Mapping the Sustainability of Geographical Indication Products: A Systematic Literature Review

Mapping the Sustainability of Geographical Indication Products: A Systematic Literature Review | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Systematic Review Mapping the Sustainability of Geographical Indication Products: A Systematic Literature Review R Nirosha, J Paul Mansingh This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5761863/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 18 Jun, 2025 Read the published version in Discover Sustainability → Version 1 posted 12 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This review aims to analyze and visualize the significant contribution of geographical indications (GIs) tagged products to sustainability. The research articles included in this study were sourced from the Scopus and the Web of Science databases, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework was applied to the systematic review of the quality articles. The study conducts comprehensive scientific Bibliometric and TCCM (Theory, Context, Characteristics, and Methodology) analysis over time. The main contribution of these studies is providing opportunities for the development of local economies, cultural heritage preservation, and promoting sustainable agricultural practices through biodiversity conservation, contributing to economic, social, and environmental sustainability. A Conceptual framework has been developed that shows how GI registration links to sustainability and contributes to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Furthermore, the Sustainability of Geographical Indication is an emerging field; there is a need for more research in this area. Some insightful future research directions have been proposed to advance this research domain further, especially in contributing to the UN SDG goals Geographical Indications Sustainability TCCM Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 1. Introduction The rise in the global population has significantly increased the demand for resources, which has led to over-exploitation and environmental degradation. The need for this growing population drives global development and traditionally relies on exploiting natural resources, which can result in deforestation, soil erosion, water scarcity, and loss of biodiversity [ 1 ]. The Brundtland Commission's concept of sustainable development [ 2 , 3 ], introduced in 1987 (Fig. 3 ), emphasizes the need to balance economic growth, social equity, and environmental protection “to meet the present needs without compromising future generations' ability to meet their own needs [ 3 ].” Geographical Indication (GI) labeled products plays a significant role in conserving natural resources and maintaining biodiversity through product-specific quality such as geographic factors (climate, soil, and altitude), traditional methods of sustainable farming practices, cultural heritage, and traditional culinary methods [ 4 ]. These qualities are followed from generation to generation by the Indigenous community's knowledge and identity concerning health and nutritional benefits intrinsically linked with sustainability. In 2015, the United Nations 2030 Agenda recognized the extensive potential of Geographical Indications in achieving sustainability development goals (SDG) [ 5 ] which shows the vital role of GIs in sustainability. The Sustainability Strategy for Geographical Indications (SSGI) was developed by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the Organisation for an International Geographical Indication (OriGIn) in the year 2016 [ 6 ] (Fig. 3 ), is not just a theoretical concept. It is a significant step in the practical application of GIs. This strategy aligns with the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agricultural Systems (SAFA) framework [ 5 ]. It gives a clear path for GI to label authorized producers and stakeholders to engage in sustainable farming practices. Integrating sustainable indicators into GIs addresses resource depletion, social inequality, and malnutrition [ 7 ]. Through this, the demand for GI-labelled product production gradually increased. It is a comprehensive approach that harmonizes with the three dimensions of sustainability for safeguarding culture by improving rural livelihoods [ 8 ]. Geographical Indications (GIs) serve as unique identifiers for products from specific locations, with their inherent qualities and preserving their rich cultural heritage [ 9 ]. GIs benefit from protection under the “Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement (1994)” established by the “World Trade Organization (WTO)” [ 10 ]. This safeguard prevents commercial counterfeiting and upholds the integrity of the products. GI-labelled products enhance the producer's capabilities and market access, linking farmers to domestic and international markets by developing strong GI value chains [ 11 ]. They also engage the local stakeholders in empowering marketing, trade, and export activities and assessing consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) premiums for GI-labeled products [ 12 ] showing the importance of GIs in rural development. In agrifood systems, the value chain is vital in food products’ market price and quality demand. Still, it differs based on the specific product of the country’s trade channel. This GI label can alter the balance of the producers due to their significant influence on the quality of the GI-labelled product. When considering the possible impacts of GI on biodiversity, the first and foremost one is the genetic diversity of local breeds and varieties, which contributes to the registration of GI-labeled products [ 6 ]. From the above statement, the majority of the research has been performed on the sustainability of GI agri-food products like “Protected Geographical Indication” (PGI) beverages [ 13 – 17 ] “Protected Designation of Origin” (PDO) /PGI Agricultural products [ 13 , 18 – 35 ] PGI dairy products[ 23 , 28 , 29 , 36 – 39 ], PGI Olive oil[ 40 ], and PGI/PDO meat [ 28 , 29 , 41 – 45 ]Most research studies on agrifood systems focus on the crop varieties, breeds, and dairy products associated with socio-cultural, economic, and environmental sustainability. Even though there is much literature on the sustainability of GI products, only a few systematic literature reviews have been conducted. The author Milano and Cazella [ 46 ] have analysed 28 studies on the environmental effects of geographical indications. They identified the 16 influential positive, impactful factors with five adverse ecological effects. The positive impacts are more frequently observed in the Northside, while the negative impacts are more frequently observed in the global South. They have also found the six key factors that favour the development of positive impacts, emphasizing a sound GI governance system. Singh and Bharati [ 1 ] have extracted 194 studies using the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (WoS) database from 2001–2023 the study provides the trends in the emergence of the new topic by analysing the academic research works conducted in GI and Rural Sustainable Development. Falasco et al. [ 47 ] conducted SLR using the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework reveals mixed impacts of Geographical Indications (GIs) on environmental protection, particularly concerning SDG 9 and 12. The details of the previous systematic literature reviews are shown in Table 1 . Table 1 Existing Systematic Literature Review Studies on GI and Sustainability Author Name and Year Title Focus [ 46 ] (Milano & Cazella, 2021) “Environmental effects of geographical indications and their influential factors: A review of the empirical evidence” This article explores the link between the GIs and Environmental Sustainability. [ 1 ] (Singh & Bharti, 2023) “Geographical Indication and Rural Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis” This review analyses trends in GIs by reviewing academic research in a particular field. [ 47 ] (Falasco et al., 2024) “Can Geographical Indications promote environmental Sustainability in food supply chains? Insights from a systematic literature review” This systematic literature review comprehensively analyses the connection between GIs and environmental Sustainability in food products. Source: Authors compilation (2024) The existing systematic literature reviews (Table 1 ) primarily focus on the link between GIs and sustainable development, particularly how the food supply chain promotes environmental sustainability. However, these reviews did not comprehensively address all three dimensions of sustainability. Given this scenario, this study focuses on synthesizing a quantitative literature study on GIs and their Sustainability. This study surpasses the traditional citation metrics. It employs the TCCM and the bibliometric analysis using the R studio bibliometric package, VOS viewer, CiteSpace 6.3.1, and NVivo 14 software to analyze available literature visually and comprehensively. This study mainly focuses on GIs for agricultural products. All non-agricultural products and services that are beyond the scope of the research are excluded. It envisions the progressing view of the critical area in finding the author's keywords, sources, citations, and corresponding author countries. This study helps to investigate the evolution of research themes and trends by systematically using the TCCM framework. To know the theories, contexts, characteristics, and methods” that are applied in the research. Consequently, the research questions addressed in this review are as follows: 1) How the research landscape evolved? 2) what emerging trends can be identified? 3) Which authors, countries, and institutions have contributed significantly to this field? 4) Which theory, context, characteristics, and methods are used in existing literature? 5)What gaps are in current research studies and suggestions for forthcoming researchers? This study explores the themes within the literature on the sustainability of geographical indication and how sustainability offers future direction. The review is formatted in the following sections: The research methods section provides an overview of the various approaches used in conducting a systematic literature review(SLR), followed by a selection of methodology, data collection, inclusion and exclusion criteria using the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” ( PRISMA) framework, results and discussion section, a descriptive presentation of the articles selected and identifies the theory, context, characteristics and Methods using TCCM analysis, identifying the critical gaps and proposing suggestions for future research reading this work. 2. Methodology 2.1 Systematic Literature Review A “systematic literature review” has five methods that can be conducted: “domain-based reviews, theory-based reviews, method-based reviews, meta-analytical reviews, and meta-systematic reviews” [ 48 – 51 ]. The domain-based review is the most widely used method in SLR [ 48 , 52 ]. This type of review is focused on the research topic and is carried out using five different methods [ 48 , 51 ]. The first method is the structured domain-based review, which aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research within a specific domain by synthesizing articles based on commonly used theories, constructs (variables), contexts, and methods [ 53 , 54 ]. This approach also identifies gaps in the research to suggest the future research directions [ 50 , 55 ]. Next method is the “framework-based review” in this review, the researchers will create their framework [ 48 , 51 ]. The third method is the bibliometric review, which involves using analytical software tools to examine the trends in the research area and citation patterns in the literature [ 49 , 53 , 56 ]. The fourth is the hybrid review, a combination of numerous domain-based reviews. For instance, combining the bibliometric review and structured review or by combining framework-based review and structured review writing together in one review article [ 49 , 50 , 57 ].The fifth type of review is a conceptual review, which proposes new theories and hypotheses in a review domain [ 49 , 51 ]. The hybrid review is chosen to integrate the bibliometric and structured review methods [ 57 ] to examine the trends widely, identify the research gaps, and suggest future areas in the field of research [ 1 , 57 – 61 ]. These methods are aligned to map the state-of-the-art in scientific research, presenting universally applied research methods in the various domains, identifying the trends, and academic publication [ 57 , 58 , 62 – 64 ]. This review is focuses on analysing the trend of a research study in mapping the sustainability of GI products [ 62 , 64 – 66 ] Furthermore, the widely used theories, variables, and methodologies are synthesised to understand and identify the gap in the research studies and propose future research areas in this domain. Hence, the bibliometric and structured review is the suitable method [ 53 , 58 , 61 , 66 , 67 ]. 2.1 Data collection 2.2 Articles Search Strategy and Search Terms An intense search criterion is used to find the papers for the study [ 50 ].This procedure was in line with the previously published literature reviews [ 48 – 50 , 67 ]. The databases used in the study were “Elsevier’s Scopus and Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (WoS)” [ 48 , 55 , 58 , 62 , 68 ]. The main reason for selecting the two scholarly databases is to reduce the bias of leaving out appropriate data and to carry over a thorough analysis. Wisely, to reduce the chance of risk of collecting the replication of data [ 69 ]. The search terms used to search in both the databases are “PGI” OR “Protected Geographical Indications” OR “Geographical Indication” OR “Geographical Indication crop” AND “sustainability” OR “Social Sustainability” OR “Economic Sustainability” OR “Sustainable indicators” OR “Social Indicator” OR “Employment” OR “Governance” OR “Social Capital” OR “Economic Indicator” OR “Price Premium” OR “Profitability” OR “Value added Distribution” OR “Trade” OR “Local Multiplier”. The keyword search was mainly put into the “title, abstract, and keywords” to extract articles from Scopus, which was 706, and in the Web of Science, the keyword search was mainly put into the “topic”, which was 603 articles. The data was extracted on 02.03.2024. 2.3 Inclusion and Exclusion criteria using the PRISMA framework According to the PRISMA framework Fig. 1 , 1309 articles were found from the chosen databases in the first phase, as stated in the search terms and keyword search. Next, the relevant papers were extracted based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria: they are limited to journal articles, English language articles, all countries, and open-access articles. After the screening, 220 articles were extracted from Scopus in Bib Tex format and from the Web of Sciences, 245 in plaintext. After extraction, both the files were imported into R Studio to merge into a single document and to remove the duplication. Accordingly, the extracted number of full-text articles is 350. The next step is a quality assessment of the inclusion and exclusion criteria [ 70 ]. Here, the articles irrelevant to the subject domain and the scope of the research field are excluded. Then, Total number of articles excluded from the study is 243. Finally,107 full-text articles were selected after reading the full articles under the scope and relevant to the subject area. Articles related to sustainability and GIs labelled agricultural products are included in this study to make the analysis more comprehensive. The details of the extracted data are presented in Fig. 1 . In this study, four software were used for bibliometric analysis:” RStudio, Biblioshiny developed by Aria & Cuccurullo”, “VOS viewer version 1.16.18 by Van Eck & Waltman”, and “CiteSpace 6.3.1 developed by Chaomei Chen”. All this software is free and open source for quantitative data analysis and visualization. “Biblioshiny” is a web tool from the RStudio bibliometrics package that provides a web interface, for visualization of the data. Similarly, the VOS viewer and Citespace will also visualize the scientometric data. Lumivero, QSR International, created the “NVivo 14” software, a paid version of the subscription used for data analysis. This study integrates both the “bibliometrics and TCCM analysis” to find emerging trends in the sustainability of geographical indications [ 58 , 60 , 61 ]. This study portrays the history of GIs and sustainability, key trends in the sustainability of GI publications, theories, sustainable indicators, widely registered GIs across the countries and methods and software applied in the studies. Furthermore, to find the research gap and provide suggestions for forthcoming researchers. 3. Results and Discussions The following section demonstrates outcomes of Bibliometric analysis from three distinct perspectives: descriptive analysis, network analysis, and thematic analysis. 3.1 Descriptive analysis The primary information of the dataset on the sustainability of geographical indications, depicted in Fig. 2, spans from 2007 to 2024 and includes 107 documents from 55 sources. It has an annual growth rate of 4.16 percent; despite the document's relatively young average age of 3.6 years, this shows that they have a notable impact on average citations of 8.664 each. The dataset is rich in references, totaling 4,391. It also highlights the diversity of the research topics with 313 Keywords Plus and 413 Author Keywords. Contributions come from 361 authors, with 12 single-authored documents. Collaboration among the co-authors is 4.64 percent on average for each document, and 28.97 percent of documents are from international co-authors, emphasizing the global scope of research on the sustainability of geographical indications. The annual scholarly publications of articles and the emerging trend in the research area from 2007–2024 are depicted in Fig. 3. In earlier years, only a countable number of articles were published from 2007 to 2016. Before 2017, articles remained relatively stable, consistently focusing only on GI protection, marketing, and trade. However, the publication of research activity began to rise, with a gradual increase in publications. The publication on the sustainability of GI started from 2017 onwards in research output, and this aligns with the historical and trend lines of GIs and Sustainability (Fig. 4), i.e., since the implementation of the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) by the “United Nations” in 2015 marked a turning point in the sustainability of geographical indications[5]. The FAO and OriGIn developed a sustainability strategy for GIs to support GI producers in 2016[7]. The Sustainable Assessment of Food and Agriculture (SAFA) aligns with the SDGs[5] and significantly increases many scientific publications. Since 2017, this graph shows a peak in 2021, with 28 publications; after that, there is a slight decrease in the articles in 2022 and a gradual increase in 2023. The graph visually depicts the influence of global research initiatives on sustainability in academic research related to the sustainability of geographical indications. The most relevant source is “sustainability”, with most articles. This journal is especially for publishing research in various categories such as sustainability, environmental, cultural, agronomy, and social and economic sustainability studies. The “Journal of Agriculture and Food Industrial” and “ Agricultural – Basel” have published four articles on GI agri-food governance and Sustainability. “Agronomy – Basel’, “Journal of Rural Studies,” and “ Agronomy for Sustainable Development,” which equally published three articles related to the Sustainability of GI-tagged crops and food products that enhance rural sustainability development. The other sources provide their valuable contribution based on trade agreements and policy (Table 2) Table 2 Most Relevant Journals Name of the Journals No. of Articles Sustainability 35 Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization 4 Agriculture-Basel 4 Agronomy-Basel 3 Journal of Rural Studies 3 Agronomy For Sustainable Development 2 American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2 Food Policy 2 Journal of Agricultural Economics 2 Journal of Ethnic Foods 2 Source: Authors Compilation(2024) The impact of the cited articles on different academic journals is highlighted in Table 3. The table below covers the topmost journals' including major bibliometric indices such as “h-index, g-index, m-index, total citations (TC), number of publications (NP), and the year of initial publication (PY start)”. Impressively, “sustainability” journal began in 2018 has a high h index of 10 and a total citation of 309, followed by “the Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization”, which has a four h index with 24 total citations, and “Agricultural – Basel” has three h index and has more number of total citation when compared to the previous one. This analysis helps researchers find reputable sources and provides context for research publication trends in Sustainability. Table 3 Most Relevant Impact Journals Name of the Journals h_index g_index m_index TC NP PY_start Sustainability 10 15 1.429 309 35 2018 Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization 4 4 1 24 4 2021 Agriculture-Basel 3 4 0.333 39 4 2016 Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2 2 0.5 9 2 2021 Agronomy-Basel 2 3 0.5 9 3 2021 American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2 2 0.182 42 2 2014 Journal of Agricultural Economics 2 2 0.4 30 2 2020 Journal of Ethnic Foods 2 2 0.25 32 2 2017 Journal of Rural Studies 2 3 0.333 24 3 2019 Sustainability (Switzerland) 2 2 0.4 23 2 2020 Source: Authors compilation(2024) The research contributions from several key institutions are the University of Parma, which has 11 publications, followed by Kasetsart University, with nine publications, and Inrae, with eight publications, highlighting their significant presence in this field. The key institutions driving research into the Sustainability of GI are depicted in Table 4. Table 4 Most Relevant Institutions Name of the Institutions No. of Articles University of Parma 11 Kasetsart University 9 Inrae 8 Universite De Montpellier 7 Cirad 6 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki 6 University of Belgrade 6 Warsaw University of Life Sciences 6 Corvinus University Of Budapest 5 University Of Zagreb 5 Source: Authors compilation(2024) The most relevant authors significantly contributing to the field of Sustainability of Geographical Indications are presented in Table 5. Bellassen V, Gil J, and Napasintuwong O have published six articles. Similarly, Arfini F, Donati M, Ferrer–Perez H, Gauvrit L, Malak–Rawlikowska A, and Ristic B have equally published five articles. Additionally, author Csillag P has contributed four research articles, which indicate that these authors are actively working in the field of Sustainability of geographical indications to advance the field of research. Table 5 Most Relevant Authors Name of the Authors No. of Articles Bellassen V 6 Gil J 6 Napasintuwong O 6 Arfini F 5 Donati M 5 Ferrer-Pérez H 5 Gauvrit L 5 Malak-Rawlikowska A 5 Ristic B 5 Csillag P 4 Source: Authors compilation(2024) 3.2 Network Analysis The Network visualization map (Fig. 5) co-occurrence network map depicts each colored node is depicted as each indicator. Each of the node sizes reflects the occurrence or repetition of indicators used in the various studies; this ensures the more prominent variable. The width of the lines connecting the nodes indicates the frequency of co-occurrence between labels. The nodes of the same colour indicate stronger connections. The keyword “geographical indication” stands out as the largest and central node, and “Sustainability” ranks second. The strongest links between geographical indication and sustainability are the European Union, supply chain, food quality, economic sociology, collective actions, certification, consumer preference, and protected geographical indication (PGI). The time zone visualization map (Fig. 6) visualizes the temporal connections within the keyword network associated with the sustainability of GI. In this keyword cluster analysis, the timeline view depicts the horizontal axis depicting the years, and the cluster labels were displayed in the vertical axis. Studies 2007–2024 are selected for analysis within the time frame of one year. The sphere-shaped circle represents several author keywords used in the studies published by researchers. The shorter the distance between two circles shows greater collaboration between the two keywords. Cluster #0, the Sustainability cluster, ranks first. This cluster has keywords such as traditional food landscapes, cultural ecosystem services, sustainable production, territorial policy, geographic factors, sustainable development goals, agricultural products, and spatial distribution. The most recently used keywords are Sustainability and Geographical Indication labeling. Since the UN SDG goals, the focal point of the research has changed. Global developments have had an impact on the research trend of the sustainability of GI. 3. 3 Thematic analyses The thematic map (Fig. 6) presents a network analysis of word occurrences to emphasize key themes and patterns. Density measures the consistency between nodes, while centrality assesses the correlation among the subjects. Numerous scientific studies and citations on "geographical indications "are associated with keywords in the motor theme. The keyword ‘sustainability’ has more connections to the subject, which has the most centrality and low density as an emerging theme for the trending topic. ‘Protected geographical indication’ is a type of geographical indication isolated as niche themes, and they have high centrality and low density. The word ‘financial sustainability’ falls under the centrality of emerging or declining themes with very low density. The other keyword, ‘governance’, is considered low centrality with low density and comes from basic themes. The three-field plot (Fig. 7) also known as the Sankey diagram, visualizes the proportions among the sources (left), keywords (middle), and Authors (left) in three-dimensionality, showing the author's contribution, which author works on which topic and publishes in which journals. The Sankey diagram explains that if more links exist among the variables, the connection lines will be thicker; it will also show the interrelationship between the author, keywords, and sources. The author, Bellassen, has worked on “Geographical Indication”, “Sustainability”, and “Rural development” and published in Sustainability Journal, followed by Gil J, has worked on the keywords "Geographical Indication", "Protected Geographical Indication", "Sustainability", "Supply chain", and "Rural development", and published most of their articles in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization, and Sustainability Journal. Napasintuwong O, who works on the keywords "Geographical Indications", "Protected Geographical Indication", and "Rural development", and published his articles in the Sustainability Journal. 3.2 TCCM analysis The TCCM framework is a standard method used in systematic literature reviews to categorize and analyze research studies. The "TCCM framework (Theory, Context, Characteristics, and Methods)" was first introduced by [52] Paul and Rosarado. It helps to identify the knowledge gaps, enhances the rigour of literature reviews, provides a pathway for future directions, and facilitates meta-analyses by providing a structured approach. The existing theories, methodologies, and indicators are given in Table 7 according to the selected articles. 3.2.1 Theory Theories provide researchers with a framework to comprehend and understand complex phenomena and help identify key variables and relationships. Sustainability theories prioritize and integrate social responses to environmental and cultural issues. An economic model sustains natural and financial capital; an ecological model preserves biological diversity and ecological integrity; a political model upholds social systems that ensure human dignity. This literature review will examine previous Geographical Indication (GI) and Sustainability research. The development of theoretical concepts in the context of relevant research has significantly improved economic, social, behavioural, and psychological theories. The theories applied in the selected articles are depicted in Fig. 8. In most studies, theory of planned behaviour (TPB) has been extensively applied to understand various aspects of producer and consumer behaviour in the context of GIs and sustainability labelling. The author used TPB to assess the producer's perceptions of coffee and tea as potential GI export beverage crops, focusing on profit maximization [71]. Similarly, Uzar and Fillipovic [36] introduced a novel construct (trust in the labeling system) within the TPB to enhance its predictive power in determining consumer intention to purchase GI-labelled cheeses. Kaczorowska et al. [72] applied TPB to investigate consumer preferences for food sustainability labelling, examining the impact of the “Euro–leaf”, “PGI”, and “fair-trade logos on purchasing decisions”, “willingness to buy”, and “willingness to pay” a premium for sustainability products. In addition to TPB, the neoclassical theory was employed to optimize consumer purchase decisions to satisfy consumer needs fully. Random utility theory was also applied to individual choices among various options, closely mimicking real buying scenarios. The study concentrates on Kenya's semi-arid regions and aims to determine producers' “willingness to pay” and protect unique terroir-based agri-food products with GI labels. This research utilized Lancaster consumer theory to determine producer preferences through choice experiments, providing valuable insights into the economic valuation of GI products [73]. The study assesses the potential benefits of a strategic differentiation approach based on PGI for the Argentinean wine industry in international markets. Employing the hedonic price model, derived from Lancaster consumer theory and Rosen's hedonic method, the research estimates the implicit prices of geographical names in the US, UK, Netherlands and Germany, providing insights into the economic value of GIs in the wine industry[74]. Fredah Wangui Maina et al. [75] investigates the consumer behavior and purchase intention of fair-trade handicrafts with geographical indications (GI) and their influence on fair-trade knowledge in a brand equity model. This study applies the boundary object and cognitive learning theories to create a social learning theory that promotes sustainable development and authenticity. De Pin and Fiore [76] conducted a study to identify the eligible vegetable markets of the “Radicchio Rosso di Treviso PGI label”. The economic theory was used to identify the “overall market opportunity Index (OMOI) method”. The study analyses the dynamics of the PGI and the PGI lambs supply chain from the same region in Spain. The research uses the “vector error correction model and multivariate BEKK GARCH model,” aligned with economic theory, are used to analyze the differences and similarities in price volatility dynamics between premium products and their benchmarks [77]. Moreover, the research on the “financial sustainability of the Parma PDO Ham sector” focuses on analysing economic and financial characteristics, profit margins and financial margins, and financial sustainability through interest coverage ratios (ICR). The study is grounded in the economic theory of capital intensity and the erosion of profitability due to debt costs, emphasising the challenges of maintaining financial sustainability in high-debt environments [78]. Another study explores the local stakeholders’ involvement in collective actions to safeguard GI labelled cheese, analysing the local stakeholder's willingness to cooperate towards a common goal in the diverse rural areas employing social capital theories like rational choice theory, civic engagement theory and network theory with Ostrom conditions, referring to symmetric interests [79]. It helps maintain the competitive edge of GI products. Torok and Jambor [80] examined the effects of the European Union extension on the “competitiveness of fruit spirits in six Central–Eastern European Countries (CEECs)” concerning GIs. They were utilising the theory of revealed comparative advantages. Similarly, the authors [76, 81] investigated “the determinants of revealed comparative advantages” by analysing the “EU cheese” trade data, further elucidating the factors contributing to the revealed comparative advantages of GI-labelled cheese. In the context of EU-Australia trade negotiations, the author [82] assessed the theory of EU demands for GIs by analysing the coded data on GI names in Australian supermarkets, with a particular focus on feta cheese, which shows that the GI EU-labelled products are more authentic and well-established. The author [83] investigates the significance of a registered GI label for African forest honey, focusing on the costs and benefits associated with GIs. This study employs competition and governance theories to assess the economic value of differentiated products, the value chain governance and stakeholders' supply chain management to promote sustainable marketing practices. The author [24] examines the systematic sustainability of the “French organic rice” and “PGI Einkorn” value chains. Despite growing support from government authorities and consumers for environmentally friendly food value chains, these chains encounter technical, economic, and institutional challenges. The study integrates economic, social, and environmental performance assessments, network analysis, and cluster theory to evaluate the food value chain sustainability. A comparative analysis of agri-food products with GIs between the EU and Mercosur focuses on the performance of brands and supermarkets. The research applies institutional theory, and field theory to analyse and differentiate the economic blocs, providing insights into the market dynamics and competitive positioning of GI-labelled products in these regions [84]. In the context of production, a study evaluates the integration of sustainability undertakings in GIs, focusing on stakeholders from Franconia, Germany, and South Tyrol, Italy. It employed Elinor Ostroms' Design Principles for sustainable governance of common-pool resources, emphasize the importance of stakeholder collaboration in reaching sustainability objectives [85]. The sustainability of the GI building process of sharr cheese in Kosovo is analysed. Dewey's theory of inquiry is based on organisation studies. This study emphasizes collective learning processes and boundary work in creating a GI, providing a framework for understanding the collaborative efforts required to establish and maintain GIs [37]. The study explores how localised agri-food systems, particularly GIs, can drive sustainable agriculture by integrating a values-based approach. The research employs the theory of worlds of worth [23], categorising relationships based on principles such as honesty, efficiency and equity, focusing on interactions between farmers and processors in Corsica and the western Pyrenees. The importance of PGI in trade agreements is examined by analysing the firm-level performance of PDO-labelled cheese and butter using firm–based trade theory [86]. This study underscores the role of GIs in enhancing the competitiveness of agri-food products in international trade. Further research investigates the factors influencing competitiveness in the global beer trade at the macroeconomic level. The study applies theories such as the Helpman and Krugman and gravity models to understand trade dynamics, offering a comprehensive analysis of the global beer market [87]. The study examines how geographical indications (GIs) reduce the “urban-rural income gap in China”. Using the Spatial Durbin model (SDM) and international trade theory, the research finds that GI branding significantly narrows this gap by enhancing foreign trade competitiveness and promoting agricultural export[88]. Martijin Huysmans's [89] examines the theory of EU’s trade policy objectives aimed at protecting regional speciality foods through GIs, by providing a theoretical framework for understanding the EU's approach to GIs in trade agreements. A comparative analysis of GI agri-food products in Mercosur and the European Union focuses on e-retail supermarkets. This research applies market theory and economic sociology theories, to understand market stabilization and institutional influence. Furthermore, a study analyses online auction markets or specialty food products with GIs, focusing on auction prices and highlighting theories of auction mechanisms and consumer economics [90]. The author examines six agro-food chains, highlighting farmers' roles and challenges. It applies theories from new institutional economics, Business and Management Economics, and fund flow theories to understand hybrid institutions. The study also investigates how quality performance in agri-food supply chains is influenced by two governance decisions: adopting GIs and creating cooperative ownership structures. The research applies institutional and organisational theories, such as transaction costs, property rights, and agency theories, to analyse these governance decisions [91]. The study analyses the influences of geographical Indications (GIs) on value chains and territorial development in the context of Mexico “ Designation of Origin Distillates” context with a particular focus on Tequila and Mezcal. The research explores food quality and its link with trust in the context of GIs, focusing on Iberian acorn – ham from Spain and chorizo from Toluca, Mexico. Similarly, the author examines the tradeoffs between farm and factory production in context with GIs, focusing on cider production in three counties in the UK. It employs the value chains methodology to examine the institutional framework. It incorporates convention theory, which characterizes value chains through product quality, trust, collective commitment, and reputation [92–94]. The study aims to examine the organisational changes in supply chains when a geographical brand becomes a GI. Using case studies from the EU, it differentiates the GI and non-GI supply chains, applying transaction cost theory (TCT) and Institutional Economics [45]. Another study investigated whether “food quality schemes (FQS)”, such as organic products and geographical indication products, are more socially sustainable than conventional products by analysing the distribution of bargaining power in supply chains. Theories applied include transactional and Institutional Economics to understand the dynamics of bargaining power distribution [95]. In northeast China, the study aims to understand the determinants that enhance or constrain the spatial distribution of Geographical Indications of Agricultural Products (GIAPs). It applies the random forest model to analyse multi-perspective factors such as natural phenomena, socioeconomic, agricultural, and market demand factors. Theories of machine learning interpretability, Central place theory, and cooperation game theory are used to reveal the importance of these actors [30]. The study aims to assess the “impact of mutual recognition of GIs between China and the EU on the quality upgrading of China’s agricultural exports”. The theoretical framework incorporates Melitz’s (2003) model, which focuses on firm heterogeneity and productivity, and Antoniades's (2015) model, which examines the role of quality differentiation in trade, using the theories of quality upgrading, trade theory, and the theory of demand hierarchy to understand the importance of mutual recognition [96]. In the context of single-origin coffee and GIs, the importance of Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS) sustainability models in addressing coffee growers' challenges and promoting the sustainable coffee industry was emphasized. While VSS models have shown positive effects, they require re-evaluation to reflect better the complexities of coffee growing. The new sustainability model aims to benefit farmers economically and enhance public-private partnerships, aligning with the sustainable market transformation theory for continuous improvement and region-specific initiatives [17]. The study explores the potential of Geographical Indications (GIs) to enhance Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Japan, focusing on the Mishima Potato GI. The main objectives are to examine existing knowledge on GI inception and explore GI impacts on the complete set of SDGs through interviews and participatory observations. Theories applied include territorial approaches, social capital, and socio-technical transition theory to analyses the capacities of GI, to adapt to sustainability challenges [20]. 3.2.2 Context Regarding the context, based on the World Intellectual Property Organization's 2023 report on Geographical Indications (GIs) for 2022, (Fig. 9) indicates that China has the highest GI in force, followed by European Union countries, Switzerland, and the Republic of Moldova. The above aligns with the statement of Giovannucci et al. [97]. China holds the record for the highest number of registered GIs, However, for many years, majority of the registered GIs were found in the EU. The selected data source for the existing literature indicates that most of the research studies conducted between 2007–2024 are in European Union countries, followed by China. This indicates that EU countries' researchers contributed the most in the field of geographical indications. The world map (Fig. 10) highlights the country-based collaboration of corresponding authors. The map highlighted the colour intensity to show the strength of relationships between the countries: dark blue indicates a stronger relationship, light blue indicates weak ones, and grey indicates no connection between the countries. Many European Union countries, such as Italy, France, and Germany, are actively working on the sustainability of GI. Italy collaborates with 12 countries, including Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, France (3 collaborations), Mexico, Netherlands, Spain (2 collaborations), Switzerland, Tunisia, and the United Kingdom. Other than the European countries, China collaborates with Ireland and the USA. The collaboration patterns among authors reveal that most of the studies were conducted in the European Union, which is one reason that Sui generis protects the GI and patents more robustly in these regions. The selected paper’s overall data shows that most of the research studies have been conducted in developed countries, especially in European Union countries, rather than developing countries. 3.2.3 Characteristics The overall key indicators of Geographical Indication and Sustainability are presented through conceptual mapping (Fig. 11) for an easy understanding of the relevant literature studied from 2007 to 2024. This section represents how GI contributes to sustainability. Mili and Martínez-Vega [18] analyses the regional heterogeneity of agricultural sustainability in Spain at a province level using 22 indicators based on the environmental, economic, and social dimensions. The results indicate that higher economic sustainability is linked to the intensive utilization of agricultural labour and machinery contributes to economic growth and increased wealth, followed by medium social sustainability associated with economic diversification and quality productions based on PDO and PGI labels, and low environmental sustainability is found in the areas with less agricultural land and higher burned areas, better carbon sequestration. It is found that there is a need for tailored policies towards sustainable farming systems in Spanish agriculture. Samper and Quiñones-Ruiz [17] discusses the sustainability of GIs in the coffee industry and the need for a balanced approach that incorporates local realities and sustainability challenges. It emphasizes the pivotal role of Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS) in driving economic upgrade opportunities and origin-based sustainability indicators, highlighting their potential and power. The sustainability of GIs is considered medium due to the challenges in capturing higher income for growers and the need for better governance and stakeholder engagement. Key indicators include economic resilience, social equity, and environmental protection. Cavagnero and Giordano [16] assess the cross-sector and transdisciplinary explorative research exploring the importance of GIs to foster the sustainability of localized fashion, drawing parallels with the wine industry in Apulia, Italy. This study revealed that there is higher sustainability in preserving local culture, traditions, and environmental practices, underscoring the importance of cultural heritage preservation in sustainability. Medium sustainability is found in economic benefits, such as market access and product differentiation. However, low sustainability is observed in areas requiring more stringent regulations and incentives for environmental and social impacts. Key indicators include cultural heritage preservation, economic resilience and ecological practices. Iotti and Bonazzi [78] studied the financial sustainability of agri-food companies in the case of members of the PDO Parma Ham sector, commonly known for producing high-quality meat products. The study reveals that, despite their global reputation, they have modest profitability, especially when considering the cost of debt (COD). The length of the ageing process and the cash conversion cycle negatively impact profitability is due to the challenges in financial sustainability, particularly in managing debt and maintaining profitability. Sekine [98] discusses the potential benefits and contradictions of geographical indications GI and patrimonization in promoting the sustainability of indigenous communities, with a particular focus on Cordillera Heirloom rice in the Philippines. The study revealed that GI and patrimonization enhance economic opportunities and cultural preservation; it may also cause resource overuse and social conflicts. So, public policies must carefully balance these aspects to support indigenous communities effectively. Flinzberger et al. [21] studied the GIs labels in promoting sustainability within Mediterranean agroforestry systems. He stated that the GI label provides the chance to demonstrate sustainable management along the supply chain while increasing incomes for farms practicing sustainability. However, despite experts strong awareness of the social-cultural benefits of agroforestry systems, the high initial costs and a lack of consumer awareness of agroforestry are the major constraints in preventing the producers from participating in labeling schemes. Clodoveo et al. [40] assess the PGI for Extra Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO) in Tunisia, emphasizing its potential to strengthen environmental, social, and economic sustainability. The study revealed that GIs help create niche marketing for high–quality products, provide a price premium and enhance the monetary value of EVOO, which supports local economies and small–scale producers. It also provides a credible certification mechanism that helps distinguish quality products, build consumer trust, and enhance the reputation of Tunisian EVOO in international markets. Geographical indications also protect the value chain. This study also highlighted how the implementation of PGIs for EVOO in Tunisia has contributed to the 17 SDG goals. Quiedeville et al. [24] analysed the systemic sustainability of French organic rice and PGI einkorn value chains by combining traditional sustainability pillars with network analysis. The main objective is to evaluate their environmental, economic, and social viability. The results show that while the einkorn value chain indicates a high centrality and ecological performance, its sustainability is impeded by dependence on a lead processors. Similarly, the organic rice value chain benefits from a strong, diverse network, enhancing overall sustainability. De Rosa et al.[39] investigated the main role of geographical indication GI in the Italian dairy sectors, focusing on the “disaffection effect”, where producers are increasingly exiting the GI system. The study highlighted the negative dynamics and regional disparities in GI adhesion. The findings revealed a substantial decline in the number of operators in the dairy GI sector, particularly in northern Italy, which leads to the risks of unsustainability of the dairy sector. Kaczorowska et al.[72] assessed the impact of food sustainability labels on urban consumers' purchasing decisions and price expectations in Poland. This study focuses on consumer perception of sustainability labels. It evaluates how the “labels influence” the “buying behavior of willingness to buy” and determines their effect on consumer preferences of willingness to pay. This study found that consumers are normally price-sensitive and that even those with positive attitudes towards sustainability do not always use labels as a cue when shopping, especially if the logos are not well known. The study concludes that two distinct consumer groups emerged, skeptical and mindful, with the latter showing a great willingness to pay (WTP) for sustainability-labeled products. Flinzberger et al. [28] examined how “Protected Designation of Origin (PDO)” labels can support sustainable development in European agri-food landscapes. By analysing the relationship between PDO production and socio-ecological landscape characteristics, the study found that there is a positive correlation between PDO-labelled products and ecologically valuable landscapes. It highlights that PDOs can effectively combine ecological and social aspects of sustainable landscape management. Rabadan et al. [99] analysed the impact of PDOs on eco-innovation in the case of the olive oil sector. The objective is to evaluate the drivers of eco-innovation, particularly focusing on the role of PDOs. The study finds that larger cooperatives show a strong commitment to sustainability, but PDOs can limit the implementation of eco-innovative measures. This suggests a need to balance traditional production methods with sustainable practices. Pato and Duque [29] studied the role of traditional agri-food products and sustainability as a fruitful relationship for the development of rural areas in Portugal. The main focus is on analysing the spatial distribution of these products and their impact on rural development. Results show that Portugal ranks fourth in the EU for the number of traditional certified products, with the northern region in the product variety, highlighting the potential of GIs to support sustainable development by preserving cultural heritage and boosting local economies. Reinhardt and Ambrogio's [85] studies on the GIs and Sustainable Viticulture evaluating the integration of sustainability into GIs within the EUs Farm-to-Fork Agenda, focusing on the German wine region Franconia and the Italian region of South Tyrol, use a mixed-method approach to assess the stakeholders' perspectives. Results indicated that while GIs can enhance sustainability governance, they can avoid administrative burdens and be inclusive. The study concluded that GIs could contribute to sustainability but should be part of a broader policy mix. Arfini et al. [22] investigated the role of GIs in generating public goods within agri-food systems, focusing on cultural heritage, socio-economic themes, and natural resources. Using the FAO-SAFA method, the study assesses the sustainability of GIs through case studies of Parmigiano and Reggiano and Ternasco de Aragon. The findings indicate that GIs contribute to sustainable rural development by preserving cultural heritage, enhancing socio–economic conditions and managing natural resources effectively. Bonazzi et al. [44] evaluate the economic sustainability of Italian pig slaughtering firms producing PDO hams by analysing the financial data for over ten years. The findings indicated that important financial challenges, such as high raw material costs and low profit margins, affect their capital attraction. More studies suggest including small and medium-sized enterprises to develop strategies for improvement, emphasising the importance of sustainability practices for the economic viability of firms linked to GIs. Millet et al. [31] investigated product qualification to identify sustainability Pathways for Place-Based Agri-Food Systems case of the GI Corsican Grapefruit; the study revealed that certain compromises written into the code of practices threaten the system's sustainability. The GI fruits are harvested before they are fully mature, which leads to food wastage; this affects the value chain of market channels like export markets. This study suggests short-term changes lie in later harvests and diversified marketing channels, as well as long-term pathways such as reinforcing fruit typicality, reducing food waste, and embedding the fruit in local culture to enhance sustainability. Nuary et al. [19] analyses the sustainability of Salk Pondoh Sleman (SPS) fruit with a geographical indication (GI) certification using a multidimensional approach. The study aims to analyze the sustainability of SPS by examining environmental, organizational, and technological dimensions. Findings show that the SPS plantation system is sustainable, with a sustainability index of 59.83. The key sustainability factors include irrigation system availability, organizational conflicts, and product quality classification. Tok et al. [100] examines the relationship between geographical indications, sustainability and multifunctionality in table olive farming in Akhisar, Turkey. The study analyses how GIs contribute to sustainable agricultural practices and multifunctionality in olive cultivation. Factors such as marketing opportunities and price advantages are very important. The application of fertilizer and plant protection management is carried out in a coordinated manner in the region to minimize environmental damage. Geographical indications are essential for the sustainability of table olive cultivation and the principle of multifunctionality in agriculture is upheld by keeping the farmers engaged in table olive farming. Table olive farming can be emphasized as a model for integrating traditional agricultural practices with modern sustainability goals, highlighting the benefits of GIs in promoting environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Bernard-Mongin et al. [37] examines the sustainability of the GI building process in the case of Sharr Cheese in Kosovo, focusing on how environmental accountability emerges through collective action and strategic knowledge brokering. The results show that sustainability goals in GI-building are achieved through intensive boundary work and experimental spaces. The research highlighted the importance of context-specific and collective learning in achieving environmental sustainability within the GI framework. Kimura and Rigolot [20] studied the potential of GIs to enhance SDGs in Japan. The results indicate that based on interviews and participatory observation, Mishima Bareisho Potato GI was used. According to the local stakeholders, the Mishima Potato GI produce can contribute to at least nine sustainable development goals (SDGs) throughout all the stages of production, processing, and commercialization. Arslam et al.[101] investigates Tokat Bez Sucuk, a traditional Turkish sausage a local food with a geographical indication, within the framework of sustainable gastronomy. This study shows the importance of unique production methods, cultural significance, and contribution to local cuisine. The study reveals that, based on interviews with local producers, this sausage is made with traditional techniques, emphasizing sustainability and the preservation of cultural heritage. The results show that GIs have increased product recognition, commercial value and standardization, contributing positively to sustainable gastronomy and local economic development. Petruang and Orachos [32] assess the economic sustainability of Khao Sangyod Muang Phatthalung and indigenous rice varieties in Thailand, mainly focusing on profit efficiency among the farmers. The main aim of the study is to measure the farmers' net incomes and compare the profit inefficiency between the GI and non-GI areas. The findings revealed that Sangyod rice farmers have an average profit efficiency score of 68%, indicating the need for improvement. The farmers in the GI area show higher profit efficiency than others. The results also suggested that GI registration, experience in rice cultivation, and reducing drought vulnerability can enhance profit efficiency, while the organic standards and off-farm jobs reduce it. Girard[102]investigates the importance of how the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) for Bay of Mont-Saint-Michel mussels can enhance the environmental sustainability of bivalve aquaculture by improving environmental sustainability. The study finds that the PDO system supports sustainable mussel farming by ensuring quality linked to origin, promoting resource management, and involving collective organization and institutional support. However, it indicates that a more flexible approach is needed to manage the PDO label to enhance the environmental sustainability. The PDO’s success is attributed to its rigorous inspection system, historical development, and the collective efforts of mussel farmers. Muller et al.[95] examines whether Food Quality Schemes (FQS), including organic and geographical indication products, are more socially sustainable than conventional products by analyzing the distribution of bargaining power within supply chains. The study finds that FQS supply chains are more socially sustainable due to a fairer distribution of bargaining power and higher adaptation capacity, driven by competition-based, transactional, and institutional factors. Bellassen et al.[26]assess the sustainability performance of certified (e.g., PDO, PGI, organic) and non-certified food products across economic, environmental, and social dimensions. This study evaluates 25 indicators for 27 certified and 27 conventional food value chains. Certified products generally show better sustainability performance, particularly in terms of carbon footprint and social indicators like employment. However, the results vary significantly depending on the product and context, highlighting the complexity of sustainability assessments. The dataset and methodology provide a comprehensive framework for future research and practical applications in food value chain sustainability. Overall, GIs can act as entry points for rural development strategies, especially in less populated regions, by enhancing the economic value of local products. GIs help farmers command a premium price for their rice, improving their income and contributing to conserving indigenous varieties and genetic diversity. It also helps in educational activities involving the local communities and schools, promoting awareness about local products and sustainable practices. This shows that GI products play an important role in contributing to the sustainability and sustainable development to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The conceptual framework of GI linking with sustainability (Fig. 12) highlights how GI registration benefits economic, environmental, and social sustainability. Economically, it boosts local products and tourism; environmentally, it promotes sustainable practices; socially, it preserves traditional knowledge. Moreover, the sustainability of the geographical indication is interconnected with the traditional practices of indigenous communities, including the roles of producers, stakeholders' involvement in supply chain management, and emphasizing how GI product labels can command premium prices due to consumer preference for authenticity. 3.2.4 Methods The various academic literature applied and the methodology used in the selected article from (2007–2024) are depicted in Fig. 13. Most of the research studies were conducted using the quantitative research methodology, which is about 58%, focusing on the price premium, willingness to pay, profitability in marketing, consumer preference, trade, and export of GI products. The quantitative data includes primary data (Direct and indirect surveys) and secondary datasets, including centralized databases like EUROSTAT, DOOR, and e Ambrosia (Fig. 14). Most quantitative research used secondary databases from GI registration and market data. Followed by qualitative research methodology and mixed-method research, each carrying 21%. Qualitative research methodology covers observation, expert interviews, and focus group discussions with the stakeholders regarding the geographical indications and sustainability of the GI label. Mixed method research covers quantitative and qualitative research, including social network analysis, cross-disciplinary approach, and case studies research. Here, the primary data is collected qualitatively, and the quantitative data is secondary data collected from the government database. 4. Critical gaps identified and Summary of the future research Table 8 Critical gaps identified and Summary of the future research TCCM Critical gaps identified Suggestions for Future Research Theory Most of the researchers have researched either economic sustainability or environmental sustainability. There is only a few studies has been undertaken on interdisciplinary approaches. There is a vast application of social and economic-related frameworks in the literature, leaving behind the environmental and economic concepts. There is a need for a robust theoretical framework that studies multidisciplinary approaches such as social, ecological and economic dimensions. Future researchers can apply the theory of change, theory of stakeholders, theory of ecology while studying the sustainability for rural development. Context The majority of studies are conducted in developed countries, and only a few are conducted in developing countries. Most countries recognize GI, but they do not know its importance. Researchers can conduct studies in developing and under-developing countries to study the impact of the sustainability of GI Characteristics Most research studies have concentrated on single dimensions of sustainability rather than addressing its multi-dimensional sustainability. Future researchers can examine the impact of the relationship between GI and sustainability by integrating a multidisciplinary approach. Methods There is no standardized scale to measure sustainability and study the impact of GIs on sustainability. There is insufficient research involving the local producers/farmers of a particular region of that specific GI-labelled product. Most of the studies on GI sustainability are on firms based in the province/industry product of any particular county. Most of the research was conducted based on secondary quantitative data. There is a lack of participatory approaches involving local farmers, stakeholders, experts, and government agencies in assessing the role played by the value chain actors to understand and leverage the potential of sustainability. Future researchers can develop a scale to measure sustainability. Research can be conducted in the village of the county/province of the specific region from the perspectives of the producers and GI-authorised users studying rural development sustainability. Researchers can conduct the study by collecting primary data to study the actual impact among the stakeholders. Researchers can conduct longitudinal studies on the long-term impact of the sustainability of GI. Qualitative and mixed research can be applied to explore the novel indicators that can be used for the studies. Conclusions This review highlights the studies on the sustainability of geographical indication conducted worldwide based on the Scopus and Web of Science sources. This study helps to identify the diverse approaches, key themes, and methodologies integrating environmental, social, and economic sustainability. The findings show how geographical indications of agricultural produce play an important role in contributing to sustainability. Despite significant progress, this study identified some gaps and challenges that need to be addressed in standardizing the methodologies and proposed suggestions for future research directions depicted in Table 8 . These suggestions help develop more participatory mapping approaches, enhance the scalability of GI, and conduct research in underrepresented regions to understand and maximize the benefits of GIs in promoting sustainability. Declarations Funding: No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript Conflicts of interest: The authors declare no conflict of Interest Financial interests: The authors declare they have no financial interests Non–financial interests: None Data availability: No datasets were generated or analyzed in this study Code availability is Not applicable Authors’ Contributions R Nirosha contributed substantially to the conceptualization, methodology, analysis, visualization, and writing of the original draft, review, and editing. J Paul Mansingh provided guidance and supervised the entire process from inception, guided how to collect the data, supervised the data collection tirelessly, created a review matrix, and reviewed and corrected the original manuscript, finally approving the final version for submission. Acknowledgment: We sincerely appreciate the editor's and reviewers' efforts and valuable comments, which have significantly improved this article. References Singh S, Bharti N. Geographical Indication and Rural Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis. Australas Accounting, Bus Financ J. 2023;17(1):32–50. Whitfield K. Quick Guide to Sustainable Development: History and Concepts [Internet]. 2015. Available from: http://www.precautionaryprinciple.eu/. WCED. Our Common Future. OxfordOxford Univ Press. 1987; doi: 10.1080/07488008808408783. FAO. Geographical Indications for sustainable food systems Preserving and promoting agricultural and food heritage GI s contribution to sustainability(FAO). Rome, Italy [Internet]. 2017; Vandecandelaere E, Samper LF, Rey A, et al. The geographical indication pathway to sustainability: A framework to assess and monitor the contributions of geographical indications to sustainability through a participatory process. Sustain. 2021;13(14). FAO and OriGIn. Developing a roadmap towards increased sustainability in geographical indication systems. Rome Italy. 2024. FAO. The state of food and agriculture, 2016. Eugen. Rev. 2016. Belletti G, Marescotti A, Sanz-Cañada J, et al. Linking protection of geographical indications to the environment: Evidence from the European Union olive-oil sector. Land use policy. 2015;48:94–106. Török Á, Jantyik L, Maró ZM, et al. Understanding the real-world impact of geographical indications: A critical review of the empirical economic literature. Sustain. 2020;12(22):1–24. Curzi D, Huysmans M. The Impact of Protecting EU Geographical Indications in Trade Agreements. Am J Agric Econ. 2022;104(1):364–384. Bowen S, Zapata AV. Geographical indications, terroir, and socioeconomic and ecological sustainability: The case of tequila. J Rural Stud [Internet]. 2009;25(1):108–119. FAO. The State of Food and Agriculture. Rome, Italy. 2013. Reinhardt T, Ambrogio Y. Geographical Indications and Sustainable Viticulture: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Sustain. 2023;15(23). Stanco M, Lerro M, Marotta G. Consumers’ preferences for wine attributes: A best-worst scaling analysis. Sustain. 2020;12(7):1–11. Dede D, Didaskalou E, Bersimis S, et al. A statistical framework for assessing environmental performance of quality wine production. Sustain. 2020;12(24):1–16. Cavagnero S, Giordano S. Sui Generis Geographical Indications Fostering Localized Sustainable Fashion: A Cross-Industry Assessment. Sustain. 2022;14(9). Samper LF, Quiñones-Ruiz XF. Towards a balanced sustainability vision for the coffee industry. Resources. 2017;6(2):1–28. Mili S, Martínez-Vega J. Accounting for regional heterogeneity of agricultural sustainability in Spain. Sustain. 2019;11(2). Nuary RB, Maksum M, Sukartiko AC. A Multidimensional Approach in Assessing Geographical Indication Product Sustainability: Salak Pondoh Sleman. agriTECH. 2022;42(1):55. Kimura J, Rigolot C. The potential of geographical indications (Gi) to enhance sustainable development goals (sdgs) in Japan: Overview and insights from Japan Gi Mishima potato. Sustain. 2021;13(2):1–12. Flinzberger L, Zinngrebe Y, Plieninger T. Labelling in Mediterranean agroforestry landscapes: a Delphi study on relevant sustainability indicators. Sustain Sci [Internet]. 2020;15(5):1369–1382. Arfini F, Cozzi E, Mancini MC, et al. Are geographical indication products fostering public goods? Some evidence from Europe. Sustain. 2019;11(2):1–14. Millet M, Casabianca F. Sharing values for changing practices, a lever for sustainable transformation? The case of farmers and processors in interaction within localized cheese sectors. Sustain. 2019;11(17). Quiédeville S, Bassene JB, Lançon F, et al. Systemic sustainability of the French organic rice and PGI einkorn value chains: A preliminary assessment based on network analysis. Sustain. 2018;10(7). Marescotti A, Quiñones-Ruiz XF, Edelmann H, et al. Are protected geographical indications evolving due to environmentally related justifications? An analysis of amendments in the fruit and vegetable sector in the European union. Sustain. 2020;12(9). Bellassen V, Arfini F, Antonioli F, et al. Sustainability Performance of Certified and Non-certified Food Social and Economic History. Res Data J Humanit Soc Sci. 2021;6(1):1–22. Kurnilasari DT. Geographical Indications in Trade Commodities for Promoting Sustainable Economic Development in Indonesia. Lentera Huk. 2020;7(3):279–300. Flinzberger L, Cebrián-Piqueras MA, Peppler-Lisbach C, et al. Why Geographical Indications Can Support Sustainable Development in European Agri-Food Landscapes. Front Conserv Sci. 2021;2(January). Pato ML, Duque AS. Traditional agri-food products and sustainability - A fruitful relationship for the development of rural areas in Portugal. Open Agric. 2023;8(1). Luo S, Ma Y, Wang T. What Determinants Will Enhance or Constrain the Spatiality of Agricultural Products with Geographical Indications in Northeast China? An Interpretable Learning Approach. ISPRS Int J Geo-Information. 2023;12(11). Millet M, Keast V, Gonano S, et al. Product qualification as a means of identifying sustainability pathways for place-based agri-food systems: The case of the GI Corsican Grapefruit (France). Sustain. 2020;12(17). Petruang N, Napasintuwong O. Economic Sustainability of Geographical Indication Indigenous Rice: the Case of Khao Sangyod Muang Phatthalung, Thailand. Asian J Agric Rural Dev. 2022;12(2):104–112. Donati M, Wilkinson A, Veneziani M, et al. Economic Spill-Over of Food Quality Schemes on Their Territory. J Agric Food Ind Organ. 2021;19(2):95–111. Hilal M, Leedon G, Duboys De Labarre M, et al. Organic and Geographical Indication Certifications’ Contributions to Employment and Education. J Agric Food Ind Organ. 2021;19(2):161–176. Di Vita G, Vecchio R, Borrello M, et al. Oh my darling clementine: Heterogeneous preferences for sustainable citrus fruits. Renew Agric Food Syst. 2021;36(6):557–568. Užar D, Filipović J. Determinants of Consumer Purchase Intention Towards Cheeses With Geographical Indication in a Developing Country: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior. Market-Trziste. 2023;35(2):183–204. Bernard-Mongin C, Balouzat J, Chau E, et al. Geographical indication building process for sharr cheese (Kosovo): “Inside insights” on sustainability. Sustain. 2021;13(10):1–23. Guareschi M, Mancini MC, Arfini F. Geographical Indications, public goods and sustainable development goals: A methodological proposal. J Rural Stud [Internet]. 2023;103(December 2022):103122. De Rosa M, Masi M, Apostolico L, et al. Geographical Indications and Risks of Unsustainability Linked to “Disaffection Effects” in the Dairy Sector. Agric. 2023;13(2):1–12. Clodoveo ML, Yangui A, Fendri M, et al. Protected geographical indications for EVOO in Tunisia: Towards environmental, social, and economic sustainable development. Sustain. 2021;13(20). Vidaurreta I, Orengo J, de la Fe C, et al. Price fluctuation, protected geographical indications and employment in the spanish small ruminant sector during the covid-19 crisis. Animals. 2020;10(12):1–15. Flinzberger L, Zinngrebe Y, Bugalho MN, et al. EU-wide mapping of ‘Protected Designations of Origin’ food products (PDOs) reveals correlations with social-ecological landscape values. Agron Sustain Dev. 2022;42(3). Iotti M, Manghi E, Bonazzi G. Financial performance of companies associated with the PDO Parma ham consortium: Analysis by quartile of firms. J Agric Food Res [Internet]. 2023;13(April):100598. Bonazzi G, Camanzi P, Ferri G, et al. Economic sustainability of pig slaughtering firms in the production chain of denomination of origin hams in italy. Sustain. 2021;13(14):1–18. Fernández-Barcala M, González-Díaz M, Raynaud E. Contrasting the governance of supply chains with and without geographical indications: complementarity between levels. Supply Chain Manag. 2017;22(4):305–320. Milano MZ, Cazella AA. Environmental effects of geographical indications and their influential factors: A review of the empirical evidence. Curr Res Environ Sustain [Internet]. 2021;3:100096. Falasco S, Caputo P, Garrone P. Can Geographical Indications promote environmental sustainability in food supply chains? Insights from a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2024;444(February):141100. Jebarajakirthy C, Maseeh HI, Morshed Z, et al. Mobile advertising: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Int J Consum Stud. 2021;45(6):1258–1291. Paul J, Feliciano-Cestero MM. Five decades of research on foreign direct investment by MNEs: An overview and research agenda. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2021;124(February 2020):800–812. Paul J, Criado AR. The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know? Int Bus Rev [Internet]. 2020;29(4):101717. Shankar A, Jebarajakirthy C, Nayal P, et al. Online food delivery: A systematic synthesis of literature and a framework development. Int J Hosp Manag [Internet]. 2022;104(May):103240. Rosado-Serrano A, Paul J, Dikova D. International franchising: A literature review and research agenda. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2018;85(September 2017):238–257. Kahiya ET. Five decades of research on export barriers: Review and future directions. Int Bus Rev [Internet]. 2018;27(6):1172–1188. Paul J, Singh G. The 45 years of foreign direct investment research: Approaches, advances and analytical areas. World Econ. 2017;40(11):2512–2527. Swain S, Jebarajakirthy C, Maseeh HI, et al. Permission marketing: a systematic review of 22 Years of research. Mark Intell Plan. 2023;41(3):310–328. Paul J, Lim WM, O’Cass A, et al. Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). Int J Consum Stud. 2021;(April):1–16. Bahoo S. Corruption in banks: A bibliometric review and agenda. Financ Res Lett. 2020;35(October 2019). Olaleye SA, Mogaji E, Agbo FJ, et al. The composition of data economy: a bibliometric approach and TCCM framework of conceptual, intellectual and social structure. Inf Discov Deliv. 2023;51(2):223–240. Redine A, Deshpande S, Jebarajakirthy C, et al. Impulse buying: A systematic literature review and future research directions. Int J Consum Stud. 2023;47(1):3–41. Singh S, Dhir S. Structured review using TCCM and bibliometric analysis of international cause-related marketing, social marketing, and innovation of the firm. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark. 2019;16(2–4):335–347. Sharma K, Dhir S, Ongsakul V. Artificial intelligence and hospitality industry: systematic review using TCCM and bibliometric analysis. J Int Bus Entrep Dev. 2022;14(1):48–71. José de Oliveira O, Francisco da Silva F, Juliani F, et al. Bibliometric Method for Mapping the State-of-the-Art and Identifying Research Gaps and Trends in Literature: An Essential Instrument to Support the Development of Scientific Projects. Sci Recent Adv. 2019;1–20. Khanra S, Dhir A, Mäntymäki M. Big data analytics and enterprises: a bibliometric synthesis of the literature. Enterp Inf Syst [Internet]. 2020;14(6):737–768. Singh S, Dhir S, Das VM, et al. Bibliometric overview of the Technological Forecasting and Social Change journal: Analysis from 1970 to 2018. Technol Forecast Soc Change [Internet]. 2020;154(January):119963. Dias CT, De Vasconcelos Rodrigues da Silva W, Leitão Russo S. Bibliometric Analysis on Protection of Geographical Indications. Int J Innov Educ Res. 2018;6(4):176–192. Maier D, Maier A, Aşchilean I, et al. The relationship between innovation and sustainability: A bibliometric review of the literature. Sustain. 2020;12(10). Gopalakrishnan S, Ganeshkumar P. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: Understanding the best evidence in primary healthcare. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2013;2(1):9. Kaur P, Dhir A, Tandon A, et al. A systematic literature review on cyberstalking. An analysis of past achievements and future promises. Technol Forecast Soc Change [Internet]. 2021;163(June 2020):120426. Sharma K, Mahna T, Jain S, et al. Bibliometric Review of Blended Finance and Partial Risk Guarantee: Establishing Needs and Advantages. Int J Financ Stud. 2023;11(3). Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7). Maina FW, Mburu J, Ackello-Ogutu C, et al. Intellectual property and agricultural trade: Producer perceptions of tea and coffee as potential geographical indications. Open Agric. 2018;3(1):586–595. Kaczorowska J, Rejman K, Halicka E, et al. Impact of food sustainability labels on the perceived product value and price expectations of urban consumers. Sustain. 2019;11(24). Maina FW, Mburu J, Ackello-Ogutu C, et al. Producers’ valuation of geographical indications-related attributes of agri-food products from semi-arid lands in Kenya. Heliyon [Internet]. 2019;5(2):e01218. Defrancesco E, Orrego JE, Gennari A. Would “New World” wines benefit from protected geographical indications in international markets? The case of Argentinean Malbec. Wine Econ Policy [Internet]. 2012;1(1):63–72. Lee E, Zhao L. Understanding Purchase Intention of Fair Trade Handicrafts through the Lens of Geographical Indication and Fair Trade Knowledge in a Brand Equity Model. Sustain. 2024;16(1). DE PIN A, Fiore M. Investigating eligible markets for Radicchio Rosso di Treviso PGI: the OMOI method. Stud Agric Econ. 2022;124(1):10–21. Ferrer-Pérez H, Abdelradi F, Gil JM. Geographical indications and price volatility dynamics of lamb prices in Spain. Sustain. 2020;12(7). Iotti M, Bonazzi G. Financial Sustainability in Agri-Food Companies: The Case of Members of the PDO Parma Ham Consortium. Sustain. 2023. Kokthi E, Guri G, Muco E. Assessing the applicability of geographical indications from the social capital analysis perspective: Evidences from albania. Econ Sociol. 2021;14(3):32–53. Torok ,Aron;Jambor A. Competitiveness and Geographical Indications: the case of fruit spirits in Central and Eastern European countries. AgEcon Search. 2013;25–32. Balogh JM, Jámbor A. Determinants of revealed comparative advantages: The case of cheese trade in the European Union. Acta Aliment. 2017;46(3):305–311. Huysmans M. On Feta and Fetta: Protecting EU geographical indications in Australia. J Agric Econ. 2022;73(2):598–613. Ingram V, Hansen ME, Bosselmann AS. To Label or Not? Governing the Costs and Benefits of Geographic Indication of an African Forest Honey Value Chain. Front For Glob Chang. 2020;3(September):1–18. Fracarolli GS. Mapping online geographical indication: Agri-food markets on E-retail shelves. Agronomy. 2021;11(12):1–21. Reinhardt T, Ambrogio Y. Geographical Indications and Sustainable Viticulture: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Sustainability. 2023;15(23):16318. Duvaleix S, Emlinger C, Gaigné C, et al. Geographical indications and trade: Firm-level evidence from the French cheese industry. Food Policy. 2021;102:0–34. Xu Z, Feng Y, Wei H. Does Geographical Indication Certification Increase the Technical Complexity of Export Agricultural Products? Front Environ Sci. 2022;10. Zhang S, Sun Y, Yu X, et al. Geographical Indication, Agricultural Products Export and Urban–Rural Income Gap. Agric. 2023;13(2):1–16. Huysmans M. Exporting protection: EU trade agreements, geographical indications, and gastronationalism. Rev Int Polit Econ [Internet]. 2022;29(3):979–1005. Fracarolli GS. Mapping online geographical indication: Agrifood products on e-commerce shelves of mercosur and the European Union. Economies. 2021;9(2). Carbone A. Food supply chains: coordination governance and other shaping forces. Agric Food Econ. 2017;5(1). Oledinma A, Roper S. Tradition (re-)defined: Farm v factory trade-offs in the definition of geographical indications, the case of Three Counties Cider. J Rural Stud [Internet]. 2021;84(February):12–21. Pérez-Akaki P, Vega-Vera NV, Enríquez-Caballero YP, et al. Designation of origin distillates in Mexico: Value chains and territorial development. Sustain. 2021;13(10):1–25. Fernández-Zarza M, Amaya-Corchuelo S, Belletti G, et al. Trust and food quality in the valorisation of geographical indication initiatives. Sustain. 2021;13(6):1–22. Muller P, Böhm M, Csillag P, et al. Are Certified Supply Chains More Socially Sustainable? A Bargaining Power Analysis. J Agric Food Ind Organ. 2021;19(2):177–192. Qian W, Dong Y, Liu Y. The impact of mutual recognition of geographical indications on the quality upgrading of China’s agricultural exports. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2023;10(1). Giovannucci D, Josling T, Kerr WA, et al. Guide to Geographical Indications - Linking Products and Their Origins. Geneve: Geneva; 2009. Sekine K. The potential and contradictions of geographical indication and patrimonization for the sustainability of indigenous communities: A case of cordillera heirloom rice in the Philippines. Sustain. 2021;13(8). Rabadán A, Álvarez-Ortí M, Tello J, et al. Tradition vs. Eco-innovation: The constraining effect of protected designations of origin (pdo) on the implementation of sustainability measures in the olive oil sector. Agronomy. 2021;11(3). Tok N, Çobanoğlu F, Tunalıoğlu R. The Link Between Geographic Indication, Sustainability, and Multifunctionality: The Case of Table Olive Groves in Western Turkey. Erwerbs-Obstbau. 2023;65(4):851–859. Arslan E, Kendir H, Akmeşe H, et al. Investigation of Tokat Bez Sucuk, a Geographically Indicated Local Food, within the Scope of Sustainable Gastronomy. Sustain. 2023;15(17). Girard S. Can Geographical Indications promote sustainable shellfish farming? The example of Bay of Mont-Saint-Michel mussels. Mar Policy [Internet]. 2022;135(November 2021):104845. Table 7 Table 7 is available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Table7.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 18 Jun, 2025 Read the published version in Discover Sustainability → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 25 Feb, 2025 Reviews received at journal 24 Feb, 2025 Reviews received at journal 24 Feb, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 20 Feb, 2025 Reviews received at journal 19 Feb, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 19 Feb, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 19 Feb, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 19 Feb, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 14 Feb, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 13 Feb, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 12 Feb, 2025 First submitted to journal 04 Jan, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5761863","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Systematic Review","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":414760899,"identity":"ea614e34-7393-40b4-992d-082a6ce02e37","order_by":0,"name":"R Nirosha","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Vellore Institute of Technology University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"R","middleName":"","lastName":"Nirosha","suffix":""},{"id":414760900,"identity":"8a52c245-f7f2-45c1-8d2f-f66842519177","order_by":1,"name":"J Paul Mansingh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Vellore Institute of Technology University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"J","middleName":"Paul","lastName":"Mansingh","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-01-04 06:53:15","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5761863/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5761863/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01332-4","type":"published","date":"2025-06-18T15:57:57+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":76200114,"identity":"4bfc2b62-be8e-46ed-b593-ff3594a25198","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:03","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":211670,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePRISMA framework\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/22105e3fc974d865f77088de.png"},{"id":76200925,"identity":"fb9f09af-b9a5-4fd5-b089-e8e8bca06745","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:24:03","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":417748,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMain Information\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors Compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/cd29e13c65ef26317851a7c5.png"},{"id":76200115,"identity":"79a33322-77e8-4f96-ae27-852a6650ee87","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:03","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":138140,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAnnual Scholarly Publications of Articles\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors Compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/34ca5d9ae61d4605674c2677.png"},{"id":76201332,"identity":"96674ac1-7324-4b68-ab3e-7e2084e9bf89","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:32:04","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":746662,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eHistory and trendline chart of GIs and Sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors Compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/f647508221d88acb3e2936de.png"},{"id":76201114,"identity":"85af2ae0-88bc-4d4e-ac2a-a2ecf14f01cf","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:24:06","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":457219,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCo-occurrence network map of Author keywords.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/a55a1f8710e25adb460631b9.png"},{"id":76200120,"identity":"24ba497b-79c1-4481-b15b-9eeed00fbb21","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:03","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":808473,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTime zone visualization map using Cite Space.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/17236f6c2c4fb16cea80f1ef.png"},{"id":76200926,"identity":"443f0efc-4d04-42ef-ae10-40e351066498","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:24:03","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":20832,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig.6 Keyword Thematic map\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/6626384a2f03494e3ff27b71.png"},{"id":76200143,"identity":"55883b4e-a1fe-430f-84e5-f58189ca14d3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:04","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":280693,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig. 7 Three–field plot using R studio.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/ca61fed89099e358fa182879.png"},{"id":76201110,"identity":"ca8839d2-8782-41b0-b740-4491eae43bb6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:24:05","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":650529,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig. 8 Theories and cited references visualisation using project map in NVivo 14\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/c6b139ac7476af3942b838b0.png"},{"id":76200126,"identity":"c9881317-599b-4238-8d5f-2f0f9cbf3a39","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:04","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":72169,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig.\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003e9 Source World Intellectual Property Organization’s 2023 report on Geographical Indications (GIs) for 2022,\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/1b867ee4c4d6135da34b390f.png"},{"id":76200961,"identity":"5fbd27c8-4621-4834-90c6-ececbb4271d9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:24:04","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"Figure 11","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":104713,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e10 Author’s country-based collaboration of selected articles\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/52d11763145195b430b5ad08.png"},{"id":76200150,"identity":"2ac94ceb-6524-452e-8b0d-a9a625e4bc32","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:05","extension":"png","order_by":12,"title":"Figure 12","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":489162,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig. 11 Concept mapping of overall key indicators from the study retrieved from 2007-2024\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors Compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/d6e75266a0cf214732b470dc.png"},{"id":76200131,"identity":"2cc134e2-e695-4973-ad9b-8b0d2bc7705b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:04","extension":"png","order_by":13,"title":"Figure 13","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":169330,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig. 12 Conceptual framework of GI registration link with sustainability of GI products\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage12.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/64f16e965b69c9134620530c.png"},{"id":76201104,"identity":"2d24681d-cad3-4732-bd7f-d4f3b7dd17d9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:24:05","extension":"png","order_by":14,"title":"Figure 14","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":108213,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig. 13 Methodology\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"13.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/f26f858a72d749ee8bd811b6.png"},{"id":76200139,"identity":"686b9e2d-82f7-44a0-aa9a-2d96bf5c16d7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:04","extension":"png","order_by":15,"title":"Figure 15","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":271863,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFig.14.Secondary Database sources used in the study from 2007-2024\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"14.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/31bb4d35ab6c7c810180dbde.png"},{"id":85231593,"identity":"f49cdc7b-a105-4109-bf49-d2016322b030","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-23 16:09:12","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":5455625,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/d8c53867-c078-415e-bc85-6020052f31f9.pdf"},{"id":76200124,"identity":"ee6f8c22-b35c-4626-bdfe-9823f583f5bd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-13 11:16:04","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":21765,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table7.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5761863/v1/382445877847007d8b06bc67.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Mapping the Sustainability of Geographical Indication Products: A Systematic Literature Review","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe rise in the global population has significantly increased the demand for resources, which has led to over-exploitation and environmental degradation. The need for this growing population drives global development and traditionally relies on exploiting natural resources, which can result in deforestation, soil erosion, water scarcity, and loss of biodiversity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. The Brundtland Commission's concept of sustainable development [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e], introduced in 1987 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), emphasizes the need to balance economic growth, social equity, and environmental protection \u0026ldquo;to meet the present needs without compromising future generations' ability to meet their own needs [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e].\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographical Indication (GI) labeled products plays a significant role in conserving natural resources and maintaining biodiversity through product-specific quality such as geographic factors (climate, soil, and altitude), traditional methods of sustainable farming practices, cultural heritage, and traditional culinary methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. These qualities are followed from generation to generation by the Indigenous community's knowledge and identity concerning health and nutritional benefits intrinsically linked with sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn 2015, the United Nations 2030 Agenda recognized the extensive potential of Geographical Indications in achieving sustainability development goals (SDG) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e] which shows the vital role of GIs in sustainability. The Sustainability Strategy for Geographical Indications (SSGI) was developed by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the Organisation for an International Geographical Indication (OriGIn) in the year 2016 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e] (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), is not just a theoretical concept. It is a significant step in the practical application of GIs. This strategy aligns with the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agricultural Systems (SAFA) framework [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. It gives a clear path for GI to label authorized producers and stakeholders to engage in sustainable farming practices. Integrating sustainable indicators into GIs addresses resource depletion, social inequality, and malnutrition [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. Through this, the demand for GI-labelled product production gradually increased. It is a comprehensive approach that harmonizes with the three dimensions of sustainability for safeguarding culture by improving rural livelihoods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographical Indications (GIs) serve as unique identifiers for products from specific locations, with their inherent qualities and preserving their rich cultural heritage [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. GIs benefit from protection under the \u0026ldquo;Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement (1994)\u0026rdquo; established by the \u0026ldquo;World Trade Organization (WTO)\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. This safeguard prevents commercial counterfeiting and upholds the integrity of the products. GI-labelled products enhance the producer's capabilities and market access, linking farmers to domestic and international markets by developing strong GI value chains [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. They also engage the local stakeholders in empowering marketing, trade, and export activities and assessing consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) premiums for GI-labeled products [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e] showing the importance of GIs in rural development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn agrifood systems, the value chain is vital in food products\u0026rsquo; market price and quality demand. Still, it differs based on the specific product of the country\u0026rsquo;s trade channel. This GI label can alter the balance of the producers due to their significant influence on the quality of the GI-labelled product. When considering the possible impacts of GI on biodiversity, the first and foremost one is the genetic diversity of local breeds and varieties, which contributes to the registration of GI-labeled products [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom the above statement, the majority of the research has been performed on the sustainability of GI agri-food products like \u0026ldquo;Protected Geographical Indication\u0026rdquo; (PGI) beverages [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR14 CR15 CR16\" citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e] \u0026ldquo;Protected Designation of Origin\u0026rdquo; (PDO) /PGI Agricultural products [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR19 CR20 CR21 CR22 CR23 CR24 CR25 CR26 CR27 CR28 CR29 CR30 CR31 CR32 CR33 CR34\" citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e] PGI dairy products[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR37 CR38\" citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e], PGI Olive oil[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e], and PGI/PDO meat [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR42 CR43 CR44\" citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e]Most research studies on agrifood systems focus on the crop varieties, breeds, and dairy products associated with socio-cultural, economic, and environmental sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEven though there is much literature on the sustainability of GI products, only a few systematic literature reviews have been conducted. The author Milano and Cazella [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e] have analysed 28 studies on the environmental effects of geographical indications. They identified the 16 influential positive, impactful factors with five adverse ecological effects. The positive impacts are more frequently observed in the Northside, while the negative impacts are more frequently observed in the global South. They have also found the six key factors that favour the development of positive impacts, emphasizing a sound GI governance system. Singh and Bharati [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e] have extracted 194 studies using the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (WoS) database from 2001\u0026ndash;2023 the study provides the trends in the emergence of the new topic by analysing the academic research works conducted in GI and Rural Sustainable Development. Falasco et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e] conducted SLR using the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework reveals mixed impacts of Geographical Indications (GIs) on environmental protection, particularly concerning SDG 9 and 12. The details of the previous systematic literature reviews are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExisting Systematic Literature Review Studies on GI and Sustainability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAuthor Name and Year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTitle\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFocus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Milano \u0026amp; Cazella, 2021)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Environmental effects of geographical indications and their influential factors: A review of the empirical evidence\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis article explores the link between the GIs and Environmental Sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Singh \u0026amp; Bharti, 2023)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Geographical Indication and Rural Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis review analyses trends in GIs by reviewing academic research in a particular field.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Falasco et al., 2024)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Can Geographical Indications promote environmental Sustainability in food supply chains? Insights from a systematic literature review\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis systematic literature review comprehensively analyses the connection between GIs and environmental Sustainability in food products.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003eSource: Authors compilation (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe existing systematic literature reviews (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) primarily focus on the link between GIs and sustainable development, particularly how the food supply chain promotes environmental sustainability. However, these reviews did not comprehensively address all three dimensions of sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiven this scenario, this study focuses on synthesizing a quantitative literature study on GIs and their Sustainability. This study surpasses the traditional citation metrics. It employs the TCCM and the bibliometric analysis using the R studio bibliometric package, VOS viewer, CiteSpace 6.3.1, and NVivo 14 software to analyze available literature visually and comprehensively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study mainly focuses on GIs for agricultural products. All non-agricultural products and services that are beyond the scope of the research are excluded. It envisions the progressing view of the critical area in finding the author's keywords, sources, citations, and corresponding author countries. This study helps to investigate the evolution of research themes and trends by systematically using the TCCM framework. To know the theories, contexts, characteristics, and methods\u0026rdquo; that are applied in the research. Consequently, the research questions addressed in this review are as follows: 1) How the research landscape evolved? 2) what emerging trends can be identified? 3) Which authors, countries, and institutions have contributed significantly to this field? 4) Which theory, context, characteristics, and methods are used in existing literature? 5)What gaps are in current research studies and suggestions for forthcoming researchers? This study explores the themes within the literature on the sustainability of geographical indication and how sustainability offers future direction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe review is formatted in the following sections: The research methods section provides an overview of the various approaches used in conducting a systematic literature review(SLR), followed by a selection of methodology, data collection, inclusion and exclusion criteria using the \u0026ldquo;Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses\u0026rdquo; ( PRISMA) framework, results and discussion section, a descriptive presentation of the articles selected and identifies the theory, context, characteristics and Methods using TCCM analysis, identifying the critical gaps and proposing suggestions for future research reading this work.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Systematic Literature Review\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA \u0026ldquo;systematic literature review\u0026rdquo; has five methods that can be conducted: \u0026ldquo;domain-based reviews, theory-based reviews, method-based reviews, meta-analytical reviews, and meta-systematic reviews\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR49 CR50\" citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. The domain-based review is the most widely used method in SLR [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e]. This type of review is focused on the research topic and is carried out using five different methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. The first method is the structured domain-based review, which aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research within a specific domain by synthesizing articles based on commonly used theories, constructs (variables), contexts, and methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e]. This approach also identifies gaps in the research to suggest the future research directions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e]. Next method is the \u0026ldquo;framework-based review\u0026rdquo; in this review, the researchers will create their framework [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. The third method is the bibliometric review, which involves using analytical software tools to examine the trends in the research area and citation patterns in the literature [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e]. The fourth is the hybrid review, a combination of numerous domain-based reviews. For instance, combining the bibliometric review and structured review or by combining framework-based review and structured review writing together in one review article [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e].The fifth type of review is a conceptual review, which proposes new theories and hypotheses in a review domain [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. The hybrid review is chosen to integrate the bibliometric and structured review methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e] to examine the trends widely, identify the research gaps, and suggest future areas in the field of research [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR58 CR59 CR60\" citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e]. These methods are aligned to map the state-of-the-art in scientific research, presenting universally applied research methods in the various domains, identifying the trends, and academic publication [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR63\" citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e]. This review is focuses on analysing the trend of a research study in mapping the sustainability of GI products [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR65\" citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e] Furthermore, the widely used theories, variables, and methodologies are synthesised to understand and identify the gap in the research studies and propose future research areas in this domain. Hence, the bibliometric and structured review is the suitable method [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Data collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Articles Search Strategy and Search Terms\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn intense search criterion is used to find the papers for the study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e].This procedure was in line with the previously published literature reviews [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR49\" citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e]. The databases used in the study were \u0026ldquo;Elsevier\u0026rsquo;s Scopus and Clarivate Analytics Web of Science (WoS)\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e]. The main reason for selecting the two scholarly databases is to reduce the bias of leaving out appropriate data and to carry over a thorough analysis. Wisely, to reduce the chance of risk of collecting the replication of data [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e69\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe search terms used to search in both the databases are \u0026ldquo;PGI\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Protected Geographical Indications\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Geographical Indication\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Geographical Indication crop\u0026rdquo; AND \u0026ldquo;sustainability\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Social Sustainability\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Economic Sustainability\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Sustainable indicators\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Social Indicator\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Employment\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Governance\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Social Capital\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Economic Indicator\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Price Premium\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Profitability\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Value added Distribution\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Trade\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;Local Multiplier\u0026rdquo;. The keyword search was mainly put into the \u0026ldquo;title, abstract, and keywords\u0026rdquo; to extract articles from Scopus, which was 706, and in the Web of Science, the keyword search was mainly put into the \u0026ldquo;topic\u0026rdquo;, which was 603 articles. The data was extracted on 02.03.2024.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Inclusion and Exclusion criteria using the PRISMA framework\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the PRISMA framework Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, 1309 articles were found from the chosen databases in the first phase, as stated in the search terms and keyword search. Next, the relevant papers were extracted based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria: they are limited to journal articles, English language articles, all countries, and open-access articles. After the screening, 220 articles were extracted from Scopus in Bib Tex format and from the Web of Sciences, 245 in plaintext. After extraction, both the files were imported into R Studio to merge into a single document and to remove the duplication. Accordingly, the extracted number of full-text articles is 350.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe next step is a quality assessment of the inclusion and exclusion criteria [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e70\u003c/span\u003e]. Here, the articles irrelevant to the subject domain and the scope of the research field are excluded. Then, Total number of articles excluded from the study is 243. Finally,107 full-text articles were selected after reading the full articles under the scope and relevant to the subject area. Articles related to sustainability and GIs labelled agricultural products are included in this study to make the analysis more comprehensive. The details of the extracted data are presented in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study, four software were used for bibliometric analysis:\u0026rdquo; RStudio, Biblioshiny developed by Aria \u0026amp; Cuccurullo\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;VOS viewer version 1.16.18 by Van Eck \u0026amp; Waltman\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;CiteSpace 6.3.1 developed by Chaomei Chen\u0026rdquo;. All this software is free and open source for quantitative data analysis and visualization. \u0026ldquo;Biblioshiny\u0026rdquo; is a web tool from the RStudio bibliometrics package that provides a web interface, for visualization of the data. Similarly, the VOS viewer and Citespace will also visualize the scientometric data. Lumivero, QSR International, created the \u0026ldquo;NVivo 14\u0026rdquo; software, a paid version of the subscription used for data analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study integrates both the \u0026ldquo;bibliometrics and TCCM analysis\u0026rdquo; to find emerging trends in the sustainability of geographical indications [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e]. This study portrays the history of GIs and sustainability, key trends in the sustainability of GI publications, theories, sustainable indicators, widely registered GIs across the countries and methods and software applied in the studies. Furthermore, to find the research gap and provide suggestions for forthcoming researchers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and Discussions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe following section demonstrates outcomes of Bibliometric analysis from three distinct perspectives: descriptive analysis, network analysis, and thematic analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Descriptive analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe primary information of the dataset on the sustainability of geographical indications, depicted in Fig. 2, spans from 2007 to 2024 and includes 107 documents from 55 sources. It has an annual growth rate of 4.16 percent; despite the document\u0026apos;s relatively young average age of 3.6 years, this shows that they have a notable impact on average citations of 8.664 each. The dataset is rich in references, totaling 4,391. It also highlights the diversity of the research topics with 313 Keywords Plus and 413 Author Keywords. Contributions come from 361 authors, with 12 single-authored documents. Collaboration among the co-authors is 4.64 percent on average for each document, and 28.97 percent of documents are from international co-authors, emphasizing the global scope of research on the sustainability of geographical indications.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe annual scholarly publications of articles and the emerging trend in the research area from 2007\u0026ndash;2024 are depicted in Fig. 3. In earlier years, only a countable number of articles were published from 2007 to 2016. Before 2017, articles remained relatively stable, consistently focusing only on GI protection, marketing, and trade. However, the publication of research activity began to rise, with a gradual increase in publications. The publication on the sustainability of GI started from 2017 onwards in research output, and this aligns with the historical and trend lines of GIs and Sustainability (Fig. 4), i.e., since the implementation of the \u0026ldquo;Sustainable Development Goals\u0026rdquo; (SDGs) by the \u0026ldquo;United Nations\u0026rdquo; in 2015 marked a turning point in the sustainability of geographical indications[5]. The FAO and OriGIn developed a sustainability strategy for GIs to support GI producers in 2016[7]. The Sustainable Assessment of Food and Agriculture (SAFA) aligns with the SDGs[5] and significantly increases many scientific publications. Since 2017, this graph shows a peak in 2021, with 28 publications; after that, there is a slight decrease in the articles in 2022 and a gradual increase in 2023. The graph visually depicts the influence of global research initiatives on sustainability in academic research related to the sustainability of geographical indications.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe most relevant source is \u0026ldquo;sustainability\u0026rdquo;, with most articles. This journal is especially for publishing research in various categories such as sustainability, environmental, cultural, agronomy, and social and economic sustainability studies. The \u0026ldquo;Journal of Agriculture and Food Industrial\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo; Agricultural \u0026ndash; Basel\u0026rdquo; have published four articles on GI agri-food governance and Sustainability. \u0026ldquo;Agronomy \u0026ndash; Basel\u0026rsquo;, \u0026ldquo;Journal of Rural Studies,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo; Agronomy for Sustainable Development,\u0026rdquo; which equally published three articles related to the Sustainability of GI-tagged crops and food products that enhance rural sustainability development. The other sources provide their valuable contribution based on trade agreements and policy (Table 2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost Relevant Journals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eName of the Journals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo. of Articles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSustainability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgriculture-Basel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgronomy-Basel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Rural Studies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgronomy For Sustainable Development\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFood Policy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Agricultural Economics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Ethnic Foods\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSource: Authors Compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe impact of the cited articles on different academic journals is highlighted in Table 3. The table below covers the topmost journals\u0026apos; including major bibliometric indices such as \u0026ldquo;h-index, g-index, m-index, total citations (TC), number of publications (NP), and the year of initial publication (PY start)\u0026rdquo;. Impressively, \u0026ldquo;sustainability\u0026rdquo; journal began in 2018 has a high h index of 10 and a total citation of 309, followed by \u0026ldquo;the Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization\u0026rdquo;, which has a four h index with 24 total citations, and \u0026ldquo;Agricultural \u0026ndash; Basel\u0026rdquo; has three h index and has more number of total citation when compared to the previous one. This analysis helps researchers find reputable sources and provides context for research publication trends in Sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost Relevant Impact Journals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eName of the Journals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eh_index\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eg_index\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003em_index\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePY_start\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSustainability\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.429\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e309\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgriculture-Basel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.333\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2016\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgronomy for Sustainable Development\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgronomy-Basel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.182\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2014\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Agricultural Economics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Ethnic Foods\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal of Rural Studies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.333\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2019\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSustainability (Switzerland)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe research contributions from several key institutions are the University of Parma, which has 11 publications, followed by Kasetsart University, with nine publications, and Inrae, with eight publications, highlighting their significant presence in this field. The key institutions driving research into the Sustainability of GI are depicted in Table 4.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost Relevant Institutions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eName of the Institutions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo. of Articles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Parma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKasetsart University\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInrae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversite De Montpellier\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCirad\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAristotle University of Thessaloniki\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity of Belgrade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWarsaw University of Life Sciences\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorvinus University Of Budapest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity Of Zagreb\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe most relevant authors significantly contributing to the field of Sustainability of Geographical Indications are presented in Table 5. Bellassen V, Gil J, and Napasintuwong O have published six articles. Similarly, Arfini F, Donati M, Ferrer\u0026ndash;Perez H, Gauvrit L, Malak\u0026ndash;Rawlikowska A, and Ristic B have equally published five articles. Additionally, author Csillag P has contributed four research articles, which indicate that these authors are actively working in the field of Sustainability of geographical indications to advance the field of research.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost Relevant Authors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eName of the Authors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo. of Articles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBellassen V\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGil J\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNapasintuwong O\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArfini F\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDonati M\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFerrer-P\u0026eacute;rez H\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGauvrit L\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMalak-Rawlikowska A\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRistic B\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCsillag P\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSource: Authors compilation(2024)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Network Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Network visualization map (Fig. 5) co-occurrence network map depicts each colored node is depicted as each indicator. Each of the node sizes reflects the occurrence or repetition of indicators used in the various studies; this ensures the more prominent variable. The width of the lines connecting the nodes indicates the frequency of co-occurrence between labels. The nodes of the same colour indicate stronger connections. The keyword \u0026ldquo;geographical indication\u0026rdquo; stands out as the largest and central node, and \u0026ldquo;Sustainability\u0026rdquo; ranks second. The strongest links between geographical indication and sustainability are the European Union, supply chain, food quality, economic sociology, collective actions, certification, consumer preference, and protected geographical indication (PGI).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe time zone visualization map (Fig. 6) visualizes the temporal connections within the keyword network associated with the sustainability of GI. In this keyword cluster analysis, the timeline view depicts the horizontal axis depicting the years, and the cluster labels were displayed in the vertical axis. Studies 2007\u0026ndash;2024 are selected for analysis within the time frame of one year. The sphere-shaped circle represents several author keywords used in the studies published by researchers. The shorter the distance between two circles shows greater collaboration between the two keywords. Cluster #0, the Sustainability cluster, ranks first. This cluster has keywords such as traditional food landscapes, cultural ecosystem services, sustainable production, territorial policy, geographic factors, sustainable development goals, agricultural products, and spatial distribution. The most recently used keywords are Sustainability and Geographical Indication labeling. Since the UN SDG goals, the focal point of the research has changed. Global developments have had an impact on the research trend of the sustainability of GI.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e3. 3 Thematic analyses\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe thematic map (Fig. 6) presents a network analysis of word occurrences to emphasize key themes and patterns. Density measures the consistency between nodes, while centrality assesses the correlation among the subjects. Numerous scientific studies and citations on \u0026quot;geographical indications \u0026quot;are associated with keywords in the motor theme. The keyword \u0026lsquo;sustainability\u0026rsquo; has more connections to the subject, which has the most centrality and low density as an emerging theme for the trending topic. \u0026lsquo;Protected geographical indication\u0026rsquo; is a type of geographical indication isolated as niche themes, and they have high centrality and low density. The word \u0026lsquo;financial sustainability\u0026rsquo; falls under the centrality of emerging or declining themes with very low density. The other keyword, \u0026lsquo;governance\u0026rsquo;, is considered low centrality with low density and comes from basic themes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe three-field plot (Fig. 7) also known as the Sankey diagram, visualizes the proportions among the sources (left), keywords (middle), and Authors (left) in three-dimensionality, showing the author\u0026apos;s contribution, which author works on which topic and publishes in which journals. The Sankey diagram explains that if more links exist among the variables, the connection lines will be thicker; it will also show the interrelationship between the author, keywords, and sources. The author, Bellassen, has worked on \u0026ldquo;Geographical Indication\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;Sustainability\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;Rural development\u0026rdquo; and published in Sustainability Journal, followed by Gil J, has worked on the keywords \u0026quot;Geographical Indication\u0026quot;, \u0026quot;Protected Geographical Indication\u0026quot;, \u0026quot;Sustainability\u0026quot;, \u0026quot;Supply chain\u0026quot;, and \u0026quot;Rural development\u0026quot;, and published most of their articles in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization, and Sustainability Journal. Napasintuwong O, who works on the keywords \u0026quot;Geographical Indications\u0026quot;, \u0026quot;Protected Geographical Indication\u0026quot;, and \u0026quot;Rural development\u0026quot;, and published his articles in the Sustainability Journal.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2 TCCM analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe TCCM framework is a standard method used in systematic literature reviews to categorize and analyze research studies. The \u0026quot;TCCM framework (Theory, Context, Characteristics, and Methods)\u0026quot; was first introduced by [52] Paul and Rosarado. It helps to identify the knowledge gaps, enhances the rigour of literature reviews, provides a pathway for future directions, and facilitates meta-analyses by providing a structured approach. The existing theories, methodologies, and indicators are given in Table 7 according to the selected articles.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2.1 Theory\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTheories provide researchers with a framework to comprehend and understand complex phenomena and help identify key variables and relationships. Sustainability theories prioritize and integrate social responses to environmental and cultural issues. An economic model sustains natural and financial capital; an ecological model preserves biological diversity and ecological integrity; a political model upholds social systems that ensure human dignity. This literature review will examine previous Geographical Indication (GI) and Sustainability research. The development of theoretical concepts in the context of relevant research has significantly improved economic, social, behavioural, and psychological theories. The theories applied in the selected articles are depicted in Fig. 8.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn most studies, theory of planned behaviour (TPB) has been extensively applied to understand various aspects of producer and consumer behaviour in the context of GIs and sustainability labelling. The author used TPB to assess the producer\u0026apos;s perceptions of coffee and tea as potential GI export beverage crops, focusing on profit maximization [71]. Similarly, Uzar and Fillipovic [36] introduced a novel construct (trust in the labeling system) within the TPB to enhance its predictive power in determining consumer intention to purchase GI-labelled cheeses. Kaczorowska et al. [72] applied TPB to investigate consumer preferences for food sustainability labelling, examining the impact of the \u0026ldquo;Euro\u0026ndash;leaf\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;PGI\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;fair-trade logos on purchasing decisions\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;willingness to buy\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;willingness to pay\u0026rdquo; a premium for sustainability products. In addition to TPB, the neoclassical theory was employed to optimize consumer purchase decisions to satisfy consumer needs fully. Random utility theory was also applied to individual choices among various options, closely mimicking real buying scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study concentrates on Kenya\u0026apos;s semi-arid regions and aims to determine producers\u0026apos; \u0026ldquo;willingness to pay\u0026rdquo; and protect unique terroir-based agri-food products with GI labels. This research utilized Lancaster consumer theory to determine producer preferences through choice experiments, providing valuable insights into the economic valuation of GI products [73].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study assesses the potential benefits of a strategic differentiation approach based on PGI for the Argentinean wine industry in international markets. Employing the hedonic price model, derived from Lancaster consumer theory and Rosen\u0026apos;s hedonic method, the research estimates the implicit prices of geographical names in the US, UK, Netherlands and Germany, providing insights into the economic value of GIs in the wine industry[74]. Fredah Wangui Maina et al. [75] investigates the consumer behavior and purchase intention of fair-trade handicrafts with geographical indications (GI) and their influence on fair-trade knowledge in a brand equity model. This study applies the boundary object and cognitive learning theories to create a social learning theory that promotes sustainable development and authenticity.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDe Pin and Fiore [76] conducted a study to identify the eligible vegetable markets of the \u0026ldquo;Radicchio Rosso di Treviso PGI label\u0026rdquo;. The economic theory was used to identify the \u0026ldquo;overall market opportunity Index (OMOI) method\u0026rdquo;. The study analyses the dynamics of the PGI and the PGI lambs supply chain from the same region in Spain. The research uses the \u0026ldquo;vector error correction model and multivariate BEKK GARCH model,\u0026rdquo; aligned with economic theory, are used to analyze the differences and similarities in price volatility dynamics between premium products and their benchmarks [77].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the research on the \u0026ldquo;financial sustainability of the Parma PDO Ham sector\u0026rdquo; focuses on analysing economic and financial characteristics, profit margins and financial margins, and financial sustainability through interest coverage ratios (ICR). The study is grounded in the economic theory of capital intensity and the erosion of profitability due to debt costs, emphasising the challenges of maintaining financial sustainability in high-debt environments [78].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnother study explores the local stakeholders\u0026rsquo; involvement in collective actions to safeguard GI labelled cheese, analysing the local stakeholder\u0026apos;s willingness to cooperate towards a common goal in the diverse rural areas employing social capital theories like rational choice theory, civic engagement theory and network theory with Ostrom conditions, referring to symmetric interests [79]. It helps maintain the competitive edge of GI products.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTorok and Jambor [80] examined the effects of the European Union extension on the \u0026ldquo;competitiveness of fruit spirits in six Central\u0026ndash;Eastern European Countries (CEECs)\u0026rdquo; concerning GIs. They were utilising the theory of revealed comparative advantages. Similarly, the authors [76, 81] investigated \u0026ldquo;the determinants of revealed comparative advantages\u0026rdquo; by analysing the \u0026ldquo;EU cheese\u0026rdquo; trade data, further elucidating the factors contributing to the revealed comparative advantages of GI-labelled cheese. In the context of EU-Australia trade negotiations, the author [82] assessed the theory of EU demands for GIs by analysing the coded data on GI names in Australian supermarkets, with a particular focus on feta cheese, which shows that the GI EU-labelled products are more authentic and well-established.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe author [83] investigates the significance of a registered GI label for African forest honey, focusing on the costs and benefits associated with GIs. This study employs competition and governance theories to assess the economic value of differentiated products, the value chain governance and stakeholders\u0026apos; supply chain management to promote sustainable marketing practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe author [24] examines the systematic sustainability of the \u0026ldquo;French organic rice\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;PGI Einkorn\u0026rdquo; value chains. Despite growing support from government authorities and consumers for environmentally friendly food value chains, these chains encounter technical, economic, and institutional challenges. The study integrates economic, social, and environmental performance assessments, network analysis, and cluster theory to evaluate the food value chain sustainability. A comparative analysis of agri-food products with GIs between the EU and Mercosur focuses on the performance of brands and supermarkets. The research applies institutional theory, and field theory to analyse and differentiate the economic blocs, providing insights into the market dynamics and competitive positioning of GI-labelled products in these regions [84].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the context of production, a study evaluates the integration of sustainability undertakings in GIs, focusing on stakeholders from Franconia, Germany, and South Tyrol, Italy. It employed Elinor Ostroms\u0026apos; Design Principles for sustainable governance of common-pool resources, emphasize the importance of stakeholder collaboration in reaching sustainability objectives [85]. The sustainability of the GI building process of sharr cheese in Kosovo is analysed. Dewey\u0026apos;s theory of inquiry is based on organisation studies. This study emphasizes collective learning processes and boundary work in creating a GI, providing a framework for understanding the collaborative efforts required to establish and maintain GIs [37].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study explores how localised agri-food systems, particularly GIs, can drive sustainable agriculture by integrating a values-based approach. The research employs the theory of worlds of worth [23], categorising relationships based on principles such as honesty, efficiency and equity, focusing on interactions between farmers and processors in Corsica and the western Pyrenees. The importance of PGI in trade agreements is examined by analysing the firm-level performance of PDO-labelled cheese and butter using firm\u0026ndash;based trade theory [86]. This study underscores the role of GIs in enhancing the competitiveness of agri-food products in international trade. Further research investigates the factors influencing competitiveness in the global beer trade at the macroeconomic level. The study applies theories such as the Helpman and Krugman and gravity models to understand trade dynamics, offering a comprehensive analysis of the global beer market [87].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study examines how geographical indications (GIs) reduce the \u0026ldquo;urban-rural income gap in China\u0026rdquo;. Using the Spatial Durbin model (SDM) and international trade theory, the research finds that GI branding significantly narrows this gap by enhancing foreign trade competitiveness and promoting agricultural export[88].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMartijin Huysmans\u0026apos;s [89] examines the theory of EU\u0026rsquo;s trade policy objectives aimed at protecting regional speciality foods through GIs, by providing a theoretical framework for understanding the EU\u0026apos;s approach to GIs in trade agreements.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA comparative analysis of GI agri-food products in Mercosur and the European Union focuses on e-retail supermarkets. This research applies market theory and economic sociology theories, to understand market stabilization and institutional influence. Furthermore, a study analyses online auction markets or specialty food products with GIs, focusing on auction prices and highlighting theories of auction mechanisms and consumer economics [90].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe author examines six agro-food chains, highlighting farmers\u0026apos; roles and challenges. It applies theories from new institutional economics, Business and Management Economics, and fund flow theories to understand hybrid institutions. The study also investigates how quality performance in agri-food supply chains is influenced by two governance decisions: adopting GIs and creating cooperative ownership structures. The research applies institutional and organisational theories, such as transaction costs, property rights, and agency theories, to analyse these governance decisions [91].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study analyses the influences of geographical Indications (GIs) on value chains and territorial development in the context of Mexico \u0026ldquo; Designation of Origin Distillates\u0026rdquo; context with a particular focus on Tequila and Mezcal. The research explores food quality and its link with trust in the context of GIs, focusing on Iberian acorn \u0026ndash; ham from Spain and chorizo from Toluca, Mexico. Similarly, the author examines the tradeoffs between farm and factory production in context with GIs, focusing on cider production in three counties in the UK. It employs the value chains methodology to examine the institutional framework. It incorporates convention theory, which characterizes value chains through product quality, trust, collective commitment, and reputation [92\u0026ndash;94].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study aims to examine the organisational changes in supply chains when a geographical brand becomes a GI. Using case studies from the EU, it differentiates the GI and non-GI supply chains, applying transaction cost theory (TCT) and Institutional Economics [45]. Another study investigated whether \u0026ldquo;food quality schemes (FQS)\u0026rdquo;, such as organic products and geographical indication products, are more socially sustainable than conventional products by analysing the distribution of bargaining power in supply chains. Theories applied include transactional and Institutional Economics to understand the dynamics of bargaining power distribution [95].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn northeast China, the study aims to understand the determinants that enhance or constrain the spatial distribution of Geographical Indications of Agricultural Products (GIAPs). It applies the random forest model to analyse multi-perspective factors such as natural phenomena, socioeconomic, agricultural, and market demand factors. Theories of machine learning interpretability, Central place theory, and cooperation game theory are used to reveal the importance of these actors [30].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study aims to assess the \u0026ldquo;impact of mutual recognition of GIs between China and the EU on the quality upgrading of China\u0026rsquo;s agricultural exports\u0026rdquo;. The theoretical framework incorporates Melitz\u0026rsquo;s (2003) model, which focuses on firm heterogeneity and productivity, and Antoniades\u0026apos;s (2015) model, which examines the role of quality differentiation in trade, using the theories of quality upgrading, trade theory, and the theory of demand hierarchy to understand the importance of mutual recognition [96].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the context of single-origin coffee and GIs, the importance of Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS) sustainability models in addressing coffee growers\u0026apos; challenges and promoting the sustainable coffee industry was emphasized. While VSS models have shown positive effects, they require re-evaluation to reflect better the complexities of coffee growing. The new sustainability model aims to benefit farmers economically and enhance public-private partnerships, aligning with the sustainable market transformation theory for continuous improvement and region-specific initiatives [17].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study explores the potential of Geographical Indications (GIs) to enhance Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Japan, focusing on the Mishima Potato GI. The main objectives are to examine existing knowledge on GI inception and explore GI impacts on the complete set of SDGs through interviews and participatory observations. Theories applied include territorial approaches, social capital, and socio-technical transition theory to analyses the capacities of GI, to adapt to sustainability challenges [20].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2.2 Context\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding the context, based on the World Intellectual Property Organization\u0026apos;s 2023 report on Geographical Indications (GIs) for 2022, (Fig. 9) indicates that China has the highest GI in force, followed by European Union countries, Switzerland, and the Republic of Moldova. The above aligns with the statement of Giovannucci et al. [97]. China holds the record for the highest number of registered GIs, However, for many years, majority of the registered GIs were found in the EU. The selected data source for the existing literature indicates that most of the research studies conducted between 2007\u0026ndash;2024 are in European Union countries, followed by China. This indicates that EU countries\u0026apos; researchers contributed the most in the field of geographical indications.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe world map (Fig. 10) highlights the country-based collaboration of corresponding authors. The map highlighted the colour intensity to show the strength of relationships between the countries: dark blue indicates a stronger relationship, light blue indicates weak ones, and grey indicates no connection between the countries. Many European Union countries, such as Italy, France, and Germany, are actively working on the sustainability of GI. Italy collaborates with 12 countries, including Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, France (3 collaborations), Mexico, Netherlands, Spain (2 collaborations), Switzerland, Tunisia, and the United Kingdom. Other than the European countries, China collaborates with Ireland and the USA. The collaboration patterns among authors reveal that most of the studies were conducted in the European Union, which is one reason that \u003cem\u003eSui generis\u003c/em\u003e protects the GI and patents more robustly in these regions. The selected paper\u0026rsquo;s overall data shows that most of the research studies have been conducted in developed countries, especially in European Union countries, rather than developing countries.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2.3 Characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe overall key indicators of Geographical Indication and Sustainability are presented through conceptual mapping (Fig. 11) for an easy understanding of the relevant literature studied from 2007 to 2024. This section represents how GI contributes to sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMili and Mart\u0026iacute;nez-Vega [18] analyses the regional heterogeneity of agricultural sustainability in Spain at a province level using 22 indicators based on the environmental, economic, and social dimensions. The results indicate that higher economic sustainability is linked to the intensive utilization of agricultural labour and machinery contributes to economic growth and increased wealth, followed by medium social sustainability associated with economic diversification and quality productions based on PDO and PGI labels, and low environmental sustainability is found in the areas with less agricultural land and higher burned areas, better carbon sequestration. It is found that there is a need for tailored policies towards sustainable farming systems in Spanish agriculture.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSamper and Qui\u0026ntilde;ones-Ruiz [17] discusses the sustainability of GIs in the coffee industry and the need for a balanced approach that incorporates local realities and sustainability challenges. It emphasizes the pivotal role of Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS) in driving economic upgrade opportunities and origin-based sustainability indicators, highlighting their potential and power. The sustainability of GIs is considered medium due to the challenges in capturing higher income for growers and the need for better governance and stakeholder engagement. Key indicators include economic resilience, social equity, and environmental protection.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCavagnero and Giordano [16] assess the cross-sector and transdisciplinary explorative research exploring the importance of GIs to foster the sustainability of localized fashion, drawing parallels with the wine industry in Apulia, Italy. This study revealed that there is higher sustainability in preserving local culture, traditions, and environmental practices, underscoring the importance of cultural heritage preservation in sustainability. Medium sustainability is found in economic benefits, such as market access and product differentiation. However, low sustainability is observed in areas requiring more stringent regulations and incentives for environmental and social impacts. Key indicators include cultural heritage preservation, economic resilience and ecological practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIotti and Bonazzi [78] studied the financial sustainability of agri-food companies in the case of members of the PDO Parma Ham sector, commonly known for producing high-quality meat products. The study reveals that, despite their global reputation, they have modest profitability, especially when considering the cost of debt (COD). The length of the ageing process and the cash conversion cycle negatively impact profitability is due to the challenges in financial sustainability, particularly in managing debt and maintaining profitability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSekine [98] discusses the potential benefits and contradictions of geographical indications GI and patrimonization in promoting the sustainability of indigenous communities, with a particular focus on Cordillera Heirloom rice in the Philippines. The study revealed that GI and patrimonization enhance economic opportunities and cultural preservation; it may also cause resource overuse and social conflicts. So, public policies must carefully balance these aspects to support indigenous communities effectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFlinzberger et al. [21] studied the GIs labels in promoting sustainability within Mediterranean agroforestry systems. He stated that the GI label provides the chance to demonstrate sustainable management along the supply chain while increasing incomes for farms practicing sustainability. However, despite experts strong awareness of the social-cultural benefits of agroforestry systems, the high initial costs and a lack of consumer awareness of agroforestry are the major constraints in preventing the producers from participating in labeling schemes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eClodoveo et al. [40] assess the PGI for Extra Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO) in Tunisia, emphasizing its potential to strengthen environmental, social, and economic sustainability. The study revealed that GIs help create niche marketing for high\u0026ndash;quality products, provide a price premium and enhance the monetary value of EVOO, which supports local economies and small\u0026ndash;scale producers. It also provides a credible certification mechanism that helps distinguish quality products, build consumer trust, and enhance the reputation of Tunisian EVOO in international markets. Geographical indications also protect the value chain. This study also highlighted how the implementation of PGIs for EVOO in Tunisia has contributed to the 17 SDG goals.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eQuiedeville et al. [24] analysed the systemic sustainability of French organic rice and PGI einkorn value chains by combining traditional sustainability pillars with network analysis. The main objective is to evaluate their environmental, economic, and social viability. The results show that while the einkorn value chain indicates a high centrality and ecological performance, its sustainability is impeded by dependence on a lead processors. Similarly, the organic rice value chain benefits from a strong, diverse network, enhancing overall sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDe Rosa et al.[39] investigated the main role of geographical indication GI in the Italian dairy sectors, focusing on the \u0026ldquo;disaffection effect\u0026rdquo;, where producers are increasingly exiting the GI system. The study highlighted the negative dynamics and regional disparities in GI adhesion. The findings revealed a substantial decline in the number of operators in the dairy GI sector, particularly in northern Italy, which leads to the risks of unsustainability of the dairy sector.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKaczorowska et al.[72] assessed the impact of food sustainability labels on urban consumers\u0026apos; purchasing decisions and price expectations in Poland. This study focuses on consumer perception of sustainability labels. It evaluates how the \u0026ldquo;labels influence\u0026rdquo; the \u0026ldquo;buying behavior of willingness to buy\u0026rdquo; and determines their effect on consumer preferences of willingness to pay. This study found that consumers are normally price-sensitive and that even those with positive attitudes towards sustainability do not always use labels as a cue when shopping, especially if the logos are not well known. The study concludes that two distinct consumer groups emerged, skeptical and mindful, with the latter showing a great willingness to pay (WTP) for sustainability-labeled products.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFlinzberger et al. [28] examined how \u0026ldquo;Protected Designation of Origin (PDO)\u0026rdquo; labels can support sustainable development in European agri-food landscapes. By analysing the relationship between PDO production and socio-ecological landscape characteristics, the study found that there is a positive correlation between PDO-labelled products and ecologically valuable landscapes. It highlights that PDOs can effectively combine ecological and social aspects of sustainable landscape management.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRabadan et al. [99] analysed the impact of PDOs on eco-innovation in the case of the olive oil sector. The objective is to evaluate the drivers of eco-innovation, particularly focusing on the role of PDOs. The study finds that larger cooperatives show a strong commitment to sustainability, but PDOs can limit the implementation of eco-innovative measures. This suggests a need to balance traditional production methods with sustainable practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePato and Duque [29] studied the role of traditional agri-food products and sustainability as a fruitful relationship for the development of rural areas in Portugal. The main focus is on analysing the spatial distribution of these products and their impact on rural development. Results show that Portugal ranks fourth in the EU for the number of traditional certified products, with the northern region in the product variety, highlighting the potential of GIs to support sustainable development by preserving cultural heritage and boosting local economies.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReinhardt and Ambrogio\u0026apos;s [85] studies on the GIs and Sustainable Viticulture evaluating the integration of sustainability into GIs within the EUs Farm-to-Fork Agenda, focusing on the German wine region Franconia and the Italian region of South Tyrol, use a mixed-method approach to assess the stakeholders\u0026apos; perspectives. Results indicated that while GIs can enhance sustainability governance, they can avoid administrative burdens and be inclusive. The study concluded that GIs could contribute to sustainability but should be part of a broader policy mix.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArfini et al. [22] investigated the role of GIs in generating public goods within agri-food systems, focusing on cultural heritage, socio-economic themes, and natural resources. Using the FAO-SAFA method, the study assesses the sustainability of GIs through case studies of Parmigiano and Reggiano and Ternasco de Aragon. The findings indicate that GIs contribute to sustainable rural development by preserving cultural heritage, enhancing socio\u0026ndash;economic conditions and managing natural resources effectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBonazzi et al. [44] evaluate the economic sustainability of Italian pig slaughtering firms producing PDO hams by analysing the financial data for over ten years. The findings indicated that important financial challenges, such as high raw material costs and low profit margins, affect their capital attraction. More studies suggest including small and medium-sized enterprises to develop strategies for improvement, emphasising the importance of sustainability practices for the economic viability of firms linked to GIs.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMillet et al. [31] investigated product qualification to identify sustainability Pathways for Place-Based Agri-Food Systems case of the GI Corsican Grapefruit; the study revealed that certain compromises written into the code of practices threaten the system\u0026apos;s sustainability. The GI fruits are harvested before they are fully mature, which leads to food wastage; this affects the value chain of market channels like export markets. This study suggests short-term changes lie in later harvests and diversified marketing channels, as well as long-term pathways such as reinforcing fruit typicality, reducing food waste, and embedding the fruit in local culture to enhance sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNuary et al. [19] analyses the sustainability of Salk Pondoh Sleman (SPS) fruit with a geographical indication (GI) certification using a multidimensional approach. The study aims to analyze the sustainability of SPS by examining environmental, organizational, and technological dimensions. Findings show that the SPS plantation system is sustainable, with a sustainability index of 59.83. The key sustainability factors include irrigation system availability, organizational conflicts, and product quality classification.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTok et al. [100] examines the relationship between geographical indications, sustainability and multifunctionality in table olive farming in Akhisar, Turkey. The study analyses how GIs contribute to sustainable agricultural practices and multifunctionality in olive cultivation. Factors such as marketing opportunities and price advantages are very important. The application of fertilizer and plant protection management is carried out in a coordinated manner in the region to minimize environmental damage. Geographical indications are essential for the sustainability of table olive cultivation and the principle of multifunctionality in agriculture is upheld by keeping the farmers engaged in table olive farming. Table olive farming can be emphasized as a model for integrating traditional agricultural practices with modern sustainability goals, highlighting the benefits of GIs in promoting environmental, social, and economic sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBernard-Mongin et al. [37] examines the sustainability of the GI building process in the case of Sharr Cheese in Kosovo, focusing on how environmental accountability emerges through collective action and strategic knowledge brokering. The results show that sustainability goals in GI-building are achieved through intensive boundary work and experimental spaces. The research highlighted the importance of context-specific and collective learning in achieving environmental sustainability within the GI framework.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKimura and Rigolot [20] studied the potential of GIs to enhance SDGs in Japan. The results indicate that based on interviews and participatory observation, Mishima Bareisho Potato GI was used. According to the local stakeholders, the Mishima Potato GI produce can contribute to at least nine sustainable development goals (SDGs) throughout all the stages of production, processing, and commercialization.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArslam et al.[101] investigates Tokat Bez Sucuk, a traditional Turkish sausage a local food with a geographical indication, within the framework of sustainable gastronomy. This study shows the importance of unique production methods, cultural significance, and contribution to local cuisine. The study reveals that, based on interviews with local producers, this sausage is made with traditional techniques, emphasizing sustainability and the preservation of cultural heritage. The results show that GIs have increased product recognition, commercial value and standardization, contributing positively to sustainable gastronomy and local economic development.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePetruang and Orachos [32] assess the economic sustainability of Khao Sangyod Muang Phatthalung and indigenous rice varieties in Thailand, mainly focusing on profit efficiency among the farmers. The main aim of the study is to measure the farmers\u0026apos; net incomes and compare the profit inefficiency between the GI and non-GI areas. The findings revealed that Sangyod rice farmers have an average profit efficiency score of 68%, indicating the need for improvement. The farmers in the GI area show higher profit efficiency than others. The results also suggested that GI registration, experience in rice cultivation, and reducing drought vulnerability can enhance profit efficiency, while the organic standards and off-farm jobs reduce it.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGirard[102]investigates the importance of how the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) for Bay of Mont-Saint-Michel mussels can enhance the environmental sustainability of bivalve aquaculture by improving environmental sustainability. The study finds that the PDO system supports sustainable mussel farming by ensuring quality linked to origin, promoting resource management, and involving collective organization and institutional support. However, it indicates that a more flexible approach is needed to manage the PDO label to enhance the environmental sustainability. The PDO\u0026rsquo;s success is attributed to its rigorous inspection system, historical development, and the collective efforts of mussel farmers.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMuller et al.[95] examines whether Food Quality Schemes (FQS), including organic and geographical indication products, are more socially sustainable than conventional products by analyzing the distribution of bargaining power within supply chains. The study finds that FQS supply chains are more socially sustainable due to a fairer distribution of bargaining power and higher adaptation capacity, driven by competition-based, transactional, and institutional factors.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBellassen et al.[26]assess the sustainability performance of certified (e.g., PDO, PGI, organic) and non-certified food products across economic, environmental, and social dimensions. This study evaluates 25 indicators for 27 certified and 27 conventional food value chains. Certified products generally show better sustainability performance, particularly in terms of carbon footprint and social indicators like employment. However, the results vary significantly depending on the product and context, highlighting the complexity of sustainability assessments. The dataset and methodology provide a comprehensive framework for future research and practical applications in food value chain sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall, GIs can act as entry points for rural development strategies, especially in less populated regions, by enhancing the economic value of local products. GIs help farmers command a premium price for their rice, improving their income and contributing to conserving indigenous varieties and genetic diversity. It also helps in educational activities involving the local communities and schools, promoting awareness about local products and sustainable practices. This shows that GI products play an important role in contributing to the sustainability and sustainable development to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe conceptual framework of GI linking with sustainability (Fig. 12) highlights how GI registration benefits economic, environmental, and social sustainability. Economically, it boosts local products and tourism; environmentally, it promotes sustainable practices; socially, it preserves traditional knowledge. Moreover, the sustainability of the geographical indication is interconnected with the traditional practices of indigenous communities, including the roles of producers, stakeholders\u0026apos; involvement in supply chain management, and emphasizing how GI product labels can command premium prices due to consumer preference for authenticity.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2.4 Methods\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe various academic literature applied and the methodology used in the selected article from (2007\u0026ndash;2024) are depicted in Fig. 13. Most of the research studies were conducted using the quantitative research methodology, which is about 58%, focusing on the price premium, willingness to pay, profitability in marketing, consumer preference, trade, and export of GI products. The quantitative data includes primary data (Direct and indirect surveys) and secondary datasets, including centralized databases like EUROSTAT, DOOR, and e Ambrosia (Fig. 14). Most quantitative research used secondary databases from GI registration and market data. Followed by qualitative research methodology and mixed-method research, each carrying 21%. Qualitative research methodology covers observation, expert interviews, and focus group discussions with the stakeholders regarding the geographical indications and sustainability of the GI label. Mixed method research covers quantitative and qualitative research, including social network analysis, cross-disciplinary approach, and case studies research. Here, the primary data is collected qualitatively, and the quantitative data is secondary data collected from the government database.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Critical gaps identified and Summary of the future research","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCritical gaps identified and Summary of the future research\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTCCM\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCritical gaps identified\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSuggestions for Future Research\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTheory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost of the researchers have researched either economic sustainability or environmental sustainability. There is only a\u0026nbsp;few studies has been undertaken on\u0026nbsp;interdisciplinary approaches. There is a vast application of social and economic-related frameworks in the literature, leaving behind the environmental and economic concepts. There is a need for a\u0026nbsp;robust theoretical framework that studies multidisciplinary approaches such as social, ecological and economic dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture researchers can apply the theory of change, theory of stakeholders, theory of ecology while studying the sustainability for rural development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eContext\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe majority of studies are conducted in developed countries, and only a few are conducted\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;developing countries. Most countries recognize GI, but they do not know its importance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearchers can conduct studies in developing and under-developing countries to study the impact of the\u0026nbsp;sustainability of GI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost research studies have concentrated on single dimensions of sustainability rather than addressing its multi-dimensional sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture researchers can examine the impact of the relationship between GI and sustainability by integrating a\u0026nbsp;multidisciplinary approach.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethods\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is no standardized scale to measure sustainability and study the impact of GIs on sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is insufficient research involving the local producers/farmers of a\u0026nbsp;particular region of that specific GI-labelled product. Most of the studies on GI sustainability are on firms based in the province/industry product of any particular county. Most of the research was conducted\u0026nbsp;based on secondary quantitative data. There is a lack of participatory approaches involving local farmers, stakeholders, experts, and\u0026nbsp;government agencies in assessing the role played by the value chain actors to understand and leverage the potential of sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture researchers can develop a scale to measure sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch can be conducted in\u0026nbsp;the village of the county/province of the specific region from the perspectives of the producers and GI-authorised users studying\u0026nbsp;rural development sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearchers can conduct the study by collecting primary data to study the actual impact among the stakeholders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearchers can conduct longitudinal studies on the long-term impact of the\u0026nbsp;sustainability of GI.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eQualitative and mixed research can be applied to explore the novel indicators that can be used for the studies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis review highlights the studies on the sustainability of geographical indication conducted worldwide based on the Scopus and Web of Science sources. This study helps to identify the diverse approaches, key themes, and methodologies integrating environmental, social, and economic sustainability. The findings show how geographical indications of agricultural produce play an important role in contributing to sustainability. Despite significant progress, this study identified some gaps and challenges that need to be addressed in standardizing the methodologies and proposed suggestions for future research directions depicted in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e. These suggestions help develop more participatory mapping approaches, enhance the scalability of GI, and conduct research in underrepresented regions to understand and maximize the benefits of GIs in promoting sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of interest:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors declare no conflict of Interest\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFinancial interests:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors declare they have no financial interests\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNon\u0026ndash;financial interests:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability:\u003c/strong\u003e No datasets were generated or analyzed in this study\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCode availability\u003c/strong\u003e is Not applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; Contributions\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eR Nirosha contributed substantially to the conceptualization, methodology, analysis, visualization, and writing of\u0026nbsp;the original draft, review, and editing. J Paul Mansingh provided guidance and supervised the entire process\u0026nbsp;from inception,\u0026nbsp;guided how to collect the data, supervised the data collection tirelessly, created a review matrix, and reviewed and corrected the original manuscript,\u0026nbsp;finally\u0026nbsp;approving the final version for submission.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgment:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eWe sincerely appreciate the editor\u0026apos;s and reviewers\u0026apos; efforts and valuable comments, which have significantly improved this article.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh S, Bharti N. Geographical Indication and Rural Sustainable Development: A Bibliometric Analysis. Australas Accounting, Bus Financ J. 2023;17(1):32\u0026ndash;50.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWhitfield K. Quick Guide to Sustainable Development: History and Concepts [Internet]. 2015. Available from: http://www.precautionaryprinciple.eu/.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWCED. Our Common Future. OxfordOxford Univ Press. 1987; doi: 10.1080/07488008808408783.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO. Geographical Indications for sustainable food systems Preserving and promoting agricultural and food heritage GI s contribution to sustainability(FAO). Rome, Italy [Internet]. 2017;\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVandecandelaere E, Samper LF, Rey A, et al. The geographical indication pathway to sustainability: A framework to assess and monitor the contributions of geographical indications to sustainability through a participatory process. Sustain. 2021;13(14).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO and OriGIn. Developing a roadmap towards increased sustainability in geographical indication systems. Rome Italy. 2024.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO. The state of food and agriculture, 2016. Eugen. Rev. 2016.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBelletti G, Marescotti A, Sanz-Ca\u0026ntilde;ada J, et al. Linking protection of geographical indications to the environment: Evidence from the European Union olive-oil sector. Land use policy. 2015;48:94\u0026ndash;106.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eT\u0026ouml;r\u0026ouml;k \u0026Aacute;, Jantyik L, Mar\u0026oacute; ZM, et al. Understanding the real-world impact of geographical indications: A critical review of the empirical economic literature. Sustain. 2020;12(22):1\u0026ndash;24.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCurzi D, Huysmans M. The Impact of Protecting EU Geographical Indications in Trade Agreements. Am J Agric Econ. 2022;104(1):364\u0026ndash;384.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBowen S, Zapata AV. Geographical indications, terroir, and socioeconomic and ecological sustainability: The case of tequila. J Rural Stud [Internet]. 2009;25(1):108\u0026ndash;119.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO. The State of Food and Agriculture. Rome, Italy. 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReinhardt T, Ambrogio Y. Geographical Indications and Sustainable Viticulture: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Sustain. 2023;15(23).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStanco M, Lerro M, Marotta G. Consumers\u0026rsquo; preferences for wine attributes: A best-worst scaling analysis. Sustain. 2020;12(7):1\u0026ndash;11.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDede D, Didaskalou E, Bersimis S, et al. A statistical framework for assessing environmental performance of quality wine production. Sustain. 2020;12(24):1\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCavagnero S, Giordano S. Sui Generis Geographical Indications Fostering Localized Sustainable Fashion: A Cross-Industry Assessment. Sustain. 2022;14(9).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSamper LF, Qui\u0026ntilde;ones-Ruiz XF. Towards a balanced sustainability vision for the coffee industry. Resources. 2017;6(2):1\u0026ndash;28.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMili S, Mart\u0026iacute;nez-Vega J. Accounting for regional heterogeneity of agricultural sustainability in Spain. Sustain. 2019;11(2).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNuary RB, Maksum M, Sukartiko AC. A Multidimensional Approach in Assessing Geographical Indication Product Sustainability: Salak Pondoh Sleman. agriTECH. 2022;42(1):55.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKimura J, Rigolot C. The potential of geographical indications (Gi) to enhance sustainable development goals (sdgs) in Japan: Overview and insights from Japan Gi Mishima potato. Sustain. 2021;13(2):1\u0026ndash;12.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlinzberger L, Zinngrebe Y, Plieninger T. Labelling in Mediterranean agroforestry landscapes: a Delphi study on relevant sustainability indicators. Sustain Sci [Internet]. 2020;15(5):1369\u0026ndash;1382.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArfini F, Cozzi E, Mancini MC, et al. Are geographical indication products fostering public goods? Some evidence from Europe. Sustain. 2019;11(2):1\u0026ndash;14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMillet M, Casabianca F. Sharing values for changing practices, a lever for sustainable transformation? The case of farmers and processors in interaction within localized cheese sectors. Sustain. 2019;11(17).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQui\u0026eacute;deville S, Bassene JB, Lan\u0026ccedil;on F, et al. Systemic sustainability of the French organic rice and PGI einkorn value chains: A preliminary assessment based on network analysis. Sustain. 2018;10(7).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarescotti A, Qui\u0026ntilde;ones-Ruiz XF, Edelmann H, et al. Are protected geographical indications evolving due to environmentally related justifications? An analysis of amendments in the fruit and vegetable sector in the European union. Sustain. 2020;12(9).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBellassen V, Arfini F, Antonioli F, et al. Sustainability Performance of Certified and Non-certified Food Social and Economic History. Res Data J Humanit Soc Sci. 2021;6(1):1\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKurnilasari DT. Geographical Indications in Trade Commodities for Promoting Sustainable Economic Development in Indonesia. Lentera Huk. 2020;7(3):279\u0026ndash;300.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlinzberger L, Cebri\u0026aacute;n-Piqueras MA, Peppler-Lisbach C, et al. Why Geographical Indications Can Support Sustainable Development in European Agri-Food Landscapes. Front Conserv Sci. 2021;2(January).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePato ML, Duque AS. Traditional agri-food products and sustainability - A fruitful relationship for the development of rural areas in Portugal. Open Agric. 2023;8(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuo S, Ma Y, Wang T. What Determinants Will Enhance or Constrain the Spatiality of Agricultural Products with Geographical Indications in Northeast China? An Interpretable Learning Approach. ISPRS Int J Geo-Information. 2023;12(11).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMillet M, Keast V, Gonano S, et al. Product qualification as a means of identifying sustainability pathways for place-based agri-food systems: The case of the GI Corsican Grapefruit (France). Sustain. 2020;12(17).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePetruang N, Napasintuwong O. Economic Sustainability of Geographical Indication Indigenous Rice: the Case of Khao Sangyod Muang Phatthalung, Thailand. Asian J Agric Rural Dev. 2022;12(2):104\u0026ndash;112.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDonati M, Wilkinson A, Veneziani M, et al. Economic Spill-Over of Food Quality Schemes on Their Territory. J Agric Food Ind Organ. 2021;19(2):95\u0026ndash;111.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHilal M, Leedon G, Duboys De Labarre M, et al. Organic and Geographical Indication Certifications\u0026rsquo; Contributions to Employment and Education. J Agric Food Ind Organ. 2021;19(2):161\u0026ndash;176.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDi Vita G, Vecchio R, Borrello M, et al. Oh my darling clementine: Heterogeneous preferences for sustainable citrus fruits. Renew Agric Food Syst. 2021;36(6):557\u0026ndash;568.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUžar D, Filipović J. Determinants of Consumer Purchase Intention Towards Cheeses With Geographical Indication in a Developing Country: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior. Market-Trziste. 2023;35(2):183\u0026ndash;204.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBernard-Mongin C, Balouzat J, Chau E, et al. Geographical indication building process for sharr cheese (Kosovo): \u0026ldquo;Inside insights\u0026rdquo; on sustainability. Sustain. 2021;13(10):1\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuareschi M, Mancini MC, Arfini F. Geographical Indications, public goods and sustainable development goals: A methodological proposal. J Rural Stud [Internet]. 2023;103(December 2022):103122.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDe Rosa M, Masi M, Apostolico L, et al. Geographical Indications and Risks of Unsustainability Linked to \u0026ldquo;Disaffection Effects\u0026rdquo; in the Dairy Sector. Agric. 2023;13(2):1\u0026ndash;12.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClodoveo ML, Yangui A, Fendri M, et al. Protected geographical indications for EVOO in Tunisia: Towards environmental, social, and economic sustainable development. Sustain. 2021;13(20).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVidaurreta I, Orengo J, de la Fe C, et al. Price fluctuation, protected geographical indications and employment in the spanish small ruminant sector during the covid-19 crisis. Animals. 2020;10(12):1\u0026ndash;15.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlinzberger L, Zinngrebe Y, Bugalho MN, et al. EU-wide mapping of \u0026lsquo;Protected Designations of Origin\u0026rsquo; food products (PDOs) reveals correlations with social-ecological landscape values. Agron Sustain Dev. 2022;42(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIotti M, Manghi E, Bonazzi G. Financial performance of companies associated with the PDO Parma ham consortium: Analysis by quartile of firms. J Agric Food Res [Internet]. 2023;13(April):100598.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBonazzi G, Camanzi P, Ferri G, et al. Economic sustainability of pig slaughtering firms in the production chain of denomination of origin hams in italy. Sustain. 2021;13(14):1\u0026ndash;18.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFern\u0026aacute;ndez-Barcala M, Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-D\u0026iacute;az M, Raynaud E. Contrasting the governance of supply chains with and without geographical indications: complementarity between levels. Supply Chain Manag. 2017;22(4):305\u0026ndash;320.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMilano MZ, Cazella AA. Environmental effects of geographical indications and their influential factors: A review of the empirical evidence. Curr Res Environ Sustain [Internet]. 2021;3:100096.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFalasco S, Caputo P, Garrone P. Can Geographical Indications promote environmental sustainability in food supply chains? Insights from a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2024;444(February):141100.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJebarajakirthy C, Maseeh HI, Morshed Z, et al. Mobile advertising: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Int J Consum Stud. 2021;45(6):1258\u0026ndash;1291.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePaul J, Feliciano-Cestero MM. Five decades of research on foreign direct investment by MNEs: An overview and research agenda. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2021;124(February 2020):800\u0026ndash;812.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePaul J, Criado AR. The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know? Int Bus Rev [Internet]. 2020;29(4):101717.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShankar A, Jebarajakirthy C, Nayal P, et al. Online food delivery: A systematic synthesis of literature and a framework development. Int J Hosp Manag [Internet]. 2022;104(May):103240.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRosado-Serrano A, Paul J, Dikova D. International franchising: A literature review and research agenda. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2018;85(September 2017):238\u0026ndash;257.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKahiya ET. Five decades of research on export barriers: Review and future directions. Int Bus Rev [Internet]. 2018;27(6):1172\u0026ndash;1188.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePaul J, Singh G. The 45 years of foreign direct investment research: Approaches, advances and analytical areas. World Econ. 2017;40(11):2512\u0026ndash;2527.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSwain S, Jebarajakirthy C, Maseeh HI, et al. Permission marketing: a systematic review of 22 Years of research. Mark Intell Plan. 2023;41(3):310\u0026ndash;328.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePaul J, Lim WM, O\u0026rsquo;Cass A, et al. Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). Int J Consum Stud. 2021;(April):1\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBahoo S. Corruption in banks: A bibliometric review and agenda. Financ Res Lett. 2020;35(October 2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlaleye SA, Mogaji E, Agbo FJ, et al. The composition of data economy: a bibliometric approach and TCCM framework of conceptual, intellectual and social structure. Inf Discov Deliv. 2023;51(2):223\u0026ndash;240.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRedine A, Deshpande S, Jebarajakirthy C, et al. Impulse buying: A systematic literature review and future research directions. Int J Consum Stud. 2023;47(1):3\u0026ndash;41.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh S, Dhir S. Structured review using TCCM and bibliometric analysis of international cause-related marketing, social marketing, and innovation of the firm. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark. 2019;16(2\u0026ndash;4):335\u0026ndash;347.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSharma K, Dhir S, Ongsakul V. Artificial intelligence and hospitality industry: systematic review using TCCM and bibliometric analysis. J Int Bus Entrep Dev. 2022;14(1):48\u0026ndash;71.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJos\u0026eacute; de Oliveira O, Francisco da Silva F, Juliani F, et al. Bibliometric Method for Mapping the State-of-the-Art and Identifying Research Gaps and Trends in Literature: An Essential Instrument to Support the Development of Scientific Projects. Sci Recent Adv. 2019;1\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhanra S, Dhir A, M\u0026auml;ntym\u0026auml;ki M. Big data analytics and enterprises: a bibliometric synthesis of the literature. Enterp Inf Syst [Internet]. 2020;14(6):737\u0026ndash;768.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh S, Dhir S, Das VM, et al. Bibliometric overview of the Technological Forecasting and Social Change journal: Analysis from 1970 to 2018. Technol Forecast Soc Change [Internet]. 2020;154(January):119963.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDias CT, De Vasconcelos Rodrigues da Silva W, Leit\u0026atilde;o Russo S. Bibliometric Analysis on Protection of Geographical Indications. Int J Innov Educ Res. 2018;6(4):176\u0026ndash;192.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaier D, Maier A, Aşchilean I, et al. The relationship between innovation and sustainability: A bibliometric review of the literature. Sustain. 2020;12(10).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGopalakrishnan S, Ganeshkumar P. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: Understanding the best evidence in primary healthcare. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2013;2(1):9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaur P, Dhir A, Tandon A, et al. A systematic literature review on cyberstalking. An analysis of past achievements and future promises. Technol Forecast Soc Change [Internet]. 2021;163(June 2020):120426.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSharma K, Mahna T, Jain S, et al. Bibliometric Review of Blended Finance and Partial Risk Guarantee: Establishing Needs and Advantages. Int J Financ Stud. 2023;11(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaina FW, Mburu J, Ackello-Ogutu C, et al. Intellectual property and agricultural trade: Producer perceptions of tea and coffee as potential geographical indications. Open Agric. 2018;3(1):586\u0026ndash;595.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaczorowska J, Rejman K, Halicka E, et al. Impact of food sustainability labels on the perceived product value and price expectations of urban consumers. Sustain. 2019;11(24).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaina FW, Mburu J, Ackello-Ogutu C, et al. Producers\u0026rsquo; valuation of geographical indications-related attributes of agri-food products from semi-arid lands in Kenya. Heliyon [Internet]. 2019;5(2):e01218.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDefrancesco E, Orrego JE, Gennari A. Would \u0026ldquo;New World\u0026rdquo; wines benefit from protected geographical indications in international markets? The case of Argentinean Malbec. Wine Econ Policy [Internet]. 2012;1(1):63\u0026ndash;72.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee E, Zhao L. Understanding Purchase Intention of Fair Trade Handicrafts through the Lens of Geographical Indication and Fair Trade Knowledge in a Brand Equity Model. Sustain. 2024;16(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDE PIN A, Fiore M. Investigating eligible markets for Radicchio Rosso di Treviso PGI: the OMOI method. Stud Agric Econ. 2022;124(1):10\u0026ndash;21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFerrer-P\u0026eacute;rez H, Abdelradi F, Gil JM. Geographical indications and price volatility dynamics of lamb prices in Spain. Sustain. 2020;12(7).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIotti M, Bonazzi G. Financial Sustainability in Agri-Food Companies: The Case of Members of the PDO Parma Ham Consortium. Sustain. 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKokthi E, Guri G, Muco E. Assessing the applicability of geographical indications from the social capital analysis perspective: Evidences from albania. Econ Sociol. 2021;14(3):32\u0026ndash;53.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTorok ,Aron;Jambor A. Competitiveness and Geographical Indications: the case of fruit spirits in Central and Eastern European countries. AgEcon Search. 2013;25\u0026ndash;32.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBalogh JM, J\u0026aacute;mbor A. Determinants of revealed comparative advantages: The case of cheese trade in the European Union. Acta Aliment. 2017;46(3):305\u0026ndash;311.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuysmans M. On Feta and Fetta: Protecting EU geographical indications in Australia. J Agric Econ. 2022;73(2):598\u0026ndash;613.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIngram V, Hansen ME, Bosselmann AS. To Label or Not? Governing the Costs and Benefits of Geographic Indication of an African Forest Honey Value Chain. Front For Glob Chang. 2020;3(September):1\u0026ndash;18.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFracarolli GS. Mapping online geographical indication: Agri-food markets on E-retail shelves. Agronomy. 2021;11(12):1\u0026ndash;21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReinhardt T, Ambrogio Y. Geographical Indications and Sustainable Viticulture: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Sustainability. 2023;15(23):16318.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuvaleix S, Emlinger C, Gaign\u0026eacute; C, et al. Geographical indications and trade: Firm-level evidence from the French cheese industry. Food Policy. 2021;102:0\u0026ndash;34.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXu Z, Feng Y, Wei H. Does Geographical Indication Certification Increase the Technical Complexity of Export Agricultural Products? Front Environ Sci. 2022;10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang S, Sun Y, Yu X, et al. Geographical Indication, Agricultural Products Export and Urban\u0026ndash;Rural Income Gap. Agric. 2023;13(2):1\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuysmans M. Exporting protection: EU trade agreements, geographical indications, and gastronationalism. Rev Int Polit Econ [Internet]. 2022;29(3):979\u0026ndash;1005.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFracarolli GS. Mapping online geographical indication: Agrifood products on e-commerce shelves of mercosur and the European Union. Economies. 2021;9(2).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCarbone A. Food supply chains: coordination governance and other shaping forces. Agric Food Econ. 2017;5(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOledinma A, Roper S. Tradition (re-)defined: Farm v factory trade-offs in the definition of geographical indications, the case of Three Counties Cider. J Rural Stud [Internet]. 2021;84(February):12\u0026ndash;21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP\u0026eacute;rez-Akaki P, Vega-Vera NV, Enr\u0026iacute;quez-Caballero YP, et al. Designation of origin distillates in Mexico: Value chains and territorial development. Sustain. 2021;13(10):1\u0026ndash;25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFern\u0026aacute;ndez-Zarza M, Amaya-Corchuelo S, Belletti G, et al. Trust and food quality in the valorisation of geographical indication initiatives. Sustain. 2021;13(6):1\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuller P, B\u0026ouml;hm M, Csillag P, et al. Are Certified Supply Chains More Socially Sustainable? A Bargaining Power Analysis. J Agric Food Ind Organ. 2021;19(2):177\u0026ndash;192.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQian W, Dong Y, Liu Y. The impact of mutual recognition of geographical indications on the quality upgrading of China\u0026rsquo;s agricultural exports. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2023;10(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGiovannucci D, Josling T, Kerr WA, et al. Guide to Geographical Indications - Linking Products and Their Origins. Geneve: Geneva; 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSekine K. The potential and contradictions of geographical indication and patrimonization for the sustainability of indigenous communities: A case of cordillera heirloom rice in the Philippines. Sustain. 2021;13(8).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRabad\u0026aacute;n A, \u0026Aacute;lvarez-Ort\u0026iacute; M, Tello J, et al. Tradition vs. Eco-innovation: The constraining effect of protected designations of origin (pdo) on the implementation of sustainability measures in the olive oil sector. Agronomy. 2021;11(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTok N, \u0026Ccedil;obanoğlu F, Tunalıoğlu R. The Link Between Geographic Indication, Sustainability, and Multifunctionality: The Case of Table Olive Groves in Western Turkey. Erwerbs-Obstbau. 2023;65(4):851\u0026ndash;859.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArslan E, Kendir H, Akmeşe H, et al. Investigation of Tokat Bez Sucuk, a Geographically Indicated Local Food, within the Scope of Sustainable Gastronomy. Sustain. 2023;15(17).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGirard S. Can Geographical Indications promote sustainable shellfish farming? The example of Bay of Mont-Saint-Michel mussels. Mar Policy [Internet]. 2022;135(November 2021):104845.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Table 7","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable 7 is available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e\n"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-sustainability","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"disu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Sustainability](https://www.springer.com/43621)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Sustainability","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Geographical Indications, Sustainability, TCCM","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5761863/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5761863/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis review aims to analyze and visualize the significant contribution of geographical indications (GIs) tagged products to sustainability. The research articles included in this study were sourced from the Scopus and the Web of Science databases, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework was applied to the systematic review of the quality articles. The study conducts comprehensive scientific Bibliometric and TCCM (Theory, Context, Characteristics, and Methodology) analysis over time. The main contribution of these studies is providing opportunities for the development of local economies, cultural heritage preservation, and promoting sustainable agricultural practices through biodiversity conservation, contributing to economic, social, and environmental sustainability. A Conceptual framework has been developed that shows how GI registration links to sustainability and contributes to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Furthermore, the Sustainability of Geographical Indication is an emerging field; there is a need for more research in this area. Some insightful future research directions have been proposed to advance this research domain further, especially in contributing to the UN SDG goals\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Mapping the Sustainability of Geographical Indication Products: A Systematic Literature Review","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-02-13 11:15:58","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5761863/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-02-25T13:38:00+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-02-24T20:40:34+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-02-24T13:33:48+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"288331314017205149341774332522987528003","date":"2025-02-20T12:11:31+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-02-19T19:49:21+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"203048349945236143746547186421272682114","date":"2025-02-19T14:42:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"291897067396002917257533494448214890919","date":"2025-02-19T14:20:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"121797694922261911859458921071600279371","date":"2025-02-19T08:08:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-02-14T18:47:51+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-02-13T10:35:09+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-02-12T12:20:23+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Sustainability","date":"2025-01-04T06:47:33+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-sustainability","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"disu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Sustainability](https://www.springer.com/43621)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Sustainability","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"047e53cf-d791-4980-b167-754fca3a18b1","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 13th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-23T16:05:32+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-5761863","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01332-4","journal":{"identity":"discover-sustainability","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Discover Sustainability"},"publishedOn":"2025-06-18 15:57:57","publishedOnDateReadable":"June 18th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-02-13 11:15:58","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s43621-025-01332-4","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01332-4","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5761863","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5761863","identity":"rs-5761863","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}