Abstract
In an attempt to capture a greater share of the symbolic value of coffee in the market, some producers have started to safeguard the geographical names of specific origins through Geographical Indications in their home country, and then subsequently registering Protected Geographical Indications (PGI) under European Union (EU) law. To enable effective value capture, such initiatives require successful collective action. We explain how the need for collective action has manifested within four coffee Protected Geographical Indications in Colombia, Indonesia and Thailand (2 cases). Based on the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework developed by Elinor Ostrom, we examine the cases following a common analytical approach, encompassing: i) contextual setting of product and territory; ii) actors involved; iii) institutional arrangements and action arena; and iv) the outcome of these arrangements. The cases involved a diversity of applicants including a producer association (Colombia), a social foundation and a private company (Thailand), and a government-supported consortium (Indonesia). The process of institutionalizing the GI required powerful, and well-resourced actors to assume a lead role resulting in relatively little participation from actual producers themselves. Therefore, this does not truly satisfy the IAD requirements for effective collective action, such compliance with the EU requirement for collective action was mainly observed as an administrative formality. The design of guiding rules for collective action processes are seen to significantly affect their effectiveness and the distribution of any benefits generated. This article emphasizes how this design is shaped by the positionality and particular interests of the actors involved, their different capacity to exert power and influence, their diverse attitudes towards moral legitimacy, and varying relationships with external actors such as development agents, research organizations and state agencies.
Highlights
Collective action is carried out by a group to pursue the members’ shared interests (Scott and Marshall 2009)
We aim to understand the role of collective action and the nature of governance structures followed by producer groups for Protected Geographical Indications (PGI) in the coffee sector through a cross-country comparative study
Based on the work done by Quiñones-Ruiz et al (2016), and drawing upon Ostrom’s IAD framework, we present the four cases through the following common analytical approach: i) contextual setting of product and territory; ii) actors involved in the collective action institutional arrangements3 and action arena where collective action efforts are designed and effected; and iv) the outcome of these arrangements for collective action
Summary
Collective action is carried out by a group to pursue the members’ shared interests (Scott and Marshall 2009). Daviron and Ponte (2005) emphasized how value was increasingly embedded in the symbolic quality and in-person services (intangible quality attributes) of coffee This implies that producers need to assume greater control of these immaterial or in-person means of quality production rather than selling a highly commercialized and standardized product (Samper et al 2017) and this has manifested in various attempts at product differentiation, some of which are producer-driven (Fischer 2017; Jaffee 2007). These attempts include voluntary sustainability and quality standards such as Fairtrade, Organic, and Rainforest Alliance, and include Geographical Indications (GIs) and producer involvement in “Cup of Excellence” events (Neilson et al 2018; Quiñones-Ruiz et al 2015; Teuber 2010)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
