Abstract:Indicators have been used in many sustainability assessment methods, however, disagreements over a common definition and scope for the sustainability concept have led to many distinct assessment methods, which are not often directly comparable. Before developing a sustainability assessment, it is essential to: define sustainability and specify the viewpoint of the assessor, the purpose of the assessment, and the context and time frame of the assessment. This article presents a short list of indicators and a method that can be readily adopted by any agricultural business or region to assess sustainability, making any organization, region or crop qualitatively comparable. These indicators were proposed by 83 top-level executives in 14 group interviews conducted using our adapted nominal group technique (ANGT). Executives were sourced from wine-grape growing organisations from New World wine-producing countries that also owned vineyards, and they considered everyday management practices of farms. These indicators, grouped within three categories (economic, environmental, and social) were ranked by their importance. The method defines OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 8179 qualitative indicators that, in the context of distinct wine regions or crops should be quantified to maintain their relevance and usefulness.

We present outcomes from a mixed methods research project in agricultural sciences. An atypical methodology for sciences was developed as the only way to avoid embedded assumptions commonly seen in sustainability investigations. Eighty-three upper echelon participants from the wine grape industry participated in 14 focus groups in five countries: Australia, Chile, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United States. Quantitative measures were compared with results from qualitatively coded participant utterances using two content analysis software tools: Leximancer and NVivo. This article presents the strategies and method applied in this investigation to define sustainability. A consensual sustainability definition prior to the establishment of assessment systems is essential. The model developed seems to be viable for similar sustainability investigations of individual organizations.

This article documents and compares the most prominent sustainability assessment programs for individual organisations in viticulture worldwide. Certification and engagement processes for membership uptake; benefits; motives; inhibiting factors; and desirable reporting system features of viticultural sustainability programs, are all considered. Case-study results are derived from nine sustainability programs; 14 focus groups with 83 CEOs, Chief Viticulturists or Winemakers from wine grape production organizations from five countries (Australia, Chile, New Zealand, South Africa and the United States); 12 semi-structured interviews with managers either currently or formerly in charge of the sustainability programs; researcher observations; and analysis of documents. Programs were categorized by their distinct program assessment methods: process-based, best practice-based, indicator-based and criterion-based. We found that programs have been created to increase growers' sustainability, mainly through the direct and indirect education they receive and promote, and the economic benefit to their business caused by overall improvement of their operations. The main finding from this study is that the success of each of these programs is largely due to the people driving the programs OPEN ACCESS Sustainability 2014, 6 2032 (program managers, innovative growers and/or early adopters) and the way these people communicate and engage with their stakeholders and peers.

No abstract