Do Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) or Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) Exist for Turkish Wine
- Chris Vannoy
- 7 days ago
- 8 min read
Why Turkey’s Wines Deserve Geographical Indication Protection. A Terroir Unprotected: The Absence of Geographical Indication for Turkish Wines
Despite being one of the world’s oldest wine-producing regions, Turkey lacks a comprehensive and functioning Geographical Indication (GI) system for its wines. This omission places Turkish wine producers at a considerable disadvantage in a global marketplace where provenance, terroir, and regional character matter more than ever, especially when compared with other similar producers such as Greece (33 PDOs and 114 PGIs).
In a country celebrated for its rich agricultural biodiversity and ancient winemaking heritage, it is surprising—and increasingly problematic—that Turkey has yet to establish a robust legal or practical framework for geographical indications (GIs) for wine. While Turkey has made strides in aligning aspects of its intellectual property laws with the European Union (EU), its wine industry remains strikingly under-protected in a world where regional authenticity is everything.
From France’s Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée (AOC) to Italy’s Denominazione di Origine Controllata (DOC) and the EU-wide Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) systems, the Old World has long recognized that wine is not merely a beverage—it is an agricultural and cultural artifact rooted in a specific place.
As global wine markets become more saturated and consumer awareness about terroir and provenance deepens, wines without certified geographic origin are at risk of being overlooked, misunderstood, or misrepresented. In Turkey’s case, this means that wines grown on the volcanic slopes of Cappadocia or the Aegean breezes of Urla have no formal mechanism—beyond trademarks or broad regional labels—to express or protect their unique identity. Furthermore, the lack of PDO and PGI inhibits consumers from understanding the fertile, diverse, and marvelous wines of Turkey.
So why is Turkey, a country rich with indigenous grape varieties, unique terroirs, and winemaking traditions that date back millennia, missing from this conversation?
Understanding Geographical Indication in the Wine World
Globally, geographical indication systems exist to certify and legally protect the link between a product’s characteristics and its place of origin. In wine-producing nations, these systems distinguish between wines made to express a region’s identity and those made without such constraint.
Geographical Indication refers to a name or sign used on products—especially agricultural goods—that correspond to a specific geographical location or origin. In wine, this typically relates to characteristics derived from soil, climate, grape varietals, and traditional practices.
France: The Benchmark
France, often seen as the gold standard for GI, offers a tiered system:
• AOC – Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée: The highest level, indicating strict regulations on grape varieties, yield, alcohol levels, and winemaking techniques. Examples include Bordeaux, Chablis, and Champagne.
• AOP – Appellation d’Origine Protégée: This is the EU’s harmonized version of AOC since 2009 but used interchangeably in France.
• IGP – Indication Géographique Protégée: A looser classification that allows more freedom in winemaking and grape sourcing but still anchors the wine to a region (e.g., IGP Pays d’Oc).
• Vin de Pays (VdP) and Vin de France: Wines with even fewer geographical or regulatory restrictions. These are essentially wines without formal regional identity.
Similar systems exist across Europe—DOC/DOCG in Italy, DO/DOQ in Spain, and QbA/Prädikatswein in Germany to AVAs in the United States and WO classifications in South Africa. These frameworks not only help producers differentiate their offerings but also reassure consumers that a wine genuinely reflects its claimed origin —each affirming that where and how a wine is made significantly influences its identity and marketability.
Turkey’s Missing Framework
In contrast, Turkey currently lacks a binding, enforceable GI system specifically designed for wine. While Turkish law does recognize geographical indications in theory (under their patent legal structure), implementation for wine is virtually absent.
Some products like Antep baklava, Ezine cheese, and Aydın figs have received GI status, even EU recognition. Yet, Turkish wine—despite the growing reputation of regions like Bozcaada, Urla, Thrace, Elazığ, and Cappadocia—remains outside of this system. Wine labels are not certified or enforced through a terroir-focused GI system; instead, they fall under general trademark law and technical production regulations.
Where the EU uses regulations directly applicable across all member states to enforce GIs, Turkish implementation remains producer-centric and product-based. There is little in the way of collective regional wine identity, codified boundaries, or specific grape variety standards tied to location. Even though the law provides the possibility for “designation of origin” and “appellation of origin,” these remain theoretical tools rather than applied categories in the Turkish wine sector.
A Gap Between Legislation and Wine Reality
What does this mean in practice? Currently, a wine labeled as coming from “Cappadocia” or “Thrace” may—or may not—be made from grapes grown there. Turkish labelling laws loosely require that at least 85% of grapes come from a named location if it appears on the label, but oversight is inconsistent. Moreover, terms like “reserve,” “oak-aged,” or even vineyard names have no standardized legal meaning and can be used without regulatory oversight.
This ambiguity undermines the trust of both domestic and international consumers. At worst, it invites deceptive marketing. At best, it leaves quality-focused producers unable to distinguish their wines in a meaningful and legally defensible way.
While there are technical regulations concerning sugar levels in sparkling wines, alcohol levels for fortified wines, and safety-related label warnings (like the prohibition of drinking while pregnant or driving), these focus on public health and consumer safety, not terroir or authenticity.
Why This Matters
1. Lack of Recognition Abroad
Without a GI framework, Turkish wines cannot legally protect the name of their region or winemaking tradition internationally. For example, a wine labeled “Urla” does not have any protected significance beyond marketing.
2. Consumer Trust and Education
Geographical indications help consumers associate specific styles, quality levels, and grape varieties with a place. The absence of such a system in Turkey means that even knowledgeable wine buyers have little guidance about what “Aegean” or “Cappadocia” might imply in a bottle.
3. Winemaker Constraints
Producers lack formal support to build consistent regional identities. A winemaker in Şarköy or Denizli may produce excellent wines, but without PDO-like protections, their regional branding is vulnerable to imitation or misuse.
What Would a Turkish GI System Look Like?
A functioning Turkish GI system for wine would need to include several components:
1. Defined Zones and Subzones
Much like France’s appellation system or Italy’s DOCs, Turkey would benefit from clear geographic boundaries tied to viticultural, historical, and climatic factors. For example:
• Thrace could be subdivided into Şarköy, Gelibolu, and Kırklareli.
• Aegean might include Urla, Denizli, and Aydın.
• Central Anatolia could designate Cappadocia as its flagship zone.
• Eastern Anatolia could elevate Elazığ and Malatya, especially for Boğazkere and Öküzgözü.
2. Varietal Regulation
Each region could highlight recommended or required grape varieties. For instance, Narince might be central to Tokat PGI; Boğazkere and Öküzgözü essential to Diyarbakır or Elazığ PGIs
3. Viticultural and Vinification Standards
Specifications regarding maximum yields, alcohol levels, oak usage, aging periods, and harvesting methods would help ensure typicity and quality.
Producer Certification and Enforcement
A national body (or independent regional committees) could be responsible for granting certifications, monitoring compliance, and issuing seals or stamps—akin to the those in France or Italy.
Labeling Oversight: Ensuring consumers understand terms like “single vineyard,” “oak-aged,” or “reserve.”
Potential Benefits for Turkey
These features would align Turkey’s wine industry with global best practices and offer a competitive edge in international markets increasingly oriented toward authenticity and sustainability.
Countries like Austria (through its DAC system), Germany (with Prädikatswein and VDP classifications), and Greece (via PDO/PGI schemes) have shown how GI systems can strengthen regional identity while allowing room for innovation and producer growth.
Economic Development
With better branding and protection, Turkish wines could command higher prices, both domestically and internationally. GI systems have been shown to increase rural development, preserve traditional practices, and encourage agrotourism (Belletti & Marescotti, 2011).
Wine Tourism
Imagine visiting a PDO-certified Cappadocia vineyard where volcanic soil is part of the certified terroir, or tasting a PGI Şarköy Sauvignon Blanc known for coastal minerality. Such storytelling boosts both tourism and export potential.
Export Advantage
Turkey faces considerable barriers in wine export—high taxes, limited name recognition, and competing in price-sensitive markets. GI-backed certification adds credibility and enables producers to break into niche markets that value terroir and sustainability.
Cultural Preservation
The indigenous grape revival in Turkey—Kalecik Karası, Karalahna, Hasandede, and others—is gaining momentum. A GI system would bolster these efforts, supporting the work of boutique producers committed to preserving Turkey’s oenological heritage.
An Opportunity Worth Pursuing
The future of Turkish wine depends not only on the skill of its vintners but on the credibility of the labels that represent them. As boutique wineries expand—some growing from 25,000 to 800,000 bottles annually—there is an urgent need for consistent quality signals. In an industry where perception shapes value, vague or unregulated labels do a disservice to winemakers and consumers alike.
Indeed, GIs offer more than just legal protection—they create pathways for economic development, tourism, and export. The volcanic soils of Cappadocia, the limestone slopes of Denizli, and the coastal breezes of Şarköy each have a story to tell. A GI system would give them a voice.
Why Hasn’t It Happened Yet?
Despite the clear advantages, several challenges persist.
1. Political Climate and Alcohol Policy
Under the current Turkish government, there is limited support for alcohol-related industries. Advertising bans, high excise taxes, and limited public funding inhibit the growth of the wine sector.
2. Fragmentation of Producers
Unlike France or Italy, Turkey lacks strong, unified producer associations capable of lobbying for GI protections. Many producers are small-scale and operate independently.
3. Insufficient Research and Mapping
Reliable data on microclimates, soil types, and vine performance across regions is limited or unpublished. GI systems depend on rigorous zoning studies, which remain underdeveloped in Turkey.
4. Consumer Education
Turkish consumers are beginning to explore terroir-driven wine appreciation. Without demand for regionality, there is limited pressure to establish official recognition.
Comparing with France: A Missed Opportunity
In France, AOC laws were developed partly to fight fraud and protect both farmers and consumers. A Burgundy Pinot Noir cannot be passed off as Bordeaux Cabernet. The same cannot be said of Turkish wines. A wine from Bozcaada might taste entirely different from one in Denizli, but currently, they may both be labeled generically as “Aegean Wine.”
Moreover, in France, even basic Vin de Pays (now IGP) wines benefit from regional identity. A VdP d’Oc wine tells the buyer something about the Mediterranean influence and varietal freedom. In Turkey, a similar wine might be simply labeled as “Dry Red Wine” with no further geographical context.
The time is ripe. Turkish wines are earning critical acclaim, and tourism is recovering. The country can position itself not just as a historical curiosity in wine production but as a terroir-driven producer of distinctive, high-quality wines.
Conclusion: A Terroir Without a Voice?
Turkey has the raw ingredients: ancient grape varieties, diverse soils, distinct microclimates, and dynamic, talented winemakers. What it lacks is a system that allows these qualities to speak clearly to the global market. But without a formal GI framework, this potential remains muted.
Until Turkish wines are afforded the legal and cultural protection of geographical indications, they risk being dismissed as generic, unplaceable, and interchangeable. For a country that could easily rival Europe’s best in terms of terroir expression, that would be an enormous loss—not just for Turkish producers but for wine lovers everywhere.
Comments