European Union agri-food quality schemes for the protection and promotion of geographical indications and traditional specialities: an economic perspective

Open access

ABSTRACT

The schemes for identifying and protecting the names of agricultural products and foods having specific qualities, have been launched by European Union as a part of its complex agricultural quality policy. The main objective of this article is to examine different aspects of three of the schemes, developed for products with specific characteristics resulting from a particular origin or farming method: PDO (Protected Designation of Origin), PGI (Protected Geographical Indication) and TSG (Traditional Speciality Guarantied). The focus is mainly on the economic issues of the production and marketing of products and foodstuffs registered under particular schemes. The methodology includes studying the existing literature and European regulations on the subject, collecting and analysing statistical data as well as examining a short practical case.

The economic theory suggests that PDO/PGI/TSG registration results in the higher ability of producers to compete in the market. The increasing number of registrations confirms the growing interest of producers in using it as a tool to create competitive advantage. However, a higher price for such products compared with a standard product, does not always translate into a market success, since producing them requires farmers to follow a certain specification and this may involve additional costs. The analysis of the Vistula Cherry case found that there are significant market opportunities for certified producers of high quality fruits due to excellent characteristics of their products, but at the same time they face certain external and internal challenges and need to further develop their production and marketing skills, within the framework of the local collective organization.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • AND - International 2012. Value of production of agricultural products and foodstuffs wines aromatised wines and spirits protected by a geographical indication (GI). Final report by the European Commission and AND International Oct. 2012.

  • Barham E. 2003. Translating terroir: the global challenge of French AOC labelling. J. Rural Stud. 19: 127-138.

  • Barjolle D. Sylvand er B. 2000. Some factors of success for origin labelled products in agrifood supply chains in Europe: market internal resources and institutions. In: B. Sylvander D. Barjolle and F. Arfini (Eds). The Socio-Economics Of Origin Labelled Products In Agri-Food Supply Chains: Spatial Institutional And Co-Ordination Aspects. INRA Actes et Communications 17-1: 45-71.

  • Belletti G. Burgassi T. Man co E. Marescotti A. Pacciani A. Scaramuzzi S. 2007. The roles of geographical indications (PDO and PGI) on the internationalisation process of agro-food products. Contributed Paper prepared for presentation at the 105th EAAE Seminar ‘International Marketing and International Trade of Quality Food Products’ Bologna Italy March 8-10 2007. Available online at http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/7851/1/cp070035.pdf; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • Belletti G. Marescotti A. 2011. Evaluating the effects of protecting Geographical Indications: scientific context and case studies. In: Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (Ed.). The Effects of Protecting Geographical Indications. Ways and Means of their Evaluation Berne Publication n.7 (07.11): 31-121.

  • Bramley C. 2011. A review of the socio-economic impact of geographical indications: considerations for the developing World. Paper prepared for presentation at the WIPO Worldwide Symposium on Geographical Indications June 22 - 24 2011 Lima Peru: 1-22. Available online at http://www.wipo.int/ edocs/mdocs/geoind/en/wipo_geo_lim_11/wipo_ geo_lim_11_9.pdf; cited on 15 July 2013.

  • Door database. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/door/ list.html; cited on 15 July 2013.

  • Dziewirz F. 2013. „Wiśnia Nadwiślanka” w unijnym systemie jakości żywności. The Nadwiślanka Fruit and Vegetable Producers’ Cooperative IX Wojewódzkie Święto Kwitnącej Wiśni Plantpress Nowe. European Commissi on notice No 2009/C 104/09. Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs ‘Wiśnia Nadwiślanka’. Official Journal of the European Union 2009.

  • European Commission 2011. Europe the taste of quality Europe values the diversity of its quality products. European Commission Directorate - General for Agriculture and Rural Development Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2011.

  • European Commission 2013. Agriculture and Rural Development Geographical indications and traditional specialties. Available online at http:// ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/schemes; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • Giovannucci D. Josling T. Kerr W. O’Conn or B. Yeung M.T. 2009. Guide to Geographical Indications: Linking products and their origins International Trade Centre Geneva.

  • Goodman D. 2003. The quality ‘turn’ and alternative food practices: reflections and agenda. J. Rural Stud. 19: 1-7.

  • Green Paper on agricultural product quality: product standards farming requirements and quality schemes Commission of the European Communities Brussels 15.10.2008.

  • Hegnes A.W. 2012. Introducing and practising PDO and PGI in Norway Anthropology of Food. Available online at http://aof.revues.org/7210; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • Hughes D. 2002. Consumer interests and the reform of the CAP: a review of relevant documentation and research Imperial College University of London: 1-31. Available online at http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/reports/rep02_en.pdf; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • Ilbery B. Kneafs y M. 2000. Producer constructions of quality in regional specialty food production: a case study from south West England. J. Rural Stud. 16: 217-230.

  • Josling T. 2006. What’s in a Name? The Economics Law and Politics of Geographical Indications for Foods and Beverages. Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper No. 109: Trinity College Dublin: 1-33. Available online at http://www.tcd.ie/iiis/documents/discussion/pdfs/iiisdp109.pdf; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • London Economics 2008. Evaluation of the CAP policy on protected designations of origin (PDO) and protected geographical indications (PGI) London. Study financed by the European Commission.

  • Marescotti A. 2003. Typical products and rural development: Who benefits from PDO/PGI recognition? Paper presented at: Food Quality Products in the Advent of the 21st Century: Production Demand and Public Policy. 83rd EAAE Seminar Chania Greece 4-7 September. Available online at http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/olq/documents/documents/cherry%20of%Lari%20marescotti.pdf; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • Marsden T. Banks J. Bris tow G. 2000. Food supply chain approaches: exploring their role in rural development. Sociologia Ruralis 40 424-438.

  • Marty F. 1997. Which are the ways of innovation in PDO and PGI products? In: F. Arfini and C. Mora (Eds). Typical and Traditional Products: Rural Effect and Agro-Industrial Problems. Proceedings of 52nd EAAE Seminar (19-21.6.1997) Parma. Available online at http://www.origin-food.org/pdf/eaae97/02_marty.pdf; cited on 09 July 2013.

  • Porter M. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations The Free Press New York.

  • Regulation (EU ) No 1151/2012 of The European Parliament and of The Council of 21 Nov. 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural product and foodstuffs Article 1.

  • Suszyna j. 2012. Wiśnia nadwiślanka w unijnym systemie jakości. The Nadwiślanka Fruit and Vegetable Producers’ Cooperative VIII Wojewódzkie Święto Kwitnącej Wiśni. Plantpress Nowe.

  • Suszyna j. 2013. Szanse i zagrożenia uprawy ‘Wiśni nadwiślanki’. The Nadwiślanka Fruit and Vegetable Producers’ Cooperative VIII Wojewódzkie Święto Kwitnącej Wiśni. Plantpress Nowe.

  • Warner K.D. 2007. The quality of sustainability: Agroecological partnerships and the geographic branding of California winegrapes. J. Rural Stud. 23: 142-155.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor

Web of Science, IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.532

CiteScore 2018: 0.6

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.198
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.644

Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 582 356 27
PDF Downloads 339 215 31