Geographical Indications of Origin at the Crossroads of Local Development, Consumer Protection and Marketing Strategies

  • Irene CalboliEmail author


This article reviews the international provisions applicable to the protection of geographical indications of origin (GIs) and elaborates on the benefits of GI protection for local development and consumer information. Yet, this article supports that these benefits are dependent on a strict linkage between the GI-denominated products and the territory from which they originate. This article also highlights how the current definition of GIs has loosened this linkage and criticizes this development. In particular, this article supports that today GIs have essentially transformed into marketing tools, which can play a strategic role in international trade in agricultural, food-related, and other products due to the competitive advantage that GIs can grants because of the evocative power that is embodied in the geographical terms. This development, however, questions the theoretical premise for protecting GIs as intellectual property rights altogether. Ultimately, this article advocates against this development and calls for a stricter enforcement of the territorial linkage between GI-denominated products and the terroir.


Geographical indications of origin International trade in agricultural products Food policy Local development Consumer information TRIPS 


  1. Agdomar M (2008) Removing the Greek from Feta and adding Korbel to Champagne: the paradox of geographical indications in international law. Fordham Intellect Prop Media Entertain LJ 18(541):588Google Scholar
  2. Blakeney M (2014) The protection of geographical indications: law and practiceGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowen S (2010) Embedding local places in global spaces: geographical indications as a territorial development strategy. Rural Sociol 75(2):209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowen S, Zapata AV (2009) Geographical indications, terroir, and socioeconomic and ecological sustainability: the case of tequila. J Rural Stud 25(1):108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Calboli I (2006) Expanding the protection of geographical indications of origin under TRIPs: “Old” debate or “new” opportunity?”. Marquette Intellect Prop Law Rev 10(181):192Google Scholar
  6. Calboli I (2015) Intellectual property protection for fame, luxury, wine, and spirits: lex specialis for a corporate “dolce vita” or a “good quality life”. In: Dinwoodie GB (ed) Intellectual property and general legal principles: is IP a lex specialis? p 156Google Scholar
  7. Coombe RJ et al (2014) Geographical indications: the promise, perils and politics of protecting place-based products. In: David M, Halbert D (eds) The Sage handbook of intellectual property. SAGE, p 207Google Scholar
  8. Gangjee D (2007a) Quibbling siblings: conflicts between trademarks and geographic indications. Chi Kent L Rev 82(1253):1256–1259Google Scholar
  9. Gangjee D (2007b) Say cheese: a sharper image of generic use through the lens of Feta. Eur Intellect Prop Rev 5:172Google Scholar
  10. Gangjee D (2012) Relocating the law of geographical indications. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Giovannucci D et al (2009) Guide to geographical indications: linking products and their origins.
  12. Hughes J (2006) Champagne, Feta, and Bourbon: the spirited debate about geographical indications. Hastings Law J 58(299):305Google Scholar
  13. Long DE (2014) Branding the land: creating global meanings for local characteristics. In: Calboli I, Lee E (eds) Trademark protection and territoriality challenges in a global economy. Edward Elgar, p 100Google Scholar
  14. Maher M (2001) On vino veritas? Clarifying the use of geographic references on American wine labels. Calif Law Rev 89:1881 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. Niska HN (2004) The European Union trips over the U.S. constitution: can the first amendment save the Bologna that has a first name?”, Minn J Glob Trade 13:413, 440–441Google Scholar
  16. O’Connor B (2004) The law of geographical indications. Cameron MayGoogle Scholar
  17. Rangnekar D (2009) Indications of geographical origin in Asia: legal and policy issues to resolve. In: Meléndez-Ortiz R, Roffe P (eds) Intellectual property and sustainable development: development agendas in a changing world. Edward Elgar, p 273Google Scholar
  18. Rangnekar D, Kumar S (2010) Another look at Basmati: genericity and the problems of a transborder geographical indication. J World Intellect Prop 13(2):202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Raustiala K, Munzer SR (2007) The global struggle over geographic indications. Eur J Int Law 18(337):359–360Google Scholar
  20. Ricolfi M (2009) Geographical symbols in intellectual property law. In: Hilty RM, Drexl J, Nordemann W (eds) Schutz Von Kreativität und Wettbewerb, p 239Google Scholar
  21. Ritzert M (2009) Champagne is from Champagne: an economic justification for extending trademark-level protection to wine-related geographical indicators. AIPLA Q J 37(191):212–220Google Scholar
  22. Sheff JN (2013) Marks, morals, and markets. Stanf Law Rev 65:761Google Scholar
  23. Waggoner JM (2008) Acquiring a European taste for geographical indications. Brook J Int Law 33(569):578Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in AsiaSingapore Management University School of Law; Professor of Law, Texas A&M University School of LawSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations