---

On September 20, Stephanie Henning, a transatlantic fellow of the German Marshall Fund based in Brussels, presented her research and analysis on Geographic Indications (GIs) in luncheon discussion entitled, "Beyond Culture and Rights: Geographical Indications and Economic Interests in the Doha Round," at a luncheon discussion in GMF’s Washington, DC office.

GIs are indications which identify goods – mostly agricultural products, although not limited to them – “as originating in a specific territory of a WTO Member country, region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin.” For example, Roquefort cheese, Darjeeling tea, Tennessee whiskey, and Parma ham.

Ms. Henning first laid out the background and significance of GIs as a both a cultural issue and as a transatlantic trade issue – the desire to utilize GIs originated in Europe. She then discussed what was at stake in the extension of these geographical protections in the current round of trade negotiations. Ms. Henning explored the current debate on the extension and examined the political pressures and economic potential involved for ‘Old World’ and ‘New World’ governments. Europe is the biggest user of GIs, already with 5,000 protected names, and has the most to gain from their extension. EU trade officials stated that securing GIs protections for their producers is an imperative, especially in the face of looming Common Agricultural Policy reform. To a greater extent, Europeans firmly believe that place name and product identification add value for producers, in addition to providing a future for European farmers, who increasingly cannot compete successfully in bulk commodities.

While the actual value of GIs is connected to those products with the longest history of association with quality, the true and wider economic value is not well studied. In fact, the costs and benefits to the developing countries and their products have not yet been studied, and Ms. Henning was skeptical that new GIs will be valuable to those countries at all. Because the extension issue will not be major impediment to the final resolution of Doha trade negotiations, she expressed concern that it will likely be decided quickly and after other issues have been resolved, as it was in the Uruguay Round. This may result in developing countries agreeing to the extension, which they believed to be beneficial, when in fact it may only be worthwhile for in Europe, or possibly the United States.

Following her presentation, Ms. Henning engaged in a lively dialogue, particularly with the participants who strongly support GI extension.

Ms. Henning will release a law review article on this subject in 2006.