The grapes of wrath: The Coonawarra dispute, geographical indications and international trade

The famous wine region of Coonawarra in South Australia has been promoted as ’Australia's other Red Centre', emphasizing its terra rossa soil and its cabernet sauvignon. In his atlas of the wine regions of Australia, John Beeston comments upon the rich and contested history of the region: ’Coonawarra is certainly the most famous cabernet sauvignon region in Australia, and some would argue, the most renowned wine region in Australia per se'. A reporter, Penelope Debelle, captures a sense of the legal conflict over the parameters of the boundaries of Coonawarra: ’Behind the name Coonawarra, an inglorious contest is being waged that pits the romance of South Australia's terra rossa cool-climate wine region against the cold commercial reality of the label.'This Chapter tells the story behind the Coonawarra litigation, addressing the parties to the dispute; the legal and historical context of the case; and the immediate impact case, as well as its lingering significance. It considers the ’Coonawarra' case as, very literally, a landmark in Australian jurisprudence in respect of intellectual property. This chapter engages in the methodology of ’legal storytelling'. In the field of new historicism, the use of anecdotes - petite histoire - has been seen as a useful way of challenging grand historical narratives. Joel Fineman has observed that the anecdote is ’the literary form or genre that uniquely refers to the real.' This chapter has three parts. Part 1 outlines the European Community - Australia Wine Agreement 1994, and the operation of the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Act 1980 (Cth). Part 2 considers the various stages of the dispute over the Coonawarra region - moving from the decision of the Geographical Indications Committee, to the ruling of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; and the conclusive decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. Part 3 examines the implications of the Coonawarra litigation for other wine regions of Australia - most notably, the King Valley in Victoria; but also the Hunter Valley in the New South Wales; and the Margaret River in Western Australia. The conclusion considers the ramifications of the European Community-Australia Wine Agreement 2007, which has been initialed by both sides.

Monopolising Names? : The Protection of Geographical Indications in the European Community

Marketing of goods under geographical names has always been common. Aims to prevent abuse have given rise to separate forms of legal protection for geographical indications (GIs) both nationally and internationally. The European Community (EC) has also gradually enacted its own legal regime to protect geographical indications. The legal protection of GIs has traditionally been based on the idea that geographical origin endows a product exclusive qualities and characteristics. In today s world we are able to replicate almost any prod-uct anywhere, including its qualities and characteristics. One would think that this would preclude protec-tion from most geographical names, yet the number of geographical indications seems to be rising. GIs are no longer what they used to be. In the EC it is no longer required that a product is endowed exclusive characteristics by its geographical origin as long as consumers associate the product with a certain geo-graphical origin. This departure from the traditional protection of GIs is based on the premise that a geographical name extends beyond and exists apart from the product and therefore deserves protection itself. The thesis tries to clearly articulate the underlying reasons, justifications, principles and policies behind the protection of GIs in the EC and then scrutinise the scope and shape of the GI system in the light of its own justifications. The essential questions it attempts to aswer are (1) What is the basis and criteria for granting GI rights? (2) What is the scope of protection afforded to GIs? and (3) Are these both justified in the light of the functions and policies underlying granting and protecting of GIs? Despite the differences, the actual functions of GIs are in many ways identical to those of trade marks. Geographical indications have a limited role as source and quality indicators in allowing consumers to make informed and efficient choices in the market place. In the EC this role is undermined by allowing able room and discretion for uses that are arbitrary. Nevertheless, generic GIs are unable to play this role. The traditional basis for justifying legal protection seems implausible in most case. Qualities and charac-teristics are more likely to be related to transportable skill and manufacturing methods than the actual geographical location of production. Geographical indications are also incapable of protecting culture from market-induced changes. Protection against genericness, against any misuse, imitation and evocation as well as against exploiting the reputation of a GI seem to be there to protect the GI itself. Expanding or strengthening the already existing GI protection or using it to protect generic GIs cannot be justified with arguments on terroir or culture. The conclusion of the writer is that GIs themselves merit protection only in extremely rare cases and usually only the source and origin function of GIs should be protected. The approach should not be any different from one taken in trade mark law. GI protection should not be used as a means to mo-nopolise names. At the end of the day, the scope of GI protection is nevertheless a policy issue.

Tanzanian Food Origins and Protected Geographical Indications

As the world`s population is constantly growing, food security will remain on the policy Agenda, particularly in Africa. At the same time, global food systems experience a new wave focusing on local foods and food sovereignty featuring high quality food products of verifiable geographical origin. This article argues that Geographical Indications (GI´s) hold the potential to help transform the Tanzanian agriculture-dependent economy through the tapping of value from unique products, attributing taste and colour to place or regional geography. This study aims to identify the existence and characteristics of food origin products in Tanzania that have potential for GI certification. The hypothesis was that there are origin products in Tanzania whose unique characteristics are linked to the area of production. Geographical indications can be useful policy instruments contributing to food security and sovereignty and quality within an efficient marketing system with the availability of government support, hence the need to identify key candidates for GI certification. Five Tanzanian origin products were selected from 14 candidate agricultural products through a scoping study. Rice from Kyela, Aloe vera, Coffee and Sugar from Kilimanjaro and Cloves from Zanzibar are some of the product cases investigated and provides for in-depth case study, as ´landscape´ products incorporating ´taste of place´. Interviews were conducted to collect quantitative and qualitative data. Data was collected on the production area, product quality perceived by the consumer in terms of taste, flavour, texture, aroma, appearance (colour, size) and perceptions of links between geography related factors (soil, land weather characteristics) and product qualities. A qualitative case study analysis was done for each of the (five) selected Tanzanian origin products investigated with plausible prospects for Tanzania to leapfrog into exports of Geographical Indications products. Framework conditions for producers creating or capturing market value as stewards of cultural and landscape values, environments, and institutional requirements for such creation or capturing to happen, including presence of export opportunities, are discussed. Geographical indication is believed to allow smallholders to create employment and build monetary value, while stewarding local food cultures and natural environments and resources, and increasing the diversity of supply of natural and unique quality products and so contribute to enhanced food security.

Vale dos Vinhedos and the development of geographical indications in Brazil.

2012

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

No logo: Brand bullies, trade mark law, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a sweeping trade agreement, spanning the Pacific Rim, and covering an array of topics, including intellectual property. There has been much analysis of the recently leaked intellectual property chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership by WikiLeaks. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks’ Editor-in-Chief, observed “The selective secrecy surrounding the TPP negotiations, which has let in a few cashed-up megacorps but excluded everyone else, reveals a telling fear of public scrutiny. By publishing this text we allow the public to engage in issues that will have such a fundamental impact on their lives.” Critical attention has focused upon the lack of transparency surrounding the agreement, copyright law and the digital economy; patent law, pharmaceutical drugs, and data protection; and the criminal procedures and penalties for trade secrets. The topic of trade mark law and related rights, such as internet domain names and geographical indications, deserves greater analysis.

Indigenous Intellectual Property: A Handbook of Contemporary Research

Taking an interdisciplinary approach unmatched by any other book on this topic, this thoughtful Handbook considers the international struggle to provide for proper and just protection of Indigenous intellectual property (IP). In light of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007, expert contributors assess the legal and policy controversies over Indigenous knowledge in the fields of international law, copyright law, trademark law, patent law, trade secrets law, and cultural heritage. The overarching discussion examines national developments in Indigenous IP in the United States, Canada, South Africa, the European Union, Australia, New Zealand, and Indonesia. The Handbook provides a comprehensive overview of the historical origins of conflict over Indigenous knowledge, and examines new challenges to Indigenous IP from emerging developments in information technology, biotechnology, and climate change. Practitioners and scholars in the field of IP will learn a great deal from this Handbook about the issues and challenges that surround just protection of a variety of forms of IP for Indigenous communities. Preface The Legacy of David Unaipon Matthew Rimmer Introduction: Mapping Indigenous Intellectual Property Matthew Rimmer PART I INTERNATIONAL LAW 1. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Human Rights Framework for Indigenous Intellectual Property Mauro Barelli 2. The WTO, The TRIPS Agreement and Traditional Knowledge Tania Voon 3. The World Intellectual Property Organization and Traditional Knowledge Sara Bannerman 4. The World Indigenous Network: Rio+20, Intellectual Property, Indigenous Knowledge, and Sustainable Development Matthew Rimmer PART II COPYRIGHT LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 5. Government Man, Government Painting? David Malangi and the 1966 One-Dollar Note Stephen Gray 6. What Wandjuk Wanted Martin Hardie 7. Avatar Dreaming: Indigenous Cultural Protocols and Making Films Using Indigenous Content Terri Janke 8. The Australian Resale Royalty for Visual Artists: Indigenous Art and Social Justice Robert Dearn and Matthew Rimmer PART III TRADE MARK LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 9. Indigenous Cultural Expression and Registered Designs Maree Sainsbury 10. The Indian Arts and Crafts Act: The Limits of Trademark Analogies Rebecca Tushnet 11. Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions within the New Zealand Intellectual Property Framework: A Case Study of the Ka Mate Haka Sarah Rosanowski 12 Geographical Indications and Indigenous Intellectual Property William van Caenegem PART IV PATENT LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 13. Pressuring ‘Suspect Orthodoxy’: Traditional Knowledge and the Patent System Chidi Oguamanam, 14. The Nagoya Protocol: Unfinished Business Remains Unfinished Achmad Gusman Siswandi 15. Legislating on Biopiracy in Europe: Too Little, too Late? Angela Daly 16. Intellectual Property, Indigenous Knowledge, and Climate Change Matthew Rimmer PART V PRIVACY LAW AND IDENTITY RIGHTS 17. Confidential Information and Anthropology: Indigenous Knowledge and the Digital Economy Sarah Holcombe 18. Indigenous Cultural Heritage in Australia: The Control of Living Heritages Judith Bannister 19. Dignity, Trust and Identity: Private Spheres and Indigenous Intellectual Property Bruce Baer Arnold 20. Racial Discrimination Laws as a Means of Protecting Collective Reputation and Identity David Rolph PART VI INDIGENOUS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES 21. Diluted Control: A Critical Analysis of the WAI262 Report on Maori Traditional Knowledge and Culture Fleur Adcock 22. Traditional Knowledge Governance Challenges in Canada Jeremy de Beer and Daniel Dylan 23. Intellectual Property protection of Traditional Knowledge and Access to Knowledge in South Africa Caroline Ncube 24. Traditional Knowledge Sovereignty: The Fundamental Role of Customary Law in Protection of Traditional Knowledge Brendan Tobin Index

Propriedade intelectual e preservação do meio ambiente no sistema multilateral de comércio

As discussões sobre as relações entre o Acordo TRIPS e a Convenção sobre a Diversidade Biológica (CDB) encontram-se na agenda internacional desde a realização da IV Conferência Ministerial da Organização Mundial do Comércio, ocorrida em novembro de 2001, em Doha no Catar. Apesar da considerável atenção que o tema tem recebido nos fóruns internacionais, o debate sobre o tratamento adequado da questão persiste sem solução. A presente tese apresenta uma abrangente análise das conexões que existem entre a proteção dos direitos de propriedade intelectual e a conservação da diversidade biológica. Além disso, a partir de uma análise de conceitos de propriedade intelectual como patentes, indicações geográficas, transferência de tecnologia e propriedade comunitária de conhecimentos tradicionais, destacam-se elementos necessários para o uso sustentável e conservação dos recursos biológicos.

Entre l’art, l’invention et la nourriture : examen de la possibilité de protéger les recettes de cuisine en droit de la propriété intellectuelle canadien

Les recettes de cuisine sont partout de nos jours, dans les livres, à la télévision, sur l’Internet, ainsi que dans les restaurants et les entreprises alimentaires industrielles. Cette grande présence médiatique et économique soulève la question de savoir s’il est possible de les protéger par le droit de la propriété intellectuelle canadien. L’auteure commence par décrire les recettes et les plats, puis examine si ceux de nature traditionnelle et familiale sont des éléments de culture et s’ils peuvent constituer des savoirs traditionnels. Cela amène l’auteure à examiner si les indications géographiques peuvent procurer aux recettes et aux plats une certaine forme de protection contre leur appropriation à l’usage exclusif d’une personne. L’auteure aborde ensuite les régimes usuels de propriété intellectuelle à l’aune de la recette et du plat de chefs ou de l’industrie. Elle examine en premier ceux de la propriété industrielle. Les recettes et les plats peuvent-ils être des marques de commerce? Peuvent-ils être des secrets de commerce? Peuvent-ils constituer des inventions brevetables? Elle se penche ensuite sur le droit d’auteur et examine si les recettes et les plats peuvent être des œuvres protégeables et s’ils se qualifieraient comme œuvres littéraires ou artistiques. Cet examen l’amène à regarder le développement de la protection des œuvres musicales pour mieux cerner les enjeux pour les recettes. Au terme de son analyse, l’auteure fait ressortir quel régime appert le plus approprié selon la nature des recettes et des pratiques des chefs et des entreprises industrielles.

L’accès et le partage des avantages des savoirs traditionnels en Amérique latine : comment les droits de propriété intellectuelle peuvent empêcher la biopiraterie

Ce travail se situe dans la perspective des études sur la protection des savoirs traditionnels contre la biopiraterie commise par quelques industries pharmaceutiques et cosmétiques. Malgré le débat qui s’est déroulé à ce sujet après la signature de la Convention sur la diversité biologique, ces patrimoines culturels continuent d’être largement menacés. L’étude se propose d’analyser les mécanismes capables de protéger contre la biopiraterie les savoirs traditionnels associés à la biodiversité qui intéressent l’industrie pharmaceutique, et ce, par le biais des droits de propriété intellectuelle existants aussi bien à l’échelle internationale que dans le cadre des législations nationales. Ces mécanismes sont évalués quant à leur efficacité, en vue d’en identifier les plus intéressants, susceptibles d’être adoptés soit par des pays qui ne disposent pas encore de législation en matière de protection des savoirs traditionnels soit pour être utilisés dans le cadre international. Avec cet objectif, le présent travail dressera un panorama concernant la législation du Brésil, du Costa Rica et du Pérou. En outre, seront mises en exergue par la suite les différentes conventions en lien avec les savoirs traditionnels, à savoir la Convention sur la diversité biologique, le Protocole de Nagoya, le Comité intergouvernemental de la propriété intellectuelle relative aux ressources génétiques, aux savoirs traditionnels et au folklore de l’Organisation mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle. L’analyse menée a mis en lumière un certain nombre de dispositions assez efficaces pouvant être utilisées de façon optimale par des pays ne disposant pas de législation en matière de protection des savoirs traditionnels ou encore pouvant être intégrées dans des traités internationaux en la matière, afin de rendre lesdits traités plus efficaces sur le plan pratique. Bien plus, ladite analyse démontre que l’Accord sur les aspects des droits de propriété intellectuelle qui touchent au commerce est actuellement l’accord le plus coercitif et le plus contraignant lorsque l’on veut mener une lutte efficace contre la biopiraterie. Par ailleurs, en s’appuyant sur des fondements théoriques constructivistes, notre analyse essaye de démontrer que les pays du Sud, riches en biodiversité et en savoirs traditionnels, peuvent véritablement impulser un mouvement en faveur d’une législation internationale efficace en matière de protection des savoirs traditionnels

Denominaciones territoriales agroalimentarias, políticas y gestión social: Argentina, Brasil y la experiencia española en el contexto europeo

This article examines the conceptual framework and the institutional context of the Geographical Indications and Social Management in Spain on the European Union space. Then, providing a comparative study, Argentina’s and Brazil’s cases are analyzed. The emphasis is on identity and territorial development, where family farming has a central role. Thereafter, public policy drawings and implementation are projected in order to strength concrete agenda and measures elaboration based on Spanish and European experiences’. In both the Argentinean and Brazilian cases, the conclusions point to the need of an adjustment on public policies to better situate and implement actions and objectives. In Brazil the disclosure, financing and strengthening of the Geographical Indications should be bounded to the Programa Territórios da Cidadania, linked to the Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário, which is the place of the family farming strengthening policies. In Argentina, with the same logic, the actions should be situated on the Programa Nacional de Apoyo al Desarrollo de los Territórios.

Rastreabilidade de camarão amazônico proveniente de cultivo e ambiente natural utilizando a técnica de isótopos estáveis

Pós-graduação em Aquicultura - FCAV

Indicações geográficas, produtos tradicionais e desenvolvimento territorial na Amazônia: um olhar sobre o projeto de indicação geográfica da farinha de Bragança

Investigar o potencial das Indicações Geográficas para a proteção de produtos da agrobiodiversidade, derivados de conhecimento tradicional, é o objetivo central deste trabalho acadêmico. Trata-se de uma análise de caso, a partir do projeto de Indicação Geográfica que está sendo desenvolvido para a farinha tradicionalmente produzida em Bragança, no estado do Pará. Foram realizadas pesquisas bibliográficas e de campo. A pesquisa bibliográfica, através da leitura de produções científicas, destinou-se a compreender os principais conceitos abordados neste trabalho, tais quais a noção de agrobiodiversidade, indicações geográficas, produtos de conhecimento tradicional e desenvolvimento territorial, além disso foram analisados documentos fornecidos por alguns dos atores envolvidos no processo de construção do projeto de Indicação Geográfica. A pesquisa de campo visou à coleta de informações sobre como o projeto está sendo desenvolvido e em que estágio se encontra. A partir dos estudos e da análise das informações coletadas em campo, chegou-se à conclusão de que, para a concretização da proteção de produtos da agrobiodiversidade, obtidos a partir de conhecimento tradicional, faz-se necessário que o projeto de Indicação Geográfica e sua gestão posterior estejam pautados em uma ideia de desenvolvimento territorial, vislumbrando os diversos aspectos que circundam o produto, sendo, pois, o registro da Indicação Geográfica uma consequência da observação das necessidades de toda a cadeia produtiva da farinha e da realidade da região que se pretende determinar como delimitação geográfica.