Trade Negotiations Insights • Volume 8 • Number 6 • August 2009

Protected Geographical Indications for ACP Countries: A Solution or a Mirage?

by Vincent Fautrel, Solene Sureau, Marie-Cecile Thirion, and Massimo Vittori

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

The position of African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries in the EU marketplace is inherently weak. Of late, this unequal trade relationship has been characterised by a marked reduction in commercial preferences awarded to ACP countries, increased competition among emerging economies, continued price instability of raw materials, and an increased demand for high quality foodstuffs by European consumers. But perhaps geographical indications (GIs) could serve as a tool to differentiate and develop local knowledge and techniques, thus enabling ACP countries to counter these challenges to some extent.

A GI is a distinctive marker used to designate a product that bears the name of its territory of origin and which possesses certain qualities, enjoys a certain reputation, or has particular characteristics due specifically to its geographical origin. GIs, which are extensively used within the EU[1], enable numerous products to be more widely recognised and valued for their quality. This system also enables producers to protect themselves against fraudulent use of these geographical names. Within the EU, the price of a product with a Protected Designation of Origin (PGI/PDO) may be as much as 40 percent higher than that of a similar non-GI product[2].

In ACP countries, very few GIs are protected even though there are many products of specific origin that have an international reputation. Examples include rooibos from South Africa, pineapples from Guinea, shea butter from Burkina Faso, white honey from Cameroon, carvings and cloth paintings from Korhogo in Côte d’Ivoire, hot peppers and pickled vegetables from Mauritius, and vanilla from Madagascar. Although products in some ACP countries are protected by the trademark system (e.g., Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee) GI protection may be more effective.

Easier said than done: conditions for instituting GIs

In addition to an appropriate institutional and legal framework, there are certain other prerequisites for the creation of GIs. These requirements include specific products that can find new markets at a fair price and the existence of producer organisations (POs) that can initiate the process. Experience in the EU has shown that the presence of a dynamic and organised PO covering at least one group of actors in the sector is essential for the success of the operation. However, in ACP countries, POs have not yet acquired sufficient capacities to carry out such initiatives. They are the driving force in defining specifications and putting in place quality control processes but they must also take consumer expectations and the capacities of the downstream distribution chain into account from the outset. The experience of other developing countries, particularly that of Morocco with argan oil, shows that it is possible to ensure these conditions are met and that the associated costs, particularly of control and certification, can be largely offset by the increased value of the products. Thus, in order to be truly effective the technical assistance needed for the purposes of GIs must take account of the needs of POs.

The legal framework: are current provisions being used to the full?

The new EU ruling on GIs and Appellations of Origin for agricultural and food products[3] allows producers from third countries, and hence ACP countries, to register their indications in the European GI Register, which would thus allow their products to be protected within the 27 EU member states.

With regard to ACP countries, efforts have been made by Caribbean and Pacific members to implement institutions and an appropriate legal framework. In West and Central Africa, the African Intellectual Property Organisation (OAPI), within the framework of the Bangui Agreement on Intellectual Property, allows for official recognition of GIs and protection of appellation of origin products simultaneously within its 16 member states. However, despite this developed legal framework, it should be noted that not a single GI has been formally registered.

Economic partnership Agreements (EPAs) and GIs

EPAs could play a part in improving protection for GIs from ACP countries in the European market. However, a number of issues must be addressed in this regard: will the signing of EPAs with ACP countries provide an additional element of protection, with respect to the 2006 EU ruling? Will EPAs simplify procedures for EU recognition of GIs for ACP countries that have signed up to them? Only the CARIFORUM-EC EPA has debated the issue of GIs in the intellectual property discussions of their EPA negotiations. Article 145[4] of the agreement provides for a rendezvous clause whereby CARIFORUM member states will draw up a scheme of protection for GIs by 2014, the date by which the two parties will begin negotiations on a complete agreement on GIs. The agreement also provides for the strengthening of cooperation on identifying and promoting GIs, through the Trade and Development committee.

The development of GIs, as a tool for increasing competitiveness, may qualify for specific support measures within aid-for-trade programmes being negotiated with various ACP countries. This will depend largely on the ACP countries making specific demands on this subject.

Beyond the European market

While the EU forms a sizeable market for most ACP countries, other developing countries (particularly those in Asia) boast markets with high growth potential for ACP exports. It is therefore important that GIs developed by ACP countries are protected also at the international level and not solely within the European market. In this respect, the World Organisation of Intellectual Property (WIPO), by means of the Lisbon Arrangement for the protection of appellations of origin and their international registration, and the WTO through the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS - articles 22 and 24) ensure a minimum level of protection for GIs. However these agreements are insufficient, as the Lisbon Arrangement applies only to its 26 signatory countries and TRIPS only provides adequate protection to wines and spirits[5]. The EU proposal to the WTO to extend the multilateral register of GIs to other agricultural products is now supported by a large number of ACP countries (with the notable exception of South Africa).

More information

The issue of the stakes involved in GIs for the ACP countries was the subject of a workshop last March organised jointly by the CTA (Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development ACP-EU), AFD (French Development Agency) and CIRAD (Agricultural Research Centre for International Development). An electronic discussion forum hosted by CTA and oriGIn (Organisation for an International Geographical Indications Network) containing all the presentations and workshop materials can be accessed at: www.dgroups.org/cta/GI

See also: CE, Impact Assessment Report for a Communication on Agricultural Product Quality Policy, Annex B on Geographical Indications, April 2009 http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/policy/communication_en.htm

Authors

Vincent Fautrel is the Trade Programme Coordinator at CTA, Solene Sureau is a Junior Scientist in the Trade Programme at CTA, Marie-Cecile Thirion is the Research Coordinator in the, Research Department at AFD, and Massimo Vittori is the Secretary General of OriGIn.

[1]To date there are approximately 5,000 GIs in the EU, mainly in France, Italy and Germany, for wines and spirits (from 4,200 GIs in 2005) but also for agricultural and food products (around 798 in 2008).

[2] O’Connor and Company, CTA. Les Indications géographiques et les enjeux pour les pays ACP (Geographical Indications and the stakes for ACP countries). 2005

http://agritrade.cta.int/fr/content/view/full/1794

[3] Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_093/l_09320060331en00120025.pdf ; OrigGIn, Note sur le règlement de la CE N°510/2006, http://origin.technomind.be/fileadmin/origin/PDFs/English/OriGIn_publications/News/Note_on_GIs_under_the_modified_EC_Regulation.EN.pdf

[4] EC Information sheet, CARIFORUM-EC EPA: Innovation and Intellectual Property, Octobre 2008

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2008/october/tradoc_140978.pdf

[5] World Trade Organisation website, http://www.wto.org/french/tratop_f/trips_f/gi_f.htm