Making wine on shifting sands: how regulatory volatility reshaped Moldova’s wine sector

  • Home
  • Uncategorized
  • Making wine on shifting sands: how regulatory volatility reshaped Moldova’s wine sector
  • October 18, 2025

A story of market and regulatory transition…

Abstract

This article examines the evolution of wine quality control in the Republic of Moldova during its transition from a planned to a market economy. It traces the transformation of institutional, legislative, and technical frameworks that shaped the sector, from the highly centralized Soviet model to the more diversified and market-oriented systems that emerged after independence. The analysis highlights the role of key factors, including legislation, regulatory bodies, and laboratory networks in defining approaches to quality assurance. Special attention is given to the 2006 Russian embargo, which served as both a crisis and a catalyst, forcing producers and authorities to re-evaluate their methods and standards. The study also explores the post-2012 reforms that aligned Moldova’s wine sector with European Union practices, assessing their impact on production, exports, and the overall culture of quality. Ultimately, the paper argues that Moldova’s experience illustrates how regulatory volatility can function both as a source of instability and as a driver of innovation within a transforming industry.

Introduction

Moldovan winemaking has a long history. It had periods of growth and destruction, depending on the fate of different peoples living on the territory of present-day Moldova. From ancient times and until present days, Dacians and other related tribes, then Romans and the Romanised populations, later Romanians, have all practiced viticulture and winemaking.

Moldova used to be Soviet Union’s most important wine supplier. And by 2012, approximately 10-12% of the national annual government budget was formed of incomes generated by viticulture (“Documents of OIV”, 2012).

The quality of wine was an important aspect for the locals in all times, even though the processes and the approach related to quality control were different. An important function in the Romanian principalities was the one of “paharnic” – “cupbearer”, his responsibility was verifying whether the wine of the prince is poisoned or not, but also choosing the best wines for the royal court, taking care of  the royal vineyards and deciding the moment to start the grape harvest.

Later, in the era of industrialisation, the approach to quality changed. The high production levels required a scientific-based, documented, centralised quality control system, especially when considering the fact that in the beginning of the XIXth century, high amounts of wine were counterfeited (“Winemaking history”, 2012).

In the second half of the XXth century, Moldova’s wine industry was based on a model of administrative order and mass production, which influenced quality and was not compatible with the global wine markets. Presently, the country found new model – focused on international markets and on the control of wine quality from the vineyard to the table. Just by using new quality policies and quality control techniques, Moldova was able to secure a position on global wine markets.

Geo-economical position of Moldova and its impact on wine quality control system

The geo-economical position of the Republic of Moldova, in between European Union and former Soviet countries, implies that the producers have to always consider and adapt to different quality standards and quality control systems. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was created for the maintenance of economical relations between former Soviet countries. In 2001 Moldova joined the WTO, ratifying all the agreements regarding quality and safety of foodstuffs. Moldova has also joined the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA), which provides conditions for free trade of manufactured products, with significant preferences for agricultural goods. CEFTA was important since it offered the possibility of new markets for Moldovan wines (“Analysis of wine market”, 2012), (“Pre-strategy assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector”, 2007).

Relations with the European Union

From 1 January 2006 the European Union imposed a generalised system of extended preferences (GSP +) for goods from Moldova. GSP + has helped to offset the tendency of export decline. After this agreement the exports of wine to the EU increased to 13.6 percent in 2006. However, the number of customers from EU was still limited and the benefits of GSP + could not be fully used by most producers in Moldova. Moldova actively participated in the negotiations on a future EU-Republic of Moldova Association Agreement. EU agreed in December, 2011 to launch negotiations on the establishment of a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA). The Republic of Moldova concluded negotiations with the EU on a number of many important matters, the agreement on the protection of geographic indications being of particular importance for wine quality control and quality assurance (“Implementation of the European Neighbourhood Policy in the Republic of Moldova. Progress in 2011 and recommendations for action”, 2012).

However, after the creation of CIS, the tendency to preserve and use old soviet standards has increased. Despite being revised and updated, their use was sometimes conflicting with the use of new international standards. Therefore, the participation of Moldova at different agreements (CIS) was creating chaos in its wine quality policies, forcing the country to maintain many useless or outdated documents.

Wine quality control in Soviet era

The official policy of the Soviet Union stated that foods were not meant to be means of gain, but a way of meeting the needs of the population. The Soviet Union had a very centralized standard system – GOST (Russian acronym for государственный стандарт which means state standard). The standards issued before 1995 had legal power, the same as regulations and therefore were required to be used in areas that were defined in the preamble of the standard (“History of standardization in Moldova”, 2012).

Wines in the Soviet Union were prepared in accordance with the technological regimes, designed on the basis of science and study of the population. The most important means to improve the quality of grape production used to be the technical-chemical and microbiological control. A vast network of wine laboratories was established in order to implement the control system, first in Crimea, then after World War II, in the newly annexed territories. Only in Crimea, there were about 30 of such laboratories. After 1945, a similar system of laboratories started appearing on the territory of present-day Republic of Moldova. By 1974, there were around 214 wineries in Moldova and a unique association “Moldvinprom” (“Technical and microbial control of wines”, 2012).

Depending on the complexity of the work and the desired result, the laboratories were grouped in 3 classes:

  • Class I laboratories – analysing 38 components in wines
  • Class II laboratories – analysing 14 components in wines
  • Class III laboratories – analysing 8 components in wines

The main function of the laboratories was to perform the quality control of raw materials and auxiliary materials which would afterwards be used in the production process, and to verify their compliance with the established standards. The analyses were performed to help winemakers determine harvest time, check alcohol and sugar content during fermentation, keep the levels of sulphur dioxide under control and determine levels of contaminants, such as mercury or arsenic. The laboratories were also empowered to monitor the purity of containers and equipment, as well as the quality of auxiliary materials.

The laboratories were controlling the quality, the correctness and the timeliness of all technological processes, starting with the reception of the grapes and ending with the release of it on sale, influencing the decisions of the winemaker.

Although wine laboratories were assigned with great responsibilities, they also had many rights. They were allowed to ban production of wine in the case of non-compliance to the established conditions and quality parameters (“Technical and microbial control of wines”, 2012).

Several disadvantages of the quality system used in the Soviet Union are obvious just from its description:

  • Limited area of action
  • Non consumer-orientation
  • Non-structured approach to the system
  • Over centralised quality control system
  • Excessive responsibility on the central quality control bodies and little involvement of the other personnel

Legislative and regulatory framework of post-soviet era

A weakness of Moldova’s wine quality assessment system is the continuous change in legislation and in the structure of official bodies responsible of wine quality. The modification of the regulatory system started in 1993, when Moldova was preparing to join WTO.

Previous mandatory standards (GOST, MS) became optional in January 2007. Technical regulations were the only normative-technical documents that remained mandatory. However, the legislation mandated for wineries to issue technical instructions, describing the entire production process for each type of product and for each trademark. In 2006 the normative framework regulating winemaking included laws, governmental decisions, provision of Moldova-Vin agency and other ministries, regulations and normative and technical documents, with an estimated content of 150 000 pages.

Paradoxically, the most important of them i.e. “The law on vine and wine from 2006” was sometimes the most ignored one, while documents of less importance or even without legal power were considered superior.

Finding an exhaustive list that would indicate those documents that are no longer in force was another challenge. Such lack of transparency made wine producers ignore them quite frequently. The wine sector was also covered by numerous overlapping legal documents, some of them outdated and expensive to implement. In addition, many regulations contained a number of restrictions which were not justified neither by market conditions, nor by international quality requirements (“Pre-strategy assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector”, 2007), (“Documents on winemaking”, 2012).

By 2007, it was clear that the legislative framework in assuring wine quality was too complex and heavy, and must be changed. Certain laws and regulations directly affected exports to Western countries because they were not harmonised with the EU legislation and the best international practices. The argument for maintaining the old system was that it is mandatory for exports to Russia and CIS countries. However, many other countries exported to those markets without having technological instructions for each name and trademark of wine. Georgia, which denied the Soviet system and simplified the legislation, served as a good example for Moldova. Later, an entire project on the change of the Moldovan wine legislation was launched.

Governmental bodies responsible for wine quality

In Moldova, there were many administrative agencies responsible for the wine sector. But a clear separation of powers between the different agencies doesn’t exist, which leads to duplication of controls and inspections. The two main agencies are:

Moldova-Vin This specialised central administrative body with full powers in the wine sector is a ministerial-level institution that promotes the state policy in the wine sector as part of the national development strategy. This agency went through several reorganisation processes with each strategic geopolitical shift of Moldova (Department for policies in the sector of vine and wine). The Agency was also responsible for promoting products, organising trade missions, trade fairs and exhibitions (“Current situation in the Moldovan wine sector”, 2012), (Moldova-Vin”, 2012).

State Inspectorate for the Supervision of Alcoholic Products (ISSP) This is a state body, which used to report to Moldova-Vin Agency and which is responsible for the supervision and control of alcohol production and its circulation at national level. Although the ISSP has these features, it is only a monitoring authority and has no powers to apply sanctions or penalties, which considerably limits its role and allow other authorities to engage in the wine sector control.

Other administrative authorities complicating business activities include:

National Centre of Alcoholic Beverages Testing (certification), the Centre for Evidence of circulation of ethyl alcohol and alcoholic products (release of trademarks and the control of their use), Central Tasting Commission (wine tasting), the Board of Approval of Appearance of Wine and Spirits (examines labels and technological instructions related to the labels). There are also other public authorities involved in the regulation of the wine sector, among which are the Chamber of Licensing, Department of Standardization and Metrology, police, environmental services, the former National Institute of Vine and Wine, also reorganized several times. The presentation of wines was also supported by the Moldova Wine Guild which is a non-profit organization established in 2007 by several of Moldova’s leading private wineries (“Current situation in the Moldovan wine sector”, 2012), (“Reorganization of the wine sector in Moldova”, 2012).

The Russian import ban in 2006 and its consequences on quality control

In March 2006, Russia banned the import of Moldovan and Georgian wines, creating a diplomatic conflict between Republic of Moldova and Georgia on one side and Russian Federation on the other side. In that period 80-90 % of the total Moldovan wine export was directed to Russia. The main accusation of Russian authorities was that Moldovan wines contained heavy metals and pesticides. The Russian side claimed that pesticides were found 60% of the Moldovan wine samples, although the proof of that was never presented to the Moldovan side. The Moldovan government brought the argument that many other countries import Moldovan wine and no problems related to pesticides or heavy metals were reported, considering the embargo as economic blackmail (“The Russian embargo on Moldovan wines”, 2012).

The 2006 embargo had serious impact on the economy of Moldova, e.g. wine production decreased by 63% from 2005 to 2006 and the losses of wine sales in March 2006 – January 2007 comprised $180 million (“Pre-strategy assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector”, 2012).

Apart from the economical consequences, the embargo motivated the producers to change their approach to quality assurance and quality control. After the embargo in 2006, the need for the ability to prove quality became stringent. Thus, producers started to understand that “to have quality” does not always mean “to prove quality”. That led to increased quality control and the beginning of changes in the quality system.

Quality control and certification after 2006

One of the conditions of the Russian authorities to lift the embargo was the creation of a single certification centre for wine, spirits and other products containing alcohol. Other conditions forced Moldova to introduce a complex, costly and time consuming procedure for wine certification. This system required inspections at wineries, obtaining certificates of quality control, stamps of authenticity, restrictions on the names on the labels, and for the Russian market – a single point of entry import/export. Even wines destined for markets that do not require such strict controls are subject to these procedures. In addition, the same single, state-owned laboratory that issues certificates VI-1 for non-EU market was also performing the certification for the CIS market which causes long delays and additional expenses. As a result, Moldovan wine producers and exporters, with the support of the government, decided to create a unique specialised centre which would deal with wine quality control and certification, but would also help producers implement quality systems. And that’s how the “National center of alcoholic beverages testing” was created around the Soviet-era Central Laboratory, which had survived the crisis in early 90s and had a certain history and experience in the field of quality control (“Pre-strategy assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector”, 2012), (“The National Center of Alcoholic Beverages Testing”, 2012).

In order to meet the new conditions it had to go through serious reorganisation. The main activities of the Centre are certification and testing of alcoholic beverages for export and for sale in the local market, arbitrage testing, elaboration, review and implementation of technical documentation, implementation of methods of analysis in accordance with European and international practice. The centre is composed of two entities:

  • The Certification body
  • The Testing laboratory

Presently, two types of certification procedures are practiced: load certification and batch certification. Most wine producers choose load certification (bulk wine certification) because it allows testing a larger volume at a lower price. After load certification, the producer must obtain certification for the batch of bottled wine. The certification process includes seven steps (“Pre-strategy assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector”, 2012).

Although the main function of the laboratory is to test quality and safety parameters of wines and spirits, certain lab operators are also empowered to be auditors for laboratories of the wine factories and help them maintain an adequate quality system in the respective industrial laboratories. According to state regulations, each winery must have a laboratory equipped with three qualified chemists and microbiologist. Some factories are impressively well equipped, but most have minimum equipment required by the law and are able to perform only the simplest analyses.  The same is valid for the certification body. Each expert is responsible for a certain wine producer and has the function to periodically inspect the wine factory and see if the producers comply with legal quality requirements, although usually for certification only the results from the laboratory are needed (“The National Center of Alcoholic Beverages Testing”, 2012).

Even though a unique centre for quality testing is probably the best choice for such a small country like Moldova there are also certain disadvantages, e.g. when the producers do not accept the results and the decision of the Centre, the are limited in his access to services of other laboratories. This was addressed by liberalising the law on accreditation.

Although in the past the lack of an effective regulatory control to ensure minimum quality standards was an obvious weak part, the new system introduced in late 2006 is considered too complicated and too centralized. Taking into account the provisions of other laws and agreements of the WTO, and that competition between laboratories stimulates competence, the authorities of Moldova understood that the liberalization of the conformity assessment market is necessary, which is why, in April, 2003 the Law Nr.186-XV on conformity assessment of products was adopted. The law settles the central definitions in the area, the most important being:

  • Accreditation – the process through which a body that has a certain authority, recognizes legally that a body or person is competent to carry out specific tasks
  • Certification of conformity – action of a third party which certainly demonstrates that an identified product conforms to aspecific standard or other normative document

Considering these definitions, it can be noticed that the accreditation focuses more on competence of specific tasks, while the conformity certification is defined for products. It is generally accepted that accreditation is a specific process of certification, while certification is just the actual confirmation of certain characteristics.  For the application of the law on conformity assessment of products, the Accreditation centre of Moldova started its activity in 2003  and presently a visible progress in the liberalization of quality control market can be noticed.

Situation in 2012

  • 3 certification bodies for quality management systems
  • 2 certification bodies for food safety management systems
  • 4 certification bodies for wines and spirits
  • 32 accredited laboratories performing analysis of wine and spirits (“The register of accredited bodies of Moldova”, 2012)

Geographical appellation and traceability

Moldova has a complicated regulatory system of names, the most important being:

  • VDO – “Vin de origine” (rom. wine with origin)
  • VDOC – “Vin de origine controlată” (rom. wine with controlled origin)

Wines produced in specified regions (VDO wines) must be produced using defined methods and meet defined quality standards. VDOC regions (with designation of origin) are sub-territories of VDO regions which are subject to more stringent quality and production standards. Moldova created its system being inspired by the ones existing in France and Italy. The argument in favour of this system was that it contributes to the preservation of tradition and quality assurance. But this argument was often reconsidered. In the old markets, such as Russia and the CIS, the average consumer was not willing to pay more for a wine with designated origin, while on new markets the consumer has a vague idea about Moldova (“Current situation in the Moldovan wine sector”, 2012).

Such a system can be justified in countries such as France, which have regions with already established reputation in winemaking traditions. But even in France the value of the system is challenged by today’s industry switch to other perception of quality. In Moldova, the question whether the claimed benefits worth the effort for the public and private sectors to fully maintain the system. Moreover, the system prevents innovations, which are very important in adapting to rapidly changing consumer tastes and trends. Also, Moldovan producers must implement a great number of regulations and standards, which is quite impossible to achieve without a traceability system (“Pre-strategy assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector”, 2007), (Turcan, 2006).

Moldova tried to implement a wine traceability system, but its effects could hardly be noticed even as late as 2012. The system was very bureaucratic, implying periodical reports from producers to a central authority, by email, and this was complicated since some wineries were not even connected to the internet. The system was deemed outdated and in need of reform by simplifying and adopting the EU model. The EU model implies the development of a national cadastre of vineyards (Turcan, 2006).

ISO quality certification and HACCP

After the Russian embargo, many companies started introducing new quality policies and strategies, e.g. the wine complex “Milestii Mici” successfully implemented the Integrated Management System. Also, big producers such as “Chateau Vartely” and “Purcari” have obtained the quality certificates ISO 9001:2000 and have introduced the HACCP.

The introduction of integrated quality systems after 2006, led to an increased quality of wine and offered the producers the opportunity to export to new markets, like the ones of the European Union, Israel and Japan. The main problem is that only the big producers (“Purcari”, “Chateau Vartely”,„Aroma”, „Mileştii Mici”, „Maurt”, „Vinaria Bardar” „Ever-Vin”, „NIS Struguraş”, „Vismos” , „Vinia Traian”) have obtained the ISO certification, while small producers still use old practices on sanitation, management, process control and quality control (“ISO certification of companies in Moldova”, 2012), (“The report on the activity of Cricova”, 2012), (Turcan, 2006).

It is generally considered that for developing economies, especially in the wine sector, small producers can make a difference in the sector, since they are more open for innovation and can adapt quickly to new trends on the market. However, it is very difficult for small producers to implement complex quality systems like HACCP. Even the European regulation 852/2004, stated that small businesses can avoid the implementation of HACCP, since for certain industries, the identification of critical control points is very difficult. In such cases good hygienic practices can replace the monitoring of critical points. Therefore, for small wine businesses the principle of HACCP flexibility would be recommended (“Guidance document on the implementation of procedures based on the HACCP principles, and on the facilitation of the implementation of the HACCP principles in certain food businesses”, 2005).

Changes since 2012 and their effects on production and exports

Since 2012, Moldova’s wine sector has undergone substantial reform driven by political realignment and market diversification. The two most significant developments were the EU Association Agreement (signed in 2014, with the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area – DCFTAentering into force in mid-2016) and the deliberate shift from dependence on the CIS market toward premium exports to the EU and other high-value destinations (World Bank, 2018; FAO, 2021).

Policy and institutional developments

The DCFTA required alignment with EU standards in food safety, traceability, and geographic indications. This led to a restructuring of Moldova’s regulatory and certification systems, including the creation of the National Office of Vine and Wine (ONVV) in 2013, harmonisation of PDO/PGI schemes, and adoption of EU-compatible technical regulations (Government of Moldova, 2014; EU Delegation to Moldova, 2017).

Commercial and production impact

These reforms coincided with a process of premiumisation — a shift from bulk exports toward bottled wines. While bulk wine still dominates by volume, bottled wines now account for over 55% of export value (ONVV Annual Report, 2019). Producers such as Purcari Wineries and Cricova invested in branding, bottling lines, and international certification, aligning with European quality expectations (Purcari Group, Annual Report 2020).

Export and production trends

Moldovan wine exports reached around US $137 million in 2018, recovering from the 2013–2014 Russian embargo and marking one of the strongest years since 2006 (OIV, 2019). Production volumes also stabilised: 1.8 million hectolitres in 2023, among the highest levels of the last decade (OIV Statistical Report, 2024). Market diversification advanced, with over 65% of export value in 2022 directed to the EU, the UK, China, and North America (ONVV, 2023).

Overall effect

The post-2012 period transformed Moldova’s wine industry from a volume-driven, CIS-dependent model to a quality-oriented, export-diversified system. Export earnings improved, and sector institutions became more coherent, though persistent challenges remain in small-producer capacity, domestic value addition, and long-term institutional consolidation (World Bank, 2021; EU Delegation to Moldova, 2023).

Regulatory volatility: chaos or catalyst for transformation

Moldova and similar countries, situated at geopolitical crossroads, provide valuable insights for navigating today’s volatile landscape of trade disputes and regulatory change. Regulatory volatility — the frequent modification, overlap, or reversal of policies — has long defined the country’s wine industry. In the post-Soviet period, this volatility created institutional uncertainty, discouraging investment and long-term planning. Frequent restructuring of agencies, inconsistent enforcement of standards, and unclear hierarchies between technical regulations, government decisions, and outdated GOST norms generated what many experts have described as “administrative chaos” (Pre-Strategy Assessment of the Moldovan Wine Sector, 2007; World Bank, 2018).

Destructive effects

In its destructive form, regulatory volatility leads to loss of institutional memoryand erosion of trust between producers and authorities. In Moldova, every new governmental reorganization, from the dissolution of “Moldova-Vin” to the creation of overlapping inspection agencies, delayed strategic development and diverted resources from quality enhancement to compliance with shifting bureaucratic demands. This unpredictability made small producers particularly vulnerable, as they lacked the legal and financial capacity to adapt quickly (EU Delegation to Moldova, 2017). As a result, many wineries either exited the market or operated informally, undermining the credibility of the sector.

Catalytic effects

However, in some cases, regulatory disruption acted as a catalyst for modernisation. The 2006 Russian embargo and the ensuing overhaul of the certification system, although initially chaotic, forced the industry to reconsider its structure. The establishment of the National Office of Vine and Wine (ONVV) in 2013 and the harmonization with EU regulations under the DCFTA were direct outcomes of that period of instability (Government of Moldova, 2014; ONVV, 2019). The reforms compelled wineries to pursue international certification, traceability systems, and brand differentiation, elevating Moldova’s global profile as a quality wine producer.

The dual nature of volatility

Thus, regulatory volatility functions as a double-edged sword. When driven by short-term political cycles, it fragments and exhausts the sector; but when paired with external pressure, such as trade shocks or integration agreements, it can generate creative disruption. Moldova’s trajectory after 2006 and especially after 2012 demonstrates both extremes: bureaucratic chaos nearly dismantled the wine sector, yet the same turbulence ultimately triggered its transformation into a more open, quality-driven, and export-diversified industry.

 Wine quality control in the light of TQM philosophy

Note – Total Quality Management is an integrated management system for creating and implementing continuous improvement and eventually producing results that exceed customer expectations. It is a process and strategy that in certain situations can improve an organization’s effectiveness and efficiency. The objective of TQM is the continual improvement of processes, achieved through a shift in focus from outcomes (or products) to the processes that produce them. It uses a lot of quality tools from which a better understanding and improvement of processes can be achieved.

If wine quality control in Moldova is analysed through the lense of TQM principles, many deficiencies in the system could be identified. It can be noticed that the Moldovan system has developed from the extremely centralized Soviet system, where the main responsibility for quality was attributed to laboratories.

When application of TQM in wine industry from other countries is reviewed, it can be noticed that an integrated approach to quality is used, while responsibility is shared by all the participants of the branch, especially the winemaker and, more new, the winegrower. The relation between the two is a classic supplier-customer relationship and an appropriate application for TQM.

In Moldova, the relation between producers, certification bodies and governmental authorities should consider the TQM principles, in order to have a holistic and integrated view on quality. And this is a lesson for other industries.

All the participants of the system must form a team. The team will determine together the current state of the quality, and after come with an improvement plan. Finally, all the participants of the chain should continue the process of planning, doing, checking, and analysing the results to develop the plan for a future period (Alderson et al., 1994), (Pociovalasteanu et al., 2012). Some work in this direction is already done, e.g. training and education of wineries’ personnel by certification bodies and authorities. Still, more comprehensive cooperation and improvement of communication are needed.

Furthermore, the experience of other countries of TQM implementation in wine industry demonstrated  benefits such as decrease of the cost of quality, lower number of mistakes, higher quality of the wine, reduced waste, improved productivity, etc. (Pociovalasteanu et al., 2012). All these benefits can be a motivation for the Moldovan wine industry to continue the process of quality improvement.

 Conclusions

The evolution of Moldova’s wine quality infrastructure reflects the broader trajectory of its institutional development: a continuous negotiation between inherited systems and modern integration demands.

The country’s oscillation between Soviet legacies and European alignment has repeatedly tested the industry’s capacity for adaptation. Yet, through these cycles of disruption and reform, Moldovan winemaking has begun to redefine itself, moving from a system of administrative dependence to one of strategic autonomy and quality orientation. Understanding this dynamic is essential not only for interpreting Moldova’s economic trajectory but also for appreciating how regulatory turbulence can become a creative or a destructive force, capable of reshaping entire industries depending on how it’s harnessed.

Despite significant progress, e.g. adoption of EU-aligned laws, creation of new institutions, and greater awareness of quality management, several structural inconsistencies persist: overlapping competencies, incomplete implementation, and limited integration between quality assurance systems and market mechanisms.


The transition from inspection and punishment to prevention and process improvement has begun, but remains uneven.

A true modernization of Moldova’s wine sector requires more than legislative convergence. It demands a coherent institutional culture of quality — one that integrates producers, regulators, laboratories, and educational institutions around shared principles rather than formal compliance.

In practical terms, four strategic imperatives emerge:

  1. Institutional consolidation and clarity of mandate.
  2. Systemic implementation of Total Quality Management (TQM).
  3. Integration with the main export destionations regulatory and market frameworks.
  4. Human capital and knowledge infrastructure.

Ultimately, Moldova’s wine sector stands at the intersection of history and strategy. Its success depends on transforming formal compliance into functional quality culture — one that values knowledge, trust, and long-term excellence over bureaucratic conformity.
Only through such transformation can Moldova move from being a regulatory borrower to a regional contributorto the culture of quality in wine.

Bibliography

Leave A Comment