Bio-bashing: Champagne's favorite activity at all levels

Fish tales and hearsay sustain the conveniently false information on organic certification

Organic vineyard at the end of May 2024

This morning, a good friend sent me this article entitled: What are the brakes to organic certification in Champagne?, penned by Aurélie Ringval-Deluze, an economics professor and researcher at the University of Reims Champagne Ardennes (URCA). The fact that Ms Ringaval-Deluze is an academic gives extra weight to her words, however, the fact that she decided to write on a topic outside the realm of her specialties begs to question.

The article starts with the following sentence: “There are several elements that put into question the credibility of the organic certification.” A strong opener, divisive even, especially if one continues to read. It seems Ms Ringval-Deluze based this argument on a study (which is not referenced or detailed in said article)  she conducted (it seems) interviewing a sample of grape growers and winemakers and employees of big champagne houses and cooperatives. In her first paragraph she states that certain respondents to the study (again no exact percentage are given) believe organic farming is bollocks because copper (a heavy metal) is allowed. Interestingly, she fails to mention the severe European restriction on copper usage which are binding for EVERYONE, including conventional farmers, who in difficult years rarely comply knowing that they do not need to declare their copper usage, hence making it impossible to be penalized

She continues by saying that other respondents (again without percentages) argue that since organic growers have to treat their vines more often, they have a greater carbon footprint – which is further exacerbated by the important export market share in the total champagne sales.

Rather than justifying these statements with real academic arguments, she uses controversial statements given by random self-acclaimed experts. There is Thibault, a