For over half a century, the Wine & Spirit Education Trust (WSET) has stood as the global standard-bearer for formal beverage education. Headquartered in London and awarding qualifications in more than 70 countries, WSET is often described as the Oxford of wine certification. But recent shifts in its language, leadership priorities, and programming have raised a question that until recently seemed out of place in oenological circles: is WSET becoming a political institution?
How WSET Went Political
On paper, WSET remains neutral. Its curriculum—covering grape varieties, appellations, and production techniques—still reads like a technical manual. Its examinations are rigorous, facts-based, and administered globally. And yet, the organization has increasingly framed its mission through the lens of social equity, environmentalism, and post-colonial critique. These are not fringe ideas, but neither are they apolitical.
To understand the shift, one must examine not only what WSET teaches, but how it chooses to talk about the industry it serves. Over the past five years, the Trust has embraced the language of progressive activism. Terms like “equity” (as distinct from “equality”), “non-colonial lens,” and “diversity and inclusion” now appear in official WSET statements and events. Its 2021 Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI) panel opened with an Indigenous land acknowledgment and included explicit calls to reconsider how wine education reinforces historical inequalities. WSET’s leadership has since mandated that its 800+ global affiliates adopt diversity and equality policies. The organization even requires accommodation for religious diets and disabilities, aligning itself with modern ESG norms.
The Arguement for DEI in Wine
To some, this is overdue. Wine education—like the wine industry itself—has long been dominated by Eurocentric norms, white male gatekeepers, and metaphors alien to students outside of the UK and France. A gooseberry might be a common tasting note in Sussex, but it hardly resonates in Soweto. WSET’s willingness to accept non-Western descriptors and diversify access via scholarships and translated materials is, by this logic, a sign of progress, not partisanship.
Yet there is a line between social responsibility and ideological drift, and WSET may be approaching it. Consider the organization’s decision to describe climate change in its seminars as a “climate emergency”—a rhetorical choice echoing the language of climate activism rather than neutral science. Or its partnerships with groups like Women of the Vine & Spirits and The Roots Fund, both of which openly champion race- and gender-based advancement. Again, few object to these goals in principle. But their inclusion as institutional priorities in an educational charity—not a lobbying group—indicates a shift in mission from pure education to social engineering.
Left-Leaning Leadership
This shift is mirrored in leadership. WSET’s current trustees include figures like Regine Lee MW, who co-founded Women in Wine London and is lauded by WSET for her advocacy of DEI principles. Another trustee, Lulie Halstead, has led gender research collaborations and heads a foundation funding diversity scholarships. These affiliations are not problematic per se, but taken together they suggest that WSET’s upper ranks are increasingly populated by those who view education as a platform for correcting social imbalances—an inherently political stance.
Importantly, WSET’s ties to government and trade remain non-partisan. Trustees like Miles Beale (chief executive of the Wine and Spirit Trade Association) routinely lobby UK officials on taxation and trade, and occasionally weigh in on Brexit logistics. But these are industry matters, not ideological crusades. If there is any party-political influence, it lies in WSET’s cautious preference for free trade and stability—positions that could be claimed by either side of the aisle.
A Political Imbalance
What is absent, however, is any trace of conservative ideology. Nowhere in WSET’s recent output will one find appeals to tradition, nationalism, or individual liberty. There is no institutional concern about political correctness, no mention of overreach in ESG mandates, no echo of the culture war rhetoric that has gripped other sectors. In its discourse, WSET leans culturally left—not in a partisan way, but in the broader sense of embracing progressivism as moral common sense.
Some might argue that this reflects the values of the drinks industry as a whole. Global wine firms, particularly those based in Western markets, are increasingly ESG-conscious. Corporate sponsors like Moët Hennessy and Constellation Brands have sustainability pledges and diversity hiring goals. If WSET is aligning with its funders and students, it is merely following the money and the moment.
Does Ideology Harm Wine Education?
Still, there are risks in turning education into advocacy. One is credibility. WSET’s authority depends on its neutrality: it certifies professionals across borders, cultures, and beliefs. If students come to view the organization as a vehicle for Western liberal ideology—however gently expressed—its global legitimacy may erode. Another risk is the narrowing of discourse. By pre-committing to specific ideological frameworks, WSET could unintentionally chill debate or alienate dissenting voices, especially in regions where progressive social politics are less dominant.
It is worth noting that there has been no public backlash. Former students and instructors praise WSET’s academic rigor. Critics of DEI initiatives in wine, such as commentator Tom Wark, tend to direct their ire at broader trends rather than WSET specifically. But the absence of outrage does not mean neutrality. It may mean the politicization of wine education is subtle, embedded not in what students are taught to taste, but in how they are taught to think.
This is the paradox of WSET’s evolution. Its content remains objective; its context increasingly ideological. The Trust continues to resist overt partisanship, but has embraced a worldview that aligns closely with contemporary progressive values: globalism, environmentalism, social equity. These are not universally held. Nor are they wrong. But they are political. And in recognizing them as such, WSET must tread carefully—lest it sour the very neutrality that once made it the gold standard of global wine education.
