CC BY
27
РЕГИОНАЛЬНЫЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫРАЗВИТИЯ ТУРИСТСКОГО СЕРВИСА
REGIONAL ISSUES OF TOURISM SERVICE
UDC 338.48 EDN: HYPVVJ DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7423012
Mirna de Lima MEDEIROS
Ponta Grossa State University / UEPG (Ponta Grossa, Parana, Brazil)
Center for Studies in Strategic Management of Tourism Marketing (MarkTur / UEPG); Center for Studies in
Management and Contemporary Public Policy, University of Sao Paulo (GPublic / USP)
PhD in Organizational Management, Professor; e-mail: mirnadelimamedeiros@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-7198-9835
Hellen Vitória SILVA
Ponta Grossa State University / UEPG (Ponta Grossa, Parana, Brazil)
Center for Studies in Strategic Management of Tourism Marketing (MarkTur / UEPG);
Undergraduate student of Tourism; e-mail: helvitsil@hotmail.com, OCIRD: 0000-0002-8279-5075
Augusta Pelinski RAIHER
Ponta Grossa State University / UEPG (Ponta Grossa, Parana, Brazil)
Regional Economics and Public Policies Centre (NEREPP/UEPG);
PhD in Economics, Professor; e-mail: apelinski@gmail.com, ORCID: 0000-0001-9542-0689
USE OF BRAZILIAN GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS IN TOURISM: APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Abstract. Services and products (agri-food, mineral, handcrafting, or industrial) from a specific place are linked to the place historical-cultural-environmental context. When there is a very close link of the goods/service to the place that renders it notoriety or specificities, these might be recognized as Geographical Indications (GIs). By bearing the territory's name and other immaterial aspects, the GI is naturally assimilated to the region and related activities such as tourism might develop. This tourism application occurs and is studied in several countries. However, in Brazil, this research is limited to particular cases. This raised the question whether (and how) a broader use in tourism exists, thus, we sought to verify whether and how geographical indications are allied to tourism in Brazil. To achieve this aim, we promoted a theoretical discussion related to GIs and tourism, and also collected data using an online questionnaire that was sent to representative entities of Brazilian geographical indications known at the time of the development of this study. We obtained 55 replies that were investigated using descriptive statistics, correlations, and content analysis. Our results revealed tourism activities related to some national GIs. On the other hand, there are some registered, but without effective use (due to lack of structure, articulations, or resources). Another finding pointed out the need to disseminate the theme among tourists and producers in general, aiming at the GI valuation and implementation of actions that promote their use as an asset.
Funding information: Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) - CNPq; Fundagao Ar-aucária de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico do Estado do Paraná (Arau-cária Foundation for Scientific and Technological Development of Paraná State) - FA.
Keywords: geographical indications, tourism, basket of territorial goods and services, Brazil
Citation: Medeiros, M. de L., Silva, H. V., & Raiher, A. P. (2022). Use of Brazilian geographical indications in tourism: Applications and implications. Sovremennye problemy servisa i turizma [Service and Tourism: Current Challenges], 16(3), 51-70. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7423012.
Article History
Received 9 June 2022 Accepted 20 November 2022
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
© 2022 the Author(s)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
УДК 338.48 EDN: HYPVVJ DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7423012
МЕДЕЙРОС Мирна де Лима
Государственный университет Понта-Гросса / UEPG (Понта-Гросса, Парана, Бразилия) Центр исследований в области стратегического управления туристическим маркетингом (MarkTur/UEPG); Центр исследований в области управления и современной государственной политики Университета Сан-Паулу (GPublic / USP); кандидат менеджмента, профессор ORCID: 0000-0002-7198-9835
СИЛЬВА Хеллен Витория
Государственный университет Понта-Гросса / UEPG (Понта-Гросса, Парана, Бразилия) Центр исследований в области стратегического управления туристическим маркетингом (MarkTur/UEPG); аспирант; e-mail: helvitsil@hotmail.com, OCIRD: 0000-0002-8279-5075
РАЙХЕР Августа Пелински
Государственный университет Понта-Гросса / UEPG (Понта-Гросса, Парана, Бразилия)
Центр региональной экономики и общественной политики (NEREPP / UEPG);
кандидат экономических наук, профессор; e-mail: apelinski@gmail.com, ORCID: 0000-0001-9542-0689
ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЕ БРАЗИЛЬСКИХ ГЕОГРАФИЧЕСКИХ БРЕНДОВ В ТУРИЗМЕ: ПРАКТИКА И РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ
Услуги и продукты (агропродовольственные, минеральные, ремесленные или промышленные), произведенные в конкретной местности, связаны и обусловлены с её историческим, культурным и экологическим контекстом. Когда связь товара/услуги с местом производства очень тесная и придает известность как территории, так и произведенным в её пределах продуктам, то последняя может рассматриваться как географический бренд. Географические бренды отражают название территории, ее особенности и свойства, и в результате не только выступают ассоциациями, но способствуют развитию разных видов туризма. Феномен географических брендов привлекает к себе внимание и активно изучается в разных странах. Однако в Бразилии эта тематика изучена слабо, в основном на примере нескольких частных географических брендов. Это даёт возможность поднять вопрос о том, как географические бренды влияют на развитие туризма в Бразилии. Для достижения этой цели авторами изучен теоретический базис туристского брендинга территорий и локальных территориальных брендов, а также проведено онлайн-анкетирование представителей отдельных бразильских «брендовых» объектов, известных на момент проведения настоящего исследования. Полученные 55 ответов исследованы с помощью описательной статистики, корреляций и контент-анализа, в результате чего была установлена связь между наличием и спецификой географических брендов и уровнем развития туризма на их территориях. Еще одним результатом исследования стало выявление географических брендов, которые слабо влияют, либо не влияют вообще на развитие туризма, что обусловлено разными причинами - отсутствием грамотного управления, продвижения, их слабой известностью, неконкурентоспособностью и пр. Поэтому необходимо популяризировать географические бренды как инструмент развития туризма среди практиков и исследователей.
Ключевые слова: географические бренды, туризм, корзина территориальных товаров и услуг, Бразилия
Для цитирования: Медейрос М. де Л., Сильва Х.В., Райхер А.П. Использование бразильских географических брендов в туризме: практика и результаты // Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма. 2022. Т.16. №3. С. 51-70. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7423012.
Дата поступления в редакцию: 9 июня 2022 г. Дата утверждения в печать: 20 ноября 2022 г.
1. Introduction
Geographical indications (GIs) consist of products and services that became famous or are qualitatively characterized by the place where they come from (BRASIL, 1996; SEBRAE & INPI, 2019; World Trade Organization, 1995). Historically, several peoples distinguish and advertise certain goods according to their origin. However, after some people/companies tried to benefit from the other's fame (associating their goods to a certain region, which was not their actual origin, for example) it was necessary to protect GIs (Almeida et al.,
2014).
Although the initial aim is to control the use of these denominations, the distinctive seals (belonging to industrial property in Brazil) might have a market function (for differentiating and pricing the items, etc.) and be considered collective territorial assets of public interest (Arfini et al., 2019; Medeiros & Passa-dor, 2022). Therefore, when the territorial name is highlighted, to value a good or service, the region can be equally valued, as well as its tourism offers and attractions.
The disclosing, organization, and exploration of such geographical resources might transform them in assets for several activities (Cazella et al., 2020). This study focused on the tourism industry. Several authors indicate the potential of tourism implementation associated with a product with GI, mainly in gastronomic tourism (Coelho-Costa, 2019; De La Torre et al., 2014; Hadelan et al., 2021; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Pamukgu et al., 2021; Pasli & Akbaba, 2019; Vieira & Soares, 2019), agricultural tourism (Airriess, 2020; Lis-Gutierrez et al., 2017; Sidali et al., 2016; Vieira & Soares, 2019), and rural tourism (Lopes et al., 2021, Vieira & Soares, 2019). Other segments investigated were those linked to specific items such as Enotourism (Pellin & Vieira,
2015), tea-tourism (Besky, 2014), oil-tourism (Cehic et al., 2020), and even ham-tourism (Jiménez et al., 2019; Millán Vázquez De La Torre et al., 2016).
Another aspect to be highlighted is the technological manufacture process in industrial tourism in GIs, where the manufacture or
the technical evolution is emphasized, even if handcrafted (Sato & Kohsaka, 2017). The tourism offer structure can also be favored by approaching other resources to the goods marked with the GI. Kullberg et al. (2014), for example, pointed out the viability of developing geo-tourism linked to the wine of certain region, since the local geology influences the drink. Coelho-Costa and Coriolano (2017) highlighted the eno-gastronomic tourism by connecting the local cuisine with the local wine making. Landscape, biodiversity, specific knowledge, rural and adventurous activities, and even geology (Jaelani et al., 2020; Kullberg et al., 2014; Kurokawa, 2013; Narciso et al., 2020) can be linked to those products or services creating a particular territorial basket.
GIs can be employed before, during, and after the trips, in isolation or along with other goods of the regional basket (Bianchini et al., 2016; Lopes et al., 2021; Medeiros et al., 2018). Therefore, the discussions and analysis presented in this paper are guided by the "Basket of Territorial Goods and Services" approach. According to that theory, specific resources are transformed into assets by the initiative of local actors, the constitution of a singular geographical image, and the prioritization of local and regional markets and on-site consumption (Cazella et al., 2020; Pec-queur, 2001, 2005). These elements are integrated with the appreciation of the quality of products and services with geographical indications in several cases (Cazella et al., 2020).
In Brazil, the first GI registered was the Vale dos Vinhedos (for wine) in 2002. Currently (April 2022), there are already 89 registered GIs. It seems relevant to emphasize that there has been a significant increase recently (2020 and 2021 recorded the highest number of registers up to now: 10 and 18, respectively) (Mans, 2022), and there are several applications still being analyzed.
There are several national studies related to GIs and tourism, but those usually focus on theoretical-documental discussions and/or specific cases such as the Vale dos Vin-hedos (Vineyard Valley) (Coelho-Costa &
Coriolano, 2017; Druzian & Nunes, 2012; Nas-cimento et al., 2012; Salvagni et al., 2020; Siedenberg et al., 2017), Vale do Rio Sao Francisco (Sao Francisco Valley) (Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017), Vales da Uva Goethe (Goethe Grape Valley) (Jenoveva-Neto & Vieira, 2019; Leite et al., 2021; Vieira et al., 2012), Serro (Medeiros et al., 2018), Paraty (Nasci-mento et al., 2012), Corupa (Lorena et al., 2019), etc. Very few studies integrate data from several GIs even if belonging to the same sector.
Based on literature review and document analysis, Coelho-Costa (2019) and Lo-rena et al. (2019) linked geographical indication with terroir, property, tourism, and gastronomy; Jenoveva-Neto and Vieira (2019) suggested experience tourism as a business opportunity; while Salvagni et al. (2020) sought to understand GIs recognition to analyze possible related actions that might innovate eno-tourism.
At the Vales da Uva Goethe (SC), agents of tourism trade and wine production (Leite et al., 2021) were asked about GI as a tourism booster. There, they understand that GI helps the producers and promotes interest in tourism activities. Another aspect mentioned was how crucial articulation and alignment of interests are. After interviewing local actors, Siedenberg et al. (2017) also verified regional development as a result of the Vale dos Vin-hedos GI. Their results showed that the wine notoriety broadened people's interest in the area and tourism flow attracting new businesses to the region.
Felisberto & Le Guerroue (2019) collected municipal data classifying the visitors and recording GIs specifications, those authors sought to define the relationship between tourism and geographical indications. They identified four main situations: I) the GI is the main tourism attraction source; II) other regional attractions (archeological sites, natural parks, events, etc.) are the main visitors' motivation and favor the knowledge and
consumption of GI items; III) the basket of local goods is commercialized, and all participants promote tourism equally; and IV) the territory's touristic potential and the geographical indication are not linked in any way.
Based on the theoretical discussions related to the theme and recognition of potentialities, and also recognizing that there are connections between tourism development and GI territories, we proposed some questions, as follows: is it possible to "travel through Brazilian flavors and knowledges" recognized as geographical indications? Which products have been promoted by the tourism activity? How does it occur? Thus, this study sought to investigate whether and how geographical indications are allied to tourism in Brazil. Discussions around this theme have been developed, but many times they address realities different from the Brazilian scenery, describing places with greater maturity regarding the use of several quality or origin labels, where the consumers already know and take advantage of them, such as Oliveira (2007). When portraying a country with developing GIs, interesting uses, trends, and frailties are noticeable regarding the action of public and private managers, which can also be observed in other countries.
2. Geographical indications and Tourism
In addition to linking a product/service to its place of manufacture, geographical indications distinguish producers and other social and industrial groups by confirming their reputation. "Geographical Indications convey the cultural identity of a nation, region or specific area. They make it possible to add value to the natural riches of a country and to the skills of its population and they give local products a distinguished identity" (Ghosh, 2016, p.308). Tourism appears as one of the related activities that might develop in these regions.
GIs are granted to specific products (or services1) to defend them from improper use and make them outstand commercially (Airriess, 2020). However, other advantages
1 The GIs applicability to services varies from country to country. In Brazil, it is allowed under the Lei da Propriedade Industrial - LPI (Industrial Property Law) n°9.279/1996 (BRASIL, 1996).
result from this recognition, which include the development of related tourism offer - and tourism in general (Hadelan et al., 2021) - in places where they are inserted and whose geographical name they advertise. Therefore, both the goods and territory are favored (Ja-elani et al., 2020; Lopes et al., 2021), mainly because the sign directly links places, people, products, and traditions (FAO, 2010; Narciso et al., 2020).
Another factor is the use of marketing techniques focusing on the GI product or distinguishing it as part of the identity and mark of such destination. Products with determined territorial location that is expressed by a geographical indication (or other quality labels) have been important tools for market advertisement, and a symbol to promote places and broaden the tourism flow (Ghosh, 2016; Lopes et al., 2021).
At the same time, they disseminate veracity and particularity, reinforcing the external image of that territory, and they might become an instrument of dissemination of the local culture and identity (Lopes et al., 2021; Narciso et al., 2020). In addition, depending on the strategy employed, they might confer exclusiveness and even luxury due to their uniqueness (Besky, 2014). Related actions might then be directed to different target audiences (probable visitors; tourism trade; and business tourism - mainly achieved through the product insertion in international fairs; producers' and local exhibitions, etc.) through several channels.
The product and the destination image might reach potential tourists, specifically, even before the trip. Through the knowledge and purchase in other areas, individuals might create a bond with the product and even with the place. Lopes et al. (2021) found effective symbiosis between goods and tourism in their homeland boosted by the consumers' strong mobilizing capability (which in that specific case - Spain and Portugal - knew and
recognized distinctive brands and labels, and their intrinsic meaning). Li et al. (2020, p.1) pointed out that "[...] when tourists form a strong connection between people and place through GI products before visiting the destination, they have better experience, stronger attachment to the place, and easier implementation of environmental protection behaviors".
Therefore, registered goods bear notions, motivate choices of destination, and interfere in the individuals' behavior during the visit. Jiménez et al. (2019) and De La Torre et al. (2014) demonstrated that according to the degree of knowledge about the product/service, the tourists' interests and attitudes change regarding the spaces of production and attractions available within certain territory.
As regards the main activities directly related to goods with geographical indications, the literature reports some actions and practices that have been developed (Table 1).
Marketing and branding strategies involving terroir products highlight the role of ecological landscapes and the skilled producers in creating such genres (Besky, 2014). Consequently, when visiting the destination, tourists might want to relate to these aspects, accessing the landscape where the raw material is found and processed and, if possible, taste / try on the final product.
The trip provides the visitor with contact with the product and the manufacturers' stories, relating it to their personal history/tradition and/or characteristics of its manufacture that value it and distinguish it from other products such as organic, fair, family production, etc. (Airriess, 2020). It also allows the sharing of specific knowledge regarding production, technologies, and the very issue of what a GI is.
This contact with the local cultural ter-roir2, its history, its product, and producers, might bring the tourist closer and deepen a collective identity. Therefore, in addition to
2 "While environmental terroir is a contingent dimension, the construction of a place bound cultural terroir is anchored in a strong cultivation tradition, cultivar diversity, and a historical sense of community" (Airriess, 2020, p.06)
promoting visits, the narrative might be presented in spaces of memory, theme museums, and destination promotion. Sato and Kohsaka (2017) highlight storytelling in the dissemination of the local history and building
up emotional relationships with consumers. On the other hand, some authors draw attention to the "fabrication" of costumes, falsely persistent, creating a tourist performance (Besky, 2014).
Table 1 - Activities related to GIs developed by destinations
Action / Activity Authors №
Marketing and branding actions Airriess, 2020; Besky, 2014; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; Feltynowsk, 2013; Ghosh, 2016; Golija, 2017; Jaelani et al., 2020; Jiménez et al., 2019; Kurokawa, 2013; Lis-Gutierrez et al., 2017; Lopes et al., 2021; Narciso et al., 2020; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Pamukgu et al., 2021; Sato & Kohsaka, 2017; Terzic et al., 2015; Uchiyama et al., 2017 17
Visits to places where raw material is processed and /or transformed Airriess, 2020; Besky, 2014; Cehic et al., 2020; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; De La Torre et al., 2014; Jiménez et al., 2019; Lis-Gutierrez et al., 2017; Lopes et al., 2021; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Pamukgu et al., 2021; Pellin & Vieira, 2015; Sato & Kohsaka, 2017; Sidali et al., 2016; Terzic et al., 2015 14
Fairs, festivals, and other social events Airriess, 2020; Cehic et al., 2020; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; De La Torre et al., 2014; Golija, 2017; Jiménez et al., 2019; Lis-Gutierrez et al., 2017; Lopes et al., 2021; Pamukgu et al., 2021; Pellin & Vieira, 2015; Terzic et al., 2015 11
Tasting and pairing Airriess, 2020; Besky, 2014; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; De La Torre et al., 2014; Jiménez et al., 2019; Lopes et al., 2021; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Pamukgu et al., 2021; Pellin & Vieira, 2015; Sato & Kohsaka, 2017 10
Theme tourism routes Airriess, 2020; Cehic et al., 2020; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; De La Torre et al., 2014; Jiménez et al., 2019; Kullberg et al., 2014; Lopes et al., 2021; Narciso et al., 2020; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Sidali et al., 2016 10
Product sale in loco Airriess, 2020; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; Jaelani et al., 2020; Jiménez et al., 2019; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Sidali et al., 2016; Terzic et al., 2015 7
Product insertion in specialized shops, markets, restaurants and/or other local businesses Airriess, 2020; Cehic et al., 2020; De La Torre et al., 2014; Golija, 2017; Lis-Gutierrez et al., 2017; Lopes et al., 2021; Sidali et al., 2016 7
Spaces of memory, museums, or performance centers Besky, 2014; Cehic et al., 2020; Jiménez et al., 2019; Pamukgu et al., 2021; Sidali et al., 2016; Terzic et al., 2015 6
Visits to plantations or animal raising sites Airriess, 2020; Besky, 2014; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; Jiménez et al., 2019; Sato & Kohsaka, 2017 5
Theme accommodations or those inserted in production sites Airriess, 2020; Besky, 2014; Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; Oledinma & Roper, 2021; Pellin & Vieira, 2015 5
Courses, workshops, and other teaching practices (product production and/or use) Coelho-Costa & Coriolano, 2017; Jiménez et al., 2019; Terzic et al., 2015 3
Product supply in local events promoted by companies or the government Airriess, 2020; Golija, 2017 2
Business events linked to the product Cehic et al., 2020 1
Source: Elaborated based on papers found on the Scopus and ISI Web of Science scientific data bases in January 2022 using the descriptors "Geographical Indication" + AND + "Tourism" (Appendix A).
Allying tourism and GIs still presents some challenges and drawbacks. De La Torre et al. (2014) revealed that there are registered products (such as honey and raisings in Andalusia) that do not necessarily raise the tourists' desire to have contact with their production or taste them in situ. According to those authors, this probably occurs because the elaboration/processing is not shown to visitors. Issues related to accessibility, distance, safe and suitable tourism infrastructure (Airriess, 2020; Narciso et al., 2020), lack of specialized workforce, proper management, and institutional support (Narciso et al., 2020) influence negatively the consumers' interest in visiting places of extraction, production, or manufacture of a well-known product for limiting their ability to receive visitors.
Another relevant factor is the distinctive seal. Its application and lack of individuals' awareness of its norms and functions might limit its value (Oledinma & Roper, 2021). Moreover, as pointed out by Airriess (2020), in many developing countries, geographical indications are initiated by public incentive rather than the producers' involvement. Without such insertion, the GI use, prestige, and protection are harmed. There are cases, however, when the producers' appreciation and commitment are observed, but difficulties are found to create elite tourism niches due to the population standard of living, which excludes them from the process (Narciso et al., 2020). The promotion of routes and activities linked to products of origin is not enough if the producers and the local population are not prepared to receive the visitors or "[...] make
tourism a key element in their development" (Narciso et al., 2020, p.78).
3. Methodology
To develop this quantitative-qualitative research, we initially carried out a literature review to understand the current situation of the discussion of the theme GIs and tourism. Next, we investigated the uses of geographical indications linked to tourism by sending online questionnaires to the representative entities3 of the 78 Brazilian GIs granted up to 4th May 2021.
The respondents were asked about the ways the distinctive seal was used, the tourism activities developed with the recognized product4, and about their impressions regarding post-register changes. The questionnaire included Likert items specifying levels of agreement regarding the register consequences, multiple choice questions about GI uses and tourism activity, and an open question to collect their opinion regarding geographical indications and regional tourism.
The responses were collected from 6th May to 8th October 2021. Fifty-seven national geographical indications took part in the investigation (73% of the total number), listed in Appendix B, totaling 55 responses5. It seems relevant to emphasize that their participation was volunteered, without material rewards, and accompanied by a brief free and informed consent form adapted to the electronic medium, where all representatives authorized the disclosure of their GI.
The sample was characterized by product category (Table 2), following the model proposed by DataSebrae (SEBRAE, 2022), and a
3 A representative entity is a group of producers in charge of the application for recognition. In Brazil, pursuant to the Ordinance INPI n°04 de 2022 (BRASIL & MDIC, 2022), the application for a GI must be submitted by a collective entity (association, union or any other entity that can legally represent the group and apply for the register) except for cases in which there is a single producer /service provider or when it is a foreign application. After recognition, pursuant to article 15 "Art. 15. Producers and Service providers established in a specific location can use the Geographical Indication provided that they are in compliance with the technical specifications and submit to the defined control".
4 We prioritized the discussion of national products with GI because the only recognized service in the country did not return the questionnaire.
5 In Brazil, there are two kinds of geographical indications: indication of provenance and denomination of origin. Up to 2020, it was not possible to change the category, for this reason two national regions show the two typologies at the same time. All statistics consider the number of respondents (55) to prevent those GIs responses from being ascribed higher value.
subdivision was added (food and drinks) in the agri-food group. The final classification was detailed in Table 3.
Table 1 - Respondents per product category
Product category Number of respondents Sample percentage, %
Agri-food (food) 26 47.27
Agri-food (drink) 19 34.55
Handcraft 8 14.55
Industry 1 1.82
Stones/Minerals 1 1.82
Source: Research data, 2022.
Table 3 - Respondents per sector linked to the agri-food categories
General category Product /service sector Number of respondents
Meat, fish, and byproducts 3
Agri-food (food) Fruit 8
Honey and Propolis 3
Other food products 7
Cheese 5
Cacha?a 3
Agri-food Coffee 9
(drink) Wines and sparkling wines 5
Other beverages 2
Source: Research data, 2022.
The quantitative data was grouped with descriptive statistics and correlations were carried out (Pearson Correlation), favoring the understanding of the general results in the categories listed above. By using the software Stata, the perception of increased tourism flow, new businesses, and new events were related to the number of visitors, tourism
activities, and uses of the distinctive seal. The qualitative data was examined using content analysis followed by the determination of typologies based on the text framework. Considering the GI importance, we focused on:
1. Product differentiation, through the sensation of authenticity and singularity (Lopes et al., 2021; Narciso et al., 2020);
2. Regional image improvement, due to the fact that the seal links directly places, people, products, and local traditions (FAO, 2010; Narciso et al., 2020);
3. Product appreciation, due to exclusive-ness and luxury resulting from the uniqueness of the goods (Besky, 2014) and/or sensation of authenticity and singularity of the certified product (Lopes et al., 2021; Narciso et al., 2020);
4. Increased tourism flow / events / business / income, due to the strengthening and/or creation of marketing strategies focusing on or inserting the GI product as part of the destination identity and branding (Ghosh, 2016; Lopes et al., 2021).
4. Geographical Indications use in tourism in Brazil Firstly, the distinctive seal use is presented (Fig. 1). We could verify higher number of occurrences of the label use, with figurative or nominal representation ("seal"). Next, advertisement of the product and the territory was observed - coinciding with findings of the literature review (Table 1), which mentioned GIs as marketing and branding strategies for the goods and destinations.
Product label 26
Product printed advertisement ^^m 2s
Product virtual advertisement
Territory printed advertisement ^m 23
Not used 20
Territory virtual advertisement
Product 11
Tourism signal
Product packaging dumber of responses
10
20
30
Fig. 1 - Use of the Geographical Indication "seal"
Source: Research data, 2022.
Seals were seen to be hegemonically used on labels (Fig. 1) (47.27%), however, great dissemination was also seen via leaflets (printed media) (45.45%), virtual media
(webpages, social networks, etc.) (43.64%) and printed material referring to the places the items come from (41.82%). The predominant use on labels distinguishes the product,
and links it to its geographical name, fixes it on the consumers' mind, and differentiates it from other similar items, which consequently strengthens the genre and its register. Aiming its use in the communication between product and territory, representative entities with great online insertion outstand for advertising the GI and destination with tourism purposes.
Conversely, several regions still do not operate their GIs in any way (36.36%), even though they are enrolled with the Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial - INPI (Industrial Property National Institute). In the research, 20 respondents were seen to not use the sign effectively for several reasons. These were justified in the open question referring to short period of register, lack of information and appreciation of the theme by producers and tourist-consumers, difficulties of postregister operationalization, lack of local resources and support, as well as delays resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.
When the Brazilian consumer knowledge was observed, differences were found from Lopes et al. (2021) and Li et al. (2020) reports, and results close to those presented by Oledinma & Roper (2021) and Narciso et al. (2020) were found regarding the challenges for the use of geographical indications.
The GIs that still do not effectively use their seal despite having received a GI were categorized (Table 3) and the categories industry and stones/minerals outstood for the fact that all respondents reported not using them.
Table 3 - Percentage of GIs that do not use the Geographical indication seal
Category Percentage of each category that still does not use the seal, %
Agri-food (food) 26.92
Agri-food (drinks) 26.32
Handcraft 25.00
Industry 100.00
Stones/Minerals 100.00
Source: Research data, 2022.
Tourist attractions linked to the registered items were investigated (Graph 2). The findings were organized as follows: visits to elaboration/processing sites (65.45%), business events (54.55%), and festivals (49.09%), and recognized item tasting sessions (40%). These results are in accordance with those found in the literature (chart 01); however, underuse of the possible tourism interrelations might occur. Surprisingly, 9.09% of the regions did not develop any tourism activity related to the GIs.
Fig. 2 - Tourism activities related to GI products
Source: Research data, 2022.
Respondents did not mark the commercialization in situ as an existing tourism activity. This might result from a routine practice that is not necessarily associated with tourism; however, sales are carried out at the production sites. Moreover, when these sites receive visitors, they have specially built spaces for the commercializa-tion of their products, utensils related to them, and other souvenirs.
The Vale dos Vinhedos (Vineyard Valley) approaches the commercialization of their product to the final consumer
[...] All these attractions linked to eno-tourism, that is, wine tourism, have attracted almost 400 thousand visitors every year since the Geographical Indication register, which represents an increase of over 300%. On the other hand,
tourism helps us to disseminate the GI concept to the consumers. In addition to, of course, enabling the sale of the product directly to the final consumer
(Research data, 2022, our emphasis).
After registering the geographical indication, and with its use in marketing product development strategies, positive commercial and socioenvironmental alterations are
desired (Besky, 2014; Li et al., 2020; Lopes et al., 2021; Medeiros et al., 2016). For this reason, we analyzed the agreement regarding the improvement of these issues.
Firstly, we asked aspects related to the territory (Fig. 3). The producers' feeling of appreciation and the improvement of the regional image showed greater agreement (total or partial).
30
26;
10
Producers' feeling of appreciation Region image improvement Real estate appreciation Property appreciation
13
Fig. 3 - Territorial changes resulting from the GI Source: Research data, 2022.
1.11-1 ll Ji
Totally agree Partially Neither Partially Totally Have no agree agree nor disagree disagree opinion Responses disagree
Therefore, the geographical indication bond to its territory is strengthened, since the distinctive sign makes the product popular and disseminates it commercially, also increasing the value of its productive area, and those responsible for its manufacture. The GI register makes the territory known and favors the appreciation and clarification by the locals with their identity elements. When they realize the recognition of the product and its origin, producers have a feeling of belonging and having their work valued. This increased
self-esteem might occur while applying for the register, even before the effective use of the sign (Medeiros et al., 2020).
Certainly, these territorial impacts also result from the consumers' recognition. For this reason, we also investigated the entities' perception regarding buyers' behavior and knowledge of the geographical indications (Fig. 4). We found out that 63.64% of the respondents stated that to a certain extent customers tend to pay more for GI items.
25
21 21 2
Willingness to pay more for the products Increased knowledge about the GI Interest in learning about the GI
Fig. 4 - Behavioral changes resulting from the GI Source: Research data, 2022.
Totally agree Responses
Partially agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Regarding the customers' knowledge about GIs and their interest in learning more, partial agreement predominated. However, reasonable difference was observed when considering total disagreements and agreements. As for the improvement of the GI perception, total and partial disagreements totaled 18. When the interest in knowing about the GI was analyzed, the second highest proportion referred to those that neither agreed nor disagreed, indicating the need for education related to geographical indications, since the consumers' willingness to pay more was dependent on the identification of the values
20
20
15
»10
■2 5
1313 13
1818
14
15
certified by the distinctive sign.
As regards the tourism consequences originated in the concession of national geographical indications, evidence was found and systematized (Fig. 5). Increased tourism flow in the regions and visits to the production sites were emphasized. Most respondents noticed certain growth in the number of visitors within the delimited area (56.36%), against 27.27% who neither agreed nor disagreed with such increase after the GI register, and reported having kept or even reduced the flow post-recognition (also as a result of the Covid-19).
I Increased tourism flow I Higher number of visitors on the production site
1 Fig. 5 - Effects of Geogra-
phical Indications on tourism Source: Research data, 2022.
New events
.Ji У
Totally agree Partially Neither Partially Totally Have no agree agree nor disagree disagree opinion Responses disagree
Considering the creation of new businesses to serve the public aware of the GI, most respondents noticed some increase (34.55%); however, part of the respondents did not observe any growth directly related to the sign (27.27%). As for events with registered products, an increase was noticed in general (36.36%).
When analyzing the data, we could confirm the GIs ability to influence positively regional tourism, either as the main attraction or in addition to other already consolidated local attractions:
a GI works as a way to add value to the attractions with the commercialization of products that have cultural appeal, differentiation, and safety for the tourist who wants to consume a certified product, knowledge about the production, [... ] protection of the local culture
and inheritance, involvement with local communities, [...] etc. (Vieira & Soa-res, 2019, p.9).
The respondent from Paraty referred to the possibility of incorporating the existing offer of tourism with the seal.
The Paraty region already had a strong tourism flow. The GI provided it with increased tourism in the distilleries, which resulted in their restructuring to receive tourists and strengthened the rural tourism in the area with visits to distilleries and waterfalls. The distillery circuit has become one of the main tourist routes in the region.
New businesses and events might be created to meet the requirements of the tourism flow and the growth of GI direct business, providing the destination with dynamism and innovation. Such dynamics was observed in
the Vale dos Vinhedos: "[...] New entrepreneurs linked to tourism and the wine sector started to join the route, which year after year has presenting new businesses linked to gastronomy, accommodation, agribusiness, handcraft, tourism agencies/ operators, in addition to the several events included in the tourists' route [...]".
The synergy created by geographical indications invigorates the tourism sector and others. This is also noticed in the Canastra GI: "The tourism sector started to receive a higher number of visitors interested in knowing the products and their production process. The producers started to receive visitors in their farms and aggregate higher value to the cheese, in addition to selling other products and services" (APROCAN representative).
In addition to giving their opinion, some representative entities included examples of the tourism activity development as a consequence of the GI, totaling 35 responses. These are listed below (Table 4) divided by connotation (positive, negative, or neutral). The number of negative aspects was close to that of the positive ones, showing that in Brazil the GI-tourism relationship varies according to each case.
The COVID-19 pandemic was appointed as a negative factor, since it impacted many sectors and prevented several practices in different periods depending on the region. Other factors were also mentioned such as lack of use due to operational difficulties, lack of resources and support, and poor articulation to apply the seal effectively.
Lack of knowledge by the tourist-consumer and, therefore, lack of appreciation of the distinctive sign were also emphasized. Conversely, a positive aspect was mentioned linked to the visitors' interest in learning about GIs. They also referred to the use of GIs to advertise the destination, which still lacks knowledge and understanding of its meaning to become a real differential factor in the tourism offer. Coelho-Costa & Coriolano
(2017) and Medeiros et al. (2020) highlighted the need for the dissemination of knowledge about GIs6 in Brazil among producers, consumers, and public and private managers.
Table 4 - Tourism development as a consequence of the GI according to respondents
Connotation Aspect mentioned Occurrence
Increased regional tourism flow
3
Destination promotion
3
Tourists' interest in learning about the GIs 3 Increased tourism flow on production sites 2 Offer of new tourism products 2
g Product differentiation_2_
New businesses_2_
Q- Product sale to the final consumer 2
Partnerships
Structural improvement of facilities
New investments
Inclusion in events
1
Total: 23
No impact observed due to the pandemic 7
Incomplete GI structure
6
Lack of knowledge and appreciation by consumers and tourists Lack of resources for advertisement a, and collective action implementation 'B Lack of support and interinstitutional of partnerships_
Lack of cooperation between GI producers
Lack of knowledge about GIs by the producers
Lack of infrastructure to receive tourists in the destination
Total: 23
Impact on tour- the product category
ism not observed \ tu other tourism segments
Total: 2
Source: Research data, 2022.
The product category might justify the non-occurrence of tourism, since the segments most referenced in the literature were food-tourism and rural tourism. To deepen this argument, we verified the percentage of each classification of GIs that disagreed (totally or partially) with the increase in tourism flow, new
1
1
1
4
2
6 Such lack of knowledge was also reported in other countries such as Sweden (Hadelan et al., 2021), Ecuador (Sidali et al., 2016), and Japan (Sato & Kohsaka, 2017), etc.
events, and new businesses. These GIs were seen to be dissatisfied regarding the increase of their business/events/tourists (Table 5).
Table 5 - Percentage of GIs that disagreed (partially or totally) that there was increase in new businesses, new events, and tourism flow
Category New businesses New events Increased tourism flow
Agri-food (food) 27% 23% 19%
Agri-food (drinks) 21% 16% 5%
Stones/Minerals 100% 100% 100%
Source: Research data, 2022.
As shown above, only GIs granted to food, drinks, and stones/minerals reported some disagreement. In general, when the distinctive sign use growths, greater increase in
business, events, income, etc. is noticed (Table 6). Another finding is that the categories that did not observe increase in these aspects were those that informed not having used the seal yet.
GIs that identified increased tourism flow (totally agree and partially agree) were those that observed increase in the number of visits and presented more tourism activities, GI use, and producers using the seal, revealing a positive and statistically significant correlation (Table 6). Similar association was verified between the greater perception of new businesses and new events and increased income x increased number of visits, tourism activities, IG seal use, and producers using the seal (and vice-versa).
Table 6 - Correlation between the perception of increase in tourism flow, new businesses, new events, increased income x increased visits, tourism activities, producers using the GI and GI seal use
INCREASE:
Perception regarding: Visits Tourism activities Producers using the GI Number of those using the seal
Tourism flow 0.46* 0.20* 0.11* 0.16*
New businesses 0.29* 0.17* 0.20* 0.06**
New events 0.47* 0.29* 0.14* 0.18*
Increased income 0.22* 0.08** 0.17* 0.21*
Note: * 5% significance level.**10% significance level.
Source: Research data, 2022.
In general, we could see that the producers that used their GIs noticed greater benefits from the seal use, mainly regarding the development of tourism activities. They also noticed higher occurrence of visitors, new businesses, and events (directly or indirectly related with the GI) that improved the local income with multiplier effects (Table 5).
The differentiation of their products along with the improvement of the regional image due to the GIs were seen as the main reasons for their positive perception. The seal use on the product label really differentiates the product and favors its marketing and branding, consequently, favoring the territory (Ghosh, 2016; Lopes et al., 2021). Therefore, GIs add value to the goods and improve tourism flow, which, in turn, mobilizes tourism
agents and favors the purchase of local and traditional items with territorial identity (Vieira & Soares, 2019).
Finally, we could observe that many producers do not use the seal (over 1/3 of the participants) due to lack of appreciation and knowledge by some consumers, lack of information and absence of tourism activities within the delimited area. Oledinma and Roper (2021) emphasized that the inexistence of awareness raising practices related to GIs, their norms, and functions, limit the seal advantages. Moreover, Airriess (2020) pointed out that if the GI is operationalized using a top-down approach, without involving the producers, it is more difficult to reach it effects and develop it.
For this reason, including producers
more effectively and appreciating GIs more intensely is crucial. Thus, the tourism involvement, the respect to commercialization rules, and advertisement to spread knowledge,
favor the continuity and efficiency of registered GIs. (Melo et al., 2020). The positive effects reported by the respondents are summarized below (Fig. 6).
GI
Effect on tourism
1 Differentiating products Improving the region image 1 Intensifying the consumers' willingness to pay more for the products
}
Greater tourism flow Greater event flow Higher number of businesses Increased income
Fig. 6 - Summary of producers' perception regarding the GI benefits Source: Research result, 2022.
In Brazil, GIs are complex and heterogeneous (regarding products, types of actors, techniques, and collectives that apply for the register) (Wilkinson et al., 2017). Moreover, there are different levels of consumers' understanding and interest, and possibilities and limitations to develop tourism activities related or associated with the product. A GI might, then, create market strategies for destinations since it is used critically, analyzing the local context and specificities.
5. Final Considerations
Brazilian geographical indications, mainly agri-food are allied to tourism. Their representative entities answered a semi-structured online questionnaire confirming that within their delimited areas there are: visits to the production site, tasting sessions, corporate events and festivals, courses, and workshops about the product production or consumption (such as pairing courses), partnerships with accommodation, restaurants and/or guides and agencies. It seems relevant to emphasize that the number of activities varied among territories, confirming the heterogeneity of the development of tourism related to GIs at the national level (Felisberto & Le Guerroué, 2019).
Most agri-food GIs agreed (totally or partially) with the increased tourism flow, new businesses, and events, mainly the beverage sector. As for handcraft and industrial products, only agreement or indifference was reported. However, recognized stones and minerals totally disagreed with these factors,
maybe due to their own extraction-manufacture features. Therefore, we observed a positive correlation between the number of places where the seal is used and the number of uses in tourism found.
Thus, the more the geographical indication seal use is and the greater the offer of tourism activities observed is, the higher the increase in number of visitors, creation of new events and businesses is. This highlights the importance of implementing GIs as specific territorial assets, rather than merely registering them.
When the data was collected (mid-2021) there were 78 Brazilian GIs, currently, there are 100. Although this can be considered a limitation of this study, the structuring and development of actions and products related to the GI granted requires time. This was also emphasized by the respondents as a reason for the inexistence of tourism activities in territories whose GI register is still recent.
Answers given to the open question in the research form explained the statistical data. Advantages were seen - increased tourism flow, creation of products, tourists' interest in the theme, etc. - and obstacles to the tourism activity development (and the GI) were also reported - lack of GI structure (and consequent use), lack of knowledge by producers and tourist-consumers about geographical indications, COVID-19 pandemic, etc. Part of those who reported not using the GI or other difficulties for its use emphasized their positive future expectancy regarding the
sign, the product, and the related tourism.
The literature surveyed presents possibilities and barriers regarding tourism development linked to GIs, either as the main motivation or a complementary factor. Moreover, "Promoting any tourism product undoubtedly requires knowledge of the peculiarities, circumstances, preferences, and needs of the market, both from the perspective of supply and of demand" (Jiménez et al., 2019, p.17). It is relevant to understand the product (background, differential, forms of production and use, etc.) and what GIs are,
since there might be experienced visitors who want to see details and nuances of the production, even clients that do not know the product, which would provide them with some education on the matter. The need for research on tourists' profile and demand for the knowledge of "products of origin", gas-tro-tourists, or others with specific motivations (such as products or technologies, for example) is also highlighted. Thus, further studies are suggested to approach Brazilian geographical indications from the tourist-consumer standpoint.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank to Fundado Araucária, CNPq and UEPG - grant n° 062/2020.
References
1. Airriess, C. (2020). Constructing durian terroir and geographical indications in Penang, Malaysia. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 41(1), 6-22. doi: 10.1111/sjtg.12298.
2. Almeida, S. C., Dörr, A. C., Guse, J. C., Rossato, M. V., Sidali, K. L., & Márchese, A. (2014). Enfoque a Legislado Brasileira E Europeia Sobre a Indicado Geográfica. REGET, 18, 47-56. doi: 10.5902/2236117013045.
3. Arfini, F., Cozzi, E., Mancini, M. C., Ferrer-Perez, H., & Gil, J. M. (2019). Are geographical indication products fostering public goods? Some evidence from Europe. Sustainability, 11(2), 1-14. doi: 10.3390/su11010272.
4. Besky, S. (2014). The labor of terroir and the terroir of labor: Geographical indication and Darjeeling tea plantations. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(1), 83-96. doi: 10.1007/s10460-013-9452-8.
5. Bianchini, I. M. E., Castro, M. J., Carneiro Neto, J. A., Domingues, M. A., Lima, J. B. S., & Santos, J. A. B. (2016). Turismo e Indicado Geográfica: Possibilidades Para O Incremento Do Turismo. Proceeding of ISTI/SIMTEC, 3, 547-554. doi: 10.7198/s2318-3403201600030064.
6. BRASIL. (1996). Lei no 9.279, de maio de 1996: Regula direitos e obrigagöes relativos a propriedade industrial. Presidencia da República. URL: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ ccivil_03/leis/l9279.htm.
7. Cazella, A. A., Medeiros, M., Desconsi, C., Schneider, S., & de Paula, L. G. (2020). O enfoque da cesta de bens e servidos territoriais: seus fundamentos teóricos e aplicagäo no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Gestäo e Desenvolvimiento Regional, 16(3), 193-206.
8. Cehic, A., Mesic, Z., & Oplanic, M. (2020). Requirements for development of olive tourism: The case of Croatia. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 26(1), 1-14. doi: 10.20867/thm.26.1.1.
9. Coelho-Costa, E. R. (2019). Breves considerares sobre comida local, terroir, indicates geográficas e turismo gastronómico. Desenvolvimento Regional Em Debate, 9(2), 262-293. doi: 10.24302/drd.v9iEd.%20esp.%202.2497 Artigo.
10. Coelho-Costa, E. R., & Coriolano, L. N. (2017). Indicates Geográficas e Turismo Enogastronómico no Vale dos Vinhedos (RS) e no Vale do Rio Sao Francisco (PE/BA). Revista Turismo Estudos & Práticas, 6(Número Especial), 48-77.
11. De La Torre, G. M. V., Fernández, E. M., & Pérez Naranjo, L. M. (2014). Gastronomic tourism, protected designations of origin and rural development in Andalusia: Present situation. Boletin de La Asociacion de Geografos Espanoles, 65, 437-439.
12. Druzian, J. I., & Nunes, I. L. (2012). Indicates Geográficas Brasileiras e Impacto sobre Bens Agrícolas e/ou agroindustriais. Revista Geintec, 2(4), 413-426.
13. FAO. (2010). Linking people, places and products (E. Vandecandelaere, F. Arfini, G. Belletti, & A. Marescotti (eds.)). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); SINER-GI. URL: www.foodquality-origin.org/guide/guide.pdf.
14. Felisberto, A. F., & Le Guerroué, J.-L. (2019). A Convergencia entre o Turismo Rural e as Indicates Geográficas Brasileiras. Desenvolvimento Regional Em Debate, 9(2), 248-261. doi: 10.24302/drd.v9iEd.%20esp.%202.2588 Artigo.
15. Feltynowsk, M. (2013). Regional Products in the Central and Eastern European Countries that Acceded to the European Union in May 2004. Comparative Economic Research, 16(1), 21-38. doi: 10.2478/cer-2013-0002.
16. Ghosh, P. (2016). Geographical indications: A corner stone in poverty alleviation and empowerment in the indian himalayan region. National Academy Science Letters, 39(4), 307309. doi: 10.1007/s40009-016-0464-y.
17. Golija, M. G. (2017). The growing importance of local pumpkin seed oil production in Slovenia. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica, 62(2), 373-388. doi: 10.1556/022.2017.62.2.6.
18. Hadelan, L., Jez Rogelj, M., Mikus, O., Prisenk, J., & Zrakic Sussac, M. (2021). Food Geographical Indication in Enhancing Agricultural and Tourism Performance. Scientific Papers Ser. Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 21(1), 361-368.
19. Jaelani, A. K., Handayani, I. G. A. K. R., & Karjoko, L. (2020). Development of tourism based on geographic indication towards to welfare state. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(3), 1227-1234.
20. Jenoveva-Neto, R., & Vieira, A. C. P. (2019). Turismo de experiencia para a regiao delimitada pela Indicagao de Procedencia dos Vales da Uva Goethe, sul de Santa Catarina - Brasil. TURyDES, 12(26). URL: https://www.eumed.net/rev/turydes/26/vales-uvagoethe.html.
21. Jiménez, J. A. C., de la Torre, M. G. M. V., & Rojas, R. H. (2019). Analysis of the tourism demand for Iberian ham routes in Andalusia (Southern Spain): Tourist profile. Sustainability, 11(16), 1-21. doi: 10.3390/su11164278.
22. Kullberg, J. C., Coelho, C. L., Almeida, J. A., & Rocha, R. B. (2014). Bases para o estabelecimento de itinerarios sobre a "Geologia e o Vinho" na Arrábida, no ámbito da candidatura da Arrábida a Património Mundial. Comunicacoes Geologicas, 101(3), 1283-1288.
23. Kurokawa, K. (2013). Case Studies of the Innovative Local Cottage Industries and Tourism in North and Northeast District in Thailand: Implications from the local Branding Strategy of Thailand. Studies in Regional Science, 43(2), 215-222.
24. Leite, A. R., Vieira, A. C. P., & Fritz Filho, L. F. (2021). Indicagoes geográficas como propulsoras do turismo nos Vales da Uva Goethe, Santa Catarina. Turismo e Sociedade, 14(2), 125-145.
25. Li, Q., Li, X., Chen, W., Su, X., & Yu, R. (2020). Involvement, place attachment, and environmentally responsible behaviour connected with geographical indication products. Tourism Geographies. doi: 10.1080/14616688.2020.1826569.
26. Lis-Gutierrez, J.-P., Gaitan-Angulo, M., Moros, A., Lis-Gutierrez, M., & Viloria, A. (2017). Use of Intellectual Property in the Tourism Sector. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 12(11), 2838-2841.
27. Lopes, C. M. dos R., Rengifo Gallego, J. I., & Correia Leitao, J. C. (2021). La importancia de los productos agroalimentarios de calidad para la promoción del turismo en España y Portugal. Boletín de La Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles, 89. doi: 10.21138/bage.3020.
28. Lorena, G. De, Areas, P. de O., & Lima, F. B. C. (2019). Turismo e Indicagao Geográfica: a denominagao de origem da banana da Regiao de Corupá , Santa Catarina. Turismo & Sociedade, 12(2), 65-83.
29. Mans, M. (2022). Indicagoes geográficas ganham impulso no Brasil. Paladar - Estadao, 2020-2023. URL: https://paladar.estadao.com.br/noticias/comida,indicacoes-geograficas-ganham-impulso-no-brasil,70003987359.
30. Medeiros, M. de L., Cunha, J. A. C. da, & Passador, J. L. (2018). Turismo gastronómico e desenvolvimento regional: um estudo a partir do caso do queijo minas artesanal do Serro. Caderno Virtual de Turismo, 18(2), 173-194. doi: 10.18472/cvt.18n2.2018.1373.
31. Medeiros, M. de L., Passador, C. S., & Passador, J. L. (2016). Implications of geographical
indications: a comprehensive review of papers listed in CAPES' journal database. RAI Revista de Administraçao e Inovaçao, 13(4), 315-329. doi: 10.1016/j.rai.2016.09.002.
32. Medeiros, M. de L., & Passador, J. L. (2022). Examining the development attributed to geographical indications. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 25(1), 86-105. doi: 10.1111/jwip.12208.
33. Medeiros, M. de L., Terra, L. A. A., & Passador, J. L. (2020). Geographical indications and territorial development: A soft-system methodology analysis of the Serro Case. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 37(1), 82-96. doi: 10.1002/sres.2601.
34. Melo, P. de T. A. de, Melo, S. de S. C. de, & Ribeiro, S. da C. A. (2020). Cacau de tomé-açu: a importancia da indicaçao geográfica para produtos comercializados no mercado internacional tomé-açu cacao: the importance of geographical indication for products commercialized in the international market. INGI, 4(4), 1033-1047.
35. Millán Vázquez De La Torre, M. G., Amador, L., & Fuentes, J. M. A. (2016). La denominación de origen protegida "Los Pedroches" como ruta gastronómica del jamón ibérico: Análisis del perfil del visitante y evolución futura. Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural, 13(77), 63-91. doi: 10.11144/Javeriana.cdr13-77.dopp.
36. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), 1-6. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
37. Narciso, A., Barzini, S. A., & Di Nuzzo, A. (2020). Discovering Neverland: Sao Tomé and Príncipe and the development of the agricultural heritage of a multi-ethnic population. Journal of Agriculture and Environment for International Development - JAEID, 114(2), 63-84. doi: 10.12895/jaeid.20202.1376.
38. Nascimento, J. S., Nunes, G. S., & Bandeira, M. da G. A. (2012). A importancia de uma indicaçao geográfica no desenvolvimento do turismo de uma regiao. Revista Geintec, 2(4), 378-386.
39. Oledinma, A., & Roper, S. (2021). Tradition (re-)defined: Farm v factory trade-offs in the definition of geographical indications, the case of Three Counties Cider. Journal of Rural Studies, 84(March), 12-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.03.005.
40. Oliveira, S. (2007). La importancia de la gastronomía en el turismo: Un ejemplo de Mealhada - Portugal. Estudios y Perspectivas En Turismo, 16, 261-280.
41. Pamukçu, H., Saraç, O., Aytugar, S., & Sandikçi, M. (2021). The effects of local food and local products with geographical indication on the development of tourism gastronomy. Sustainability, 13(12), 6692. doi: 10.3390/su13126692.
42. Pasli, M. M., & Akbaba, M. (2019). Sustainable Gastronomy Tourism with Geographical Indications : The Case for Black Sea Region in Turkey. In: i. Yazicioglu, O. Yayla, & A. Solunoglu (Eds.), Current Issues in Tourism and Hospitality Management (pp. 181-191). SRA Academic Publishing.
43. Pecqueur, B. (2001). Qualité et développement territorial: l'hypothèse du panier de biens et de services territorialisés. Économie Rurale, 261, 37-49. doi: 10.3406/ecoru.2001.5217.
44. Pecqueur, B. (2005). O desenvolvimento territorial: uma nova abordagem dos processos de desenvolvimento para as economias do Sul. Raízes, 24(1-2), 10-22.
45. Pellin, V., & Vieira, A. C. P. (2015). Contributions of geographical indications for territorial strengthening in rural space: A case study in southern Brazil. Espacios, 36(8), 7-7.
46. Salvagni, J., Valduga, V., & Nodari, C. H. (2020). Cooperation , Innovation and Tourism in the Grape and Wine Region, Brazil. Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural, 17. doi: 10.11144/Javeriana.cdr17.citg.
47. Sato, J., & Kohsaka, R. (2017). Japanese sake and evolution of technology: A comparative view with wine and its implications for regional branding and tourism. Journal of Ethnic Foods, 4(2), 88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jef.2017.05.005.
48. SEBRAE, & INPI. (2019). Guia das indicaçoes geográficas: Conceitos. SEBRAE, INPI.
49. Sidali, K. L., Granja Toledo, N. R., Altamirano, A. M., Fernandez, M. S., Del Rosario Mejía, M., & Usiña, W. (2016). New trends in the debate on geographical indications: Evidence from Ecuador. Economia Agro-Alimentare, 18(1), 39-52. doi: 10.3280/ECAG2016-001003.
50. Siedenberg, D. R., Thaines, A. H., & Baggio, D. K. (2017). Desenvolvimento regional sob a ótica do reconhecimento da indicagao geográfica: o case do Vale dos Vinhedos, a partir da percepgao dos atores sociais. Gestao & Regionalidade, 33(99), 4-20. doi: 10.13037/gr.vol33n99.2771.
51. Terzic, A., Bjeljac, Z., & Curcic, N. (2015). Common histories, constructed identities: Intangible cultural heritage and the rebranding of Serbia. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 10, 101-120. doi: 10.35638/ijih.2015..10.013.
52. Uchiyama, Y., Tanaka, Y., Matsuoka, H., & Kohsaka, R. (2017). Expectations of residents and tourists of agriculture-related certification systems: analysis of public perceptions. Journal of Ethnic Foods, 4(2), 110-117. doi: 10.1016/j.jef.2017.05.003.
53. Vieira, A. C. P., Watanabe, M., & Bruch, K. L. (2012). Perspectivas De Desenvolvimento Da Vitivinicultura Em Face Do Reconhecimento Da Indicagao De Procedencia Vales Da Uva Goethe. Revista Gestao, Inovagao e Tecnologia, 2, 327-343. doi: 10.7198/S2237-0722201200040001.
54. Vieira, L. V. L., Soares, R. N. G. (2019). Turismo e geografia: perspectivas da Indicagao Geográfica (IG) no planejamento territorial. Caderno Virtual de Turismo, 19 (3), 1-14. doi: 10.18472/cvt.19n3.2019.1497.
55. Wilkinson, J., Cerdan, C., & Dorigon, C. (2017). Geographical Indications and "Origin" Products in Brazil - The Interplay of Institutions and Networks. World Development, 98, 82-92. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.003.
56. World Trade Organization. (1995). TRIPS - Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. URL: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/intel2_e.htm.
Appendix A - Papers included in the elaboration of Table 1
The Scopus and ISI Web of Science data bases were surveyed in January 2022, by entering the descriptors "Geographical Indication" and "Tourism" connected by the Boolean operator "AND". The additional filters specified were: I) period of publication within the last ten years (2011 to 2021); II) occurrence of the two descriptors in the title, abstract, or keywords; and III) the document should be "a peer reviewed scientific paper".
With the application of these filters, we obtained an initial sample of 40 files (Scopus: 28 and ISI Web of Science: 12). The analysis started on the data base with the higher number of papers (Scopus). The screening process was carried out as suggested by Moher et al. (2009) by reading abstracts. Five papers were excluded, since we noticed that they did not exactly address geographical indications. Another study was excluded for the fact that it was written in Turkish. On the second platform, repeated papers were excluded (08 papers were found on both platforms) and 02 papers were excluded in the screening phase. Finally, the remaining full papers were read, resulting in a final sample of 24 papers (listed below)
Authors Title Year Source title N.
Airriess C. Constructing durian terroir and geographical ndications in Penang, Malaysia 2020 Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 41 1
Besky S. The labor of terroir and the terroir of labor: Geographical indication and Darjeeling tea 2014 Agriculture and Human Values 31 1
plantations
Cehic A., Mesic Z., Oplanic M. Requirements for development of olive tour-sm: The case of Croatia 2020 Tourism and Hospitality Management 26 1
Coelho-Costa, ER; Coriolano, LN Geographical Indications And Enogastrono-mic Tourism In The Vale Dos Vinhedos (Rs) And In The Vale Do Rio Sao Francisco (Pe / Ba) 2017 Turismo-Estudos E Praticas 6
De La Torre G.M.V., Fernández E.M., Pérez Naranjo L.M. Gastronomic tourism, protected designations of origin and rural development in Andalusia: Present situation 2014 Boletin de la Asociacion de Geografos Espanoles 65
Feltynowsk M. Regional Products in the Central and Eastern European Countries that Acceded to the Eu- 2013 Comparative Economic Research 16 1
ropean Union in May 2004
Authors Title Year Source title V. N.
Ghosh P. Geographical indications: A corner stone in poverty alleviation and empowerment in the ndian Himalayan region 2016 National Academy Science Letters 39 4
Golija M.G. The growing importance of local pumpkin seed oil production in Slovenia 2017 Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 62 2
Hadelan, L; Rogelj, MJ; Mikus, O; Pri-senk, J; Susac, MZ Food Geographical Indication In Enhancing Agricultural And Tourism Performance 2021 Scientific Papers-Series Management Economic Engineering In Agriculture And Rural Development 21 1
Jaelani A.K., Handayani I.G.A.K.R., Karjoko L. Development of tourism based on geographic indication towards to welfare state 2020 International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology 29 3
Jiménez J.A.C., de la Torre M.G.M.V., Rojas R.H. Analysis of the tourism demand for Iberian ham routes in Andalusia (Southern Spain): Tourist profile 2019 Sustainability (Switzerland) 11 16
Kullberg J.C., Coel-ho C.L., Almeida J.A., Rocha R.B. Bases to implement the "Geology and Wine" tineraries in Arrabida within the framework of the Arrabida World Heritage nomination file 2014 Comunicacoes Geologicas 101 3
Kurokawa K. Case studies of the innovative local cottage ndustries and tourism in north and northeast district in Thailand: Implications from the local branding strategy of Thailand 2013 Studies in Regional Science 43 2
Li Q., Li X., Chen W., Su X., Yu R. nvolvement, place attachment, and environmentally responsible behaviour connected with geographical indication products 2020 Tourism Geographies
Lis-Gutierrez J.-P., Gaitan-Angulo M., Moros A., Lis-Gutierrez M., Viloria A. Use of Intellectual Property in the Tourism Sector 2017 Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 12 11
Lopes, CMD; Gallego, J IR; Leitao, JCC The importance of quality agro-food products for the promotion of tourism in Spain and Portugal 2021 Boletin de la Asociacion de Geografos Espanoles 89
Narciso A., Barzini S.A., Di Nuzzo A. Discovering Neverland: Sao Tomé and Principe and the development of the agricultural heritage of a multi-ethnic population 2020 Journal of Agriculture and Environment for International Development 114 2
Oledinma A., Roper S. Tradition (re-)defined: Farm v factory tradeoffs in the definition of geographical indications, the case of Three Counties Cider 2021 Journal of Rural Studies 84
Pamukgu H., Sarag Ö., Aytugar S., Sandikg M. The effects of local food and local products with geographical indication on the development of tourism gastronomy 2021 Sustainability (Switzerland) 13 12
Pellin V., Vieira A.C.P. Contributions of geographical indications for territorial strengthening in rural space: A case study in southern Brazil 2015 Espacios 36 8
Sato J., Kohsaka R. Japanese sake and evolution of technology: A comparative view with wine and its implications for regional branding and tourism 2017 Journal of Ethnic Foods 4 2
Sidali K.L., Granja Toledo N.R., Alta-mirano A.M., Fernandez M.S., Del Rosario Mejía M., Usiña W. New trends in the debate on geographical ndications: Evidence from Ecuador 2016 Economia Agro-Alimentare 18 1
Terzic A., Bjeljac Z., Curcic N. Common histories, constructed identities: ntangible cultural heritage and the rebrand-ng of Serbia 2015 International Journal of Intangible Heritage 10
Uchiyama Y., Tanaka Y., Matsuoka H., Kohsaka R. Expectations of residents and tourists of agriculture-related certification systems: analysis of public perceptions 2017 Journal of Ethnic Foods 4 2
Appendix B - GIs responding the research form
Geographical Indication General Category Product/service Sector Register
IP/DO Vale dos Vinhedos Agri-food (drink) Wines and sparkling wines 19/11/2002
IP Campo das Vertentes Agri-food (drink) Coffee 24/11/2020
IP Sao Joao Del-Rei Handcraft Handcraft 07/02/2012
IP Franca Industry Shoes/Fashion 07/02/2012
IP Oeste do Paraná Agr -food (food) Honey and Propolis 04/07/2017
IP Altos Montes Agr -food (drink) Wines and sparkling wines 11/12/2012
IP Canastra Agr -food (food) Cheese 13/03/2012
IP Sao Mateus Agr -food (drink) Other food products (mate) 27/06/2017
IP/DO Cerrado Mineiro Agr -food (drink) Coffee 14/04/2005
IP Pelotas Agr -food (food) Other food products (sweets) 30/08/2011
IP Matas de Minas Agr -food (drink) Coffee 15/12/2020
IP Vales da Uva Goethe Agr -food (drink) Wines and sparkling wines 14/02/2012
DO Corupá Agr -food (food) Fruit production 28/08/2018
IP Marialva Agr -food (food) Fruit production 27/06/2017
IP Antonina Agr -food (food) Other food products (Banana candy) 29/12/2020
IP Cachoeiro de Itapemirim Stones/Minerals Rocks and ornamental stones 29/05/2012
IP Regiao das Lagoas de Mundaú Manguaba Handcraft Handcraft 19/04/2016
IP Venda Nova do Imigrante Agr -food (food) Meat, fish and byproducts 12/06/2018
IP Alta Mogiana Agr -food (drink) Coffee 17/09/2013
IP Maués Agr -food (food) Fruit production 16/01/2018
IP Caicó Artesanato Handcraft 23/06/2020
IP Uarini Agri-food (food) Other food products 27/08/2019
IP Norte Pioneiro do Paraná Agri-food (drink) Coffee 25/09/2012
IP Paraíba Handcraft Handcraft 16/10/2012
IP Capanema Agr -food (food) Other food products 17/12/2019
DO Manguezais de Alagoas Agr -food (food) Honey and Propolis 17/07/2012
IP Sao Tiago Agr -food (food) Other food products 05/02/2013
DO Montanhas do Espirito Santo Agr -food (drink) Coffee 04/05/2021
IP Cruzeiro do Sul Agr -food (food) Other food products 22/08/2017
IP Divina Pastora Handcraft Handcraft 26/12/2012
IP Pirenópolis Handcraft Handcraft 09/07/2019
IP Salinas Agr -food (drink) Cachaça (Brazilian sugar cane rum) 16/10/2012
DO Ortigueira Agr -food (food) Honey and Propolis 01/09/2015
IP Microrregiao Abaíra Agr -food (drink) Cachaça (Brazilian sugar cane rum) 14/10/2014
DO Mantiqueira de Minas Agr -food (drink) Coffee 31/05/2011
IP Oeste da Bahia Agr -food (drink) Coffee 14/05/2019
IP Maracajú Agr -food (food) Meat, fish and byproducts 24/11/2015
IP Pampa Gaúcho da Campanha Meridional Agri-food (food) Meat, fish and byproducts 12/12/2006
IP Serro Agri-food (food) Cheese 13/12/2011
IP Pinto Bandeira Agri-food (drink) Wines and sparkling wines 13/07/2010
IP Cariri Paraibano Handcraft Handcraft 24/09/2013
IP Monte Belo Agr -food (drink) Wines and sparkling wines 01/10/2013
IP Piauí Agr -food (drink) Other food products 26/08/2014
IP Sul da Bahia Agr -food (food) Fruit production 24/04/2018
IP Witmarsum Agr -food (food) Cheese 24/04/2018
IP Sabará Agr -food (food) Fruit production 23/10/2018
IP Marajó Agr -food (food) Cheese 23/03/2021
IP Novo Remanso Agr -food (food) Fruit production 09/06/2020
IP Tomé-Agu Agr -food (food) Fruit production 29/01/2019
DO Campos de Cima da Serra Agr -food (food) Cheese 03/03/2020
DO Caparaó Agr -food (drink) Coffee 02/02/2021
IP Paraty Agr -food (drink) Cachaça (Brazilian sugar cane rum) 10/07/2007
DO Terra Indígena de Andirá-Marau Agr -food (food) Fruit production 20/10/2020
IP Goiabeiras Handcraft Handcraft 04/10/2011
DO Litoral Norte Gaúcho Agri-food (food) Other food products 24/08/2010
