Investigation of Socio-Economic Effects of Geographical Indication Registration: Bozcaada Çavuş Grape Sample

Öz

Purpose: In this study, it is aimed to examine the possible socio-economic effects of geographical indication registration in regard to the application example of Bozcaada Çavuş Grape.
Design/Methodolog/Approach: In the research, the qualitative research method was used and the research data were collected with a semi-structured interview form prepared in accordance with the in-depth interview method.
Findings: In the research, it has been seen that the possible socio-economic effects of Bozcaada Çavuş Grape with geographical indication registered are shaped around the themes of regional development, economic development and market creation. It has been determined that the limitations with Bozcaada Çavus Grape due to its characteristics of variety and the fact that the Bozcaada people earn their mainstay from tourism negatively affect the benefits expected from the registration of geographical indications.
Originality/Value: The research is one of the limited number of studies examining effects of expected of geographical indication registration in terms of application.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Geographical Indication Registration
• Bozcaada Çavui Grape
• Qualitative Research
• Socio-economic effect

Coğrafi İşaret Tescilinin Yaratacağı Sosyo-Ekonomik Etkilerin İncelenmesi: Bozcaada Çavuş Üzümü Örneği

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, Bozcaada Çavuş Üzümü ile ilgili uygulama örneğinde coğrafi işaret tescilinin yaratacağı olası sosyo-ekonomik etkilerin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Tasarım/Metodoloji/Yaklaşım: Araştırmada, nitel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmış olup, araştırma verileri, derinlemesine görüşme metoduna uygun olarak hazırlanmış olan yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme formu ile toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde ise araştırma yöntemine uygun olarak seçilen tematik analiz kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Araştırmada, coğrafi işaret tescilli Bozcaada Çavuş Üzümü’nün yatacağı olası sosyo-ekonomik etkilerin bölgesel gelişim, ekonomik kalkınma ve pazar oluşturma temaları etrafında şekillendiği görülmüştür. Bozcaada Çavuş Üzümü’nün çeşit özelliği gereği, sahip olduğu sınırlılıkların ve ada halkının geçimini turizmden sağlıyor oluşu, coğrafi işaret tescilinden beklenen faydaları negatif yönde etkilediği tespit edilmiştir.
Özgünlük/Değer: Araştırma, coğrafi işaret tescilinin beklenen etkileri, uygulama yönüyle inceleyen sınırlı sayıdaki çalışmalardan biridir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Coğrafi İşaret Tescili
• Bozcaada Çavuş Üzümü
• Nitel Araştırma
• Bozcaada

Kaynakça

1. Alyakut, Ö. (2016). Kültürel Ürünlerde Coğrafi İşaretleme Konusunun Medyaya Yansıması. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(45): 675-686.
2. Balogh, J. M. and Jâmbor, A. (2017). Determinants of the Revealed Comparative Advantages: The Case of Cheese Trade in the European Union. Acta Aliment, 46: 305-311.
3. Bayır, M. (2019). Küresel Tüketim Toplumu ve Küreselleştirici Araçları. Nosyon: Uluslararası Toplum ve Kültür Çalışmaları Dergisi, 2: 11-33.
4. Belletti G. and Marescotti A. (2011). Origin Products, Geographical Indications and Rural Development. Editors; Barham, A. ve Sylvander, B. Labels of Origin for Food: Local Development, Global Recognition. https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=us6pBFbdb3UC&oi=fnd&pg=PA75&dq=geographical+indication+rural+development&ots=tYF0Finbm9&sig=sFAIgd49w85BuacxaggPiZqM3uA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=geographical%20indication%20rural%20development&f=false . Erişim: Kasım, 2021.
5. Bond, C., Thilmany, D. and Keeling Bond, J. (2008). Understanding Consumer Interest in product and Process-Based Attributes for Fresh Produce.Agribusiness, 24(2), 231–252.
6. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Sage.
7. Bramley, C. (2011). A Review of The Socio-Economic Impact of Geographical Indications: Considerations fort The Developing World. WIPO Worldwide Symposium on Geographical Indications, (June 22-24, Peru), 1-22 ss.
8. Bramley, C. and Kirsten J. F. 2007. Exploring The Economic Rationale for Protecting Geographical Indicators in Agriculture. Agricultural Economics Research, Policy and Practice in Southern Africa, 46(1): 47-71.

9. Çalışkan, V. ve Koç, H. (2012). Türkiye’de Coğrafi İşaretlerin Dağılış Özelliklerinin ve Coğrafi İşaret Potansiyelinin Değerlendirilmesi. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 28: 193-214.
10. Callois, J. M. (2006). Quality Labels and Rural Development: A new Economic Geography Approach. Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), 78: 31-51.
11. Cei, L., Defrancesco, E. and Stefani, G. (2018a). From Geographical Indications to Rural Development: A Review of the Economic Effects of European Union Policy. Sustainability, 10(10):1-21.
12. Cei, L., Stefani, G., Defrancesco, E. and Lombardi, G. V. (2018b). Geographical Indications: A First Assessment of the Impact on Rural Development in Italian NUTS3 Regions. Land Use Policy, 75: 620-630.
13. Clarke, V. and Kitzinger, C. (2004). Lesbian and Gay Parents on Talk Shows: Resistance or Collusion in Heterosexism. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1: 195-217.
14. Çukur, F. ve Çukur T. (2017). Coğrafi İşaretli Ürünlerin Kırsal Kalkınma Açısından Değerlendirilmesi. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 23(2):187-194.
15. Dagne, T. W. (2010). Harnessing The Development Potential of Geographical Indications for Traditional Knowledge-based Agricultural Products. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, 5(6), 441-458.
16. Darby K., Batte M. T., Ernst, S. and Roe, B. (2006). Willingness to Pay for Locally Produced Foods: A Customer Intercept Study of Direct Market and Grocery Store Shoppers. American Agricultural Economics Association, Annual Meeting, (July 23-26, California), 1-31 ss.
17. Dardeniz, A., Şeker, M., Yancar, A., Gökbayrak, Z., Bahar, E ve Kahraman, K. A. (2011). Çanakkale’de Bozcaada Çavuş Üzüm Çeşidi Yetiştiriciliği ve Karşılaşılan Sorunlar. Uluslararası Katılımlı 1. Ali Numan Kıraç Tarım Kongresi ve Fuarı, (27-30 Nisan, Eskişehir), 1-15 ss.
18. Das K. (2006). International Protection of India’s Geographical Inditications with Special Reference to ‘Darjeeling’ Tea. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 9(5): 459-495.
19. Dokuzlu, S. (2016). Geographical Indications, Implementation and Traceability: Gemlik Table Olives. British Food Journal, 118(9): 2074-2085.
20. Dokuzlu, S., Durmuş, E. ve Meral, S. (2017). Ortak Pazarlama Ajansları Araştırma ve Fizibilite Raporu. DOĞAKA, Akdeniz Ofset, Osmaniye.
21. Fernández-Ferrín, P., Calvo-Turrientes, A., Bande, B., Artaraz-Miñón, M. and Galán-Ladero, M. M. (2018). The Valuation and Purchase of Food Products That Combine Local, Regional and Traditional Features: The Influence of Consumer Ethnocentrism. Food Quality and Preference, 64: 138-147.
22. Galli, F. and Brunori, G. (2013). Short Food Supply Chains as Drivers of Sustainable Development Evidence Document. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262933441_Short_Food_Supply_Chains_as_drivers_of_sustainable_development_Evidence_Document . Erişim: Kasım, 2021.
23. Ganesh, M. and Ajeesh, A. S. (2017). Disputes Between India and Other Countries in Geographical Indications. https://www.slideshare.net/GANESHM59/disputes-between-india-and-other-countries-in-geographical-indication-73050671 . Erişim: Kasım, 2021. Gangjee, D. S. (2017). Proving provenance? Geographical Indications Certification and Its Ambiguities. World Development, 98: 12-24.
24. Gracia, A., Pérez, P. L. and Sanjuân, A. I. (2007). Hedonic Analysis of Farmland Prices: The Case of Aragón. International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, 6(1): 96- 110.
25. Gunion, L.A., Diehl, D. C. and McDonald, D. (2011). Conducting an In-depth Interview. EDIS, 11(8): 1-3.
26. Hülür, H. (1991). Indigenism: The Possibility of Constructing a Paradigmatic Myth in The Modern Global Times Third World Situation. Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara.
27. Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative Research Method-Interviewing and Observation. Journal of Basic Clinical Pharmacy, 5(4): 87-88.
28. Jena, P. R. and Grote, U. (2012). Impact Evaluation of Traditional Basmati Rice Cultivation in Uttarakhand State of Northern India: What Implications Does It Hold for Geographical Indications?. World Development, 40(9): 1895-1907.
29. Kalof, L., Dan, E. and Dietz, T. (2008). Essentials of Social Research. Maidenhead: Open University Press, England.
30. Kan, M., Gülçubuk, B. Kan, A. ve Küçükçongar, M. (2010). Coğrafi İşaret Olarak Karaman Divle Tulum Peyniri. KMÜ Sosyal ve Ekonomik ve Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12(19): 15-23.
31. Lobb A.E. and Mazzocchi M. (2007). Domestically Produced Food: Consumer Perceptions of Origin, Safety and the Issue of Trust. Food Economics-Acta Agriculture Scand C, 4(1): 3-12.
32. Marie-Vivien, D. (2008). From Plan Variety Definition To Geographical Indication Protection: A Search For The Link Between Basmati Rice And India/Pakistan. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 11(4): 321-344.
33. Meral, Y. ve Şahin, A. (2013). Tüketicilerin Coğrafi İşaretli Ürün Algısı: Gemlik zeytini Örneği. KSÜ Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(4): 16-24.
34. Moran, W. (1993). Rural Space as Intellectual Property. Political Geography, 12 (3): 263–277.
35. Nar, M. Ş. (2015). Küreselleşmenin Tüketim Kültürü Üzerindeki Etkisi: Teknoloji Tüketimi. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(37): 941-954.
36. Özdoğan, D. (2018). Türkiye’de Zeytinyağında Kalite Ve Markalaşmanın İncelenmesi. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Aydın.
37. Pieniak,Z., Verbeke, W., Vanhonacker, F., Guerrero, L. and Hersleth, M. (2009).Association Between Traditional Food Consumption and Motives For Food Choice in Six European Countries. Appetite, 53(1): 101–108.
38. Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publishings, Inc.
39. Roy, T. (2004). Handmade in India: Traditional Craft Skills in a Changing World. A Copublication of the World Bank and Oxford University Press,Washington, DC 20433.
40. Schröck, R. (2014). Valuing Country of Origin and Organic Claim: A Hedonic Analysis of Cheese Purchases of German Households. British Food Journal, 116(7): 1070-1091.
41. Seggie, F. N. ve Bayyurt, Y. (2015). Nitel Araştırma Yöntem, Teknik, Analiz ve Yaklaşımları. Anı Yayıncılık, Ankara.
42. Stigler, G. J. (1964). Public Regulation of The Securities Markets. Journal of Business, 37(2): 117-142.
43. Suh, J. and MacPherson, A. (2007). The Impact of Geographical Indication on the Revitalisation of a Regional Economy: A Case Study of ‘Boseong’ Green Tea. Area, 39(4): 518-527.
44. Suresh, V., Kan, M. and Rentala, S. 2021. An Exploratory Study of Socio-Economic Challenges Of Jasmine Flower Cultivators and Traders of South India with Special Reference to Post Geographical ındications. J. Glob. Innov. Agric. Sci.,9(1): 57-65.
45. Tekelioğlu, Y. (2016). Bresse Kümes Hayvanı: Türünde Dünyanın Tek Coğrafi İşareti. Gastro Dergisi, 81:118-121.
46. Tekelioğlu, Y. (2019). Coğrafi İşaretler ve Türkiye Uygulaması. Ufuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(15):47-75.
47. Tregear, A., Arfini, F., Belletti, G. and Marescotti, A. (2007). Regional Foods and Rural Development: The Role of Product Qualification. Journal of Rural studies, 23(1): 12-22.
48. Vanhonacker F., Lengard, V., Hersleth, M. and Verbeke, W. (2010). Profiling European Traditional Food Consumers. British Food Journal, 112(8-9): 871-886.
49. Weiss, R. S. (1995). Learning From Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies. New York: The Free Press.
50. WTO, (2019). Uruguay Round Agreement: TRIPS Part II–Standards Concerning the Availability, Scope and Use of Intellectual Property Rights. WTO | intellectual property (TRIPS) - agreement text - standards . Erişim: Kasım, 2021.