Vol. 15 No. 2 (2026)
Full Research Articles

Are Geographical Indications contributing to environmental conservation? The case of Café de Colombia

PDF HTML Suppl. Mat.
  • Nicola Caravaggio,
  • Cristina Vaquero-Pineiro
Nicola Caravaggio
Department of Economics, University of Molise, Via Francesco De Sanctis, Campobasso, Italy
Cristina Vaquero-Pineiro
Department of Economics, Statistics and Business, Universitas Mercatorum, Piazza Mattei 10, Rome, Italy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-17307

Published 2025-09-16

Keywords

  • Geographical Indications,
  • Cafè de Colombia,
  • Deforestation,
  • Synthetic Control Method,
  • local development

How to Cite

Caravaggio, N., & Vaquero-Pineiro, C. (2025). Are Geographical Indications contributing to environmental conservation? The case of Café de Colombia. Bio-Based and Applied Economics, 15(2), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-17307

Copyright (c) 2026 Nicola Caravaggio, Cristina Vaquero-Pineiro

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Colombia has a rich history of coffee production spanning over 300 years. As one of the world’s leading producers, the country dedicates a significant portion of its land to cultivating this vital crop. In the early 2000s, Café de Colombia received Geographical Indication (GI) certification, a milestone aimed at strengthening its reputation and competitiveness both nationally and internationally. This paper examines the impact of that recognition on land-use dynamics (i.e., deforestation). Using the Synthetic Control Method on a country-level panel dataset from 1992 to 2020, it estimates the effect of the GI certification on Colombia’s national deforestation rate. The findings reveal That deforestation would have been about 0.2 percentage points lower on average without the acknowledgement. Based on these results, the paper proposes to adopt a territorial-based and community-led policy mix to convert local peculiarities in strategic assets for sustainable development.

PDF HTML Suppl. Mat.

References

  1. Abadie, A. and Gardeazabal, J. (2003). The economic costs of conflict: A case study of the Basque Country. The American Economic Review, 93(1), 113-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455188
  2. Abadie, A., Diamond, A., and Hainmueller, J. (2010). Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California’s tobacco control program. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490), 493-505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2009.ap08746
  3. Abadie, A., Diamond, A., and Hainmueller, J. (2015). Comparative Politics and the Synthetic Control Method. American Journal of Political Science, 59(2), 495-510. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12116
  4. Abadie, A. (2021). Using Synthetic Controls: Feasibility, Data Requirements, and Methodological Aspects. Journal of Economic Literature, 59(2), 391-425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20191450
  5. Amador-Jiménez, M., Millner, N., Palmer, C., Pennington, R. T., & Sileci, L. (2020). The unintended impact of Colombia’s COVID-19 lockdown on forest fires. Environmental and resource economics, 76, 1081-1105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-020-00501-5
  6. Angelsen, A., & Kaimowitz, D. (1999). Rethinking the causes of deforestation: lessons from economic models. The World Bank research observer, 14(1), 73-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/14.1.73
  7. Arfini, F., Cozzi, E., Mancini, M. C., Ferrer-Perez, H., & Gil, J. M. (2019). Are geographical indication products fostering public goods? Some evidence from Europe. Sustainability, 11(1), 272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010272
  8. Arias, R. C., & Fromm, I. (2019). From cocoa producers to chocolatiers? Developing an entrepreneurial model for small‐scale producers in Honduras. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 10(1), 38-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18461/ijfsd.v10i1.03
  9. Armenteras, D., Cabrera, E., Rodríguez, N., & Retana, J. (2013). National and regional determinants of tropical deforestation in Colombia. Regional Environmental Change, 13, 1181-1193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0433-7
  10. Armenteras, D., Rodríguez, N., Retana, J., & Morales, M. (2011). Understanding deforestation in montane and lowland forests of the Colombian Andes. Regional Environmental Change, 11(3), 693-705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-010-0200-y
  11. Athey, S., & Imbens, G. W. (2017). The state of applied econometrics: Causality and policy evaluation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 3-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.3
  12. Bagal, M., Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., & Onori, G. (2013). Study on the potential of marketing of Kenyan Coffee as Geographical Indication. European Commission.
  13. Bakkegaard, R. K., Hogarth, N. J., Bong, I. W., Bosselmann, A. S., & Wunder, S. (2017). Measuring forest and wild product contributions to household welfare: Testing a scalable household survey instrument in Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 84, 20-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.10.005
  14. Barjolle, D., Quiñones-Ruiz, X. F., Bagal, M., & Comoé, H. (2017). The role of the state for geographical indications of coffee: Case studies from Colombia and Kenya. World Development, 98, 105-119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.006
  15. Beer, J. (1988). Litter production and nutrient cycling in coffee (Coffea arabica) or cacao (Theobroma cacao) plantations with shade trees. Agroforestry systems, 7, 103-114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00046846
  16. Bellassen, V., Drut, M., Hilal, M., Bodini, A., Donati, M., De Labarre, M. D., … & Arfini, F. (2022). The economic, environmental and social performance of European certified food. Ecological Economics, 191, 107244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107244
  17. Belso-Martinez, J. A., Díez-Vial, I., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2024). Inter-organizational governance and innovation under different local institutional contexts. Journal of Economic Geography, 24(4), 527-548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbae001
  18. Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates?. The Quarterly journal of economics, 119(1), 249-275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355304772839588
  19. Bhattarai, M., & Hammig, M. (2001). Institutions and the environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation: a cross-country analysis for Latin America, Africa and Asia. World Development, 29(6), 995-1010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00019-5
  20. Blackman, A., Epanchin-Niell, R., Siikamäki, J., & Velez-Lopez, D. (2014). Biodiversity conservation in Latin America and the Caribbean: Prioritising policies. Routledge, New York, United States of America. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315848433
  21. Buchhorn, M., Smets, B., Bertels, L., De Roo, B., Lesiv, M., Tsendbazar, N. E., … & Tarko, A. J. (2020). Copernicus Global Land Service: Land Cover 100m: Version 3 Globe 2015-2019: Product User Manual. Zenodo, Geneve, Switzerland.
  22. Cantillon, E., Lambin, E.F. & di Mauro,E.W.. (2025), Policy Insight 145: Designing and scaling up nature-based markets, CEPR Policy Insight No 145, CEPR Press, Paris & London.
  23. Cappelli, F., Caravaggio, N., & Vaquero-Piñeiro, C. (2022). Buen Vivir and forest conservation in Bolivia: False promises or effective change?. Forest Policy and Economics, 137, 102695. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102695
  24. Caragliu, A., & Landoni, P. (2024). Firm cooperation policies: the impact of territorial spillovers. The Annals of Regional Science, 73(1), 363-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-024-01273-2
  25. Caravaggio, N. (2020). Economic growth and the forest development path: A theoretical reassessment of the environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation. Forest Policy and Economics, 118, 102259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102259
  26. Cary, M., & Bekun, F. V. (2021). Democracy and deforestation: The role of spillover effects. Forest Policy and Economics, 125, 102398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102398
  27. Cei, L., Stefani, G., Defrancesco, E., & Lombardi, G. V. (2018). Geographical indications: A first assessment of the impact on rural development in Italian NUTS3 regions. Land Use Policy, 75, 620-630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.023
  28. Ciravegna, E., Ingram, V., Naranjo, M.A., Cocchini, S., Herrera, N. & Weitkamp, T. (2024). Coffee sector in Colombia. Wageningen University & Research and Resilience. Wageningen, Netherlands.
  29. Clerici, N., Armenteras, D., Kareiva, P., Botero, R., Ramírez-Delgado, J. P., Forero-Medina, G., … & Biggs, D. (2020). Deforestation in Colombian protected areas increased during post-conflict periods. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 4971. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61861-y
  30. Cortinovis, N., & van Oort, F. (2019). Between spilling over and boiling down: network-mediated spillovers, local knowledge base and productivity in European regions. Journal of Economic Geography, 19(6), 1233-1260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lby058
  31. Crescenzi, R., De Filippis, F., Giua, M., & Vaquero-Piñeiro, C. (2022). Geographical Indications and local development: the strength of territorial embeddedness. Regional Studies, 56(3), 381-393. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1946499
  32. Cunningham, S. C., Mac Nally, R., Baker, P. J., Cavagnaro, T. R., Beringer, J., Thomson, J. R., & Thompson, R. M. (2015). Balancing the environmental benefits of reforestation in agricultural regions. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 17(4), 301-317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2015.06.001
  33. Curzi, D., & Huysmans, M. (2022). The impact of protecting EU geographical indications in trade agreements. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 104(1), 364-384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12226
  34. De Filippis, F., Giua, M., Salvatici, L., & Vaquero-Piñeiro, C. (2022). The international trade impacts of Geographical Indications: Hype or hope?. Food Policy, 112, 102371. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102371
  35. De Simone, E., Giua, M., & Vaquero-Piñeiro, C. (2024). Eat, visit, love. World heritage list and geographical indications: Joint acknowledgement and consistency as drivers of tourism attractiveness in Italy. Tourism Economics, 30(6), 1531-1556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166231218765
  36. Duvaleix, S., Emlinger, C., Gaigné, C., & Latouche, K. (2021). Geographical indications and trade: Firm-level evidence from the French cheese industry. Food Policy, 102, 102118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102118
  37. EC (2021) COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS New EU Forest Strategy for 2030 (COM/2021/57 final). European Commission. Brussels, Belgium.
  38. EC (2024). Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture. A shared prospect for farming and food in Europe. September 2024.
  39. EC (2025) COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations (COM/2025/75 final). European Commission. Bruxelles, Belgium.
  40. ESA. 2017. Land Cover CCI Product User Guide Version 2.0. Belgium: UCL Geomatic (Université catholique de Louvain); Friederich-Schille-Universität Jena; Wageningen University; Max-Planckde Louvain; Friederich-Schille-Universität Jena; Wageningen University; Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie; JRC European Commission.
  41. Falasco, S., Caputo, P., & Garrone, P. (2024). Can Geographical Indications promote environmental sustainability in food supply chains? Insights from a systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 444, 141100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141100
  42. FAO & oriGIn (2024). Developing a roadmap towards increased sustainability in geographical indication systems– Practical guidelines for producer organizations to identify priorities, assess performance and improve the sustainability of their geographical indication systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Organization for an International Geographical Indications Network, Rome, Italy.
  43. FAO. (2018). FRA 2020 Terms and Definitions. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
  44. FAO. (2022a). FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. Retrieved from: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data [Accessed November 2022].
  45. FAO. (2022b). Global Forest Resources Assessment. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
  46. Ferman, B., Pinto, C., & Possebom, V. (2020). Cherry picking with synthetic controls. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 39(2), 510-532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22206
  47. FNC. (2008). Informacíon economica cafetera. Estadísticas Históricas. Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
  48. FNC. (2011). Informacíon economica cafetera. Estadísticas Históricas. Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
  49. Freedom House. (2022). Freedom in the World. Retrieved from: https://xmarquez.github.io/democracyData/reference/download_fh.html. [Accessed November 2022].
  50. Furumo, P.R. & Lambin, E.F. (2020). Scaling up zero-deforestation initiatives through public-private partnerships: A look inside post-conflict Colombia. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102055. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102055
  51. Furumo, P.R. & Lambin, E.F. (2021). Policy sequencing to reduce tropical deforestation. Global Sustainability. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2021.21
  52. Galiani, S., & Quistorff, B. (2017). The synth_runner package: Utilities to automate synthetic control estimation using synth. The Stata Journal, 17(4), 834-849. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1701700404
  53. Galli, F., Prosperi, P., Favilli, E., D’Amico, S., Bartolini, F., & Brunori, G. (2020). How can policy processes remove barriers to sustainable food systems in Europe? Contributing to a policy framework for agri-food transitions. Food Policy, 96, 101871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101871
  54. GFW. (2023). Forest Monitoring Designed for Action. Global Forest Watch. Retrieved from: https://www.globalforestwatch.org/ [Accessed February 2023].
  55. Gibson, L., Lee, T. M., Koh, L. P., Brook, B. W., Gardner, T. A., Barlow, J., … & Sodhi, N. S. (2011). Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature, 478(7369), 378-381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10425
  56. Giua, M., Salvatici, L., Vaquero-Piñeiro, C., & Solazzo, R. (2025). Do Territories with Geographical Indications Trade Better?. Italian Economic Journal, 11(1), 31-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40797-024-00269-3
  57. Gocci, A., & Luetge, C. (2020). The synergy of tradition and innovation leading to sustainable geographical indication products: A literature review. J. Mgmt. & Sustainability, 10(1), 152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/jms.v10n1p152
  58. González-González, A., Villegas, J. C., Clerici, N., & Salazar, J. F. (2021). Spatial-temporal dynamics of deforestation and its drivers indicate need for locally-adapted environmental governance in Colombia. Ecological Indicators, 126, 107695. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107695
  59. Gori, C., & Sottini, V. A. (2014). The role of the Consortia in the Italian wine production system and the impact of EU and national legislation. Wine Economics and Policy, 3(1), 62-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2014.05.001
  60. Hansen, M. C., Potapov, P. V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S. A., Tyukavina, A., … & Townshend, J. (2013). High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science, 342(6160), 850-853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693
  61. Heckman, J.J., and Hotz., V.J. (1989). Choosing among Alternative Nonexperimental Methods for Estimating the Impact of Social Programs: The Case of Manpower Training. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84 (408): 862–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1989.10478848
  62. Heilmayr, R. & Lambin, E.F. (2016). Impacts of nonstate, market-driven governance on Chilean forests, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113 (11) 2910-2915. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1600394113
  63. Houghton, R. A., Skole, D. L., Nobre, C. A., Hackler, J. L., Lawrence, K. T., & Chomentowski, W. H. (2000). Annual fluxes of carbon from deforestation and regrowth in the Brazilian Amazon. Nature, 403(6767), 301-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35002062
  64. Hughes, J. (2009) Coffee and chocolate – Can we help developing country farmers through geographical indications?. A report prepared for the International Intellectual Property Institute, Washington, D.C, United States of America. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1684370
  65. Hyde, W. F. (2012). The global economics of forestry. Routledge, New York, United States of America. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203122693
  66. Ibanez, M., & Blackman, A. (2016). Is eco-certification a win–win for developing country agriculture? Organic coffee certification in Colombia. World Development, 82, 14-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.01.004
  67. ICO. (2022). The Value of Coffee: Sustainability, Inclusiveness, and Resilience of the Coffee Global Value Chain. International Coffee Organization, London, UK.
  68. Ingram, V., Hansen, M. E., & Bosselmann, A. S. (2020). To label or not? Governing the costs and benefits of geographic indication of an African forest honey value chain. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 3, 102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00102
  69. Jha, S., Bacon, C. M., Philpott, S. M., Rice, R. A., Méndez, V. E., & Läderach, P. (2011). A review of ecosystem services, farmer livelihoods, and value chains in shade coffee agroecosystems. In W. B. Campbell & S. López Ortiz (Eds.). Integrating Agriculture, Conservation and Ecotourism: Examples from the field. (pp. 141-208). Springer Science & Business Media. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1309-3_4
  70. Kaul, A., Klößner, S., Pfeifer, G., & Schieler, M. (2015). Synthetic control methods: Never use all pre-intervention outcomes together with covariates. MPRA Paper n. 83790.
  71. Kramer, R. A., Richter, D. D., Pattanayak, S., & Sharma, N. P. (1997). Ecological and economic analysis of watershed protection in Eastern Madagascar. Journal of Environmental Management, 49(3), 277-295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1995.0085
  72. Lankina, T., Libman, A., & Obydenkova, A. (2016). Authoritarian and democratic diffusion in post-communist regions. Comparative political studies, 49(12), 1599-1629. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016628270
  73. Leblois, A., Damette, O., & Wolfersberger, J. (2017). What has driven deforestation in developing countries since the 2000s? Evidence from new remote-sensing data. World Development, 92, 82-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.11.012
  74. Libman, A., & Obydenkova, A. (2013). Communism or communists? Soviet legacies and corruption in transition economies. Economics letters, 119(1), 101-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.02.003
  75. Liu, H., Gong, P., Wang, J., Clinton, N., Bai, Y., & Liang, S. (2020). Annual dynamics of global land cover and its long-term changes from 1982 to 2015. Earth System Science Data, 12(2), 1217-1243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1217-2020
  76. Lugo, A. E. (1997). The apparent paradox of reestablishing species richness on degraded lands with tree monocultures. Forest ecology and management, 99(1-2), 9-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00191-6
  77. MADR-UPRA. (2014). Identificacíon General de la Frontera Agrícola en Colombia. Unidad de Planificacíon Rural Agropecuaria. Unidad de Planificación Rural Agropecuaria, Bogotá, Colombia.
  78. Mao, H., & Görg, H. (2025). Don’t take me for a free‐ride: Chinese Agricultural Geographical Indications and firms’ export quality. Agricultural Economics, 56(2), 188-209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12871
  79. Marescotti, A., & Belletti, G. (2016). Differentiation strategies in coffee global value chains through reference to territorial origin in Latin American countries. Culture & History Digital Journal, 5(1), e007-e007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3989/chdj.2016.007
  80. Matricardi, E. A. T., Skole, D. L., Costa, O. B., Pedlowski, M. A., Samek, J. H., & Miguel, E. P. (2020). Long-term forest degradation surpasses deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Science, 369(6509), 1378-1382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb3021
  81. Menapace, L., & Moschini, G. (2024). The Economics of Geographical Indications: An Update. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-101623-092812
  82. Menapace, L., Colson, G., Grebitus, C., & Facendola, M. (2011). Consumers’ preferences for geographical origin labels: evidence from the Canadian olive oil market. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 38(2), 193-212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbq051
  83. Meyer, A. L., Van Kooten, G. C., & Wang, S. (2003). Institutional, social and economic roots of deforestation: a cross-country comparison. International Forestry Review, 5(1), 29-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1505/IFOR.5.1.29.17427
  84. Meyfroidt, P., Rudel, T. K., & Lambin, E. F. (2010). Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(49), 20917-20922. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014773107
  85. Mourao, P. R., & Martinho, V. D. (2020). Forest entrepreneurship: A bibliometric analysis and a discussion about the co-authorship networks of an emerging scientific field. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120413
  86. Murillo-Sandoval, P. J., Van Dexter, K., Van Den Hoek, J., Wrathall, D., & Kennedy, R. (2020). The end of gunpoint conservation: Forest disturbance after the Colombian peace agreement. Environmental Research Letters, 15(3), 034033. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6ae3
  87. Murtazashvili, I., Murtazashvili, J., & Salahodjaev, R. (2019). Trust and deforestation: A cross-country comparison. Forest Policy and Economics, 101, 111-119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.02.001
  88. Negret, P. J., Sonter, L., Watson, J. E., Possingham, H. P., Jones, K. R., Suarez, C., … & Maron, M. (2019). Emerging evidence that armed conflict and coca cultivation influence deforestation patterns. Biological Conservation, 239, 108176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.07.021
  89. Niklitschek, M. E. (2007). Trade liberalization and land use changes: explaining the expansion of afforested land in Chile. Forest science, 53(3), 385-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/53.3.385
  90. Oberlack, C., Blare, T., Zambrino, L., Bruelisauer, S., Solar, J., Villar, G., … & Ramírez, M. (2023). With and beyond sustainability certification: Exploring inclusive business and solidarity economy strategies in Peru and Switzerland. World Development, 165, 106187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2023.106187
  91. Puyravaud, J. P. (2003). Standardizing the calculation of the annual rate of deforestation. Forest ecology and management, 177(1-3), 593-596. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00335-3
  92. Quiñones-Ruiz, X. F., Penker, M., Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., Scaramuzzi, S., Barzini, E., … & Samper-Gartner, L. F. (2016). Insights into the black box of collective efforts for the registration of Geographical Indications. Land Use Policy, 57, 103-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.021
  93. Quiñones-Ruiz, X., Penker, M., Vogl, C., & Samper-Gartner, L. (2015). Can origin labels re-shape relationships along international supply chains?–The case of Café de Colombia. International Journal of the Commons, 9(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/bmgn-lchr.529
  94. Rana, P., & Sills, E. O. (2018). Does certification change the trajectory of tree cover in working forests in the tropics? An application of the synthetic control method of impact evaluation. Forests, 9(3), 98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f9030098
  95. Ros-Tonen, M.A., & Wiersum, K.F. (2003, May 19–23). The importance of non-timber forest products for forest-based rural livelihoods: an evolving research agenda [Conference presentation]. The International Conference on Rural Livelihoods, Forests and Biodiversity, Bonn, Germany.
  96. Rueda, X., & Lambin, E. F. (2013). Responding to globalization: impacts of certification on Colombian small-scale coffee growers. Ecology and Society, 18(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05595-180321
  97. Sánchez-Cuervo, A. M., Aide, T. M., Clark, M. L., & Etter, A. (2012). Land cover change in Colombia: surprising forest recovery trends between 2001 and 2010. PLoS ONE, 7(8): e43943. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0043943
  98. Sills, E. O., Herrera, D., Kirkpatrick, A. J., Brandão Jr, A., Dickson, R., Hall, S., … & Pfaff, A. (2015). Estimating the impacts of local policy innovation: the synthetic control method applied to tropical deforestation. PloS one, 10(7), e0132590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132590
  99. Somarriba, E., & López Sampson, A. (2018). Coffee and cocoa agroforestry systems: pathways to deforestation, reforestation, and tree cover change. Background paper for Leveraging Agricultural Value Chains to Enhance Tropical Tree Cover and Slow Deforestation (LEAVES).
  100. Sulla-Menashe, D., Gray, J. M., Abercrombie, S. P., & Friedl, M. A. (2019). Hierarchical mapping of annual global land cover 2001 to present: The MODIS Collection 6 Land Cover product. Remote Sensing of Environment, 222, 183-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.12.013
  101. Takayama, T., Norito, T., Nakatani, T., & Ito, R. (2021). Do geographical indications preserve farming in rural areas? Evidence from a natural experiment in Japan. Food Policy, 102, 102101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102101
  102. UNCTAD. (2019). International classification of non-tariff measure. United Nations Publications, New York, United States of America.
  103. Vanderhaegen, K., Akoyi, K. T., Dekoninck, W., Jocqué, R., Muys, B., Verbist, B., & Maertens, M. (2018). Do private coffee standards ‘walk the talk’in improving socio-economic and environmental sustainability?. Global Environmental Change, 51, 1-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.04.014
  104. Vaquero Piñeiro, C., & Curzi, D. (2024). Assessing the role of geographical indications in affecting the quality of imports. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75(2), 653-671. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12578
  105. Vaquero‐Piñeiro, C., & Pierucci, E. (2025). Spirit of Innovation or Historical Tradition? The Complex Dilemma of EU Policy for Renowned Products. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13739
  106. Vaquero-Piñeiro, C., Salvatici, L., & Zago, A. (2025). Synergies among ownership forms and cooperating territories: The case of wine. Food Policy, 135, 102938. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102938
  107. Vaquero-Piñeiro, C., Henke, R., Cimino, O., & Sardone, R. (2025). Wine and tourism: An analysis of synergies in Italy. Tourism Economics, 13548166251338872. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166251338872
  108. Wiśniewski, P., & Märker, M. (2019). The role of soil-protecting forests in reducing soil erosion in young glacial landscapes of Northern-Central Poland. Geoderma, 337, 1227-1235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.11.035