The Definition of Craft Beer

Today's my birthday, and I have some celebrating to get to, but I wanted to discuss a post on FiveThirtyEight - here is the article in question.

Sarris's topic is a worthy one - just how does one define 'craft beer' in 2014, especially with breweries like Sam Adams making millions of barrels per year? All established definitions inevitably fall short, in my opinion.

The Brewers Association definition hinges on size, ownership, and ingredients. I don't think any of these actually define craft beer. Here's why.

Size is unhelpful - Sam Adams, Deschutes, New Belgium, and Sierra Nevada make some of the best beers in the world, both in terms of their year-round lineup and (especially) their special releases. And these breweries are all growing very quickly. Sarris points out that the BA had to increase the cap on maximum production to continue to include Sam Adams as a craft brewery. It's certainly true that there are tons of breweries making 1000 barrels or less per year doing some excellent work, but it's not because of their size. In the next few years, it's conceivable that some of these breweries may surpass the current 6 million barrel mark. What will happen then? The limit will be increased again. Size doesn't define craft.

Ownership doesn't define craft beer, either. The BA pegs craft breweries as those with less than 25% ownership by a non-craft organization. But this discounts excellent breweries like Widmer, Redhook, and Goose Island. The notion of independence - of brewer-owned breweries - is a valuable one, and there's certainly something to be said for a small brewery that's able to entirely control its beer and business. But the question of who owns the brewery doesn't itself determine the quality of its products. Ownership isn't what makes good beer.

The BA's last criterion is word salad. It states that craft brewers have a majority of their product as "beers whose flavor derives from traditional or innovative brewing ingredients and their fermentation". Well, other than traditional or innovative, what other category of ingredient is there? The easy answer is 'adjuncts', but an adjunct is simply a non-standard ingredient (e.g. not barley, hops, yeast, and water). Wheat's an adjunct, as are oatmeal and coffee, by this definition. And of course one can get into hours of debate on what exactly a 'traditional' beer ingredient is, depending on historical perspective, culture, and a host of other factors.

The more I think about it, the more an explicit definition of craft beer seems out of reach. Defining craft beer and trying to make all beers produced as 'craft' fit under one set of criteria is by necessity going to make those criteria vague and unhelpful, and the rules would have to keep changing as the beers and breweries do.

In the end, Tony Magee from Lagunitas comes closest to what's probably the best solution. Sarris quotes him as saying it's like pornography - you know craft beer when you see it. So that's a good point to leave off. I think we shouldn't be so worried about craft beer as a defined set of absolutes. The Brewers Association criteria are helpful for evaluating what kind of company you're dealing with - yes, pay attention to the size of the brewery, know who owns it and who makes the important decisions - but really, just find a comfortable chair and enjoy a pint or two.