ESRC Impact Report. For awards ending on or after 1 November 2009

Transcription

1 ESRC Impact Report For awards ending on or after 1 November 2009 This Impact Report should be completed and submitted using the grant reference as the subject to reportsofficer@esrc.ac.uk on or before the due date. Completion of this Impact Report is mandatory. It will not be possible to edit this Impact Report at a later date, as it is designed to provide a statement of the impacts of your project to date 12 months after your grant ends. Please note that the Impact Report will only be accepted if all sections have been completed in full. If a section does not apply to you, please enter n/a. Grant holders will not be eligible for further ESRC funding until the Report is accepted. (Please see Section 5 of the ESRC Research Funding Guide for details.) Please refer to the Guidance notes when completing this Impact Report. In particular, the notes explain what the ESRC means by impact. Grant Reference RES Grant Title Localising Economic Control through Clubs: Examining the Intellectual Property Protection of Feni in Goa, India Grant Start Date 19 Feb 2007 Total Amount 138, Grant End Date 30 Apr 2010 Expended: Grant holding Institution Warwick University Grant Holder Dwijen Rangnekar Grant Holder s Contact Details Address School of Law University of Warwick Coventry CV4 7AL Co-Investigators (as per project application): N/A Institution d.rangnekar@warwick.ac.uk Telephone Scientific impact A Please summarise below the scientific impact(s) your project has had. [Max 250 words] The research is possibly the first systematic study of the acquisition of an intellectual property right, a Geographical Indication (GI), in the Global South. It is further distinguished by framing GIs as a club and explicating a politics in place. My work has been informed by cultural 1

2 geographers and anthropologists who recognise the complicity of power in the social construction of standards so as to explore how local relations of power are either challenged or entrenched in the use of new legal vehicles to protect place. GIs lie at the cusp of narrations of the past (e.g. how the product was produced) and imaginations of the future (e.g. temporal modifications to production); thus, necessitating a negotiation a consensus on the specifications that co-constitute the GI. There is no a priori reason to assume that differentially endowed and located actors share such a consensus or that a consensus will endure. The case study provides an ethnographic account of how local social relations of power play out in the acquisition of an intellectual property. Further, given the developmental aspirations associated with GIs, the project draws attention to the possibilities for and limits to localisation through the articulation of specifications that coconstitute the GI. On the one hand, enduring and socially embedded supply routes require greater economic and cultural incentives to adopt GIs. While, on the other, specifications that might localise a GI (e.g. bottling at source) may not be economically desired by those seeking distant export markets. B Please outline the findings and outputs from your project which have had the scientific impact(s) outlined in 1A. [Max 250 words] In addition to the outputs identified in the End of Award Report, I now elaborate on the following two: Re-making place: The Social Construction of a Geographical Indication for Feni, Environment and Planning A (special issue, editors Dwijen Rangnekar & John Wilkinson) (In press) The Social Construction of Geographical Indications: Re-making Place (single-authored monograph, publisher being negotiated) While both outputs were noted in the End of Award Report, the article has since been reviewed/revised and is in press now. The monograph proposal has been favourably received by a leading UK and international publishers with contracts being offered and a final decision awaited from a law/society press. The finding is of a politics in place in the acquisition of a GI. The ethnographic account of the Feni case study demonstrates acquisition of a global legal vehicle enabling the entrenchment of local social relations of power with the government aligning with sections of (large) distillers and bottlers in the social construction of the specifications. However, it is GI Registry s complicity that witnesses the application being navigated to successful registration. This finding of a politics in place finds traction in the reception to the article and the monograph proposal. The monograph will deepen and elaborate this framing of GIs through a number of case studies. C Please outline how these impacts were achieved. [Max 250 words] The project was conceptualised with substantial stakeholder engagement that included a surveys, meetings and fieldwork interviews. The Research Advisory Group (RAG) assisted in opening networks either locally, nationally or within the academic and legal professions. The dissemination meetings sought to take back a story of the local use (in Goa) of a global legal vehicle (from Geneva) via national legislation (Delhi). Thus, dissemination meetings were held in Goa, Delhi and Geneva and saw participation from the Feni sector, local government, national regulators, multilateral institutions, academia, and legal and development communities. Securing media coverage to these events, it was possible to achieve further circulation of and attention to the project. The project s publication mix helped in speaking to these different audiences. Special mention is made of a workshop added at a later stage with ESRC s agreement and held towards 2

3 the end of the project. It provided an opportunity to collaborate with geographers and law/society scholars. The papers are forthcoming as a special issue of a flagship geography journal, Environment and Planning A (co-edited with Professor John Wilkinson). On the side of the workshop is an application to Law and Society Association for their 2011/12 International Research Collaboration (with Professor Rosemary Coombe, who also contributed to the special issue). Finally, the project website remains live and has received over 14,000 visits since August 2010 with several thousand downloads of project publications. Placing the report here and at a number of other sites (e.g. SSRN, IDEAS) ensures its continuing circulation. D Please outline who the findings and outputs outlined above had an impact upon. This can include specific academics/researchers through to broader academic groups. [Max 250 words] In line with the commentary above, the work appears to find traction and favourable response amongst legal scholars, particularly those with a law/society approach, geographers, policy community (specifically, intellectual property / development) and practitioner GI lawyers. Indicative of and a testimony to the scholarly reception are the anonymous referee reviews to the journal article and the monograph proposal. I am confident that the monograph, presently being drafted, will be considered as an important contribution by legal scholars and the disciplines that are framing the work. In addition, the IP-Development community have also indicated use and interest to my work on GIs (this is elaborated below). I am aware that the Project Report, GIs and Localisation, has been well cited in recent and forthcoming monographs like Sol Picciotto s (2011) Regulating Global Corporate Capitalism and Dev Gangjee s (2012) Relocating the Law of Geographical Indications. The report has registered nearly 150 downloads at SSRN. 2. Economic and societal impact A Please summarise below the economic and societal impact(s) your project has had. [Max 250 words] On reflection, one of the most striking impacts has been the local awareness of GIs and the circulation of ideas of localisation through a GI. This awareness has been deepened with an understanding that making a consensus is difficult and time-consuming. During the fieldwork, in particular at the stakeholder meeting, the project was able to make meaningful contributions to the draft GI application. To summarise, the lawyers at the meeting drew attention to the deficiencies in the proposed name, Goan Cashew Feni, by noting threats of rendering Feni a generic term. A number of other issues with the draft application were highlighted, such as the exclusion of coconut, with suggestions for re-drafting. A number of these recommendations, though not all, were taken on board by the Goa government and the Feni Association. Achieving these changes to the GI application are notable. In addition, the project s publications also bring together illustrative examples from other products; thus, giving an opportunity for future modifications to the GI and/or use of additional policy interventions. Some of the criticisms of the GI Regulator, such as the absence of local representatives and experts in review committees, has caught the attention of national commentators in India in their calls for better quality to GI applications. Finally, some in the wider IP-Development community, including those associated with multilateral bodies, have taken the findings on board to caution their enthusiasm for GIs as a developmental tool. 3

4 B Please outline the findings and outputs from your project which have had the economic and societal impact(s) outlined in 2A. [Max 250 words] Outputs: (in order of publication) (a) Baseline Survey; (b) How to make Feni uniquely Goan, Herald; (b) GIs and Localisation (Project Report, published in English and Marathi). In addition, the events organised through the project, with the documentation that was circulated, is to be noted (see, The project report elaborates the findings, which are summarised here: Even while firms are interdependent, club-making in GIs are complicated by cultural norms of production and local relations of power. The case witnesses the Goa government as co-applicant providing a means for securing a consensus but also privileging certain distillers and bottlers whilst entirely excluding coconut Feni from the GI; The registered GI rules exhibit tensions between adhering to traditional practices and accommodating culturally acceptable novel techniques and materials. Yet, many distillers, especially those in socially embedded and enduring supply routes, haven t seen any (cultural or economic) incentives in participating in the GI effort; The drafting of the GI and particularly its regulatory review suggests a complicity between local power and regulators. The GI-Registry was instrumental in managing the application through to successful registration whilst potentially violating its own protocol. Finally, certain opportunities to deepen localisation (e.g. local sourcing of raw materials, rules on blending and bottling) have not been included and the GI remains incomplete. C Please outline how these impacts were achieved. [Max 250 words] A key element in generating the awareness and local debate on GIs was the range of stakeholder engagement that included the baseline survey, two focus group meetings, 40+ individual interviews, and the stakeholder meeting. Documentation shared at these meetings and, at the stakeholder meeting, the speakers (and their presentations) provided useful materials for debating GIs, in general, and the draft application, in particular. With the help of local and national RAG members, I was able to get drafts of the GI application and develop an intervention with the help of a network of GI-law practitioners. Finally, the publication mix of the project allowed the research to speak to a range of audiences and at different stages of progression. In this respect, a local newspaper article after the stakeholder meeting which was also posted on the project website proved useful in achieving impact. Finally, the project report was professionally edited to make it readable, professionally designed, using fieldwork photographs, to make it attractive and translated into Marathi for local circulation. Apart from posting the report on the project website and other repositories, it has been digitally distributed and several hundred were also mailed to individuals, academic and public libraries and organisations both locally in Goa and internationally. D Please outline who the findings and outputs outlined above had an impact upon. This can be at a broad societal level through to specific individuals or groups. [Max 250 words] Foremost in terms of impacts and outputs would be the stakeholders constituting the Feni sector in Goa. I am confident that local and national government bureaucrats and regulators have also benefitted from the project events and the final report. I also believe that the nuances that have been added to the literature on GIs through this work are of benefit to the legal community and 4

5 those engaging in policy work associated with GIs. Possible indication of this reception are the invitations I continue to receive to address such communities. Illustratively, most recently to give the lecture on GIs at World Intellectual Property Organisation s Training Course on Legal, Administrative, and Economic Aspects of Intellectual Property organised by Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI) of the University of Strasbourg (June 2011). The project report was distributed to all participants. 3. Unexpected and potential future impacts A Unexpected Impacts Please note which, if any, of the impacts that your research has had were unexpected at the outset of the project, explaining where possible why you think this was the case. [Max 250 words] n/a B Potential Future Impacts If you have a clear idea of the impact your project is likely to have in the future please detail these below. [Max 250 words] n/a 4. Impact limitations A Limited scientific impact Please state below any major scientific difficulties that have limited the scientific impact of your project. The statement should refer to an effect on impact rather than simply detail research difficulties or other project activity problems. [Max 250 words] n/a 5

6 B Limited economic and societal impact ESRC recognises that some of the research it funds will not have an economic or societal impact in the short term. Please explain briefly below if this is the case for your project, and refer to your grant application where relevant. [Max 250 words] n/a C No impact to date This project has had no impact to date Please note that ESRC projects are evaluated on the basis of their scientific and/or economic and societal impact. Grant holders are expected to report any future impacts as they occur using the Impact Record, downloadable from the ESRC website. If you have no impacts at this stage, please give reasons below. [Max 250 words] 6

7 5. Declarations Please read the statements below. Submitting this Impact Report to confirms your agreement. i) This Impact Report is an accurate statement of the impacts of the project to date. All coinvestigators named in the proposal to ESRC or appointed subsequently have seen and approved the Report. ii) Details of any subsequent impacts will be submitted via an Impact Record as they occur. Thank you for completing this Impact Report. Your Impact Report will be considered along with your End of Award Report in the evaluation of your project.* You are now invited to complete the confidential Nominations form, which will assist with the evaluation of your project.* *With the exception of Seminar Series, Follow-On Funding Awards and Knowledge Exchange Schemes which will not be evaluated through the full peer review process. 7

8 Nominated outputs Please nominate a maximum of two outputs from your project which you would like to be considered as part of the evaluation. Please submit these with your report. Output type (eg journal article, book, newspaper article, conference proceedings, toolkit, online resource) Journal article Project Report Publication details (eg author name, title, date, publisher details, URL for an online resource) Rangnekar, Re-making place: the social construction for a geographical indication for Feni, (in press), Environment and Planning A Rangnekar, Geographical indications and localisation: A case study of Feni, 2009, Uploaded to the ESRC website? (Yes/No) NO Yes Please your completed Impact Report, including the Nominations section, to reportsofficer@esrc.ac.uk, using your grant reference number as the subject. 9