Comparative Study of GI Tags in India and Other Asian Countries: Analysing the Impact of MSMEs on Artisanal Industry

INTRODUCTION

Intellectual property is the result of human ingenuity, inventiveness, skill, and innovative idea. It is a property which could be purchased, sold, mortgaged, licensed, and exchanged in the same way like any other property. IPRs, or intellectual property rights simply means the legal rights associated with skillful as well as imaginative work in the performance of concepts. It grants right to safeguard the new creation and innovation of the human intellect. These days, this has become an essential feature to safeguard

Intellectual Properties to prevent it from unauthorized use in the competitive world, also it provides an edge over competitors. These rights are protected only when it possesses the capability of being used for industrial application, which means it is available for public usage and help the innovator or creator to get profits from them as economic incentive. These rights are result of intellectual endeavors in the fields of literature, art, engineering, technology, science, manufacturing, business, and agriculture, among others.

Types of IPRs

Intellectual property rights come in various forms, including as follows: Trademarks, Patents, Copyrights, Geographical Indications, Trade Secrets, Industrial Design, Semiconductor chips and Integrated Circuits.

Intellectual property rights (IPR) are the legal protections given to inventors or creators in order to protect the creative work in domain like arts, science, literature, and other fields for a certain period. Meanwhile, these rights allow the inventor or creator their assignee, for the exclusive ability for complete use of their creation, invention or work. Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects both the material and moral interests of those who create works in science, literature, or the arts, establishing these intellectual property rights.

The World Intellectual Property Organization i.e. WIPO has a paramount role in managing the global protection of intellectual property rights. It turns out to be the first global treaties that recognize importance of intellectual property, including Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883) and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1886).

GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION

Geographical indications are the labels implemented on the goods with a certain geographic origin, attributes, reputation, or characteristics that are basically associated with that origin. In India, Gis deals with agricultural items, handicrafts, and manufactured commodities. GIs can safeguard consumers, compensate producers, and promote sustainable regional development by anchoring goods to location and custom. Names and signs that identify products as coming from a certain location where a particular quality, reputation, or other attributes are essentially assigned to that geographic origin are protected by geographical indications (GIs). GIs are a desirable tool to preserve heritage goods, create value, and sustain rural livelihoods throughout Asia due to the region’s varied agricultural and artisanal traditions.

In order to learn more about design decisions, enforcement tactics, market integration, and socioeconomic results, this study contrasts India’s GI system with a few Asian counterparts.

The geographical Indication shows that particular goods originate from a certain nation, region or locality and also have some unique properties, qualities or reputation, that are attributable to its place of origin. These unique features or properties are a result of several factors. For instance, natural factors like raw materials, soil, climate of that region, temperature of the place, moisture content, or various methods of manufacture or preparation of the certain product such as traditional production methods or other human factors like prevalence of like businesses in the same region, expertise in the production or making of unique products and also mitigating certain quality standards. The relation between the product and the certain region have become very famous that, if any reference is made to the place, it reminds about the products being produced in that certain place and the vice versa. For instance, we have District of Champagne i.e. France, that comes to mind and wine ‘Champagne’ is evident of being manufactured in France.¹

The current understanding of “Geographical Indication” encompasses the earlier concepts of “indication of source” and “appellation of origin.” The “Indication of source” signifies the place or country of origin of a product, such as “Made in India,” “Made in Germany,” or “Product of Japan.” These labels do not imply the quality of the product; they simply denote its source, ensuring that products with unique characteristics are not misrepresented as coming from a different location. “Appellation of Origin” can be referred as a sign that indicates, a product originates in that certain geographical location only, when the unique qualities of the product are because of the geographical location and to its environment, that includes natural and human factors as well.²

In the journey toward achieving excellence in quality, products also gain recognition linked to their geographical origin. As a result, consumers often interpret the name of the origin as an indication of the products’ quality. These references, which suggest quality by highlighting the place from which the goods originate, are referred to as geographical indications and are afforded protection similar to that of other intellectual properties. The distinction that a geographical indication may have over other intellectual properties such as trade mark, patents, and designs are that, due to it links to specific geographical area and not to any other specific enterprise, and also it can’t get registered by any single commercial enterprise. The expression of it was also given by Jayashree Watal says, “No single enterprise or even a set of enterprises owns this distinctive sign and, therefore, unlike trade mark, there is no right conferred or any entity to grant or refuse authorization on use. Rather, all undertakings situated in the specified geographical area are authorized to use the geographical indication on the specified products produced by them”.³

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF LAW ON GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS

Before 1999, India lacked a distinct geographical indicators law that would have sufficiently safeguarded producers’ interests. India did not pass a law pertaining to geographical indicators until 1999, even though she was a signatory to the TRIPs Agreement. However, the judiciary has been proactive in stopping people from using geographical indicators illegally. In Mohan Meakin v. Scotch Whisky, the Delhi High Court upheld the Registrar of Trademarks’ decision to deny registration of the applicant’s mark, which was made with an intention to be used on whisky made in India and featured the words “Highland Chief” along with a picture of a man’s head and shoulders wearing a Scottish highland costume that included, among other things, a plaid, a feather bonnet and edged with tartan, a well-known symbol of Scottish origin.

In other case, Scotch Whisky Association v. Pravara Sahakar Karkhana, the Whisky Association was succeeded in stopping the defendants from selling their whisky with the information ‘Blended with Scotch’ along with the device of Scottish drummer wearing a kilt or tartan and the word ‘Drum Beater’.⁴

Basmati Controversy

It was in 1997, when India was serious to protect its geographical Indications. The reason behind it was the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) gives patent to the Ricetec Inc, it is a multinational company in 1997 for the grains with name of ‘Basmati’ rice. It claimed by them that these new varieties possess better properties than the original basmati rice, also could be grown in specific areas in North America. The company had been granted various trademark for several years to sell its version of Basmati Rice in the name of ‘Taxmati’, ‘Kasmati’, and ‘Jasmati’. The controversy arose, and on the other hand, India claimed that patent granted to them was invalid. That too, the marketing of rice by company under the name ‘Basmati’ which is in Indian perspective, had been a geographical indication of India and shouldn’t be allowed to be cultivated in any other region. The reality unfolds the reason of saying so, as it is known worldwide, the long-grained rice variety with aroma known as Basmati, it is a traditional produce that is cultivated in sub-Himalayas region. It is a tradition of India and Pakistan of growing it for so many years by applying traditional methods and had developed many varieties. The argument given by India in this case was that Basmati is a geographical indication and grown here in India and Pakistan for many years, so that no other nation can allow people to use this certain indication of that location.

With regard to the use of geographical indication Basmati, the claim of Ricetec Inc. was that it was the genetic name for varieties of aromatic rice, and not a specific variety of rice that was indigenous to India, as this had been used for decades in a generic manner highlighting this variety from other regions such as American Basmati, and Thai Basmati. Now the question arises, whether basmati satisfies the definition of GI Tags under the TRIPS agreement. Thus, it was concluded that, Basmati satisfies the criteria for protection under the TRIPS agreement. The company still claims that even if it satisfied the criteria for the TRIPS agreement, it has lapsed into the public domain and is generic. Thus, after the exclusive research of more than two years, India assembled information and challenged this granted patent of Ricetec Inc. in the year 2000. Only three out of the twenty claims made by the company were patented by the USPTO. These three strains of Basmati on the protection of which was granted were of a very evident and clear distinction. The patent officials argued that Ricetec can use Basmati trademark because it is not a trademarked word or a geographical name, unlike Champagne, that are specific to certain geographical regions. The case further indicated that Basmati is not a geographical indicator even in India, Pakistan and Thailand. The Basmati episode is not a smooth sail with the infringement being felt during the mid of 1990s, when both Texmati and Jasmati were initially launched on the retail shelves of grocery chains. This incident was heavily publicized then and was a wake-up call to India. This led to the legislation of Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 by India. This is the initial special statute that was enacted to cater the registration and protection of geographical indications.⁵

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS ON GI TAGS

In order to preserve the distinctive identity and quality of goods with a GI tag, certain international agreements and systems are essential.

Paris Convention: A multilateral convention for the protection of industrial property rights, including geographical indications, is provided by the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883). It also creates the rights of priority and national treatment.

Lisbon System: International registration of appellations of origin, a specific type of GI, is provided for in the Lisbon Agreement that concerns the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration (1958). This ensures safeguarding is extended to all contracting states and provides a centralized filing procedure

Madrid System: Although the Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks is mostly concerned with trademarks, it can also be used to protect geographical indications by registering collective or certification marks.⁶

GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION TAGS IN INDIA

Geographical Indications (GI) Tags in India is a kind of intellectual property which marks products of being belonging to a particular geographical location, where a certain unique quality or other factor is essentially due to its geographical origin. GI tags improve marketability, help rural development, and protect traditional knowledge. In India, Geographical Indications (GI) tags are an important type of IP. They designate goods as belonging from a certain geographic area where the product’s reputation, quality, or other unique features are mainly due to place of origin. This ensures that the traditional knowledge, regional handicrafts, and indigenous products are protected and their distinctiveness is maintained. The GI tags are useful in preserving cultural heritage, rural economic development, and increasing the marketability of the products. India has a large number of GI-tagged products, such as handicrafts, food products, textiles, and agricultural products. The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act of 1999, is the legal framework deals with the registration, protection, and enforcement of GI tags in India. This Act ensures that the GI tag is not misused and imitated by limiting the use of the GI tag to the authorized producers of the specified geographic region. Some of the most popular GI products of India are Darjeeling Tea, known for its distinct flavor and aroma; Alphonso Mango, famous for its sweetness and texture; Kanchipuram Silk, renowned for its intricate weaving and artistic skills; Basmati Rice, known for its distinct grain quality; and Darjeeling Tea, admired globally for its distinct aroma and flavor.

GI Tags granted in different states of India, for instance, Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of GI-tagged products as of April 2025, such as Lucknow chikan craft, Farrukhabad prints, Firozabad glass, Moradabad metal crafts, Meerut scissors, Khurja pottery, Aligarh tala, Banaras pan etc. The other states like Gujarat have been granted with many GI Tags like Kutch embroidery, Surat Zari craft, Jamnagar bandhani, Ahmedabad sodagari block print etc. In Himachal Pradesh got GI tags on Kullu Shawl, Kangra tea, Chamba Rumal, Kangra paintings. In Madhya Pradesh such as Chanderi sarees, Ratlami sev, leather toys of Indore, Sharbati gehu, Ujjain batik print, Gwalior handmade carpet etc. In Maharashtra got tags for Paithani sarees and fabrics, Mahabaleshwar strawberry, Nashik grapes, Beed custard apple, Alibag white onion, Nandurbar mirchi, Nandurbar amchur etc. in Punjab like Punjab Phulkari and basmati (agriculture).

LEGAL FRAMEWORK RELATED TO GI (INDIA)

The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 created a unique legal framework for GIs in India. This law protects products that come from specific geographic areas and have qualities or a reputation tied to those locations. It aims to safeguard the interests of producers by allowing them to stop unauthorized use or imitation of their regional products. The Indian GI Act recognizes GIs legally and gives producers the right to use the GI label on authentic goods from the specified area. To gain protection, manufacturers or their representatives must submit an application to the Geographical Indications Registry. The GI prevents others from misusing it by giving holders the exclusive right to use the indication for the registered items.

India’s GIs law meets the standards framed by the WTO’s agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. It protects both products and handicrafts, including Basmati rice, Darjeeling tea, and crafts from specific states. The law also imposes penalties for the improper use of registered GIs.

PROTECTION OF GI TAGS IN OTHER ASIAN NATIONS UNDER GOVERNMENTAL SCHEMES

While many Asian countries have works for the similar goals for their Geographical Indications protection programs, their legal systems, management practices, and enforcement strategies differ. Important schemes include:

India

•  Governed by the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999.

•  It mainly dealt by the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks through the GI Registry.

•  provides registration for products from a specific region that have unique traits tied to their origin.

•  Registration gives exclusive rights to use the GI and provides legal remedies against infringement.

China

•  Protected by the Trademark Law and the Regulations on the Protection of Geographical Indications Products.

•  GI products can be registered as certification marks or collective marks.

•  Managed by the National Intellectual Property Administration of China (CNIPA).

•  It mainly focuses on the traceability related to geographical origin and quality control.

Japan

•  The Act on Protection of Geographical Indications for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs, came into the effect in 2015, set up GI protection.

•  It is governed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).

•  It emphasizes on fisheries, forestry, and agricultural products that meet strict production and quality standards.

•  Registration grants exclusive usage and protection from misuse.

Thailand

•  The Geographical Indications Act B.E. 2546 (2003) curbs the GI protection. The Department of Intellectual Property governs its administration.

•  It requires the proof of origin and unique features to register.

•  It imposes fines for infringement and exclusive rights are examples of protection.

South Korea

•  Protected by the Agricultural Products Quality Control Act and the Trademark Act. The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) delts with the charge of its administration.

•  It has a certification system that guarantees the goods to fulfil the requirements related to their origin and enforcing penalties for fraudulent labelling are part of enforcement.

Common characteristics of these schemes:

•  The registration process mandates the proof of origin and distinctive characteristics related to geography.

•  It provides the legal protection against unapproved use, copying, and deceptive labelling.

•  It is mitigated by specialized GI registries or national intellectual property organizations.

•  A focus on upholding traceability and product standards.

A good knowledge of GI protection schemes in Asian nations serves as a basis for comparison. It illustrates how varying legal traditions and administrative procedures influence the marketing and protection of products associated with specific geographical areas. A balanced perspective can be achieved by organizing the subject matter of an academic section on this topic according to legal systems, administrative bodies, registration procedures, enforcement measures, and socio-economic effects.

This paper also provides information on the sustainability of Geographical Indication (GI) products. It does so by analyzing how these products can ensure the protection of property rights associated with traditional knowledge and local resources in developing nations. It compares the GIs schemes related to rice in India and Thailand, specifically Khao Sangyod Muang Phatthalung from Thailand and Navara rice from India. Both rice are red-colored GI rice varieties that are famous for their high nutritional content and are an essential part of cultural and traditional foods. The findings of the comparison indicate that although GI registration benefits farmers, particularly with regard to the selling price, the existing control and certification mechanisms require improvement. This will help ensure quality assurance for consumers at a reasonable cost. Sangyod rice is commonly grown in Southern Thailand, but its registration is limited to Phatthalung province. This registration helps farmers of that certain area to earn more money. Thailand has three control systems for GI rice: self, internal, and external. To get PGI certification for the EU market, external control is needed. This process is very expensive, but the government provides subsidies. In contrast, Thai GI certification is much cheaper but only applies to the domestic market.

Navara rice is grown in nine districts namely, Palakkad, Malappuram, Calicut, Wayanad, Kannur, Trichur, Ernakulam, Kottayam, and Alleppey in the state of Kerala. This rice also possesses medicinal qualities and one of the native genetic resources of that state. Since it can be witnessed that it is originated in a small geographical location and people are less aware of it, and its cultivation and usage are restricted to the state of Kerala, it can be called as an endemic crop. In Kerala, the cultivation of Navara organic rice has become popular, but its growth has been slow. The cultivation of Navara does not involve any inorganic fertilizer or agro-chemicals, as it may influence its medicinal properties. In Phatthalung, either Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) or some authentic and organic practice is needed for the GI Sangyod Muang Phatthalung. Both conventional and contemporary practices is used in cultivation process for both varieties. Hence, the code of practice (COP) for GI Navara rice cultivation uses conventional practices at all levels, from seed processing to plant protection and nutrition. On the other hand, the COP for Sangyod rice cultivation does not involve local knowledge per se. The uniqueness of this COP is based on the type and geographical location. For genuine and quality Sangyod rice, quality seeds of the GI product are needed. The Phatthalung Rice Seed Center, under the Rice Department, supplies and promotes the production of quality seeds among local farmers. On the other hand, the absence of true seeds and the limited use of seeds, their availability has been diminished the production of Navara in the recent past.

The process of manual harvesting has continued to be economically disadvantageous and farmers have resulted into mechanized methods of harvesting. In the case of Navara, labor constitutes over 65 percent of the overall cost of cultivating one hectare. Only farmers with the certification obtained among the surveyed farmers were capable of attaining higher revenues capable of covering the high cost of labor. The price estimated by the Navara Rice Farmers Society was INR 400/kg, based on the cost of organic production and the profit margin that is likely to be achieved in respect of the variety. This price is however limited by the availability of non-authentic Navara which is available at significantly lower prices in the market. The geographical Indications (GIs) in the case of Sangyod rice will not be able to give farmers increased revenues than non-certified rice, which is mostly because of the substantial costs on fertilizers. Even though GI-certified products are offered a better price in the farmgate than their non-certified counterparts, they have lower returns as compared to those certified as organic. The results show that the government supports and promotes the use of Plant Geographical Indication (PGI) rice in Thailand but the farmers do not receive similar reward, mainly due to production expenses and lack of consumer awareness that limits the access to foreign markets. Similarly, the registered farmers would enjoy more benefits with GI rice in India provided that the system of certification management was more rigid. This is why there is a strong necessity to seek ways on improving the control system that operates the production and marketing of GI certification and to introduce additional useful training programmes, and as a result, to enhance the economic profitability of cultivating GI indigenous rice.⁷

ROLE OF MSME IN ARTISANAL ECONOMICS IN INDIA

MSMEs also known as micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises, is an essential part of the path of development of artisanal economies in India. More than 200 million people are directly or indirectly working in the artisan industry. Mostly unskilled, predominantly rural and labor intensive, this industry is highly decentralized and mainly seen in rural areas, strengthening beyond of the traditional industrial-based production to become the second largest employer after the agricultural sector. MSMEs are important in maintenance of rich-culture heritage and artisanal skills of India by encouraging craft-based business, which has the effect of creating jobs and encouraging macroeconomic growth. The resources, creative support system, skill building and strengthened market network, especially connecting rural producers to larger domestic and global markets provides artisans with the ability to adapt to changing demand trends and market competitive pressures associated with industrial production.⁸

The spreading of economic activity in rural, semi-urban areas and the backward regions, where most of the craftsman live in, is one of the distinctive features of MSME sector, which is generally recognized as the driver of national development. This dispersion has enabled an even-handed sharing of developmental benefits across spatial dimensions. MSMEs are also characterized by flexibility in operations and mobility across regions, which are invaluable towards the sustainability of small-scale craft businesses and facilitating inclusive development. Besides, their comparatively low capital expenditures to start and grow such businesses make them an appealing investment vehicle. Nevertheless, in spite of their growth and importance, MSMEs continue to face various hurdles such as the threat of being replaced by mass-produced goods, lack of finance, restricted market penetration, poor infrastructure and technological obsolescence.⁹¹⁰ In order to overcome these obstacles and attain sustainability, sustainable growth strategies for MSMEs concentrate on technical innovation, skill transfer, and encouraging entrepreneurship among craftspeople have been implemented. These actions are meant to harmonize the growth path of MSMEs with development on a larger scale.¹¹Through the established a set of policies, programs, and regular censuses aimed at enhancing the knowledge and determination of this sector. MSMEs have played significant role as subsidiary units to larger manufacturing enterprises and creating an enabling environment.¹² MSMEs still face ongoing challenges such as competition by mass-produced products, lack of funds, poor infrastructure, and obsolescence of technology. The positive effect of promoting inclusive growth through as MSMEs helps vulnerable and marginalized populations, such as women artisans, where certain government initiatives support women’s entrepreneurship within the MSME ecosystem. Since some of the government initiatives are aimed for guaranteeing wider involvement in economic development and optimizing the craft sector’s economic potential. In conclusion, the efforts are necessary in ensuring that more people are involved in economic development and also to open the full economic potential of the craft sector. They serve as pillars for equitable and long-term economic growth based on India’s traditional artisanal strengths.¹³

Geographical Indication (GI) tags in India are an invaluable tool of protection of intellectual property in India that documents the originality of the products and shows their places of origin. This certification has the effect of boosting market values and conserving traditional wisdom. The Indian government has expressed a plan to achieve 10,000 GI registrations by 2030 in order to revive rural, agricultural, and handicraft industries. One of the most notable initiatives to use GI tags for local economic growth is the One District One Product (ODOP) Scheme. This program aims to encourage unique local products that can granted with GI tags. It focuses on identifying, branding, and marketing one special product per district. Additionally, it includes Value Chain Development to improve production, design, and packaging to enhance marketability, while also working alongside District Export Action Plans. The Indian government has launched several specific programs and policies to support MSMEs, including those in the artisanal economy, so they can grow, compete, and become more sustainable.

1.  Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana (PMMY): provides micro and small business units, many of which are artisan cooperatives, with easy access to unsecured credit. This financial system alleviates capital restrictions, which allows the investment in the infrastructure, tools, and raw materials required to expand the operations.

2.  Cluster Development Program: Cluster Development Program projects enable the establishment and improvement of artisan clusters by offering facilities spaces, infrastructural improvement, skills trainings and market network. All these measures help strengthen production capacity, product quality and marketing efficacy of the craftspeople working in the clusters.

3.  Market Support and Export Facilitation: The policies of market support and export facilitation that are executed by the Ministry of MSME are introduced to integrate artisanal MSMEs into international value chains through support of product marketing, quality certification and promotion of exports. The program is in line with strategic objectives of the Aatmanirbhar Bharat Abhiyan that aims to increase contribution of MSME exports.

4.  Skill Development and Capacity Building: The capacity building and skill development activities are designed to align the artisan skills and capabilities with the evolving quality parameters and customer requirements with the implementation of the structured training and technology.

5.  Women Entrepreneurs Specific Initiatives: Specific initiatives for women entrepreneurs, like Stand-Up India and Mahila Coir Yojana, provide economic assistance and market access to women artisans, thus ensuring the inclusive development of the artisan sector.

6.  Technological Support and Digital Adoption: To enable artisanal businesses to develop and maintain their competitiveness, the government encourages the adoption of cutting-edge technology like IoT for monitoring, mentoring, and enhancing production processes in MSMEs.¹⁴

The set of these policies is a solid framework that supports the economic sustainability of artisanal MSMEs in India, managing the issue of capital, infrastructure, access to the market, and insufficiency of human capital and regulatory complications.

OBSTACLES FACED BY MSMES IN COMPETING WITH MASS-PRODUCED GOODS IN ARTISANAL SECTOR

The differences in scale, level of operational efficiency, and the access to resources pose significant barriers to MSMEs when they have to face mass-produced counterparts. The most prominent of these challenges is the lack of finances which limits the capacity of MSMEs to invest in the state of art technology, high end raw materials and advanced methods of manufacture that will be used to attain economies of scale and cost-efficiency. This is financial constraint is compounded by credit constraints and unavailability of input tax credit within the GST system which results in the working-capital deficits and high operational costs that leads to working capital shortages and greater operational costs for many MSMEs.¹⁵

Other daunting challenges are infrastructure and technical weaknesses. Not reliant on economies of scale, automation, and lean supply chains, unlike large scale producers, MSMEs often rely on labor-intensive and archaic production techniques that limit the pace and quantity of production. Further, due to a lack of e-commerce sites and digital literacy, many artisanal MSMEs have limited access to the market and contribute to their competitive disadvantage in the expanded local and international markets.¹⁶

On top of MSMEs are compliance burdens and complexity in regulations. There are larger manufacturers who have available specific resources to route through compliance frameworks, however, with MSMEs, disproportionate levels of expenditure and administrative effort are required to achieve compliance with requirements like GST compliance, and thus, operational costs are inflated, and further barriers to entry are created.¹⁷

The threat of substitutes in the form of mass-produced goods is based on the ability of large manufacturers to compete based on economies of scale. This creates price-based competition which artisanal MSMEs have to counter and in most cases, this requires the firms to focus on product originality and quality, a strategy that they are crippled to express due to lack of marketing capabilities and finances to establish their product features in a crowded market. ¹⁸

Lastly, MSMEs face barriers in research and development, innovation, and technology adoption- potentials involved in improving productivity and product differentiation. Artisan MSMEs find it difficult to follow the continuous process and cost-reduction made by mass producers, who never hesitate to adopt the technological inventions.¹⁹

In summary, MSMEs in the artisanal sector experience nexus of limitation like restricted access to finance, infrastructure and technology limitations, regulatory compliance requirements, and cutthroat price wars of mass-produced items. These limitations hamper their ability to develop, innovate, and compete successfully in increasingly complex and globalized marketplaces.

ROLE OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN PROTECTION OF GI TAGS IN VARIOUS ASIAN NATIONS

Many Asian jurisdictions are developing geographical indication (GI) protection systems that are more based on traditional knowledge (TK). These jurisdictions share comprehensive collections of TK, local traditions and cultural manifestations which form the substratum of a significant fraction of GI-designated products, in particular in the areas of agriculture, handicraft, and gastronomy. The GI statutes in most Asian countries include community rights. The TK and practices of local and tribal communities, which are passed down across generations, are inextricably connected with the unique attributes and admiration of products that are connected with specific geographic places. In this regard, GI regulations protect not only an appellative denomination or provenance but also the traditional practices, cultural values and production techniques that give these products their uniqueness. As an example, the GI Act of 1999 in India is being enforced alongside other related laws, i.e. the Biological Diversity Act (2002), the Plant Variety Protection and Farmer Rights Act (2001) which in effect provides a conservation-based goal, protecting both TK and geographic origin. This convergence of laws helps in preserving the knowledge of indigenous people and preventing its unsuitable use or misuse. In the same way, the 2020 Geographical Indications (Registration and Protection) Act, a sui generis law in Pakistan, implies the corrections of the earlier institutional failures and advances the protection of TK that is related to the GI products. It meant to safeguard the culture of the certain region and promote sustainable development and creation of economic value. Even though the protection modalities vary throughout the region, the results of empirical research suggest that Malaysia, China, Indonesia, and Thailand also recognize the necessity to preserve TK as part of their GI framework. In South Asia, TK is mostly susceptible to erosion and pilferage due to its oral transmission and the lack of any system of writing. As a result, GI legislation provides a legal framework to prevent such losses through the provision of collective rights to communities when it comes to the use of TK integrated in the GI products. Such legal provisions therefore support community livelihoods and contribute to cultural heritage conservation.

Besides the law, TK has an influence on the operational aspects of GI certification and regulatory oversight. The quality of the certification and control regimes depends greatly on the local producer and subject-matter experts in a number of Southeast Asian states. The reliance here highlights the critical importance of TK in ensuring authenticity and compliance to GI standards of the products. At the international level, there is no universal agreement or international law authority that has a single jurisdiction on the protection of TK. However, the intersection of GI and TK is a viable factor in the field of attention of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), especially to developing economies that want to preserve their cultural and biological diversities. To conclude, TK implementation in Asian GI protection regimes supports claims of products originality, protection of communal rights, alleviates theft and facilitates sustainable economic growth. The rules understand that the preservation and promotion of TK tied to products’ geographical origins are significant both culturally and economically.²⁰

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Geographical Indication (GI) is a relatively recent addition to the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) framework. Nonetheless, this does not diminish its importance as a significant element impacting the global food and agriculture sector. The GI Act of 1999 aims to tackle various issues regarding the commercial use of geographical indications while ensuring the protection of rights for registered owners or authorized users of such indications. These rights are safeguarded under Indian law, enabling producers and traders in India’s agricultural sector to seek comparable protection in other member countries of the World Trade Organization. It, in turn, will prevent the repetition of a controversy like same happened with Basmati rice.²¹ In India, geographical indications can be an effective means of improving export competitiveness, conserving culture, and rural development. However, a good strategy is required for the same. This includes legal protection, market development, enforcement, skill development, and fair benefit sharing. Geographical indications can transform from being a mere symbol to becoming sustainable economic value for communities through strategic policy intervention and cooperation. In Asia, geographical indications can help preserve cultural heritage and enhance the economy. A comparison study indicates that those with a strong legal system, in addition to support infrastructure, achieved better results. Policymakers should concentrate on skill development of producers, enforcement, and regional cooperation rather than relying on legal formalization alone to reap the benefits of geographical indications.

*****

Footnotes

1. Ahuja V K, Third Edition, ISBN 978-81-312-5165-2

2. Ahuja V K, Third Edition, ISBN 978-81-312-5165-2

3. Jayashree Watal, (Oxford 2001, third impression 2002), p. 263

4. Ahuja V K, LexisNexis, ISBN 978-81-8038-143-0

5. Ahuja V K, LexisNexis, ISBN 978-81-8038-143-0

6. https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/gi-tag/

7. Blakeney, et al., (2020); Petruang N. et al., (2022)

8. Sharma Agastya, IJSSER, Jan, 2024

9. M C Ramesh, Growth and Working of MSME in India: An Overview, Feb, 2021

10. Shelly Richa, International journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Sep, 2020

11. Tripathi Ravindra, Jan, 2013; Majumdar Prarthana, Jan, 2017

12. Surjan Sapna, MSMEs intertemporal Evaluation- India and Madhya Pradesh Sept, 2019; Kaur Gurneet, International Journal of Research- GRANTHAALAYAH, May, 2017

13. Shelly Richa, International journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Sep, 2020

14. Maheshkar Chandan et al., (2021)

15. Sureka Anchit et al., 2024; Taneja Apurva, Impact of GST on MSMEs in Bikaner District, Jun, 2025

16. Kaur Pradeep, Digital Transformation and E-Commerce adoption by MSMEs in Jalandhar’s Sports Goods Sector, Apr 21, 2025; Kumar Kottur, International Journal on Science and Technology, Oct,2025

17. Taneja Apurva, Impact of GST on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises in Bikaner District, Jun, 2025

18. Upendar, Social Sciences (ISSN 2455-2267), Oct, 2016; Kumar Kottur, International Journal on Science and Technology, Oct, 2025

19. Singh Davinder, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Aug, 2023

20. Jose et al. 2021, Indonesian Journal of International law, Vol. 18: No. 3, Article 5

21. Ahuja V K, 3^rd edition, ISBN 978-81-312-5165-2, LexisNexis