World Food Policy Volume 3, No. 2/Volume 4, No. 1, Fall16/Spring17 | Page 120

World Food Policy Table 1: Comparison between the GI systems in Southeast Asia Thailand Vietnam Cambodia Lao PDR Year of IP Law 2003 2005 2009 2011 Competent authority MoC DIP MoST NOIP MoC DIP MoST DIP GI applicant Private entity, group of producers, public authorities Local public authorities (can delegate to the producers, collective organizations) Association Association External control Certification bodies or public authorities— operational Public authorities (Little operational) Certification bodies (operational) Certification bodies (not operational) National Standardization Council (member of IAF) Bureau of Accreditation (member of IAF) Department of Accreditation (not a member of IAF) National Accreditation Board (not operational, not a member of IAF) 2+2 - Accreditation body GI national logo N° of registered GIs In process 76+14 52+6 Source: Authors’ survey. Discussion are not yet fully operational, we con- sider that several options are still open 1.6 Choosing the “right” for drafting a credible certification sys- certification model tem that is not prohibitively costly for xisting laws and regulations in the producers and remains manageable Southeast Asia already provide by local institutions. As certification is for a GI control system. As they costly, to be sustainable it must be off- E 120