Partnerships for the Goals

Living Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho, Anabela Marisa Azul, Luciana Brandli, Pinar Gökcin Özuyar, Tony Wall

Geographical Indications and Regional Trade Agreements: Facilitating International Partnerships for Sustainable Development

  • Ryo KohsakaEmail author
  • Yuta Uchiyama
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71067-9_15-2

Synonyms

Definition

Geographical indications 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 essentially attributable to its geographical origin” (WTO 1994). This definition is included in Article 22 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO 1994).

Introduction

Traditional and local products, such as food and handicrafts, are closely linked with their production areas. These products, which are physically and socially tied to the local climate, soil, and culture, can be registered as products with geographical indications (GIs). These place-based characteristics, which are strongly influenced by human-nature interactions, are embodied by the French term terroir– one of the principal words used to describe...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. ASEAN and ASEAN’s Free Trade Agreement Partners (2012) Guiding principles and objectives for negotiating the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. http://asean.org/storage/2012/05/RCEP-Guiding-Principles-public-copy.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2018
  2. Barham E (2003) Translating terroir: the global challenge of French AOC labeling. J Rural Stud 19(1):127–138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00052-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bérard L, Marchenay P (2006) Local products and geographical indications: taking account of local knowledge and biodiversity. Int Soc Sci J 58(187):109–116.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2451.2006.00592.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouamra-Mechemache Z, Chaaban J (2010) Determinants of adoption of protected designation of origin label: evidence from the French brie cheese industry. J Agr Econ 61(2):225–239.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2009.00234.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowen S, Zapata AV (2009) Geographical indications, terroir, and socioeconomic and ecological sustainability: the case of tequila. J Rural Stud 25(1):108–119.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calboli I, Ng-Loy WL (2017) Geographical indications at the crossroads of trade, development, and culture: focus on Asia-Pacific. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK  https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316711002Google Scholar
  7. Chabrol D, Mariani M, Sautier D (2017) Establishing geographical indications without state involvement? Learning from case studies in Central and West Africa. World Dev 98:68–81.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.11.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. EC (2018) EU quality logos. https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/schemes_en. Accessed 10 Apr 2018
  9. FAO (2009) International treaty on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i0510e.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2018
  10. Frankel S (2017) Geographical indications and mega-regional trade agreements and negotiations. In: Calboli I, Ng-Loy WL (eds) Geographical indications at the crossroads of trade, development, and culture: focus on Asia-Pacific. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 147–167.  https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316711002.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gugerell K, Uchiyama Y, Kieninger PR et al (2017) Do historical production practices and culinary heritages really matter? Food with protected geographical indications in Japan and Austria. J Ethn Foods 4(2):118–125.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jef.2017.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haas F (2015) Biodiversity knowledge commons and sharing of research results with providers in East Africa. In: Kamau E, Winter G, Stoll PT (eds) Research and development on genetic resources: public domain approaches in implementing the Nagoya protocol. Routledge, London, pp 245–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ingram VJ (2014) Win-wins in forest product value chains?: how governance impacts the sustainability of livelihoods based on non-timber forest products from Cameroon. African Studies Centre, Leiden. http://hdl.handle.net/1887/24875Google Scholar
  14. Kajima S, Tanaka Y, Uchiyama Y (2017) Japanese sake and tea as place-based products: a comparison of regional certifications of globally important agricultural heritage systems, geopark, biosphere reserves, and geographical indication at product level certification. J Ethn Foods 4(2):80–87.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jef.2017.05.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kamau EC, Winter G (2015) Unbound R&D and bound benefit sharing. In: Kamau E, Winter G, Stoll PT (eds) Research and development on genetic resources: public domain approaches in implementing the Nagoya protocol. Routledge, London, pp 1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kizos T, Koshaka R, Penker M et al (2017) The governance of geographical indications: experiences of practical implementation of selected case studies in Austria, Italy, Greece and Japan. Br Food J 119(12):2863–2879.  https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2017-0037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kohsaka R (2017) Transdisciplinary approaches to governance of intellectual properties: genetic resources and traditional knowledge in terrestrial, coastal and marine Areas. http://www.chikyu.ac.jp/rihn_e/project/FS-2017-04.html. Accessed 10 Apr 2018
  18. Kohsaka R, Tomiyoshi M, Saito O et al (2015) Interactions of knowledge systems in shiitake mushroom production: a case study on the Noto Peninsula, Japan. J For Res 20(5):453–463.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10310-015-0491-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kohsaka R, Kajima S, Tashiro A et al (2018) Geographical indications in agriculture and forestry sectors: spatio-temporal multilayers of products and institutions. J Intellect Prop Assoc Jpn 15(1):4–10Google Scholar
  20. Larson J (2010) Geographical indications, in situ conservation and traditional knowledge. Policy brief number 3. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  21. MAFF (2018) Geographical Indication (GI) protection system. http://www.maff.go.jp/e/policies/intel/gi_act/index.html. Accessed 10 Apr 2018
  22. Marie-Vivien D, Chabrol D (2014) Geographical indications (GIs), biodiversity and poor communities: the opportunity of GIs to provide protection of traditional indigenous biodiversity products and benefits to poor agricultural communities. A desk study on six target countries: Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Mauritania. UNCTAD and CFFGoogle Scholar
  23. Mesías FJ, Gaspar P, Escribano M et al (2010) The role of protected designation of origin in consumer preference for Iberian dry-cured ham in Spain. Ital J Food Sci 22(4):367–376Google Scholar
  24. Napasintuwong O (2017) The roles of agricultural cooperatives in certification and production of geographical indication (GI) rice In Thailand. Country paper presented at the 3rd FFTC-NTIFO international seminar on enhancing agricultural cooperatives’ roles in response to changes in food consumption trends. Taipei, 18–22 SeptGoogle Scholar
  25. Passeri S (2017) Geographical indication expert. J Intellect Prop Assoc Jpn 14(2):44–53Google Scholar
  26. Sato J, Kohsaka R (2017) Japanese sake and evolution of technology: a comparative view with wine and its implications for regional branding and tourism. J Ethn Foods 4(2):88–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jef.2017.05.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Spielmann N, Gélinas-Chebat C (2012) Terroir? That’s not how I would describe it. Int J Wine Bus Res 24(4):254–270.  https://doi.org/10.1108/17511061211280310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sunder M (2012) From goods to a good life: intellectual property and global justice. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  29. Suyama Y, Matsuki Y (2015) MIG-seq: an effective PCR-based method for genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism genotyping using the next-generation sequencing platform. Sci Rep-UK 5:16963.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sylvander B, Isla A, Wallet F (2011) Under what conditions geographical indications protection schemes can be considered as public goods for sustainable development? In: Territorial governance. Physica-Verlag HD, Heidelberg, pp 185–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Uchiyama Y, Matsuoka H, Kohsaka R (2017a) Apiculture knowledge transmission in a changing world: can family-owned knowledge be opened? J Ethn Foods 4(4):262–267.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jef.2017.09.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Uchiyama Y, Tanaka Y, Matsuoka H et al (2017b) Expectations of residents and tourists of agriculture-related certification systems: analysis of public perceptions. J Ethn Foods 4(2):110–117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jef.2017.05.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Caenegem W, Cleary JA, Drahos P (2014) Pride and profit: geographical indications as regional development tools in Australia. J Econ Soc Policy 16(1):Article 5. http://epubs.scu.edu.au/jesp/vol16/iss1/5Google Scholar
  34. WTO (1994) Annex 1C Agreement on Trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS)Google Scholar
  35. Yu PK (2017) A spatial critique of intellectual property law and policy. Wash Lee Law Rev 74(4):Article 6. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol74/iss4/6Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Environmental StudiesTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Environmental StudiesNagoya UniversityNagoyaJapan

Section editors and affiliations

  • Monica Thiel
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Public Administration and School of Business AdministrationUniversity of International Business and Economics & China University of PetroleumBeijingChina