The natural wine movement does not have a universally agreed definition, which is part of why it generates so much argument. But most producers who use the term are pointing at a specific set of practices: minimal intervention in both the vineyard and the winery.
In the vineyard, this usually means farming organically or biodynamically. No synthetic pesticides or herbicides. Cover crops between the rows to encourage biodiversity. Harvesting by hand. The goal is a healthy, living ecosystem rather than a chemically managed monoculture.
In the winery, natural wine production means avoiding or drastically reducing the additives and techniques conventional winemaking relies on. No commercial yeasts. Native fermentation only, using the wild yeasts that live on the grape skins and in the winery. No fining agents. Minimal or no added sulphites, which are the most common preservative in conventional wine.
Sulphites are the main point of debate. Even natural wine producers who add nothing will find naturally occurring sulphites in their wine, produced by fermentation itself. Some producers add a tiny dose at bottling for stability. Others add nothing and accept that the wine will be more fragile and have a shorter drinking window.
The results can be extraordinary. More alive, more interesting, genuinely different from conventional wine. They can also be faulty. Brett, volatile acidity and reduction are the risks when you remove the safety nets.
Orange wine gets grouped with natural wine frequently. It is white wine made with skin contact, giving it colour and tannin. It is not always natural, but natural producers often make it.
The honest way to think about it: natural wine is a philosophy and a practice, not a certificate.
