Actes de la Conférence > Contributions par auteur > Casabianca François

The limits of inclusion in Geographical Indications – Should we exclude any exclusion?
François Casabianca  1, *@  , Delphine Marie-Vivien  2@  
1 : Systèmes d\'élevage méditerranéens et tropicaux  (UMR SELMET)  -  Site web
Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement : UMR112, Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement : UMR0868, Institut Agro Montpellier
TA C-112 / A - Campus international de Baillarguet ou Avenue Agropolis 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5, France -  France
2 : Innovation et Développement dans lÁgriculture et lÁlimentation  (UMR Innovation)  -  Site web
Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement : UMR85-2007, Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement : UMR0951, Institut Agro Montpellier
A lÍNRA : Campus La Gaillarde – 2 place Viala – Bat 27 - 34060 Montpellier Cedex 02Au CIRAD : Campus Lavalette – TA-85/15 – 73, rue J.F. Breton - 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5A lÍRC : 1101, avenue Agropolis - BP 5098 - 34093 MONTPELLIER Cedex 05 -  France
* : Auteur correspondant

Inclusion is a great worth of our time, addressing inequalities within our societies. It legitimately becomes a permanent injunction for public policies. However, we observe that, beyond the exclusive use of the protected name, exclusion plays a core role in designing and implementing geographical indications (GI).

What role does exclusion play in the conception of GI? Should we track down any form of exclusion and seek to eliminate it? We aim to answer these questions by mobilizing our large experiences on GIs.

Analyzing GIs, we observe a series of exclusions. In the productive sphere, the specifications frame the conditions producers must respect. At first, the area delimitation introduces a boundary among neighboring producers. Then choosing rules for product elaboration lead to exclusions among producers with (i) resources whose access may be unequal and (ii) practices chosen among those present locally. In addition, GI governance modalities can constitute internal barriers against some types of producers (small producers, poorly organized or dispersed) in favor of others more powerful or with higher social capital. In the consumption sphere, exclusion arise from (i) the price level GI food is sold selecting the buyers and (ii) the targeted markets generally outside the production area depriving the usual local users of these foods and affecting their cultural affiliation.

Is removing all these exclusions in the name of inclusion making sense? It seems necessary to distinguish exclusions necessary for the functioning of any place-based sign and harmful exclusions endangering coherence of the GI cohesion and solidarity of local actors. Delimiting an area is a necessity and including the neighbors would ultimately lead to making the name generic. Similarly, setting production rules helps to give food its unique characteristics and if the rules were too weak in order to be more inclusive, they could no longer provide the guarantees essential to the food recognition. In addition, in order to ensure purchase by as many people as possible, one can seek to maintain low prices, which implies reducing requirements for reducing costs or make economies of scale by concentrating production in very large units. GIs doing so adopt the least demanding rules and their justification is the weakest.

At the opposite, delimiting a too small area, or choosing scarce resources and very demanding practices in non-mechanizable work without worrying about the viability of production units, or exporting all GI product outside the area depriving local connoisseurs, may be all forms of fragility. Thus, pushing the necessary exclusions to excessive levels jeopardizes the GI system in the long term. The ambition linked to GIs should lead to adequate measures for ensuring good internal inclusion in the area, for example by supporting producers ready to gradually implement stronger rules. Similarly, governance can also target local consumers, children in canteens, fairs and markets in the area for enhancing food typicity.

Finally, exclusion in GIs should be thought both as an absolute necessity ontologically linked to any origin sign and as a regulatory requirement at the heart of governance ethical issues.

Personnes connectées : 1 Vie privée