Localized AgriFood Systems dynamics and Geographical Indications as ways to reinforce food systems' sustainability? Case studies in Mongolia and Peru

Summary in the original language of the document

Localised AgriFood Systems (LAFS), particularly when they are reinforced by a Geographical Indication (GI) registration system, are seen as a sustainable model of production and trade. This paper interrogates this assertion. Seeking the bases of LAFS and GI sustainability, it examines their appearance and continuation throughout their development trajectory, first theoretically, then thanks to two case studies ("Villa Rica coffee" in Peru and "Uvs Seabuckthorn" in Mongolia). Theoretically, LAFS ability to induce a sustainable trajectory for local resources’ valorization is established. Different types of proximities, an institutionalization process and territorial solidarity may help overcome collective action blockages and contribute to constructing an innovation system, providing that local actors may interact with the system’s external environment. Clear threats appear however during LAFS expansion, as proximities and coordination capacity are necessarily reduced, whereas increase in production may induce a stronger competition. GI could then appear as the solution, being able to delimit production area and to reinforce local organizations within it. Put to the test, this model appears quite strong during the initial phases of LAFS development, but doesn’t capture the interactions between LAFS and the other production and trade models coexisting in the food systems. LAFS and GI, which need a strong producers’ involvement, are permanently challenged by other models in which producers can engage themselves individually (private brands, organic production, niche markets…). Permanent tensions exist between collective dynamics having created a reputation that can be seen as a common resource and individual strategies using that resource and potentially weakening it.