Some reforms happen because the law requires it. Others happen because experience opens your eyes to opportunities you never fully appreciated before.

For me, Geographical Indications (GIs) belong to the latter.

When I assumed office as director general of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), I discovered that while our Intellectual Property Code recognized Geographical Indications, the Philippines had no implementing rules for their registration. More than two decades after the passage of the IP Code, no Philippine producer could actually register a GI because the legal mechanism simply did not exist.

The more I attended meetings of the ASEAN Working Group on Intellectual Property Cooperation, the more this gap became impossible to ignore.

Almost every meeting featured updates from our ASEAN neighbors. Thailand proudly spoke of its growing list of registered GIs. Vietnam shared how products like Phu Quoc fish sauce and Buon Ma Thuot coffee had become internationally recognized symbols of quality and origin.

Indonesia presented one success story after another — from Gayo Arabica Coffee, Muntok White Pepper to many other regional products. Cambodia was very proud of their Kampot Pepper. Their governments were investing heavily in protecting products deeply rooted in their local communities.

During one of those discussions, I found myself asking a simple question: Why were all our neighbors putting so much effort and investments into Geographical Indications while the Philippines seemed content to watch from the sidelines?

I remember telling then Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez, “There must be something in Geographical Indications that we are not seeing.”

That conversation stayed with me.

It convinced me that we needed to move beyond simply having GI provisions in our law. We had to make the system work. I immediately instructed Bureau of Trademarks Director Jesan Ros to prioritize the drafting of the Implementing Rules and Regulations for GI registration.

We consulted producers, lawyers, academics, international experts, and our development partners. We studied best practices while ensuring that the rules reflected Philippine realities mindful of the Philippine government commitments with foreign governments.

Eventually, IPOPHL issued the country’s first rules on Geographical Indications registration on 5 October 2022. It was a milestone that perhaps did not receive the public attention it deserved, but one that quietly laid the foundation for protecting some of our country’s most valuable products.

This issuance may be one of the reasons why the EU restarted negotiations for the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the Philippines. For the longest time, the negotiations for the FTA were on pause, since 2017, but were officially relaunched in March 2024 after a technical stocktaking in July 2023.

Let me take this opportunity to commend IPOPHL for approving the GI applications of Guimaras Mangoes, Albuquerque Asin Tibuok, Aklan Piña, Lake Sebu’s T’nalak, and many other products whose quality and reputation are inseparable from the places where they are produced. Their uniqueness comes not only from nature but also from the generations of knowledge, craftsmanship, and tradition passed down through families and communities.

A Geographical Indication protects more than a product’s name. It protects its story. It rewards communities that preserve quality and tradition. It helps producers command premium prices, combats imitation, strengthens tourism, and creates jobs where they are needed most — in the rural areas.

As I said during the launch of GIs in the Philippines, this was our gift to our farmers and workers who belong to the most vulnerable sector of our country.

But the work of IPOPHL is far from over.

The issuance of the rules was only the first step. The challenge now belongs to local governments, producer associations, farmers, artisans, exporters, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Trade and Industry, and IPOPHL itself. Together, they must identify deserving products, organize producer groups, establish quality standards, and build strong Philippine GI brands that can compete globally. And, more importantly, to capacitate our farmers and workers on leveraging their GI registration.

Looking back, I realize that one of the most valuable lessons I learned as director general did not come from a conference room in Manila. It came from listening to our ASEAN neighbors and development partners. Sometimes, progress begins by asking why others believe so strongly in something that we have overlooked. More importantly, it comes from having the courage to act on the answer.

Today, I remain hopeful that Geographical Indications will become one of the country’s most powerful tools — not only for protecting intellectual property, but for preserving our heritage, empowering our communities and bringing the world closer to the richness of the Filipino identity.