A Comprehensive Analysis of Shared Challenges and Needs across U.S. Grape and Wine Regions

Demographics

Of the 1145 surveys collected on Qualtrics, 792 surveys were completed, representing 40 states (Figure 1). Surveys were completed by vineyard owners (14%), winegrape growers (12%), winemakers (12%), and winery owners (9%), and the remaining 53% of responses were collectively obtained from wine retailers, vineyard managers, viticulturists, hobby grapegrowers and winemakers, business/general managers, cellar assistants/assistant winemakers, consultants/crop advisors, and enologists (data not shown). Most of the participants who completed the survey were located in the West, with 232 responses in California (29% of completed surveys) and 75 responses in Oregon (9% of completed surveys) (Figure 1). Sixty-six responses were obtained from Michigan participants (8%), followed by Pennsylvania with 44 responses (5%) (Figure 1). These results were expected because California produces 85% of U.S. wine, followed by Washington, New York, and Oregon (https://wineamerica.org/policy/by-the-numbers/). Despite their substantial size and influence within the U.S. wine industry, relatively few responses were obtained from participants residing in Washington (n = 11) and New York (n = 29). This pattern may reflect structural characteristics of these industries, where a larger share of vineyard acreage and production is concentrated among fewer operators; nonetheless, results for these and other states with limited response counts should be interpreted with caution because they may not fully represent statewide industry conditions.

In both the West and Northeast, most respondents had over 20 yr of experience in grape production (53% in the West, 35% in the Northeast), wine production (46% in the West, 37% in the Northeast), and wine business and marketing (45% in the West, 49% in the Northeast) (Table 2). The South was predominantly led by participants involved in grape production for more than 20 yr (28%), in wine production for 10 to 14 yr (27%), and in wine business and marketing for 15 to 20 yr (39%). By contrast, the Midwest was represented by participants involved in grape production for 15 to 20 yr (32%), in wine production for 10 to 14 yr (34%), and in wine business and marketing for 5 to 9 yr (48%). These demographics highlight the Midwest as an emerging region in the U.S. grape and wine industry. The Midwest was heavily affected by Prohibition but began its revival in the 1940s, driven by the introduction of new grape varieties such as Cayuga White (Einset and Robinson 1972), developed by the Cornell University breeding program and introduced in 1972, and Bluebell (https://enology.umn.edu/sites/enology.umn.edu/files/2024-08/752_bluebellfactsheet_fnl.pdf), developed by the University of Minnesota breeding program and released in 1944, and by grape varieties developed by a breeding program in eastern Canada. This resurgence has been further supported by universities with dedicated research and extension programs.

Overall, based on the reported data, the average number of vineyard hectares owned by a grapegrower in the U.S. was 42; the Midwest and the South were comprised of growers with the smallest number of hectares of vineyards: 3.2 and 4 ha on average, respectively (Table 3). As expected, the West showed the largest number of vineyard hectares per grower, with an average of 155 ha of vines owned by a grower, with 79% of growers growing only V. vinifera grape varieties and 8% growing no V. vinifera grape varieties. These results should be interpreted with caution because data from the 2025 AgCensus indicate that California had ~222,577 ha dedicated to winegrapes (CDFA 2025). Our findings represent only a portion of the broader grape and wine industry.

The percentage of V. vinifera and non-V. vinifera grape varieties grown in the West varied in different states, with different climate conditions. In addition, the climate varies by location within the same state, which affects the phenology of winegrapes (Jones et al. 2005, Parker et al. 2024, Martínez-Lüscher et al. 2025). Divergent results were observed in the Midwest region, with 79% of participants indicating no V. vinifera cultivation and 7% indicating that they only grow V. vinifera grape cultivars. Similar to the West, the climate in the Midwest varies depending on location. For example, the climate in North Dakota is extremely cold compared to Missouri, and therefore the grape varieties grown are not necessarily adapted across an entire region (Schrader et al. 2019, North et al. 2021). In the Northeast and the South, the grape varieties produced are a combination of V. vinifera and non-V. vinifera, with varying percentages representing these species categories in those regions (Table 3).

Industry challenges of viticulture

At the national level, the top three viticulture challenges were disease management, pest management, and environment and climate (including flood, fire, spring frosts, winter cold injury, herbicide drift, heatwaves, and drought). Unfortunately, a “sub-question” to “environment and climate” was not asked but would have given further insight into the specific aspect of climate that was of concern to respondents, such as wildfires, dormant cold injury events, or spring frosts. Similarly, a clarifying question was not asked about which non-disease pests were of greatest concern to growers.

Disease management was the top national challenge (844 responses), while the second most common challenge was pest management (581 responses) (Table 4). These top challenges of viticulture were the same and in the same order for the West and South. From the focus group meeting discussion and based on the concerns shared by growers, Pierce’s Disease and powdery mildew are the common diseases that are a challenge in vineyards of these two regions. These concerns are related to spray programs and the development of resistant grape varieties, as growers who would like to farm organically and sustainably have challenges to design an effective spray program and to determine the best product efficacy, given strong disease pressure and changing climate (Kunova et al. 2021).

Similarly, in the Northeast, disease management was the top challenge for growers, most likely because of the presence of downy mildew, powdery mildew, and black rot in this humid region, as discussed in the focus group (Armijo et al. 2016). In the Midwest, disease management was ranked as the third top challenge, with powdery mildew also indicated as one of the top concerns. The top challenge of the Midwest region was the environment and climate, which was rated almost as equally as pest management challenges (Table 4). Growers from the Midwest states all had concerns about late frosts, hot summers, cold winters, and climate shifts, requiring them to grow regionally-adapted grape varieties. These varieties tolerate extreme winter low temperatures and are less susceptible to diseases. However, new varieties are still needed to cope with changing climate conditions, along with strategies to minimize inconsistencies caused by climate variability and by training systems and canopy management practices (Fennell 2004). Climate and environment was the third top challenge of the West and South and included dealing with heat waves, drought tolerance, and fall frosts all affecting grape ripening and quality (Keller 2010).

One of the top (ranking third) viticulture challenges mentioned during all regional focus group meetings was labor. This concern included access and cost of both trained and untrained labor. It is challenging for growers to recruit workers because there is no central platform to garner industry demand. Focus group discussions also cited high costs associated with obtaining H-2A workers and visas. Many workers coming into vineyards are not specifically trained in agriculture or viticulture, so time and money is needed to train those workers (Martin 2019). However, as discussed during the West and South focus group meetings, foreign agricultural workers on H-2A visas cannot be a part of professional development programs (e.g., training, workshops, field days) because such programs are not part of the work.

These findings support previous studies on the need for climate-adapted grape varieties and sustainable vineyard practices (Wolkovich et al. 2018) and build on this by explaining complexity. The call for applied research, extension programs, and improved grapevine genetics reflects an industrywide demand for practical solutions for vineyard health and sustainability that could be readily implemented and reduce labor and chemical inputs, thereby improving profitability.

Industry challenges of enology

The top three enology challenges at the national level were management of microbial spoilage, production costs, and wine acidity, with equal weight given to microbial spoilage and production costs (Table 4). However, the Midwest region did not have management of production costs as a top three challenge; instead, the quality of available grapes was a top challenge. Managing wine acidity was also not ranked as a top three challenge in the West, where the third most important challenge was the management of aromatic profiles. In the Northeast, the top third challenge was availability of labor. However, the management of wine acidity was discussed during the focus group meeting in all four regions. Many of the winemaker challenges are the same as those of growers, especially because some of those challenges are correlated. Good grapes are necessary to make good wines, and the management of wine acidity and microbial spoilage depend to some extent on the quality and chemistry of the harvested grapes. Currently, participants are managing those challenges by using sulfur dioxide as the main preservative used in the winery, cleaning and sanitizing the working environment, and filtration and ozone treatment (mainly used in larger winery operations in the West) to reduce the risks of microbial spoilage (Boulton et al. 1996). Participants mentioned trying to wait for the optimum harvest maturity prior to harvest in order to reduce the use of additives and manipulation in the winery. As climate and the environment affect the growing seasons and time to harvest grapes, it is challenging for winemakers to make decisions when the technological maturity (total soluble solids, pH, and titratable acidity) and phenolics maturity are different every year (Conde et al. 2007). In the West, management of aromatic profile is a challenge resulting from year-to-year variability and unpredictable weather conditions, including wildfire smoke that needs to be mitigated. Similar to the viticulture challenges, the availability of labor is a challenge for winemakers, as shown by the number of responses from the Northeast and the South (Table 4). This challenge was discussed during the focus group meetings of all regions because trained labor can be expensive and difficult to find. This suggests that mechanization in the vineyard and winery could be a good approach to reduce labor costs (Kurtural and Fidelibus 2021).

The importance of microbial spoilage and wine acidity highlights the direct effect of grape quality and chemistry on winemaking processes. Climate variability complicates grape ripening and phenolic maturity, making it challenging to achieve consistent wine quality. The industry’s reliance on sulfur dioxide, filtration, and ozone treatment underscores the need for innovative preservation techniques that maintain wine integrity while reducing chemical inputs (Jackson 2014). The desire for applied research, technology development, and educational programs indicates a need for both foundational knowledge and practical training.

Industry business and marketing challenges

At the national level, the top business and marketing challenges included understanding consumer awareness, acceptance, and valuation of grape varieties and regional wines; gathering insights on tasting room visitors; and adapting to the evolving preferences of younger generations (Table 4). These challenges reflect a growing need for industry research to enhance consumer engagement and market positioning. A key challenge across all regions was improving consumer awareness, acceptance, and value perception of wines from specific regions and American Viticultural Areas (AVAs). Wineries struggle to communicate the unique characteristics of locally and sustainably produced wines, as well as their distinct regional identities. Understanding how consumers interpret and respond to this information is essential for strengthening branding efforts and increasing sales (Atkin et al. 2017).

Another significant challenge was obtaining detailed insights on tasting room visitors, including their demographics, wine preferences, purchasing behaviors, and how they differ from consumers who purchase wine in retail settings. Most wineries, particularly outside of the West Coast, rely heavily on direct sales to tasting room visitors seeking a wine-themed experience (Bruwer and Alant 2009). Wineries across all regions emphasize the need for research to identify visitor expectations and behaviors, allowing for better-targeted marketing strategies and optimized tasting room experiences. The effect of winery activities on beneficial outcomes such as increased product involvement, brand loyalty, and sales also presents a challenge. While wineries invest in a variety of activities—ranging from tasting experiences to educational events—there is limited data on how these efforts translate into long-term consumer engagement and revenue growth. More research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of these activities and to identify best practices (Joy et al. 2021).

Additionally, wineries face barriers in establishing market channel legitimacy, particularly when expanding beyond direct-to-consumer sales. Distribution challenges, regulatory constraints, and competition from larger brands make it difficult for small and mid-sized wineries to gain visibility in traditional retail and online markets. Identifying successful strategies for building legitimacy in various sales channels remains a priority for business growth.

Finally, the industry is grappling with how to appeal to younger generations, particularly Gen Z (born after 1997) and Millennials (born between 1981 and 1996; https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins/), who have different purchasing behaviors, preferences, and communication styles than those of older consumers. Research is needed to understand their psychographics and wine consumption trends, enabling wineries to develop more appealing experiences, targeted marketing strategies, and price points that align with the expectations of the younger generations (Olsen et al. 2007).

As consumer preferences shift and market dynamics evolve, wineries must adapt by leveraging research-driven insights to refine marketing efforts, improve visitor engagement, and expand distribution opportunities. These challenges highlight the ongoing need for industrywide collaboration and investment in market research to ensure long-term sustainability and competitiveness.

These findings demonstrate the complex landscape of wine business and marketing, particularly for producers outside the West Coast. Many wineries struggle to articulate the distinctiveness and value of their grape varieties, production practices, and regional identities in ways that resonate with consumers. The distinction between visitors seeking an experience in the tasting room and those purchasing wine in retail settings presents both a challenge and an opportunity for data-based engagement strategies (Charters and Ali-Knight 2002). Meanwhile, the evolving preferences and behaviors of younger generations call for updated marketing approaches, communication tools, and product offerings. Addressing these needs will require sustained investment in consumer research, business and marketing education, and support from industry associations to help wineries refine their outreach, grow their customer base, and remain competitive in a changing marketplace.

Resources needed

At the national level, participants identified the following resources as needed to address the viticulture challenges: applied research, extension programs (e.g., field days, workshops), and labor. Out of the 545 responses, applied research received 362 responses and extension programs received 331 responses (Table 5). In focus group meetings, it was discussed that often what is thought of as applied research is actually an extension topic. This distinction suggests a need for extension programs that more effectively disseminate and translate existing research to industry audiences. In the West, the third top resource needed was technology research and development, while better grapevine genetics and new varieties were chosen by the Midwest (Vivier and Pretorius 2019).

Resources needed to address the enology challenges, similar to viticulture challenges, included applied research, technology research, and development and education (i.e., certificate and degree programs at community colleges and universities). In the West, Midwest, and South, industry association support was a resource needed to manage the enology concerns. In the Northeast, some participants ranked the ability to buy new equipment as a top resource needed for enology, while the South mentioned the need for lab analysis (Lapsley et al. 2019).

At the national level, the primary resources needed for business and marketing were market research, industry association support, and extension programs; these were the same resources that respondents voiced for all regions. During the focus group meetings, participants shared the need for a better understanding of market trends, as well as state policies to support wine and alcoholic beverage boards. There is a need for educating industry stakeholders on how to choose a distributor and how to do marketing overall, as well as education of wine consumers and how to reach a broader audience from all generations. In all four regions, outcomes indicated a need for wine economists and marketers to serve as resources to help stakeholders understand how to address certain market challenges (Lapsley et al. 2019).

For viticulture, these research and education needs include climate adaptation, environmental stress physiology, and sustainable disease management. Enology research should focus on adapting winemaking practices to changing grape chemistry and developing rapid analytical techniques for real-time decision making. Market research should explore consumer awareness, winery visitor profiles, and effective communication strategies. The educational priorities identified in this study emphasize the need for practical training in viticulture and enology, as well as marketing and business development, particularly for smaller wineries and emerging regions.

Strategies for future research and education

Based on the data of the questionnaire and focus group discussions, some researchable themes for each competency (viticulture, enology, and wine business and marketing) were identified.

The research themes for viticulture were related to climate change as it affects future grape production. This includes ways to mitigate environmental stress (heat, water, freeze) by using rootstocks and/or improved cultivars, both of which necessitate trials. The threat of new pests and diseases was also a concern. The industry would need to find ways to achieve consistency despite climate fluctuations, and to focus on fewer grape cultivars. Programs on cultivar selection should continue to test and select cultivars with better tolerance to climate fluctuations, improved disease resistance, and high wine quality potential (van Leeuwen and Darriet 2016). Sustainable production practices are critical to allow growers to achieve solvency in times of change, whether from economic or climate concerns. Examples of sustainability research could include ways to reduce the frequency of applications and amount of pesticide used for disease and pest management, or could consider the overall carbon footprint of vineyard inputs (Santini et al. 2013). Much of what was discussed in interpreting the survey results during the focus group meetings centered on the fact that what the industry sees as research is actually a need for extension/outreach/training, because the topics were often well defined by research, with practical deliverables of which growers are often unaware. In addition, researchers need to understand that extension outreach takes time and resources (labor, funding), and there should be a focus on improving the integration of research and extension activities formally through grant projects that are open to extension and not just research. Some themes that are education-based include disease management and product efficacy trials; viticulture best practices for smaller acreage producers and younger grapegrowing regions; and focus content and increase reach by supporting a variety of outreach channels, including extension and increased collaboration with community colleges. In the focus groups, discussion of strategies that are out of the control of academia included labor (supply, regulation, and costs) and current challenges of the grape market. These are areas that are best managed by groups such as commodity commissions and regulators.

The enology research themes closely mirrored those in viticulture, focusing on climate change and sustainability. Environmental changes alter grape chemistry at harvest, making it challenging to adapt winemaking practices and to predict grape quality and yield each year. Further research on fundamental winemaking knowledge is needed to understand how grape chemistry, influenced by specific cultivars and growing regions, affects winemaking practices. Key challenges include managing acidity, ensuring consistency in quality, preventing oxidation, and developing rapid techniques to analyze chemical parameters for real-time decision making (Waterhouse et al. 2016).

Many enological concerns shared by study participants indicate a need for education, as existing research already addresses issues such as stuck fermentations, wine faults and their prevention, and best practice implementation. Similar to viticulture, certain factors lie beyond the control of academic research or extension, including severe weather events. These events affect grape quality and subsequently influence winemaker decisions. Additionally, challenges persist related to funding research and education, as well as industry acceptance of educational initiatives. Enology research and extension programs also cannot control external market forces, consumer preferences, or the effects of supply and demand (Jackson 2017).

The themes for market research include consumer awareness, acceptance, and value of grape varieties, wines produced in specific regions or AVAs, and the information shared about wines; information about tasting room visitors, including demographics, geographics, wine preferences and behavior, winery visit preferences and behaviors, and the differences between winery visitors and wine consumers in retail settings; the effect of winery activities on beneficial outcomes, including sales, product involvement, and acceptance; market channel legitimacy; and psychographics and behaviors of younger generations. This latter research area would help to create more appealing experiences, appropriate communication methods, and desirable products. Overall, the potential themes for education focus on pricing and promotional strategies and reviewing the relevant laws and taxes at the local, state, and national levels. Other fields of wine operations staff education include how to use social media and influencers, developing various business models by winery size, developing distribution, retail and restaurant strategies, as well as a regional identity. To achieve effective education, it is important to define the roles of wine boards, grapegrower associations, universities, and individual companies, to enable each to meet their full potential in assisting the wine industry. Communication of who does what role is critical, as many industry stakeholders are often confused about these roles (Taylor et al. 2008).

While this study provides valuable insights, it is important to acknowledge its limitations. The survey responses may not fully represent the entire industry, particularly in regions with lower participation rates from well-established industries such as Washington and New York. Additionally, the focus group discussions, while informative, may have been influenced by the perspectives of the participants selected and limited by the small number of industry stakeholders from each region. Furthermore, to keep the survey from becoming too long, the questions were more general in scope and topic focus; additional context and information could have been gained if more detailed questions were asked. The focus group meetings were therefore designed to examine those questions more deeply and to get an idea of how well the survey represented the states and regions. Despite these limitations, the findings offer a robust foundation for developing targeted research, education, and outreach programs that address the evolving needs of the U.S. grape and wine industry.