Speaker
Description
Keywords
Deforestation, Cocoa, equity, Ghana and Cote d'Ivoire, supply chain
Introduction
Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana lead global cocoa production, but the cocoa sector faces significant challenges related to smallholder poverty, deforestation, and child labour (Fountain and Huetz-Adams, 2022). Over 60% of cocoa from Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire is produced by smallholder farmers who cultivate an average of 2-5 hectares and rely on it as their main source of income (Bymolt et al., 2018). More than 30% of cocoa producers in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire live below the extreme poverty line with about 78% earning less than a living income (van Vliet et al., 2021).
Smallholder farmers are considered a major driver of deforestation (Higonnet et al., 2017; Renier et al., 2023), expanding both cocoa cultivation and food crops into forested lands including protected areas (Kalischek et al., 2023, Fountain and Huezt-Adams, 2022).
In response, most global companies within the cocoa and chocolate industry in recent years have adopted a range of forest-focused supply chain policies (FSPs) to address the environmental and social issues in the sector. FSPs are companies’ 'formal and/or public declarations about how forest impacts are considered within their supply chain” (Garrett et al., 2021). They usually consist of reducing or eliminating deforestation, and/or encouraging forest conservation and restoration (Garrett et al., 2021; Lambin and Thorlakson, 2018).
Concerns have been raised about the effectiveness and equity or fairness of the companies' FSPs considering deforestation rates and socio-economic challenges in the cocoa sector (Higonnet et al., 2017). Effectiveness in this context refers to the ability of a policy to conserve forests and prevent deforestation in cocoa production, while "equity" means creating equal opportunities for all cocoa producers to comply with, participate in, and benefit from these policies (Grabs et al., 2021; McDermott et al., 2013). Research suggests that FSPs can be effective in reducing deforestation depending on the stringency, scope and target of the FSP and the market share of the companies that have adopted FSPs (i.e. how much of the supply they source) (Garrett et al., 2019; Levy et al., 2023). However, the implementation of highly stringent FSPs can lead to a higher exclusion of producers that are less able to comply resulting in unequitable effects.
Objectives
The objective of this paper is twofold: Firstly, to integrate primary documents, field interviews, and observations to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the diverse theories of change guiding the implementation of FSPs initiatives within specific regions. Secondly, to perform a theory-driven ex-ante assessment to gauge the potential effectiveness and equity of the FSP's design and implementation strategies.
Methods
We used a stratified purposeful sampling approach to select respondents for semi-structured and in-depth interviews. This method ensured that key stakeholder groups within the cocoa sector were included. The data collection process began with a comprehensive review of grey literature and company communications (such as sustainability policies, reports) to gain a broader understanding of the design and implementation of companies' FSPs, as well as the supply chain structure. This informed the selection of analytical frameworks, which guided the design of the interview guides, the selection of interview participants, and the data analysis. The interview guides were also influenced by previous studies in the palm (Grabs and Garrett, 2023) and cattle (Cammelli et al., 2022) sectors, which examined the effectiveness and equity of FSPs. We conducted a total of 91 interviews in both countries, involving cocoa traders, chocolate manufacturers, local buying companies, non-governmental and non-profit organizations (NGOs), state institutions, research institutions, cocoa sector experts, third-party certification bodies, and farmer cooperatives.
Results
We identified seven FSP implementation themes across the companies we assessed. These seven implementation themes are: i) productivity enhancement, ii) monitoring and traceability, iii) promotion of agroforestry, iv) community engagement, v) market incentives, vi) collaboration and partnership activities, and vii) alternative livelihood support activities. Overall, many FSP implementation activities aim to increase cocoa farm yields for farmers in companies' direct supply chain. This contrasts with activities related to community engagement, alternative livelihood support, and collaboration and partnership, which do not directly affect productivity.
Furthermore, we organised the implementation activities into three pathways of influence adapted from Bernstein and Cashore (2012) to better understand the theories of change of companies FSPs. Our analysis show that companies' theory of change tends to focus on creating enabling conditions and providing incentives (both positive and negative), with less attention given to norms and values. This confirms the narrative that increasing farmers' income through enhanced productivity will discourage farmers from expanding into forest areas. The norms pathway requires activities that activate farmers' pro-environmental behaviour and conservation values and is considered to have the most lasting impact.
Regarding the potential effectiveness and equity of companies' FSPs, we found deficiencies in how companies define their targets and commitments, which could reduce the effectiveness of the policies. For instance, while most companies have pledged to eliminate all forms of deforestation from their supply chain in their policy documents, we have found that companies only address illegal deforestation, specifically protected area deforestation caused by cocoa, based on legal definitions of forests. Additionally, the design and implementation of companies' current FSPs fall short in involving smallholder cocoa farmers in the policy design and implementation, as well as in benefit sharing, such as paying farmers a living income price. In some cases, farmers are only consulted after the policy has already been designed. This creates equity issues that contribute to the failure of the policies.
Nevertheless, we found that companies are performing relatively well in terms of monitoring and enforcement, primarily due to the widespread adoption of third-party verification systems such as Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade certification standards. However, the impacts of these systems are limited due to poor targeting and definition.
Conclusion
Overall, the design and implementation of current FSPs seem to have limited impact on addressing deforestation and improving farmer wellbeing, attributed to their insufficient targeting or definition, inadequate benefit sharing for farmers and lack of inclusion of smallholder farmers in FSP formulation and implementation.
