Bibliography

The protection of Geographical Indications (GIs) supports producers to define common quality standards while highlighting the geographical origin of food products with specific qualities. Adaptations of quality standards are driven by international competition, new production technologies or environmental change. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the modifications affecting the European Union (EU) Protected Designation of Origin-Protected Geographical Indication. It specifically compares the share of amendments in the diverse product classes, years and countries, illustrates specific cases and identifies the factors explaining the probability to amend product specifications.
Official documents of the DOOR Database provide the material for an analysis of changes in product specifications. They also supply the data for four illustrative cheese cases and logistic regression of all EU amendments.
Amendments of GI product specifications are very frequent: 17 per cent of all 1,276 EU GIs had at least one amendment. This happens in particular for processed products (42 per cent more often than for unprocessed ones) and specific countries (GIs in Italy are six times, Spain five times and France four times more likely to have an amendment compared to GIs from other EU countries). As illustrated by contrasting cheese amendments, the diverse modifications in the product specifications range from more flexibility and innovation on the one hand to stricter rules for strengthening the product’s identity on the other hand.

The registration of Geographical Indications (GIs) under the European Union (EU) legislation requires collective action and considerable efforts borne by multiple actors such as producers, processors, public authorities and research centers. We analyze their efforts, risks and benefits by comparing two EU GI registration processes in Italy and Austria, namely the Sorana bean Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) and the Perry from Mostviertel PGI. Results from the institutional and transaction costs analysis suggest that intensive interaction for solving conflicting interests, negotiating quality standards and defining common rules might pay off in indirect benefits and reduced risks. In particular, an inclusion of diverse and heterogeneous interest groups and a high degree of direct enterprise participation along the GI application process (as observed in the Italian case) generate benefits such as trust and social cohesion, which then support the actual use of the GI label and a better implementation of associated quality standards. A supportive legal framework with assistance from public authorities can back up the community of producers not only in technical aspects, but also as mediators when conflicts seem to be difficult to solve. As there seems to be a positive relationship between the intensity and effectiveness of collective action and the likelihood of achieving broadly accepted standards and social cohesion needed for successful GI implementation, the question for future research would not be how to avoid collective efforts but how to effectively organize the interaction among heterogeneous producer groups.

The search for financial opportunities to promote value creation has been a key topic in the literature concerning geographical indications. In this framework, a relevant set of opportunities is provided by the rural development policy (Rdp) of the European Union. However, access to Rdp is not easy: therefore, value creation through consumption of Rdp is the result of an individual and collective entrepreneurial process within a GI area. This paper intends to look into different adoption strategies of Rdp to promote value creation in a GI food supply chain. Our results confirm, on the one hand, a higher aptitude to create value through Rdp on behalf of farms working inside GI circuits; on the other hand, empirical analysis evidences a limited set of consumed measures by the farms. This reflects lost opportunities in terms of value creation.

The following pages will address, from a practical perspective, the factors that need to be considered in order effectively to support the promotion of, and adding value to, a traditional product of regional origin. While this document is dedicated primarily to association processes, it was deemed essential to clarify concepts and elucidate the legal implications of geographical indications, particularly by putting them into perspective with regard to trademark legislation. The first part of the paper is dedicated therefore to the legal aspects. In the second section, value-adding groups are defined in general and the promotion of traditional products of regional origin is discussed. Furthermore, the role of typical products in the dynamics of rural development is highlighted and initial insight into quality consortia is provided. The third part, which is the methodological component of the document, deals with the various issues that must be considered when creating and developing a quality consortium. This section discusses the factors that determine, firstly, the extent of the socio-economic benefits that consortium members can obtain through their involvement in the joint initiative and secondly, the degree of success a traditional product of regional origin may achieve in the market. It specifically addresses: the desirable characteristics of the product to be promoted; methods for launching a collective value-adding initiative; procedures for jointly developing and implementing common production rules; services a quality consortium can offer; ways of collectively promoting the product; the issue of expanding the quality consortium; the criteria for applying for a geographical indication; and the importance of external support. Although the document includes theoretical considerations, it is action-oriented and focuses on topics applying in the field. This objective is borne out in the many case studies provided in the text.