Sustainability of the Origin Indication of Sugar Cane Spirit from Abaíra Microregion, Bahia, Brazil Under the Aegis of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Abstract

This study evaluates the economic, social, environmental, and institutional impacts of the Geographical Indication (GI) of the Indication of Origin (IO) type in the Abaíra Microregion, Bahia, Brazil, and its alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDGs 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16. The research focuses on assessing the long-term sustainability effects of the Abaíra GI on local communities and territories after its recognition in 2014. Using an exploratory, qualitative approach, this study applies the Economic, Social, and Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology for GIs developed by EMBRAPA, along with semi-structured interviews and field visits with local producers and cooperative members. The analysis highlights the importance of post-GI sustainability assessment and identifies significant impacts on local economic development, cultural preservation, and environmental management. The research reveals improvements in product visibility and commercial value, as well as the adoption of sustainable and innovative practices by local cooperatives and producers. Among the key findings are the strengthening of local traditions, enhanced product quality, and increased market access despite challenges such as rural exodus. When compared with Embrapa Grape and Wine’s methodology, this study proposes a comprehensive framework for evaluating other GIs. Additionally, the results show that support from SEBRAE and educational institutions through training and technical assistance has positively impacted territorial conditions, contributing to the broader goals of sustainable development.

1. Introduction

Geographical Indications (GIs) are an industrial property asset that is regulated by Law No. 9279/96 [1], covering articles 176 to 182. According to [2], GI design encompasses components that value both product and service, as well as geographic region and its producers. Several scholars and experts in the field emphasize that the GI system plays a role in promoting a territory through the authenticity of its products and the guarantee of rights granted to its producers [3,4,5].

The United Nations (UN) developed the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, aiming to ensure targeting towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in order to achieve sustainable development goals. The 2030 Agenda is part of a report that contains 17 SDGs and 169 goals, constituting a call for action by developed and developing countries in global partnership through broad and targeted strategies, considering the 2030 time horizon [6,7].

Globally, research on sustainability pays attention to the development tripod that covers the following dimensions: economic, social, and environmental [8]. Indicators such as producer’s organization, product value addition, local culture appreciation, biodiversity preservation, and tourism growth, among others, are elements increasingly interconnected with the sustainability dimensions.

From an economic point of view, several studies emphasize that GIs significantly contribute to the economic development of specific regions, generating positive impacts on the value of products and the income of local producers. In particular, research conducted by [8] highlights that GIs create a competitive advantage, resulting in increased market value for certified products and improving the livelihoods of producers [9,10,11,12]. The value addition occurs because of the recognition of the quality and authenticity of products associated with a GI, and the literature reinforces that the promotion of these products can also lead to rural tourism growth, benefiting the local economy.

In the Brazilian context, a study by [10,11,12] on GIs in the agricultural sector reveals that GI recognition brings significant economic gains, especially for small-scale producers, by creating access to new markets and increasing revenues through differentiated marketing [13,14,15]; however, a recurring challenge in economic analyses is the cost of maintaining and controlling product quality, which can pose a barrier to entry for smaller producers.

The social impacts of GIs are linked to the preservation of local traditions and the strengthening of social cohesion within the involved communities. Studies show that GIs can reverse rural exodus, particularly among young people, by offering qualified employment opportunities and encouraging them to remain in their communities of origin [16]. According to [17] Mendonça et al. (2019), GIs create a collective identity that values local labor and knowledge while promoting social equity through the fair distribution of income among members of the production chain [15].

Active participation by producers in cooperatives and associations, often linked to the management of the GI, is another crucial element. Cooperatives strengthen the sense of belonging and contribute to improving the living conditions of producers, as demonstrated in studies on GIs in Europe and Latin America [16]. Furthermore, continuous training and technical assistance provided by institutions, such as SEBRAE in Brazil, play a vital role in improving producer qualifications and generating long-term benefits for local communities.

The literature also emphasizes the relationship between GIs and environmental preservation. A GI is often intrinsically linked to the protection of the ecosystem from which the product originates, as is the case with wines, cheeses, and coffees from specific regions. GIs encourage sustainable agricultural practices by promoting responsible management of natural resources, which, in turn, contributes to biodiversity preservation and environmental conservation [17]. Studies show that less harmful cultivation and production practices are encouraged through the production standards established by GI regulations.

In this scenario, this study proposes to investigate the effects resulting from the recognition of a GI after a certain period of time by the National Institute of Intellectual Property (Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Intelectual—INPI). In order to support this analysis, the research adopts the Economic, Social, and Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology for Geographical Indications, developed and validated by Grape and Wine EMBRAPA [11] adapted to the context of the IO of Abaíra Microregion, Bahia, Brazil recognized by INPI on 14 October 2014 [10]. The territory covers 272,914.69 acres and includes parts of the municipalities of Abaíra, Mucugê, Jussiape, and Piatã. The research is guided by the following question: between 2014 and 2022, following the IO recognition, was it possible to observe sustainable development impacts on the Abaíra Microregion, Bahia, Brazil?

The objective of this study is to evaluate indicators of economic, social, environmental, and institutional impact, in addition to their relationship with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Origin Indication of Abaíra Microregion, Bahia. Given the alignment with the Geographical Indications context, attention is mainly focused on SDG2, SDG4, SDG8, SDG12 and SDG16.

This study is organized into four sections in addition to this introduction. Section 2 covers the theoretical framework. Section 3 describes the methodology, adapted from the Grape and Wine EMBRAPA study. In Section 4, the indicator results are presented and discussed. Finally, Section 5 comprises the final conclusions and bibliographical references.

2. Dimensions of Sustainability, SDGs and GI

The sustainable development agenda was intensified after Rio+20 in 2012. Initially, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) emerged, which were later converted into SDGs, leading to the understanding that commitments made within international scope allow for continuity and create a cross-section, translating into a design for evaluating public policies in the country [11].

National Institute of Intellectual Property, Brazil [12] highlights that preparation of the 2030 Agenda, which included the SDGs, began with discussions at the Rio+20 Conference and served to evaluate compliance with the MDGs, ensuring next steps and a direction from 2015, aiming at keeping countries linked to the assumptions for sustainable development.

The concept of sustainable development encompasses multiple elements [13]. In this study, the development definition of the Brundtland Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCCD/UN) is adopted. From this definition, it is clear that preserving the capacity of future generations requires a sustainable approach to the exploitation of natural resources, covering different production systems [14,15]. The document resulting from the Rio+20 Conference, entitled “The Future We Want”, established commitments to the well-being of people and the planet [16]. Mendonça et. al. [17] highlights that priority areas outlined in this document cover growth, inclusion, and protection, including poverty eradication, as well as ensuring food security, water, sanitation, energy, and health, among others. In this study, the four sustainability dimensions are: (a) Economic, (b) Social, (c) Environmental, and (d) Institutional.

Table 1. Criteria and GI survey elements according to the SEBRAE methodology.

Criteria	GI Main Survey Points
Product	Product characteristics/qualities; product byproducts; product temporality; legal regulations.
Territoriality	Recognized geographic area; steps carried out in the area; producers based in the area.
Production method/Production chain	Existence of common practice or traditional way; production quality control; links of the production chain.
Governance	Organization representing local community; representativeness; competing organizations; interaction and relationship.
Identity and Sense of belonging	Shared values, beliefs, and principles; positive engagement for the territory development.
Need for protection	Evidence of product falsification on the market; requirement for guarantee of origin.
Research involved	Natural factors influencing product quality; human factors (know-how); link proof with the geographic environment; ICT studies.
Future Vision	Market expansion goals; goals related to the territory development.

Source: Prepared by the authors (adapted from SEBRAE, 2022 [11]).

depicts priority elements in an analysis of GI scenarios. According to the SEBRAE methodology used to identify potential GIs [18], nine criteria are defined in a structural dimension, which is present in all production chains that support GI recognition. Conceptually, Table 1 relates criteria to the main survey elements, aiming to demonstrate a territory’s performance through the production chain of its determining product.

These criteria are subject to evaluation throughout their existence, including in post-recognition studies.

Table 2. Scope definition of Post GI evaluation survey by sustainability dimension.

Dimension	Features
Economic	Community involvement with the Abaíra Microregion GI in economic practices related to the sugar cane spirit (cachaça) production chain, aiming to market expansion, as well as to guarantee financial growth for the producer, his family, and the community itself.
Social	Guarantee of qualified occupation for the local community involved with the Abaíra Microregion GI, motivating them to value the productive activity and the GI general context.
Environmental	Reinforcement of sustainability practices aimed at the rational use of environmental resources.
Institutional	Guarantee of positive effects in the territory delimited by the Abaíra Microregion GI, involving public and private institutions and the community in general.
Future Vision	Market expansion goals; goals related to the territory development.

Source: Prepared by the authors (2023).

aims to comprehensively address expectations related to GI post-recognition indicators evaluation in the Abaíra Microregion, Bahia, segmented by dimension.

Table 2, therefore, in comparison with Table 1, reduces the subjective aspects of the methodology proposed by SEBRAE, as it analyzes fewer abstract factors, thus closer to the reality of the territory. The dimensions (Economic, Social, Environmental, Institutional, and even the future vision) are easier to perceive by the local population, which enhances the process of analyzing the externalities (positive, negative, or neutral) of the GI in the studied region.

Post-GI survey takes place within the scope outlined in Table 2, broadly involving the delimited territory and community, and more specifically, the Association of Quality Brandy Producers of Abaíra Microregion (Associação dos Produtores de Aguardente de Qualidade da Microrregião de Abaíra—APAMA), which plays the role of procedural substitute in the GI constitution, and the territory’s own sugar cane spirit producers, the majority of whom act as APAMA members.

A subsequent analysis, summarized in Figure 1, established a correlation between SEBRAE diagnosis for new GIs, sustainability dimensions, and the SDGs. This relationship allows for a more comprehensive exploration considering SDGs’ interdisciplinary nature. Study implications transcend the economic sphere, considering environmental, social, and institutional dimensions in promoting sustainable agricultural practices and preservation of natural resources in line with specific SDG targets. Figure 1 presents a matrix with the relationship detailed below, in addition to signaling new constructions that can be established.

In Figure 1, The bold lines within the matrix represent the correlations discussed in the text, illustrating the relationships among SEBRAE’s diagnostic frameworks, the dimensions of sustainability, and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In contrast, the dashed lines denote potential connections between these elements that remain unexplored in the current analysis. These visual markers underscore the subject’s inherent transversality and interdisciplinarity, offering new perspectives for analysis and interpretation. Such insights pave the way for further exploration in future studies, enriching the discourse on sustainable development.

The SDGs cover issues that are disciplined under different aspects, such as poverty eradication, gender equality, health, education, and access to drinking water. As already mentioned, this study made a selection, choosing five of them (2, 4, 8, 12, and 16), in order to identify synergies and areas that recognize the interdisciplinarity inherent to these relationships, as well as to provide valuable insights for the formulation of strategies that are both economically viable as well as socially and environmentally sustainable. Furthermore, other relationships can be outlined.

When analyzing the development strategies of a given GI, the economic dimension emerges as a basic element; however, the literature highlights the importance of integration with other elementary sources in the process, such as cultural heritage appreciation and its social demands—well-being, fair trade and tourism [11,13,19]. Gevher and Acet [19], associated with several scholars on the subject [20,21], report that a GI implementation announces advantages that can reach producers, followed by consumers, and the delimited region economy, as well as that of the state and the country. The economic benefits that stand out are adding value to the product and increasing the income associated with it. Linked to productive activity, there is an increase in access to new markets for production flow, whether national or international market [19].

When analyzing the social dimension in the context of public policies, it is possible to verify under what conditions this community carries out its activities [22]. It is important that people are included in local policies through training, creativity development, and recognition for the work carried out [23]. According to [24], the State has an important role in creating links between existing social structures. Public policy expansion is crucial to achieving economic development, enabling territories to attract and negotiate resources [13,24]. Caldas, A.d.S [25] emphasizes that, in rural areas, innovative development dynamics emerge as a counterpoint to urbanization chaos. Strategies that strengthen rural areas, such as valuing GIs, can combat growing rural-urban migration, especially among young people [25].

The need to protect GIs demonstrates a concern to value the origin and quality of products, as well as agents belonging to a territory. The literature highlights that there is a concern on the part of the community regarding issues such as counterfeiting of products with GI, associated with the benefits of adding value and valuing local culture [10,26].

Another crucial dimension in assessing development is environmental preservation. The environmental dimension, according to [27], encompasses factors that affect environment conservation. Evolution monitoring of these factors over time is part of the sustainable development scope, which aims to improve life quality of present generations and preserve future ones.

The 2030 Agenda promotion from an environmental aspect involves indicators, goals, and policies that require collective efforts to achieve established objectives; however, conflicts of interest, lack of supervision, lack of punitive measures, and ineffectiveness in implementing environmental control mechanisms are significant obstacles in the formulation of public policies in this area [28].

Public policies aimed at sustainable development must be integrated with the other dimensions addressed in this study, as well as in partnership with other institutions that promote the common good, in line with the GI development process. Territorial development strategies require the engagement of several institutions, classified as stakeholders, according to [27].

Valente et al. [28] highlights that in the context of sustainable rural development, government interventions cover (a) elimination of rural poverty, (b) promoting the protagonism and political involvement of farmers, (c) use of the territory as a reference for formulating public policies, and (d) central focus on environmental preservation and conservation.

In the context of a development process, Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics [29] identifies a GI as an institutional structure that brings together various social actors. A GI formation involves restructuring technological trajectories, incorporating accumulated knowledge and work methods related to the product or service.

GI Characterization of Abaíra Microregion, Bahia, Brazil

The Abaíra Microregion GI was officially recognized on 14 October 2014 as an IO, with the nominative registration for cachaça-type sugar cane spirit identified as N°BR402012000001-2 [30]. This landmark is represented in Francisco Pereira Square, located at Abaíra downtown, symbolizing a common practice in the community.

The municipality of Abaíra/BA, situated 540 km from the state of Bahia’s capital, Brazil, emerges as the epicenter of sugar cane spirit production in the microregion. It is where the headquarters of the sugar cane spirit producers’ association is located. The Abaíra Microregion GI is located in a region known as the Diamantina Plateau (Chapada Diamantina) in the state of Bahia.

The region stood out as a sugarcane producer, encompassing parts of the municipalities of Abaíra, Jussiape, Mucugê, and Piatã. Founded in 1996, APAMA is the entity requesting the GI. Its purpose is to organize producers and guide them in the production of artisanal sugar cane spirit [31,32]. The non-profit entity aims to strengthen the cachaça production chain in Abaíra. Composed of local producers, its central mission is to promote and ensure Abaíra’s sugar cane spirit quality, in addition to defending producers’ interests. The association structure is democratic, with board elections every two years.

Due to legal requirements for sugar cane spirit commercialization, the Cooperative of Sugarcane Producers and its derivatives of Abaíra Microregion (Cooperativa dos Produtores de Cana e seus derivados da Microrregião de Abaíra—COOPAMA) was created in 2003. Its primary role is to represent, organize, and support local producers by providing technical assistance, promoting training, and creating conditions for sugar cane spirit production and commercialization. Located at BA 148, km 124, Salgado Farm, Rural Zone of Abaíra/BA, COOPAMA also defends and values Abaíra Microregion Geographical Indication.

Abaíra Cachaça Festival is an event that celebrates regional sugar cane spirit production, promoting GI appreciation. The meeting brings together local producers to present their products and participate in activities such as lectures, tastings, competitions, and musical performances. The event also attracts tourists and visitors and provides knowledge of local sugar cane spirit production and the experience of its flavors and aromas, strengthening local cultural and economic identity and generating commercial opportunities for producers.

3. Methodological Procedures

This research adopts a qualitative exploratory approach, facilitating ideas expansion, thus covering various aspects relevant to the topic under analysis [33]. This study relies on primary and secondary data.

Using a case study as a basis, the objective was to understand sustainability dimensions (economic, social, environmental, and institutional), establishing connections with the GI Diagnosis Methodology of SEBRAE in order to analyze the potential for structuring and recognizing a GI [18], as well as SDG2, SDG4, SDG8, SDG12, and SDG16 intrinsically related to GI theme. Figure 1 presents a detailed matrix that relates the SDGs to economic, social, environmental, and institutional dimensions. This matrix offers an outlook of interconnections between objectives and various sustainability features, allowing for a more comprehensive and integrated assessment of GI impacts.

This study adapts the Economic, Social, and Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology for Geographical Indications, developed and validated by Grape and Wine EMBRAPA [9]. It is important to highlight that the qualitative research carried out in the Abaíra Microregion presents a difference in relation to the methodology used. Originally, the technique incorporated a mixed approach, which combines qualitative and quantitative elements enriched by control regions for comparative purposes.

The methodology was guided by a proposed flow of activities to evaluate GI impacts (Figure 2) by demonstrating a process of elaboration and validation of indicators used in Post-GI studies and by relating them to the four sustainability dimensions—economic, social, environmental, and institutional. The final product is a systematization and evaluation of these indicators’ impacts.

This construction proves to be an indispensable requirement, substantiating the relevance of this study, since, during the bases formulation for recognition of the Abaíra Microregion GI with the INPI, a prospective assessment of future sustainability impacts was not considered.

Data collection took place through interviews, conducted both in person and via videoconferences. They occurred in close collaboration with the cooperative and sugar cane spirit producers, who, in addition to being catalysts for the production of Abaíra cachaça, are part of the association and cooperative.

The delimitation of respondents was structured as follows: PJ1—Cooperative directors; PF1, PF2, PF3, and PF4—sugar cane spirit producers from the Abaíra Microregion and members associated with the cooperative. Given the qualitative nature of the research and the non-probability sampling approach, a network of references was established between the researcher, the cooperative, and local producers, resulting in a snowball sampling strategy. This approach, cited by [34], proved to be prone to interviewee’s involvement, as acceptance to participate often results from recommendations from peers and implies minimal costs. The interviewees were chosen from a population of 132 producers.

On-site technical visits took place in collaboration with the cooperative and producers on 22–23 November 2022. The parameters were aligned with the Economic, Social, and Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology for Geographical Indications [9].

The logical framework construction, anchored in this methodology, comprising indicators systematization, was also supported by sustainable development contextualization as well as GI legal precepts. This evaluation process, in its genesis, allowed a categorization of eight primary themes according to the four sustainability dimensions previously outlined (

Table 3. Sustainability dimensions and themes.

Dimension/Themes
Economic	Social	Environmental	Institutional
Economic impact on the producer.	Conditions for improving the life quality of producers.	Use of natural resources.	Institutional articulation and development of local actors.
Economic impact on the territory.	Conditions for social development in the production sector and the territory.	Use of agricultural inputs.	Strengthening partnerships for sustainable development.

Source: [9].

). Subsequently, these themes were broken down into 21 indicators for evaluating sustainability impacts in the Abaíra Microregion GI. Table 3 details the relationship between themes and each sustainability dimension.

Previous studies [7,9,17] employing similar methodologies have revealed significant positive externalities across economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Economically, certified products achieved higher market prices, resulting in increased producer income and enhanced competitiveness both domestically and internationally. Social impacts included a strengthened cultural identity and improved cohesion among local stakeholders, fostering collective action and participatory governance. Environmentally, the adoption of sustainable practices, the preservation of natural resources, and incentives for responsible environmental management were prominent outcomes, underscoring the multifaceted benefits of these certifications.

The indicators analyzed in this study in the economic dimension were the following: (a) income; (b) property size; (c) revenue evolution; (d) land prices evolution; (e) production average price evolution; (f) workforce profile evolution; (g) access to credit; (h) investments on production quality improvement; (i) production/productivity growth; (j) tourism increase; (k) employment growth.

As for the social dimension, they were: (a) qualified local employment opportunities; (b) access to education for people who work or live in the production unit; (c) access to basic services (local and individual) for the person responsible and permanent employees; (d) comfort and equipment in place.

In the environmental dimension, the indicators were (a) land occupation; (b) water use for consumption and production; (c) evolution in the use of pesticides, organic fertilizers, chemicals, and agrochemicals. Finally, in the institutional dimension, they were: (a) collective decision-making; (b) partner institutions; (c) sustainable development public policies.

The sustainability indicators, derived from the dimensions and themes outlined in Table 3, served as a basis for the questionnaire construction, a data collection instrument used during technical visits to the cooperative and sugar cane spirit producers. This questionnaire provided the approach and presentation of results in a qualitative manner. The interview guide was structured with specific criteria for interaction with interviewees (cooperative members and producers). These criteria included: (I) variation analysis over the years (2014 and 2022); (II) occurrence intensity assessment (absent, very low, low, medium, high, very high); (III) selection based on priorities (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th).

4. Results and Discussion

This study phase examines sustainability indicators impact in the Abaíra Microregion IO, organized into four dimensions: economic, social, environmental, and institutional. Each dimension presents indicators evaluation, adapted to the reality of the GI studied, including qualitative results from the interviews, which are exposed following the approach criteria outlined in Section 3—Methodological Procedures.

4.1. Assessment of Sustainability Indicators in the Abaíra Microregion/BA Geographical Indication

Primary data were contextualized with the literature reviewed in this study’s theoretical framework, aiming to identify correlations between information present in the literature on GIs, covering analysis of structuring and recognition potential, as well as management studies related to SDG2, SDG4, SDG8, SDG12 and SDG16, which are the main areas covered in this research. This allowed data organization, analysis, and interpretation, establishing a link between field research and impact assessment, as represented in Figure 2.

4.1.1. Economic Dimension

In the interview carried out with sugar cane spirit producers, criteria related to the characteristics of the product and the production method were investigated, as well as a long-term analysis was performed, based on economic development and the producers’ vision of the GI future. In the economic context, issues involving production volume and corresponding revenue, investments, and costs, as well as different forms of access to credit, were investigated.

Table 4. Indicators Assessment of Abaíra Microregion (Economic Dimension).

The Average Land Cultivated by Sugarcane Producers: 0.7 Hectare.
Land market value: 2000.00 BRL/ha to 2500.00 BRL/ha (2014/2022—cooperative) 2350.00 BRL/ha in 2014 and 3850.00 BRL/ha (2014/2022—producers)
Access to credit: medium intensity level. Production costs: high intensity—aggravating the product flow process (consumer does not understand).
Investments: medium/high intensity (infrastructure, technology, quality control, good practices and training, besides expanding production).
Post-GI actions to improve raw material quality (more productive sugarcane varieties and pest control without the use of chemicals).

Source: Prepared by the authors (2023).

presents the main results.

During data collection with PJ1, a decrease of around 10% was observed in the number of producers selling Abaíra sugar cane spirit between 2014 and 2022, going from 144 to 132 active producers in the 2022 harvest; however, in this period of time, it was observed an increase of approximately 15% in the activity revenue of producers linked to the cooperative. This economic increase in GIs is supported by [19].

The largest GI producer has an area of 3 hectares, while the average land size cultivated by sugarcane producers is 0.7 hectares. Most producers process sugarcane directly in their production units; however, those without their own mill take their sugarcane to be processed at the cooperative. The harvest takes place between April and September, culminating in the Abaíra festival.

Common sugar cane spirit, produced by non-cooperators who do not follow the technical GI specifications, is regionally sold for 2.50 BRL to 3.00 BRL per liter. Producers in the GI area who meet the specifications sell sugar cane spirits to the cooperative for 5.00 BRL per liter. This contributes to positive impacts on producers’ income. According to PJ1, land value increased by around 25% between 2014 and 2022, although the producers interviewed (PF1, PF2, PF3, and PF4) considered higher values.

The majority of GI producers depend on sugar cane spirit sales as their main income source, with some of them practicing other attributes of family farming. GI acquisition allowed Abaíra cachaça to gain visibility and conquer new markets, increasing demand and sales value.

After the GI acquisition, producers faced criticism about the final product’s higher prices, as many people did not understand the costs involved in a production process associated with the GI, including production, administration, management, certification, and registration costs. Economic indicators, such as access to credit, production costs, and investments, for the Abaíra Microregion GI in 2014 and 2022 are presented in

Table 5. Prevalence intensity of economic indicators.

Economic Indicators	Cooperative		Producers
	2014	2022	2014	2022
Access to credit	Low (2)	Medium (3)	Absent (0)	Medium (3)
Production costs	Low (2)	High (4)	Very Low (1)	Medium (3)
Investments made in production	High (4)	Very High (1)	Low (2)	Medium (3)
Subtitle—intensity (i): 0 = none, absent; 1 = very low; 2 = low; 3 = medium; 4 = high; 5 = very high.

Source: Prepared by the authors (2023).

, following the occurrence intensity criterion used in data collection.

Producers associated with the GI and the cooperative were asked about the use of credit instruments to finance activities on their properties. From the cooperative’s perspective, support in this area was of low intensity in 2014 and is currently considered moderate. Producers reported the absence of this support in 2014 and an intermediate level in 2022.

When investigating Abaíra sugar cane spirit history, it was observed that the region has stood out in recent years for hosting several cultural and tourist events that value music, gastronomy, and local culture. Cachaça, as a typical product, is one of the main attractions at these events. When tracing the historical evolution, PF1 and PF2 highlight that the sugar cane spirit gained notoriety through the Abaíra Cachaça Festivals (the first one took place in 1987), leading several institutions to recognize the product quality. Initially, the association received financing from Nordeste Bank to purchase equipment, indicating the beginning of producers’ collective organization.

Both PJ1 and all the producers interviewed highlighted that production costs are so intense that they harm products’ sales and marketing. GI management establishes standards that consumers do not always understand, especially the final product price variation. Costs are divided into inputs, labor, and infrastructure maintenance. In 2014, all of these costs were of low intensity, while in 2022, they were classified as medium to high.

Investments were allocated in several categories, including infrastructure, technology, quality control, good practices adoption and training, in addition to production expansion. The majority of producers interviewed noted an increase in investment intensity in quality control, good practices, and training in recent years, while investments in production expansion did not undergo significant changes. The importance of strengthening the local productive base through investments was also highlighted by [23]. PJ1 emphasized investment security in producer training, soil, and raw material management practices, and quality criteria analysis. It was observed that producers frequently send samples of their sugar cane spirits for analysis at the cooperative’s laboratory, ensuring compliance with the quality standards established by the Ministry of Agriculture.

During the interviews, improvements in sugar cane quality over the eight years of the existence of the GI were discussed, as well as the cooperative’s support in this process.

Table 6. Post-GI raw material quality improvement actions.

Cooperative	Producers
Distribution among members of more productive sugarcane varieties.	Implementation of more productive sugarcane varieties in the activity.
Guidance for members on how to attack pests without using chemicals.	Increase in irrigated area.

Source: Prepared by the authors (2023).

lists the actions implemented to improve raw material quality, as reported by the cooperative and producers.

PJ1 highlighted that the Technical Specifications Booklet (Caderno de Especificações Técnicas—CET) of the Abaíra Microregion IO was created by members between 2010 and 2014, based on numerous meetings and collective learning. Producers fully comply with what is described in the CET, as it demonstrates the characteristics and requirements to guarantee the drink authenticity produced in the region, with regard to raw material, production process, alcohol content, as well as product aging process, and finally, packaging and identification of the region and producers. Shortly after the GI recognition, the 2015 Abaíra Cachaça Festival was a milestone highlighted by PF1, which focused on valuing artisanal production and strengthening cultural and economic identity.

In the interview, PJ1 revealed that the GI registration did not lead to an immediate increase in production flow. This is congruent with [19] since the products’ output was already reasonable previously. The cooperative mediates the marketing process. PF1 emphasizes the need for investments to revitalize and intensify sales channels, both nationally and internationally. PF3 highlights publicity importance to raise consumer awareness about GI products and combat counterfeits, a topic addressed by [10,26].

Coinciding with the observations of PJ1 on post-registration production flow, PF1 suggests aligning tourism and sugar cane spirit production to create an additional source of income through ecological and rural tourism, encouraging environmental preservation and local traditions, in line with [28]. SDG8—Decent Work and Economic Growth, in the observation of [35], foresees reducing inequalities, generating jobs, and increasing sales for GIs; however, the research indicates that the Abaíra Microregion IO has not yet reached this growth level due to a lack of consumer awareness about the GI, although progress has been noted.

4.1.2. Social Dimension

In a development background from a social perspective, the interviews covered topics related to labor, retention, and training of inhabitants of the area covered by the GI, as well as predominant motivations for local production and individual perception of the GI operation. These elements were examined, and their central results are as follows: significant employee turnover in property work; motivating elements for production at IG: family tradition and heritage maintenance (1º), prestige and reputation (2º), income and life quality benefits (3º), enabling other business opportunities (4º); Rural exodus reality and the non-continuity of grown-up children in the production chain; product appreciation with GI (tourist knowledge about GI importance)—tourism promotion.

After permission was granted by the INPI to use the GI seal, the interviewee (PJ1) observed that producers were eagerly awaiting the moment to harvest the results resulting from the association’s joint effort. From the perspective of both PJ1 and the producers interviewed GI is still a relatively little-known concept in Brazil since most end consumers are not used to searching for products based exclusively on the GI reference. Interviewees emphasize that, in the Brazilian context, the organic product seal has a higher value compared to the GI seal. In the course of conducting this research, members establish a comparison between the difficulty faced in obtaining the GI seal and the effective financial return generated after obtaining it.

A substantial difference in product appreciation was not evident after GI granting, as stated by PJ1 and PF1. They indicate that tourists currently have more comprehensive knowledge about GI products, but it is crucial to intensify dissemination at a regional and national level. This could provide broader access to consumers, who would then understand the product quality and its connection to a historical, cultural, and local process.

After eight years of Abaíra sugar cane spirit IO filing at the INPI, GI maintenance, and productive activity are faced with a rural exodus challenge, according to PF1, corresponding to a finding made by [25]. The decrease in family sizes in the countryside and the lack of interest among young people in continuing the practices of their predecessors are determining factors. The socioeconomic issue of properties linked to Abaíra sugar cane spirit over the years also contributed to rural exodus, revealing the lack of significant increase in family income after the GI implementation, as highlighted by PF1. Tourism promotion appears as a strategy to mitigate this trend, in line with the observations of [25].

The producers’ reports, especially PF1, PF3, and PF4, provide a comparison between occupation and labor training between 2014 and 2022. The properties have a limited work team, even during harvest periods, with family members remaining residing on the properties; however, more than 50% of interviewed producers’ children are studying in other locations.

The motivation for on-site production and individual perception of GI were asked of producers.

Table 7. Production motivating elements in the Abaíra Microregion GI.

Motivations to Produce in This Place	Cooperative and Producers
Family tradition and heritage preservation	1º
Prestige and reputation	2º
Income and life quality benefits	3º
Enabling other business opportunities	4º

Source: Prepared by the authors (2023).

details the factors’ sequential arrangement that have a predominant influence on the decision of producers and members of the cooperative’s management to remain in the territory circumscribed by the Abaíra Microregion GI. The interviewees’ answers coincide remarkably.

The preponderant element for sugar cane spirit production progress on site is family tradition and heritage preservation. This element is intrinsically related to the notion of identity and belonging, a fundamental fact in GI formation. PF1 highlights that any changes to the original characteristics of the production activity may compromise the traditional production method. Second, there is the factor of prestige and reputation. The validation of quality, tradition, and authenticity provides an increase in the value perception by consumers, intensifies visibility and expands opportunities for tourism, as expressed by PJ1.

Income, associated with improved life quality, is considered a factor that has not been a sufficient incentive to attract grown-up children back to properties after completing their studies, according to those interviewed. This coincides with strategies outlined by [25] in relation to the rural exodus.

The producers in the Abaíra Microregion perceive GI as a crucial component to increase the appreciation and recognition of local products in terms of quality. The general assessment of producers’ satisfaction is positive in relation to the GI. This feeling is anchored in prominent regions in Brazil that promote specific products, giving them notoriety and/or close links with local traditions. Such progress is attested by [35].

SDG2 (Zero Hunger and Sustainable Agriculture) and SDG4 (Quality Education) constitute the main objectives linked to the social dimension of this study, according to the 2030 Agenda’s perspective. GI valorization and development are related to SDG2, by encouraging sustainable agricultural practices in accordance with standards defined by local parties. In turn, SDG4 is associated with valuing the process of culture and tradition, as well as promoting sustainable development. The research indicated that the community, despite the rural exodus, seeks to preserve the cultural heritage in the territory.

4.1.3. Environmental Dimension

From an environmental point of view, components associated with sugar cane spirit production inputs in the Abaíra Microregion, waste production resulting from this activity, and elements concerning landscape quality were examined. These results are portrayed in the evaluation presented below: careful with water use in the region, which comes from springs and rivers; environmental conditions: tropical high altitude climate of the Diamantina Plateau region and thermal variations that favor the development of sugar cane production; tourism as an element of environmental promotion and preservation. Environmental actions: (1) plastics use reduction; (2) reuse and recycling; (3) education and awareness; (4) parcerias com cooperativas de coleta seletiva. No pesticides or chemical fertilizers are used (The vinasse disposal is carried out properly).

The distinct nature of the practices involved in sugar cane spirit production in the Abaíra Microregion, combined with producers’ tradition and technique within the delimited territory, were the elements that culminated in obtaining the certification by INPI. Interviewee PJ1 highlights that the tropical high-altitude climate of the Diamantina Plateau region and thermal fluctuations encourage the cultivation of sugar cane, reaffirming the observations of [19].

Concurrently, attention dedicated to the use of the region’s water, which comes from springs and rivers, is evident once it is used in sugar cane cultivation, as well as in drink production. Associated with this concern is biodiversity preservation, which depends on practices established for waste treatment and disposal; therefore, tourism in line with the Abaíra Microregion GI can be a development instrument that promotes both environmental preservation and appreciation of local culture and traditions. The appreciation of this territory delimited by a GI converges with the findings of [2,28,29].

In the context of Abaíra sugar cane spirit production activity, it was found that pesticides and chemical fertilizers are not used. A relevant concern associated with this activity, expressed by PJ1, PF2, and PF3, lies in the disposal of vinasse, a liquid by-product resulting from the sugar cane spirit distillation process. The members recognized the importance of appropriate disposal in order to minimize environmental impacts, building collection tanks for decomposition and organic load reduction through biological processes, and avoiding direct release into the environment. PJ1 emphasizes that this practice requires adequate monitoring and control.

Environmental awareness plays a fundamental role with regard to waste management, particularly concerning the disposal of plastics and similar materials. PF1 highlights the adverse effects of this practice, especially in large parts of rural areas where regular collection is non-existent. Respondents outlined several alternative approaches to address this reality, including (1) plastic use reduction, (2) reuse and recycling, (3) education and awareness, and (4) partnerships with selective waste collection cooperatives, among other measures. Furthermore, most properties reuse organic waste.

In the SDG12 context (ensuring sustainable production and consumption patterns), it is clear that the balanced use of natural resources and agricultural inputs constitutes a crucial aspect of an environmental assessment of GI development. Indicators related to the correct use of soil and responsible water management in a territory are linked to improving a community’s life quality and development, both on the part of producers and the territory where the GI is rooted. Thus, the initiative of the Abaíra Microregion GI to promote sustainable consumption and production conditions is very important.

4.1.4. Institutional Dimension

The crucial role of collaborative decision-making is emphasized as a fundamental element for sustainable advancement, as argued by [13,36]. The evaluation results of the institutional dimension indicators are presented below: the importance of partnerships aiming at curbing counterfeiting of Abaíra sugar cane spirit; highlight the participation of public and private entities, including government bodies, in the process of recognizing the Abaíra Microregion GI; GI support institutions: SEBRAE; Universities (teaching and research institutions); agriculture departments (municipal and state); MAPA/INPI; technical assistance and rural extension companies.

Regarding the four municipalities encompassed by the delimited territory (Abaíra, Jussiape, Mucugê, and Piatã), PF1 reports that there was broad adherence to the process initially. However, over time, there was a certain degree of resentment on the part of producers in the municipalities of Jussiape, Mucugê, and Piatã. This was due to the fact that the identified product nomenclature was directly associated with Abaíra municipality. The process of defining territorial borders included all individuals interested in engaging in the movement at that time.

An adverse factor that negatively affects the activity in the Abaíra Microregion IO is product falsification, which is corroborated by [10]. PJ1 and PF1 emphasized that this problem cannot be addressed exclusively by the cooperative, as it requires legislative changes and the active involvement of institutions to effect substantial transformations. [24] also support this perspective, emphasizing the role of the State in enabling public policies that reinforce territories.

It was found that producers’ participation in the GI collective decisions and the regulatory council remains high despite the challenges. PF2 observed a sense of collective engagement among cooperative members. Over the eight years of operation, considering the perspective of the cooperative and producers through interviews, the institutions were classified as follows (

Table 8. Institutions supporting the GI and the Cachaça Production Chain.

Institutions Supporting the GI	Cooperative	Producers
SEBRAE	1º	1º
Universities (Teaching and Research Institutions)	2º	2º
Agriculture Departments (Municipal and State)	4º	3º
MAPA/INPI	3º	4º
Technical Assistance and Rural Extension Companies	5º	5º

Source: Prepared by the authors (2023).

).

SEBRAE and teaching and research institutions emerge as primary collaboration entities with the Abaíra Microregion GI, as evidenced by the research findings. Universities were notably mentioned for their support to the IG throughout the entire process, involving activities such as research and development, provision of technical assistance, training, dissemination and promotion, among others. Nevertheless, the involvement of companies specializing in technical assistance and rural extension has witnessed a notable decrease in their contribution to GI development over the years, according to PJ1 and PF1.

Finally, the intermediary support from MAPA, INPI, and the State and Municipal Agriculture Departments stands out. Limited financial resources affect their ability to provide technical assistance, along with a lack of understanding of GIs’ importance for agricultural and regional development.

In the context of SDG16, which aims to promote peace, justice, and the effectiveness of institutions, Gil, A. C. [35] emphasizes GIs’ collaboration with institutions in order to combat piracy and counterfeiting. This approach is crucial for the sugar cane spirit protection of the Abaíra Microregion GI, considering it as an intellectual property. Product integrity and quality are paramount, and those who do not follow the CET lose the right to use the GI. Legislation provides for sanctions for external producers who opt for counterfeiting, addressing unfair competition, as established in the Intellectual Property Law (Lei de Propriedade Intelectual—LPI), Penal Code, besides other relevant laws.

5. Conclusions

The results revealed that in the economic dimension, the GI contributed to increasing producers’ income by selling the product at a higher price; however, structural challenges persist in marketing and logistics.

In the social dimension, the GI improved the sugar cane spirit acceptance in the market, but did not necessarily expand the market. Family tradition, historical heritage preservation and cachaça prestige motivated its appreciation; however, families’ life quality did not experience significant enhancements due to rural exodus. Public authorities and control bodies have acted insufficiently in monitoring and inspection processes; therefore sugar cane spirit segment faces many challenges, such as product falsification, compromising population health, and the GI reputation.

In the environmental dimension, the cooperative focused on meeting sustainable practices and rational use of resources, as established in the Technical Specifications Booklet (Caderno de Especificações Técnicas—CET). Technical guidance for proper vinasse disposal exists, but there is still a need for greater environmental awareness, including plastic use reduction and partnerships with selective waste collection cooperatives.

In the institutional dimension, producers demonstrated a spirit of cooperation and participation in internal decision-making but criticized an active involvement and lack of external partners, such as technical assistance companies and agriculture departments. The support from SEBRAE, and Education and Research Institutions was valued by producers as significant contributions to the activity development and the territory appreciation.

The main limitation of the research is related to the application of the questionnaire to the participants. Since this is qualitative research, the participants’ responses may contain some level of bias, which may compromise the inference of the results.

Despite this, some potential impacts of the research can be highlighted, especially locally. This study illustrates how GIs can empower communities by fostering cooperative spirit and preserving traditions, though greater efforts are needed to combat socio-economic disparities and environmental challenges.

Future studies should explore the long-term impacts of GIs on producer communities, with a focus on measuring improvements in quality of life and market expansion. Research into more effective governance mechanisms, including public-private partnerships and enhanced monitoring systems, would also be valuable. Additionally, studies could investigate innovative marketing strategies and sustainable practices tailored to specific GI contexts, enabling more inclusive and impactful development.