Geographical Indications (GIs) have become an important subject in regional trade, cultural identity, intellectual property protection, and economic development, particularly in South Asia. Countries in this region possess rich agricultural traditions, handicrafts, cultural diversity, and traditional knowledge systems. Because many products, traditions, and geographical regions historically developed before modern political boundaries were established, neighbouring states often share cultural and commercial associations with similar goods. As a result, disputes, cooperation, and legal challenges relating to GIs frequently arise among neighbouring countries.
India’s experiences with neighbouring states in relation to GIs have been both cooperative and contentious. Products such as Basmati Rice, Darjeeling Tea, Pashmina Shawls, and traditional handicrafts have generated debates concerning geographical ownership, shared heritage, historical use, and international protection. These experiences demonstrate that GI protection involves not only intellectual property law but also diplomacy, trade policy, cultural heritage, and regional cooperation.
A Geographical Indication identifies goods as originating from a specific territory, region, or locality where a given quality, reputation, or characteristic of the goods is essentially attributable to that geographical origin. In India, GIs are protected under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, enacted in compliance with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement).
One of the most significant experiences involving neighbouring states concerns the dispute over Basmati Rice between India and Pakistan. Basmati Rice is a premium long-grain aromatic rice traditionally cultivated in the Indo-Gangetic plains covering regions of northern India and parts of Pakistan. Both countries claim historical and geographical association with the product.
The Basmati issue gained international attention when foreign companies attempted to market rice products using the term “Basmati.” One of the most notable controversies arose in the late 1990s when a US company obtained patent-related claims involving rice varieties marketed as Basmati-type rice. This triggered concerns regarding biopiracy, misappropriation of traditional products, and protection of regional reputation.
India and Pakistan both recognize Basmati as a product deeply connected with their agricultural heritage. However, disputes arose regarding the geographical boundaries entitled to use the GI and the extent of exclusive protection in international markets. Such conflicts illustrate the complexity of GI protection where historical cultural regions extend across modern political borders.
The Basmati experience demonstrates the challenge of shared geographical heritage among neighbouring countries. Since many traditional products originated before partition and political division, strict national ownership claims become legally and diplomatically difficult. This has encouraged discussions regarding possible joint GI applications or cooperative protection mechanisms in some cases.
Another important example concerns Pashmina products associated with the Himalayan region. Genuine Pashmina wool originates from specific mountain goat breeds found in regions of India, Nepal, and surrounding Himalayan areas. Cross-border trade, imitation products, and disputes regarding authenticity have created enforcement challenges for producers and governments.
India has also experienced issues relating to counterfeit products entering from neighbouring countries. Unauthorized use of geographical names and imitation handicrafts often affect the reputation of genuine Indian GI products in domestic and international markets. Weak border enforcement and informal trade networks sometimes facilitate circulation of counterfeit goods.
India’s experience with Bangladesh has also highlighted the importance of GI registration and cultural identity. One notable example involved the GI registration of “Jamdani” products. Jamdani weaving traditions historically flourished in regions that now form part of both India and Bangladesh. Bangladesh secured international recognition for Jamdani as part of its cultural heritage, while India also possesses historical traditions of Jamdani weaving in West Bengal.
Such situations reveal how neighbouring countries may share overlapping cultural traditions and artisanal practices. GI protection in these circumstances requires careful balancing of historical evidence, geographical connection, and producer interests while avoiding unnecessary diplomatic conflicts.
India’s relations with Nepal in relation to GIs have generally been cooperative but also illustrate common regional challenges. Many agricultural and handicraft traditions are culturally interconnected across the Himalayan belt. Cross-border movement of goods and artisans sometimes complicates determination of geographical origin and authenticity.
Another important issue in South Asia concerns lack of awareness and institutional development regarding GI protection. Compared to the European Union, where GI systems are highly developed, several neighbouring South Asian countries historically lacked strong GI registration frameworks and enforcement mechanisms. This created difficulties in securing international protection for regional products.
Over time, however, neighbouring countries have increasingly recognized the economic and cultural importance of GIs. Countries such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka have developed legal frameworks for GI protection influenced by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) under the World Trade Organization.
India’s experience demonstrates that GI protection can also become an instrument of soft diplomacy and regional cooperation. Shared cultural products create opportunities for collaborative branding, tourism promotion, and regional trade development. Instead of treating all GI issues as competitive disputes, neighbouring countries may benefit from cooperative approaches where traditions and geographical regions overlap historically.
At the same time, GI disputes may sometimes carry nationalist and political dimensions. Since GIs are associated with national identity, cultural pride, and export markets, governments often seek exclusive recognition for products closely linked with their heritage. This can lead to tensions where neighbouring states claim similar historical associations.
One major challenge in dealing with neighbouring states is the issue of cross-border enforcement. Counterfeit products and unauthorized use of geographical names frequently move across borders through informal trade channels. Weak customs coordination and inconsistent legal standards make enforcement difficult.
For example, imitation handicrafts or agricultural products may be produced in one country and sold using another country’s geographical name. Producers of genuine GI products often face economic losses due to such unfair competition.
Another challenge concerns differing legal systems and standards among neighbouring states. Some countries follow sui generis GI systems similar to India, while others rely more heavily on trademark law or possess weaker enforcement institutions. These differences complicate regional harmonization and mutual recognition of GI rights.
The role of international agreements becomes important in addressing these challenges. Articles 22 to 24 of the TRIPS Agreement establish minimum standards for GI protection and require WTO members to prevent misleading use and unfair competition. However, TRIPS does not fully resolve issues involving shared heritage products or overlapping geographical claims.
Free Trade Agreements and bilateral cooperation arrangements may therefore play a significant role in improving regional GI protection. Mutual recognition agreements, information-sharing mechanisms, and cooperative enforcement systems can help neighbouring countries address cross-border challenges more effectively.
India’s experience with neighbouring states also demonstrates the importance of documentation and historical evidence in GI disputes. Establishing geographical origin, historical reputation, traditional production methods, and cultural association often requires extensive historical, scientific, and cultural documentation.
The role of producer associations and local communities is equally important. Effective GI protection requires cooperation among governments, producers, artisans, exporters, and legal authorities. Regional collaboration can strengthen international recognition of South Asian products in global markets.
The European Union’s experience with cross-border GIs offers useful lessons for South Asia. Several European GI products involve multiple regions or countries, and cooperative frameworks have been developed for managing such products. Similar regional approaches may eventually emerge in South Asia.
India’s GI experience also highlights the importance of balancing national interests with regional cultural realities. Many traditional products reflect centuries of shared cultural interaction rather than strictly modern national identities. A rigidly exclusive approach may therefore not always be historically accurate or commercially beneficial.
The increasing globalization of trade and digital commerce has further intensified cross-border GI challenges. Online marketplaces enable counterfeit products to reach international consumers easily. Coordinated regional enforcement and digital monitoring are becoming increasingly necessary.
In conclusion, India’s experiences with neighbouring states in relation to Geographical Indications reveal both opportunities and challenges associated with regional cultural heritage, shared traditions, and cross-border trade. Disputes such as those involving Basmati Rice, Jamdani weaving, and Pashmina products demonstrate the complexity of GI protection in regions with interconnected historical and cultural identities. At the same time, GI protection offers opportunities for regional cooperation, rural development, export promotion, and preservation of traditional knowledge. Effective management of GI relations with neighbouring states requires balanced legal frameworks, international cooperation, strong enforcement mechanisms, and recognition of the shared cultural heritage that characterizes much of South Asia.
Leave a Reply