Biodynamic Practices Research Articles

Studies of Personal Profile and Adoption Level of RSVY Trainees in Relation to Biodynamic Practices in Tomato Crop in Balia District

Studies of Personal Profile and Adoption Level of RSVY Trainees in Relation to Biodynamic Practices in Tomato Crop in Balia District

Hocus pocus? Spirituality and soil care in biodynamic agriculture

In this article, I participate in efforts to re-imagine soils as lively, complex, more-than-human ecologies, by turning to the largely sidestepped subject of spirituality in agriculture. Spiritual knowledge practices rarely sit comfortably alongside technoscientific, productivist accounts of soil health, and yet they can re-configure how soils are conceptualised and managed, with implications for relationships of care. Drawing on an extended period of learning with a Community Supported Agriculture project in south Wales, the article explores how care is cultivated through a non-conventional method of farming known as biodynamics, which incorporates astrological and spiritual principles. I suggest that biodynamic narratives and rituals encourage attentiveness to more-than-human agency and energy, to depth (not only underground but also above-ground influences of the air and celestial bodies), and to reciprocity between soil biota and humans. Biodynamic practices also make space for mystery, thereby resisting drives to measure and map, and offering possibilities for disrupting anthropocentric approaches to soil care. However, the example presented here also highlights how, despite biodynamic’s growing popularity, its spiritual elements have a tendency to be kept quiet, their presence sidelined by more familiar, secular, narratives. Nonetheless, I contend that if effective soil care demands more diverse knowledge practices than those that are currently obliterating critical soil communities at an alarming rate, then there can be much to learn from a touch of magic.

The value of signals: Do self-declaration and certification generate price premiums for organic and biodynamic wines?

Given the growing demand for sustainable products, producers are faced with the question as to whether the costs of certification are necessary for credibility and associated price premiums. However, current research has not convincingly demonstrated customers’ willingness to pay for organic or biodynamic products, as studies relying on stated preferences have produced results that are difficult, if not impossible to reconcile with observable behavior. Furthermore, no study has so far attempted to understand to what extent signals either reinforce or dilute each other and how this affects prices. To fill these research gaps, the wine industry serves as an example, since a large number of producers have already adopted organic or biodynamic practices. While some of these wineries have successfully applied for third-party certification, others follow strict guidelines without being certified and self-declare themselves to be eco-friendly. Using a large sample of 55,500 wines produced by 1,514 German wineries between 2010 and 2017, this study estimates a series of hedonic models across different price quantiles. The results indicate a statistically significant price premium for organic and biodynamic wines, the magnitude of which is, however, far smaller than the effects usually identified in surveys and laboratory experiments. While self-declaration is only a credible signal for organic practices generating a price premium of 8.6 percent, biodynamic practices require certification for a price premium of 4.1 percent. The results also suggest that the interaction of collective reputation and biodynamic practices has a significantly positive impact on prices. Thus, this study contributes to global sustainability research by showing that the costs of certification can be avoided since in certain cases self-declaration is sufficient to enable a price premium.

Responses to climatic and pathogen threats differ in biodynamic and conventional vines

Viticulture is of high socio-economic importance; however, its prevalent practices severely impact the environment and human health, and criticisms from society are raising. Vine managements systems are further challenged by climatic changes. Of the 8 million hectares grown worldwide, conventional and organic practices cover 90% and 9% of acreage, respectively. Biodynamic cultivation accounts for 1%. Although economic success combined with low environmental impact is widely claimed by biodynamic winegrowers from California, to South Africa, and France, this practice is still controversial in viticulture and scientific communities. To rethink the situation, we encouraged stakeholders to confront conventional and biodynamic paradigms in a Participative-Action-Research. Co-designed questions were followed up by holistic comparison of conventional and biodynamic vineyard managements. Here we show that the amplitude of plant responses to climatic threats was higher in biodynamic than conventional management. The same stood true for seasonal trends and pathogens attacks. This was associated with higher expression of silencing and immunity genes, and higher anti-oxidative and anti-fungal secondary metabolite levels. This suggests that sustainability of biodynamic practices probably relies on fine molecular regulations. Such knowledge should contribute to resolving disagreements between stakeholders and help designing the awaited sustainable viticulture at large.

Linking the knowledge and reasoning of dissenting actors fosters a bottom-up design of agroecological viticulture

Wine growing has a high economic value globally, and vineyards, with their centenarian grape varieties, are an integral part of our societies. Yet with the use of spraying to control pathogens and weeds, mainstream viticulture has become a big pesticide consumer. Criticism of this conventional type of viticulture and its environmental/health impacts is increasing strongly throughout society. Until now, mainstream ‘top-down’ scientific-technical developments have focused on breeding for new varieties and on designing new agronomic models. In parallel, organic and biodynamic practices have been developing alternatives. Either way, changes do not develop on the expected time scale. We posit that the diversity of actors concerned, from winegrowers to technical advisers, consumer associations, conservationists, elected representatives, citizens, and scientists, all contribute to the perpetuation of a constrained situation, through their differences in perspectives and practices, positions, knowledge, and reasoning. To untangle this situation, we brought together these dissenting actors. With a view to resolving the epistemological challenges, we then characterized four types of knowledge, along with the reasoning in play, and designed a tetrahedral model to legitimize and inter-relate them. This tetrahedron supported co-construction of a collective epistemology after a paradigm shift, in which the dissensus became a resource on numerous occasions. We then highlighted masked double-bind situations and went further, developing a seven-step Argonaut to conduct the project. New practices were designed, to do away with herbicides and develop ecological grassing. They were implemented on a large scale in vineyards, within a short time frame, while enhancing the value of a neighbouring nature reserve. Projects currently underway in Switzerland, Germany, and France suggest that differences in knowledge are enriching, and yet that the reasoning at play fit with our tetrahedron model. We thus show that dissenting actors can dissolve agronomic/economic/ecological dilemmas, while acting under uncertainty, and foster agroecology development.

Physiological responses of grapevines to biodynamic management

AbstractA 3-year (2011–2013) field trial was carried out in a mature vineyard (Vitis viniferaL., cv. Sangiovese), planted in 2003, to assess physiological responses of grapevines to biodynamic management. Starting in 2007, the vineyard was managed with organic production protocols in accordance with EC Regulations (834/2007). In 2008, the vineyard (2 ha) was divided in two large plots, with each plot having similar soil physico-chemical properties. One of the plots was managed with organic protocols per EC Regulations and the other with biodynamic practices, consisting of spray application of preparations 500, 500 K, fladen and 501. During the 2011–2013 season, the biodynamic preparations were used at least twice per year, with the exception of 501 that was applied only once in 2013. Concentration of hormones and mineral elements in biodynamic preparations were determined. Biodynamically managed vines showed lower stomatal conductance in all years and lower leaf water potential in 2012. Leaf photosynthetic activity was not influenced by cultivation method. Biodynamic management led to an increase in leaf enzymatic activities of endochitinase (EC 3.2.1.14), exochitinase (β-N-acetylhexosaminidase, EC 3.2.1.52 and chitin 1,4-β-chitobiosidase) and β-1,3-glucanase (EC 3.2.1.39), which are typically correlated with plant biotic and abiotic stresses and associated with induced plant resistance. Year effects were observed with 1,3-β-glucanase, whose activity in 2012 was 4.1-fold higher than in 2013. Disease incidence and grape yields were not different between organic and biodynamic treatments. This study provided a strong indication of a stimulation of natural defense compounds in grapes grown under biodynamic cultivation, but subsequent effects on plant protection and productivity require further evaluation.

Understanding vineyard soils

The first edition of Understanding Vineyard Soils has been praised for its comprehensive coverage of soil topics relevant to viticulture. However, the industry is dynamic--new developments are occurring, especially with respect to measuring soil variability, managing soil water, possible effects of climate change, rootstock breeding and selection, monitoring sustainability, and improving grape quality and the "typicity" of wines. All this is embodied in an increased focus on the terroir or "sense of place" of vineyard sites, with greater emphasis being placed on wine quality relative to quantity in an increasingly competitive world market. The promotion of organic and biodynamic practices has raised a general awareness of "soil health", which is often associated with a soil's biology, but which to be properly assessed must be focused on a soil's physical, chemical, and biological properties. This edition of White's influential book presents the latest updates on these and other developments in soil management in vineyards. With a minimum of scientific jargon, Understanding Vineyard Soils explains the interaction between soils on a variety of parent materials around the world and grapevine growth and wine typicity. The essential chemical and physical processes involving nutrients, water, oxygen and carbon dioxide, moderated by the activities of soil organisms, are discussed. Methods are proposed for alleviating adverse conditions such as soil acidity, sodicity, compaction, poor drainage, and salinity. The pros and cons of organic viticulture are debated, as are the possible effects of climate change. The author explains how sustainable wine production requires winegrowers to take care of the soil and minimize their impact on the environment. This book is a practical guide for winegrowers and the lay reader who is seeking general information about soils, but who may also wish to pursue in more depth the influence of different soil types on vine performance and wine character.