https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3883-3035
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
The article examines how differentiated national implementation of EU policies affects later European integration – whether it leads to renewed unified vertical integration, differentiated integration, the status quo or renationalisation. It examines the case of geographical indications (GIs), an EU labelling system for food and drink based on place of origin and processes of production. Despite features such as diverse national interests and gastronationalism, differentiated implementation has resulted in renewed unified vertical integration. The article identifies three processes: EU legislative requirements encouraging the establishment of producer groups; European Court of Justice decisions which gave priority to quality over cross-border trade; the use of free trade negotiations to alter EU rules. While the integration outcomes are those expected by neo-functionalist analyses, the processes are more institutionally-based. Differences in implementation may aid rather than hinder further integration due to institutional features of EU legislation and decision making.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the editors of WEP and of the Special Issue, the anonymous referees, Martijn Huysmans, Kent Weaver and Jonathan Zeitlin for their comments on earlier drafts. Earlier versions were presented at the Luiss European Cluster seminar and the ECPR SGEU conference at Luiss in 2022, and the authors are grateful for the many comments received. The authors also thank Professor Pier Luigi Petrillo for his assistance and our interviewees.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with a minor change. This change does not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1 E.g. Schimmelfennig and Winzen define DI as occurring ‘if EU rules and policies are not legally valid in all member states- or not exclusively valid in member states’ (Citation2019: 1172).
2 Interview 6.
3 E.g. France in 1905, the Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée, Italy in 1954 for diary products and in 1963 for the wine sector, or in Spain, 1932 for wine.
4 Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the Protection of Geographical Indications and Designations of Origin for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs.
5 Interviews 6 and 8.
6 Interviews 1, 2 and 3; the French Agriculture Ministry has perhaps 10–12, while INAO has more than 200, albeit not all on GIs – interview 7.
7 For discussions of the economic value of GIs, see European Commission (Citation2013); European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (Citation2019, Citation2021); interviews 5, 7 and 8.
8 Interviews 1, 4 and 5.
9 We could not find data on the number of GI producer groups but since usually there is one producer group per GI, we use numbers of GIs as a proxy. The number of GI producers is even more elusive.
10 Interview 2.
11 Interview 1.
12 AREPO was established in May 2004 in Bordeaux by 16 regions from six European countries, and now represents 31 European regions and over 700 producer associations covering over 50% of European GIs. EFOW – European Federation of Origin Wines; in addition, in 2003 the Organization for an International Geographical Indications Network – oriGIn – was established, based in Geneva. It represents 576 associations of producers and other GI-related institutions from 40 countries. National branches were established in Italy in 2006, representing 95% of Italian Geographical Indication productions, in Spain in 2008 and in 2013 in France.
13 Interviews 1, 5 and 8.
14 Such as Euro Coop, oriGIn, EFOW, the Federation of farmers from Açores, ECTA, COPA-COGECA.
15 Interviews 5 and 8.
16 Eg Case C-469/00 Ravil SARL v Bellon Import SARL and Biraghi SpA (Grana Padano case); C-108/01 Consorzio del Prosciutto di Parma and Salumificio S. Rita SpA v Asda Stores Ltd and Hygrade Foods Ltd – the ‘Parma ham’ case).
17 Interview 6.
18 Interview 5.
19 European Parliament question, 5 July 2021, P-003435/2021 to the Commission, Mara Bizzotto (Lega).
20 Interviews 2 and 3; European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development Citation2021.
21 Huymans 2020, Interviews 1 and 4.
22 Interview 5, 7 and 8.
23 Interviews 5 and 8.
24 Interviews 2 and 3.
25 Interviews 7 and 8.
26 Interviews 5 and 8.
27 Interview 5.
28 Interview 5.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Mark Thatcher
Mark Thatcher is Professor of Political Science at Luiss University, Rome and also a visiting professor, European Institute, LSE. Recent publications include: Foreign States in Domestic Markets: Sovereign Wealth Funds and the West (with Tim Vlandas, Oxford University Press, 2021); ‘Constructing the EU’s political identity in policy making’ (with Sabine Saurugger), Comparative European Politics (2019) and ‘The state and historic buildings: preserving “the national past”’, Nations and Nationalism (2018). [[email protected]]
Monica Garcia Quesada
Monica Garcia Quesada is Associated Researcher at Centre Montesquieu d‘études de l‘action publique, Catholic University of Louvain, Louvain la Neuve. She has published in International Review for Administrative Sciences, Utilities Policy, and Journal of Public Policy, amongst others. [[email protected]]