Insights into the black box of collective efforts for the registration of Geographical Indications
Section snippets
Little knowledge on GI-registration processes
With Geographical Indications (GIs), firms communicate to consumers those reputation and quality characteristics of their food products that are linked to the geographical origin. According to the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) (Article 22.1), GIs are “indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is
Analytical framework and comparative case study design
Our empirical study is guided by the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework (IAD) Framework (Ostrom, 2007b). The IAD Framework helps to analyse the interaction of GI-firms during the registration process using an analytical framework which structures the transaction efforts along the registration process (Enengel et al., 2011, Enengel et al., 2014) (Fig. 1).
Contextual and institutional features of registration processes
The five cases are presented following the analytical framework (Fig. 1) and based on the sources of data listed in Table 1. We first portray the contextual and institutional situation (territorial link to the product, attributes of the community, rules in use, action arena including risks, and outcome) case by case. Collective efforts are presented and comparatively analysed in Section 4.
Collective efforts of registration processes
In this section, we present the data on efforts (by process phase and by category of actors) and interpret the explaining factors.
Discussion of the analytical framework
The selected variables of the IAD Framework (Ostrom, 2007a) and Enengel et al.’s framework (2011, [Enengel et al., 2014]2014) were very helpful for understanding how the contextual and institutional situation of the five case studies shaped the action arena (Ostrom, 2007a) and ultimately how efforts for the registration process were allocated among different actors’ groups involved.
Despite our thorough work, an assessment of collective efforts based on a recall-approach always remains a rough
Conclusion
The variability of the five cases compared in this article does not indicate a panacea for an efficient and effective GI-registration process, but illustrates how the context-specific institutional environment, the degree of involvement of supply chain actors, group size and heterogeneity can influence the merits of GI-registration processes and shape the allocation of associated efforts. Most of these efforts are invested in defining GI-specific standards and the geographical delimitation that
Acknowledgments
We truly thank all interviewees, especially, Karen Yepes, Néstor Pérez, Andrés Villegas, Oscar Bernal, Marcela Urueña, Gamaliel Grisales and Luis Hernández in Colombia; Angela Crescenzi, Luciano Zoppi, Stefano Barzagli, Giovanni Piscolla, Simona Toni, Giorgio Castiglione, Fabrizio Salvadorini, Mauro Carreri, Romano Dingacci, Rita Chelini, Alfio Marchini, Ota and Olma in Italy and Josef Weber, Andreas Cretnik, Klaus Gallob, Andreas Ennser, Karl Becker, Ljiljana Pantovic, Markus Stangl and Gerald
References (65)
Translating terroir: the global challenge of French AOC labeling?
J. Rural Stud.
(2003)- et al.
Linking protection of geographical indications to the environment: evidence from the European Union olive-oil sector
Land Use Policy
(2015) - et al.
Geographical indications, terroir, and socioeconomic and ecological sustainability: the case of tequila
J. Rural Stud.
(2009) - et al.
Group heterogeneity and cooperation on the geographical indication regulation: the case of the Prosciutto di Parma Consortium
Food Policy
(2012) - et al.
Change of competition regime and regional innovative capacities: evidence from diary restructuring in France
Food Policy
(2014) - et al.
Benefits: efforts and risks of participants in landscape co-management: an analytical framework and results from two case studies in Austria
J. Environ. Manage.
(2011) - et al.
Landscape co-management in Austria: the stakeholder’s perspective on efforts: benefits and risks
J. Rural Stud.
(2014) - et al.
Transaction costs for SSSIs and policy design?
Land Use Policy
(2002) - et al.
The effectiveness of marked-based instruments to foster the conservation of extensive land use: the case of geographical indications in the French Alps
Land Use Policy
(2015) Geographical Indications in Latin America value Chains: a branding from below strategy or a mechanism excluding the poorest?
J. Rural Stud.
(2013)
Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies
Ecol. Econ.
Property rights: transaction costs and institutional change: conceptual framework and literature review
Progress Plann.
The effectiveness of contemporary Ggeographical indications (GIs) schemes in enhancing the quality of Chinese agrifoods − experiences from the field
J. Rural Stud.
A complex feature of agro-food products
What are transactions costs?
Res. Law Econ.
A ladder of citizen participation?
J. Am. Inst. Plann.
Geographical Indications and Property Rights: Protecting Value-Added Agricultural Products
Introduction
Public policies and geographical indications
Geographical Indications and protected designations of origin: intellectual property tools for rural development objectives
Origin products, geographical indications and rural development
The roles of geographical indications in the internationalisation process of agro-food products
Collective rules and the use of protected geographical indications by firms
Int. Agric. Policy
Geographical Indications, Public Goods and Sustainable Development: the roles of actors’ strategies and public policies
World Development
Tradition, regulation and intellectual property: local agricultural products and foodstuffs in France
Local products and geographical indications: taking account of local knowledge and biodiversity
Int. Soc. Sci. J. Cult. Divers. Biovers.
Local or localized? Exploring the contributions of Franco-Mediterranean agrifood theory to alternative food research
Agric. Hum. Values
Why the need to consider GIs in the south?
A review of the socio-economic impact of geographical indications: considerations for the developing world
Establishing geographical indications without state involvement? Learning from case studies in central and West Africa
World Dev.
Assessing the economic impact of GI protection
Cited by (63)
Can Geographical Indications promote environmental sustainability in food supply chains? Insights from a systematic literature review
2024, Journal of Cleaner ProductionSustainability for stakeholders and the environment? Understanding the role of geographical indications in sustaining agri-food production
2023, International Journal of Gastronomy and Food ScienceA cup of black coffee with GI, please! Evidence of geographical indication influence on a coffee tasting experiment
2022, Physiology and BehaviorGeographical indications as global knowledge commons: Ostrom's law on common intellectual property and collective action
2023, Journal of Institutional Economics