The following subsections present the main results from the data analysis. The first section is dedicated to sustainable practices already developed by Canavese’s entrepreneurs. In the second section, sustainable aspects are explored from an ecosystem perspective focusing on the main aspects that encouraged the entrepreneurs’ approaches towards a thrivable ecosystem.
Development of sustainable practices in Canavese wineries
Perceptions around sustainability were generally important to wineries in Canavese: 59% considered these perceptions very important and 28%, quite important. As shown in Table
4, the most relevant dimensions of sustainability were related to environmental aspects. Most practices mentioned by wineries concerned vineyard management and land protection in general. Reduction of chemicals in pest and disease management of grapes was the main activity for Canavese’s wineries, associated with soil management and conservation of biodiversity in the vineyard ecosystem.
Table 4
Sustainable practices in Canavese wineries
Agrochemical reduction | 72 | 22 |
Soil management | 50 | 47 |
Energy saving | 50 | 22 |
Maintenance of land surrounding vineyards | 45 | 26 |
Biodiversity conservation | 39 | 45 |
Air quality | 38 | 41 |
Recovery of uncultivated land | 38 | 28 |
Solid waste management | 38 | 41 |
Local networks involving producers | 28 | 41 |
Water management | 23 | 55 |
Human resources management | 23 | 55 |
Involvement of the local community | 16 | 38 |
In the open questions, wineries showed they took care not only of their vineyards but also of the surrounding land. They mentioned initiatives about abandoned land recovery and management of non-vineyard areas such as woods and fallows. However, water, energy-saving, solid waste disposal and air quality were not the major focus of sustainability practices. The social dimension of sustainability was less ehnanched among wineries. The involvement of local communities, both citizens and producers, was mainly focused on creating a solidarity network and sustainable management of human resources.
The importance given to activities concerning sustainability practices was mirrored by what wineries already did. For example, agrochemicals were perceived as the most important aspect among various practices, as was soil and land management. Energy saving also acquired a certain relevance in terms of importance in the sustainable management of wineries. Some wineries had already implemented projects for solar energy production and saving of rainwater for cellar duties.
The perception among interviewees was that entrepreneurs’ practices were not just related to their sustainable behaviour. Sustainability was already taken for granted, as underlined in one of the first interviews in which the entrepreneur stated: ‘we have been doing these practices, defined as sustainable, for years’ (Int. 1).
From a sustainable to a thrivable ecosystem
The entrepreneurial ecosystem was also investigated through the survey, asking about the importance of different initiatives for a sustainable ecosystem. The results, summarised in Table
5, show that one of the most important areas of common action was related to the protection of water quality in waterways and aquifers, which required strict controls on agrochemical use in the vineyards. It was interesting to note how the ecosystem point of view also changed the prioritisation of sustainable actions such as water protection. Consequently, the general protection of biodiversity and the landscape was another concern for producers.
Table 5
Sustainability practices in the Canavese ecosystem
Protection of water courses and aquifers from agrichemicals | 59 | 19 |
Protection of biodiversity in the vineyard ecosystem | 56 | 23 |
Landscape protection | 53 | 19 |
Recovery and redevelopment of uncultivated/abandoned land | 44 | 27 |
Creation of paths walk and educational activities for the enhancement of the Canavese wine area | 44 | 18 |
Conservation and enhancement of traditional systems of vine growing (pergola) | 41 | 22 |
Conservation and recovery of native/ancient/minor varieties of wine grapes | 41 | 32 |
Community awareness of sustainability issues | 41 | 27 |
Creation of a solidarity network of local producers | 32 | 47 |
Cleaning and maintenance of wooded areas | 28 | 39 |
Recovery of abandoned land and activities that involved local communities, through educational offerings about sustainable viticulture, was an object of interest. Regarding viticulture, the importance of conservation of minor grape varieties was consolidated throughout the region, and included traditional systems of vine growing in the territory. Also, the maintenance of wooded areas was reported as generally important. Social sustainable activities such as solidarity networks among producers were generally important for wineries in the Canavese region.
One open question asked respondents to describe further actions they had developed towards the creation of their sustainable ecosystem. The results revealed a large variety of additional practices dedicated to the community, landscape, biodiversity and wellbeing of people as part of the ecosystem.
The words of interviewees represented their practices in a holistic way and showed their engagement with the long-term perspective. In this sense, the core motivation of the Canavese ecosystem was to thrive, thanks to a common way of acting in a way to bring prosperity. This was particularly well expressed by one interviewee:
We imagine this as a community and not just as a corner of Canavese. Without our wineries, this place would be all brambles and thorns. (…) The further we move away from the cellars, the more the vineyards disappear … this activity is the glue for the community. (Int. 1).
As their main goal, all the entrepreneurs underlined the importance of being aligned in their ecosystem goals in terms of common pursuit and protection of the land from climate-related damage. Protection of biodiversity in vineyards and conservation of minor and rare varieties of grapes were activities in which producers were generally willing to invest. Regarding waterway protection from chemical contamination, wineries were increasing their reduction of any kind of treatment because, as noted by one entrepreneur, ‘in the end we have more weeds but we are happier with the way we treat our land’ (Int. 2). The gradual elimination of chemical treatment of plants and grapes was seen to function to make plants stronger. As pointed out by one winemaker, ‘in this way the plant develops greater resistance and over the years we are seeing a gradual improvement in this sense’ (Int. 4). One winery interviewee referenced the famous Esopus tale of the turtle and the hare to communicate their motto, using the turtle’s words: ‘You don't have to run, you have to start on time’.
Economic goals were considered a long-term issue and investment for conservation of the traditional growing system of vines was of pivotal importance for increasing profitability of the ecosystem. Non-market goals such as the recovery of abandoned land, maintenance of wooded areas, solidarity networks among producers, and protection of the landscape reflected the importance of transformation and regenerative practices. In this sense, safeguarding the land for the interviewed entrepreneurs meant also recovering and employing the unused resource of the community. This was highlighted by the words of one winemaker–entrepreneur who explained how they were intervening in the dry-stone walls and stability of the hills:
If these places were abandoned, as happened in other places, it would be a disaster, the hill would collapse … instead renovating the existing terraces and dry-stone walls and keeping the vineyards healthy, the landscape also benefits. The community and tourists find a beautiful place. (Int. 3).
Uncultivated land was being revitalised with crops that increased biodiversity, were profitable and maintained the stability of the soil. Speaking about olive trees, one entrepreneur underlined that, ‘climate change has led us to adapt also in this sense; with the increase in temperatures we have begun to plant olive trees that are typical of the lake area and were based here in the ancient Roman period’ (Int. 16). The same was being done with nettles, which, as weeds, were collected and used to prepare herbal teas to sell. Following a similar approach, another entrepreneur declared:
We left an uncultivated area set up by my father where you can only access it on foot and where people can stop to look at the view and have a picnic. In this way, people participate in the community and buy our products. (Int. 4).
It was interesting to note the strong sense of belonging and self-help among entrepreneurs who, apart from their winemaking goals, shared knowledge and tools in the case of need. As noted by one entrepreneur, ‘Joining together is the only way. All together we create a single system, and we are big enough to reach our goal because our wine must be produced and aged here, in our area (Int. 8).
As with every entrepreneurial ecosystem, the winemakers were led to consider the vineyard within their business as an asset for seeking profit. Interviewees underlined that respect for the land itself allowed them to maintain and increase their business. This happened because the anthropocentric view did not prevail because entrepreneurs respected the rhythms of nature (life-centric view) and embedded their business into these rhythms without changing the ecosystem. This was clearly explained by one cellar manager: ‘The [eco]system works just if the entrepreneur has an incentive to remain here. The incentive must be of an economic nature and here they understood it 50 years ago when winemakers started collaborating with one another’ (Int. 10).
The perception of operating in a profitable entrepreneurial ecosystem could also be of great help as, ‘the entrepreneur takes more time, takes more thought, shows more passion in improving their own land if they know that this behaviour will also be rewarded economically (Int. 13).
To face their organisational development challenge the entrepreneurs considered only a systemic point of view in running their businesses, in which their wineries were a ‘piece of a puzzle’ (Int. 15). At an ecosystem level, the entrepreneurs had also organised themselves to obtain European funding to purchase equipment for use by the embedded members. In this way, it was possible to achieve a goal that, because of lack of knowledge on fundraising and excessive red tape around the process, would otherwise not be achieved.
The entrepreneurs underlined the importance of maintaining osmotic boundaries by encouraging collaboration with other industries such as tourism, local retailers and other developed entrepreneurial ecosystems. This was the reason why it was quite normal for an entrepreneur to declare that:
We must rediscover all local producers, from small shops to winemakers. This is also why I prefer to sell products from other companies in the area; so those who buy know this place and don’t buy from an ordinary supermarket. (Int. 3).
This attitude of openness was strictly connected with the need to create a future for younger generations of local entrepreneurs. As noted, ‘Young people who are trained to become agricultural entrepreneurs return to these lands with skills, new ideas and innovations for developing the land’ (Int. 4). This potential entrepreneurial ecosystem was well known to the interviewees who underlined the need to find incentives for these young entrepreneurs who wanted to follow in the footsteps of their fathers and grandparents, who had been able to improve the landscape and the quality of life of its community.
At the governance level, this thrivable ecosystem did not present a focal organisation that coordinated entrepreneurs’ actions; instead they preferred local meetings and informal agreements. However, an important role was played by local consortia that periodically distributed bulletins to share their knowledge on environmental issues and suggest common actions to put in practice for climate change adaptation. In doing so, ‘they advise the direction to take at the best time to respect the environment and make treatments more effective’ (Int. 5). This could also be considered as saving on intangible overhead costs that could have an impact from the vineyard to the final product. This was also enabled by the installation of weather stations situated in vineyards that facilitated the measurement and monitoring of weather data and helped to provide information to improve vineyard management in the case of unexpected events caused by climate change. The monitoring stations and other forms of internal audit practices (e.g. consumption of water) were informal and not reported. Therefore, the Canavese ecosystem had not yet developed a holistic and integrated form of assessment.