Geographical indications (GIs) in Vietnam are protected through a sui generis system involving a Statedriven management following a topdown approach. However, in practice, collective or certification trademarks (TMs) are increasingly used as origin labels, following the same path of a Statedriven process. This is mainly explained by the very demanding criteria to meet for proving the qualitative link with the origin in the case of GIs, which may be considered as going beyond the GI definition, and the sometimes arbitrary choice between TM and GIs to meet quotas. Drawing upon case studies, the paper shows that the choice between GIs or TMs is not the most relevant factor to contribute to local economic development, preserve traditional knowledge and conserve biodiversity. The marketing channels seem to be more significant. Yet the lack of consideration of the weaker level of protection of TMs compared to GIs might be a threat. Finally, it seems legitimate to question the EU's preferential policy for GIs over TMs in the bilateral agreement between Vietnam and the EU.