This exploratory study aims to unpack the dynamic nature of Geographical Indications (GIs) through a longitudinal case study on Prosecco. As pointed out by different authors (e.g. Vandecandelaere et al., 2009; Rinaldi, 2017), GIs combine product, place, people and their know how, and they act as cultural and symbolic markers of identity for local communities. These brands originate and cannot be separated from their territory, offering to enterprises within the territorial brand an overarching and collective brand identity (Charters & Spielmann, 2014). GIs have clear and defined rules for producers that determine the product’s collective reputation, making them a relevant collective asset for value creation. When GI products have a strong collective reputation, they also become an instrument to signal quality – represented by their origin (place) and the local know-how (people) (Bramley & Bienabe, 2012). As cultural products with a collective dimension embedded in specific territories and situated within a global marketplace, GIs are not static and crystallized brands: they do possess a dynamic nature that changes over time. This fluidity and dynamicity of GI branding (Ferrari, 2014) implies that across time the relationship among GIs’ underlying dimensions, namely collective identity, geographies, and brand name might evolve and might potentially lead to frictions, both internally - among local stakeholders represented by the brand – and/or externally – in terms of meanings associated with the brand for consumers/ tourists. Therefore, this study unpacks a worldwide renown GI brand – Prosecco – by determining its trajectory across time through the analysis of some “critical moments” where the relationship among actors’ collective identity, geographies and branding has changed. In particular, this paper will analyze Prosecco through a longitudinal approach, investigating how the Prosecco brand has evolved from 1969 to 2021. Prosecco represents a particularly relevant type of GI as it has witnessed many modifications across the years: Prosecco firstly became a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) in 1969 including only the traditional production territory of Valdobbiadene Conegliano located in one province of the Veneto region, while in 2009 the production area of Prosecco was extended to include also other provinces in Veneto and in the neighboring region of Friuli Venezia Giulia, leading to different types of Prosecco brands (2 DOCGs and 1 DOC), managed by three different consortia. Since 2009 Prosecco has become an incredible worldwide success (total sales in 2021 peaked at more than 700 million bottles); however, different visions around the brand identity, positioning, and its future have arisen, generating tensions that might influence the evolution of the PDO and the prospects of the firms insisting on its territories. One of the main issues emerging from this research is represented by the Prosecco name itself: some historical producers of the DOCG area do not feel represented by the Prosecco brand name anymore, due to the massive use of this brand name currently linked to the DOC production. Accordingly, this study attempts to do justice to the complexity underlying a collective territorial brand, by addressing its dynamic nature across time. In addition, it seeks to identify the processes that might © 6th Annual Conference IPBA 81 BOOK OF ABSTRACTS endanger the stability of the GI in some sensitive periods (Marquis, Tilksic, 2013), influencing the evolution of the PDO and how it is perceived by different actors. REFERENCES Bramley, C., & Bienabe, E. (2012). Developments and considerations around geographical indications in the developing world. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 2(1), 14- 37. Charters, S., & Spielmann, N. (2014). Characteristics of strong territorial brands: The case of champagne. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1461-1467. Ferrari, M. (2014). The narratives of geographical indications. International Journal of Law in Context, 10(2), 222-248. Marquis, C., & Tilcsik, A. (2013). Imprinting: Toward a multilevel theory. Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 195-245. Rinaldi, C. (2017). Food and gastronomy for sustainable place development: A multidisciplinary analysis of different theoretical approaches. Sustainability, 9(10), 1748. Vandecandelaere, E.; Arfini, F.; Belletti, G.; Marescotti, A. (2009). Linking People, Places and Products. A Guide for Promoting Quality Linked to Geographical Origin and Sustainable Geographical Indications. FAO: Rome, Italy.

Unpacking the dynamic nature of Geographical Indications (GIs): a longitudinal study on Prosecco as a territorial brand

C. Rinaldi;V. Finotto;C. Mauracher;F. Checchinato
2022-01-01

Abstract

This exploratory study aims to unpack the dynamic nature of Geographical Indications (GIs) through a longitudinal case study on Prosecco. As pointed out by different authors (e.g. Vandecandelaere et al., 2009; Rinaldi, 2017), GIs combine product, place, people and their know how, and they act as cultural and symbolic markers of identity for local communities. These brands originate and cannot be separated from their territory, offering to enterprises within the territorial brand an overarching and collective brand identity (Charters & Spielmann, 2014). GIs have clear and defined rules for producers that determine the product’s collective reputation, making them a relevant collective asset for value creation. When GI products have a strong collective reputation, they also become an instrument to signal quality – represented by their origin (place) and the local know-how (people) (Bramley & Bienabe, 2012). As cultural products with a collective dimension embedded in specific territories and situated within a global marketplace, GIs are not static and crystallized brands: they do possess a dynamic nature that changes over time. This fluidity and dynamicity of GI branding (Ferrari, 2014) implies that across time the relationship among GIs’ underlying dimensions, namely collective identity, geographies, and brand name might evolve and might potentially lead to frictions, both internally - among local stakeholders represented by the brand – and/or externally – in terms of meanings associated with the brand for consumers/ tourists. Therefore, this study unpacks a worldwide renown GI brand – Prosecco – by determining its trajectory across time through the analysis of some “critical moments” where the relationship among actors’ collective identity, geographies and branding has changed. In particular, this paper will analyze Prosecco through a longitudinal approach, investigating how the Prosecco brand has evolved from 1969 to 2021. Prosecco represents a particularly relevant type of GI as it has witnessed many modifications across the years: Prosecco firstly became a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) in 1969 including only the traditional production territory of Valdobbiadene Conegliano located in one province of the Veneto region, while in 2009 the production area of Prosecco was extended to include also other provinces in Veneto and in the neighboring region of Friuli Venezia Giulia, leading to different types of Prosecco brands (2 DOCGs and 1 DOC), managed by three different consortia. Since 2009 Prosecco has become an incredible worldwide success (total sales in 2021 peaked at more than 700 million bottles); however, different visions around the brand identity, positioning, and its future have arisen, generating tensions that might influence the evolution of the PDO and the prospects of the firms insisting on its territories. One of the main issues emerging from this research is represented by the Prosecco name itself: some historical producers of the DOCG area do not feel represented by the Prosecco brand name anymore, due to the massive use of this brand name currently linked to the DOC production. Accordingly, this study attempts to do justice to the complexity underlying a collective territorial brand, by addressing its dynamic nature across time. In addition, it seeks to identify the processes that might © 6th Annual Conference IPBA 81 BOOK OF ABSTRACTS endanger the stability of the GI in some sensitive periods (Marquis, Tilksic, 2013), influencing the evolution of the PDO and how it is perceived by different actors. REFERENCES Bramley, C., & Bienabe, E. (2012). Developments and considerations around geographical indications in the developing world. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 2(1), 14- 37. Charters, S., & Spielmann, N. (2014). Characteristics of strong territorial brands: The case of champagne. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1461-1467. Ferrari, M. (2014). The narratives of geographical indications. International Journal of Law in Context, 10(2), 222-248. Marquis, C., & Tilcsik, A. (2013). Imprinting: Toward a multilevel theory. Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 195-245. Rinaldi, C. (2017). Food and gastronomy for sustainable place development: A multidisciplinary analysis of different theoretical approaches. Sustainability, 9(10), 1748. Vandecandelaere, E.; Arfini, F.; Belletti, G.; Marescotti, A. (2009). Linking People, Places and Products. A Guide for Promoting Quality Linked to Geographical Origin and Sustainable Geographical Indications. FAO: Rome, Italy.
2022
6th Annual Conference International Place Branding Association
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
IPBA_Book-of-abstracts_2022.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: Accesso libero (no vincoli)
Dimensione 5.26 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
5.26 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in ARCA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10278/5020941
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact