Negotiations continuing on EU GI protection for Kalamata

In September last year we reported on the ongoing process around Geographical Indications (GIs) being proposed as part of an Australian free trade agreement (FTA) with the European Union (EU). If approved, the GI protection would mean the names could not be used for products - including from the same species, breed or ingredient – not emanating from within the specified geographical region.

Among the 172 food items whose names are on the proposed GI protection list are Elia Kalamatas table olives and Kalamata olive oil, both from Greece.

At the time the EU was in similar GI negotiations with other countries, including significant Australian olive export destinations Japan, China and New Zealand. The AOA had made representations on behalf of the industry in these and other jurisdictions, submitting that: • the word Kalamata is now widely recognised globally as a variety of olive tree that is grown all over the world; and

Kalamata is the most popular variety used for producing table olives in international markets; and • the Kalamata variety has been grown in

Australia for well over 100 years, with

Australian Kalamata table olives and

Kalamata olive oil marketed domestically and internationally over that time.

The association has also had ongoing dialogue with both the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Water, and Environment (DAWE) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).

Status quo

Another year on, the Australia-EU and New Zealand-EU FTAs are still in negotiation, while arrangements between the EU and both China and Japan have been finalised and are now operational.

Japan

The EU’s GI negotiations with Japan initially included a GI for Kalamata olives. The AOA, in conjunction with the Australian Government, made a submission to Japan opposing the GI and Japan subsequently rejected the EU’s application. A subsequent list of proposed GIs for agricultural products from the EU included three types of olive oil, including Kalamata from Greece. The AOA again worked with the Australian Government to raise official objections to the granting of these GIs by Japan.

The EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement now in place includes, however, both Elia Kalamatas (in the product category Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed [table olives]) and Kalamata (under the product category of Oils and fats [olive oil]).

A footnote for Elia Kalamatas states, however, that:

For greater certainty, varietal names containing or consisting of "Kalamata" may continue to be used on similar goods, provided that the consumer is not misled on the nature of such term or the precise origin of the good.

AOA CEO Michael Southan and OliveCare® Code of Best Practice Administrator Peter McFarlane said the footnote is a positive inclusion for Australian producers.

“My read on it is that the name Kalamata can be used as long as the label clearly states that the olives are of the variety Kalamata grown in Australia,” said Southan.

McFarlane agrees, and said the local industry’s home-grown pride means the majority of labels would not need to be changed.

“Certainly the footnote appears to me a major concession that would allow for current Australian practice. A search of Australian Kalamata Olive products on the web shows that most if not all have the word ‘Australia’ or ‘Australian’ on the front label, and many also have specific regional references,” he said.

China

In March this year the EU-China bilateral agreement protecting geographical indications (GIs) in China and Europe also came into force. The agreement protects around 200 European and Chinese agrifood names, including both Elia Kalamata table olives and Kalamata extra virgin olive oil – one of 24 olive oil denominations from five countries.

Ongoing process

AOA CEO Michael Southan said the inclusion of both Kalamata olives and olive oil in the EU-Japan FTA and the EU-China bilateral agreement is disappointing, however there is still hope for a positive outcome from the Australia-EU negotiations.

“It’s interesting to note that in 2013 the EU attempted to register ‘prosecco’ as a GI in Australia, arguing that only white wines produced in the Prosecco region of Italy should be allowed to use the name. The Winemakers’ Federation of Australia successfully opposed the move on the basis that the term ‘prosecco’ is, first and foremost, the name of a grape variety,” he said.

“So while the Australian FTA is still in negotiation we’re continuing to argue that Kalamata is a cultivar widely grown around the world, and that producing table olives and oil from the cultivar has nothing to do with being in a specific geographic region.

“We’ll continue to keep in contact with the government as the negotiations proceed and will keep the industry informed of both the eventual outcomes and any necessary actions stemming from those outcomes.”

Find out more

The EU’s list of proposed GIs is available on the DFAT website - www.dfat.gov.au/ aeufta/gis.

How does greater GI protection affect Australian businesses? If Australia fully accepts the EU’s GI protection proposal and implements it in Australian law, many Australian businesses will be required to rebrand their locally produced goods. Besides the direct cost of relabelling, Australian businesses will potentially lose sales due to damage to brand recognition. The EU has not proposed any compensation to Australian businesses for the potential costs involved in changing product labelling.

The 400 GIs proposed by the EU include several product names that are commonly used in Australia. One of the most prominent examples is ‘feta’ cheese. There are many Australian cheesemakers that produce and advertise their cheese as ‘feta’ or ‘fetta’ because in Australia it is arguably a generic term that describes salty white cheese, rather than an indicator of geographic origin. However, according to current EU GI rules, only those white cheeses produced in a traditional way in mainland Greece can be called ‘feta’ cheese. GI protection could therefore potentially affect the advertising and labelling of Australian produced ‘feta’ cheese. Source: Ian Zhou and Rob Dossor, Parliament of Australia Economic Policy Section - www.aph.gov.au.