Measures and Guidelines for Protection of Geographical Indication of Agricultural Products in Chiang Rai

Main Article Content

Archariya Wongburanavart

Abstract

Chiang Rai has made progressive steps in using Geographic Indications (GI’s) adding economic value to local products and expanding the market access of its agricultural products, including processed agricultural products to foreign markets. However, it was found that the use of GI as a tool to promote local development in Chiang Rai was not as successful as it should be. Therefore, this research article aims to investigate legal measures to protect agricultural products under GI regimes in Thailand and the EU and the major challenges in obtaining them and proposing possible guidelines. According to this study, it was found that major challenges include a lack of strong integration of people within a community, lack of sufficient knowledge and understanding about GI, lack of a clear and standardised control system to monitor and keep the quality consistent with the specifications, as well as lack of appropriate and adequate budget and experts in GI protection.


Thus, to help promote GI protection of agricultural products in Chiang Rai, policy recommendations have been proposed as follows. Firstly, with the support from the government agencies, community leaders should be created in order to promote local products with unique quality to be protected as GIs Secondly, sufficient knowledge and understanding in GI, as well as its benefits should be provided to all stakeholders, including producers, entrepreneurs, government officers, and consumers through collaboration from relevant agencies from both the public and private sectors. Thirdly, the Thai Geographical Indication Protection Act B.E. 2546 (2003) should be amended to provide the control system that is consistent with the EU standard in order to certify the quality of the Thai GI products. Lastly, sufficient budget and GI experts should be allocated for the government agencies involved, particularly the Department of Intellectual Property and the Provincial Commercial Office in order to enhance their operational efficiency.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section
Research Articles

References

Arfini F, Valentin Bellassen, Sustainability of European Food Quality Schemes: Multi-Performance, Structure, and Governance of PDO, PGI, and Organic Agri-Food Systems (Springer Nature 2019).

Bramley C et al. ‘The Economics of Geographical Indications: Towards A Conceptual Framework for Geographical Indication Research in Developing Countries’, in WIPO (ed), The Economic of Intellectual Property (WIPO, Geneva 2009).

Dagne TW, Intellectual Property and Traditional Knowledge in the Global Economy: Translating Geographical Indications for Development (Routledge 2015).

Downes DR, ‘How Intellectual Property Could Be a Tool to Protect Traditional Knowledge’ (2000) 25 Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 253.

European Commission, ‘Geographical Indications in the EU’ (28-19 March 2019, Lima) available at <https://ipkey.eu/sites/default/files/ipkey-docs/2019/IPKey-LA_Peru_March-2019_Geographical-Indications-in-the-EU_en.pdf> accessed 6 December 2020.

European Commission, ‘New Search Database for Geographical Indications in the EU’ (2020) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/news/new-search-database-geographical-indications-eu-2020-nov-25_en> (accessed 29 November 2020).

European Commission, ‘Green Paper on the protection of geographical indications for non-agricultural products – Frequently Asked Questions, MEMO/14/486, Brussels/Strasbourg’ (2014)
<https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_14_486> accessed 10 June 2020.

European Commission, ‘Quality Schemes Explained’ <https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/food-safety-and-quality/certification/quality-labels/quality-schemes-explained_en> accessed 11 January 2021.

European Commission, ‘Geographical Indications for non-agricultural products’ <https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/intellectual-property/geographical-indications/non-agricultural-products_en> accessed 11 January 2021.

European Commission, ‘Quality Schemes Explained’ <https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/food-safety-and-quality/certification/quality-labels/quality-schemes-explained_en> (accessed 11 January 2021).


Favale, M. and Borghi, M., Harmonization of Intellectual Property Rights within and beyond the European Union: The Acquis Communautaire in the Framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy, (2013) WP5/25 Search Working Paper, SEARCH Project, <http://www.ub.edu/searchproject/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/WP05.25.pdf> accessed 10 July 2020

Gervais D, The TRIPS Agreement: Drafting History and Analysis (2nd edn, Sweet and Maxwell 2003).

Hemarachata C, Characteristics of Intellectual Property Law: The Basic Knowledge of Copyright, Patent, Trademark, Trade secrets, Semiconductor, New Plant Variety (9th edition, Nititham Publishing House 2016).

Hoang G et al., ‘The Impact of Geographical Indications on Sustainable Rural Development: A Case Study of the Vietnamese Cao Phong Orange’ (2020) MDPI.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ‘ISO/IEC 17065:2012(en) Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services’ <https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:17065:ed-1:v1:en> accessed 15 March 2021.

Kuanpoth J and Srethasirote B, Geographical Indication, Intellectual Property, and Community rights (Nititham Publishing House 2013).

Malik M, ‘Updates on Geographical Indications in the ASEAN Region’ (2 July 2019, Lisbon, Portugal) available at <https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sct/en/wipo_geo_lis_19/wipo_geo_lis_19_6.pdf> accessed 19 January 2021.
National News Bureau of Thailand, Department of Intellectual Property Continues to promote GI products to help increase local incomes and improve the economic foundation (2019) <http://thainews.prd.go.th/th/news/detail/TCATG190402101013376> accessed 3 February 2021.

Navarra C and Elodie Thirion, ‘Geographical Indications for Non-agricultural products: Cost of Non-Europe Report’ (European Parliament 2019).

O’Connor B, The Law of Geographical Indications (Cameron May 2004).
UNCTAD, ‘Why Geographical Indications for Least Developed Countries (LDCs)?’ (2015).

Preusse V, ‘Control Systems for Geographical Indications in the EU and Thailand: Do the EU’s Standard Travel Abroad?’ (MSc Thesis, Wageningen University and Research 2019).

Pomares A, ‘Controls of Geographical Indications (EU System)’ (EUIPO 2020) available at <https://ipkey.eu/sites/default/files/ipkey-docs/2020/IPKey_SEA_aug_2020_%20AitorPomares_Control_of_GIs_presentation.pdf> accessed 3 January 2021.

Sautier D, ‘Seminar on Geographical Indications’ (20 September 2018, Hanoi, Vietnam) <https://internationalipcooperation.eu/sites/default/files/arise-docs/2019/5_ARISEplusIPR_sep2019_Maintaining-and-Controling-a-registered-GI_EN.pdf > accessed 5 March 2021.

Sciarra AF and Louise Gellman, ‘Geographical indications: why traceability systems matter and how they add to brand value’ (2012) 7 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 264.

Seville C, EU Intellectual Property Law and Policy (Edward Elgar Publishing 2009).

Sirisakbanjong T et al. Research on Legal Measures of Geographical Indication to Protect Traditional Knowledge in Food in the ASEAN Community: Lessons for Thailand, (The Secretariat of the House of Representatives 2015).

Sylvander B and Barham E, ‘Introduction’ in Elizabeth Barham and Bertil Sylvander (eds), Labels of Origin for Food: Local Development, Global Recognition (CABI 2011).


The Department of Intellectual Property, ‘GI Products in Region’ (2020), <http://ipthailand.go.th/th/gi-002.html> (accessed 15 June 2020).

WTO, Geographical Indications (2020) <https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/ta_docssec5_e.htm> accessed 15 June 2020)