The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHIL), recently approved the Guimaras Mango Growers and Producers Development Cooperative (GMGPDC) application as the country’s first registered a geographical indication (GI).
According to the IPOPHIL, “a GI serves as a marketing tool that accentuates a product’s distinctiveness and appealing narratives . . . it certifies a link between the quality, characteristics and reputation of a product and its geographical source. Thes factors may have been shaped by environmental influences, such as soil and climate, or human factors, such as tradition and local know-how.”
A Guimaras mango fruit is ellipsoid-shaped with a rounded crown and an oblong end that features distinct broader shoulder and full cheek weighing an average of 160 grams or more. Its flesh is meaty smooth, firm, juicy and non-fibrous. It is as thin-seeded, making over 80 percent of the fruit edible.”
Accordingly, the tagline “the sweetest mango” is also proven by the Total Soluble Solids (TSS) test conducted by the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) – National Crop Research, Development and Production Center. Additionally, the aforementioned qualities are attributed to the province’s calcareous soil, which is abundant in calcium and magnesium and ensures proper drainage.”
MY COMMENT:
Good for the IPOPHIL to have ‘settled’ the issue on “the sweetest Philippine- grown mango”. I am saying this because sometime back the Zambales Mango Growers publicly claimed about their mango fruits being the “sweetest” in the country. Since then, I have not read any disclaimer from Guimaras and/or other mango-growing provinces! Now is the turn of Zambales mango planters to ‘contest’ the IPOPHIL’s decision in approving the GMGPDC registration as a GI.
ooo000ooo
NEXT TOPIC : “Fisheries production from WPS drops in 2021-2022”
SHARE S & T THOUGHTS through E-Mail: drpacjr@yahoo.com.
Winners?
The recent barangay elections that were held for the old and the youth had exposed the corruption of the electoral process. It showcased the money contest that were only practiced in the higher levels of local governance, usually in the provincial, city and municipal levels which carried the candidates for congressional, provincial board members as well as city and municipal councillors.
Those were the ugly commercialized elections were barangay officials merely acted as ward leaders. The huge money for vote buying were reportedly downloaded to the barangay level to ensure that votes are delivered and monitored at the precinct level where ward leaders who keep the funds for themselves are easily traced from the results at the precinct votes.
Time has changed that the corruption had now invaded the barangay elections both for the old and youth candidates. Vote selling and vote buying had been rampant and at high prices for barangay and youth positions. What seems to be the benchmark was the honorarium that a candidate expects to get if elected for duration of the term. Other candidates include the possible gains that would be raked in from the implementation of programs, projects and activities.
Never mind the platform of governance that candidates were forced to declare during the campaign period as a qualification issue of those wannabes for the various positions. Those who won are now preparing for recovery of their expenses and the amount to prepare for the next elections. Vote sellers and those who did not sell their votes have to bear with whatever kind of governance the purported winners by vote buying will do. Their right to complain for bad governance had been compromised by the corrupted elections.
With barely two years in office, the honorarium the winners will receive would be barely a little more that the election expenses incurred. The excess would not even be enough to maintain the position in the next elections. Yet, the victors in the vote buying would have the gall to call themselves . . . winners?
comments to alellema@yahoo.com