This deliverable gather the 5 Policy Briefs elaborated for each of the 5 Clusters of VCs established in WP5: • Cluster S: Social and Demographic aspects • Cluster V: Value and Quality products • Cluster I: Innovation and Infrastructures • Cluster N: Nature and Ecosystem Services • Cluster G: Governance, Cooperation and Territoriality Every documents stand as [...]
This deliverable gather the 5 Policy Briefs elaborated for each of the 5 Clusters of VCs established in WP5:
• Cluster S: Social and Demographic aspects
• Cluster V: Value and Quality products
• Cluster I: Innovation and Infrastructures
• Cluster N: Nature and Ecosystem Services
• Cluster G: Governance, Cooperation and Territoriality
Every documents stand as an individual one.
Despite the extensive literature on Local Agro-food Systems (LAFS), which involves research on local food identity and organisational proximity, the environmental sustainability of these systems has rarely been addressed. This paper develops a new concept called Local Agroecological Food Systems (LAEFS), which focuses the research not [...]
Despite the extensive literature on Local Agro-food Systems (LAFS), which involves research on local food identity and organisational proximity, the environmental sustainability of these systems has rarely been addressed. This paper develops a new concept called Local Agroecological Food Systems (LAEFS), which focuses the research not only on local food identity, but also on agroecological principles. We aim to conduct a reflexive review of the literature on the conceptual factors attempting to describe the particular characteristics of LAEFS (distinguishing these from LAFS). We explore five axes of analysis: (a) to establish a compromise at the local level between agro-food sectoral specialisation on the one hand and greater cultivated biodiversity and a more diversified economic structure on the other; (b) to geographically and commercially shorten food channels to the fullest extent; (c) to construct new institutional formulae in the fields of logistics, distribution and public procurement for the scaling up of sustainable food; (d) to develop a participatory, bottom-up, multi-stakeholder and multi-level territorial governance; and (e) to reduce the metabolic profile of food systems by reorganising rural-urban linkages. One of the principal objectives of LAEFS should involve redesigning agricultural and food systems at a scale greater than that of the farm (territory or landscape). This requires both a major public policy push and sustainable territorial governance that incorporate an approach based on territory, food systems and agroecology.
Geographical Indications (‘GIs’) designate a product whose reputation, characteristics and quality are essentially due to their geographical origin. They are identifiers of ‘origin products’, immersed in a specific local natural and socio-cultural ecosystem. Local tangible and intangible assets and the associated reputation are nurtured over time, but they are also [...]
Geographical Indications (‘GIs’) designate a product whose reputation, characteristics and quality are essentially due to their geographical origin. They are identifiers of ‘origin products’, immersed in a specific local natural and socio-cultural ecosystem. Local tangible and intangible assets and the associated reputation are nurtured over time, but they are also vulnerable to erosion. GIs encourage stakeholders to codify arrangements (product specifications) as a response to this problem.
The importance of collective action issues in GIs has been demonstrated by interdisciplinary scholarship. However, it is mostly considered extraneous in the legal discourse and in policy prescriptions at the European level. Through a transdisciplinary approach this work combines comparative legal and case study analyses, illustrating the diversity of the protection and valorisation strategies of French and Italian agricultural and non-agricultural origin products.
Inspired by the theory and diagnostic frameworks of Elinor Ostrom’s and colleagues for analysing human cooperation for the sustainable governance of tangible and intangible commons, it explores the potential of the conceptual proximity between GIs and the commons reframing key aspects of GI legal theory and embracing the collective action perspective. The analysis of how actors’ interactions in rulemaking for product specification design affects the outcomes, reveals that the interpretation and implementation of national legal rules at the pre-registration and registration phases are not harmonised in Europe. Empirically grounded findings flag legally relevant collective action issues in GI settings and support suggestions for coherent policy transitions, measuring implementation feasibility and avoiding panaceas.
The EU free trade agreements have become the single most influential force shaping the Geographical Indication landscape today. While their critics may see GIs as an unwelcome ‘Trojan horse’ to be let in in exchange for access to the European market, this legal figure has the potential of becoming greatly [...]
The EU free trade agreements have become the single most influential force shaping the Geographical Indication landscape today. While their critics may see GIs as an unwelcome ‘Trojan horse’ to be let in in exchange for access to the European market, this legal figure has the potential of becoming greatly beneficial for developing countries.
It looks in particular at Costa Rica before and after the signature of the EU–Central American Association Agreement of 2012. We examine the practicalities of its implementation on the ground and its impact on the local industry of cheese ‘generics’. It also explores its potential effect on the coffee industry and assess how a developing country of modest size like Costa Rica can embrace this foreign legal transplant and use it to its advantage.
In recent years, the European Union (EU) GI systems for agricultural products, foodstuffs, wines and spirit drinks have become increasingly popular: on 27 October 2020, the eAmbrosia database totalled no less than 3300 designations of origin or geographical indications registered under four different regulations and 197 pending applications. The legal framework secures producers’ rights [...]
In recent years, the European Union (EU) GI systems for agricultural products, foodstuffs, wines and spirit drinks have become increasingly popular: on 27 October 2020, the eAmbrosia database totalled no less than 3300 designations of origin or geographical indications registered under four different regulations and 197 pending applications.
The legal framework secures producers’ rights and their products’ value-added. It affords broad protection to PDOs/PGIs registered at EU level, not only against direct or indirect uses but also against evocations, with the aim of combatting misleading and deceptive practices and preventing traders from taking unfair advantage of the protected names’ reputation. This article examines the jurisprudence of the EU’s General Court and Court of Justice related to the protection of registered designations against evocation, and highlights the open issues that remain to be addressed to clarify the legal arsenal and tighten the protection scheme.
