It’s just over 100 years since Rudolf Steiner delivered his eight-lecture Agriculture Course in Kobertwitz (Kobierzyce in present-day Poland). Sometimes described as the world’s first organic agriculture course, one that would “heal the earth”, according to Steiner, it also gave rise to the biodynamic movement. Then close to the end of his life, the Austrian was already a controversial figure in many respects and remains so today. As well as founding anthroposophy, so-called “spiritual science”, he was an artist, teacher, philosopher and playwright. Although his thinking was esoteric and based on mysticism and the occult, and he did not consume alcohol himself, today his legacy is perhaps most evident in vineyards.

What is it about the farming practices he devised that still makes sense to his followers, a century after he died? Why do these methods appeal to so many great wine producers in Europe and beyond, seemingly in the face of science? “I can’t prove it, but it works,” is a common phrase from vignerons who use biodynamics. Improvements in the vineyard and the wines can turn a sceptic into a proselyte. Alsace vigneron Olivier Humbrecht Master of Wine of Domaine Zind-Humbrect is quoted in Ray Isle’s book The World in a Wine Glass saying just this: “I’m very happy to believe in things that you cannot explain scientifically, as long as there’s a difference that you can register scientifically. If we do an experiment and can compare the results and there is a difference, then that’s enough information for me.”

Steiner developed his agricultural teachings and techniques partly as a response to the concerns of small farmers who were concerned about the increasing use of chemical fertilisers. They had witnessed the degradation of soils and the declining quality of crops. They were right to be worried. Fast forward to 2025 and soil degradation has become a global concern. Biodynamic farming may not save global agriculture, as the yield per hectare is generally lower than from conventional farming and it is hard to practice on an industrial scale. But in vineyards, Steiner’s beliefs have a growing number of adherents

The numbers speak for themselves. France has the largest total area of biodynamic vineyards, with 10,166 hectares in 2021. Switzerland and Austria have the highest percentage of the vineyards under biodynamic certification, with 2.8 and 2.7 % respectively. Biodynamics is used all over the world, from Chile to the United States, New Zealand to Argentina, Germany to South Africa. And, more often than not, it is adopted by high-quality producers.

Following Steiner’s lectures in 1924, farmers and gardeners started to experiment, and in 1928 created Demeter standards. This organisation certifies different forms of agriculture, not just vineyards. In addition, there are certifying bodies that focus solely on vine growing and wine production. Biodyvin was created in 1995, and currently has 215 members, mostly in France. Respekt-BIODYN was created by growers in Austria and Germany in 2007 and has subsequently taken on members in Italy and Slovenia.

The main idea behind biodynamic farming is that each farm should be self-sufficient, and therefore a polyculture. Working this way, the people who live and work on the farm will (have to) understand the interaction between livestock, crops, the soil and the surrounding environment. Instead of looking at plants and animals solely as economic assets, they become aware of “the circle of life”. Instead of fighting crop diseases with treatments that harm other parts of the ecosystem, by understanding how and why the plants react in a certain way they can help to harvest a healthy crop.

When I visited Thorsten Melsheimer from Weingut Melsheimer in Reil on the Mosel, he told me he could not achieve the same yields in his vineyards every year as some of his neighbours do, who work conventionally. But over the space of a decade, things even out, and nature finds its own balance. If the farm is a polyculture, the loss of yield in one crop can be made up for in another, or in the birth of more animals among the livestock. Most biodynamic wineries rely on wine production as their main product of income, though. Some wine estates keep animals for the manure they produce, some borrow sheep, and others make do without.

Some of the treatments used in biodynamic farming might sound a bit strange. Like most of Steiner’s work, they are pseudo-science and not easy to test empirically. This is especially true the 500 and 501 preparations. These involve burying cow manure in a horn over the winter and then mixing the decomposed material with water the next spring, before applying it in the vineyard. To the general public, this may sound like something from the hippie movement, but it makes sense to a large number of actual farmers who have used the preparation in their vineyards. And it certainly doesn’t do any harm. Is it more responsible to use chemical fertilisers that alter the balance of the soil, and herbicides that kill most other life under the vine? Several studies of biodynamic treatments, and 500 and 501 in particular (most recently in a study published by International Viticulture and Enology Society IVES) show little or no difference in yield, grape quality or soil health compared to organically farmed vineyards, but highly interventionist “conventional” agriculture is something else altogether.

In a world where arable land is diminishing in size, people growing vines should not take away more than they leave behind. Pascaline Lepeltier says in her new book, One Thousand Vines, A New Way to Understand Wine: “Here it should be understood that these formation processes are complex and delicate and can be upset by any number of viticultural practices where these are carried out too intensively, including the use of pesticides that kill earthworms, fungi and bacteria; mineral fertilizers that disrupt the soil’s chemical composition; ploughing, extraction and the de-structuring of soils and so on.”

Perhaps harder to grasp is the biodynamic view of the lunar and astrological influences on soil and plant development. Mathieu Deiss of Domaine Marcel Deiss in Alsace told me his approach to biodynamics is not dogmatic, and that good farming is more important than the lunar calendar. Melsheimer also states that some of Steiner’s statements and claims must be seen in their historical context. And even Steiner did not have all the answers to how biodynamics should be practised. He said: try this out, see if it works and do your own evaluation of the process along the way. For Melsheimer the most important factor is the realisation that everything is connected and interdependent. “With this basic idea, you change what you do. You become more mindful. That’s good for you and for your environment.”

This greater understanding of the role of human beings in biodynamics is something that has caught on in various wine districts. On the plateau to the east of Saint-Emilion, close to the border with the Gironde département, the Amoureau family of Château Le Puy has practiced old school, chemical free farming and polyculture for 400 years. They do not mention Rudolf Steiner when they tell their story, yet the estate has become an inspiration for more prestigious châteaux on both banks in Bordeaux. The estate is not just covered with vines, but has trees, hedges, a pond and uses horses for some of the work to prevent compaction of the soil. They do not plough, so as not to disturb the mycorrhizal fungi underground. This way, they say, the Amoureaux increase the quality of their wines and help to maintain the balance of their ecosystem.

For Fred Loimer in Kamptal in Austria, the biodynamic way of living and working has brought a better balance to the soil, the plants and the people. Showing a sense of place in the wines is, he argues, a vital part of quality. And the wines are truer to their origin when the whole ecosystem is singing the same tune. The practitioners of biodynamic viticulture today have added some post-Steiner practices that chime with an awareness of how to preserve and promote soil health. Since Steiner’s death, knowledge about the effects of ploughing and tilling has increased. Today many producers apply different sorts of cover crops between the rows, and mow rather than turn the soil, to minimise moisture loss and erosion.

Not everyone gives biodynamics a free pass. There are critics of biodynamics, just as there are critics of Steiner the man. Australian “flying” viticulturist Richard Smart, for example, argues that without effective systemic sprays, both organic and biodynamic estates rely too much on copper sulphate to combat fungal attacks like peronospora. This metal does not break down as easily as some systemic sprays, and harms microbes in the soil. As the products used in organic and biodynamic farming against fungi are less effective, he argues that there is a chance of compacting the soil due to multiple treatments from driving the tractor between the rows of vine.

Despite the lack of rock-solid scientific proof of the efficacy of biodynamic farming methods, the spirit of Rudolf Steiner’s teaching has found fertile ground in many high-profile wine estates. The world Steiner lived in was very different from ours. But taking care of precious soils is still important. Of course, there is no single, one-size-fits-all solution. The debate around biodynamics will continue to open new doors and help people to see things with different perspectives. But let’s be honest with ourselves. The world does not need wine to survive. It needs food and water. Wine consumption is decreasing, especially among the younger generation. Could we appeal to them more by talking about wine’s place in the Circle of Life, by placing it in a broader context, a context that Steiner knew only too well?

Photo by David Beale on Unsplash