Bibliography

The EU free trade agreements have become the single most influential force shaping the Geographical Indication landscape today. While their critics may see GIs as an unwelcome ‘Trojan horse’ to be let in in exchange for access to the European market, this legal figure has the potential of becoming greatly beneficial for developing countries.
It looks in particular at Costa Rica before and after the signature of the EU–Central American Association Agreement of 2012. We examine the practicalities of its implementation on the ground and its impact on the local industry of cheese ‘generics’. It also explores its potential effect on the coffee industry and assess how a developing country of modest size like Costa Rica can embrace this foreign legal transplant and use it to its advantage.

This study is the largest empirical work on the functioning of EU agricultural GIs and it aims to provide more insight into the practical nature, functioning and foundations of the EU sui generis GI regime for the protection of agricultural products and foodstuffs.

This paper presents five case studies on the nutritional potential of registered GI foods: Carnalentejana (Portuguese beef), furu (Chinese fermented tofu), Parmigiano Reggiano and Grana Padano (Italian fermented cheese), rooibos (South African herbal tea) and indigenous rice varieties from the highlands of Borneo (Malaysia and Indonesia). The study explores the link between the production processes and the nutritional composition of the final products. Indeed, the nutritional characteristics of these foods can be largely attributed to their unique ingredients and production procedures, which are linked to their geographical origins. The analysis of nutritional compositions not only considers ordinary nutrients, but also bioactive compounds, which do not usually appear in nutrition facts tables. A number of foods similar to the case study subjects (not necessarily GIs) are briefly discussed in the respective sections.

In its ground-breaking decision, the Court of Justice of the European Union has extended protection of a protected designation of origin or protected geographical indication to the reproduction of shape or appearance of the product itself. The Defendant, Société Fromagère du Livradois, had been producing Morbier cheese since 1979. Until 11 July 2007 they used the name ‘Morbier’ without AOC indication. After the expiry of the transition period, Defendant changed the name, but not the appearance of their cheese, from then on marketed as ‘Montboissié du Haut Livradois’. The Claimant brought proceedings against the Defendant before the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris (Regional Court, Paris), basically requesting an injunction prohibiting the Defendant from producing and marketing a cheese that would reproduce the visual appearance of ‘Morbier’, and in particular, any use of a black line separating two parts of the cheese. this text aims to present the facts and the legal context, addressing analysis of how the dispute was resolved in the field of the legal protection of intellectual property rights.

Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on cooperation on, and protection of, geographical indications (signed on 14 September 2020). The recently signed EU-China Agreement for the protection of Geographical Indications (GIs) will provide a framework and increase the knowledge of the respective systems of GIs protection. However, for EU GIs owners, it will not replace registration and enforcement under Chinese law.

The Supreme Administrative Court Rhineland-Palatinate has allowed a winegrower to use the protected designation of origin (PDO) ‘Rheinhessen’ for wine grown on his vineyard located in the geographical area according to the product specification with no need to meet additional requirements prescribed by national legislation.
The PDO ‘Rheinhessen’ did not undergo a specific application, but was part of Germany’s list of quality wines forwarded to the European Commission according to Article 54 Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999. This means that ‘Rheinhessen’ was automatically granted protection. Germany, as the EU Member State of origin, was required to submit the technical file for the PDO, including, in particular, the product specification for the PDO. The product specification had to include at least the name to be protected, a description of the wine, the specific oenological procedures for producing wine (where applicable), the wine production guidelines, and the demarcation of the geographical area concerned. The single document for the PDO ‘Rheinhessen’ published in the database eAmbrosia containing the product specification defines the geographical area as the vineyard areas of 148 municipalities in Rhineland-Palatinate, which are expressly enumerated in alphabetical order (from Albig to Zotzenheim). This text aims to present the facts and the legal context, addressing an analysis of how the dispute was resolved in the field of legal protection of intellectual property rights.

On 17 September 2015, Interprofession du Gruyère (IDG), a Swiss registered association, and Syndicat Interprofessionnel du Gruyère (SIG), a French syndicate, filed an application for a standard character certification mark for GRUYÈRE, claiming first use as early as 1982. IDG is also the owner of the certification mark No 4398395 for LE GRUYÈRE SWITZERLAND AOC’ (design), registered in 2013. In its certification, the mark indicates that the cheese originates in the Gruyère region in Switzerland and lists the various cantons and districts of origin. The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), US Dairy Export Council (USDEC), Atalanta Corporation (‘Atalanta’), and Intercibus Inc (‘Intercibus’) (collectively ‘the Opposers’) filed notices of opposition alleging that IDG and SIG had failed to exercise legitimate control over the proposed certification mark. Hence, ‘GRUYÈRE’ would be incapable of functioning as a certification mark under Sections 4 and 45 of the Trademark Act, 15 USC section 1052(e)(1).
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (‘the Board’) concluded that US consumers of cheese understand the term ‘gruyère’ as a designation that primarily refers to a type of cheese that can come from anywhere, and not specifically from Switzerland or France.

In recent years, the European Union (EU) GI systems for agricultural products, foodstuffs, wines and spirit drinks have become increasingly popular: on 27 October 2020, the eAmbrosia database totalled no less than 3300 designations of origin or geographical indications registered under four different regulations and 197 pending applications.
The legal framework secures producers’ rights and their products’ value-added. It affords broad protection to PDOs/PGIs registered at EU level, not only against direct or indirect uses but also against evocations, with the aim of combatting misleading and deceptive practices and preventing traders from taking unfair advantage of the protected names’ reputation. This article examines the jurisprudence of the EU’s General Court and Court of Justice related to the protection of registered designations against evocation, and highlights the open issues that remain to be addressed to clarify the legal arsenal and tighten the protection scheme.

Geographical indications (GIs) as distinctive signs and catalysts for local development identify local, national, European and international governance systems, regulated by heterogeneous rules and stakeholders. These rule systems can evolve, and their robustness and resilience can be challenged by external drivers. Among the objectives of the new Farm to Fork strategy of the Green Deal, the European Commission envisages the introduction of sustainability criteria in the EU GI sui generis system. This article gives an overview of the possible impact of these criteria on the GI rule systems at the local, national and EU level. It also describes some of the implications of the reform for producers’ groups and for national and EU authorities.

This article focuses on the development and expanded importance placed by the European Union and its trading partners on Geographical Indications. As a result of this importance, and the related inclusion as a competent of international trade, this article seeks to assess how the European Union has included ever-higher levels of protection to Geographical Indications within its trade agenda. The article further addresses how the European Union wields the competence to act in this field but also how this is balanced against the related human rights concerns which may be at risk as a result of this increased level of protection. This article offers some guidance for future development in the area, as the European Union is currently engaged in a number of similar agreements at the global stage, in which is it ever more becoming the dominant player.

This article discusses the current position in Australia regarding the protection of Geographical Indications (GIs) at both the national and international level. It explains the current difference in the protection offered at the national level to Australian regional names used on wine labels vis-à-vis on food labels. It explains that, at the national level, Australia has had a dedicated wine GI framework since 1994 that regulates the usage of regional names on wines labels, in the form of GIs. However, up until now, Australia has relied on consumer protection, trade mark and passing off laws to protect the value that exists in regional names that are used on food labels to make an origin claim. Furthermore, this article explains that, at an international level, Australia complies with its international obligations to provide a protection mechanism for GIs by protecting international GIs for wines or grape products pursuant to its dedicated wine GI framework, while protecting international GIs for all other products as certification trade marks (CTMs).
This article discusses that there is a strong case for the implementation of a dedicated food GI framework in Australia at the national level and this is particularly given the current negotiations between Australia and the EU in relation to the Australia–European Union Free Trade Agreement (A-EUFTA).

Country names are incomparable value creators, synonymous with a State’s national competitive identity, and deserve sui generis protection. Three broad approaches to amplifying protection of country names against misuse and free riding in international commerce have emerged. First, the ‘Swissness’ model, which is a national statutory framework for the protection of the appellation ‘Swiss’. It is characterized by co-branding regulations,¹ and supplementing intellectual property (IP) protection with diplomacy through bilateral and plurilateral trade agreements.
Secondly, French jurisprudence affirmed—in France Atout v France.com—that the appellation ‘France’ constitutes for the French government a reference to its economic, geographic, historic, political and cultural identity, and is understood by the public as signifying goods and services made in France. Thirdly, the multilateral approach, whereby the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) mechanism is being used to sift through divergent views of member states on protection of country names and coalesce recommendations into a norm setting instrument, has made some incremental cede way. The critical question that continues to provoke debate is whether member states should adopt an instrument modifying international IP policy to embrace increased IP protection of country names in keeping with the vicissitudes of modern global trade. The article highlights the recommendations made by the international community on this issue. A new IP classification, ‘country name designation’, is considered to encompass the extended function of country names as well as the author’s proposal for the creation of a sui generis multilateral IP framework. Exceptions and limitation to the scope of protection are also explored.

This article critically analyses the recent reform of the Russian Geographical Indications (GI) Law which came into force on 27 July 2020. This has deeply transformed the sui generis system of the country, in an effort to introduce a regime inspired by the EU experience as well as by the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement. On the basis of the best available legal and economic sources, the article investigates this legal framework from two perspectives. First, the new provisions of this law are critically assessed. Next, the article discusses whether and to what extent this reform can achieve the ambitious goals that it has set itself. It will be concluded that, first, although this is an interesting attempt to introduce an improved GI system that will probably fix some of the previous dysfunctions, this is still incomplete and distant from the international best practices. Secondly, the analysis will lead to the conclusion that the policy goals of the reform will be difficult to achieve at least in the short term. This article represents the first scholarly analysis of the new Russian sui generis GI regime, thus filling a gap in international academic literature.

Geographic Indications (GIs) are an internationally recognised form of protection for goods based on their quality or reputation and a fairly recent instrument in Brazilian law. In this context, there is an ongoing discussion in academia regarding the relevance of GIs as a tool to promote the sustainable development of territories. This debate considers that there is a strong connection between a good’s reputation and quality and its traditional and sustainable production practices. This research aims to understand how Brazilian GI regulation of agricultural products protects and encompasses socio-environmental sustainability dimensions, discussing the main gaps and opportunities thereof. For that, from an interdisciplinary perspective, this study provides a small-N qualitative content analysis of 30 Brazilian GIs, identifying their socio-environmental provisions, and debating whether GIs can become a mechanism for greater environmental protection in Brazil.

At a Diplomatic Conference in May 2015, the Special Union of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin amended the Lisbon Agreement which sees the subject matter and scope of protection extending beyond appellations of origin to include geographical indications. The amendment, the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications opens the pathway for international registration of geographical indications, which previously never existed under the Lisbon Agreement and which failed to materialise under the TRIPS Agreement. This article examines key provisions of the Geneva Act that could make it attractive to African countries. It explores the state of GIs on the continent and the interest in GIs as an avenue for rural development as reinforced by the African Union Continental Strategy for GIs. It makes a case for the Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OAPI) to consider joining the Geneva Act and seek the international registration of Oku White Honey from Cameroon as one of the first GIs in the region.

This article explores the possibility that geographical indications (GIs) may enhance value addition for avocados grown in Kenya. It concludes that factors that are attendant to the registration of GIs in Kenya provide a basis upon which the commercial value of avocados grown in Kenya can be enhanced.

This article analyzes the current laws, regulations and legal doctrines applicable to the registration of geographical indications in Indonesia. Notably, this contribution considers the complications in implementing the protection for geographical indications for non-agricultural products in Indonesia following the adoption of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights Regulation (MJHR) 2019. Non-agricultural products have a strong link with local cultural factors but, in some instances, a weaker link with natural factors. This makes them difficult to be registered as geographical indications under the current language and requirements of MJHR 2019. This article uses primary and secondary sources as well as semi-guided and in-depth interviews to make its conclusions and recommendations. In particular, the article proves the current text of Regulation 2019 is in contradiction with the trade mark and geographical indications law of 2016 as well as the previous regulation of 2007. Accordingly, it suggests that the current requirements of MJHR Reg. 2019 be harmonized.

Increasing threats to Ghana’s kente textile have intensified the need for its urgent defensive intellectual property (IP) protection. While Ghana’s Copyright Act, 2005 (Act 690) protects the kente styles and designs from being copied, it can neither address the problem of third parties producing kente imitations for sale nor the cultural misappropriation of Ghana’s textile tradition. Additionally, the world’s largest free trade agreement, the comprehensive African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), has the potential to further damage Ghana’s kente trade where it has no extensive IP protection. This article makes a case for why Geographical Indication (GI) protection should be an important part of a comprehensive IP strategy to protect Ghana’s kente. From a global perspective, the African Union (AU) and European Union (EU) agreed to enhance cooperation through a commitment to an AU-EU Continental strategy for Geographical Indications in Africa with an action plan to improve Africa’s GI systems. Notably, the action plan identifies Ghana’s kente as having GI potential. This article argues that supportive pan-African, regional and national GI policies are needed to link people, places and products, and calls for the enforcement of Ghana’s Geographical Indications Act to preserve Ghana’s traditional kente from wider misappropriation.

Recently the European Commission has launched two road maps affecting geographical indications (GIs) regulations from two different perspectives: one regarding a revision of agricultural products, wine and spirits regulations and another regarding intellectual property. In this second plan, special attention will be paid to upgrading the system for IP protection, by exploring ways to strengthen the protection system for GIs of agricultural products and considering the introduction of an EU protection system for non-agricultural GIs. This article aims to explore the principal challenges of reforming the GI legal regime, and the opportunity to establish core common principles for those rights by considering the unitary legal nature of GIs as an intellectual property right while analysing and preserving differences within each sector. The article shows the value of analysing GIs as an intellectual property right in a coordinated way, as an essential element of the EU Action Plan addressed to upgrade the EU IP system to facilitate the digital and green transition. The study analyses EU GIs case law, in comparison with other jurisdictions such as Spain.

This article looks into wine as a credence product, whose bond of trust is vested in the concept of terroir as a signal to the consumer that the wine she or he is buying originates from a specific location and is made in specific circumstances. The main question of the present analysis is what the legal consequences are when such terroir is shared between two EU Member States, looking into the examples of wines Tokaj and Teran. Arguments advanced in the article are that, on the EU-wide level, there are two effects of the shared terroir. The first effect is a shared PDO, and the second effect is an artificial enlargement of terroir that is not linked to the original geographical position.

The European Union Geographical Indications (GI) framework has granted, from the outset, a broad scope of protection to producers of GI-protected products. This already broad scope of protection has been expanded further by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), particularly in evocation cases, where its case-specific approach has resulted in a gradual expansion of the protection of registered names against evocation. Based on CJEU decisions, the authors attempt to propose a systematic test for GIs’ evocation, the goal being to contribute to greater coherence and legal certainty on decisional practice. Moreover, they advocate for a more principled approach which ensures an appropriate balance between the goals of the GI system and GIs’ scope of protection with a special reference to the—recently decided—Morbier case.

Geographical Indications (GIs) are widely considered as tools to contribute to sustainability (The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations—FAO, 2009; 2017), if established and well managed. While the literature may not always agree on the positive effects of GIs in all sustainability dimensions (e.g., economic, social, and environmental), there is evidence that engaging GI producers in a sustainability strategy can maximize their contribution to different components of sustainable development. FAO and oriGIn developed the sustainability strategy for GI (SSGI) to support GI producers and their associations so that they could engage in a place-based and participative approach in order to generate concrete progress and results. This paper presents original research for building both a framework and database for the selection and use of relevant sustainability indicators for GIs. A number of SSGI principles have guided the work throughout an iterative process for reviewing, selecting, and improving relevant indicators, while the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture (SAFA) has provided the structure to align with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and other widely used and recognized sustainability frameworks. As a result of this work, a database of 372 robust sustainability indicators that are relevant to GIs have been characterized to facilitate their use by practitioners. The discussion highlights the importance of the place-based approach, and the participative, inclusive process that represents the key to empowerment and the ability to develop alliances. It also focuses on action, and the need to strengthen both internal and external communication.

The strategic guide on Food Quality Schemes (FQS) is a tool for practitioners, policymakers and researchers to explore the links between sustainability and FQS. It was developed by a team of researchers at the University of Parma in collaboration with several academic and non-academic partners, in the context of the 5-year EU Horizon 2020 research project “Strenght2Food”.  The guide presents the findings on an extensive research investigating the positive impacts of FQS linked to good production and consumption practices. Based on the results of 26 benchmarked value chains, involving different FQS (organic, PDO and PGI products) in 14 countries, the guide reports methods, tools and case studies to explore the sustainability performance of FQS. The research identified three main dimensions of public goods linked to FQS production: cultural and heritage preservation; socio-economic; and natural resources. Presenting best practices, recommendations and case studies related to each of these dimensions, the guide represents a unique opportunity of “learning from practice” and strengthening the positive impacts of FQS.

• This article discusses the structure of a geographical indication (GI), that is the model behind the rules, ie European Union (EU) rules. In fact, this industrial property right is complex, but some options were taken under EU law—a model that corresponds to the legal functions of this right as well as to its legal nature. However, the structure has some flexibility. It mays identify—making a horizontal analysis of all the rules in force in the EU—three pillars: a group of producers (which will be the applicant and must be representative); a product specification (the GI function, the guaranteed quality function and the assurance of trade loyalty in a collective right); and a control and certification body (which must comply with the principles of objectivity, independence and impartiality—but this body can be public or private).

Within the framework of multifunctional conceptualisation, the authors have investigated the level of public goods embedded in Agri-food geographical indication products. Moving from the concept of the local Agri-food system, the generation of public goods is observed both on the value chain and on the territory. Three different dimensions of public goods are considered: Cultural heritage issues, socio-economic themes, and natural resources. To pursue this aim, the FAO-SAFA method is adopted. A single index for the three dimensions is computed in order to provide an easy and quick interpretation of the three dimensions. Preliminary empirical evidence on two case studies suggests different public goods levels embedded in geographical indications, depending on the dimensions analysed. The method proposed aims to be a simple and effective tool to support good practice for policymakers and indicate fields for intervention where indexes show that improvements could be made.

Sustainability is becoming a pivotal guide for driving the governance strategies of value chains. The sustainable policy should have as its objective the perpetuation of production models overtime to maintain its environmental, economic and social dimensions. Therefore, measuring the sustainability of a production system is fundamental to deepening the understanding of ongoing trends, considering the pressure exerted by agricultural policies, market dynamics and innovations introduced in the production system. The purpose of this paper is to present a holistic framework for assessing the sustainability of food quality schemes (FQS), including the role of both stakeholders within the value chain, and the territorial dimension. This paper discusses the use of dimensional indicators and proposes synthetic indexes to provide an overall picture of the evolution of sustainability of a specific production system. Particularly, the evolution of sustainability in the Parmigiano Reggiano Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) production system is evaluated over the period 2000-2018. It is assumed that its evolution is due to the effect of 20 years of innovations that have impacted product quality, value chain performance and rural development, modifying the sustainability of the whole production system.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the determinants and the impact of some of the more significant innovations applied to the localised agri-food systems (LAFSs) bearing a (Geographical indication) GI product, considering the multi-faceted aspects of innovation and how the producers have managed the implementation of such innovations. It underlines implications on territory and sustainability. The research analyses some of the more significant innovations applied to the PR VC. Despite a large number of innovations were introduced since 1860, the authors had to choose just some of them, considering also the availability of dates. The analysis shows the positive and negative impacts of innovations. The main finding is that governance action is crucial to pursuing quality strategies and maintaining economic value at the production level.

The aim of this chapter is to describe how the interactions between different models of local agri-food production systems can produce synergies that are able to meet new agri-food system challenges and consumer expectations. In particular, the short food supply chain (SFSC) of a product bearing a geographical indication (GI) and its relationship with a localized agri-food system (LAFS) is analyzed. The chapter consists of two parts. The first part presents the theoretical framework underpinning the relationships and synergies between LAFS and SFSCs. The second part presents a case study of Parmigiano-Reggiano (PR) cheese and explores the synergies between an SFSC of this cheese and the LAFS in which such an SFSC is embedded. SFSCs can be a model which meets the requirements of consumers while giving producers a sizable share of added value. However, the SFSC model is based on the specific nature of the product, the social environment and the organization of the supply chain.

Using a new detailed dataset on country-product information on European Union (EU) Geographical Indications (GIs), we study the impact of this food quality policy on trade margins over the 1996–2014 period. We consider the effect of GIs on both intra- and extra-EU trade margins (extensive and intensive), as well as on export (and import) unit values. Our main results show that GIs affect trade flows differently depending on whether GIs are produced by the exporter or importer country. The presence of GIs in the exporter country systematically exerts a positive trade effect on both the extensive and intensive trade margin. When registered only in the importer country, GIs seem to act weakly as a trade-reducing measure, at least at the intensive trade margin. In addition, GIs positively affect export prices, consistent with the idea that GI products are perceived by consumers as higher quality goods. Importantly, extra-EU trade margins react similarly to those on intra-EU trade. These results have clear and interesting implications concerning the EU strategy of promoting the protection of GIs worldwide.

Considering the features of GIs and organic production, Deliverable 5.2 analyses the relationship between Public Goods (PGs) and Food Quality Schemes (FQS). The deliverable evaluates the impacts of the cases study described in Deliverable 5.1 in terms of their contribution to rural development and territorial cohesion given by the capacity to generate positive externalities and hence PGs. The analysis focuses on: contribution to local economies, generation of environmental, social, cultural externalities; contribution of different governance mechanisms to ensure the valorisation of producers’ know-how and local resources; social cohesion in terms of creation of social capital and social networks.

Consumers are increasingly turning their attention to the quality and origin of products that they consume. European Union (EU) quality schemes are associated with a label, which was introduced to allow consumers to perform an informed choice and to protect producers from unfair practices. This present study provides an overview of the last 25 years of EU quality schemes [Protected Designations of Origin (PDO), Protected Geographical Indications (PGI) and Traditional Specialities Guaranteed (TSG)] on agricultural products and foodstuffs across the 28 EU Member States. According to the results, it was possible to conclude that Southern European countries have the highest number of registered products. The most usedEUquality scheme is PGI, followed by PDO. Concerning the analysis of the evolution in the last 25 years, the number of registered products among EU Member States has increased significantly. The fruit, vegetables and cereals (fresh or processed) category is theonethat accounts for the highest percentage (26.8%) of registered products, followed by cheeses and meat products (cooked, salted, smoked) categories, with 17.2% and 13.5%, respectively. Further investigations should address consumer preferences, knowledge and attitudes, especially Northern European countries with a lower number of registered products. Moreover, the investigation and registration of products should be encouraged among all EU Member States to allowthe maintenance of important elements of the history, culture and heritage of the local areas, regions and countries.

One of the main functions of geographical indications (GIs) is to provide information and quality to consumers. This, in turn, can generate benefits for producers and stimulate rural development processes, as advocated by European Union (EU) legislation. The objective of the present study is to understand if the theorized effects of GIs on local economic development are supported by empirical evidence. Using a systematic approach, we reviewed the literature on the topic and structured the results of the review adopting a supply chain framework. This allows us to better understand how the effects of GIs are distributed among the chain actors and finally arrive at the local territories where GI products originate. Evidence shows that GIs are actually able to generate value-added, especially at the consumer and retailer levels, while the effects on the economic performance of producers are more heterogeneous and dependent on specific local conditions. The review also highlighted some drawbacks in the literature that make it difficult to draw robust conclusions about the actual impact of GI policy at the European level. Therefore, despite the GI tool actually showing good potential for improving local economic conditions, more structured and focused research is needed.

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 European Agricultural Policy tries to achieve sustainable agriculture by paying appropriate subsidies. EU makes agri-food chains more competitive by developing quality policy through the definition and promotion of food quality schemes which consider the area of production as a credence good. Those products are classified as Geographical Indication (GI) and include PDO and PGI products. In particular, the generated effects of GIs on the territorial level are not clear. The objective of this research is to evaluate the socio-economic impacts of GIs on the territory of origin indicated in the product specification. The research considers all the NUTS 3 regions of Italy, France and Spain during 1993 – 2014 in a framework of dynamic panel model. The results shown that an increase in the number of GI products generate a positive socio-economic impact in the short and long run.

The protection of Geographical Indications is an issue of growing importance all over the world, as it offers local producers a tool to differentiate their products on the market and escape price competition. In the European Union, the legal protection of Geographical Indications dates back to 1992, and aims at both preventing misuses and abuses of brand names on the market fostering fair competition among producers and transparent and complete information to consumers, and supporting rural development dynamics, especially in marginal areas. In this chapter, after describing the many and multifaceted effects the protection of Geographical Indications may exert on the economic, social, and environmental spheres, the case study of the Sorana Bean PGI in Tuscany (Italy) will be analyzed. The case is related to a very small production system, where a few small farms are using the protected Geographical Indication to market their product. The case shows that the protection granted by the European Union, besides supporting farmers’ income, exerts important economic and social effects on the territory, thus supporting rural development in a marginal area.

The protection of Geographical Indications (GIs) is being explored more and more worldwide as a tool for supporting local sustainable development. Focusing on wine and coffee value chains, this paper will set out in what way GI protection schemes can contribute to the provision of public goods, and illustrate how this contribution is being threatened by different failures that may occur within both valorization strategies and legal protection policies. By examining how private, collective, and public interventions front these failures, this paper will put forward economic arguments supporting a more comprehensive policy approach, to ensure GIs’ contribution to sustainable development.

Linking people, places and products presents a methodological approach for the development of procedures to preserve and promote quality products, centred on the virtuous circle of origin-linked quality. The guide provides concepts, recommendations and practical examples from all over the world, together with self-evaluation exercises. With a view to boosting the capacities of those involved in such procedures, increasing the number of experts worldwide and also bearing in mind the recent level of interest in this subject, FAO and REDD plan to offer a complete training tool.FAO and REDD have thus worked together to support a bottom-up approach, developing a first training tool for a participatory process of training on the promotion of origin-linked quality and sustainable geographical indications. The training material in the present volume, Linking people for quality products: sustainable interprofessional bodies for geographical indications and origin-linked products, focuses on the management and promotion of the specific qualities of geographical indications (GIs) by local stakeholders gathered together in a collective management organization – the interprofessional, or joint body – that is central to the commercial success, and ultimately to the sustainable impact, of any initiative to promote the link between a product and its origin. The content and theory pages of this training manual set out the basic concepts, while the exercise sheets provide for participative activities. The trainer notes, together with the introduction, guide trainers in the preparation of tailored training in relation to the five steps of the virtuous circle.

Geographical indications (GIs) serve to designate goods with quality, characteristics, or reputation attributed to their geographical origin. They are increasingly protected in many countries of the South as a tool for economic, social, territorial, and ecological development. Implemented in the wake of the weakly prescriptive WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) of 1995, the choice of the institutional framework for protecting GIs nationally as well as associated public support infrastructure was left open. This led to divergences in overarching approaches and to GI institutionalization that differs remarkably across countries. Twenty years after TRIPs, the purpose of both this paper and of the special issue is to advance our understanding of the institutionalization of GIs, as an IPR, a quality standard, and a policy instrument in harnessing all of the expected benefits of GI protection. Building upon the contributions to this special issue, we use an original multilevel governance framework to analyze all the multifaceted roles of the state, in different empirical situations worldwide. This reflects the experiences of countries that have only recently implemented GI protection, such as Brazil, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, South Africa, Kenya, and West African countries, as well as of regions with a long history of GI protection, including the EU and the US. Based on an analysis of the complexity and diversity of all states, we show that global harmonization is underway with convergence toward a prominent role of the state in GI regulation, in particular for defining GI content, which is specific for GIs when compared to other IPRs or quality standards. We suggest that the intervention of the state is supported by a universal desire to guard against unfair exclusion and to protect a common heritage. 

Short food supply chains are considered a tool for promoting the local economy and meeting consumers’ quality requirements. This paper analyses the case of a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) product that is marketed both worldwide and through a short supply chain (Parmigiano Reggiano). The case study shows that short chains can be an important trade channel for consumers, producers and rural development. Parmigiano Reggiano dairy factories with direct sales are more resilient than those without direct sales. The study also shows that the successful implementation of a short supply chain requires efficient governance.

This book explores the potential benefits and disadvantages of geographical indication (GIs) registration schemes, analyzing the utility of GI registrations for the development and promotion of regional economies, both in national and international markets. The book draws on the van Caenegem, Cleary & Drahos Australian Provenance Report, along with the valuable empirical data collected in connection with it.  The book situates the rural development question in an international context, presenting several case studies from Italy, France and Morocco, New Zealand and Australia. The book contains various chapters focused on comparing regulatory structures in various relevant jurisdictions and drawing on other countries’ experiences. It contains significant contributions from industry actors with extensive experience in regional branding initiatives and GI-related policy issues. Progressive in structure, the book starts from the ‘big picture’ level before moving down to the local and concrete scale. Geographical indications of Australian products are vital both in domestic and overseas markets by accurately representing the origin and quality of niche agricultural products. Thus, with a particular focus on Australia, the book promotes the assessment of geographical indications as potential regional assets that will help producers develop local quality indicators that will serve as public goods for successive generations of producers.

This chapter aims to develop a theoretical approach identifying the main factors which contribute to successful Geographical Indications (GIs). To achieve this objective, we highlight the interactions between the mechanisms of intellectual property rights protection, those linked to economic transactions and those linked to sustainable rural development. Consequently, our theory will take into account three levels of interactions: markets, organisations (or institutions) and territory. As far as GIs are concerned, we refer to the special case of traditional products whose names can be potentially protected under international treaties, such as those qualifying as GIs under Art 22.1 of TRIPS, or subject-matter-specific protection regimes, such as Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs) or Protected Geographical Indication (PGIs) recognized in Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 on Quality Schemes for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs. The intellectual property protection of GIs, as defined in TRIPS, must be implemented by national regulations in each member state. The foundation of the actual legal basis of protection is the ‘unfair competition’ framework, which regulates the conduct of firms in the marketplace: they obtain the means to fight against unfair imitations, produced outside the geographical area of the traditional product, in almost all the cases at lower prices because of less demanding processes, and by abusing the trust of the consumers about the genuine provenance of the product.

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.

This three-volume collection comprises a selection of research articles and papers on geographical indications by the leading academics in this field. The collection examines the functions and economic underpinnings of this form of product designation, together with the various forms of legal protection of geographical indications, both national and international. It contains a number of contributions which examine the potential impacts of geographical indications in developing countries, which explore this form of marketing through case studies.

The present paper investigates the relationship between the legal protection of geographical indications and the environment, analyzing the Product Specifications of the 107 olive-oil geographical indications registered in the European Union. They performed the analysis using a set of indicators related to six thematic areas of potential environmental impact, including tree varieties, intensity of production, phytosanitary and fertilization methods, soil and water management, harvesting and post-harvesting techniques, and environmental awareness.
Results indicate that environmental concerns are not considered to a great extent in the Product Specifications; indeed, they result more from the need to attain specific product qualities than from any direct interest in the environment. In any case, some relevant differences do exist between all six thematic areas (rules on the use of specific rare varieties and on maximum production limits are the most widespread ones in this sense) and between European Union countries (France and Italy are characterized by the highest levels of environmental care).

La question de l’évaluation ex ante de l’impact des IG, qui se pose dans de nombreux projets de développement, est complexe. La nécessaire capacité de mobilisation et d’action collective des acteurs économiques peut être évaluée, mais la concurrence des filières conventionnelles et le cumul d’objectifs au sein des IG peuvent la réduire. Des processus d’innovation sont conjointement nécessaires et assurés par une tension permanente entre gouvernance sectorielle et gouvernance territoriale, induisant une multiplicité de trajectoires d’évolution. Many development projects try to assess ex ante the Geographical Indications’ impact which is a complex challenge. The economic actors’ involvement and collective action capacity is determining and may be estimated, but the competition with conventional supply chains and stakes’ multiplication within GI projects can reduce it. Innovation processes are jointly needed and allowed by a permanent tension between sectorial and territorial governances, leading to a multiplicity of evolution trajectories.

Protected designations of origin (PDOs) and protected geographical indications (PGIs) for food products are used by the European Union with the goal of achieving several policy objectives. We build a multicriteria analysis framework for ex-post assessment of the performance of PDOs. The performance criteria are based on five policy objectives, as defined by European policymakers in regulations, with each criterion measured by a set of indicators. We apply the framework to analyze the performance of all Italian PDO cheeses and olive oils from 2004 to 2008. The results show that for the PDOs studied it is feasible, in general, to perform on all five objectives at the same time, although partial tradeoffs are present between the bargaining power and local development objectives on one side and the market performance objective on the other. A ranking of PDOs in the two sectors on all objectives using multi-criteria analysis and equal weights on all objectives shows overall higher performance for smaller PDOs that are well-rooted in the territory of origin and targeted to niche market segments. Lower ranked PDOs under this scenario tend to be bigger, older, and better established in wider markets. Alternative weighting scenarios that emphasize niche/local market PDOs or market performing PDOs yield different relative rankings. The results provide insights for both policymakers and stakeholders into the evaluation of PDO policy, as well as into the performance of individual PDO products.

Lo scopo di questo lavoro è quello di analizzare le decisioni strategiche che portano gli agricoltori e le imprese di trasformazione a decidere se e come utilizzare l’IG protetta per la produzione e commercializzazione dei loro prodotti, attraverso l’analisi di due studi di caso relativi a prodotti DOP e IGP in Toscana.
Numerosi sono gli effetti generati dalla protezione delle IG, primi tra tutti il sostegno ai sistemi agroalimentari locali e ai processi di sviluppo rurale sostenibile.
Nonostante questa pluralità di effetti potenzialmente positivi, viene spesso segnalato un livello di impiego delle IG protette da parte delle imprese inferiore alle attese o alle potenzialità.
Per indagare sul comportamento strategico delle imprese sono stati analizzati in profondità due casi di studio: il Fagiolo di Sorana IGP e il Pecorino Toscano DOP. La scelta di questi due prodotti è legata alle caratteristiche “opposte” in termini di sistema produttivo.
Dal confronto tra i due casi analizzati emerge come molte spiegazioni di questo fenomeno risiedano nel grado di coerenza tra le caratteristiche e gli atteggiamenti strategici delle imprese, e i contenuti del Disciplinare di produzione.
 conclusione, per costruire IG efficaci, la fase di costruzione delle regole del disciplinare appare centrale. In particolare emerge la necessità di mettere in atto processi inclusivi di partecipazione dei produttori alle decisioni, e procedere ad una valutazione ex-ante dei possibili effetti generati dalla protezione della IG.

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.

This paper aims to examine the implications of the efforts to promote a quality-oriented economy that incorporates a vision of environmental sustainability and equitable social development.
The analysis builds on a case study of food procurement in Brazil, which intended to improve the quality of food used in public schools. The case study follows ways that the promotion of quality food has localised the procurement operation, connecting smallholders to citizen-consumers.
The efforts to promote quality food procurement worked to shape reflexive governance in a decentralised political environment and create an institutional device based on cooperative civic participation and state engagement. However, this process highlighted socioeconomic inequality within the country due to uneven local capacities to connect good-quality services to the citizens’ everyday places. The study identifies the following paths to tackle this unevenness: improvement of place-based infrastructure; promotion of trans-local cooperation; and building on the existing informal institutional arrangements.

This study contributes to the call of many scholars to investigate the relationship between group heterogeneity and cooperation patterns in GI consortia. In particular, we focus on the solution of the problems of quality standardization derived by an increasing heterogeneity and free-riding behaviour among members. A framework adapted from Lee and Wall (2012) and Forster and Metcalfe (2012) is employed to identify the resources (inputs), conditions (facilitators) and innovation process (outputs) required for the formation of a new internal institution in the Consortium, as a tool for safeguarding “higher quality” within the common (outcome). This work uses a case-study approach and analyses the Parmigiano Reggiano (PR) Consortium in Italy. Specifically, we applied a ground-theory approach and conducted 24 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders at different levels (consortium, politicians, large-sized dairy farms, small-sized dairy farms, NGOs, members of PR route, PR museum) in the time frame of May 2012-August 2013. The governance patterns highlighted in this study give evidence of a high internal dynamism within GI Consortia. Our study confirms how governance strategies to reduce free riding in GI schemes and to re-establish cooperation can be implemented even through the creation of formal endogenous or exogenous institutions. However, cooperation can stem among homogenous sub-groups as a resilience strategy showing how a formal institutionalization of sub-consortia within a well established GI common may be successful.

This paper develops five theses to analyze the distribution of economic, social and environmental effects connected with the system of geographical indications (gis). The authors claim that the distribution of benefits for the agricultural sector largely differentiates among European countries (Thesis 1); non-organized outsiders in the region who do not financially support the common pool resource can profit particularly greatly from a gis system (Thesis 2); among gis consortia, those with a clear marketing leadership of a focal supplier profit whereas those with many small suppliers are easier to get pressed by dominant buyers (Thesis 3); the role of public authorities may represent a significant bias in the application phase (Thesis 4) and environmental benefits attached to the gis such as biodiversity preservation are largely overestimated (Thesis 5).

The purpose of this volume is to present a broad-based critical analysis of the relationship between the agri-food sector and the socio-economic environment when local agri-food production systems are connecter with global markets. The local dimension of agri-food systems is considered assuming that all the variables related to agri-food production are closely connected and dependent on local production systems. In this perspective Local Agri-Food Systems (LAFS also become the focus of the analysis in order to evaluate the level of sustainability and policy requirements. Whether LAFS produce, transform or simply consume food, there are big implications for the socio-economic environment and socio-economic sustainability. The volume examines the interrelation between LAFS and agri-socio-economic aspects from two main points of view. It, therefore, consists of two parts: theoretical analysis of the different models at the basis of LAFS and empirical evidence of the role played by LAFS on local and global markets.

The main aim of this study is to offer a method and a tool to help the stakeholders involved identify food and agricultural products that could become the pivotal elements in a virtuous circle of origin‐linked quality through a territorial strategy for preservation and promotion. The enhancement of a product of origin‐linked quality can have positive effects that are reinforced over time in terms of the economic viability and preservation of the natural and cultural heritage.  This paper seeks to support the identification phase, which is carried out by local stakeholders within the territory of a given product or is introduced by policymakers at a higher, regional or national, level to support such strategies in the zones under their political control. The paper has two specific objectives: first, to propose a set of criteria for analysing the origin‐linked quality of a particular product and then the strengths and weaknesses in its zone and production system under a territorial strategy for economic development and preservation of the heritage based on the enhancement of the product; second, to propose an inventory process to be adopted by the region or country as a whole (and thus covering various zones and their products) in support of a territorial development policy, and to identify pilot case studies from a list of potential products.

In recent times, the concept of “local food” has come to attention in academic and political discourse about food, usually closely linked to the growing debate on Alternative Agro-Food Networks. However, the meaning of “local food” is not yet consolidated and two main meanings can be identified. The first refers to the relationship between consumer and producer: local food is food produced by firms located in places close to the final consumer. The second meaning is focused on the product and the resources used in its production process. Both these (non-opposing) meanings often share “alternativeness” in the vision of food production and consumption, contrasting the dominant model of the globalised mass food chains. Both definitions use insights from new theoretical approaches to resources and space to emphasize the role of actors and the relevance of organizational proximity and local institutions in enabling the deployment of opportunities offered by local specific resources to local competitiveness. This paper explores the relationship between local food quality and local resources, starting from a discussion about the concept of local resources in economics, and exploring the different meanings of local food quality in the current debate about food.

This book seeks to set geographical indications (GIs) in the context of the overall development of today’s economies and societies as marked by globalization and the interaction of cultures that this entails. The book is divided into two parts. The first part (chapters 1-6) sets out the findings of a decade of research into GIs in Europe in the global context. The second part (chapters 7-10) is based on the existence of GIs as a sector in itself in the context of globalization. Included in the appendixes are GI case studies in Europe and maps of protected designations of origin and geographical indications (PDOs and PGIs). Also included are a glossary and a subject index.

This study was an update and expansion of a previous study: “Value of agricultural production under protected designations of origin (PDO) and protected geographical indications (PGI)” (Tender N° AGRI–2008–EVAL–02) performed in 2009 for the DG AGRI of the European Commission. It covered GIs registered under Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 (the period covered 2005-2008). The present study aimed to 1) update the database for the period 2009-2010; 2) expand and complete the database with data on the volume, value and trade of production for each wine, aromatised wine and spirit registered under GI for the period 2005-2010; 3) analyse the value premium received by products bearing a registered name, to assess the evolution of value, volume and trade of geographical indications during the period 2005-2010; and, finally, to compare the situation with standard products and between different GI products and sectors at EU and Member State levels.

This book seeks to set GIs in the context of the overall development of today’s economies and societies as marked by globalization and the interaction of cultures that this entails. GIs are products that are both very ancient in terms of their ancestral function and very modern in terms of what is at stake. GIs provide a fine example of how the economic development of the planet might be envisioned so that it takes account of this classic opposition and the complexity of the main issues involved. . One assumption made here is that in the future we will see a trade economy increasingly structured by quality standards. These standards will be reached and managed through the cooperation of both public and private entities, a situation described by the term ‘quality fora’, which is explained and discussed in Chapter 8. Among the variety of such arrangements that can be expected to emerge, GIs provide a particularly interesting and forward-looking example. The book is divided into two parts. The first (Chapters 1–6) sets out the findings of a decade of research into GIs in Europe in the global context. The second part of the book is based on the existence of GIs as a sector in itself (validated, potentially at least, by the market and its externalities) in the context of globalization.

This book seeks to set geographical indications (GIs) in the context of the overall development of today’s economies and societies as marked by globalization and the interaction of cultures that this entails. The book is divided into two parts. The first part (chapters 1-6) sets out the findings of a decade of research into GIs in Europe in the global context. The second part (chapters 7-10) is based on the existence of GIs as a sector in itself in the context of globalization. Included in the appendixes are GI case studies in Europe and maps of protected designations of origin and geographical indications (PDOs and PGIs). Also included are a glossary and a subject index.

The geographical indications scheme provides a potential economic opportunity for farmers and producers of food and can have a positive impact on the rural economy. To achieve this objective and provide the intended protection, an appropriate EU framework needs to be in place. The Court examined whether the scheme’s control system is conceptually robust, whether the procedures and measures used render it attractive to potential participants and whether the measures available and the Commission’s actions have contributed to increasing consumer awareness. Checks relating to the geographical indications scheme aim to verify compliance of a PDO or PGI product with a product specification and to detect instances of disallowed use of a protected name.

This study provides a worldwide panorama of current trends in Geographical Indications (GIs) as they relate to biodiversity conservation and rural development, and their potential contributions to poverty, hunger alleviation and environmental goals. When peasant and indigenous producer organizations decide to participate in the marketplace with a product that is not generic, GIs can be useful in developing and consolidating a differentiated geographical identity and a reputation, building quality systems and providing governance to value chains based on local biological resources and traditional and innovative knowledge and practices. Challenges and opportunities facing small producers from developing and transformation countries are identified, based on the experience of two dozen GI cases from all continents. GI implementation is described through cases that were selected to illustrate both tradition and innovation; contributions and threats to biodiversity conservation; the use of traditional and innovative knowledge and practices; economic benefits at different levels; and also governance issues. GI contributions to these aspects of sustainability are assessed qualitatively as ‘relevant’, ‘modest’ or ‘negligible’; and negative and positive trends are identified. Lessons drawn from the cases are presented in tables, grouped by component, distinguishing both opportunities and pitfalls. Finally, three cases are presented in which no GI has been registered as yet but discussions are underway.

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.

In the early 1990s reform of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy led to a change in emphasis away from price into policies to promote rural development, in part through improvements to food quality. Geographic indicators are only one of a range of EU policies designed to foster these goals. Geographic indicators are put within the context of the wider quality enhancement policies that include quality assurance schemes and organic production. There appear to be considerable regional differences within the EU when it comes to the use of the various quality-enhancing policies available. The member states of the EU can be grouped into four different clusters, each characterized by a different quality policy strategy.

The protection of geographical indications for agricultural products and foodstuffs is one of the major pillars of the Common European Agricultural Policy and has become an important part of the transition from supporting commodity markets to enabling producers to market goods that satisfy consumer tastes. According to estimates, a total annual sales volume of approximately €14 bn is generated with protected geographical indications (PGI) and protected designations of origin (PDO). Nevertheless, the increase in the utilization of the protection systems made obvious a number of problems in the practical application of the law. The Commission recognized these criticisms and announced a discussion on the regulation that was to commence officially in the autumn of 2008 with a Green Book about the PDO/PGI protection regime. In this context, the most recent problems are discussed and proposals are made that should be taken into account in order to accomplish the main goals of the regulation. Therefore this article is addressed to agricultural policymakers, consumer associations, as well as food producers and producer associations in Europe in order to provide a starting point for the Green Book debate.

The objectives of this guide are: 1. to explain what origin-linked quality and the GI concept are; 2. to raise awareness regarding the potential of origin-linked products for rural development and conditions for sustainability; 3. to facilitate implementation of GI processes at local level by providing tools and a concrete methodology. Based on multidisciplinary research and empirical evidence from all over the world, this guide is intended for practitioners, rural development specialists from the public or private sectors, representatives of value chains, policy makers, rural community leaders and trainers. It is intended more particularly for those involved in the development of agricultural and food systems who have an interest in promoting and preserving local food products and resources (traditions, know-how and natural resources) within a perspective of rural development. The role of these facilitators is of paramount importance in helping local stakeholders to become aware of the potential of originlinked products, organize themselves and carry out collective actions, understand the importance of appropriate rules and pilot the GI system towards economic, sociocultural and environmental sustainability. This practical guide avoids prescriptive or normative solutions, instead offering an approach that provides step-by-step answers to the main questions facing development actors seeking to identify, define and protect products of origin-linked quality through the adoption of various measures allowing their sustainable development.

The present study provides an evaluation of the PDO/PGI scheme. The terms of reference of the project listed two key issues which were to be addressed by the evaluation study: First, the study has to provide a detailed description of the implementation and usage of the PDO/PGI scheme over the evaluation period 1992-2006; Second, the study has to evaluate the effectiveness of the PDO/PGI scheme itself. While the analysis of the implementation and usage of the scheme covers the 27 Member States over the period 1992 to 2006, the evaluation of the effectiveness of the scheme is based on publicly available information, research and academic literature, and detailed case studies of 18 PDO/PGI products in 10 Member States.

In the last few years, following a number of food crises, quality assurance systems have been widely introduced into the European agri-food sector. Customers’ growing quality demands and their undermined trust in food safety are just two of the driving forces behind this trend. With regard to quality assurance schemes, Central and Eastern European agriculture and food industries are in a catch-up position. To compensate for the lack of research in this field, this paper presents an overview of certification schemes in the European agriculture and food industry with a special emphasis on Central and Eastern Europe. It also discusses the characteristics and scope of the schemes as well as possible determinants and effects of the trend observed in recent years.

La crescente concorrenza sul lato dei costi di produzione derivante da un mercato sempre più aperto, unitamente alle modifiche apportate alla politica agricola comunitaria, porta le imprese alla ricerca di nuove modalità di competizione. Tra queste, una valenza particolare assumono da un lato la ricerca di una differenziazione delle produzioni su base qualitativa, e dall’altro l’offerta di nuovi servizi, ispirati dal principio della multifunzionalità, e che spesso non rientrano nel tradizionale alveo delle attività agricole (agriturismo, agricoltura sociale, fattorie didattiche, tutela dell’ambiente e della biodiversità, ecc.), ma che appaiono oggi in grado di permettere la permanenza e la rigenerazione dell’agricoltura nell’ambito di spazi rurali sempre meno centrati sulle attività agricole. Questo articolo indaga la natura dei costi e i benefici delle Indicazioni Geografiche.

Increasing competition on the production cost side resulting from an increasingly open market, together with changes to the EU agricultural policy, which de facto decouples the granting of aid from the realisation of specific productions, leads companies to look for new ways to compete. The text aims to briefly show the protection tools that the EU has made available to businesses by listing the significant costs and benefits of PDO and PGI quality systems.

En s’appuyant sur les résultats du projet européen DOLPHINS (Development of Origin Labelled Products : Humanity, Innovation and Sustainability) , le but de ce papier est de contribuer à la compréhension des controverses dans les débats internationaux par l’analyse des réseaux d’acteurs qui participent de près ou de loin à la construction de ces instruments. Après avoir rappelé les enjeux et l’historique de la réglementation (section 1), nous analyserons comment et sur quelles justifications se sont développées dans différents pays européens (France, Italie, Royaume-Uni et Suisse) et au niveau de l’Union Européenne (UE) des politiques de protection et de promotion des Indications Géographiques (section 2), ce qui nous permettra d’analyser dans chacun des cas les phases de développement de ces politiques (section 3).

The essay aims to investigate the link between product and territory.
Agricultural products linked to the concept of local are inextricably linked to culture.
The result of the research is set out in three parts: these deal with the identification and knowledge of the product, the regulations that protect them and, finally, their valorisation.

The aim of this paper is to highlight the main characteristics of what the authors call ‘the economy of qualities’. The authors show that qualifying products and positioning goods are major concerns for agents evolving within the ‘economy of qualities’. Competition in such an economy is structured through two basic mechanisms. The first is what the authors propose to call the process of singularization of products. The second is the mechanism whereby consumers are attached to and detached from, goods that are proposed to them. At the heart of these logics, one can find multiple socio-technical devices that are designed by economic agents, which ensure the distribution of cognitive competencies, and which constantly and finely tune supply and demand. Relying upon Jean Gadrey’s work, the authors claim that the economy of qualities is nowhere more effective than in services providing activities, and especially in those sectors that invest heavily in New Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). Finally, the authors suggest that, in the economy of qualities, the functioning and the organization of markets are issues that are shared by scholars and actors. In these highly reflexive markets, a collaboration between them is needed.