Wine growers / small wineries : Yes. Cf. reply to Q 1.1 and 1.2.
IQ 1.9 What were the impact of the NSP measures on your supplies, in terms of quality, volume and origin? . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative Improved quality and quantity. 45% of bottles sold at place and selling points in Germany. There is a trust- ful and growing relation to some specialized high-level wine trading shops and restaurants in German cities due to the improved wine quality and received awards of the cooperative. . Regional Representatives WineSe Improved quality, e.g. through investment in improved cool chains. Quantity was not that much affected. There was almost no change concerning the origin. . Wine growers / small wineries : Significant improvement on quality, quantity and reputation of wines from extremely steep vineyards. Cf. also reply Q 1.5.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 33
Award), Riesling challenge Australia, Gold Medal New Delhi/India and others.8
IQ 1.10 Did the actions undertaken by the wine producers with the support of the NSP contribute to changes as regard the organisation and coordination of the operators in the supply chain? Please explain how. . National authorities Producer organisation and companies that have contracts with producers get a higher funding. In this re- spect the NSP influences the organisation of the value chain. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: the organisations and the co-ordination of the value chain increased but not because of the NSP. It was rather market forces and competitive pressure that lead to the changes. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative Slight changes. The cooperative could improve and extend the benefits of its members. This motivates them and raises interest of the younger generation to continue as wine grower. More control and coordi- nation was introduced by the cooperative to further improve quality of grapes (reduced harvest quantity per hectare). Harvested grapes can now be delivered early morning and harvesters also work during night time. The cooperative intends to maintain ‘family size’, with slim management structures, personal contact and regular exchange with all members. . Wine growers / small wineries : Not really. Wine growers and winery is traditionally combined at the Mosel region. There are only a few wine growers work on a full-time basis. This structure has not changed. The number of wine growers was reduced, but the remaining businesses extended significantly their wine cultivation area. A reducing number of elderly (part-time) wine growers sell their grapes to him.
3.3.2 Effects on the capacity of operators to adapt to customers’ expectations
3.3.2.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 1.11 Did the NSP measures contribute to the capacity of operators to adapt to customers’ expectations, using innovative integrated approach? . National authorities: Yes, by investing in quality improvement and in new technologies. The NSP helped to extend the product portfolio and to adapt the grape varieties. Moreover it funded investments that helped direct marketers and companies selling to traders or retailers to build appropriate salesrooms. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: No. Innovations were perhaps funded indirectly by funding investments in equipment. But innovations happen independent from the NSP. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative
8 There appears to be a tendency amongst wine producers that - as soon as they have obtained a good reputation - to produce Qualitätsweine - instead of Prädikatsweine. Qualitätsweine do not require the expensive and sometimes unpre- dictable testing by the wine commissions.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 34
Yes. The new NSP supported tasting room attracts visitors. Combination of weekend tours with wine shop- ping and visits of the winery facilities is in demand by customers. Mix of tourism and wine is functional. Currently a restaurant is under construction in a historic building, which will be rented out to attract more day visitors who mix weekend leisure with wine shopping (no NSP support). This helps attracting customer visits for direct marketing of wine at the production site. . Regional Representatives WineSe Improved wine quality, new grape varieties. . Wine growers / small wineries s : Yes. Re-cultivation of extremely steep vineyards was innovative and successful. Common promotion of wines from extremely steep vineyards by wineries and tourism. The measures achieved to re-value the extremely steep vineyards region and reputation. Some high-end products were and are being designed (extremely steep vineyard - Logo). Currently has registered his vineyard area as a special PDO (accord- ing § 40 legal wine ordinance WeinV [Weinverordnung9] in the vineyard register at the Chamber of Agricul- ture. His PDO shall be used for his wines of superior quality for exclusive high-level marketing (around 55 €/bottle). The EAFRD/ELER supported trekking pathway attracts tenthousands of tourists each year and thus, wines from the extremely steep vineyards are promoted10. .
IQ 1.12 What types of supported investment were made to adapt to the evolving demand? . National authorities All supported investments served the evolving demand, some directly other more indirectly. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: Investments in technical equipment. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative NSP supported investments by the cooperative since 2002 for improved wine processing: temperature controlled stainless steel storage tanks, wine press, wine press house (2014), filling and packaging line, tasting room (2016). All these components contributed to the economic success. Without NSP support all these costly investments would not have been possible. Regional Representatives WineSe Investments in processing and marketing were undertaken. Apart from the investments in cooling facili- ties, new wine presses and wine press house are to be mentioned. More appealing sales rooms were cre- ated with NSP contributions as well. . Wine growers / small wineries : Restructuring and investments since 2000 with EU support. Currently a new wine press house is be-
9 For the full text see: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/weinv_1995/ 10 https://mobil.deutschebahn.com/mobil-magazin-download
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 35
ing built with NSP support to install two parallel working wine presses to meet the demand. 2015 steep vineyard restructuring financed by NSP. Previously a tasting and selling room for high-end marketing was built (around 2007) also with financial support of EU. All this supported the adjustment to the evolving demand.
IQ 1.13 Was the promotion measure used to support studies of new markets to identify consumers’ prefer- ences? . National authorities Possible, but interviewees at national and at regional level did not know anything about it. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: The German wine institute conducts market research on export markets. It is not known which of the stud- ies are supported by the NSP. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries No. Studies were not used because the cooperative is not involved in export. Regional Representatives WineSe The Bauern- und Winzerverband is not aware of such studies.
3.3.3 Effects of other factors on the competiveness and overall performance of wine producers
3.3.3.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 1.14 How did the market shares evolved for your major wine products? on intra and extra EU markets? What are the main factors explaining these changes? . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative Around 1.2 Mio bottles produced yearly. 75% is Riesling. More than 45% sold on the spot and 99% sold in Germany to consumers, restaurants, wine traders, online-shop without involving discounters. Only 0.8% of production is exported (around 10,000 bottles per year). It is not intended to develop export. However, foreigners and international tourists are welcome to buy at the location of the cooperative. Demand for Pinot wines (noir/gris/blanc) is growing. The current economic situation of Germany is supportive. The co- operative increased the payment to its members considerably from about 9,000 € per ha in 2012 to 14,000 to 18.000 €/ha in 2017. Moreover the income of the members is estimated to have increased by about 20%. It is supposed that the strategy of the cooperative in connection NSP support had a positive impact on competitiveness. Regional Representatives WineSe In general the exports declined in volume but increased in price leading to an only slight decrease in turno- ver. Riesling is still the most important variety and has the best reputation. Burgunder is red variety that develops well. . Wine growers / small wineries : His export of wine outside EU is growing. Reason is seen in improved quality, quantity and reputa- tion of his Riesling from extremely steep vineyard wines. Currently 40% of his wine production is exported to Member States or Third Countries (Ranking: Denmark, USA, Korea, Taiwan, Slovakia, and United King- dom). Export demand is growing but cannot be satisfied due to limited production and stocks of wine. Ex- port rate of production is expected to grow further and might soon reach 50%. His export does not depend
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 36
on few customers only. This reduces entrepreneurial risks. Good example is his US-partner: http://schatziwines.com
IQ 1.15 What are the other factors that could have had an impact on the competitiveness, product quality and market orientation of the EU wine sector (e.g. evolving demand, increased competition, climate change, etc.)? . National authorities: Market pressure on the saturated market is a driving factor for adjustment. Wine growers have to com- pete with European as well as Third Country suppliers and are forced to adapt to the markets in order to assure the companies’ future. Successful entrepreneurs detected new market opportunities and concen- trated on quality and the image of the regions. Structural change contributed not only to cost reduction; it also created opportunities and financial resources for marketing measures. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: Market pressure and the entrepreneurial adaption to it, the legal framework especially restrictions in mar- keting regarding the promotion of alcoholic beverages. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries cooperatives Climate change. The harvest period is moving to September and early October, which was in the past up to November. For some varieties dry ice (= frozen carbon dioxide) is used during harvest to keep the grapes cold. This preserves their aroma at hot days. Harvest at night and early morning was introduced and will be extended. Harvesting date and time is fixed by the cooperative with close monitoring of vineyards and lo- cal weather. Nearly 90% of harvest is done by mechanical harvesters. Wine growers are invited to cut-off all rotten grapes by hand BEFORE the mechanical harvester works in order to improve the quality of grapes, which also is better paid by the cooperative. Regional Representatives WineSe The market is highly competitive and changes sometimes very quickly. The moves of the competitors as well as the trade partners impact on the wine sector in Rhineland-Palatinate. Product quality is heavily in- fluenced by weather. The wines sector of Rhineland-Palatinate tries to find its way and niches. . Wholesalers or brokers: Increasing international competition. This refers to other European Member States as well as to Third Country suppliers. Retailers as well as wine traders are increasingly organised interna- tionally so that it is no problem for them to source in all parts of the world. Competition forces market par- ticipants to adjust to the requirements of the market. . Wine growers / small wineries : Cf. reply Q 1.3
11 Lowes “Qualitätswein “level
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 37
maturing varieties.
3.3.4 Conclusion of the expert on the effects of NSP measures on the competiveness and overall performance of wine producers
The sector in Rhineland-Palatinate improved with respect to relevant factors that influence competitiveness. Structural change, cost reduction and quality orientation and an increasing entrepreneurial spirit were sup- ported by the NSP. It is not possible to estimate what would have happened without the NSP in Germany and in other Member States as well. But we agree with the view that the NSP alleviated the adjustment process. Especially in steep slope areas the NSP seems to have made a relevant contribution to stop the decrease of the vineyards. Still the restriction of the wine area is contentious: Some stakeholders favour the restriction as it reduces competition on the supply side of the market. This especially holds for wine growers and for the ad- ministration that considers itself especially as a representative of the interests of wine growers. Those compa- nies that are engaged in wine processing and wine trade tend to reject the area restriction.
3.4 Effects of the promotion measure
3.4.1 Effects of the promotion measure on the recovery/capture of foreign markets
3.4.1.1 Evolution of the market shares of national wines on the main foreign markets In the following tables, information on the market shares of national wines on the main foreign markets (extra- EU markets) is provided. Table 20: Net exports of German wine (gross figures, including re-export) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Qualitätsweine 3.6 3.6 3.9 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.6 (PDO-wines) Source: Deutsches Weininstitut, according to Office International de la Vigne et du Vin, Paris
Table 21: Net exports of German wine (without re-export)
Year Volume Value hl 1,000 € €/hl 2000 1,996,000 276,000 138 2001 1,902,000 280,000 147 2002 1,932,000 294,000 152 2003 2,159,000 341,000 158 2004 1,897,000 307,000 162 2005 1,721,000 314,000 183
12 See Glossary, The RMS is a tracked crawler type vehicle / cater pillar with cable winch for steep vineyards. 13 For an illustration of how current RMS mechanization works in steep slopes visit inter alia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AcGBYjpJsU or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42Dsr3gAoCI . The future may be remote controlled RMS or even autonomously driving ones.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 38
2006 1,865,000 361,000 194 2007 1,924,000 385,000 200 2008 2,231,000 434,000 196 2009 2,068,000 399,000 193 2010 1,715,000 355,000 207 2011 1,435,000 341,000 238 2012 1,305,000 321,000 246 2013 1,307,000 335,000 257 2014 1,191,000 318,000 267 2015 1,058,000 305,000 288 2016* 997,000 288,000 288 2017** 1,065,000 308,000 289
* preliminary figures Source: Verband Deutscher Weinexporteure e.V. according to: Statistisches Bundesamt Table 22: German wine exports by quality, packaging and colour 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Volume absolute (hl) Qualitätsweine (PDO-wines) 1 169 000 1 016 000 962 000 856 000 767 000 754 000 Other wine 370 000 290 000 331 000 319 000 265 000 244 000 Bottled wine 1 322 000 1 099 000 1 117 000 1 021 000 899 000 853 000 Bulk wine 217 000 206 000 177 000 154 000 133 000 144 000 White wine 1 345 000 1 166 000 1 131 000 1 007 000 881 000 869 000 Red wine 194 000 140 000 163 000 167 000 150 000 128 000 Total 1 539 000 1 305 000 1 294 000 1 174 000 1 032 000 997 000 Volume % Qualitätsweine (PDO-wines) 76% 78% 74% 73% 74% 76% Other wine 24% 22% 26% 27% 26% 24% Bottled wine 86% 84% 86% 87% 87% 86% Bulk wine 14% 16% 14% 13% 13% 14% White wine 87% 89% 87% 86% 85% 87% Red wine 13% 11% 13% 14% 15% 13% Value absolute (1,000 €) Qualitätsweine (PDO-wines) 292 000 274 000 272 000 254 000 248 000 244 000 Other wine 57 000 47 000 62 000 61 000 51 000 44 000 Bottled wine 319 000 294 000 307 000 292 000 277 000 266 000 Bulk wine 30 000 28 000 26 000 23 000 22 000 22 000 White wine 308 000 288 000 295 000 276 000 259 000 251 000 Red wine 41 000 33 000 39 000 39 000 40 000 36 000 Total 349 000 321 000 334 000 315 000 299 000 288 000 Value % Qualitätsweine (PDO-wines) 84% 85% 81% 81% 83% 85% Other wine 16% 15% 19% 19% 17% 15% Bottled wine 91% 91% 92% 93% 93% 92% Bulk wine 9% 9% 8% 7% 7% 8% White wine 88% 90% 88% 88% 87% 87% Red wine 12% 10% 12% 12% 13% 13% Source: Summarised by Deutschen Weinbauverband according to publications of Statistischen Bundesamtes by order of Deutsches Weininstitut Data are not consistent with table Net exports of German wine (without re-export)
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 39
Table 23: German net wine export volume by country of destination 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016/2011 Volume absolute (hl) USA 297,000 257,000 233,000 208,000 196,000 187,000 -37% Netherlands 211,000 217,000 6,000 7,000 157,000 164,000 -22% Great Britain 223,000 173,000 38,000 30,000 139,000 93,000 -58% Sweden 94,000 105,000 37,000 31,000 84,000 65,000 -31% Norway 61,000 61,000 223,000 203,000 57,000 61,000 0% Canada 50,000 55,000 34,000 28,000 46,000 46,000 -8% Finland 24,000 20,000 7,000 9,000 25,000 36,000 50% Poland 28,000 30,000 12,000 13,000 32,000 34,000 21% Belgium/Luxemburg 37,000 35,000 3,000 3,000 25,000 32,000 -14% China 40,000 34,000 61,000 29,000 31,000 32,000 -20% France 42,000 32,000 20,000 30,000 35,000 27,000 -36% Japan 32,000 34,000 27,000 26,000 -19% Switzerland 17,000 12,000 105,000 93,000 17,000 25,000 47% Denmark 30,000 24,000 31,000 32,000 18,000 17,000 -43% Austria 12,000 9,000 61,000 59,000 15,000 15,000 25% Estonia 22,000 16,000 10,000 12,000 Latvia 4,000 10,000 52,000 50,000 8,000 12,000 200% Czech Republic 8,000 12,000 3,000 3,000 11,000 12,000 50% Italy 3,000 9,000 Lithuania 18,000 35,000 13,000 19,000 10,000 9,000 -50% Ukraine 10,000 13,000 4,000 7,000 Israel 10,000 11,000 3,000 6,000 Russia 211,000 61,000 35,000 33,000 8,000 6,000 -97% Hong Kong 7,000 8,000 175,000 165,000 6,000 5,000 -29% Ireland 10,000 8,000 7,000 5,000 9,000 5,000 -50% Spain 4,000 3,000 7,000 5,000 South Korea 5,000 5,000 4,000 4,000 -20% Australia 3,000 3,000 Singapore 5,000 4,000 11,000 10,000 3,000 3,000 -40% Taiwan 5,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 3,000 3,000 -40% Mexico 8,000 8,000 34,000 23,000 -100% Total 1,539,000 1,305,000 1,294,000 1,174,000 1,032,000 997,000 -35% Source: Summarised by Deutschen Weinbauverband according to publications of Statistischen Bundesamtes by order of Deutsches Weininstitut Data are not consistent with table Net exports of German wine (without re-export). However differences between data can be neglected.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 40
Table 24: German net wine export value by country of destination 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016/2011 Volume absolute (hl) USA 103,000 89,000 85,000 78,000 82,000 80,000 -22% Netherlands 34,000 36,000 2,000 2,000 32,000 30,000 -12% Great Britain 38,000 27,000 8,000 5,000 27,000 16,000 -58% Sweden 15,000 16,000 8,000 7,000 14,000 14,000 -7% Norway 22,000 24,000 41,000 39,000 24,000 25,000 14% Canada 16,000 17,000 14,000 11,000 15,000 15,000 -6% Finland 5,000 5,000 2,000 2,000 6,000 8,000 60% Poland 5,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 7,000 8,000 60% Belgium/Luxemburg 7,000 7,000 2,000 2,000 6,000 6,000 -14% China 13,000 13,000 8,000 4,000 14,000 14,000 8% France 8,000 7,000 5,000 6,000 6,000 5,000 -38% Japan 13,000 14,000 11,000 10,000 -23% Switzerland 6,000 6,000 17,000 15,000 8,000 10,000 67% Denmark 4,000 4,000 13,000 13,000 4,000 4,000 0% Austria 2,000 2,000 24,000 26,000 4,000 4,000 100% Estonia 4,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Latvia 1,000 2,000 17,000 16,000 2,000 2,000 100% Czech Republic 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 100% Italy 1,000 1,000 Lithuania 3,000 6,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 -33% Ukraine 2,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 Israel 2,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 Russia 22,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 2,000 1,000 -95% Hong Kong 6,000 5,000 33,000 33,000 4,000 4,000 -33% Ireland 2,000 2,000 5,000 4,000 2,000 1,000 -50% Spain 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 South Korea 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 -50% Australia 2,000 2,000 Singapore 2,000 2,000 7,000 6,000 2,000 1,000 -50% Taiwan 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 0% Mexico 3,000 2,000 6,000 4,000 -100% Total 349,000 321,000 334,000 315,000 299,000 288,000 -17% Source: Summarised by Deutschen Weinbauverband according to publications of Statistischen Bundesamtes by order of Deutsches Weininstitut Data are not consistent with table Net exports of German wine (without re-export). However differences between data can be neglected.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 41
Table 25: Calculation of the market share of German wine on key foreign markets 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 USA Domestic consumption Mio hl 28.5 29 30.2 30.4 31 31.8 Imports from Germany* hl 297,000 257,000 233,000 208,000 196,000 187,000 Calculated market share 1.04% 0.89% 0.77% 0.68% 0.63% 0.59% Netherlands Domestic consumption 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.4 Imports from Germany* 211,000 217,000 6,000 7,000 157,000 164,000 Calculated market share 6.03% 6.03% 0.17% 0.21% 4.49% 4.82% Great Britain Domestic consumption 12.9 12.8 12.7 12.6 12.7 12.9 Imports from Germany* 223,000 173,000 38,000 30,000 139,000 93,000 Calculated market share 1.73% 1.35% 0.30% 0.24% 1.09% 0.72% Sweden Domestic consumption 2 2.1 2.1 2 2.6 2.3 Imports from Germany* 94,000 105,000 37,000 31,000 84,000 65,000 Calculated market share 4.70% 5.00% 1.76% 1.55% 3.23% 2.83% Russia Domestic consumption 11.3 10.4 10.4 9.6 9.3 9.3 Imports from Germany* 211,000 61,000 35,000 33,000 8,000 6,000 Calculated market share 1.87% 0.59% 0.34% 0.34% 0.09% 0.06% * Not taking into account wine that is re-exported by Germany Source: Deutsches Weininstitut, according to Office International de la Vigne et du Vin, Paris, own calculation.
3.4.1.2 Information collected in the implementation reports Promotion measures of German beneficiaries that were promoted by the NSP in Rhineland-Palatinate are listed in Annex 1 Table 5. Total eligible expenditure for 75 promotion activities of German beneficiaries supported through NSP in Rhine- land-Palatinate in 2015/2016 was 924,375.84 €, spanning from a minimum of 280.56 € to a maximum 256,084.92 €. EU contribution of these 75 promotion activities was 5,842.17 € on average with a minimum of 140.28 €.
3.4.2 Effects of the promotion measure on the reputation of EU wines
3.4.2.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 3.1 What are the EU wine products benefiting from the best reputation abroad? Please specify: o Their origin (France/Italy/Spain/etc.) o Their category (red/white/sparkling/etc.) o Their quality (PDO/PGI/wine variety) . National authorities: Mosel as the wine growing area. In America wine from the Rhine area is considered to have a good reputation. White wine as category and Riesling as wine variety. Moreover “Spätlese” as a specific quality level is assumed to have a good reputation. Amongst the red grapes, ‘Spätburgunder’ was mentioned. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: Regarding Europe, France with Bordeaux and Burgundy as wine and Champagne as sparkling wine. Regard- ing Germany: White wine as type of wine, Mosel and Rheingau as areas, Riesling as a grape variety. . Wholesalers or brokers Regarding European wine products on Third Country markets, Italy with red wine (Barolo, Chianti, Prosec- co spumante) and France (Bordeaux, Burgundy and Champagne) have the best reputation. Regarding
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 42
German wine on the most relevant US export market Mosel wine, Riesling and Burgunder wines (Spätbur- gunder, Weißburgunder, Grauburgunder) have a good reputation. . Cooperatives This is not relevant as the cooperative is not involved in export to EU or Third Countries. Regional Representatives WineSe Riesling as white wine, Burgunder as red wine. Riesling has an outstanding position on the markets be- cause of its excellent image.
IQ 3.2 Did the promotion measure contribute to strengthen the reputation of the national wines? . National authorities: Yes, but it is not possible to isolate the effect of the promotion measures. Anyhow, obtaining a good reputation requires time and money and it is the conviction of the interviewees that the promotion measures supported by the NSP contributed to strengthen the reputation of national wines, at least according to their share in the overall spending for generic wine promotion in Third Countries. The consumers’ connotation - wines from Germany ~ sweet Liebfrauenmilch14 could be changed. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative Most likely Regional Representatives WineSe Yes, but no figures are available. The Bauern und Winzerverband is convinced that without the NSP promo- tion measures the reputation would have been worse. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: The reputation of German wine improved during the last year. It is not possible to allocate the improve- ment to individual measures, but the promotion measures funded by the NSP may have contributed just a little bit due to the small amount of money spent for promotion. However, improvement of reputation did not stop the decrease of sales volumes. Perhaps it contributed to the increase of prices achieved on export markets. . Wine growers / small wineries : No. NSP promotion measures did not influence ’s business. His export contacts were mainly es- tablished by his participation at the Pro-Wein Fair (Düsseldorf), not supported by EU.
IQ 3.3 Apart from the NSP, were there any other factors that could have impacted the reputation of national wine products abroad? . National authorities It is a package of different promotions, of wine grading in taste competitions and of different influencers that has an impact on the reputation. Some companies are also undertaking promotion measures that
14 Liebfrauenmilch is a sweet very low quality wine from Germany. Although its export share is declining German quality wine producers fear that Liebfrauenmilch’s bad reputation amongst foreign quality wine oriented consumers is still af- fecting their reputation negatively
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 43
have an impact on the reputation of wine from Germany. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Wine cellars and wine traders: The activities of the actors in the wine sector with improving quality and marketing. Cooperative For sure there were. Regional Representatives WineSe Yes. For instance tourism. Consumers who know the regions of origin are important multipliers. . Wine growers / small wineries
3.4.3 Effects of the promotion measure on wine companies’ income
3.4.3.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 3.4 Are there spill-over effects of the promotion support on wine producers’ income? . National authorities Presumably it is positive but it cannot be calculated. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: No, not based on the means of the EU. But there might be indirect effects: Due to the much higher budget competing EU Member States can achieve a much higher visibility of their promotion and integrate it in comprehensive campaigns that promote the country e.g. for holidays. In this respect there might be a neg- ative spill-over for Germany as high level of promotion of other regions indirectly affects the relative posi- tion of German regions regarding awareness and perceptibility. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Regional Representatives WineSe They assume: yes. Promotion increased reputation and better reputation allows more sales and for higher prices and higher turnover impacts positively on the wine producers’ income. But figures are not available and the amount of money spent in the NSP is quite low. . Wine growers / small wineries No. This has no influence on his income or sales.
IQ 3.5 Were there any other factors that could have impacted the wine producers’ income? . National authorities There are a lot of factors like market development, weather, cost reduction etc. Still the activities of the actors in the sector and their entrepreneurial spirits have a big influence on income. Structural changes may be another issue to mention. Small producers are replaced by bigger and younger ones that are more quality oriented and invest in quality to obtain higher prices for their products. But it is not just quality that generated good prices and income. The German Wine promoted by the celebrity “Günther Jauch” is a non- PDO/PGI wine but is sold at 5.99 € per bottle just because the promotion campaign worked well. Although Mr. Jauch owns a wine-growing estate that is member in the association “Verband Deutscher Prädikats- und Qualitätsweingüter (VDP)”, the wine labelled with his name and sold via a discounter is just ‘German Wine” that is not even bottled by Mr. Jauch’s estate, but by one large wine bottling company (Mertes KG, Bernkastel)15.
. Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: Volatility of yields that increase due to climate change.
15 ). See: Spiegel Online 18.04.2018: “Aldi-Wein: Günther Jauchs Sechs-Euro-Frage“
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 44
. Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Regional Representatives WineSe Of course! For instance: weather, competition, moves of competitors, moves of market partners - especial- ly food retailers who are really powerful players with sometime market-dominating positions - policies of countries of export destination. . Wine growers / small wineries
3.4.4 Additional benefits or negative effects in Third Countries generated by the support for promotion
3.4.4.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 3.6 Are there any additional benefits or negative effects arising from the promotion operations imple- mented in Third Countries? . National authorities Indirectly promotion of wine and wine areas can have a positive impact on tourism. But as the promotion of wine is not just supported by NSP its impact is not quantifiable and cannot be isolated. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: Other Member States have a higher overall budget for promotion and thus benefit much more from EU financing. Based on the overall low budget it is more difficult for the German wine sector to achieve awareness. In this respect funding promotion measures through NSP might even lead to a worsening of Germany’s competitive position. Regional Representatives WineSe Wine promotion is strongly believed to impact positively on tourism (and vice versa).
3.4.5 Conclusion of the expert on the effects of the promotion measure
Reputation, market prices and sales volumes are driven by many factors. It is not possible to isolate promotion measures and to evaluate their effect. Still it is known that awareness of products is relevant. It is a necessary even though not a sufficient requirement for selling wine. Promotion leads to awareness and should have a positive effect in this regard. It is the combination of activities of companies or the German Wine Institute that organise tours for journalists, promote enjoyment wine weekends as well as wine growers offering holiday arrangements on the wine-growing estate that impact the competitive position of the wine sector. Whether or not the individual activities were supported by the NSP was not differentiated in the interviews. Currently NSP supported promotion measures are administered by BLE on national level but only the Federal States of Hessen and Rhineland-Palatinate use NSP funding for their own promotion activities. Promotion on the level of small and medium wine growers is not supported to a significant extent. Whether the impression mentioned by some small and medium size wine growers - that its mainly large wineries and wholesalers who are already very strong in export that benefit from NSP promotion to reduce their costs they would have covered anyway (deadweight effect) can neither be confirmed nor denied. However, including a prosperity check as applied for NSP in the field of investment would reduce the risk of spending public money for companies that not necessarily need support for their promotion measures. What can be stated however is that NSP promotion measure does not really address the numerous small and medium wine estates, which have export potential in B2C. Many do not even have a webpage or company profile in English language, which is usually the entrance level for export. Should NSP address such issues in future?
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 45
3.5 Effects of the information measure
3.5.1 Effects of the information measure on responsible consumption of wine
3.5.1.1 Other national campaigns on responsible consumption of wine/alcohol German Wine Academy (DWA) had launched its ‘Wine in Moderation’ campaign before NSP support for such activities was available. In addition general campaigns exist - that are not restricted to wine - informing con- sumers on health risks associated with alcohol consumption. At BLE reports are available laying down in detail how some of the campaigns have been designed and evaluated. A stand on a fair in 2016 was one measure. The visitors and the contacts to journalists had been counted and the use of a car driving simulator was moni- tored. Many multipliers were reached. On April 27th, 2018 BLE sent information on a DWI promotion campaign on PGI/PGO mentioned in the face to face interview already. The information refers to a DWI action of the promotion of PGO/PGI in 2016. The action comprised an ex-ante baseline consumer survey, the creation of the website: ‘Wine With Origin’, a billboard campaign and an ex-post-consumer survey. Steps undertaken were: Tendering and recruiting of a company for the consumer survey on consumer knowledge about PGO/PGI. Tendering and recruiting of a company for designing and maintaining the website as well as monitoring the number of visits. o Result: during billboard campaign: 65 visits on average, off billboard campaign: 17 visits on average. Tendering of billboard campaign and contracting of executing company. o Result: 3,515 billboards; 458 info screens; 110 traffic boards; 8 big banners were employed. More than 200 million contacts are reported. Analysis perception ex-post survey. o Results16 26 % of respondents remembered the campaign. 80% liked the advertisement and ranked it amiable. Amongst those interviewees who remembered to have seen the campaign, the EU logo was recognized by 47% after the campaign instead of only 36% before. In addition, a distinction of respondents in three groups in ‘ambitious wine consumers’, ‘wine lovers’, ‘experimenters’ was undertaken. On the level of information, the analysis of the campaign is considered to be rather complex and well done. However, the impact assessment only refers to consumer perception. It would be inadmissible conclusion to attribute / ascribe any change in wine sales or income of wine producers or wine growers to this campaign. The contracted amount for this campaign to be paid out of NSP was 482,684 Euro (50% of planned eligible costs). Finally DWI received 451,525.17 Euro from BLE.
3.5.1.2 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 4.1 In your Member States, did the operations implemented under the information measure contribute to raise the awareness on responsible consumption of wine? Please be specific on the results achieved. . National authorities Not all interviewees of the national and the regional authorities were aware that such measures had been implemented already. Some considered it possible that an information measure had been conducted. (There was a call (Bekanntmachung Nr. 10/17/51) of 28th August 2017 for applications for respective
16 The PowerPoint presentation can be found here: https://www.prowein.com/cgi- bin/md_prowein/lib/all/lob/return_download.cgi/ProWein_Business_Report_2017_Folien_PM.pdf?ticket=g_u_e_s_t&bi d=4674&no_mime_type=0
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 46
measures and the Deutsche Wein Akademie (German Wine Academy) got a grant of about 10.000 € out of the NSP Budget, however the officials that we talked to were not aware about it.) . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: There might be effects but they cannot be allocated to specific measures. . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Regional Representatives WineSe The ‘Wine in Moderation’ campaign was launched before NSP was in place. NSP contribution allowed for more activities in this field. No figures are known concerning the awareness on responsible consumption of wine. . Representative consumer association, addressing quality, information and safety issues, including the dan- gers of harmful alcohol consumption The consumer organisation has no data on information campaigns financed by the NSP. Even if some of the budget has been spent for promoting responsible behaviour, the effect is supposed to be too small to be measurable. Still they know that the German Wine Academy has integrated the issue of responsible wine consumption into its training programs. IQ 4.2 Were there any other factors that could have influenced the awareness on responsible consumption of wine? . National authorities Companies offering alcoholic beverages promote a responsible handling of alcohol especially in context with driving. Moreover, public institutions try to raise awareness for responsible consumption (see also ex- ample above). . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Wine cellars and wine traders: As part of its social responsibility, the sector is engaged in actions that support wine in moderation. On the wine fair “pro wine” in 2018 wine in moderation was very prominent even without co-financing of the EU. Regional Representatives WineSe There appears to be a general tendency towards health consciousness. This may have an impact on the awareness on responsible consumption of wine. . Representative consumer association, addressing quality, information and safety issues, including the dan- gers of harmful alcohol consumption Information campaigns have been launched by several official institutions and associations. Even some companies offering alcoholic beverages address the problem of alcohol consumption.
3.5.2 Effects of the information measure on consumers’ knowledge of EU quality scheme
3.5.2.1 Other national campaigns on EU quality schemes In general it is possible to promote wine in combination with other agricultural products under the horizontal regulation for the promotion of agricultural products (cheese and wine, asparagus and wine ...). The only in- formation that was obtained from the interview partners is that any double funding can be denied.
3.5.2.2 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 4.3 In your Member States, did the operations implemented under the information measure contribute to enhance the knowledge of EU quality schemes? Please be specific on the results achieved. . National authorities: The differentiation of the long established quality level of the German wine sector was in line with the EU scheme anyway. The designation of different quality levels did not change based on the reform. The quali- ty scheme is well established in the wine markets and consumers are accustomed to it. Whether consum- ers allocate the quality scheme to the EU or to Germany is not yet surveyed by the national or the regional authorities. It is assumed that information measures had a low effect because of low financial resources spend for information. As information on domestic markets is part of the NSP only since 2016, effects can- not be measured anyway. As an example, DWI carried out a PDO/PGI campaign. Different media were used. 200 million contacts were realised and consumers were interviewed before and after the campaign. The awareness of PDO/PGI had risen from 36% to 47% amongst those respondents who stated to have recognised wine promotion re-
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 47
cently. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: No, no (relevant) action was undertaken because the system in Germany is based on a scheme that was implemented before. The wine sector does not communicate based on the EU labels. Regional Representatives WineSe The consumers’ knowledge on the EU quality schemes is regarded as limited. . Wine growers / small wineries Q 4.1 - 4.4 . : No. NSP information measures have not influenced his business. .
IQ 4.4 Were there any other factors that could have influenced the level of knowledge on EU quality schemes? . National authorities The German grading system is in line with the EU grading system but wine bottles are not marked with the PDO or PGI label because German consumers are not familiar with that kind of grading. Accordingly, con- sumers do not find those labels on the wine bottles. Rather the well-known German denominations “Landwein”, “Qualitätswein” or “Prädikatswein” are used. However, as PDO/PGI is more and more used with other food products, thus synergy effects can be assumed in the medium term. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: No. Regional Representatives WineSe Consumers’ knowledge on the EU quality schemes is regarded as limited. However, as other agricultural products use PDO/PGI on their labels, this may have had an impact and that impact may grow in the fu- ture.
3.5.3 Conclusion of the expert of the effects of the information measure
The German quality scheme is consistent with the EU scheme, still the denominations PDO or PGI are not used. On the German wine market the traditional denominations “Qualitätswein” and “Prädikatswein” (two quality levels of PDO) and “Landwein” (PGI) are used. There is no reliable information whether consumers link the German denominations to the EU quality scheme. The EU quality labels are still widely unknown in Germany anyway but linking product quality to specific regions is highly relevant in the wine sector. This link is supported by promotion measures on domestic and export markets. In this regard promotion measures work in line with the idea of the quality scheme. As promotion measures informing about EU PDO/PGI labels emphasise the regions, the PDO/PGI campaigns are also support- ive to make the respective wine growing regions better known among Europe consumers. It appears that there is a slow but constant development towards the EU quality scheme within the wine sec- tor. Those in favour pronounce that origin is something unique that cannot be copied by any competitor. (DWZ, ‘Die Winzer Zeitschrift’ states in its issue of March 2018, that a Chinese traders applied for a patent of the de- nomination ‘Eiswein’ for the Chinese market.) Awareness for responsible consumption is an issue in Germany. Responsible behaviour is promoted by institu- tions especially in connection with road safety. Moreover, companies selling alcoholic beverages sometimes
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 48
promote responsible behaviour. The wine sector seems to play a minor role in that context, if any. Health risk information on labels is not frequently applied on German wines disregarding any quality distinction. However, informing consumers on health risks related to alcohol and wine harmful consumption is a perma- nent task and influencing consumers in that way may take long. Thus, supporting responsible wine consump- tion campaigns continuously should be considered to be made possible.
3.6 Efficiency of the management of the NSP
3.6.1 Achievement of the technical targets of the NSP
Table 26: Rate of achievement of the foreseen expenditures per measures in Mio. Euro 2014 2015 2016 2017 Promotion 1.15 1.18 0.94 2.09
Restructuring & conversion 18.40 19.16 19.30 15.49
Harvest Insurance 0.20 0.12 0.18 0.16
Investment 11.75 16.65 16.20 15.18
Innovation 0.15* * programmed. Source: DG Agri, March 2018
Table 27: Rate of achievement of the foreseen expenditures per measures in € 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Germany
Total 38 895 000 38 895 000 38 895 000 38 895 000 38 895 000
German Wine Institute 1 000.000 1 500 000 1 500 000 1 500 000 1 500 000 Promotion1
RTK-grant2 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 €
Funds for distribution to 37 895 000 37 395 000 37 395 000 37 395 000 37 395 000 Federal States
Rhineland-Palatinate
Total 23 558 563 23 247 643 23 247 643 23 247 643 23 247 643
Funds from previous year
Funds actual available 23 558 563 23 247 643 23 247 643 23 247 643 23 247 643
Third Country promotion Promotion (Art 45) 167 833 176 042 € 478 971 194 498 (1)(b)
Domestic promotion Promotion (Art 413 098 45)(1)(a)
Restructuring Restructuring and conversion of vine- 12 063 665 14 647 430 13 776 426 10 443 539 yards (Art 46)
Harvest insurance Harvest insurance 15 218 0 € -422 (Art 49)
Investments Investments (Art. 50) 5 964 937 € 6 591 893 6 995 361 7 277 800
Innovation Innovation in the
wine sector (Art. 51)
Total spending 12 246 716 14 823 472 14 255 397 11 051 135 0 €
Remaining funds 5 346 910 1 832 277 1 997 307 12 196 508 23 247 643 1 https://www.germanwines.de/servicemenu/about-us/who-we-are/ 2 no longer applied Source: Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 49
According to the authorities in charge of the NSP management, the reasons of the achievement rates present- ed above are the following: Due to intense competition amongst the Federal States, the NSP budget - apart from Third Country, PGI/PDO and responsible wine promotion measures - is allocated to the Federal States. Only if it becomes clear - in the last months of the fiscal year that one Federal State cannot make use its budget in full, other Federal States may take over the unspent funds and finance NSP measures in their Federal States. However, a press article stated that in 2017 Rhineland-Palatinate had to return 4.9 million € to EU because funds were not spent. The Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland- Palatinate confirmed the amount for the budget year 2016/2017 but explicated that the money was (partly) made available for spending through other Federal States. (Email communication Mai 15, 2018, there is a polit- ical debate on this in Rhineland-Palatinate, currently no additional information is available.)
National and regional authorities: here regional authorities: (1) It took time to adjust to additional requirements regarding controlling, application and implementation that entered into force during the program period in 2016. Regulations 1149/2016 and 1150/2016 made the administrative process much more complicated. (2) The workload for processing applications and requirements for documentation on the level of authorities and applicants is so high that delays cannot be excluded. (3) The number of employees in the administration has been reduced considerably during the last years so that the processing of applications in time is not always possible. (4) Craft business in Germany has hardly free capacities so that delays in executing orders are possible. As the financial funds could not be transferred to the following years, they sometimes could not be used in time.
3.6.2 Selectiveness of the management procedures
BLE publishes information on its web page as well in the Bundesanzeiger. BLE states that it offers applicants also consultation and advice. Application forms are also available on the BLE web site17 and deadlines are an- nounced with all other information. The catalogue of criteria is published as well. A contract is concluded (Dif- ferent from e.g. Rhineland-Palatinate that provides NSP support under funding legislation (Zuwendungsrecht) BLE concludes contracts.) After on the spot controls the support claim is calculated upon receipts and the amount paid. BLE states that concluding contracts and making payments on this basis is less administrative work than making support payments under funding legislation. Details would be discussed with a legal expert. The general criteria ensuring the relevance of the selected applications for restructuring in Rhineland- Palatinate are revealed Annex 2, those of investments in enterprises in Annex 3. As soon as a project passes the minimum threshold of points it is eligible for funding. Points are given according to EU requirements as well as those of the very Federal State. They can be adjusted from year to year.
3.6.3 Description of the management procedures of application files
Announcement of available funds in the Bundesanzeiger and the BLE web page Offer of consultation Forms and additional information like deadlines and catalogue of selection criteria made available on BLE website Contract is concluded Measure is implemented Report, invoices and receipts are hands in for reimbursement Documents are checked and on the spot checks are carried out
17 https://www.ble.de/DE/Themen/Marktorganisation/Absatzfoerderung/Deutscher-Wein/deutscher- wein_node.html#doc8985286bodyText1).
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 50
Settlement is conducted and money paid The first announcement has been in late summer for the subsequent year.18
3.6.4 Data on workload linked to the NSP implementation
Table 28: Summary of information about costs related to the administration and payment of the NSP gath- ered in interviews without costs of controls
Workload in Full-time equivalent (FTE) Other cost (premises, IT, equipment)
National authorities 0.2 at national level
Payment services
Administrators /
Administrative costs for processing applications and for controlling the whole process according to the EU standards in the EAFRD/ELER program were calculated on the regional level in Rhineland-Palatinate. The over- all costs amount to 0.276 € for every € spent in the program. As the administrative requirements are similar in the NSP it can be assumed that the administrative burden is between 0.25.and 0.30 € per €. BLE cannot calculate its administrative costs but 20% to 40% of a senior service officer, two times 80% to 90% of two higher service officers and 80% to 90% of clerical grade are working for administering NSP. Not included are personnel working for the monitoring system, the field stations and, the certification authority. If BLE- as e.g. Rhineland-Palatinate provided NSP support under funding legislation (Zuwendungsrecht) instead of con- cluding contracts, the administration efforts would be much higher, especially in cases were a transactions have to be reversed and money has to be reimbursed.
3.6.5 Synthesis of the interviews
3.6.5.1 Questions related to the effects of the financial parameters IT 2.5 Compared to a budget that would have been manage on a 5 year period, have the yearly management of the NSP’s budget fostered an orderly implementation of the measures on all the duration of the pro- gramme? . National and regional authorities: No, the administration had distributed the money over the whole program period. Against the background of the high administrative burden for processing applications and controlling, it had not been possible not to distribute the money. According to the statements of the interviewees, there is no indication that a 5 years budget would have been more effective. BLE even sees advantages in the yearly budgets. As the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate confirmed that almost 5 million € (out of almost 39 million € per year) of unspent NSP funds of the budget year 2016/2017 had to be made available for spending through other Federal States or returned to Brussels this might indi- cate that managing annual budgets is a real big challenge for the Ministry and a 5 year budget might have been easier to manage. IT 2.7 Have the yearly management of the NSP’s budget fostered/hindered the selection of the more rele- vant applications? Have it been an obstacle to the support of multiannual projects or structuring projects? . National and regional authorities: No. IT 2.9 Have the yearly budgetary limits created a specific workload, related in particular to the need to close the budget each year? . National and regional authorities:
18 For details see: https://www.ble.de/DE/Themen/Marktorganisation/Absatzfoerderung/Deutscher-Wein/deutscher- wein_node.html#doc8985286bodyText2
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 51
Yes and No. Closing the budget always leads to work peaks. It increases the pressure for the employees and can even lead to bans on leave. On the other hand, clarity for all sides reigns earlier. Each case is closed quicker. Eventual reclaims are easier to manage by the administration. The two latter aspects are also good for the beneficiary. In case of perennial measures, splitting is possible. In addition, the yearly budget allows supporting also smaller measures. Longer planning horizons also incorporate risks. E.g. in case of a cancelled fair for which support was already granted the administration is more flexible in its re- action on the basis of yearly budgets. Another advantage is that NSP measure budgets are closed at the same time as that of BLE. BLE sees more advantages in yearly budgets than a 5 years one. . Beneficiaries or representatives Wine cellars and wine traders: No idea about it. Regional Representatives WineSe Each application causes a workload. The bureaucratic workload in general has increased. However, the electronic application worked better than expected. There are some difficulties encountered. Out of the 2017 NSP budget for Rhineland-Palatinate, 4.9 million € had to be returned to EU. This may have been due to yearly budgets.
IT 2.6 Have the absence of obligatory co-financing facilitated the access to support for beneficiaries? Please give details per measure . National and regional authorities: No, the process does not become less complicated and less difficult.
IT 2.10 Have the absence of obligatory national co-financing facilitated the management of the funds at the level of the managing authorities? . National and regional authorities Yes, the federal structure in Germany requires a lot of coordination and interest settlement on the level of the national and the federal governments. In addition the management of funds of different sources re- quires a lot of administrative input. In a worst case scenario the fund have to be gathered, parked, spend and - in case of re-claims - be redistributed amongst all financing bodies.
IT 2.8 Did the absence of obligatory national co-financing encourage the Member State to reach the EU budgetary limit, financing sometimes less relevant operations? . National and regional authorities: No. There are a lot of implementation procedures and controlling that hinder financing of less relevant op- erations. The requirements for funding measures are clearly defined in order to prevent the financing of less relevant operations. In addition one should always have in mind that beneficiaries receive a support only in percentage of their eligible costs.
3.6.5.2 Questions related to the overall effectiveness of the programme IT 8.1 Have the traceability of the expenses been improved compared to the previous programming period? If so, how? . National and regional authorities Neither on national nor on regional level significant effects are known. There were no relevant changes. . Producer organizations and/or interbranch organisation Regional Representatives WineSe No significant changes were noticed.
IT 8.2 How do beneficiaries demonstrate their actual need of EU support, and that normal operating costs are not financed by the EU budget? Please detail per measure if needed. . National and regional authorities: This is part of the application procedure regarding support for investments. Regarding the restructuring program, applicants do not have to demonstrate the need. For promotion measures, detailed plans that also include overheads have to be presented to the BLE. The plans are checked by the administration that has a lot of experience. They know the price range e.g. of fair
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 52
stands, and beneficiaries have either to tender third party goods and services or have to present at least three offers. . Producer organizations and/or interbranch organisation Wine cellars and wine traders: They do that according to the requirements of the application procedure. Regional Representatives WineSe This is part of the application procedure. Detailed calculations have to be presented. Costs are to be prov- en through at least three offers. Authorities cross check with standard costs and against other information they already obtained in the course of other applications. . Beneficiaries If demonstration of necessity is required, it is done in the course of the application procedure.
IT 8.3 Do you think that the measures have supported actions that would have been carried out anyway (without the EU support)? Please detail per measure if needed. . National and regional authorities It is not clear which actions had been carried out anyway. Market pressure might have forced companies to do so. But the measures have accelerated the necessary adjustment process for the sector. Support for the harvest insurance system is a measure that may have windfall effects. DWI and DWA are promoting wine also without NSP support but they would not be active in the field of PDO/PGI promotion. DWA was active in the field of responsible wine consumption but with NSP support they can increase their activities in that field due to NSP funding. . Producer organizations and/or interbranch organisation Wine cellars and wine traders: There might have been windfall effects. But investments might have been carried out later and in general the adjustment process of the sector had been slower.
IT 8.4 How do you make sure that the costs of the supported operations correspond to the market prices for similar operations? Please detail per measure if relevant. . National and regional authorities Prices and costs are compared to standard data like the KTBL data. Moreover, authorities control the budget and have a lot of practical knowledge and knowledge about appropriate prices. In the field of promotion tenders are required for goods and services that are purchased by the contracting party if these goods and services exceed a certain monetary threshold. In cases of goods and services with prices below the threshold the contracting party has to invite three offers. This procedure is also required for goods and services financed out of NSP funds in restructuring or investment measures.
3.6.6 Opinion of the expert
Table 29: Summary of effects of the financial parameters POSITIVE EFFECTS NEGATIVE EFFECTS Additional workload Smaller measures can be supported more Some activities with a longer duration need to be Yearly budg- flexible; budgets are closed at the same time split up etary limits as that of BLE; less risks compared to longer Less flexibility in transferring financial resources in planning horizons case of delays Unspent NSP budget had to be returned to EU Facilitating settlement of interest on the dif- Absence of ferent administrative levels of Germany. No negative effects / other MS can fund more pro- obligatory The budget can be spent for the wine sector motion measures than Germany, putting the latter national co- and there is no rivalry with interests of other relatively in a worse position financing members of the agricultural sector.
. Relevance of the selected application and risk of deadweight Rhineland-Palatinate has restricted the measures that are possible in the frame of the NSP to promotion, re- structuring and investment, and since recently - to a limited extent - innovation. These measures appear cur-
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 53
rently to be most relevant. Moreover- compared to by-product distillation or green harvesting - these measures are considered ’positive’ measures targeting the increase of competitiveness of the sector. Thus these measures aim at achieving a balance between supply and consumers’ demand. Such ‘positive’ measures are also considered to have a broader acceptance amongst tax payers. Whether in future harvest insurance should also be included is discussed by some stakeholders within the sector. . Good practices set at Member State and/or regional level ensuring the justifiability of the expenditures The fact that controllers have a deep knowledge about the sector is a positive factor that prevents fraud. Pro- cedures have to be in place for the management of a NSP.
3.7 Coherence of the NSP
3.7.1 Coherence of the objectives of the NSP with other EU/CAP objectives
3.7.1.1 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 12.1 According to you, are the objectives of the NSP coherent with: - the EU overall objective of environmental sustainability? - the EU overall objective as regards public health and prevention of harmful alcoholic use? - the EU overall objective of balanced territorial development?
. National authorities: Regarding the objective of environmental sustainability, yes, as the NSP funds measures imporve sustaina- bility. With regard to public health they do not realise conflicts as measures supported by the EU can only refer to products with high safety standards. Moreover promotion measures have to include information on re- sponsible wine consumption and the risks associated with harmful alcohol consumption view to inform consumers about the responsible consumption. Regarding balance development there is no obvious conflict. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Regional Representatives WineSe Objective of environmental sustainability: yes, in general, and in particular especially the support of ter- races in steep slopes that allow for a great biodiversity. Objective of public health and prevention of harmful alcoholic: yes, NSP helps to extend the measures that had already been in place before this issue became a matter of NSP. Thus, allowing to extent the cam- paigns and increasing awareness. Objective of balanced territorial development: yes, especially in steep slopes where there is no alternative agricultural use of the area and where costs of production are reduced by NSP.
3.7.2 Coherence and complementarity of the NSP measures with corresponding measures
3.7.2.1 Identification of measures with similar objectives Wine growers are eligible for measures of the EAFRD/ELER program. Demarcation criteria for Rhineland- Palatinate are laid down in Annex 1 Table 4 of the National Support Program of Germany.
3.7.2.2 Synthesis of the interviews IQ 13.1 According to you, are there synergies/complementarities between the NSP measures and: - the corresponding measures in the RDP? Please explain. - the corresponding measures contained in the horizontal regulation on promotion measures of agricultural products? - the corresponding measures contained in other EU policies? . National authorities The measures contribute to rural development but they address different production systems and differ-
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 54
ent parts of the production systems. In this regard, they have synergies as well as complementarities. For example, steep slope wine growing: Restructuring is funded by the NSP. For organic wine production an additional premium financed by the EULLA program (Entwicklungsprogramm Umweltmaßnahmen, Länd- liche Entwicklung, Landwirtschaft, Ernährung, i.e. Development Program Environmental Measures, Rural Development, Agriculture, Nutrition) funded by the EAFRD is available. For environmental friendly wine growing in steep slopes (>30%) additional grants from the PAUL program (Programm Agrarwirtschaft, Umweltmaßnahmen, Landentwicklung, i.e. Program Agribusiness, Environmental Measures, Rural Devel- opment) also funded by the EAFRD can be applied for. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: No competence on this question . Regional Representatives WineSe Yes. EAFRD/ELER supported tourism and infrastructure development as well as the combination of NSP co- financed restructuring of vineyards and the support for modern machines through EAFRD/ELER. As men- tioned earlier, horizontal regulation on promotion measures of agricultural products can be used for wine promotion in combination with other agricultural products, but no information whether such measures were carried out are available. The promotion campaigns on responsible wine consumption are in line with EU health policies.
IQ 13.2 Is the risk of overlapping avoided? . National authorities: The measures are clearly identified in the respective Annexes of the NSP. The demarcation criteria for Rhineland-Palatinate are laid down in Annex 1 Table 4. This is an EU requirement and this avoids overlap- ping. In addition, BLE is in constant exchange with the Federal States funding promotion as well. All inter- viewees react with a lack of understanding as all the information is documented and available for the Commission. . Representatives of the sector/interbranch organisations/ industry unions Wine cellars and wine traders: No competence for this question Regional Representatives WineSe Yes. Controls of the authorities are tight.
IQ 13.3 Did you benefit from Rural Development Programme measures? If yes, which one(s)? . Wine industries/wine growers cooperatives/wineries Cooperative No . Wine grower : Yes, indirectly: The climbing trail (Klettersteig) was realized in the beginning of this century by a mul- ti-stakeholder initiative with EAFRD/ELER support. This was, in combination with vineyard restructuring, a real improvement for the wine growers in the region. .
3.7.3 Conclusion of the experts on the coherence of the NSP
NSP appears to be coherent with other EU policies. If there was a ranking, the coherence is most visible with EAFRD/ELER objectives. Especially in steep slopes there is little alternative use of land and NSP significantly and well targeted on the only agricultural option induces regional development. As indirectly tourism is supported by NSP indirectly, the commercial options are very well addressed. When NSP and EAFRD/ELER measures are combined an even stronger impact can be assumed as shown e.g. in the area of the extremely steep vineyards and EAFRD/ELER support for a trekking pathway.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 55
Some interviewees did not have any idea with regard to synergies/complementarities of promotion measures and other EU policies. Others considered promotion measures supported by EU for other agricultural products than wine as having synergies.
3.8 Relevance of the NSP
3.8.1 Analysis of the needs of the sector
Table 30: SWOT analysis of the wine sector STRENGHS WEAKNESSES
. Rather small production units . Good and reputed wines, well established functioning . Aging wine growers without successor for the wine estate control system building trust . Different strategies within the wine sector on how it should . Good vine nurseries develop . Deficiencies regarding the quality of bulk wine OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
. Economic growth in Third Countries (emerging markets) and increase in purchasing power . Climate change and related problems as longer heat and dry . Increase of number of tourists (national & from abroad) periods, storms, unpredictable frosts etc. as well as new visiting wine growing areas pests like drosofila suzukii and diseases like funguses etc. . Young wine growers and wine makers looking for good . Lack of successors especially in steep slopes education (University Geisenheim (Hessen) and Wein Cam- pus Neustadt (Rhineland-Palatinate) established 2009) and . Demographic change in domestic population, developing new ideas population increase in ethnic groups amongst which wine consumption is not eligible . New technologies especially for steep and very steep vine- yards . Increasing sensitivity within MS population concerning health issues . Digitalisation for assisting vineyard management
. New varieties like ‘Roter Riesling’ (eligible for planting since January 1st, 2018) Sources: Discussions with the interviewees, Das Deutsche Weinmagazin (various issues), Die Winzerzeitschrift (various issues), ProWein Business Report, personal communications
It is not possible to order the needs because the different actors in the value chain have different and some- times even contradicting needs, e.g. wine growers might favour the restriction on the area whereas wine trad- ers and wineries do not. The main needs of the sector are the following, whereby the ranking is different for different stakeholders: 1. Funding of steep slope wine growing from the NSP as a separate measure (especially support for in- vestments in RMS systems [currently supported under EAFRD/ELER) 2. Deregulation of the administrative process - better harmonization of application and monitoring crite- ria for the different EU programs for the wine market => ‘one-stop-shop’ 3. Increase of incentives paid for measures that are oriented towards quality improvement 4. Elaboration of flexible approaches for funding investment of new wine growers and wine makers 5. Adjustment of application and implementation deadlines to the needs of the beneficiaries 6. Regarding export markets: The wine traders demand to reduce the restrictions regarding the labelling for non PDO/PGI wine 7. Efficient and uniform export marketing 8. Prosperity thresholds for investment as relative income limits depending on the overall eligible in- vestment costs 9. Focus of NSP promotion measure on the stimulation of small wineries exports to Third Countries (with or without cooperation with export service providers) e.g. support for small wineries to have print or online information in English or other relevant Third Country languages at hand. 10. For grubbed up vineyards (<0,3 ha) in steep and very steep slopes which are situated next to a larger vineyard to be restructured, NSP restructuring measure could be considered on condition of planting authorization (currently not eligible).
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 56
For additional opinions see inter alia: ProWein 2017 - Press Release No. 8/ 20 March 2017 ProWein Business Report assesses the International Wine Markets: The authors try to answer the question: How does the sector view its economic situation? What wine markets are attractive for wine producers now and in future? What new markets do firms want to enter by 2020? Which wine origins are in demand from marketers? What are the purchasing and sourcing channels of the future? How will wine be successfully marketed in future?19
Cooperative Main challenge is the competitive wine market in Germany and the growing competition with discounters. Currently wine growers of the cooperative do not really complain. Regional Representatives WineSe Support for steep slopes, possibly through lump sum support per hectare with additional compliance require- ments. In addition to the currently supported measures in Rhineland-Palatinate, harvest insurance - as multiple risk insurance - might also be desirable as an eligible measure. Currently cellars benefit to a large extent form NSP investment measures. It should be considered to also sup- port the investment in machinery for wine growers as the funds available under EAFRD/ELER are limited and accessible for non-wine growers too. The prosperity threshold appears - especially for large investments - ra- ther tight. Although in the past better-off applicants were not funded at all.
Wine growers : On the regional level to have more young wine growers. There is a lack of interested young persons to learn wine grower profession, enter into this business and possibly become wine grower/producer. While other frame conditions (market prices and demand, image of profession) have significantly improved, there are many “old” wine growers and a lack of young ones. Would it be possible to include this aspect in in future NSP in- formation measures? Cf. also reply Q 1.7.
3.8.2 Synthesis of the interviews
IQ 15.2. From your point of view, are the NSP measures suited/well designed to address the need of the wine sector at the EU level? national level? At regional level? . National and regional authorities Overall yes, but a better funding of steep slopes could help to balance the competitive disadvantage and to reward the external effects and multi-functionality regarding landscape and tourism. . National representatives of the wine sector Wine cellars and wine traders: The opportunities granted by the European quality policy are restricted in the German wine law. According to the German wine law it is not allowed to market a non PDI or PGO wine by labelling famous grape varieties like “Riesling”. This hampers actions on export markets. The same holds for the German word for PGI wine, which is “Landwein” “Landwein” is something like “second class
19 (www.prowein.de, https://www.prowein.com/cgi- bin/md_prowein/lib/pub/tt.cgi/ProWein_Business_Report_assesses_the_International_Wine_Markets.html?oid=32808 &lang=2&ticket=g_u_e_s_t, https://www.prowein.com/cgi- bin/md_prowein/lib/all/lob/return_download.cgi/PM_ProWein_2017_Business_Report_E.pdf?ticket=g_u_e_s_t&bid=46 76&no_mime_type=0).
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 57
wine”. . Local producers organisations / interbranch organisations Regional Representatives WineSe The amount of financial support can never be sufficient. However, NSP is overall a good and well suited programme that is helpful for the wine sector and the development of the regions concerned. . Beneficiaries : On regional level, application procedures are appropriate and fit to wine growers in steep areas like Mosel valley. Documentation is manageable despite the required sketch of vineyard and application form. Good support and advice by local authorities (Kreisverwaltung), Service Centre (Dienstlesitungszentrum, DLR) and Chamber of Agriculture (LWK). Online support through Chamber of Agriculture (LWK). “e-Antrag” is helpful and used. .
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 58
should be consolidated. Currently too many different systems are in use which frustrate and confuse espe- cially small scale wine growers. The interviewed person states to know a good number of elderly and small wine growers who do not feel able to comply with all above mentioned application and registration proce- dures and therefore finally gave up and did not apply for NSP funding. Also funding and application criteria for the various EU funding are confusing: It seems that for each support scheme (NSP, EAGF, EAFRD/ELER) different indicators and criteria exist which complicate the application process, consume a lot of time and money: E.g. one funding line requests a soil analysis for each section of 3,000 m² and another funding line requests soil analysis in line with parcels and water lines. It becomes costly and very challenging following both requests. . Wine traders/wholesalers: Regarding the authorisation scheme the measures are considered not in line with the needs of the sector. The scheme works like a cartel that restricts supply and is supposed to lead to higher prices. But it restricts the growth of wine growing companies and in the long run the competitive- ness of the whole sector. With respect to quality, the NSP supports investments in technical progress but this is not regarded as sufficient for the long term competitiveness of the sector. There is a need for a qual- ity initiative for bulk wine which is not sufficiently covered by the NSP. Regarding promotion the NSP measures are considered as non-efficient because the German sector lacks brands that could benefit from promotion. Furthermore generic marketing is not tailored to the companies needs and as a rule there is lit- tle commitment and engagement because of the free rider problem.
IQ 15.3. How did the increase of the NSP budget in 2014 impact the management of the NSP? . National and regional authorities: Not on national level. The increase of the budget did not have an impact, it were the tightening of rules for controlling and processing the applications (VO1149/2016 and VO1150/2016) that led to a considerable workload. The budget for promotion measures for which BLE is in charge was not really increased. In case it will be increased (significantly) BLE would needed more personnel.
IQ 15.4. Are the budgets on each measure appropriate to address the needs of the sector? . National and regional authorities Most of the interviewees said ‘Yes’, and if this is not the case there is flexibility to adjust the budget to fi- nance the individual measures appropriately on national and on regional level. However BLE mentioned that the budget for promotion measures is – compared to other MS – rather low and an increase should be considered. . National representatives of the wine sector Wine cellars and wine traders: No, the share of the budget devoted to export marketing should be increased. However, the efficiency of export marketing does not only depend on the budget, but on a uniform strategy, too. In addition means for restructuring measures should be re-allocated in favour of wine growing on steep slopes. Regional Representatives WineSe In general yes. There might be modifications necessary in the future due to climate change increased risks. Also certain amounts may be shifted from e.g. restructuring towards export promotion.
IQ 15.5. From your point of view, can the NSP and the scheme of authorisation allow for the development of the wine production and consumption? . National and regional authorities: Regarding production the increase of the area is possible. It might be contentious within the sector, whether this is sufficient or even too much. The NSP contributes to a stable framework for the develop- ment of the wine sector. Without a program and especially without the restrictions regarding the increase of vineyards a huge structural change with impact on wine growing areas can be expected with a lot of negative effects e.g. for the landscape and as a consequence for tourism. As a consequence of the re- striction of supply the value added per ha is increased. BLE mentions that Germany enlarges the authorisation only by 0.3% and this is not likely to have any im- pact. . National representatives of the wine sector Wine cellars and wine traders: It restricts production and by that a structural development of the sector. Regional Representatives WineSe
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 59
In general yes.
IQ 15.6. From your point of view, are those schemes needed to maintain the supply/demand balance? . National and regional authorities: The scheme leads to a certain supply/demand balance. Without the scheme there would be a sup- ply/demand balance, too, even though it might be different. The scheme restricts supply, stabilises prices and has an impact on structural change. Whether this is necessary is contentious within the sector. The present balance is considered as appropriate especially in regard of the different functions of winegrowing in the rural areas. . National representatives of the wine sector Wine cellars and wine traders: Independent from the schemes there will always be a supply demand balance. This balance might change if restrictions are abolished. Regional Representatives WineSe Yes. Without NSP there would be less wine growers and wine producers. That would be a drastic cut in the regional development especially of regions with steep slopes. Without NSP there would be less modernisa- tion, less mechanisation, less quality, less promotion, less presence on fairs etc.
3.8.3 Opinion of the expert
The NSP does not sufficiently take into account the specific problems of wine growing in steep and very steep slopes. According to the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland- Palatinate in the last years around 95% of NSP vineyard restructuring funds was spent on support in low lands and only 5% was spent for support of steep and very steep vineyard restructuring, although they represent 8% of all vineyards in Rhineland-Palatinate. As there is - different from low lands – in general no alternative agricul- tural use for vineyards in slopes and steep slopes, the fact that these areas are underrepresented in term of funding is seen critical. In order to preserve wine growing in steep slopes more funds have to be devoted in that direction and funding should be made more attractive. While a lot of possible measures specifically seem to address the needs of other Member States, the specific need of Rhineland-Palatinate seems not to be taken into account to the extent necessary. Reconstructing, on the other hand, is not an irrelevant measure but applicants do not have to document their need. Possibly part of the budget spend for restructuring is spend for companies that make a lot of money anyway, as no prosperity regulation is applied. Investment is currently limited to the second and later stages in the marketing chain. Investment in machinery of wine growers - especially for steep and very steep slopes - like RMS could be considered to be eligible for funding under NSP, as EAFRD/ELER funds are limited and investment costs for these machines are high. On the other hand, a strict prosperity regulation is applied for small and large investments with identical pros- perity thresholds. Here it appears to be rather tight for large investments. Although in the past better-off appli- cants were not funded at all one might consider to make the threshold relative to the size of investment, at least for wine growers in steep and very steep slopes. Harvest insurances had been supported in Rhineland-Palatinate in the past already and many wine growers kept them after support had ended. Thus, windfall profits might be generated in case the harvest or multiple risk insurance would become eligible for funding again. Increasing the budget share for promotion measures is demanded by some actors in the sector. This could solve alleged problems in the outflow of funds. However, a proof that such spending is effective can only be assumed.
3.9 EU added value and subsidiarity
3.9.1 Synthesis of the interviews
IQ 17.1. In your opinion, what would have been done (/how would have the wine sector been supported) at national or local level, in the absence of the EU NSP? . National and regional authorities: Probably there would have been a support for the wine sector based on other national or European funds,
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 60
e.g. the second pillar of the agricultural budget. But co-financing and interest settlement with other inter- est groups within the agricultural sector as well as budgetary constraints would have made it much more difficult to efficiently support the wine sector. Based on the NSP the wine sector can be supported much more target oriented. Especially in terms of improved wine quality NSP is regarded as effective by some in- terviewees. . National representatives of the wine sector Wine cellars and wine traders: The adaption process to market requirements would have taken a longer period of time. Regional Representatives WineSe Without NSP there would have been less modernisation, less restructuring less investment in the wine sec- tor. As consequence less vineyards and wineries would have existed today.
IQ 17.2. From your point of view, did the fact that the support was provided to the wine sector in the framework of EU regulation create an added value? i.e. - it results in more effectiveness than if actions would have been carried out at national level only? - it is more efficient than actions that would have been carried out at national level only? - it creates more synergies between instruments and policies than actions that would have been carried out at national level only? . National and regional authorities: The overall framework for NSPs is equal in all Member States that prevents competitive biases. As the money is distributed according to the vineyard area key amongst MS discussion about the size of the funds available in the different MS is limited. The budget could be spent without possible restrictions from na- tional budgets, there is flexibility for the Member States, and the regions to spend the money on measures deemed to be appropriate for the sector in their region. So the NSP provides a general and uniform framework for the Member States but it offers necessary flexibility. Moreover the limitation of the vine- yard has to be conducted at European level in order to prevent free riding. Still with the EU as the funding organisation bureaucratisation is a problem. It requires a lot of money to fulfil the processing and control requirements of the EU. The money spent for that is from national budget and might be used more effec- tively and efficiently in other fields. . National representatives of the wine sector Wine cellars and wine traders: No position regarding this question. Regional Representatives WineSe Yes, there had been fewer funds available so that the impact on the wine sector had been lower. Synergies had occurred as fewer measures dad been carried out.
IQ 17.3. Do you know of any specific cases in which a lack of flexibility in the EU framework has hindered the added value of the programme? . National and regional authorities: No . Local producer organisations / interbranch organisations Wine cellars and wine traders: Companies are not accustomed to the complicated processes with all the documentation, provisions and controls if they apply for EU funding. The additional workload and the risk of doing something wrong makes many companies reluctant to apply for EU funding. . Regional Representatives WineSe A few cases are known where wine growers who just started their business were not able to apply for in- vestment support due to the fact that three bookkeeping years are required. Thus they had to apply for small investments only whereas large investment would have been more adequate. Another problem oc- curred due to too rigid scoring system with too tight thresholds. Also the application deadlines are not al- ways in favour of the applicants. In the past some regulations were enforced too quickly leaving too little times for an appropriate reaction of the applicants, e.g. the two phase application procedures for restructuring (national rules). Some regulations are not consistent. Some programmes allow 2,000 plants per hectare others 2,500 (na- tional procedures).
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 61
IQ 17.4. Would you have any proposal of improvement in the sharing of responsibilities between EU and Member States: Regarding the design of the measure? Regarding the implementation of the programmes? Please specify which measure is concerned. . National and regional authorities: The flexibility of designing the measures is adequate and sufficient. Any more detailed regulation should by all means be avoided. The implementation and the controls cause a high workload and are by that a finan- cial burden. More flexibility taking into account the structure and procedures of the national and regional administration would be a considerable improvement. It appears that, as can be already shown by the sales promotion law for ordinary agricultural products - application procedures can be an obstacle for pos- sible applicants who are shied away by too complex regulations. Luckily, the NSP in its current framework is much more flexible and the current deepness of regulation is regarded as for sure sufficient.
3.9.2 Conclusion of the expert
It is not possible to quantify any added value induced by the NSP. However, all measured undertaken under NSP are deemed to have a positive impact on the wine growers as well as the wine growing regions.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 62
4. THEME 2: SCHEME OF AUTHORISATIONS OF VINE PLANTINGS
The total acreage of new planting rights in Germany is limited to 0.3 % of current vineyard area per year (308 hectares). 5 ha are reserved to areas for non PGI/PGI wines.
4.1 Synthesis of the literature
The authors did not find literature that addressed this topic specifically.
4.2 Synthesis of the interviews
IT 11.1 Do you assume that the new scheme of authorisations will impact the structure of the vineyard (in terms of distribution of varieties, type of wine, size of holdings, age structure of the vineyard), at regional level? at national level? Are there already evidences of such effects? . National and regional authorities: The answer depends much on the reference system. Compared to the former system of planting rights the effects in Germany and Rhineland-Palatinate are supposed to be low. Compared with a system without any restrictions the authorisation might prevent a surge in production capacity and as a consequence price cuts and economic problems especially for small holders. A price decrease would presumably lead to a decrease of steep slope wine growing, and thereby affects the unique landscape especially in the Mosel region. Moreover price decreases would lower the income of citizens that work in the wine sector and reduce regional income oppor- tunities. Indirectly it would affect tourism as tourism is depending on the unique landscape. One has to consider that the new scheme of authorisations has been implemented rather recently. This limits the profoundness of any statement. However, if Germany will keep its strategy of limiting new authorisations to just 0.3% of wine area p.a. any impact will be small and more or less negligible on a national scale. But it needs also to be mentioned that, as applications for steep slopes have priority, the impact for these areas can be considered relatively higher. Probably due to rather high wine prices in 2017 the applications for authorisations rose by 40% from 2017 to 2018, although new authorisations are not tradable. . Producer organizations and/or interbranch organisation Wine cellars and wine traders: The effect of an increase of the production area of 0.3% is too small to have any effect. Regional Representatives WineSe: The Bauern- und Winzerverband is quite content with the current scheme. Currently there is very little impact of the new scheme. Steep slope need to have a guaranteed priority also in future. . Beneficiaries : Not really. Due to availability of vineyards in the region (due to old wine growers who retire) there is a good stock of old “planting rights” which can be transformed for the new approval system, little change is ex- pected.
IT 11.2 If so, do you assume that the new scheme of authorisations will result in a vineyard structure that will be better adapted to the markets expectations? Are there already evidences of such an effect? . National and regional authorities: Again a question of the reference system: In a total liberalised wine market, market expectations were the only driver for companies’ success. Compared to planting rights there should be no difference.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 63
. Producer organizations and/or interbranch organisation Wine cellars and wine traders: It hampers structural change and in this respect it hampers the realisation of economies of scale. Regional Representatives WineSe: The new scheme of authorisations as applied in Germany is o.k. and positive for the wine sector. Without the scheme too much additional wine would be produced for which there is no demand. Unfortunately the share of applications for the expansion of vineyard area in steep slopes is lower than the share of wine area. It needs to be seen how the situation develops when old planting rights are ex- pired. . Beneficiaries
IT 11.3 Do you assume that the new scheme of authorisations will impact the economic value of vineyards? Are there already evidences of such an effect? . National and regional authorities: No, the value of the vineyards always incorporated the value of the limited production capacity. Possible im- pacts - if any - might be seen in some years. . Producer organizations and/or interbranch organisation Wine cellars and wine traders: The scheme makes structural growth of individual wine growers more expen- sive as they have to rent “wine area” instead of cheaper but equally suitable other area. The incentive for structural growth is high because of economies of scale and marginal costs for managing additional area are relatively low. That is why land prices increase and much of the benefit goes to land owners. Regional Representatives WineSe : The prices will develop differently by region and the very local situation. In case of competition between different wine growers the prices will rise. If there is no or little competition there will be no price increase or even a drop in prices. Thus, the impact of the authorisation scheme is expected to be limited. . Beneficiaries : In the lower Mosel region, the price and value for vineyards is not expected to be influenced by the new authorisation scheme. Prices for vineyards are relatively low due to retirement of old wine growers and afford- able vineyards are available. However, these usually need restructuring, re-parcelling and replanting for eco- nomic and efficient cultivation.
4.3 Conclusion of the experts
Is the new scheme of authorisations expected to contribute to the competitiveness of wine growers? Restrictions regarding the wine growing area might contribute to a strategy of wine growers and processors to concentrate on quality and on marketing. This should have an influence on the reputation of German wine or on the wine of the wine regions within Germany. However, the scheme of authorisation is more restrictive in Germany compared to other EU member states. Suppliers from Third countries might not face any restrictions at all. In this regard Germany loses overall market share and by that competitiveness.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 64
Is the new scheme of authorisation relevant to enable an increase of the production potential, while keeping the balance between demand and supply? The balance between supply and demand depends on the price. The authorisation scheme indirectly controls production volumes and leads to a balance at a specific price. It is a political question whether effects on in- come and on the local economy and landscape are considered as desirable and whether positive effects out- balance the negative ones. There is no uniform position of the German wine sector regarding the authorisation scheme. Some growers and processors have an interest in restricting the production volume to keep prices high. Some growers and processors want to increase their production volume in order to use economies of scale and to increase their income from wine growing. They feel very much restricted by the authorisation scheme. Accordingly there is not general suggestion to improve the system.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 65
5. THEME 3: WINE PRODUCTS DEFINITION, RESTRICTIONS ON OENOLOGICAL PRACTICES AND AUTHORISED WINE GRAPE VARIETIES
5.1 Detailed description of the implementation at Member State and region- al level
Table 31: Description of main local specificities in oenological practices and authorised varieties Geographical level for the Type of wine product Description of the specific rule (compared to EU standards rule (MS or region) concerned defined in the regulation) Oenological practices National “Prädikatswein” No enrichment allowed, no use of oak wood flakes in winemaking Authorised wine grape varieties Wine region Ahr White wine varieties Bacchus, Chardonnay, Früher Malingre, Huxelrebe, Johanniter, Kerner, Müller-Thurgau, Optima, Ortega, Regner, Roter Trami- ner, Ruländer, Saphira, Solaris, Weißer Burgunder, Weißer Riesling, Würzer; Red and rosé wine varieties Acolon, Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Spät- burgunder, Blauer Zweigelt, Cabernet Cortis, Cabernet Cubin, Carbernet Dorsa, Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Mitos, Cabernet Sauvignon, Dakapo, Domina, Dornfelder, Dunkelfelder, Hegel, Merlot, Müllerrebe, Neronet, Palas, Regent, Rotberger, St. Laurent.
Wine region Mittelrhein Varieties for white wine for areas in the Federal State Rhine- land-Palatinate Auxerrois, Bacchus, Chardonnay, Ehrenbreitsteiner, Ehrenfelser, Faberrebe, Findling, Früher Malingre, Gelber Muskateller, Grau- er Burgunder, Grüner Silvaner, Grüner Veltliner, Helios, Huxel- rebe, Johanniter, Kerner, Müller-Thurgau, Muskat Ottonel, Nobling, Optima, Ortega, Osteiner, Phoenix, Reichensteiner, Roter Traminer, Sauvignon blanc, Scheurebe, Schönburger, Weißer Riesling, Würzer; Varieties for red and rosé wine for areas in the Federal State Rhineland-Palatinate Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Spätburgun- der, Cabernet Dorsa, Cabernet Sauvignon, Dakapo, Deckrot, Dornfelder, Dunkelfelder, Regent, Rotberger, Saint-Laurent. White wine varieties for areas in the Federal State North Rhine-Westphalia Auxerrois, Bacchus, Ehrenfelser, Faberrebe, Freisamer, Früher Malingre, Gelber Muskateller, Grüner Silvaner, Grüner Veltliner, Huxelrebe, Kanzler, Kerner, Morio Muskat, Müller-Thurgau, Muskat Ottonel, Optima, Ortega, Perle, Phoenix, Reichenstei- ner, Rieslaner, Roter Traminer, Ruländer, Scheurebe, Siegerre- be, Solaris, Weißer Burgunder, Weißer Elbling, Weißer Gutedel, Weißer Riesling, Würzer; Red and rosé wine varieties for areas in the Federal State of North Rhine-Westphalia Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Limberger, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Spätburgunder, Domina, Dornfelder, Dunkelfelder, Frü- her Roter Malvasier, Gewürztraminer, Helfensteiner, Heroldre- be, Regent, Rotberger, Roter Elbling, Roter Gutedel, Saint Lau- rent.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 66
Wine region Mosel White wine varieties Arnsburger, Auxerrois, Bacchus, Bronner, Cabernet blanc (nur Saarland), Chardonnay, Ehrenbreitsteiner, Ehrenfelser, Faberre- be, Findling, Gelber Muskateller, Goldriesling, Grauer Burgun- der, Grüner Veltliner, Huxelrebe, Johanniter, Juwel, Kerner, Kernling, Merzling, Morio-Muskat, Müller Thurgau, Muskat- Ottonel, Optima, Ortega, Perle, Phoenix, Prinzipal, Regner, Reichensteiner, Rieslaner, Roter Elbling, Roter Muskateller, Roter Traminer, Saphira, Sauvignon blanc, Scheurebe, Schön- burger, Solaris, Weißer Burgunder, Weißer Elbling, Weißer Riesling Red and rosé wine varieties Accent, Acolon, Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Limberger, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Spätburgunder, Bolero, Cabernet Cortis, Cabernet Cubin, Cabernet Dorio, Cabernet Dorsa, Cabernet Mitos, Cabernet Sauvignon, Dakapo, Domina, Dornfelder, Dun- kelfelder, Merlot, Müllerrebe, Prior, Regent, Rondo, Rubinet, Saint-Laurent, Syrah
Wine region Nahe White wine varieties Albalonga, Auxerrois, Bacchus, Chardonnay, Ehrenfelser, Faber- rebe, Freisamer, Gelber Muskateller, Grauer Burgunder, Grüner Silvaner, Grüner Veltliner, Hibernal, Hölder, Huxelrebe, Johanni- ter, Juwel, Kanzler, Kerner, Kernling, Morio-Muskat, Müller Thurgau, Muskat-Ottonel, Optima, Orion, Ortega, Perle, Phoe- nix, Prinzipal, Regner, Reichensteiner, Rieslaner, Roter Muska- teller, Roter Elbling, Roter Traminer, Saphira, Sauvignon Blanc, Scheurebe, Schönburger, Septimer, Siegerrebe, Solaris, Staufer, Weißer Burgunder, Weißer Elbling; Weißer Riesling, Würzer Red and rosé wine varieties Accent, Acolon, Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Limberger, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Spätburgunder, Cabernet Cortis, Cabernet Cubin, Cabernet Dorio, Cabernet Dorsa, Cabernet Franc, Caber- net Mitos, Cabernet Sauvignon, Dakapo, Deckrot, Domina, Dornfelder, Dunkelfelder, Hegel, Merlot, Müllerrebe, Neronet, Palas, Regent, Rondo, Rotberger, Saint-Laurent, Syrah
Wine region Rheinhessen White wine varieties Albalonga, Arnsburger, Auxerrois, Bacchus, Bronner, Chardon- nay, Ehrenbreitsteiner, Ehrenfelser, Faberrebe, Findling, Frei- samer, Gelber Muskateller, Gewürztraminer, Grauer Burgunder, Grüner Silvaner, Grüner Veltliner, Helios, Hibernal, Hölder, Huxelrebe, Johanniter, Juwel, Kanzler, Kerner, Kernling, Ma- riensteiner, Merzling, Morio-Muskat, Müller-Thurgau, Muskat- Ottonel, Nobling, Optima, Orion, Ortega, Perle, Phoenix, Prinzi- pal, Regner, Reichensteiner, Rieslaner, Roter Gutedel, Roter Muskateller, Roter Traminer, Saphira, Sauvignon blanc, Scheu- rebe, Schönburger, Septimer, Siegerrebe, Silcher, Sirius, Solaris, Staufer, Weißer Burgunder, Weißer Gutedel, Weißer Riesling, Würzer Red and rosé wine varieties Acolon, Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Limberger, Blauer Portu- gieser, Blauer Silvaner, Blauer Spätburgunder, Blauer Trollinger, Blauer Zweigelt, Bolero, Cabernet Carbon, Cabernet Cortis, Cabernet Cubin, Cabernet Dorio, Cabernet Dorsa, Cabernet franc, Cabernet Mitos, Cabernet Sauvignon, Dakapo, Deckrot, Domina, Dornfelder, Dunkelfelder, Färbertraube, Früher Roter Malvasier, Hegel, Heroldrebe, Merlot, Monarch, Müllerrebe, Muskat Hamburg, Neronet, Palas, Prior, Regent, Rondo, Rotber- ger, Rubinet, Saint-Laurent, Syrah,
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 67
Wine region Pfalz (Palatinate) Varieties for white wine Albalonga, Auxerrois, Bacchus, Chardonnay, Ehrenbreitsteiner, Ehrenfelser, Faberrebe, Früher Malingre, Gelber Muskateller, Grauer Burgunder, Grüner Veltliner, Hölder, Huxelrebe, Johan- niter, Juwel, Kanzler, Kerner, Kernling, Mariensteiner, Morio- Muskat, Müller-Thurgau, Muskat-Ottonel, Nobling, Optima, Orion, Ortega, Perle, Phoenix, Prinzipal, Regner, Reichensteiner, Rieslaner, Riesling, Roter Elbling, Roter Gutedel, Roter Muska- teller, Roter Traminer, Saphira, Sauvignon Blanc, Scheurebe, Schönburger, Siegerrebe, Silvaner, Sirius, Solaris, Staufer, Wei- ßer Burgunder, Weißer Elbling, Weißer Gutedel, Würzer Red and rosé wine varieties Accent, Acolon, Allegro, Blauer Frühburgunder, Blauer Limber- ger, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Spätburgunder, Blauer Trollin- ger, Blauer Zweigelt, Bolero, Cabernet Carbon, Cabernet Carol, Cabernet Cortis, Cabernet Cubin, Cabernet Dorio, Cabernet Dorsa, Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Mitos, Cabernet Sauvignon, Dakapo, Deckrot, Domina, Dornfelder, Dunkelfelder, Färber- traube, Früher Roter Malvasier, Helfensteiner, Heroldrebe, Merlot, Müllerrebe, Muskat Hamburg, Palas, Portugieser, Prior, Regent, Rondo, Saint- Laurent, Syrah,
Since January 1st, 2018 ‘Roter Riesling’ is eligible for planting in Germany.
5.2 Competitiveness distortions due to specific rules on oenological practic- es
5.2.1 Description of competing wines
Table 32: Specificities oenological practices of main competing wines
Main differences in oenological practices and variety authorised PDO/PGI wine : Eiswein: EU competitor 1 Austria, Luxembourg EU competitor 2 : Spain Ice Artificial ice wine out of a deep freezer wine Abroad competitor 1 : Can- Canada ada Abroad competitor 2 : USA Artificial ice wine out of a deep freezer (Kryoextraktion)20 According to our interviewees it is not possible to fill that table. They are not aware of competitive distortions based on oenological practices.
20 See article concerning the attempt of a Chinese importer to protect the term Eiswein for the Chinese market ( DWZ, 03/2018), Artificial ice wine out of a deep freezer (Kryoextraktion) and pressed from lower quality grapes for export. Based on the interviews we are not aware of other relevant differences. Maybe that there are additional differences. But if there are, the Commission should be aware of them.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 68
However, in the past, the competitors of honest wine growers and wine makers were the fraudulent ones. In January 2012, 470,000 litre of Eiswein must were pressed although frost was insufficient in many regions and grapes had been frequently in a lousy condition. Thus, LUA contested 90% of all Eiswein samples. Consequent- ly, compulsory registration was introduced by the ministry responsible for wine.21
5.2.2 Datasets on competitiveness indicators
Stakeholders consider that there is no relevant competitive distortion based on oenological practices. Oenolog- ical practices are regarded as similar so that this does not play a role in their everyday business. Amongst the interviewees there is a tendency to regards their wine as unique. However, there are substitutional effects, but they cannot measure these effects. As costs are confidential, it is difficult to assess disadvantages.
Question 5.5 to 5.9: no answers from the Regional Representatives WineSe Wine cellars and wine traders There is no relevant competitive distortion based on oenological practices. Oenological practices are regarded as similar so that this does not play a role in their everyday business. It is not possible to reliable quantify a competitive disadvantage as data about costs are confidential and companies would not provide that infor- mation. Moreover there are not directly comparable wines, even if the wines compete in similar market seg- ments. Wine growers : Pündericher Marienburg (PDO/TSG); Winninger Uhlen (PDO/TSG) Not really possible, because there are no competitors for this quality of Riesling in EU or outside EU using different oenological practices. Riesling wines are unique.
IQ 5.7 Please name two brand or varietal wines with specific oenological practices in your Member State /region 22
IQ 5.8 For each cited brand or varietal wine, name two competitors in the EU and two competitors abroad applying different rules on oenological practices
21 Source: own translation and abstract of https://mueef.rlp.de/de/pressemeldungen/detail/news/detail/News/hoefken- weinkontrolleure-sichern-fairen-wettbewerb-neue-vorab-meldepflicht-fuer-eiswein- vorgestell/?no_cache=1&cHash=e875f157d6ba374e4f3da547c173f013 22
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 69
5.3 Synthesis of the interviews
5.3.1 Effects of oenological practices on marketing conditions for producers and traders
5.10 Did oenological practices as applied in your Member State/region/PDO-PGI territory help to improve the marketing conditions of concerned wines? . National authorities: Practices applied for “Prädikatswein” help to differentiate the quality and by that to establish the reputa- tion of the wine. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations): Wine cellars and wine traders: German Prädikatsweine must not be enriched. This restricts the market op- portunities especially on export markets. Any enriched Prädikatswein is - in case of enrichment - subject to a downgrading to Qualitätswein, devaluating the sales price. Regional Representatives WineSe No or if at all, rather little impact. . Wine industries / wine growers cooperatives / wineries: Cooperative Yes. The current oenological practice supported the quality orientation of the cooperative. However, the move towards PDO/PGI is seen challenging for the cooperative due to already introduced and intensively used majority position (Großlagen) by the cooperative like “Forster Schnepfenflug”, “Mariengarten”, “Hof- stück”. They should remain. . Wine growers : Yes. This assures quality and avoids misuse. However, the currently use of majority positions “Großla- gen” (e.g. Goldbäumchen, Grafschaft, Schwarze Katz) should be completely deleted and not used any longer. They are confusing for consumers. A territory, mentioned on the label should indicate a superior quality. .
23 Unfortunately, C did not provide any details. 24 Here, C is referring to the ‘Wine-Pyramid’-concept that is strongly recommended by the DWV (Deutscher Weinbau- verband e.V.). »Protected origin = Promise of quality “the smaller the origin = the bigger the promise”.« Estate wines, local wines and single site wines. The voyage from the traditional quality wine system (Qualitätssystem) towards the new system of origin only a few wineries have taken off on the path of the new system of origin, thinking quality new and ‘loading’ the origin with innovative and creative production methods . On the basis there will exist wines without protected origin: inexpensive, properly processed, taste without any flaw. The shelf above that with PGI wines has to be overhauled substantially. The PGI wines should not be the urchins / mucky pups of the PGO wines but become an independent product segment, maybe the ‘A-Class’ of fruity light wines, for whose pro- duction the world has great confidence in the Germans. Many things need to be done on legal, structural and organiza- tional level as the success of the ‘A-Class’ (illustrative picture related to the determination of Mercedes cars) will only ap- pear when the marketing firms are offered 15 to 20% of the total German wine production each year. … The basic quality of the PGO wines will only be labelled with the name of the region. For many wine estates these are the estate wines. On top of theses the wines with an even smaller destination will be sorted in, i.e. regional wines, local wines and single site wines. Only if for these labels strict quality criteria are applied that have to be defined by the protective association (Schutzgemeinschaften) they should only be use, but a transition period may be granted. Source: own translation of an own abstract of an interview published in ‘der deutsche weinbau 23/2017’, interview with Klaus Schneider, Chairman of the Deutsche Weinbauverband e.V. (DWV)
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 70
.
IQ 5.11 Were oenological practices as applied in your Member State/region/PDO-PGI area more or less con- straining than for main competing wines? . National authorities: No wine grower is forced to any specific oenological practice. Yet, the use of certain denominations is tied to certain practices. This still holds for the restrictions regarding varieties: The restrictions apply only to those who want to market wine and sell them under certain names. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations): Wine cellars and wine traders: Yes, regarding the alcohol content of non PDO/PGI wine Regional Representatives WineSe No, nothing like this exists. . Wine industries / wine growers cooperatives / wineries: cooperatives No. All German wine producers face the same oenological conditions. Therefore no market constraints ex- ist for the cooperative because the majority of the production is sold on the German market. . Wine producer : His family winery has not used PDO traditional “Prädikatswein” classifications for their high-level Riesling for more than 15 years. usually markets his wine as PDO “Qualitätswein”. feels unhappy about the traditional German wine classification and prefers VDP approach using geographic loca- tions/terroir for quality classification. .
5.3.2 Effect of oenological practices on the safety and quality of the products
IQ 5.1 How do EU rules on oenological practices contribute to the safety of EU wine products? . National authorities: Oenological practices have to be approved on EU level. Food safety is a relevant aspect of the approval process. Any oenological practice that has been approved on EU level is safe for consumption. (He does not know any regulation that does not match these safety standards.) . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) Wine cellars and wine traders: Oenological practices have to be approved on EU level. Food safety is a relevant aspect of the approval process. Any oenological practice that has been approved on EU level is safe for consumption.) Regional Representatives WineSe
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 71
They protect the consumer. E.g. artificial Eiswein from Spain [that is produced in the deep freezers] would be an economic problem (as long as there will be Eiswein production in Germany [i.e. as long as the impact of global warming is not that severe that real German ‘Eiswein’ can be produced at all, in 2015, 4,000 hl/of Eiswein were produced in Germany.]). . Others (e.g. consumer organisation): The German consumer organisations have to deal with a comprehensive number of tasks with a limited staff. They rely on the European standards and have not developed a position regarding oenological prac- tices.
IQ 5.2 Was there any major safety issue related to EU wine products in your Member State during the last 10 years? . National authorities: No. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) No. Regional Representatives WineSe No. . Others (e.g. consumer organisation): No.
IQ 5.3 How do EU rules on oenological practices contribute to offering a standard degree of quality for EU wine products? . National authorities: The oenological practices guarantee a high level of food safety which is a relevant quality characteristic. Moreover they separate wine from other products that are not allowed to be called wine, e.g. flavoured wine. Still there are different wines on the market with different product characteristics. In this respect the rules on oenological practices fortunately do not lead to a uniform quality. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) Regional Representatives WineSe EU rules offer orientation.
5.3.3 Relevance and added value of specific oenological practices and restrictions on varieties
IQ 14.2 For what reasons were restrictions regarding varieties initially set up? . National authorities: The original idea for restricting varieties was that only varieties adapted to the climatic and environmental conditions of the regions should be approved. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) Wine cellars and wine traders: To guarantee that the varieties were suitable to the climate condition of the region. Regional Representatives WineSe The list of wine grapes that must not be planted is very helpful to counteract potential spreads of pests and diseases.
IQ 14.3 Are the initial justifications for restrictions still relevant today? . National authorities: Some interviewees answer yes, others could imagine ceasing the variety regulations. Those restrictions are not relevant in other sectors: We promote German asparagus but do not promote German Wine. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations)
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 72
Wine cellars and wine traders: Yes Regional Representatives WineSe Yes, Phylloxera is back in almost every region. . Local producers’ organisations / interbranch organisations . Wine industries / wine growers cooperatives / wineries: Cooperative Does not know. . Wine growers : Since long, it was not allowed to plant un-grafted Riesling. However, there has remained (and were maintained) a good number of un-grafted (wurzelechte) Riesling vineyards, which give high quality wines and are marketed at high prices. Why EU / Government do not consider allowing planting of such un- grafted or other - e.g. new varieties and supports these? is in favour of NSP restructuring support for un-grafted Riesling. .
IQ 14.4 Today, what are the issues at stake regarding the quality and the use of varieties in wine production? . National authorities: The huge number of varieties that is approved in the different regions leads to very different types of wine. This makes it difficult to establish a uniform reputation of the wine regions. There is a severe conflict be- tween a uniform reputation and the quality and taste differentiation that wine growers and processors need to establish preferences for their wines. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) Regional Representatives WineSe Varieties that can stand new conditions induced by climate change are necessary. For instance there is a need for more droughts resistant. Fungus resistant varieties would also be an issue but the market must develop a demand for the wine that derives from these grapes. As soon as the protective associations (Schutzgemeinschaften) are established the Terms of Reference will deal with the varieties. It is likely that the Terms of Reference will focus on the main and most important varieties only but will not exclude other varieties as long as they are approved by the Bundesortenamt. . Local producers’ organisations / interbranch organisations . Wine industries / wine growers cooperatives / wineries: Cooperative List of EU allowed varieties for Germany in general is fine. Fungus resistant varieties are not a point of in- terest for the cooperative. However the cooperative studies how to enter in future into organic grape and wine production as this is in demand by consumers. This could influence the choice of varieties. Wine growers:
IQ 14.5 Today, what are the issues at stake regarding competitiveness and the use of varieties in wine pro- duction? . Wine growers: : Has no interest cultivating other than Riesling, Elbling and Weißburgunder. These are sufficient re- sistant towards climate change in the region. He knows that other wine growers experiment more with va- rieties and fungicide-resistant varieties (PiWi). He does not see such need for his vineyards.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 73
ported EU and Third Country wines. However, he is convinced that the produced quality of his barrique red wines will be fully convincing due to the perfect and moderate climate of his region. He is convinced to be competitive e.g. with renowned wine estates of France and can offer a similar quality to very competitive prices. French customers already buy at his estate and regard prices as “cheap” compared to same quality level in France. (It respond both to IQ14.4 and IQ 14.5)
IQ 14.6 Today, what are the other issues at stake regarding the use of varieties in wine production? . Wine cellars and wine traders: Market conditions as well as suitability to the region. This is of special relevance in the context of climate change. Climate change leads to pests and plant diseases that were not relevant in the past. Furthermore, drought and frost are problems that arise with climate change. Wine growers: : In the Mosel valley, there are still vineyards with un-grafted Riesling vineyards, bringing little quantity, but very high quality wines which are selling at good prices. Since decades it was not allowed to plant un- grafted grapes due to risk of Phylloxera (Reblaus). Would it be possible to extend un-grafted Riesling in the future? Main challenge is the adaptation of the variety to the local micro-climatic and soil conditions. E.g. a stony and extremely steep slate soil needs deep rooting rootstocks with a good stand, and a middle growth. On the other side - maybe only 200 meters away - a complete different rootstock and grape varie- ty might be necessary due to different micro conditions including different slope. A good and trustful rela- tion with his vine nursery (Rebschule) to identify the best variety of Riesling and best rootstock for a specif- ic location is more important than all EU regulations.
IQ 16.4 What would be the consequences of applying strictly OIV definitions, rules on oenological practices and rules concerning authorised wine grape varieties in the EU? . National authorities: Regarding the definition of the products, applying the OIV rules would be against the tradition of the Euro- pean wine culture. This especially refers to enrichment practices and would lead to consumer confusion too, as consumers are accustomed to that European tradition. Regarding the oenological practices, the standard for food safety might be lower as the aspect of food safety has a higher relevance in the approval procedures in the EU. Also sometimes one gets the impression that OIV is more industry oriented than small holder focussed. That may impact on their standards for oenological practices. OIV regulations con- cerning sweetening on the one hand as acidizing on the other may disfavour European wine producers. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations)
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 74
Wine cellars and wine traders: First of all it would alleviate international trade. But enrichment with sugar would not be allowed, thus having substantial consequences for the German wine sector. Substituting sugar by rectified must would increase costs considerably and thus worsen the competitive situation of the German wine sector com- pared with regions from the south of Europe. Food safety is regarded as a minor problem. Regional Representatives WineSe There is no general objection against OIV. It is science oriented and there is trust in that organisation. However, if OIV will gain in importance, the regional and national representatives of the wine growers and producers must be active member who decide. They do not want the EU administration to act as their rep- resentative. It needs to be stated that certain OIV regulations would need to be altered before they can be applied in the EU (e.g. enrichment with sucrose, exemptions for Beerenauslese, Trockenbeerenauslese and Eiswein). In addition, the USA should be a member of OIV. And last but not least OIV would need to speed up its procedures drastically. To get an approval to level 7 takes currently several years.
5.4 Comments and conclusions of the expert
5.4.1 On the effectiveness of EU rules on competitiveness and quality
The EU rules on oenological practices guarantee a standard for food safety that seems to be higher than the OIV one. Regarding quality: Quality is not an inherent product characteristic but - from a marketing point of view - quality is fitness for use and cannot be defined in general but only dependent on consumer preferences. These preferences are not uniform regarding taste and other characteristics of wine as well as regarding the willingness to pay. In this regard the EU rules offer the flexibility for a wide range of products that are designed to meet preferences in different market segments. Producer can make money by meeting the preferences of their target groups.
5.4.2 On the relevance of EU rules and their added value compared to OIV rules
The EU rules are much more adapted to the EU wine growing tradition. This is not only relevant for producers, but also for consumers who are familiar with the EU rules. Moreover they put more emphasis on the aspects of food safety. That is why they have an added value. For Germany the permission of enrichment with sucrose is a relevant difference to the OIV rules. Without this permission the competitiveness of the German wine sector might considerably decrease.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 75
6. THEME 4: EU RULES ON LABELLING AND PRESENTATION
6.1 Description of the labelling rules applied at Member State and local level
6.1.1 Description of specific labelling rules applied in your Member State, region or main PDO/PGIs (including restrictions applied to wines without GI)
The labelling regulations are rather complex25. In Rhineland-Palatinate all information on wine labels has to comply with those laid down in the ‘Food Infor- mation Regulation’, the German Wine Law (WeinG) the legal wine ordinance WeinV [Weinverordnung26. Sales description and country of origin, alcohol content, filling quantity, bottler and location of bottling including MS indication, allergens, lot number or with PGO wines the A.P.-No. (authority verification number [Amtliche Prüfnummer]) have to be labled. If the indication of the estate (of origin) [Erzeugerabfüllung] is ineligible for PDO/PGI wine, it is not even al- lowed to state it in the email or internet - address. ‘Erzeugerabfüllung‘ [bottled by the producer] and ‘Gutsab- füllung‘ [bottled on the estate] are only eligible for PGO/PGI wines. They can replace the indication of the ’bot- tler‘. An exceptional regime applies for Weißherbst27. For non-alcoholic sparkling wines labelling regulations are rather discriminating. The official sales description for non-alcoholic sparkling wines has to be ‘foaming beverage from non-alcoholic wine’ [‘schäumendes Getränk aus alkoholfreiem Wein‘]). That appears not really appealing.28 Currently, be the indication ‘bottled by the producer’ [’Erzeugerabfüllung’] is a contentious issue in Rhineland- Palatinate. Different from the past the term ’Erzeugerabfüllung’ [‘bottled by the producer’] is only allowed if the wine is bottled on the property or in venues leased on a long term basis by the producer. In the past, leased property and leased venues – even if leased on a short-term contract - were eligible.29 In order to protect the reputation of PDO/PGI wines and to prevent consumer deception by the good image of certain varieties, labelling of the following varieties is not allowed on non PDO/PGI wines: Bacchus, Blauer Lim- berger, Blauer Portugieser, Blauer Silvaner, Blauer Spätburgunder, Blauer Trollinger, Domina, Dornfelder, Grauer Burgunder, Grüner Silvaner, Kerner, Müller Thurgau, Müllerrebe, Rieslaner, Roter Elbling, Roter Gutedel, Roter Riesling, Roter Traminer, Scheurebe, Weißer Elbling, Weißer Gutedel, Weißer Riesling. The re- striction is deemed to be necessary because consumers might evaluate the quality of the wine by the variety of the grapes30.
6.1.2 Description of the system set up for controlling the labelling
The control authorities for German Wine [non PDO-PGI wine], Landweine [PGI wine, Protected geographical indication), and Qualitätswein (Quality wine, PDO wine, Protected Designation of Origin] in Rhineland- Palatinate are: . The Federal State Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture is the (supreme) compe- tent state ("Bundesland") authority for wine supervision / control. . According to § 1 of the state ordinance about competent jurisdiction in the domain of wine law of October 12, 2011, the responsibility for wine supervision rests with the Directorate for Supervision and Service [Aufsichts- und Dienstleistungsdirektion, ADD].
25 SEE for example: „Welche Angaben sind beim Weinetikett wichtig“, DIE WINZER-ZEITSCHRIFT, MAI 2018, p. 41 to 43 26 For full text see https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/weinv_1995/ 27 Weißherbst: The notion of Weißherbst does not name a grape variety, but a type of wine - as if red grapes are immedi- ately pressed; only few red colour pigments leave the berries' skin. This leads to a wine of light-red colour containing very little tanning agent. Contrary to what applies to Schillerwein, Weißherbst may only be made of one grape variety. https://wein-und-sektkellerei-stengel.de/english/sorte_weiss_schiller.html 28 Source: own translation of extracts of an article in der deutsche weinbau 22/2017 Interview with a representative of the company Carl Jung in Rüdesheim 29 For more information on the changes concerning ‘ERZEUGERABFÜLLUNGEN’ see https://www.bwv- net.de/content/fachgebiete/weinbaupolitik-im-bwv-rheinland-nassau.html (Visited: April 4, 2018) 30 According to the quality philosophy of the wine growers, non-PDO/PGI wines can be ‘everything’, mixed from different origins.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 76
. According to §31 clause 3 of the wine law, the chemical investigation office of Rhineland-Palatinate (Landesuntersuchungsamt, LUA) is seat of wine experts and inspectors (Weinsachverständigen and Wein- kontrolleure) as well as the seat of the state examined food chemists who are responsible for the official (wine) sample analyses and assessments. They support the competent authority according §4 clause 2 of the state ordinance about competent jurisdiction in the domain of wine law in the execution of their tasks. . The wine inspectors of LUA undertake on the spot controls. They control the wine books of the wine pro- ducers and wine bottlers as well as the accompanying documents (for details see Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance - number of samples, contestations by origin, 2016). They survey the flows of goods and based on this information risk oriented controls and samplings are undertaken at the producer as well as on the bottler levels in the Federal State of Rhineland-Palatinate for all product categories (German Wine, PGI Wine and PDO Wine). . According to the German wine law [§§16aff WeinG and §§19ff WeinV [Weinverordnung31, legal wine ordinance] PDO wines are subject to the special requirement that each wine batch has to be checked by the Chamber of Agriculture [Landwirtschaftskammer] of Rhineland-Palatinate. Each filled batch that is in- tended to be sold as PDO Wine is subject to an ex-ante analytical chemical and organoleptic analysis by the Chamber of Agriculture. . The district authorities, in certain non-district cities the municipal administration, are - according to §6 clause 1 of the state ordinance about competent jurisdiction – in the domain of wine law responsible for the sampling in retail stores and restaurants.
Figure 4 Overview on authorities involved in controls Federal ministries and other nation- Responsible al authorities institutions on (Ministry of Food national level and Agriculture, BVL, BfR)
Ministry of the Responsible Supreme state Economy, institutions at authority of Transport, Agri- Federal State other German culture and Viti- level Federal States culture
District authori- LUA wine in- ties and munici- ADD execution LWK Chamber of Executing spections and pal administra- authority for wine Agriculture control institutions chemical anal- tion (food con- control of PDO wines yses of wine trol, sampling)
Risk oriented, Risk oriented, Risk oriented, Control intensi- random sample random sample of random sample 100% control for
ty of German wine German wine and of German wine PDO wines and PGI wine PGI wine and PGI wine Source: own translation of documents handed over by the Ministry of the Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture of Rhineland-Palatinate.
IQ 9.4 Please describe the system set up for controlling the labelling of non-PDO/PGI wines . National authorities See above for controlling. In addition: non-PDO/PGI wines must not mention certain grape varieties on their label. E.g. German Riesling Wine must not appear on any label (see above). . Representatives of the sector Regional Representatives WineSe There are different procedures depending on the wine (Prädikatswein, Qualitätswein, Landwein, Deutscher
31 For full text see https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/weinv_1995/
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 77
Wein). The regional authorities control each wine according to legal requirements. . Producers organisations: . Wine growers is able to describe in detail the monitoring and control system in the region. He is regularly controlled by the wine inspection (e.g. cellar controller [Kellerkontrolleur]), or cross-compliance controllers and oth- ers. He regards this necessary to reduce misuse and fraud.
6.2 Existing national data on non-compliance with labelling rules
We are not aware of such data. On the level of the Federal State of Rhineland-Palatinate the LUA provides an annual report about its control activities as well its findings. The last report published in 2017 for 2016 revealed mainly minor violations. The tables on their findings are listed below:32 Table 33: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance labelling violations 2016
Checked parameter / type of violation Foreign coun- Germany Total tries
Total no. of samples 2,948 1,298 4,246
Missing Identity, circulated without or with faked A.P.- 42 14 56 No., award, or lot
Alcohol content 37 16 53
Origin 3 0 3
Taste 7 12 19
Year 2 0 2
Grape variety 9 0 9
Lot number 3 8 11
Sales designation 6 7 13
Type of wine 7 0 7
Allergen labelling 4 8 12
Ineligible use of protected terms or danger of confusion 1 3 4 with protected terms
Font size 1 8 9
Other 47 33 80
Total contestations 169 109 278
Multiple responses are possible with some samples Source: Landesuntersuchungsamt Rheinland-Pfalz: Bilanz der Weinüberwachung (in Rhineland-Palatinate) 2016, published 2017, own translation
32 For more statistics on wine controls see Annex 1 Table 6, 7, 8
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 78
Table 34: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance overview, 2016
Type of control No of actions
Total no. of controls 5,503
- of which wine producers and co-operatives 4,606
- of which wine sellers, wine cellars, big enterprises 553
- of which restaurants 9
- of sparkling wine producers 90
- of which traders / brokers 20
- of which others 225
Activities due to request from public prosecutor's office 63
Inspection reports 429
Contestations, written warning, official requirements imposed 304
Quantity of temporarily seized wines (sales ban, processing 2,335.06 ban) (hl)
- of which domestic (hl) 2,334.6
- of which abroad (hl) 0.46
No. of samples (WC 33, 34) 3,239
- of which domestic (hl) 2,666
- of which EU 407
- of which Third Countries 166
Reports of sensorial tests 2,803
Accompanying papers 74,890
- of which domestic (hl) 58,082
- of which abroad (hl) 16,808 Source: Landesuntersuchungsamt Rheinland-Pfalz: Bilanz der Weinüberwachung (in Rhineland-Palatinate) 2016, published 2017, own translation
6.3 Synthesis of the interviews
6.3.1 Effects of labelling and presentation rules on the adequate information of con- sumers
IQ 6.2 Do EU rules on labelling allow an adequate, clear and sufficient information on the products? National authorities: Yes, they provide a traditionally accepted system of grading wines and leave sufficient room for further quality differentiation. Consumer organisation: The VZBV considers that the exemptions for alcoholic beverages according to the European Food Information to Consumers Regulation (EU No 1169/2011) aggravate adequate, clear, sufficient information. Even though information might be available somewhere else, the effect was much better if it were available on the label.
IQ 6.3 Is the information provided sufficient as regards health warnings, alcohol content, calorie and nutri- tional aspects? . National authorities: Yes, but it much depends on the point of view. There is a discussion about additional information and opin- ions on that are not uniform. Consumer organisation:
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 79
No, wine is food and the label should be in accordance with the requirements for (all) other food. Thus, all ingredients should be made transparent. Consumers should not only be aware of the alcohol content but especially on calories and sugar content. In particular mixed beverages containing wine should be labelled with the ingredient list. . Producer organisations: Cooperative Yes. Regrettably, certain health related information is not allowed on labels any more. A good number of consumers preferred dry wine for diabetics. Traditional quality levels (Kabinett, Spätlese, Auslese) need to be kept. 33
IQ 6.4 For foreign wines sold on the local market, do the languages used allow an adequate, clear and suffi- cient information on the products? . National authorities: Mandatory information is in German anyway. But with regard to non-mandatory information it should be in German, too. Still the relevance of the problem is not big. Consumer organisation: No, if a product is sold in Germany, information should be available in German.
IQ 6.5 Is there any other type of information that would be necessary to add on the labels to ensure an ade- quate, clear and sufficient information on the products? . National authorities: No, but this again depends on the point of view. Opinions are not uniform. Consumer organisation: In addition to the information required by the European Food Information to Consumers Regulation no additional information is regarded necessary if there were no exemption for alcoholic beverages. This in- cludes warnings regarding the abuse of alcohol. Exemptions should be abolished.
IQ 9.1 To what extent do consumers understand the specificities of PDO/PGI labelling compared to non- PDO/PGI labelling? . National authorities: In Germany the PDO/PGI logos are hardly used in the wine market. Consumers are more familiar with the terms “Qualitätswein” (PDO) or “Landwein” (PGI) and it can be supposed that they have learned it. Good knowledge about quality schemes is restricted to experts anyway and ordinary consumers find their own cues to get an appropriate wine, e.g. the variety, the sweetness of the wine, the retailer or recommenda- tions. It is supposed that consumers and even experts do hardly know that the applied system is an EU one. Compared to the established German system they would not be misled. Still it is necessary to define nominations in order to prevent abuse. . Representatives of the sector: Wine cellars and wine traders: Consumers do not understand PDO/PGI labelling. Most of them do not understand the German system, even though it has a long tradition. With the European system they are not confronted so there is no op- portunity to learn it (the labelling with the PDO/PGI labels is not mandatory. And even if something is la- belled, consumers might not realise it as their purchase decision is structured differently). . Regional Representatives WineSe Consumers do currently understand too little. Therefore the representatives of the Bauern und Win- zerverband would like to introduce the wine pyramid. The smaller the indicated location the higher the quality. But what will be the strategies of the big players in the market? Will they comply with the pyra- mid? Consumer organisation: In the wine market, PDO/PGI logos are hardly used on the level of consumers and thus the label PDO/PGI is
33 A lot of issues are under discussion with regard to the new quality scheme. Currently we do not see that the traditional quality levels (Kabinett, Spätlese, Auslese) are removed, but the interviewee wanted to stress that this should by no means be the case.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 80
not relevant for consumers in the wine sector. Still (some) consumers realise the European quality labels on other products and feel rather confused than informed.
IQ 9.2 Without labelling restrictions applied to non-PDO/PGI wines, to what extent would consumers be misled? . National authorities: Compared to the established German system they would not be misled. Still it is necessary to define nomi- nations in order to prevent abuse. Consumer organisation: This is not relevant for Germany. The German system provides corresponding information. Wine cellars and wine traders: Consumers would not be misled if it was allowed to label non PDO/PGI wine with the underlying variety. The quality of non PDO/PGI wine is supposed to be not worse compared to PDO/PGI wine and the variety is an important factor especially for consumers on non-domestic markets. The restrictions therefore re- duce the use of market opportunities especially on export markets and may even mislead consumers be- cause the bottles are not labelled with a characteristic that is relevant for the purchase decision.
6.3.2 Effects of labelling and presentation rules on marketing conditions and fair competition between operators
. National authorities: The labelling rules provide a uniform framework for all the actors in the wine sector. Still there is enough room for competition between the operators. They have to adjust their products to the preferences of the target groups and are dependent on a clear definition of nominations. . Representatives of the sector Regional Representatives WineSe No effects so far.
IQ 6.6 Did the new rules on labelling allow an increase in the quantity of production marketed/traded? . National authorities: No, nothing changed on market level. . Representatives of the sector Wine cellars and wine traders: No, nothing changed . Regional Representatives WineSe Nothing changed. . Producers organisations:
IQ 6.7 Did the new rules on labelling allow an increase in the value of production marketed/traded? . National authorities: No. On the level of markets nothing changed. . Representatives of the sector Wine cellars and wine traders: No, nothing changed Regional Representatives WineSe Nothing changed.
IQ 6.10 Do the new rules contribute to ensure a fair competition between operators? . National authorities: Yes, because they offer a uniform framework. . Representatives of the sector Wine cellars and wine traders: ‘Fair’ is relative. It can be regarded as unfair that producers of non PDO/PGI wine are not allowed to label
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 81
the grape variety and that PGI wine has to be named “Landwein”. Regional Representatives WineSe Nothing changed. But it is regarded as positive that the variety list excluding certain variety from being on the label of non PDO/PGI wine remained. . Operators:
IQ 6.11 In your opinion, what changes would be necessary in the labelling rules to ensure a fair competition between operators? . National authorities: No changes. . Representatives of the sector Wine cellars and wine traders: Abolishing the specific restriction in the German wine law. Regional Representatives WineSe Nothing. To declare the energy value would be o.k. but list of ingredient is regarded as senseless. A decla- ration of allergens is acceptable, but declaring Histerin would result in tremendous effort and require cost- ly analyses. Thresholds are currently discussed inside OIV. . Producers organisations: Cooperative Regrettably health related information is not any more allowed on labels. A good number of consumers preferred dry wine for diabetics. Traditional quality levels (Kabinett, Spätlese, Auslese) should be kept34. The restriction should be lifted.
IQ 6.8 Were the rules on labelling simple to implement? . National authorities: There was no need for implementation because they are consistent with the rules that had been already applied. . Representatives of the sector Wine cellars and wine traders: Nothing changed. Regional Representatives WineSe Nothing changed . Operators: : Not complicated. For export to USA and Asia different labels are used. He does not apply oenological practices which require indication on the label. Might be different for the wine industry.
IQ 6.9 What would be the consequence of rules requiring more detailed information (on ingredients for instance)? . National authorities: More detailed information would be a burden especially for small enterprises. Even if the rules are not de- pendent on the size of the company, the cost of compliance (learning, analyses of products, changing of
34 The answer of the interviewee expresses his fear that as soon as things change also good things may be flushed away, although there is currently not any discourse in that direction we know of.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 82
labels etc.) can be distributed to higher a volume the bigger the company is. Accordingly higher standards and more detailed information worsen the competitive position of smallholders. . Representatives of the sector Wine cellars and wine traders: If there were no exemptions for alcoholic beverages according in the European Food Information to Con- sumers Regulation (EU No 1169/2011) the wine sector would face considerable costs. Wine is not a ho- mogenous product and the nutrients change from year to year and from grape variety to grape variety. Moreover they are dependent on oenological practices. Accordingly, a lot of expensive analyses would be- come necessary to fulfil the requirements. However, labelling calorie content would be easier. Regional Representatives WineSe There is no need for more detailed information. In case they would be required especially small producers would face tremendous additional costs per bottle.
IQ 9.5 (to non-PDO/PGI wine producers) If you could change some of the labelling rules for non-PDO/PGI wines, what would you change? What additional quantity of wine would this change in the rules allow to sell? What would this represent in value? . Producers organisations: . Operators: Producers organisations: Cooperatives No change required for wine. Ingredients should not be listed on the label of wines. However, analytic and sensory testing for quality wines should remain. Moreover, it seems contradictory that Third Countries are allowed to export wines to EU which are produced by using critical and possibly un-healthy ingredients and by applying problematic insecticides, fungicides and herbicides that are not allowed in EU countries. Why importers do not have to follow similar quality criteria to assure customer health of EU citizens?35 For elec- tronic devices this is usual, why not for wine? . Operators: : Thinks it not necessary to provide more detailed information about ingredients on the labels as it is now. .
6.4 Comments and conclusions of the expert
6.4.1 On the effectiveness of labelling rules on the adequate information of con- sumers
The labelling rules and definition of the denomination are well established since a long time. Moreover the definition of the wine growing areas has a long tradition. The EU system is consistent with the traditional Ger- man one so that no changes were necessary. Labelling of products with the EU label is not mandatory and the EU labels are not or hardly used on German wine products. Whether the mandatory information is sufficient depends on the consumer model that is basis for defining necessary information. If requirements for information are built on the model of an average consumer who is reasonably well-informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, then warnings regarding alcohol and labelling of nutritional content might be redundant. But acting according to the model of an uninformed con-
35 The interviewee did not provide any details which insecticides, fungicides and herbicides he was talking about.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 83
sumer it might be necessary to point at the consequences of the use of products. But this can be done on labels as well as on public campaigns like wine in moderation.
6.4.2 On the effectiveness of labelling rules on marketing conditions and fair com- petition between operators
The rules build a common framework and offer opportunities for competition. Both aspects are relevant for performance of markets. In this regard the rules support the performance of the wine market. However, the restrictions on variety labelling for German Wine is confronted by some actors in the sector. They would like to have the right for example to market German Riesling Wine.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 84
7. THEME 5: CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES, MONITORING AND CHECKS
7.1 Description of the local implementation of the rules
7.1.1 Description of certification procedures applied in your Member State and re- gion
All rules concerning certification procedures are laid down in the German wine law, especially § 16a Product specifications (according to article 94 Section 2 of EU Regulation 1308/2013) § 17 Qualitätswein, Prädikatswein, Qualitätslikörwein b.A., Qualitätsperlwein b.A. und Sekt b.A. § 19 Qualitätsprüfung der Qualitätsweine, Prädikatsweine, Qualitätslikörweine b.A., Qualitätsperlwei- ne b.A., Sekte b.A. und bestimmter Qualitätsschaumweine (Quality control of Qualitätsweine etc. § 20 Qualitätsprüfung der Prädikatsweine (Quality control of Prädikatsweine) § 21 Ermächtigungen § 22 Landwein (non PGO/PGI wines) § 22a Annual controls of product specifications
PDO/PGI wine E.g. Qualitätswein, Prädikatswein, Qualitätslikörwein b.A., Qualitätsperlwein b.A., Sekt b.A. and Prädikatsweine are tested and are granted a special number that is printed on the label. Prädikatsweine must inter alia not be enriched and have to have a minimum alcohol content of 7% (Kabinett, Spätlese, Auslese) and minimum alcohol content of 5.5 % (Beerenauslese, Trockenbeeren Auslesen, Eiswein). Chemical and organoleptic analyses are undertaken by the Chamber of Agriculture. There is a compulsory chemical and organoleptic analysis for each bottled container/barrel/of Prädikatswein (whatever size) certified by the Chamber of Agriculture (LWK) for PDO wines. LWK at Rhineland-Palatinate currently has six locations, where certification takes place. They are located in the towns: Koblenz, Wittlich, Trier, Alzey, Neustadt d.d. Weinstraße, Bad Kreuznach. In a first step the chemical analysis of Prädikatswein is performed in commercial wine laboratories that are approved by the LWK (certification criteria of “Wein- labor”36). Three bottles of each lot of Prädikatswein are presented to the LWK for the second step, the organoleptic test37, while two additional bottles are sealed by LWK and remain at the winery at least for two years after approval for later checks. Approved Prädikatsweine then get an official approval number (A.P. Nr.). The number informs about the certifying LWK office, the locality, the winery, the current container number and the year of bottling. The application process is described in the following document in German language.38 The tasting and testing procedure is described in this German document.39 (Both documents are not available in English) Each year around 120,000 different wines are certified as PDO. This includes all Prädikatsweine. Around 5% are not approved and for about 0.7% a lower quality level is proposed (e.g. Kabinett instead of Spätlese). There is no obligatory chemical or organoleptic control for PGI wines. However, the winery needs to report basic information about alcohol content, added sugar and acidity for PGI wine labelling. Quality criteria for PGI wines in Rhineland-Palatinate are defined by the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viti- culture Rhineland-Palatinate in a specific document.40
36 https://www.lwk-rlp.de/fileadmin/lwk-rlp.de/Weinbau/PDF/QWP_Untersuchungsmethoden_Wein_2016.pdf. 37 After bottling 38 https://www.lwk-rlp.de/fileadmin/lwk-rlp.de/Weinbau/PDF/QWP_Erlaeuterungen-QWP_2017_01.pdf 39 https://www.lwk-rlp.de/fileadmin/lwk-rlp.de/Weinbau/PDF/QWP_Qualitaetsweinpruefung_in_RLP.pdf 40 https://mwvlw.rlp.de/fileadmin/mulewf/Themen/Weinbau/Dokumente/Produktspezifikationen/ggA_Landwein_der_Mo sel_erg.pdf
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 85
Each bottled container/barrel (of whatever size) of PGI wine is assigned a number by the winery (Lxxx -number starting with letter L). Control of PGI wines are carried out through LUA by taking selected samples41. This is undertaken occasionally but not systematically. Marketing information about all wines (PDO/PGI/non-PGI) is collected through annual statistical forms that every winery or wine estate has to present to LWK. The reporting is about wine stocks, grape harvest, wine production and wine stocks). Information is collected and published ex-post by the Chamber of Agriculture. Procedure of collection is explained in a specific document.42 Yearly statistics are published by the statistical service of Rhineland-Palatinate.43 Reports about LUA wine control actions and findings are regularly published in German language.44 However, as mentioned before, it should be noted that LUA frequently takes its samples if alerted. Thus, its controls have a bias towards suspected wines and wineries. Non PDO/PGI wines with mention of grape variety or vintage year In Rhineland-Palatinate 5.5% (Germany 3.7%) of the entire 2016 wine production is categorised non-PDO/non- GI. Non-GI wines have a very limited importance. Thus, statistics in Rhineland-Palatinate do not distinguish between PGI and non-PGI wines. They neither mention any variety nor any year for PGI/non-PGI wines. Wine Estates very rarely offer PGI wines and practically never offer non-PGI wines to their customers. There is a very tiny end-consumer market for German PGI/non-PGI wines with low prices. Mainly these wines are further pro- cessed (sparkling wine = Sekt) as in Rhineland-Palatinate the majority of sparkling wine producers of Germany is located. Non PDO/PGI wines without any mention No routine tests are applied for Non PDO/PGI wines but each lot has to be announced. The statistics of 2016 show that only 2% of red wine and 7.2% of white wine is marketed as non-PDO/non-PGI wine in Rhineland-Palatinate. The reason is that such white wines are usually used for the processing of Ger- man sparkling wine [Sekt e.g. variety Elbling] and for production of wine-mix beverages like mulled wine [Glühwein] and Maibowle, etc. Wine to be exported to third countries There is no yearly certification for operators because in Germany PGI wine certification relates to the product (and not to the operator).
7.1.2 Description of monitoring and checks procedures applied in your Member State and region
Summary of the Rhineland-Palatinate control system for wine - The administration in charge of monitoring and control of compulsory declarations is in Rhineland- Palatinate the LUA. It publishes its findings. - The administration in charge of control of compliance with the “PDO specification” is in Rhineland- Palatinate the Chamber of Agriculture (LWK). It publishes its findings. - Collection of analysing fiches from the labs gathering physical and chemical analysis45: In Rhineland-Palatinate this is done by commercial laboratories approved and certified by LWK. Anal- yses results are presented to the LWK for organoleptic control. For each official container of wine sam- ple bottles are sealed officially as reference bottles and kept by the winery at least for two years and until wine is sold. Additionally, LUA can take by its own choice samples of all types of wine for analysis in its own laboratories. LUA is in charge of controls and publishes yearly its findings. The winery/wine estate keeps a copy of the laboratory analysis data for their own files. - The monitoring of the categorized wine In Rhineland-Palatinate the LUA is in charge of controls and publishes it findings.
41 For details see tables of LUA controls. We do not have any addition information. 42 https://www.lwk-rlp.de/fileadmin/lwk-rlp.de/Weinbau/PDF/WBK_TEM_WAV_2017.pdf. All statistical information is collected after marketing the products. During marketing there are checks at retail stores and restaurants by district au- thorities, in certain non-district cities the municipal administration. In addition, LUA undertakes checks. 43 https://www.statistik.rlp.de/fileadmin/dokumente/berichte/C/4043/C4043_201600_1j_AnbGeb.pdf 44 https://lua.rlp.de/fileadmin/lua/Publikationen/Jahresberichte/2016/LUA-Bilanz_Weinueberwachung_2016.pdf 45 We assume that these approved laborites use state of the art methodologies. We do not know whether they use the European databank of isotopic data for this kind of control.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 86
- The analysis of evolution of quality: The evolution of quality can be seen in the yearly/monthly statis- tics for PDO wines published by LWK on the one side and the LUA control reports on the other side. Grown average sales price and quantity of exported bottled German wines can serve as indicators. - The issuance of certificate. In Rhineland-Palatinate the certificate for PDO wines concerns the product and is issued by the Chamber of Agriculture (LWK). There is no distinction for varietal wines. For PGI and non-PGI wines there is no specific certificate as long as the winery/wine estate and its vineyards are registered. The operator is subject to LUA control and monitored by the vineyard, harvest and stocks registering system, managed by LWK. In case of inconsistencies LWK informs LUA to undertake actions.46 No one of the interviewees mentioned any difficulties. According to the LUA 2017 report in Rhineland- Palatinate, out of 2948 samples of domestic wines, 42 (1%) did not comply with the labelling requirements in terms of missing identity, were circulated without or with faked A.P.-Nr., faked award, or faked lot. 37 (1%) samples were contested because of wrong declaration of the alcohol content. Officially the Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture in Rhineland-Palatinate is in charge and delegates tasks to its different subordinate bodies like LWK and LUA. Since 2008 registration and data collection is possible on the IT platform of LWK, ‘Weininformationsportal’47. This e-platform allows access to information about registered vineyards, authorisations for vine plantings, online-application for authorisations for vine plantings, online-data registration of wine stocks, online registra- tion and information to LWK (if required) about used oenological methods, online-registration of harvested grapes, online-information about PDO-wine certification process and applications; information and application forms for wine competitions and their results. For EU-NSP-restructuring application, the platform ONLY pro- vides application forms (no online application), while the NSP-restructuring applications have to be submitted physically to local governments (Kreisverwaltungen). A second (separate) e-platform for all agricultural branches (including wine) was introduced in 2015 by DLR for the direct EU support measures linked to cultivated land (GAP-Direkthilfen). The platform has the name “E- Antrag”48 and allows the registration of cultivated plots and submitting of applications online to the local gov- ernments (Kreisverwaltung). Since 2018, this e-platform is mandatory for applicants in Rhineland-Palatinate. However, a signed physical document has still to be submitted to the local government (Kreisverwaltung). In Rhineland-Palatinate, NSP-restructuring applications have remained to be physically submitted to the local governments (Kreisverwaltungen), while applications for NSP investments (small + large) have to be submitted to the Service Centre for Rural Areas of Rhineland-Palatinate (Dienstleistungszentrum Ländlicher Raum Rhein- land-Pfalz) in Bernkastel, which acts as the service agency for the Federal state. Applications for NSP-promotion and information measure are handled directly by the Ministry of Agriculture of Rhineland-Palatinate (MWVMV). Having all that information at hand, LWK uses this information to apply consistency checks. It cannot be predicted which electronic platforms will be used in the future for applications of NSP measures. However, there appears to be room for improvement to further facilitate application procedures and make information about NSP applications and their requirements more transparent. Chemical and organoleptic tests The tasting commission is only responsible for PDO wines. At each of the six LWK locations, several tasting commissions of trained commission members are active in the certification/tasting locations. The members are wine growers as well as wine experts and consumers. Everybody who is interested can apply and after qualifi- cation through training can be nominated as commission member. One commission consists of 3 to 6 mem- bers. It tastes up to 60 wines per day. The process of tasting is explained in a specific document.49 There is a standardized and defined assessment system with points. Always six wines are tasted in one round and as- sessed with 0-5 points for smell, taste and harmony. Clarity/transparency, colour and untypical taste are the criteria. Wines of a specific variety, quality, and sweetness are tasted jointly. Wines which are rejected might still qualify for a lower category, be marketed as PGI/non-PGI wine. In extreme cases the wine can be com-
46 We assume that LUA is doing its job according to the legislation. We did not investigate any details. 47 https://wip.lwk-rlp.de. Description in Germany language: https://www.lwk-rlp.de/de/weinbau/service/wip- weininformationsportal. 48 http://www.eantrag.rlp.de 49 https://www.lwk-rlp.de/fileadmin/lwk-rlp.de/Weinbau/PDF/QWP_Qualitaetsweinpruefung_in_RLP.pdf, available only in German language.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 87
pletely refused for marketing. The winery has (after bottling) to inform LWK how the wine was marketed, oth- erwise LUA will be informed to undertake control actions. Each filled batch that is intended to be sold as PDO Wine is subject to an ex-ante analytical chemical and or- ganoleptic analysis by the Chamber of Agriculture. For PGI wines, and varietal wines this is not the case. There is no difference for varietal wines. All interviewees stated that there had not been any changes. The certification procedure is functional since the year 1971 and there was no major change. However, there is - as already mentioned - a discussion on require- ments for using the term “Erzeugerabfüllung” [bottled by the producer]. Difficulties occur in case a wine fails the organoleptic tasting. In such cases, additional tests with another com- mission member at another location can take place. However, the applicant has to pay the fee again and deliv- er three additional bottles. Such situations can happen for un-conventional, extraordinary or traditional wines (e.g. unfiltered, natural fermentation in traditional oak cask/barrels). In such cases, the winery can market the wine at a lower quality level or even as PGI/non-PGI wine. A certain number of wineries/wine estates (two were interviewed) decided by themselves to only apply for their high-quality Riesling wines for the lowest PDO quality level (Qualitätswein and Kabinett) to avoid frustration with the certification system. They usually do this with success because their customers trust more in the specific wine estate and their own taste than in the LWK tasting commission. Such wines might even be sold to reasonably high prices, sometimes up to 35€/bottle. It is questioned by some stakeholders (interviewed wine estates, VDP) if the current PDO wine certification procedure by LWK might be simplified or changed in future. As there had not been any changes, there cannot have been any impact. PDO (bottle) certification with AP number clearly helped since 1971 to improve the wine marketing and wine quality inside Germany. However, this might become challenging on export markets. The different national quality systems within EU might be confusing especially for Third Country consumers. Interviewed wine pro- ducers confirm that customers clearly give preference to PDO wines and the statistical data confirm this, too. However, younger customers seem to put less attention on the traditional German quality levels (Quali- tätswein, Kabinett, Spätlese, Auslese, …). Some interviewed wine producers stated that within the same price level, the lower PDO quality (e.g. Qualitätswein, Kabinett) sells better than the high PDO quality (e.g. Auslese). The majority of interviewees agree that in future quality of wine is better linked to geographic indication: “The closer the geographic indication, the higher the quality”. The interviewees are in favour of a reform of the tra- ditional German quality levels and its certification procedures. They see a turn towards EU standards positively. However, we know that the discussion amongst stakeholders (growers, producer organizations, cooperatives and wine industry, national and state government) about this issue is currently ongoing.
7.1.2.1 Accompanying documents Questions concerning monitoring and control of accompanying documents and self-certification: How is used the accompanying document in your Member State and regions? The new 2018 Europe- an Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/273 explicitly mentions the accompanying document as a multi- purpose document. The accompanying document in Germany can be used for: Traceability of product Certification of wine characteristics, Independent document: "accompanying paper" is required for the transport of unfilled goods in containers of more than 60 l (transport within Germany) Certification for exported products Reference document for specific export certificate Proof of exit from the customs territory There are two possible stand-alone documents for transport between EU member states: - Simplified accompanying document for products transported within the Union, after release for consumption. (vereinfachtes Begleitdokument für Waren des (Verbrauch-)steuerrechtlich freien Verkehrs) - Electronic administrative document for transport in tax suspension procedure. (Elektroni- sches Verwaltungsdokument (eVD) Transport im Steueraussetzungsverfahren)
The creation of a multipurpose document as the accompanying document is a factor of simplification from your point of view? Was the accompanying document already fulfilling all of these objectives from 2009 to 2013 and 2014 until now?
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 88
How is self-certification managed in your Member State? The accompanying document is issued by a responsible authority. The document has a registration number and a seal of the responsible authority.
Is self-certification always double checked by certified bodies before a product is put on the market? A copy of the accompanying document has to be made available to the responsible authority one day after the start of the shipment at the latest.
Are the small winegrowers with little hectares of vineyards, and wine producers with very little pro- duction subject to the same requirements as the other operators (compulsory declarations etc.)? For example, are they exempted of some compulsory declarations? Also small producers are obliged to use the accompanying document for transport of bulk wine. For transport within the EU (movement under suspension of excise duty) there is a simplification for wine producers with a production volume of less than 1,000 hl/wine marketing year. The permission of a tax warehouse is granted already at receipt of the request at the central customs office.
7.1.3 Description of the control system related to NSP implementation
Please describe in detail the organisation of the control system related to NSP implementation and mention any difficulty or problem in the implementation of this system Promotion measures: Different steps of control 100% on desk 100% on the spot Reports on all checks Random sampled checks according to VO 1306 Internal revision EU court of auditors German court of auditors
National authority NSP follows procedures well established in BLE. BLE has not heard of any complains of a remarkable extent. BLE is convinced to do a good job in the context of NSP as well. BLE closes around 10 contracts per year. The control efforts are sufficient.
7.2 Existing national data on non-compliance and workload
7.2.1 Data on workload linked to the monitoring and checks system implementation
Table 35: Workload for monitoring and checks Type of check Workload in Full-time equivalent (FTE) Vineyard register Authorities Operators Other … Declarations - Production - Harvest - Stock Inward and outward register Accompanying documents Labelling certification
None of the interviewees was able or willing to complete the table above.
7.2.2 Existing data on fraudulent manipulation of wine At BLE, no reports are made available. All existing reports must be available on EU level any- how. In the case of missing documents, the Commission can ask for them. A consultant would not be entitled to receive them.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 89
For results of fraudulent manipulation of wine in Rhineland-Palatinate see LUA-Report 201650.
7.2.3 Existing data on non-compliance with NSP rules
None of the interviewees was able or willing to provide such data.
7.3 Synthesis of the interviews
IQ 7.1 to 7.3 Is the certification procedure simple to apply? Please distinguish wines with PDO/PGI, wines without PDO/PGI and traded wines . National / regional authorities: The wine sector in Germany has established a comprehensive control system, which goes beyond the EU requirements. So there was no additional burden regarding the certification procedure. . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) Wine cellars and wine traders: Nothing changed. IQ 7.4 When change occurred in the certification system, did it allow an increase in the quantity of wine marketed or exported? . National / regional authorities. There was no change . National representatives of the wine sector (e.g. Wine growers’ unions / industry unions / interbranch organizations) Wine cellars and wine traders: Nothing changed
IQ 10.1 10.8 Did you encounter any difficulties or problems in the implementation of monitoring and checks EU requirements? . National / regional authorities: No . Wine cellars and wine traders: No, Germany already had a well-established control system. Regional Representatives WineSe In the future the protective associations (Schutzgemeinschaften) will tackle these issues and the authori- ties will be responsible for the necessary controls. . Wine growers : No. Feels that the NSP control system needs certain attention but for him there are no problems im- plementing them. He understands the reasons for control. He was controlled several times (cross- compliance and other). This could become more difficult for the elderly wine growers (according to beyond 60 years of age), but for him it is acceptable and manageable.
50 We do not have any additional information that exceeds the LUA publication.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 90
usually 2 to 3 months after final on-site control, which is regarded ok.
IQ 10.2 Did you encounter any difficulties or problem in the implementation of the control system related to NSP implementation? . National / regional authorities: No
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 91
ANNEX 1 – LIST OF THE INTERVIEWS
Annex 1 Table 1: List of the interviews
Organisation
Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture
Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate
Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate
BLE Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung
BLE Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung
Verbraucherzentrale Rheinland Pfalz e.V. als Vertreterin des Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband
Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Trier
Federation of German Wine Cellars and Wine Trade
Forster Winzerverein e.G. Pfalz (Palatinate)
Weingut Reinhold Franzen
Weingut Ben Rothmeyer
Weingut Losen-Bockstanz (Mosel)
Weingut Albert Kallfelz GbR
Bauern- und Winzerverband Rheinland-Pfalz Süd e.V., Karl-Tesche-Str. 3. 56073 Koblenz and Weinbauverband Mosel, Trier51
Wine cellar company Reh Kendermann (Germany’s biggest export wine cellar company)
51 The Bauern- und Winzerverband has 12,000 members as farmers and wine growers are members of 611 local associa- tions.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 92
Annex 1 Table 2 - Description of the NSP Measures eligible under the National Support Programmes Existing in Content of the meas- Eligible measures Implementing conditions Type of aid the 2008 ure Wine CMO Support for infor- mation or promotion Beneficiaries shall be professional organisations, wine producer measures concerning organisations, associations of wine producer organisations, tempo- Union wines either (a) rary or permanent associations of two or more producers, inter- in MS to inform con- branch organisations or bodies governed by public law. Private com- sumers about the panies are only eligible for Point (b) of the measure. responsible consump- Support granted shall last no longer than 3 years for a given benefi- tion of wine and ciary and, for Measure (b), for a given third-country market it can be Max. 50% of the eligi- Promotion (Art. 45) Yes PDO/PGI or (b) in Third extended for a maximum of two years if justified by the effects of the ble expenditure Countries to improve operation. their competitiveness Information in Member States: priority shall be given to operations (in this case, only concerning several MS / several administrative or wine regions / PDO/PGI wines or several PDO and PGI. wines with an indica- Promotion in Third Countries: priority shall be given to new benefi- tion of the wine grape ciaries or beneficiaries targeting a new Third Country. varieties are eligible). Support for MS that submitted the invento- ry of their production Compensation up to potential. Support can Beneficiaries are wine growers, i.e. natural or legal person who farm 100% of the loss of Restructuring and cover: varietal conver- an area planted with vines. revenue OR contribu- conversion of Yes sion, relocation and tion to 50% of the vineyards (Art. 46) Replanting of vineyard following a mandatory grubbing-up for health replanting of vineyards or phytosanitary reasons shall be eligible under certain conditions. costs incurred (75% in and improvements to less developed regions) vineyards management techniques. Beneficiaries are wine growers, i.e. natural or legal persons who farm an area planted with vines. Support for total Areas concerned must be kept in good vegetative conditions and no destruction or removal negative impact on the environment shall result from the application Flat rate payment / ha of grape bunches still in Green harvesting of the measure. MS can restrict the measure according to timing of (not exceeding 50% of their immature stage, Yes (Art. 47) different varieties, environmental or phytosanitary risks, etc. the costs of removal reducing the yield of and loss of revenue) the relevant area to No support shall be granted in case of complete or partial damage of zero. the crops. Green harvesting support cannot apply to the same parcel for two consecutive years. Temporary degressive Mutual funds (Art. Support for the setting- Beneficiaries are wine growers or producers of wine products. aid covering the ad- Yes 48) up of mutual funds Support period shall not exceed three years. ministrative costs of the fund Financial contribution to the insurance pre- mium, not exceeding Support for the sub- 80% in case of insur- scription of harvest Beneficiaries are wine growers. Member States may grant the sup- ance against adverse insurance safeguarding port through insurance companies as intermediaries under certain climatic events assimi- producers’ incomes Harvest insurance conditions, but the amount of the support must be transferred in full lated as natural disas- after losses caused by Yes (Art. 49) to the producer. ters and 50% in other natural disasters, cases (insurance adverse climatic Member States must ensure that the support does not distort com- against losses caused events, diseases or petition in the insurance market. by any adverse climatic pest infestations. events / by animals, plant diseases or pest infestations).
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 93
Existing in Content of the meas- Eligible measures Implementing conditions Type of aid the 2008 ure Wine CMO Support for tangible and intangible invest- Beneficiaries can be wine enterprises producing or marketing the Support dedicated to ments in processing wine products, wine producer organisations, associations of two or small/medium-sized facilities and winery more producers or interbranch organisations. enterprises, with infrastructure, market- Eligible actions are immovable property, new machinery and equip- maximum aid rate of ing structures and ment, architect/engineer and consultation fees, feasibility studies, 40% of the eligible Investments (Art. tools, intended to computer software and patents/licences/copyrights. Replacement investment costs (50% Yes 50) improve the overall investments are not eligible. in less developed performance of the Support cannot be granted to operations benefiting from promotion regions, 75% in outer- enterprise and its support. most regions, 65% in adaptation to market Priority must be given to operations likely to have positive effects in the smaller Aegean demands, as well as to terms of energy savings, global energy efficiency and environmentally islands) increase its competi- sustainable processes. tiveness. Beneficiaries can be wine enterprises producing or marketing wine Support for tangible or products, wine producer organisations and associations of two or intangible investments more producers. Research and development centres may participate Aid rate up to 40% of aimed at the develop- and interbranch organisations may be associated with the operation. the eligible investment ment of new products, Support is granted for tangible and intangible investments including Innovation in the costs (50% in less processes and technol- for knowledge-transfer for the development of new products, pro- wine sector (Art. developed regions, No ogies, intended to cesses and technologies, or other investments adding value at any 51) 75% in outermost increase the marketa- stage of the supply chain. regions, 65% in the bility and competitive- Priority must be given to operations likely to have positive effects in smaller Aegean islands) ness of EU wine prod- terms of energy savings, global energy efficiency and environmentally ucts. sustainable processes; including an element of knowledge transfer; and ensuring the participation of research and development centres. Aid paid to distillers that process by- Support for voluntary products into raw or obligatory distilla- alcohol of min. 92% by Beneficiaries are distillers that process the by-products delivered to tion of by-products of volume. wine-making. The distillation into alcohol with an alcoholic strength of at least 92% by By-product distilla- alcohol resulting from volume, to be used exclusively for industry or energy purposes. A lump-sum amount Yes tion (Art. 52) covering the cost of the supported distilla- Support includes an amount to compensate the costs of collection, to collection of by- tion must be exclusive- be transferred to the producer when relevant. ly used for industrial or product must be energy purposes. transferred from the distiller to the produc- er when relevant. Source: Agrosynergie based on regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, 2016/1149
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 94
Annex 1 Table 3: DESCRIPTION OF THE NSP MEASURE: Investments in enterprises in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 in Rhineland-Palatinate
Type of operation n°1
Type of aid and rate of 6. Investments in enterprises in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 support
Beneficiaries are wineries involved in the production or marketing of products referred to in Part II of Annex VII to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, wine producer organisations, and associations of two or more producers or inter-branch organisations which have their place of business and/or their operating premises in the relevant federal state. Beneficiaries In Thuringia beneficiaries are natural and legal persons under private and public law which operate vineyards in Thuringia. Eligible vineyards must be at least the minimum size established in Article 1(2) of the Law on old-age insurance for farmers [Gesetz über die Alterssicherung der Landwirte, ALG] for com- pulsory insurance for specialised crops The eligibility criteria comply with the criteria laid down in Article 35 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2016/1149. There are no additional eligibility criteria. An application can only be accepted if all eligibility criteria are met. The same eligibility criteria apply to all Länder. Excluded from aid in Rhineland-Palatinate are: - replacement investment; - turnover tax, discounts and non-cash contributions. Excluded from aid in Baden-Württemberg are: - replacement investment; - financing costs and insurance premiums; - lending costs, interest, leases, purchase of land and turnover tax; - depreciation costs for investments; - personal contributions. Excluded from aid in Hessen are: - land purchase; - capital works; - purchase of motor vehicles, machinery and equipment for outdoor work, used machinery and equip- ment; - simple replacement investments; - financing costs, turnover tax, non-cash contributions and other imputed costs. Excluded from aid in Bavaria are: - investments of less than €10 000 verified eligible investment volume; - investments in processing and marketing of products not included in Part II of Annex VII to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 (non-vinicultural products); - investments for the purpose of processing and marketing products from Third Countries; - administrative costs and statutory connection fees as well as development costs; - works of art; - purchase of land, including notarial costs and land purchase tax, as well as the purchase of buildings Eligibility and selection and structural facilities; criteria - external equipment; - social facilities; - investments in residential facilities, administrative buildings, garages and vehicle workshop facilities; - office equipment and facilities, as well as office software; - country dining facilities, with the exception of wine-tasting venues; - motor vehicles; - used machinery and equipment; - current operating expenses, payment of debts, debit interest, lending costs, inheritance payments and costs for legal advice, leases and leasehold interest; - personal contributions, e.g. the provision of one’s own labour, use of own building materials; - rent, leasing, hire purchase; - simple replacement investments; - structural renovation measures; - advertising efforts (e.g. flyers, brochures and signage) incl. internet presence; - value added tax (Umsatzsteuer); - rebates, bonuses and discounts. Excluded from aid in Saxony-Anhalt are: - replacement investment; - VAT where there is a right to deduction. Excluded from aid in Thuringia are: - investments under €10 000;
Criteria referring to the project
Energy saving in accordance with Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/1149 State applying the criterion Criterion Response Points RP BW BY HE SN ST TH
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 95
Type of operation n°1 Participation in energy consulting, analysis 1. Yes 3 x x x x of current operational status. 2. No 0 Energy saving Differentiated 0-4 x Assessment by expert group Investments in cases where it is demon- strated by means of expert opinion or verification provided by an expert that an 1. Yes 3 energy saving is achieved by comparison x x x with the standard (reference method, 2. No 0 reference company or previous status).
Global energy efficiency in accordance with Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) State applying the criterion Criterion Response Points RP BW BY HE SN ST TH Investments aimed at using heat from 1. Yes 3 biomass or solar energy, climate control x x x x x 2. No 0 using heat recovery. Purchase of proven energy-efficient ma- chinery, equipment, technical accoutre- ments and/or facilities (e.g. verified by 1. Yes 3 x x certificate or confirmation from the manu- 2. No 0 facturer, technical report provided by official consultancy).
Global energy efficiency assessment by differentiated 0-4 x expert group
Environmentally sustainable processes in accordance with Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/1149
State applying the criterion Criterion Response Points RP BW BY HE SN ST TH Enhancing the sustainability of the produc- tion processes (reducing the use of re- sources, substitution of energy-intensive 1. Yes 3 raw, auxiliary and operating materials, x 2. No 0 recycling, waste management, reducing the volume of wastewater and/or the pollutant load). Investments carry recognised certification such as ‘Blue Angel’, ‘FSC certificate’ or 1. Yes 3 equivalent recognised marks which indi- x x x 2. No 0 cate particularly eco-friendly or energy- efficient investments. Building investment is in built-up areas 1. Yes 3 pursuant to Section 34 BauGB (German x x 2. No 0 Building Code). Environmentally sustainable processes differentiated 0-4 x Assessment by expert group No additional sealing of the soil surface in 1. Yes 3 the case of building investment in outdoor x 2. No 0 areas pursuant to Section 35 BauGB.
Criteria referring to the application / applicant State applying the criterion Criterion Response Points RP BW BY HE SN ST TH 1. Yes 1 Young farmer/young wine-maker x x x x x 2. No 0 Completed qualification as wine- 1. Yes 1 x x x x maker/vintner 2. No 0
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 96
Type of operation n°1
Wine-growing estate as principal 1. Yes 1 x x x activity 2. No 0 Higher-level vocational training in the agricultural sector (e.g. techni- 1. Yes 1 x x x cian, master craftsman, engi- 2. No 0 neer/Bachelor’s, Master’s) Production of PDO/PGIs (product of 1. Yes 1 higher quality as defined by EU wine x 2. No 0 law) Collaboration in cooperative ven- 1. Yes 1 x tures 2. No 0 1. Micro- 5 2. Small 4 Size of company SME x x 3. Medium-sized 3 4. Large/ intermediate 1 1. Winery 2. Cooperative/ 5 Winery, cooperative, producer producer organisation 5 organisation, company in the wine 3. Company in the wine 3 x sector, market operation, inter- sector 0 branch organisation 4. Market operation 0 5. Inter-branch organi- sation 1: < prosperity thresh- Compliance with the prosperity old 1 x threshold 2: > prosperity thresh- 0 old Organic wine-growing in accordance 1. Yes 3 x x x x with Regulation (EC) No889/2008 2. No 0
Management and maintenance of 1. Yes 3 steeply sloping areas (>= 10 % of the x x x x 2. No 0 operating or marketing area) Certified production (EcoStep, ‘Fair 1. Yes 3 x x and Green’, DINE, etc.) 2. No 0 1. First application 5 Application history (2014- 2. First follow-up 3 x x 2018) application 3. Second follow-up 1 Equity capital formation within the application 1. Yes 2 company in the last or on average x 2. No 0 the last 2 financial years (at least €10 000) 1. > €750 000 Total eligible investment volume 3 2. €250 000 to x upon submission of applications 1 < €750 000 1. Major investments (with contract/< pros- perity threshold) 5 Type of application x 2. Major investments 3 (without contract/> prosperity threshold) Improving business efficiency differentiated 0-4 x Assessment by expert group
Improvement in quality Assessment differentiated 0-4 x by expert group Improvement in quality (e.g. pursu- 1. Yes 4 ant to Section 7a LVO RP (State x 2. No 0 Ordinance of Rhineland-Palatinate))
In all States except for Thüringen and Baden-Württemberg, the measures are chosen by a ranking based on the above-mentioned priority criteria. A minimum number of points is applied in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and Thüringen. The choice is made on within the framework of the available financial means in line with Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1150.
Implementation period Entire NSP period
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 97
Type of operation n°1 Rhineland-Palatinate: www.agrarinfo.rlp.de Hessen: www.rp-darmstadt.hessen.de/Umwelt_und_Verbraucher/Weinbau/Förderung_im_Weinbau Baden-Württemberg: Information regarding http://www.landwirtschaft-bw.info/pb/MLR.Foerderung,Lde/Startseite/Foerderwegweiser the management of the Saxony-Anhalt: www.elaisa.sachsen-anhalt.de measure Bavaria: http://www.stmelf.bayern.de/agrarpolitik/foerderung/003555/index.php (heading: Förderwegweiser) Thuringia: www.aufbaubank.de
Annex 1 TABLE 4: Demarcation between the NSP funded investment measures and the funding provided under the EAFRD Rural Development Programme pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 from Rhineland-Palatinate [Gegenüberstellung der Förderung im Rahmen des ELER-Entwicklungsprogramms EULLE und der Förderung nach Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1308/2013 in Rheinland-Pfalz] Zuwendungsemp- Maßnahme in EULLE Maßnahme des rlp Weinspro- Bemerkungen Fördergegenstand fänger gemäß VO (EU) Nr. gramms gemäß VO (EU) Nr. 1305/2013 1308/2013 Code 121
Modernisierung landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe o bauliche Investitionen einschl. allgemeiner Aufwendungen im Bereich der Primärproduktion ja ausgeschlossen landwirtschaftlicher Erzeugnisse, die unter Anhang I des Vertrages fallen, o Investitionen der Verarbeitung und Vermarktung landwirtschaft- licher Erzeugnisse, die unter An- ja ausgeschlossen hang I des Vertrages fallen (aus- genommen Sektor Wein) o Erschließungsausgaben eines Ja ausgeschlossen Aussiedlungsstandorts o Maschinen der Weinbausteil- Ja ausgeschlossen lagenbewirtschaftung o umweltschonende Pflanzen- Ja ausgeschlossen schutzmittelausbringung o Geräte der globalen Positionie- rungssystem (GPS) für landwirt- Landwirtschaftliche Ja ausgeschlossen schaftliche Zugmaschinen oder Unternehmen mit selbstfahrende Arbeitmaschinen) Weinbau o Einführung innovativer Landtech- Ja ausgeschlossen niken (z.B. Steillagen Vollernter) o Verbesserung der Bewirtschaftung durch Erstellung einer modernen Umstrukturierung und Um- Weinbergsanlage mit Änderung ausgeschlossen stellung von Rebflächen (Arti- der Edelreis-/ Unterlagenkombi- kel 46) nation o immaterielle und materielle In der Nationalen Investitionen in Verarbeitungsein- Rahmenregelung nach richtungen, in Infrastrukturen von VO (EU) Nr. Weinwirtschaftsbetrieben und in 1305/2013 ist der die Vermarktung von Wein, die Investitionen (Artikel 50) Bereich der Verarbei- Entwicklung neuer Erzeugnisse, ausgeschlossen Innovation im Weinsektor tung und Vermarktung Verfahren und Techniken im Zu- (Artikel 51) landwirtschaftlicher sammenhang mit den Erzeugnis- Erzeugnisse nicht dem sen im Sinne von Anhang VI Teil Code 123, sondern den II der Verordnung (EU) Nr. Codes 121 (ohne Zu- 1308/2013 kauf) bzw. 311 (mit
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 98
Zuwendungsemp- Maßnahme in EULLE Maßnahme des rlp Weinspro- Bemerkungen Fördergegenstand fänger gemäß VO (EU) Nr. gramms gemäß VO (EU) Nr. 1305/2013 1308/2013 Zukauf) zugeordnet. Code 123 Erhöhung der Wertschöpfung der land- und forstwirtschaftlichen Erzeugnisse o Investitionen (ohne bauliche Investitionen) der Verarbeitung und Vermarktung (Erfassung, La- gerung, Kühlung, Sortierung, marktgerechten Aufbereitung, ja ausgeschlossen Verpackung, Etikettierung) land- wirtschaftlicher Erzeugnisse, die unter Anhang I des Vertrages fal- len (ausgenommen Sektor Wein, Fischerei- und Forsterzeugnisse) o bauliche Investitionen (alle Sekto- Erzeugergemeinschaf- ten, - ren, ausgenommen Fischerei- und zusammenschlüsse Forsterzeugnisse) einschl. allge- und Unternehmen für Ja ausgeschlossen meiner Aufwendungen (ausge- die Verarbeitung nommen Sektor Wein) und/oder Vermarktung landwirtschaftlicher o immaterielle und materielle Erzeugnisse Investitionen in Verarbeitungs- einrichtungen, in Infrastrukturen von Weinwirtschaftsbetrieben und in die Vermarktung von Wein, die Investitionen (Artikel 50) Entwicklung neuer Erzeugnisse, ausgeschlossen Innovation im Weinsektor Verfahren und Techniken im Zu- (Artikel 51) sammenhang mit den Erzeugnis- sen im Sinne von Anhang VI Teil II der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1308/2013. Code 125 Verbesserung und Ausbau der Infrastruktur im
Zusammenhang mit der Entwicklung und An- passung der Land- und Forstwirtschaft o ländliche Bodenordnung einschl. Teilnehmerge- ja ausgeschlossen Nutzungs- und Pachttausch meinschaften Gemeinden und Umstrukturierung und Um- o Wiederbestockung nach einer Gemeindeverbän- ausgeschlossen stellung von Rebflächen (Arti- Flurbereinigung (Code 125.1) de, kel 46) o ländliche Infrastrukturmaßnahmen natürliche Perso- ausgeschlossen zur Erschließung landwirtschaftl. nen und Perso- Entwicklungspotenziale (z. B. Be- nengesellschaften regnungsanlagen, stationäre sowie juristische ja Transporteinrichtungen zur Er- Personen des pri- schließung von Rebflächen in vaten Rechts, Steillagen) Wasser- und Bo- o der Neubau befestigter Verbin- denverbände sowie ausgeschlossen dungswege und landwirtschaftli- vergleichbare Kör- ja cher Wege oder die Befestigung perschaften von solchen Wegen Code 311 Diversifizierung hin zu nichtlandwirtschaftli- chen Tätigkeiten o Energieerzeugung ja ausgeschlossen Landwirtschaftliche o Urlaub auf Bauern- und Winzer- Unternehmen mit höfen, Freizeit und landwirtschaft- Weinbau ja ausgeschlossen liche oder landwirtschaftsnahe
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 99
Zuwendungsemp- Maßnahme in EULLE Maßnahme des rlp Weinspro- Bemerkungen Fördergegenstand fänger gemäß VO (EU) Nr. gramms gemäß VO (EU) Nr. 1305/2013 1308/2013 Bildung o Bäuerliche Gastronomie, Einzel- ja ausgeschlossen handel o Direktvermarktung (außer Sektor ja ausgeschlossen In der Nationalen Wein) Rahmenregelung nach o immaterielle und materielle VO (EU) Nr. Investitionen in Verarbeitungs- 1305/2013 ist der einrichtungen, in Infrastrukturen Bereich der Verarbei- von Weinwirtschaftsbetrieben und tung und Vermarktung in die Vermarktung von Wein, die Investitionen (Artikel 50) landwirtschaftlicher Entwicklung neuer Erzeugnisse, ausgeschlossen Innovation im Weinsektor Erzeugnisse nicht dem Verfahren und Techniken im Zu- (Artikel 51) Code 123, sondern den sammenhang mit den Erzeugnis- Codes 121 (ohne Zu- sen im Sinne von Anhang VI Teil kauf) bzw. 311 (mit II der Verordnung (EU) Nr. Zukauf) zugeordnet. 1308/2013. o Lebensmittelservice ja ausgeschlossen o Bäuerliches Handwerk ja ausgeschlossen o Familien- und Altenbetreuung ja ausgeschlossen o Natur- und Landschaftspflege ja ausgeschlossen Code 312 „ Förderung von Kooperationen von Land- und Forstwirten mit anderen Partnern“
gemäß Nr. 4.3.1.2 der Nationalen Rahmenrege- lung (NRR) o Investitionskosten inkl. Leistun- gen von Architekten und Ingeni- euren, Vorarbeiten (Untersuchun- gen, Erhebungen) sowie Betreu- Natürliche Personen, Personengesellschaf- ung der Zuwendungsempfänger ten, juristische Perso- (ausgenommen die Betreuung nen des privaten ja ausgeschlossen durch Stellen der öffentlichen Rechts nur Kleinstun- Verwaltung). ternehmen unter Beteiligung von Land- o Ausgeschlossen sind Investitio- oder Forstwirten nen, die die Erzeugung, Verarbei- tung oder Vermarktung von An- hang-I-Erzeugnissen betreffen. Maßnahme Code 41 „Umsetzung der lokalen Entwicklungsstrategien“
o Immaterielle und materielle Investitionen in Verarbeitungs- Landwirtschaftliche einrichtungen, in Infrastrukturen Unternehmen mit Weinbau, von Weinwirtschaftsbetrieben und Erzeugergemeinschaf- in die Vermarktung von Wein, die Investitionen (Artikel 50) ten, - Entwicklung neuer Erzeugnisse, zusammenschlüsse ausgeschlossen Innovation im Weinsektor (Arti- Verfahren und Techniken im Zu- und Unternehmen für kel 51) sammenhang mit den Erzeugnis- die Verarbeitung und/oder Vermarktung sen im Sinne von Anhang VI Teil landwirtschaftlicher II der Verordnung (EU) Nr. Erzeugnisse 1308/2013.
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 100
Annex 1 Table 5: Promotion measures of German beneficiaries supported through NSP in Rhinland- Palatinate of which Eligible measure Commu- Eligible (Article 45(1)(b) of nity Beneficiaries Description(***) Zielmarkt Period expendi- Regulation (EC) No contri- ture (EUR) 1308/2013) bution (EUR) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Absatzförd.- und Wer- Vinnicome GmbH Nackenheim USA 2016 7 935,46 3 053,54 bemaßnahme J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltingen-Rachtig USA 2016 1 343,12 671,56 Co. KG bemaßnahme Carl Gunderloch Ver- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Singapur, Austra- Nackenheim 2016 2 302,84 967,73 triebsgesellschaft GbR bemaßnahme lien Weingut Ökonomierat Absatzförd.- und Wer- Siebeldingen China 2016 2 344,22 1 172,11 Rebholz KG bemaßnahme Moselland eG Winzer- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 17 348,26 6 939,30 genossenschaft bemaßnahme Moselland eG Winzer- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues US 2016 7 910,31 3 164,12 genossenschaft bemaßnahme Moselland eG Winzer- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 1 830,33 732,13 genossenschaft bemaßnahme Moselland eG Winzer- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 4 873,26 1 949,30 genossenschaft bemaßnahme J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltingen-Rachtig USA 2016 629,51 314,76 Co. KG bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Thailand, Singapur Wittmann Wein GmbH Westhofen 2016 5 841,55 2 337,48 bemaßnahme und Australien J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltingen-Rachtig USA 2016 2 736,33 1 368,16 Co. KG bemaßnahme Weingut Ökonomierat Absatzförd.- und Wer- Siebeldingen Australien 2016 3 677,46 1 379,05 Rebholz KG bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Deutsches Weintor eG Ilbesheim Japan 2016 4 188,23 1 884,70 bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Volker Schäfer Mettenheim USA 2016 2 259,29 1 129,65 bemaßnahme Excellence in Wine; Ralph Absatzförd.- und Wer- China, Südkorea, Kircheisen u. Thomas Ingelheim 2016 10 687,55 5 150,05 bemaßnahme Theiland Luber GbR Absatzförd.- und Wer- Vinnicombe GmbH Nackenheim USA 2016 7 622,22 3 811,11 bemaßnahme J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltlingen-Rachtig USA 2016 2 750,00 1 375,00 Co. KG bemaßnahme SMW Saar-Mosel- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Trier Südkorea 2016 13 130,60 6 565,30 Winzersekt GmbH bemaßnahme Weltachs Weinkellerei Absatzförd.- und Wer- Grosskarlbach China, Taiwan 2016 5 074,04 2 537,02 GmbH bemaßnahme Dr. Pauly-Bergweiler GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 5 233,40 2 616,70 & Co. KG bemaßnahme Weltachs Weinkellerei Absatzförd.- und Wer- Grosskarlbach USA 2016 4 912,80 2 456,40 GmbH bemaßnahme J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltlingen-Rachtig USA 2016 4 550,00 2 275,00 Co. KG bemaßnahme J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltlingen-Rachtig USA 2016 622,64 311,32 Co. KG bemaßnahme Carl Gunderloch Ver- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Nackenheim USA 2016 2 821,63 1 410,82 triebsgesellschaft GbR bemaßnahme Moselland eG Winzer- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 17 905,75 7 162,30 genossenschaft bemaßnahme HIESTAND Wein- Absatzförd.- und Wer- 10/09/1 Guntersblum Kanada 2016 1 969,87 gut&Hofbrennerei bemaßnahme 902 Weingut Ökonomierat Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bechtheim USA 2016 3 220,21 1 610,11 Johann Geil Erben bemaßnahme Schweigen- Absatzförd.- und Wer- China, Hong.Kong, Weingut Friedrich Becker 2016 1 565,00 782,50 Rechtenbach bemaßnahme Singapur Absatzförd.- und Wer- Schlossgut Diel KG Rümmelsheim USA 2016 3 260,49 1 630,25 bemaßnahme Weinhaus Gebrüder Stef- Trittenheim Absatzförd.- und Wer- China 2016 5 496,30 2 748,15
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 101
fen bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Peter Lauer Ayl USA 2016 280,56 140,28 bemaßnahme Louis Guntrum Weinkelle- Absatzförd.- und Wer- China, Südkorea, Nierstein 2016 2 484,17 1 157,02 rei GmbH bemaßnahme Philippinen Absatzförd.- und Wer- Wittmann Wein GmbH Westhofen USA 2016 2 149,21 1 074,60 bemaßnahme Dr. Pauly-Bergweiler GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues Ukraine 2016 2 570,72 1 285,36 & Co. KG bemaßnahme Günther Schlink GmbH Langenlonsheim Informationsreise USA 2016 3 034,52 1 517,26 Glas Wine Trading; Inh. Absatzförd.- und Wer- Essingen China 2016 822,96 411,48 Dominik Glas bemaßnahme Dr. Pauly-Bergweiler GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- 18 Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 37 981,07 & Co. KG bemaßnahme 990,54 Kessler-Zink GmbH, Wein- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Flonheim USA 2016 5 957,34 2 978,67 kellerei-Weingut bemaßnahme
Absatzförd.- und Wer- Sybille Kuntz Weingut Lieser Malaysia, Singapur 2016 6 995,90 3 497,95 bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Langenwalter Weisenheim am Sand USA, Kanada 2016 7 009,17 3 504,59 bemaßnahme Reh Kendermann GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bingen Kanada 2016 17 002,62 6 801,05 Weinkellerei bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Thörle GbR Saulheim Kanada 2016 936,39 468,20 bemaßnahme Reh Kendermann GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bingen Kanada 2016 4 256,37 1 702,55 Weinkellerei bemaßnahme Römerhof Weinkellerei Absatzförd.- und Wer- Trittenheim Cuba 2016 4 534,10 2 267,05 GmbH bemaßnahme Wineland GmbH - The Absatzförd.- und Wer- Singapur, Malaysia, Bernkastel-Kues 2016 9 375,78 4 687,89 Wine Agents bemaßnahme Vietnam Absatzförd.- und Wer- Wittmann Wein GmbH Westhofen Malaysia 2016 3 888,03 1 944,02 bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Wittmann Wein GmbH Westhofen China 2016 5 051,50 2 525,75 bemaßnahme Carl Gunderloch Ver- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Nackenheim USA 2016 2 638,50 1 319,25 triebsgesellschaft GbR bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Dr. Wehrmann Birkweiler China 2016 1 654,90 827,45 bemaßnahme Reh Kendermann GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- 12 Bingen Kanada 2016 30 787,30 Weinkellerei bemaßnahme 243,38 Reh Kendermann GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- 19 Bingen Kanada 2016 47 575,00 Weinkellerei bemaßnahme 030,00 J. & H. Selbach GmbH & Absatzförd.- und Wer- Zeltingen-Rachtig USA 2016 6 262,92 3 131,46 Co. KG bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Sybille Kuntz Lieser Schweiz 2016 980,59 490,35 bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Exzellenz GbR Ellenz-Poltersdorf SVR Hong Kong 2016 8 813,72 4 406,86 bemaßnahme Schweigen- Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Friedrich Becker USA 2016 543,94 271,97 Rechtenbach bemaßnahme Carl Gunderloch Ver- Absatzförd.- und Wer- China, SVR Hong Nackenheim 2016 1 874,21 937,11 triebsgesellschaft GbR bemaßnahme Kong Von Winning Weingut Absatzförd.- und Wer- Deidesheim USA 2016 1 353,97 676,99 GmbH bemaßnahme Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weinhaus Dönnhoff GmbH Oberhausen USA 2016 2 359,08 1 179,54 bemaßnahme Wineland GmbH - The Absatzförd.- und Wer- China,SVR Hong Bernkastel-Kues 2016 3 133,04 1 566,52 Wine Agents bemaßnahme Kong, Taiwan Dr. Pauly-Bergweiler GmbH Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bernkastel-Kues USA 2016 5 907,32 2 953,66 & Co. KG bemaßnahme Weltachs Weinkellerei Absatzförd.- und Wer- Großkarlbach USA 2016 6 204,31 3 102,15 GmbH bemaßnahme Weltachs Weinkellerei Absatzförd.- und Wer- Großkarlbach China 2016 1 512,51 756,26 GmbH bemaßnahme Dominikaner Weingut C. Absatzförd.- und Wer- Kasel USA 2016 1 780,29 890,15 von Nell-Breuning bemaßnahme World of Boutique Wines Absatzförd.- und Wer- Bad Ems VAE 2016 11 434,13 5 717,07 GmbH bemaßnahme
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 102
Absatzförd.- und Wer- Weingut Karp-Schreiber Brauneberg USA 2016 1 637,21 818,61 bemaßnahme China,Japan, Weltachs Weinkellerei Absatzförd.- und Wer- Großkarlbach Südkorea, Hong- 2016 4 272,34 2 136,17 GmbH bemaßnahme Kong, Taiwan
Absatzförde- Riesling, Spätburgunder & DWI Kanada 2016 7 412,38 3 706,19 rung/Information Co. in Kanada
Absatzförde- Riesling, Spätburgunder & 18 DWI Schweiz 2016 36 553,16 rung/Information Co. in der Schweiz 276,58
Absatzförde- Riesling, Spätburgunder & 128 DWI USA 2016 256 084,92 rung/Information Co. in den USA 042,46
Absatzförde- Riesling, Spätburgunder & 27 DWI Norwegen 2016 55 788,32 rung/Information Co. in Norwegen 894,16 Informationsreisen von Multiplikatoren aus Absatzförde- 45 DWI Drittländern der Bereiche div 2016 91 986,08 rung/Information 993,04 Medien, Gastronomie u. Handel nach Deutschland
Absatzförde- Riesling, Spätburgunder & 12 DWI Kanada 2016 25 156,36 rung/Information Co. in Kanada 578,18
Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, Absatzförderungs- Absatzförderungs- und Weingut Peter Jakob Kühn, und Werbemaßnah- Werbemaßnahmen mit Mühlstraße 70, 65375 USA, Norwegen 2014-2015 3 101,00 1 240,40 men gem. Art 45 Nr. Importeuren und Händ- Oestrich-Winkel 2 Bst. A der VO (EU) lern Nr. 1308/2013 Art. 45 Nr. 2 a: Öf- Veritable Wines & Estates fentlichkeitsarbeit, Werbemaßnahmen für 10 KG, Rheinallee 50, 65347 Absatzförderungs- den Rheingauer Riesling USA 2015 30 862,50 000,00 Eltville und Werbemaßnah- "J. Bäumer" men Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, JWG Johannisberger Absatzförderungs- Absatzförderungs- und Weinvertrieb KG und Werbemaßnah- Werbemaßnahmen mit USA 2015-2016 6 332,76 2 533,10 Schloss Johannisberg men gem. Art 45 Nr. Importeuren und Händ- 65366 Geisenheim 2 Bst. A der VO (EU) lern Nr. 1308/2013
Annex 1 Table 6: LUA Report 2016: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance - number of samples, contesta- tions by origin, 2016
EU without Of which cus- Total Germany Third county Germany toms goods1
Number of samples 4,246 2,948 837 461 70
checked quantity in hl 408,817 158,887 194,565 55,365 12,911
No. of samples contested 369 232 108 29 1
Share of contested samples % 8.7 7.9 12.9 6.3 1.4
No. of samples contested due to 118 63 limit value violations and ineligible 55 treatments
Share of samples contested due to 2.8 2.1 limit value violations and ineligible 6.6 treatments %
Total quantity contested [hl] 21,130 8,446 11,312 1,372 240
Share of quantity contested in % 5.1 5.3 5.8 2.5 1.9
1 Third Country wines, spot checked by customs authority during import process
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 103
Source: Landesuntersuchungsamt Rheinland-Pfalz: Bilanz der Weinüberwachung (in Rhineland-Palatinate) 2016, published 2017, own translation
Annex 1 Table 7: LUA Report 2016: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance limit violations overrun - under- run 2016
Checked parameter / type of Foreign Germany Total violation countries
No. of samples 2,948 1,298 4,246
sulphur dioxide 4 0 4
elusive acids/ethylacetat 6 1 7
sorbic acid 1 4 5
carbonation overpressure 1 0 1
exceeded fining (Überschönung) 4 0 4
limit alcohol value violations too 14 1 15 high / too low content of alcohol
Multiple responses are possible with some samples Source: Landesuntersuchungsamt Rheinland-Pfalz: Bilanz der Weinüberwachung (in Rhineland-Palatinate) 2016, published 2017, own translation
Annex 1 Table 8: LUA Report 2016: Rhineland-Palatinate - Wine surveillance ineligible treatment substances and treatments 2016
Checked parameter / type of violation Foreign coun- Germany Total tries
Total no. of samples 2,948 1,298 4,246
Enrichment with sugar for sweetening or enrichment of 2 0 2 premium wine must or wines (Prädikatswein)
Addition of water 0 1 1
Added flavours 17 22 39
Added glycerine 1 7 8
Propandiol 1 0 1
Metals 4 13 17
Concentration 1 0 1
Other 6 6 12
Total contestations 32 49 81 Source: Landesuntersuchungsamt Rheinland-Pfalz: Bilanz der Weinüberwachung (in Rhineland-Palatinate) 2016, published 2017, own translation
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 104
ANNEX 2 - RHINELAND-PALATINATE: GENERAL CRITERIA RESTRUCTURING PHASE 2 (2018)
AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 105
ANNEX 3 - RHINELAND-PALATINATE FUNDING CRITERIA INVESTMENT AND SUP- PORT FOR INNOVATION ARTICEL 50 UND 51 DER VERORDNUNG (EG) NR. 1308/2013 FOR PROCESSING PLANTS, INFRASTRUKTURE OF WINE ESTATES AND WINE MARKETERS STAND: JANUAR 2018
1. Allgemeine Angaben BNR-ZD: 276 07 Bewilligungsbehörde Name und Anschrift des Zuwendungsempfängers
2. Förderfähigkeit ja nein Ist die Förderfähigkeit nach den Voraussetzungen der Artikel 50 und 51 der VO (EU) Nr. 1308/2013 gegeben? □ □
3. Maßnahmenspezifische Auswahlkriterien nach deren Gewichtung
Punkte im An- trag er- Auswahlkriterien Ausprägung maximal möglich reicht
- Kleinstes Unternehmen 5
Unternehmensgröße - Kleine Unternehmen 4 nach KMU - Mittlere Unternehmen 3
- Große/intermediäre Unternehmen 2
- Marktbetriebe, § 5 oder 6 der LVO: - Erzeugerorganisationen § 5 5 - Unternehmen § 6 5 Antragsteller o oder:
Weinbaubetriebe nach § 4:
- Ldw. Unternehmen < Prosperität 5
- Ldw. Unternehmen > men bei Antragstellung - 250.000,00 € bis 750.000 € 1 o Zuschläge für Antragsteller Jungwinzer/in1 3 o Investitionen in ökolo- 2 o gische Erzeugung Fair'n green Ja 3 o KuW - Große Investitionen 5 (mit Vertrag/ o Qualitätsverbesserung (§ 8 LVO) Ja 4 o Eigenkapitalbildung im Unternehmen im letzten oder im Durchschnitt der Ja 2 letzten 2 WJ (mind. 10.000 €) Bewirtschaftung von mind. 20% Steil- o Ja 3 lagen- 3. Maßnahmenspezifische Auswahlkriterien nach deren Gewichtung fläche bzw. im Ab nahmevertrag/ Vermark- tungsmenge 3 - Erstantrag 5 o Antragshistorie (2014-2018) - 1. Folgeantrag 3 - 2. Folgeantrag 1 Ja 4 o Investitionen zur Wärmenutzung aus AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 106 Biomasse oder Solarenergie, Klimatisierung mit Wärmerückgewinnung4 o Gebäudeinvestitionen im bebauten Ortsbe- reich § 34 BauGB - gemäß Denkmalschutz- und-pflegegesetz 4 - nur im bebauten Ortsbereich, einschließlich Gewerbegebiet 3 o Nachweis einer Energie(effizienz) Ja5 4 beratung o EFFCheck o ISO 50001 Höchste Punktzahl 50 Source: Ministry for Economic Affairs, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate: ChecklisteAuswahlkrite- rienRP-2018_01_26.pdf AGROSYNERGIE – Case study report: Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate Evaluation study of the impact of the CAP measures applicable to the wine sector 107 KF - 04 - 18 - 977 - EN - N 10.2762/09274