top of page
Search

Geographical Indications and India's Agricultural Export Growth

  • 1 day ago
  • 6 min read

Introduction


In a world that is progressively heading towards conscious consumption, origin-based branding has become a significant variable in determining trade value. Consumers are increasingly aware and concerned to learn about where their food has been sourced, how it was grown, and the cultural meaning of it - all of which help define "origin". It is clear that, through "Geographical Indications", placing emphasis on how a product is seldom merely a commodity - it is a story based upon where it is from and is part of a sense of place.With it's varied Agro-climatic zones, centuries of farming techniques and indigenous agricultural knowledge, India holds vast potential for products with a competitive GI advantage. Not only has India had commercially successful GIs such as Darjeeling Tea, Basmati Rice, and Kashmiri Saffron, the broader possibilities within Indian GI potential as part of India's natural agricultural export strategy are yet to be uncovered. The aim of this blog is to explore the legal basis, trade implications, judicial precedents, policy processes, and worldwide comparisons for why GIs deserve a primary role in India's agri-export perspective.

 

Legal Framework Governing Geographical Indications in India


In India, the legal system that governs GI protection has been given effect by the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, which came to force on 2003. The Act was enacted in order to give effect to India's obligations under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) with respect to Articles 22 to 24.


Important provisions


  • Section 2(1)(e) defines GIs as signs identifying goods as originating in a specific region where the quality, reputation or other characteristics of the goods are essentially attributable to their geographical origin.[i]

  • Section 11 permits registration by producer groups or associations or organizations.

  • Section 22 outlines how a GI can be infringed upon with remedies like damages and injunctions.


  • GIs provide a registration for a period of ten years that can be continued forever.

  • The GIs Registry operates under the administration of the Controller General of Patent,

    Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) and the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), and sets out unique legal provisions distinct from trademarks and which confirm that the use of a GI is both locational and quality related to the product. However, India is not yet a party to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement which allows for an international filing system for GIs. This means that each GI would need to be registered separately in each foreign market which could be troublesome for a large project or for financial aspects.


 

The Economic Value of GIS in Agri-Exports


1. Brand Recognition and Market Premium


GI products enjoy consumer confidence in the marketplace, especially in certain markets like the European Union, Japan, and the Middle East. GI products also earn premium prices for their assured origin, quality, and traceability of sometimes 20-30% higher[ii].

The reason being Indian Basmati rice maintains a strong presence in the international export market for aromatic rice is due to long grain, aroma, and brand association. GI status also helps Alphonso Mangoes from Maharashtra, become more known as luxury fruit in UAE, USA, and Japan and realise bigger prices.


2. Legal Assertion of Identity Abroad


India has successfully defended its GI rights in international forums. For example, in the RiceTec case (USA), India challenged RiceTec’s patents on so-called rice varieties purportedly called “Texmati” and “Kasmati,” and after protracted legal procedures and diplomatic intervention, RiceTec surrendered its claims.[iii] Most recently, India challenged Pakistan’s unilateral attempt to register Basmati rice as a GI in its own name in the European Union in 2020. The EU recognized Basmati rice as having shared heritage from India and Pakistan in 2021, which should be celebrated as a diplomatic victory and an affirmation of India’s agro-IP rights.[iv]


3. Inclusive Rural Development


The case for GI-based exports emphasizes the notion of inclusive growth. In its 2019 report, the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), found that farmers who produced GI products earned 15 – 20% more than comparable farmers.[v] GIs, along with providing a route to formally establish producer groups, for example:


  • Kandhamal Haldi (Odisha) produced by tribal groups.

  • Erode Turmeric (Tamil Nadu), which is coordinated and marketed through an FPO.

  • Waigaon Turmeric (Maharashtra), noted for its curcumin.

 

Judicial Precedents and Legal Interpretations


While not abundant, these instances of jurisprudence originating from India, concerning GIs, show what the courts consider as the relationship between reputation, origin, and commercial use.


Tea Board, India v. ITC Ltd. (2011) - The Tea Board objected to ITC using "Darjeeling Lounge" for a bar. The Calcutta High Court held that there was no misrepresentation because hospitality (the service at issue) had nothing to do with tea.[vi] Overall, this decision demonstrated that context is important and that GI protection does not automatically extend across unrelated industries.


Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Scotch Whisky Association (2008) [vii]- The Supreme Court held that a connection to the origin has to be established for GI protection. This decision confirmed that it is not an infringement based on the name alone, unless it would confuse consumers.

 

Government Policy and Institutional Initiatives


Agricultural Export Policy (2018)


India's Agricultural Export Policy sees GIs as opportunities for diversification and branding opportunities. Key proposals are:


  • GI related export promotion zones.

  • Capacity building taking place through APEDA structures and GI facilitation cells in the state.

  • Diversifying engagement to include (to some extent) tribal and rural producers groups in export scheme relating to GIs.


One District One Product (ODOP)


The ODOP modality is not GI related, but has a fair amount of overlap with the many GI registered products currently. For example, saffron (Jammu and Kashmir), Banarasi Sarees, Mizo Chilli could be developed as an ODOP and GI linked product and create additional marketing opportunities/ funding.


Digital India and GIs


They have also started promoting GIs using ecommerce sites such as Amazon, Flipkart and GeM (Government e-Marketplace). DPIIT and APEDA have both set up portals and are using the maps they developed for GIs also to encourage interactions between buyers and producers.


Challenges in Realizing Gi Potential


In spite of these opportunities, India faces a series of bottlenecks:


  1. Awareness at the Grassroots level is Low: Most small holders will not know about the benefits of GI or about the application for registration.

  2. Post-Harvest Infrastructure lacking: There are insufficient cold chains, quality testing labs, and packaging centres in rural belts.

  3. International Protection lacking: The non-member status of treaties makes it difficult to enforce internationally.

  4. Weak enforcement: Counterfeit GI products, especially on online platforms like Amazon, is nearly impossible to police - notice from the EU/US helps but can be both selective and broad.

  5. Broken governance: Duplication across agencies - DPIIT, APEDA, FSSAI - even departments within the ministry create confusion in policy.

 

Global Best Practices: Lessons for India


Global Best Practices: Implications for India Through countries like France, Italy and Japan have deeply embedded GI governance.


  • France has the INAO (National Institute of Origin and Quality) responsible for over 350 GIs with GIs such as Champagne and Roquefort.

  • Italy has powerful producer cooperatives which are managing products such as Parmigiano Reggiano.

  • Japan's GI law (2014) integrated agricultural extension services with GI training and a registration system. India can consider:

  • Establishing a National GI Promotion Council.

  • Negotiating bilateral GI recognition treaties through FTAs (free trade agreements).

  • Investigating the possibility of providing legal aid and co-funding to support new international GI registrations.

     

Moving Ahead: Recommendations


  1. Accede to the Geneva Act - Acceding to the Lisbon Agreement and allow India to submit one application for international GI protection in over 30 countries.

  2. Phase out - Producer education and increase skills in documentation, packaging and legal literacy.

  3. Digital enforcement assistive technologies - Use AI and blockchain to track online abuses of GI.

  4. Link GIs to Climate + Organic agenda - Products grown under sustainable conditions could have a dual cert GI + Organic.

  5. Public private partnerships (PPP) - Encourage branding partnerships between rural cooperatives and private exporters.

 

Conclusion


Geographical Indications are a blend of law, culture, commerce, and popular action. In a world marketplace that is obsessed with origin, GIs can provide India not only with improved agricultural returns but also socio-economic and international branding possibilities.

India's ability to be a value-based food exporter will depend on how well the country integrates legally enforced GIs with supply chain reform, global and domestic marketing, and the empowerment of producers. With the right policies and funding, GIs could serve to be more than just an IP small-scale option but to serve as an integral component, if not pillar, to India's Agri-exports structure.


Author: Irshad Ahmed, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at  Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.


1.      [i] The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, § 2(1)(e) (India).

2.      [ii] Agric. & Processed Food Prod. Export Dev. Auth., GI-Based Export Value Chains Report, Ministry of Com. & Indus., Gov’t of India (2021).

3.      [iii] Press Release, Gov’t of India, Basmati Protection in U.S. (2001).

4.      [iv] India Wins Basmati GI Battle Against Pakistan in EU, Hindu Bus. Line (Jan. 12, 2021), https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/india-wins-basmati-gi-battle-against-pakistan-in-eu/article33556371.ece.

5.      [v] Indian Council for Research on Int’l Econ. Rels., Socio-Economic Benefits of GI Tagging in India (2019).

6.      [vi] Tea Bd., India v. ITC Ltd., (2011) 2 CHN 66 (Cal.).

7.      [vii] Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Scotch Whisky Ass’n, (2008) 10 S.C.C. 723 (India).

 

 
 
 
bottom of page