While it’s generally agreed that sustainability is a noble goal for businesses, the price of progress can be off-putting for many – particularly if achieving their green goals includes implementing large infrastructural changes or pouring precious time into pricey certification applications.
Yet prioritising sustainability is worthwhile and can ultimately bring more money to a business, said speakers at the Balancing Profit, People and Planet in Wine panel discussion, held by Curious Vines on Monday (12 January) this week.
From a big-picture perspective, sustainability is the ultimate investment in the future, said Anne Jones, sustainability consultant and director at Limestone & Jones, noting that climate resilience is vital to any business that wants to survive long term. “Resilience at a viticultural level is the most fundamental thing we have to focus on as an industry,” she said.
On a more practical level, however, there is also money to be recouped on a day-to-day basis, Jones added, pointing to savings on chemicals as an example.
“The cost of pesticides has gone through the roof in South Africa, for example, so from a pragmatic perspective we’re seeing vineyards replacing chemical inputs with things like animal integration,” Jones noted. In this way, purpose and profit can be aligned.
The same is true outside of the vineyard, continued Bronwyn Westrip, executive creative director at global agency Denomination. Using sustainable packaging design as a case study, Westrip said that “to be sustainable is profitable” because it usually means using less glass, fewer processes, or less transport, all of which are major costs for brands.
Drawing on her work at Denomination, she added: “There are so many reasons in packaging and branding [to become sustainable], but usually our briefs are based on profitability,” further proof that the two are not mutually exclusive.
Amy Roberts, MD at Sustainable Wine Solutions, likewise heralded alternative packaging as cost-saving. Citing a local example, she said: “Last year, for instance, Wimbledon took over 2,000 litres of wine in a steel keg from us, which is zero waste and was a premium product at a competitive price point.”
Like all sustainable changes in their infancy, Roberts conceded there is still sometimes a consumer stigma around more unusual packaging. But in her view, this is something that will shift.
“We saw the same thing with screwcap, and now all the people in this room wouldn’t think that. So, there is resistance to a point, but it won’t be forever,” she said.
From a wholesaler and importer perspective, Clio Giudici, ESG lead for wine at Bibendum, agreed. “For us, we’re definitely looking more into wine kegs, and that is something we’ve been reviewing in the last year,” she said – a positive sign that more sustainable design choices are becoming more normalised.
Of course, none of the examples shared in the panel alter the fact that other sustainable choices – like installing solar panels or water conservation systems – do cost money. However, the overall message was that this isn’t the whole picture: some changes can benefit all.
Jones put it succinctly: “Yes, it can cost more, but it doesn’t have to. There is no rule that says being sustainable must cost more by default.” This is something to highlight and celebrate.
