Mitigating ‘One-Size-Fits-All’ approaches to Australian agriculture: Is there a case to be made for Geographical Indications?
Date of this Version
978-3-319-53072-7 (Print); 978-3-319-53073-4 (Electronic)
Australia has been consistently opposed to extending Geographical Indications of Origin in Australian agriculture beyond their limited current application to wine. Such opposition has arisen largely because GIs have been viewed through the lens of international trade gains and losses and the subsequent contribution of these trade gains and losses to the collective wealth of the nation. GIs have not been considered in the Australian context for their potential to enhance the economic and social fabric of regional, rural and remote places, as has been the case in other nations. Such ‘rural enhancement’ considerations internationally, and particularly in Europe, have been an important part of the GI narrative. This chapter considers GIs in the Australian context from this perspective. We firstly outline the historical development of GIs and Australia’s response; and then provide an overview of Australian agricultural policy and operating environment that subsequently contextualizes two case studies. The first case study provides an in-depth look at the wine-GI experience and impact in Australia and the second provides a speculative analysis of the potential impact of GIs in a specific region. We conclude with insights into the ways in which GIs may well be contingently beneficial as tools for regional development in the Australian context.
This document is currently not available here.
This document has been peer reviewed.