ABSTRACT

The present research explores the complicated backdrop of Geographical Indications

(GIs) in India, looking at their successes, difficulties, and potential. GIs have important
ramifications for the economy, society, and culture. They are an essential tool for
protecting the distinctive characteristics of products peculiar to a given region. The
paper clarifies the processes and effects on stakeholders of the Geographical Indication
Board, highlighting its crucial role in the registration, preservation, and promotion of
GIs. The GI system in India faces a number of obstacles despite its noteworthy
achievements, including limited consumer and producer knowledge, insufficient
enforcement tools, and unfinished legislative work. This paper offers a thorough
examination of a number of GI goods, including Mysore silk and Darjeeling tea, to
highlight their significance and the advantages they offer to local communities. Using
direct data and a study of the literature, the paper identifies important issues and
proposes actionable recommendations. These consist of raising awareness campaigns,
bolstering law enforcement, modifying legal restrictions, and providing producers with
financial and technical assistance. The paper also underlines how important it is for
nations to work together in order to support the worldwide recognition and protection of
Indian GIs. The report concludes by highlighting the need for a strong GI framework in
order to optimize the cultural and economic advantages of GIs. The intended
modifications seek to address present issues and provide a more functional and inclusive
GI system, thereby advancing India's economic growth and cultural preservation.

Keywords: Geographical Indication, distinctive characteristics, preservation, cultural

preservation and economic advantage.

3
1. INTRODUCTION
The history of Geographical Indication is not very old and its significance has grown
substantially over the past few decades. Although there was no formal legal recognition but
goods and products have been famous since the centuries like spices, indigo, china pots and with
the advent of proper technology and development of the World Trade Organisation and
agreements entered into under its aegis during the late 20th Century, the Geographical Indication
got recognition. It can be presumed that the expression ‘appellations of origin’ is the precursor of
the expression ‘geographical indication’.1 The very legal concept of geographical indication as a
form of IP can be traced from the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property,
1883.2
Despite the fact that indications of sources and appellation of origin were in existence for some
time, geographical indication got a distinct recognition and identity as a separate branch of IP
only with the conclusion of TRIPS.3
Geographical indications are covered by a number of treaties overseen by the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO), such as the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations
of Origin and their International Registration 1958 and the Paris Convention for the Protection of
Industrial Property 1883. Furthermore, the TRIPS Agreement's Articles 22 through 24 address

1
These terms are not synonyms. The terms indication of source, appellation of origin and geographical indications
have distinct connotations. Any geographical sign (word or symbol) used to indicate that a product or service
originates in a given country/region/place can be treated as an Indication of Source while an Appellation of Origin is
any geographical sign (word or symbol) used to indicate that a product or service originates in a given
country/region/place and its quality and characteristics are exclusively or essentially due to the geographical
environment. While to qualify as an appellation of origin the product must necessarily have its characteristics and
quality linked with the geography, in case of indication of source, it is not necessary that the product must has
quality/reputation linked to the geographical origin. A geographical indication has the elements of both indication of
source and appellation of origin plus the elements of reputation. A GI need not be a geographical name as per TRIPS
definition – e.g., Basmati or Alphonso are not geographical names, but are still GIs. A GI consisting of a
country/region/area, must serve to designate a product originating in the country/region/area referred to and there
must be significant qualitative link between the product and the geographical area. But under TRIPS, indications of
sources whose use on products does not imply a particular quality, reputation or characteristic of those products are
not covered by the definition of GI. In this sense, indication of source is a broadest term comprising both
geographical Indication and appellation of origin. Indications of source only require that the product on which it is
used originate in a certain geographical area. Geographical indications are more broadly defined than appellations of
origin. In other words, all appellations of origin are geographical indications, but some geographical indications are
not appellations of origin.
2
Lukose, Lisa P. Rationale and Prospects of the Protection of Geographical Indication: An Inquiry. 7 Nov. 2006,
docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/CB4FFCFA-3EED-4232-9174-CEED00B5B56F.pdf. Accessed 5 Aug.
2024.
3
Srivastava Suresh , Geographical indications and legal framework in India, Economic and Political Weekly, 20
September 2003, pp 4022-4033.

4
the minimal requirements of protection and deal with the international protection of GIs within
the context of the World Trade Organisation.4
The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 was passed by
India, a World Trade Organisation member, and it went into effect on September 15, 2003. Until
this, no legislation existed for the same. Prior to this the GIs were governed by Common Law
Principles.5 By giving GIs pertaining to goods legal protection, the Act bans unapproved use of
GIs that have been registered.

4
Lukose, Lisa P. Rationale and Prospects of the Protection of Geographical Indication: An Inquiry. 7 Nov. 2006,
docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/CB4FFCFA-3EED-4232-9174-CEED00B5B56F.pdf. Accessed 5 Aug.
2024.
5

5
1.1 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The current study is extremely significant considering it aims to identify the process of allocation
of GI Tag the lacunas that exist therein and the decision making process regarding the same and
its impact on the economy as a whole. It plays a pivotal role in economic empowerment, cultural
preservation, legal rights, awareness and advocacy.

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The study aims to look into the current state and importance of Geographical Indications (GI) in
India, evaluate the functions and difficulties faced by the GI Board, investigate the characteristics
and effects of products tagged with GI, pinpoint weaknesses and problems in the GI system, and
make suggestions for enhancements and future policy directions.

1.3 CONTEMPORARY LEGAL RELEVANCE

Geographical Indications (GI) have legal significance today because they safeguard the
distinctive character and caliber of goods unique to a given area, guard against abuse and
imitation, generate revenue for nearby communities, conserve cultural assets, comply with
international IP laws, and support sustainable development.

1.4 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

1.5 RESEARCH QUESTION
The Research Questions for this study are:
1. How well does India's current Geographical Indications (GI) system support economic
development, safeguard legal protection, and preserve cultural heritage?
2. What has to be improved to solve the obstacles and inadequacies in its application and
enforcement?

1.6 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The Geographical Indication has ample amount of potential in a culturally and geographically
diverse country like India however, the lack of awareness among the producers, consumers and

6
weavers in some cases prevents them from utilizing any benefits. The current system is
ineffective and susceptible to counterfeit and misuse by the parties. This study seeks to identify
gaps in the system and suggest possible recommendations and policy changes which can be
introduced in India.

1.7 HYPOTHESIS
This research paper's hypothesis is that, despite the Geographical Indications (GI) system's
enormous potential to foster economic development and safeguard cultural heritage in India, its
efficacy is presently hampered by a lack of knowledge, insufficient legal protection, difficulties
with enforcement, and obstacles in the market. Improving market access, raising stakeholder and
public knowledge, and strengthening the legal framework can all greatly increase the system's
advantages and efficacy.

1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1.9 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study delves deeply into the Geographical Indications (GI) system in India, emphasizing its
aspects related to law, culture, and economy. It assesses the GI Board's function, examines the
characteristics and effects of different GI-tagged products, and notes problems like lack of
knowledge, difficulties with law enforcement, and obstacles in the market. The report makes
suggestions for improving the GI framework and encouraging environmentally friendly
behaviors. The research is constrained, though, by the lack of data on specific GI products,
possible biases in case studies, and the dynamic nature of the legal and commercial systems, all
of which could eventually alter how applicable the findings are.