AOSTA, Italy — The 380,000 wheels of Fontina PDO cheese matured each year are tiny in number compared to the millions churned out by more famous rivals — but that doesn’t make the creamy cheese any less important to producers in Valle d’Aosta, a region nestled in the Italian Alps.  Fontina’s protected designation of origin (PDO) provides consumers at home and abroad a “guarantee of quality and of a short supply chain,” explained Stéphanie Cuaz, of the consortium responsible for protecting the cheese from cheap copycats, as she navigated a hairpin turn on the way to a mountain pasture. With fewer than a hundred cows, a handful of farm hands and a small house where milk is transformed into cheese, the pasture at the end of the winding road feels far away from global trade tussles its flagship product is embroiled in. The EU’s scheme to protect the names of local delicacies from replicas produced elsewhere has proved controversial in international trade negotiations. For instance, in 2023, free trade talks with Australia were swamped by complaints from its cheese producers railing against EU demands that they refrain from using household names like “Mozzarella di Bufala Campana” and “Feta.”  Fontina was caught in the crossfire, having been included in the list of names the EU wants protected Down Under. Fontina DOP Alpeggio is a variant of the cheese produced during the summer months using milk from cows grazing in alpine pastures up to 2,700 meters above sea level | Lucia Mackenzie/POLITICO. No such protections exist in the U.S., where in the state of Wisconsin alone, there are a dozen “fontina” producers, one of which won bronze at the World Cheese Awards in 2022.  Europe’s small-time food producers find themselves in a bind: their protected status is vital for promoting their traditional products abroad, but charges of protectionism have soured some trade negotiations. Nonetheless, many of the bloc’s trading partners clearly see the benefits of the system, baking in similar protections for their own products into trade deals. PROTECTION VS PROTECTIONISM Fontina cheese can only be labeled as such if several strict criteria are met. Cows of certain breeds need to be fed with hay of a certain caliber and, crucially, every step of the cheesemaking process must take place within the region’s borders.   For Cuaz, who grew up on a dairy farm in Doues, a small town of around 500 people perched on the valley side, the protection of the Fontina name is vital to keep farming alive and sufficiently paid in the region. Tucked up against the French and Swiss borders, Valle d’Aosta is Italy’s least populated region, home to just over 120,000 inhabitants speaking a mixture of Italian, French and the local Valdôtain dialect. Fontina — which with its distinctive nutty flavor can be enjoyed on a charcuterie board, in a fondue, or encased in a veal chop — is one of over 3,600 foods, wines, and spirits registered under the EU’s geographical indications (GI) system. This protects the names of products that are uniquely linked to a specific region. The idea is to make them easier to promote and keep small producers competitive. In the EU alone, GI products bring in €75 billion in annual revenue and command a price that’s 2.23 times higher than those without the status, the bloc’s Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen proclaimed earlier this year. He called the scheme a “true EU success story.” The GI system is predominantly used in gastronomic powerhouses like Italy and France, and Hansen hopes to promote uptake in the eastern half of the bloc.  Italy has the most geographical indications in the world, accounting for €20 billion in turnover, the country’s Agriculture Minister Francesco Lollobrigida pointed out, describing the system as an “extraordinary value multiplier.” ‘NOTHING MORE THAN A TRADE BARRIER’ While several trading partners apparently share the enthusiasm of Hansen and Lollobrigida  — the EU’s trade agreements with countries from South Korea to Central America and Canada include protections for selected GIs — others view the protections as, well, protectionist. The U.S. has long been the system’s most vocal critic, with the Trade Representative’s annual report on intellectual property protection calling it out as “highly concerning” and “harmful.” Washington argues that the rules undermine existing trademarks and that product names like “fontina,” “parmesan” and “feta” are common and shouldn’t be reserved for use by certain regions. That reflects the U.S. dairy industry’s resentment towards Europe’s GIs: Krysta Harden, U.S. Dairy Export Council president, argued they are “nothing more than a trade barrier dressed up as intellectual property protection.” Meanwhile, the National Milk Producers’ Federation blames the scheme, at least in part, for the U.S. agri-food trade deficit.  American opposition to the system doesn’t stop at its own trade relationship with the EU. The U.S. Trade Representative’s Office also accused the EU of pressuring trading partners to block certain imports and vowed to combat the bloc’s “aggressive promotion of its exclusionary GI policies.” DOUBLING DOWN Unfazed by the criticism, Hansen continues to tout geographical indications as vital in the EU’s ongoing trade negotiations with other countries.  The EU’s long-awaited trade accord with the Latin American Mercosur bloc is heading toward ratification and includes GI protections for both sides. Speaking in Brazil last month, Hansen went out of his way to praise his hosts for protecting canastra, a highland cheese, and cachaça, a sugarcane liquor, against imitations.  Fifty-eight of the GIs protected under the agreement are Italian, Lollobrigida told POLITICO. This protects Italy’s reputation for high-quality food, he said, and ensures “that Mercosur citizens receive top-quality products.” The EU recently concluded a deal with Indonesia which will protect more than 200 EU products, and a geographical indication agreement is actively being discussed in talks on a free-trade deal with India that both sides hope to wrap up this year. As negotiations with Australia pick up once again, the issue of GI cheeses is expected to return to the spotlight. The U.S. pushback on GIs in other countries has fallen on deaf ears, argued John Clarke, the EU’s former lead agriculture negotiator. He criticized detractors for peddling “specious arguments which bear no relationship to intellectual property rights.” American claims that some terms are universally generic are “illegitimate” and ultimately “very unsuccessful,” in Clarke’s view. “They came too late to the party,” he said, “and their arguments were not very convincing from a legal point of view.” CULTURE AND COMMERCE  The uptake of GIs in other countries demonstrates the additional value the schemes can bring for rural communities and cultural heritage, Clarke posited.  In Valle d’Aosta, the GI system “keeps people and maybe also young farmers linked to this region,” argued Cuaz, adding that young people leaving rural areas in favor of urban centers is a real problem for her region. From tournaments to find the “Queen” of the herd that are a highlight of summer weekends to the “Désarpa” parade marking the end of the season as cows return to the valley from their Alpine pastures, Fontina cheese production keeps traditions alive in the tiny region every year. The dairy industry even plays a role in making use of abandoned copper mines, where thousands of cheese wheels mature annually. Thousands of cheese wheels are matured the Valpelline warehouse, built in the tunnels of a former copper mine. | Lucia Mackenzie/POLITICO. Supporters of the GI scheme also point to the food and wine tourism opportunities it offers. Les Cretes vineyard, winery and tasting room represent one such success story.  The flavors imbued into traditional and native grape varieties by the soil of the Valle d’Aosta’s high-altitude vineyards justify its inclusion as a geographically protected product, explained Monique Salerno, who has worked for the family business for 15 years and is in charge of tastings and events. The premium price on the local wines is vital to keep the producers competitive, given that the steep vines need to be picked by hand, she added. The business expanded in 2017, building a tasting room to draw tourists to Aymavilles, the town with a population of just over 2,000 that houses much of the vineyard. TARIFF TROUBLE While American critics have, in Clarke’s view, “lost the war on terroir,” Europe’s small-time food producers are not immune to the rollercoaster of tit-for-tat tariffs that have dominated recent EU-U.S. trade negotiations.  Like the vast majority of European products heading to the U.S., cheese is subject to a 15 percent blanket tariff. In the meantime, however, organizational mishaps led to some temporary doubling of tariffs on Italian cheeses, angering major producers.  The whole saga has caused uncertainty, said Ermes Fichet, administrative manager of the Milk and Fontina Producers’ Cooperative.  The Les Cretes vineyard on the slopes surrounding Aymavilles. | Lucia Mackenzie/POLITICO The U.S. is Fontina’s largest overseas market, accounting for around 60 percent of direct exports. However, producers aren’t fearing for their livelihoods, yet, as most Fontina cheese isn’t exported at all: an estimated 95 percent of wheels are sent to distributors in Italy. Rather, the impact of U.S. trade policy is long term. The American market would in theory be able to absorb all of Fontina’s production, Fichet explains, but the sale of similar cheeses at lower prices there makes it difficult to expand market share.  According to figures released by the USDA’s statistics service, over 5.1 million kilos of “fontina” cheese was produced in Wisconsin alone in 2024. That comes out to a higher volume than the 3.1 million kilos of GI-certified Fontina originating in Valle d’Aosta annually.  And looking elsewhere isn’t an easy option for the small-time cheese makers, even if future trade agreements include GI recognition. While markets in countries like Saudi Arabia are growing, they would never close the gap left by U.S. producers if trade ties worsen, said Fichet.  Responding to the foreign detractors, he highlighted the benefits from the scheme at home. Fontina DOP “allows us to maintain the agricultural reality of certain places … it’s an extra reason to try to help those who are committed to carrying on with a product that is, let’s say, the little flower of the Valle d’Aosta.”

LONDON — Britain is sleepwalking through its biggest food safety crisis since the horsemeat scandal of 2013, a group of influential MPs warned as they dismissed a recent personal import ban on EU meat and cheese as “toothless.” The government moved in April to prohibit travelers from EU countries from bringing meat and dairy products into the U.K. following an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease across the continent. However, as reported by POLITICO, the ban has not been fully enforced, with experts warning that U.K. health officials lack the funds to uphold the rules. In a damning report on Monday, the parliament’s Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee warned that “alarming amounts” of meat and dairy products were still being illegally imported for both personal consumption and sale. The committee welcomed the government’s ban on personal imports of meat and dairy from the EU but described it as “toothless,” with prohibited products continuing to enter the U.K. through airports, seaports and the Eurotunnel in freight, parcels, personal baggage and passenger vehicles. “It would not be an exaggeration to say that Britain is sleepwalking through its biggest food safety crisis since the horse meat scandal,” committee chair Alistair Carmichael said. “A still bigger concern is the very real risk of a major animal disease outbreak. The single case of foot-and-mouth disease in Germany this year, most likely caused by illegally imported meat, cost its economy one billion euros.” He urged the government to “get a grip on what has become a crisis” by establishing a national taskforce, boosting food crime intelligence networks, enforcing “real deterrents,” and giving port health and local authorities the resources and powers they need.   During the committee’s nine-month inquiry into animal and plant health, experts painted a gruesome picture of the situation at the border, describing cases of meat arriving in unsanitary conditions, often in the back of vans, stashed in plastic bags, suitcases and cardboard boxes. At the Port of Dover alone, port health officials say they intercepted 70 tons of illegal meat imports from vehicles between January and the end of April, compared with 24 tons during the same period in 2024. During a Public Accounts Committee session on animal disease last week, Emma Miles, director general for food, biosecurity and trade at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said it was unclear whether the increase in the number of seizures of illegal meat at Dover was due to a rise in crime or to better surveillance. “When you’re catching people it might just mean you are doing better surveillance and enforcement,” she said.

BRUSSELS — European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen defended the EU’s controversial trade accord with Donald Trump, warning that failure to strike a deal would have been a gift to Europe’s rivals. “Imagine for a moment that the two largest democratic economies had not managed to reach an agreement and instead launched a trade war — only Moscow and Beijing would be celebrating,” von der Leyen wrote in an op-ed published Saturday night in El Mundo. The Commission chief painted the four-page framework agreement, finalized last week, as a deliberate choice for “stability and predictability over escalation and confrontation.”  The pact caps most U.S. tariffs on EU goods at 15 percent, including on cars and pharmaceuticals, and carves out exemptions for generics and aircraft parts. Critics, including former World Trade Organization boss Pascal Lamy, have warned the accord risks undermining Europe’s credibility as a defender of rules-based trade. But von der Leyen insisted the EU had secured a unique outcome: a single tariff ceiling of 15 percent, unlike the layered rates Washington applies to other partners. She also stressed that EU food safety, health and digital rules remain untouched, and pointed to Brussels’ efforts to diversify trade ties, including through deals with Mexico, the South American bloc of Mercosur countries, and a goal of clinching a pact with India before year’s end.  Von der Leyen echoed former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi, who on Friday called to tear down internal market barriers, arguing they do more to hobble growth than any foreign tariff. “If Europe wants to fully unlock its potential, this is the most urgent challenge,” she wrote.

The U.K. government launched a campaign Thursday urging British holidaymakers not to bring foreign meat and dairy products back into the country.  London wants to protect British farm animals from infection with foot-and-mouth disease, which has reappeared on the European continent this year. “It is illegal for travelers entering GB to bring with them untreated meat or dairy products including lamb, pork, mutton, venison and goat meat, and all other products made from these meats or containing them — such as sandwiches and sausages — from the EU,” the government said in a press release. Helene Hayman, the U.K.’s biosecurity minister, added: “We are asking the public to take this seriously. Do not bring prohibited animal or plant products into the country — doing so puts farmers’ livelihoods at risk.” The U.K. Chief Veterinary Officer Christine Middlemiss said: “I know it is disappointing not to be able to bring back produce from your holidays, but please avoid temptation — you will be doing your bit to help protect our hard-working farmers.” The highly infectious disease, which primarily affects cloven-hoofed animals such as cattle, goats, pigs and sheep, spread in Germany, Hungary and Slovakia between January and April this year, but was eventually contained by the authorities. Any proof of the virus inside the EU has to be reported to the authorities. Imported animal products can spread the virus, since it can be carried in meat, dairy products and even processed food. The virus is also capable of surviving outside a host, for example in soil, water, hay or even on human clothing. The disease is generally not dangerous to humans but can devastate a herd of cattle. While vaccinations against the virus exist, preventive jabs are not permitted by the EU, because it’s hard for vets to distinguish between infected and vaccinated animals. Infected animals are usually culled. In 2001, a major outbreak of the disease in the U.K. led to the slaughtering of 6 million cows and sheep, causing an estimated £8 billion in economic damage.

LONDON — Brexit reset talks took a step forward on Wednesday as the European Commission outlined its negotiating plans on agri-food standards and carbon emissions trading. The Commission published draft proposals for its negotiating position in the two policy areas — which are among a handful set for discussions. The plans will now be scrutinized by EU governments. The publication of the proposals represents the first movement in talks since the May 19 summit, where Keir Starmer pledged to “reset” Britain’s relationship with the EU and set out a slate of negotiating objectives. Under the Commission’s proposals for a sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement, the U.K. would apply “at all times the full body of” relevant EU rules on “sanitary, phytosanitary, food safety and general consumer protection rules applicable” to agri-food products. It would also cover “the regulations of live animals and pesticides, the rules on organic production and labelling of organic products, as well as marketing standards applicable to certain sectors or products.” While London would have no “right to participate in the Union’s decision-making” of those rules, the EU would “consult the United Kingdom at an early stage of policy-making” so it could give its input. The U.K. would have to apply new EU rules within a set deadline or face legal action under the agreement. The British government would also make a financial contribution towards “the functioning of the relevant Union agencies, systems and databases to which the United Kingdom would gain appropriate access” through the proposed agreement. EMISSIONS TRADING The Commission’s proposed plan for linking the EU and U.K. emissions trading systems would also “ensure the dynamic alignment of the United Kingdom with the relevant European Union rules to avoid risks of carbon leakage and competitive distortions.” The plan says that the sectors covered by linked emissions trading should include “electricity generation, industrial heat generation (excluding the individual heating of houses), industry, domestic and international maritime transport and domestic and international aviation.” It would also create a procedure to “further expand the list of sectors” in the future. The agreement would “require that the cap and reduction pathway of the United Kingdom are at least as ambitious as the cap and reduction pathway followed by the Union” but also “not constrain” the EU and U.K. from “pursuing higher environmental ambition, consistent with their international obligations.” Under the Commission’s proposal, the U.K. would get a mutual exemption from the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). In some policy areas, the European Commission must obtain legal mandates from EU member states before it starts negotiating on their behalf. Further mandates are expected in other areas covered by the U.K.-EU reset, for example on electricity trading. Some policy areas do not require mandates, either because they are an EU competence or because one already exists. For example, negotiations about the U.K. joining the Erasmus exchange program are likely to be covered by a provision in the existing trade agreement allowing U.K. participation in EU programs.