Intellectual Property and Sustainable Development
Show Less

Intellectual Property and Sustainable Development

Development Agendas in a Changing World

Edited by Ricardo Meléndez-Ortiz and Pedro Roffe

This comprehensive book considers new and emerging IP issues from a development perspective, examining recent trends and developments in this area. Presenting an overview of the IP landscape in general, the contributing authors subsequently narrow their focus, providing wide-ranging case studies from countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America on topical issues in the current IP discourse. These include the impact of IP on the pharmaceutical sector, the protection of life forms and traditional knowledge, geographical indications, access to knowledge and public research institutes, and the role of competition policy. The challenges developing countries face in the TRIPS-Plus world are also explored in detail.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 11: Indications of Geographical Origin in Asia: Legal and Policy Issues to Resolve

Dwijen Rangnekar


Dwijen Rangnekar1 INTRODUCTION Geographical indications (GIs) are increasingly being seen as useful intellectual property rights for developing countries. This is because of their potential to localize economic control, promote rural socio-economic development and enable economic returns to holders of traditional knowledge. Some of these factors lie at the heart of the demand for stronger protection for products other than wines and spirits in the TRIPS Council (Rangnekar, 2003). Actualizing this latent potential within GIs, however, requires the development of complementary institutions and cooperation of all interested parties throughout the product’s supply chain; although there appears to be no singular and common pattern among successful GI products (Rangnekar, 2004). Unlike some provisions in the TRIPS Agreement, such as those concerning product patents in certain technology areas (for example, pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemicals under Article 65.4), the provisions for GIs do not allow for delayed implementation.2 The obligation under Section 3 (Part II) is non-specific, in that Articles 22 and 233 require the provision of ‘legal means’ for the protection of GIs to be available for ‘interested parties’.4 To be clear, the Agreement neither specifies the preferred legal means nor does it identify the range of legal options. Commentators suggest that this reflects the diverse range of legal means for the protection of indications of geographical origins (IGOs) existing at the time of the Uruguay Round negotiations (Knaak, 1996; Gervais, 1998; Watal, 2001).5 While this allows considerable room for manoeuvre – a principle supported by Article 1.1, which expressly states that Members...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.