Search

Geographical indications (GIs) aim to protect the names of specific high‐quality products (food and wine) to preserve and promote the uniqueness linked to their geographical origin and traditional know‐how. EU and extra‐EU countries register domestic products with GIs. This study disentangles the effects of such registrations on the quality of imports using country‐level product import data for the fruit, vegetable, coffee, tea, and spice sectors. Our results show that the registration of domestic products as GIs enhances the quality of imported goods only if the importing country has a lower level of quality of domestic production. The introduction of GIs into high‐quality domestic markets can discourage import quality upgrades. This is because domestic producers may prefer to compete for quality rather than price, and imported goods represent a less expensive alternative to high‐quality national goods for consumers. Conversely, in countries where domestic product quality is lower, the introduction of GIs may enhance import quality upgrading because the diffusion of GIs induces domestic consumers to become more demanding in terms of quality for foreign products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union (EU) protects about 1500 regional specialty foods such as Feta cheese and Gouda Holland. However, this geographical indications (GIs) protection does not automatically extend to other jurisdictions. This article tests a theory of EU demands for GIs in EU–Australia trade negotiations, using newly coded data on EU GI names in Australian supermarkets. Focusing on cheese, it confirms that the EU seeks protection for GIs where the authentic EU GI products are well established. The demand for protection does not seem to be driven primarily by current non‐GI uses of GI names, since a qualitative analysis reveals few product names that would be banned if EU demands are granted by Australia. These findings imply that Australian negotiators and producers should be less afraid of losing currently established generic food names—a fear that is especially present in the United States, which has strongly opposed the protection of GIs worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Geographical indications (GI) certify the geographical origins of a product and delineate the specific area in which the certified product must be produced. Despite a large literature on the economics of GIs, few papers have explored the question of the optimal size of GI regions. This note presents a flexible conceptual framework to explore the economics and politics of the delimitation of a GI. The general framework describes the efficiency and distributional effects of the size of a GI and shows how this affects interest groups' incentives to influence government decision‐making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Geographical Indications (GIs) are increasingly important instruments of agricultural and food regulations and are growing as contentious issues in trade negotiations and disputes. GIs can improve welfare but they can also be a protectionist instrument. The EU has the most GIs in the world, but they are concentrated in the south of the EU. Even excluding wine, there are seven times more food GIs per capita in the southern EU Member States than in other EU Member States. This note discusses several factors which may explain the geographic concentration of GIs in the south of the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A theoretical model is developed to illustrate the economic incentives to invest in quality in markets with a dual reputation structure: private (firm reputation) and collective (regional reputation). Numerical dynamic programming techniques are then used to simulate firms' strategic behaviour, and competitive outcomes are compared to the optimal investment of a regional planner. Market and product characteristics inducing asymmetric and/or sub-optimal investment strategies, potentially destabilising for the region, are investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Terroir, the concept of an essential link between location of production and a specific quality attribute, is emerging as a contentious issue in trade negotiations and disputes. This issue is manifest through disputes and disagreements about appropriate protection of ‘geographical indications’ (GIs). This paper explores the differences in approach taken by the EU and the US towards GI protection, and illustrates the nature of the legal and economic arguments. The transatlantic dispute is spreading to other countries through the inclusion of GI protection in regional and bilateral trade pacts. It also has implications for the eventual conclusion of the WTO Doha Round negotiations, as the terroir issue arises in both the agricultural and the Trade-Related Intellectual Property (TRIPS) agendas, once again pitting the US and EU as protagonists. But there are signs of change in these positions as the GI system in the EU comes under review and producers in the US reconsider the possible advantages of location-based identifiers. These issues are important in a number of food sectors, and are likely to be persistent. They deserve more attention from practising applied economists than they have yet received. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]