IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geographical indication protection and rural livelihoods: insights from India and Thailand


  • Pradyot Ranjan Jena
  • Chuthaporn Ngokkuen
  • Dil Bahadur Rahut
  • Ulrike Grote


type="main"> The paper synthesises the results from empirical case studies undertaken in India and Thailand on the welfare impacts of geographical indications (GIs). The findings indicate a positive effect from GI protection on the well-being of farm households and rural poverty. GI protection also preserves the traditional knowledge embedded in a GI good as well as the traditional heritage of the locality that produces the good. The findings support the call for stronger intellectual property rights protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Pradyot Ranjan Jena & Chuthaporn Ngokkuen & Dil Bahadur Rahut & Ulrike Grote, 2015. "Geographical indication protection and rural livelihoods: insights from India and Thailand," Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government, The Australian National University, vol. 29(1), pages 174-185, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:apacel:v:29:y:2015:i:1:p:174-185

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Maria Luz Loureiro & Jill J. McCluskey, 2000. "Assessing consumer response to protected geographical identification labeling," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 309-320.
    2. Luisa Menapace & GianCarlo Moschini, 2012. "Quality certification by geographical indications, trademarks and firm reputation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 39(4), pages 539-566, September.
    3. Daniel Hassan & Sylvette Monier-Dilhan, 2006. "National brands and store brands: Competition through public quality labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 21-30.
    4. Sergio H. Lence & Stéphan Marette & Dermot J. Hayes & William Foster, 2007. "Collective Marketing Arrangements for Geographically Differentiated Agricultural Products: Welfare Impacts and Policy Implications," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 947-963.
    5. Daniel Pick, 2008. "Geographical Indications and the Competitive Provision of Quality in Agricultural Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(3), pages 794-812.
    6. Giovannucci, Daniele & Josling, Timothy & Kerr, William & O'Connor, Bernard & Yeung, May T., 2009. "Guide to Geographical Indications: Linking Products and Their Origins (Summary)," MPRA Paper 27955, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    8. Sven Anders & Stanley Thompson & Roland Herrmann, 2009. "Markets segmented by regional-origin labelling with quality control," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 311-321.
    9. Pradyot R. Jena & Ulrike Grote, 2010. "Changing Institutions to Protect Regional Heritage: A Case for Geographical Indications in the Indian Agrifood Sector," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 28(2), pages 217-236, March.
    10. Jena, Pradyot R. & Grote, Ulrike, 2012. "Impact Evaluation of Traditional Basmati Rice Cultivation in Uttarakhand State of Northern India: What Implications Does It Hold for Geographical Indications?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1895-1907.
    11. George J. Stigler, 1961. "The Economics of Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69, pages 213-213.
    12. Zago, Angelo M. & Pick, Daniel H., 2004. "Labeling Policies in Food Markets: Private Incentives, Public Intervention, and Welfare Effects," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 29(01), April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:apacel:v:29:y:2015:i:1:p:174-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.