Abstract
In this study, we clarify the motivation for applying for regional collective trademarks (RCTs) and the effects perceived by the right holders of wood and forest products. We further examine the historical contexts and social circumstances of production regions with RCT registrations. A survey of eight right holders, including forestry associations that applied for RCTs, was conducted in this study. We obtained a sufficient quantity of perception data for comparisons across different production sites. The primary motivations of forest associations applying for RCTs were preventing counterfeit goods and improving awareness and familiarity. It was identified that the relative lengths of the brand histories have impacted the current branding strategies, including the motives for RCT applications. In terms of the perceived effects of RCTs, four RCT right holders perceived the former positive effect of preventing counterfeit goods, and seven perceived the latter positive effect of improving awareness and familiarity. All of the forest associations intend to renew their RCTs. The primary motivation of the RCT holders is not price enhancement. It remains to be seen whether the RCT brands can differentiate themselves to consumers and constructors in terms of quality or brand stories.
Highlights
Background and PurposeA number of rural development activities have been implemented to correct economic imbalances in rural areas worldwide towards global sustainability
With the first research question, we explore the relationship between the motivations for and perceived effects of regional collective trademarks (RCTs) and examine if they differ across products and production sites with different historical backgrounds
We present the options that the forestry associations chose as their primary motivations for their RCT applications
Summary
Background and PurposeA number of rural development activities have been implemented to correct economic imbalances in rural areas worldwide towards global sustainability. Measures like subsidies and direct support for products are sensitive issues in terms of free trade agreements. Governments and enterprises, including those at the local level, are exploring measures to differentiate and brand their products, such as the “one village, one product” movement, which is mainly for agricultural products. Japan is not an exception, and competitive product development and packages are a high priority for the government. Regional branding has become an issue in order to differentiate local special products for the purpose of rural development [1]. As part of the national strategy, branding strategies and the utilization of intellectual property, including the use of trademarks, are promoted for the field of agriculture, forestry, and fishery [2]
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.
