Have a personal or library account? Click to login
European Union agri-food quality schemes for the protection and promotion of geographical indications and traditional specialities: an economic perspective Cover

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

Open Access
|Jun 2014

References

  1. 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.
  2. Barham E., 2003. Translating terroir: the global challenge of French AOC labelling. J. Rural Stud. 19: 127-138.10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00052-9
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. Door database. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/door/ list.html; cited on 15 July 2013.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.10.2139/ssrn.1736713
  12. Goodman D., 2003. The quality ‘turn’ and alternative food practices: reflections and agenda. J. Rural Stud. 19: 1-7.10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00043-8
  13. Green Paper on agricultural product quality: product standards, farming requirements and quality schemes, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 15.10.2008.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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: 217-230.10.1016/S0743-0167(99)00041-8
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. Marsden T., Banks J., Bris tow G., 2000. Food supply chain approaches: exploring their role in rural development. Sociologia Ruralis 40 424-438.10.1111/1467-9523.00158
  21. 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.
  22. Porter M., 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations, The Free Press, New York.10.1007/978-1-349-11336-1
  23. 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.
  24. Suszyna j., 2012. Wiśnia nadwiślanka w unijnym systemie jakości. The Nadwiślanka Fruit and Vegetable Producers’ Cooperative, VIII Wojewódzkie Święto Kwitnącej Wiśni. Plantpress, Nowe.
  25. Suszyna j., 2013. Szanse i zagrożenia uprawy ‘Wiśni nadwiślanki’. The Nadwiślanka Fruit and Vegetable Producers’ Cooperative, VIII Wojewódzkie Święto Kwitnącej Wiśni. Plantpress, Nowe.
  26. Warner K.D., 2007. The quality of sustainability: Agroecological partnerships and the geographic branding of California winegrapes. J. Rural Stud. 23: 142-155. 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.09.009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/fhort-2014-0001 | Journal eISSN: 2083-5965 | Journal ISSN: 0867-1761
Language: English
Page range: 3 - 17
Submitted on: Sep 7, 2013
Accepted on: Feb 3, 2014
Published on: Jun 17, 2014
Published by: Polish Society for Horticultural Sciences (PSHS)
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2014 Agnieszka Hajdukiewicz, published by Polish Society for Horticultural Sciences (PSHS)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.