Evaluating the Economic Viability of Regenerative Viticulture in Sonoma County, California

Supplemental Table 1  Main inputs and outputs of initial data collected from interviews on the four vineyards studied. Q, quantity; EV, electric vehicle; UTV, utility terrain vehicle; ATV, all terrain vehicle; Mg, Megagram.

Supplemental Table 2  Economic comparison of different discount rates (DR) and time horizon analysis of 1 ha for the conventional viticulture (CV) and regenerative agriculture (RA) management scenarios. Net present value (NPV) difference = RA − CV. The main analysis uses a 30-yr time horizon (see Equation 1), while this table includes additional time horizons and discount rate combinations to explore sensitivity. Mg, Megagram.

Supplemental Table 3  Net present value (NPV) comparison across yield and price scenarios for four vineyards at a 4% discount rate (DR) and two time horizons (25 and 30 yr). Values represent the NPV difference between regenerative agriculture (RA) under each scenario (Optimistic, minor yield declines and higher prices; Pessimistic, larger yield reductions and lower prices) and the conventional viticulture (CV) baseline from Supplemental Table 2. Bold text highlights the only scenario with a positive profit.

Appendix 1  Economic questionnaire: Cost-benefit analysis in vineyards using regenerative practices.

Appendix 2  More information and sources on how the costs and benefits from the winegrape production systems were estimated.

• Supplemental Data