Europe’s GI Policy and New World Countries

Abstract

Trade negotiations between the European Union (EU) and Australia and New Zealand (NZ) provide the opportunity to revisit the ongoing clash between EU and New World ( United States of America (USA), Canada, Australia, NZ etc.) countries over geographical indications (GIs). Since the EU-Canada negotiations, the EU has increased its GI demands and the Australia and NZ negotiations provide the first opportunity to assess these. NZ has agreed to privileges that exceed those in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and has fewer safeguards for NZ producers than were achieved in Canada. The EU’s GI demands to Australia are scrutinized in terms of competition, rule of law and consumer information criteria, providing a basis for considering how Australia should respond. A particular focus is the problematic issues raised in the demand that specific GI names be listed in the treaty without proper review and opposition procedures. Questions are also raised about the accuracy of EU GI labels and the relative merit of EU GI policy compared to certification mark GIs to promote regional development. On this basis it is suggested that Australia should reject a number of the EU’s GI demands as these lead to approving product labels which are deceptive for consumers Geographical indications, European Union, trade policy, regional development, consumer Information, food labelling, intellectual property