University of Amsterdam Graduate School of Social Sciences International Development Studies MSc Thesis
Sustainable Development Through
Cocoa Production?
A Case Study of Corporate Sustainability Strategies of Cargill and Barry Callebaut in Ghana June 2018 Annet Sophie Röst, 11689382 annetroest@gmail.com Supervisor: Dr. Mirjam A.F. Ros-Tonen Associated Professor, Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR), University of Amsterdam Second Reader: Dr. Nicky R.M. Pouw, University of Amsterdam Photo by Annet Röstii
Abstract
The United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development attributes a major role to the private sector in development. Companies increasingly embrace this new role and are eager to contribute their share to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). How the private sector concretely contributes to achieving the SDGs is however not yet much researched. Considering the increasing responsibility the private sector is given to contribute to achieving the SDGs by 2030, this is a serious knowledge gap. This study aims to address this gap by exploring how two cocoa companies in Ghana (Cargill and Barry Callebaut) contribute to achieving sustainable development in general and the implementation of the SDGs more specifically. It first analyzes the corporate sustainability strategies of the two case study companies, and then looks at how these strategies are implemented on the ground. Data for the second part of the study was collected through key respondent interviews and observations of the companies in interaction with farmers. The research found, first, that both companies contribute to sustainable development and integrate the three dimensions of sustainable development into their sustainability strategy, but that they prioritize the economic dimension above the social and the environmental dimensions. Second, it found that implementation of the strategies is not well-advanced yet, which also influences how cocoa farmers perceive the effectiveness of companies’ sustainability strategies. This leads to the conclusion that the two case study companies recognize that the future supply of cocoa beans depends on sustainability within the cocoa sector and thus address all three sustainability dimensions in their strategies. The study recommends companies to be more transparent toward the cocoa farmers about the content and course of their strategies as farmers tend to get impatient with the implementation and have extraordinary high expectations of companies’ engagement. Additionally, farmers should be better informed about certification procedures and conditions and associated premium payments, in order to enable them to make informed decisions. Key words: SDGs, sustainable development, private sector, cocoa, Ghana, Cargill, Barry Callebautiii
Acknowledgement
At this point I would like to express a special thanks to my Thesis Supervisor Dr. Mirjam A.F. Ros-Tonen for her guidance, support, patience and encouragement throughout the thesis process. I would also like to express my gratitude towards Dr. Mercy Derkyi from the University of Energy and Natural Resources (UENR) in Sunyani (Ghana) and her team, who supported me personally and my thesis during the field research in Ghana. Further, I am also very thankful to all the support and time I received in the field, by my local research assistants Jesse and Linda from the UENR, and all interview respondents who generously gave me some of their precious time to answer my questions and introduced me the Ghanaian cocoa sector. Without their support, the completion of this thesis would not have been possible. I would like to thank Anna Laven from KIT for the support and helpful connections in the cocoa world. I am also thanking my colleague Christine for sharing the ups and downs of the thesis process, which made the weight lighter and the joys brighter. I am also grateful for the second reader’s work, Dr Nicky R.M. Pouw, who also supported me during the research proposal writing process with insightful comments and references. Last but not least, I am thanking my family, friends and my partner who supported me emotionally during this time. Special thanks goes to my brother Hannes Röst whose provision of helpful comments I always highly appreciate.iv
Table of Content
1 Introduction ... 1 1.1 Problem statement and justification of the research ... 2 1.2 Research objective and research question ... 3 1.3 Companies and study area ... 4 1.4 Thesis outline ... 6 2 Conceptual framework ... 7 2.1 The role of the private sector in development discourses ... 7 2.1.1 Inclusive growth ... 8 2.1.2 Trade, not aid ... 9 2.1.3 Green economy ... 10 2.1.4 Sustainable development ... 12 2.2 Corporate discourses ... 14 2.2.1 Corporate social responsibility ... 15 2.2.2 Creating shared value ... 16 2.2.3 Sustainable supply chain management ... 16 2.2.4 Corporate sustainable performance ... 17 2.3 A critical perspective: private sector and sustainable development ... 17 2.4 Reconstructing corporate sustainability strategies ... 18 2.5 Conceptual scheme ... 19 3 Methodology ... 21 3.1 Research design ... 21 3.2 Operationalization ... 22 3.3 Units of analysis and observation ... 25 3.4 Study area ... 25 3.5 Data collection methods ... 25 3.6 Sampling ... 27 3.7 Data processing and analysis ... 27 3.8 Validity and reliability ... 28 3.8.1 Validity ... 28 3.8.2 Reliability ... 29 3.8.3 Authenticity ... 29 3.9 Limitations to the research ... 31v 3.10 Research ethics ... 31 3.11 Positionality ... 33 4 Research context: The Ghanaian cocoa sector ... 34 4.1 Ghana: economic and developmental context ... 34 4.2 The cocoa sector ... 36 4.2.1 The Ghanaian cocoa sector ... 37 4.2.2 The private sector in the Ghanaian cocoa sector ... 38 4.3 Conclusions ... 39 5 Corporate social and sustainability strategies ... 40 5.1 Corporate strategy analysis of Cargill ... 40 5.1.1 Causal relations ... 40 5.1.2 Normative relations ... 41 5.1.3 Final relations ... 42 5.1.4 Drivers of the strategy ... 44 5.1.5 Contribution to the SDGs ... 45 5.2 Corporate strategy analysis of Barry Callebaut ... 46 5.2.1 Causal relations ... 46 5.2.2 Normative relations ... 47 5.2.3 Final relations ... 48 5.2.4 Drivers of the strategy ... 50 5.2.5 Contribution to the sustainable development goals ... 50 5.3 Comparison between Cargill and Barry Callebaut ... 51 5.4 Conclusion ... 53 6 Implementation of the corporate strategies ... 55 6.1 Cargill’s corporate strategy on the ground ... 55 6.1.1 Implementation ... 55 6.1.2 Perceptions of effectiveness ... 58 6.2 Barry Callebaut’s corporate strategy on the ground ... 61 6.2.1 Implementation ... 61 6.2.2 Perceptions of effectiveness ... 64 6.3 Comparison ... 67 6.4 Critical reflection ... 72
vi 7 Synthesis and conclusion ... 73 7.1 Answers to the research question ... 73 7.2 Conceptual reflections ... 74 7.3 Suggestions for further research ... 76 7.4 Recommendations ... 77 Literature List ... 79 Annex I: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) ... ix Annex II: Coding Frame ... x
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Political Map of Ghana (source: ezilon.com Regional Maps 2015) ... 5 Figure 2.1: Conceptual Scheme (Graphic by Christine Moncoquet and Annet Röst) ... 20List of Tables
Table 2.1 Development discourses assigning a role to the private sector ... 7 Table 2.2 Corporate discourses about the private sector and development ... 15 Table 3.1 Operationalization table ... 23 Table 5.1 Final relations in Cargill’s corporate sustainability strategy ... 44 Table 5.2 Final relations in Barry Callebaut’s corporate sustainability strategy ... 49 Table 5.3 Comparison of Corporate Sustainability Strategies ... 52 Table 6.1 Comparison of implementation on the ground ... 70List of Abbreviations
CAP Community Action Plan CCPC Community Child Protection Committees CLMRS Child Labor Monitoring and Remediation System COCOBOD Ghana Cocoa Board CSP Corporate Sustainable Performance CSR Corporate Social Responsibility CSS Corporate Sustainability Strategy CSV Creating Shared Value FBS Farmer Business School GAB Ghana Beyond Aid GAP Good Agricultural Practices ICI International Cocoa Initiative LBC Licensed Buying Companies MDGs Millennium Development Goals SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SSCM Sustainable Supply Chain Managementviii
Annexes
Annex I: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Annex II: Coding Frame
1
1 Introduction
The traditional perception of the private sector is represented in Milton Friedman’s view (Friedman 1970, cited in Lucci 2012: 5), who stated that businesses’ only responsibility is toward their stakeholders and to increase their profit, that businesses have no social responsibility. Literature has also expressed concerns regarding the role of the private sector as a development actor. Multiple authors have argued, that if the private sector becomes engaged within the development sector, the neoliberal paradigm is strengthened and a necessary systematic change may be further delayed (Haque 1999; Kumi et al. 2014; Agarwal et al. 2017; Scheyvens et al. 2016). For further elaboration of a critical perspective of the role of the private sector in (sustainable) development, see Section 2.3.
Others see businesses as social institutions that do have an obligation toward the communities and places where they operate (Lucci 2012: 5; Ashley 2009). Since the Brundtland Report Our Common Future in 1987, which is considered as the cornerstone of the sustainable development concept (Barkemeyer et al. 2014; Gupta et al. 2015; UN 2015; Gupta and Vegelin 2016: 434; Hopwood et al. 2005: 40), the function of businesses in the development sector has received increasing attention (Barkemeyer et al. 2014: 15) and the perception of the position and roles of state, civil society and market in the development processes has changed, as did their interaction (Knorringa and Helmsing 2008: 1053). Private actors moved from being passive charity givers toward active civic engagers (Knorringa and Helmsing 2008: 1058; see also Blowfield and Dolan 2014). Knorringa and Helmsing state that this solution-oriented enthusiasm with which private actors proceed within the development sector “should be welcomed by the aid-establishment in general” (2008: 1058). The private sector actors themselves argue that their way of thinking is “superior to existing development discourses” (Knorringa and Helmsing 2008: 1058). However, also the acknowledgment by international agencies and development organizations of the important role that the private sector can play in development has increased in the last years. This is also reflected in the increasing number of private sector development strategy papers by international agencies (e.g. OECD 2001, ADB 2000, ODI 2010; governmental development agencies that are increasingly working together with the private sector e.g. the Netherlands Enterprise Agency RVO.nl); and the important role attributed to the private sector in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030
2
(Scheyvens et al. 2016; Lucci 2012; Porter and Kramer 2011; Mawdsley 2017; Blowfield 2012). That key role is framed within the wider neoliberal system as engine of economic growth, employment creator, and thus poverty reduction (Knorringa and Helmsing 2008: 1054-1055; Lucci 2012: 1; Blowfield and Dolan 2014: 24). Proponents of the private sector’s active engagement in the development sector furthermore argue that new ideas concerning inclusive business and new forms of engagement have the potential to deliver scale and sustainability within the development sector (Ashley 2009: 8). Companies often have good access to finance and can invest on a scale that other actors within the development sector cannot (Davis 2012: 3). Furthermore, companies are assumed to have expert skills, knowledge, and the ability to develop their own technology that other development actors have not, but which is needed to solve complex global problems (Davis 2012: 3; Lucci 2012: 1/6). Most developing countries recognize the potential of the private sector for development and in some instances “bend over backwards to attract more foreign direct investment (FDI), given the economic benefits it can bring” (Davis 2012: 3).
Within the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (‘Agenda 2030’), which presents a framework for most current development activities, the private sector, governments and civil society actors are called upon to pursue a more sustainable path in the future through the SDGs (UN 2015). A special role is particularly attributed to the private sector: in many circles it is believed that sustainable development cannot be achieved without business support (Barkemeyer et al. 2014: 16; see also Bansal 2002; Hopwood et al. 2005; Barkemeyer et al. 2014). The private sector appreciates this role and increasingly takes an interest in development processes and the implementation of the SDGs (Hopkins 2016: 7). Research on how the private sector performs this role in practice is, however, still limited. 1.1 Problem statement and justification of the research With the adaption of the UN SDGs in September 2015, sustainable development moved into the limelight of development and gave this broad construct more guidance, even though the SDGs are not legally binding (UN 2015). Sustainable development is based on the ‘triple bottom line‘ − on an economic, a social and an environmental pillar − and aims to optimize all three aspects for the present and future generations. Since the adaption of the ‘Agenda 2030‘, academic literature in international business as well as within
3
development studies picked up on them. One strand of literature is based on literature in international business journals and looks at which dimensions of sustainable development, and which UN SDGs are mainly covered by the private sector (Kolk 2016; Kolk et al. 2017; Kourula et al. 2017). Another strand discusses the integration of the SDGs in private sector strategies more broadly and points toward the main challenges thereof (Agarwal et al. 2017; Chakravorti 2017; Hopkins 2016). How the private sector concretely contributes to achieving the SDGs is however not yet much researched. Considering the increasing responsibility the private sector is given to contribute to achieving the SDGs by 2030, this is a serious knowledge gap.
1.2 Research objective and research question
The purpose of this research is to explore the role of the private sector in contributing to achieving sustainable development in general, and in implementing the SDGs more specifically. Furthermore, the thesis aims to contribute to the discourse around the SDGs and the role the private sector plays in realizing them. Furthermore, it works toward filling the gap between academic knowledge and practical implementation of the UN SDGs by the private sector (Kolk et al. 2017: 26).
Research Question: What role do cocoa companies envisage contributing to sustainable development and the sustainable development goals?
1. What causal and normative relations drive the companies’ sustainability strategies?
2. How do the companies operationalize and envisage the implementation of their corporate sustainability strategy? (final relations)
3. How do the companies integrate the three dimensions of sustainable development in their corporate sustainability strategy?
4. How are the corporate sustainability strategies being implemented in practice? 5. How do actors within and beyond the value chain perceive the impacts of the
companies’ sustainability strategy?
6. How do the companies contribute to achieving the SDGs?
4
1.3 Companies and study area
Cargill Cocoa and Chocolate and Barry Callebaut are serving as case studies for this thesis. These two multinational companies are among the biggest cocoa-processing companies in Ghana (Laven 2010: 59; Fountain and Huetz-Adams 2015: 7) and both made publicly known that they are very ambitious in contributing to achieve the SDGs (McCoy 2017; Cargill 2017a; World Cocoa Foundation 2016: 34; Barry Callebaut 2017c). Both companies are Licensed Buying Companies (LBCs)1 in Ghana (Barry Callebaut 2015; Cargill 2017c) and relocated part of their cocoa process to the Export Processing Zone in Tema, Ghana, where their Ghanaian headquarter is situated. They invest in good relationships with the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), intervene in local marketing, and support cocoa farmers in partnerships with NGOs or the government, or develop individual programs for farmer support (Laven 2010: 100).
Cargill Incorporated (with its headquarters in Minneapolis, USA) is a global multi-sector corporation. One of their main businesses is trading, purchasing and distributing products and services, among which cocoa. In 2012, Cargill introduced the Cargill Cocoa Promise, which is part of their overarching strategy to build a sustainable cocoa supply chain (Cargill 2017b). The Cargill Kokoo Sourcing Ltd., Cargill’s own licensed buying company (LBC), was established in April 2017. According to Cargill, their new LBC allows the company to put “the farmer at the heart of our [Cargill’s] business” (Cargill 2017c). In Ghana, Cargill is sourcing cocoa from cocoa farmers in the Western Region.
Barry Callebaut (based in Zürich, Switzerland) is a manufacturer of high-quality chocolate and cocoa and sustainability is one of its four strategic pillars (Barry Callebaut 2017a). In November 2016, Barry Callebaut launched the Forever Chocolate movement, through which sustainable chocolate should become the norm by 2025 (Barry Callebaut 2017b). In November 2015, Barry Callebaut acquired Nyonkopa Cocoa Buying Company Limited in Ghana2, which is based in Kumasi in the Ashanti Region. Through Nyonkopa, Barry Callebaut aims to satisfy the increasing demand for sustainable cocoa (Barry Callebaut 2015). Barry Callebaut is sourcing its cocoa from five regions (out of six cocoa
1 In the partially liberalized cocoa sector in Ghana, private cocoa buyers have to be registered with
COCOBOD as Licensed Buying Companies (LBCs) (Barrientos 2011: 4).
2 Barry Callebaut acquired Nyonkopa in order to implement Barry Callebaut’s corporate sustainability
5
growing regions) in Ghana, from Ashanti, Brong Ahafo, Eastern, Central and Western Region.
The research for the thesis was conducted partially in Accra (Ghana’s capital where key partner organizations are based), in Tema (the Greater Accra Region) and in Kumasi (Ashanti Region). Furthermore, I visited cocoa farmers from three cocoa producing communities around Konogo in the Ashanti Region, and three cocoa producing communities in the Western Region, between Bibiani and Sefwi Bekwai (see Figure 1.1).
Figure 1.1: Political Map of Ghana (source: ezilon.com Regional Maps 2015)
6
1.4 Thesis outline
The thesis is divided into seven chapters; the first one presents the problem statement, as well as the objective and the relevance of researching the private sector’s contribution to achieving the SDGs.
The second chapter presents the theoretical framework, within which different development discourses (inclusive growth, trade not aid, green economy and sustainable development and the SDGs) and corporate discourses (corporate social responsibility, creating shared value, sustainable supply chain management, and corporate sustainability performance) are discussed. In addition, this chapter critically explores the role of the private sector in development. The policy reconstruction theory is also introduced, according to which the corporate sustainability strategy analysis is conducted. The chapter concludes with the conceptual scheme that brings the different parts of the theoretical framework together.
The third chapter presents the methodology of the thesis, as well as a reflection on ethical considerations, positionality, limitations of the research and validity and reliability.
In Chapter four, the context of the research is presented, which entails a short description of the case study country Ghana, the cocoa sector in general and in Ghana, as well as the private sector’s role in it.
In Chapter five, the corporate sustainability strategies of the two companies are analyzed, distinguishing between the causal, normative, and final relations found in these strategies, as well as the drivers behind the companies’ sustainability strategies and the companies’ contribution to the SDGs. This will first be done for each company individually, after which these two strategies will be compared.
In the sixth chapter, the implementation of the corporate sustainability strategies of the two companies is analyzed, focusing on the activities on the ground and the perceptions of the targeted population and other actors who have a stake in the value chain. The chapter compares the two companies and reflects critically on the implementation of the strategies.
The final chapter answers the research questions, reflects on the theory, and
7
2 Conceptual framework
The purpose of this research is to explore the role of the private sector in contributing to achieving the SDGs. In this chapter, the literature on the role of the private sector in development is reviewed and discussed.
2.1 The role of the private sector in development discourses
The boundaries between public and private actors within development are blurring (Kolk 2016: 24). Not only civil society and governments call upon the private sector to engage more in development, but also the corporation’s own interest in development processes and implementing the SDGs is increasing (Hopkins 2016: 7). This is reflected in different development discourses, which include inclusive growth, trade not aid, sustainable development, and green economics. They all foresee a positive role for the private sector in the development sector (Table 2.1).
Table 2.1 Development discourses assigning a role to the private sector
Approach Characteristics Relation
to SDGs References Inclusive growth Promotes efficient and sustained economic growth with benefits for people (outcome) and/or their participation (process). Central role for the private sector as the main driver of economic growth SDG 8 de Haan 2015, Klasen 2010, Stuart 2011 Trade, not aid Advocates free market access above development aid as a tool to enhance economic growth and poverty alleviation. Private sector development is the primary instrument to achieve this approach to development. SDG 8 Easterly 2006, Moyo 2009, Stiglitz and Charlton 2006 Green economy Proposal for a low-carbon, resource-efficient and socially inclusive economy, to be achieved through a combination of an enabling government and ‘green investments‘ by the private sector. Private sector should be held accountable for their social and environmental externalities. All UNEP 2011 Sustainable development/SDGs Global partnership for eradicating poverty, protecting the environment, and enhancing prosperity and peace. Integrates the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, social and environmental). Private sector has particular strengths to contribute to sustainable development, incl. innovation, responsiveness, efficiency, provision of specific skills and resources. All Agenda 2030
8
2.1.1 Inclusive growth
The inclusive growth concept reinstitutes the significance of economic growth for development, but highlights the importance to address inclusion and inequality, as these are seen to threaten growth and economic stability (de Haan 2015: 608; Klasen 2010: 2; Stuart 2011: 6). The public and policy debate on inclusive growth has mainly come from emerging economies and is progressively on the agenda of international development community. Not only is the international development community increasingly interested in engaging more with the private sector, but the discourse about inclusive growth is again arising increased interest by business leaders (de Haan 2015: 609). At the core of inclusive growth stands the duality between economy (economic growth) and society (different aspects of distribution) (Gupta and Vegelin 2016: 435; de Haan 2015: 611). Definitions of inclusive growth differ in the emphasis on outcome versus a focus on process (de Haan 2015: 611). When focusing on the outcome of inclusive growth, it emphasizes the extent to which the poor benefit from growth (e.g. inclusive growth benefits many people) and shows similarities with the pro-poor growth definition (de Haan 2015: 811). The process of inclusive growth stresses the extent to which people participate in growth, and whether or not growth is also based on the inputs of poor people (de Haan 2015: 811; see also White 2011; Stuart 2011; Klasen 2010). Thus, in the center of inclusive growth stands the promotion of efficient and sustainable economic growth. The private sector, as the main force that drives economic growth (Stuart 2011: 29) plays a central role within this concept. However, in order for the private sector to fulfill its potential in fostering inclusive growth, governments need to “develop and maintain an enabling environment for business by eliminating market distortions and institutional weaknesses and maintain the rule of law” (Rauniyar and Kanbur 2010: 42). Inclusive growth is specifically mentioned in UN Sustainable Development Goal 8, which promotes “sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all” (UN 2015).
However, critiques of the inclusive growth concept point toward its main focus on economic growth, paired with social aspects of development, but missing an environmental dimension (Gupta and Vegelin 2016: 435). Furthermore, the measurement of performance is unidimensional and focuses only on economic performance indicators and does not take into account the multidimensionality of poverty and development (Rauniyar and Kanbur 2010: 8; Gupta et al. 2015: 545). Gupta
9
et al. (2015: 545) underline that “growth strategies are based on exclusive, not structurally inclusive, principles and traits, and trickle-down economics fails for institutional and structural reasons” and indicate the need for state regulations, so that benefits of growth can be distributed more equally (Stuart 2011: 29). Moreover, due to the broadness of the concept, there is a lack of clarity about the exact objectives of inclusive growth and it is difficult to judge how much inclusiveness is necessary and or desirable (White 2011: 2).
2.1.2 Trade, not aid
The “trade, not aid” debate arose mainly from a critical rethinking of the efficiency of foreign aid. Criticism of foreign aid especially gained prominence in the public domain through the release of books like William Easterly’s (2006) “The White Man’s Burden” or Dambisa Moyo’s (2009) “Dead Aid.” Critics from these “right aid radicals” (Gulrajani 2011) argue that aid should be mainly based on free market mechanisms (Gulrajani 2011: 202). They criticize foreign aid strongly for failing to achieve its development aims, for creating dependencies that keep countries poor and for worsening the burden of poverty (Gulrajani 2011: 201). Especially Moyo (2009) calls on replacing aid with market-based policies and argues that this can address the root causes of poverty, which derive from a lack of access to capital and inadequate trading opportunities (Gulrajani 2011: 201). Consequently, the solution to Africa’s under-development lies in a combination of open trade policy, microfinance, bond market financing and Chinese investment (Gulrajani 2011: 201). Aid radicals on the right ascribe an apolitical technocratic development via trade policy, economic openness, voucher systems and micro-lending an important role for development. Trade as a development tool (for example within the Fair Trade movement) is recently being more promoted within the development sector (Mawdsley 2017: 112). The Aid for Trade (AfT) initiative, similarly to aid ‘radicals‘, asserts that trade should be prioritized in the strategies of developing countries and treated as a tool for economic growth and poverty reduction (Hynes and Lammersen 2017: 492). Aid for trade initiatives are based on the assumption that openness to trade is a key ingredient for economic success and raising living standards (Hynes and Lammersen 2017: 488-492). Internal trade barriers should be removed in order to create ‘effective market access‘ (Stiglitz and Charlton 2006: 5) with the objective to increase volume and value-added of exports, diversify export products and export markets and attracting foreign investments to generate jobs and exports (Stiglitz
10
and Charlton 2006: 6). Stiglitz and Charlton (2006: 6) argue that facilitating improvement of the business environment for exporters in order to develop the private sector is the primary instrument to achieve the AfT vision. Thus the private sector holds a central role in the AfT-initiative. The need to support aid-for-trade is specifically mentioned in the UN SDG 8, which aims to “promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all” (UN 2015). The private sector as main trading agent plays an important role in this concept.
However, AfT-programs often do not reach “the poorest of the poor” and often inadequately include vulnerable groups (Bitzer et al. 2017: 26). “Trade policy on its own is not enough to ensure progress toward achieving the SDGs” (Helble and Shepherd 2017: 533). Advocates of trade as a development tool acknowledge that “many factors come into play in mediating the relationship between trade and sustainable development” (Helble and Shepherd 2017: 530). Hence, it is important to embed trade policies that are aiming to support broader development objectives within a wide range of policy areas (e.g. tax policy, labor and environmental regulations) (Helble and Shepherd 2017: 530-534) and to increase the quality of institutions (Rodrik et al. 2004, cited in Rodríguez-Pose 2013: 1037). However, there is no coordination between multilateral agencies involved in capacity building and the World Trade Organization (WTO) (Suwa-Eisenmann and Verdier 2007: 499), which could ensure that benefits of trade can be translated into development for all. Suwa-Eisenmann and Verdier (2007: 503) furthermore point toward the risk that even if emerging developing countries such as those in East and South Asia, and China, are benefiting from investment and trade flows, less-developed economies (in sub-Saharan Africa) might be left out. In addition, there is also more general criticism toward the neoliberal market-based approach of trade-related assistance. Gabriel Goyette (2016) and Brown (2016) examine the Canadian foreign aid and point toward the problematic of using aid as an instrument for other foreign policy purposes (such as trade) due to its commercial self-interest.
2.1.3 Green economy
Different global crises (climate, biodiversity, fuel, water, financial) (UNEP 2011: vi) and increasing pressure on the planet’s resources (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 209) led to the development of a green approach to economy (green economy). The green economy thus seeks a way to protect the environment, eradicate global poverty and correct social disparities while stimulating global economic recovers (Borel-Saladin and
11
Turok 2013: 209f). Hence, it is asserted that a green economy addresses each pillar of sustainable development (economic, social and environment) (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 210). However, it is important to stress that the green economy is not substituting sustainable development, but is rather a subset of it (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 211; UNEP 2011: 2). As stated by the green economy paradigm, considering that the economy operates within social relationships and the whole of society is embedded within the environment, it is important how growth is obtained (UNEP 2011: 2). A green economy requires a type of economy without trade-offs between material wealth and environment (UNEP 2011: vi). Thus, economic growth in a green economy should improve the human-well-being and social equity whilst reducing damaging the planet (UNEP 2011: 1). The idea is to achieve sustainable development through mainstream, market-driven mechanisms, technology and government regulation (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 216). In order to achieve this, UNEP (2011) argues for a shift of public and private investments, which “reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services” (UNEP 2011: 2). Governments play a crucial role in fostering an environment, which favors greener economic decisions from the private sector and the public (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 213; UNEP 2011: 1-2). Public policies and market incentives should be reorganized so that the private sector is being held accountable for their social and environmental externalities (UNEP 2011: 1-2). Environment and the protection thereof has also been thematized by international business literature since the early 1970s, and research has more specifically focused on pollution from production, resource extraction, and product use (Kolk 2016: 26).
However, some authors questioned whether the current economic system, using the same mechanisms which caused environmental degradation and social inequality, can correct these problems now (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 215-216). Furthermore, concerns have emerged regarding the focus on continuous economic growth, arguments of limits of the economic growth are not considered (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 216). Opponents of the green economy and green growth paradigms declare that there needs to be a reduction (or even halt) of economic growth, if a significant reduction in carbon dioxide emissions should be achieved (Scott Cato 2012; Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 216). Moreover, critics argue that environmental and economic issues tend to be favored at the expense of social issues, which tend to be
12
marginalized in green economic analysis (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 216f). Furthermore, in some views the green economy represents ‘green washing,‘ as the adoption of green production methods and policies are limited while continuing with the ‘business as usual‘ economy (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 217). Therefore, some consider green economy to be an ‘add-on‘ to the current economic system, rather than a fundamental transformation of it (Borel-Saladin and Turok 2013: 217).
2.1.4 Sustainable development
Sustainable development is a widely used phrase and idea, and generally an alternate paradigm to a classic growth model with many different meanings behind this term (Banerjee 2008: 64f). The sustainable development approach is based on an economic, a social and an environmental pillar and aims to optimize all three aspects for present and future generations. The sustainability of development is strong when there are no trade-offs between the economic, social and environmental aspects of development (Gupta and Vegelin 2016: 434). On the one side, it is asserted that sustainable development can challenge the increased integration of the world in a capitalist economy dominated by multinational corporations. On the other side, the term sustainability can be used so loosely, that it allows businesses (and governments) to claim to be sustainable, without fundamentally challenge the present neo-liberal system (Hopwood et al. 2005: 40). Through the adaption of the SDGs in September 2015, sustainable development moved into the limelight of development and gave this loose conceptual construct a clearer focus, despite the fact that the SDGs are not legally binding. The SDGs are based on their predecessors, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which aimed to reduce poverty by 50% and to enhance global development. At the end of September 2015, 193 states passed the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (‘Agenda 2030‘), which thematizes the fight against poverty, sustainable growth and environmental protection. Within the Agenda 2030 the private sector, governments and civil society actors are called upon to pursue a more sustainable path in the future through the SDGs (UN 2015). The ‘Agenda 2030‘ is based on a balanced integration of the three dimensions of sustainability - economic, social and environmental - thus taking a holistic approach to development. Central to the 17 SDGs and 169 targets are their integration, indivisibility, and universal application (UN 2015). In comparison to the MDGs, the SDGs “give prominence to (i) environmental sustainability, (ii) economic development, with a focus on inclusive growth, (iii) proposed universal application to all
13
countries and (iv) an increasing concern with non-material aspects of development” (Scheyvens et al. 2016: 373). Economic growth is still seen as a key element for development, but it is emphasized that the growth should be inclusive (UN 2014). The private sector is thereby seen as an ideal collaborator to achieve inclusive economic growth (UN 2014). The private sector has been part of the sustainable development discussion since the publication of the Brundtland Report in 1987 (Scheyvens et al. 2016: 372) and also the SDGs assign an important role to the private sector in order to achieve the SDGs until 2030. The interest of the private sector in the process of development and implementing the SDGs increased sharply in the last years (Hopkins 2016: 7). The private sector was also closely involved in the formulation of the SDGs, making it evident that it has become an important player in the development field (Scheyvens et al. 2016: 374). Many assert the private sector’s particular strengths in contributing to the achievement of the SDGs, including innovation, responsiveness, efficiency and provision of specific skills and resources (Scheyvens et al. 2016: 372; see also Porter and Kramer 2011; Lucci 2012). Kumi et al. (2014: 548) argue that the “thinking and paradigm under which the realization of these goals [SDGs] will be pursued are as important as the goals themselves”.
However, critics point toward the fact that much of the writing on sustainable development has been strongly influenced by neoliberal thinking (Kumi et al. 2014; Gupta and Vegelin 2015). Kumi et al. (2014: 544) stress the contradiction therein, as neoliberalism undermines the ability of developing countries to achieve sustainable development, and the increasing level of poverty and inequality (fostered by neoliberalism) negatively affects sustainable development (Kumi et al. 2014: 544). Furthermore, they emphasize that the three-pillar approach of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental) is a too simplistic conception of the complex inter-relationships between components of sustainable development and neoliberalism (Kumi et al. 2014: 544). There is much academic literature concerned with critique and challenges, which come with the positioning of the private sector as a development agent in the era of sustainable development (Agarwal et al. 2017; Scheyvens et al. 2016; Kumi et al. 2014; Chakravorti 2017).
14
2.2 Corporate discourses
Unsustainable patterns of economic and industrial development are the causes of many of today’s environment and social issues. Companies formulate and implement new diversified corporate sustainability approaches due to regulations, market factors and the aim of building a competitive advantage (Formentini and Taticchi 2014: 1920; Engert et al. 2014: 2834; Banerjee 2008: 52). Corporate sustainability can be defined as “meeting the needs of a firms’ direct and indirect stakeholders (such as shareholders, employees, clients, pressure groups, communities etc.), without compromising its ability to meet the needs of future stakeholders as well” (Dyllick and Hockers 2002: 131). According to Baumgartner (2014) the integration of sustainability aspects on three different management levels (normative, strategic, operational) is important in order to be efficient. On the normative level the company’s vision and mission is the focus, the development of an effective corporate sustainability is part of the strategic level, and on the operational level, the emphasis lies on the implementation of the sustainability strategy (Baumgartner 2014; Engert et al. 2014).
Companies integrate sustainability into their business in different ways. The most common approaches are corporate social responsibility (CSR), creating shared value (CSV), sustainable supply chain management (SSCM), and corporate sustainability performance (CSP).
15
Table 2.2 Corporate discourses about the private sector and development
Approach Characteristics References
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) Besides economic and legal obligations, companies also have ethical and discretionary (philanthropic) responsibilities. Carroll 1991, Banerjee 2008, Kolk 2016, Porter and Kramer 2011 Creating shared value (CSV) Interdependence of competitiveness of company and well-being of community; all value chain participants benefit by expanding the total pool of economic and social value. Porter and Kramer 2011 Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) Focus on the sustainability of the value chain and improvement of the long-term economic, social and environmental performance of the organization and its value chains. Formentini and Taticchi 2014, Wolf 2014 Corporate sustainability performance (CSP) Summary of all strategies, practices and tactics implemented by a company with the aim being to improve its relationships with its social and natural environment Wolf 2014, Higgins and Coffey 2016 2.2.1 Corporate social responsibility
The early corporate social responsibility (CSR) discourse is based on the notion that “corporations do not only have economic and legal obligations, but ethical and discretionary (philanthropic) responsibilities as well” (Carroll 1991: 40). Central to this idea is that all four obligations (economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic) have to be addressed so that CSR is accepted as legitimate, whereas the economic one was seen as the most important one (Carroll 1991: 40). This discourse is based on assumptions of the role of corporations in society. Banerjee (2008) identifies three assumptions behind the corporate social responsibility discourse, these are: “corporations should think beyond making money and pay attention to social and environmental issues; corporations should behave in an ethical manner and demonstrate the highest level of integrity and transparency in all their operations; corporations should be involved with the community they operate in terms of enhancing social welfare and providing community support through philanthropy or other means” (Banerjee 2008: 62).
However, the term CSR is very broad and there is no common consensus on what exactly it entails (Kolk 2016: 24). Critics raise the concern that “the current concepts and definitions are therefore often biased toward specific interests” (Marrewijk 2003: 96) and that CSR is just an attempt to legitimize companies’ actions (Brown 2016). Thus,
16 CSR is often criticized as reactive and an add-on to the core business (Porter and Kramer 2011) and as a service strategy, designed to bring companies a competitive advantage (Banerjee 2008: 61; Porter and Kramer 2011: 76). 2.2.2 Creating shared value
Porter and Kramer (2011) are the main representatives of the creating shared value (CSV) approach, with which they respond directly to the corporate social responsibility approach. They state that shared value is “a new way to achieve economic success” (Porter and Kramer 2011: 64). At the center of the CSV approach stands the notion that the competitiveness of a company and the well-being of the communities around the company are dependent on each other and through „expanding the total pool of economic and social value“ (Porter and Kramer 2011: 65) all the participants of a value chain can profit. Porter and Kramer (2011: 77) emphasize that the shared value approach is not a philanthropy approach (for which they criticize the CSR-approach), but the company acts in self-interest as the idea is to create economic value by creating societal value.
Critics of Porter and Kramer’s shared value approach argue that they base their arguments on an “overly narrow economic perspective” (Beschorner 2013: 108). Beschorner (2013: 110) reasons, based on Porter and Kramer’s argument (2011) that creating business value goes hand-in-hand with creating social value, the CSV approach is a reformulation of a classical strategic stakeholder approach, as the company needs to mainly gain the legitimacy in the eyes of its stakeholders. This in turn would make the company prioritize the most powerful stakeholders, which is not compatible with ethical standards. 2.2.3 Sustainable supply chain management
Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) is a corporate sustainability approach, which focuses specifically on sustainability in the value chain (Formentini and Taticchi 2014: 1920). Wolf (2014: 318) defines SSCM as a “strategic and transparent integration and achievement of an organization’s social, environmental and economic objectives in the systemic coordination of key interorganizational business process for improving the long-term economic, social and environmental performance of the individual organization and its supply chains.” The central view is that stakeholder pressure is the main driver for companies to implement SSCM, thus SSCM is a reactive corporate
17
sustainability approach (Wolf 2014: 318). More recently, another strand of literature argued that a company benefits from the implementation of SSCM also in other ways than purely stakeholder pressures, and stresses the importance of proactive SSCM, which is positively related to the perception of a company (Wolf 2014; see also Lucci 2012: 7).
2.2.4 Corporate sustainable performance
The term corporate sustainability performance summarizes all strategies, practices and tactics implemented by a company with the aim of improving its relationships with the social and natural environment (Wolf 2014: 318). Sustainability reporting serves companies as a tool to demonstrate their sustainability performance (social and environmental) (Higgins and Coffey 2016: 19). Most companies that draft sustainability reports do so because they are following a sustainability or a value-based strategy (Higgins and Coffey 2016: 18). In the last 20 years, reporting social and environmental performance has become a tactic to “integrate economic, social and environmental issues into strategy and operations” (Higgins and Coffey 2016: 19). Some argue that changes within the company toward its sustainability commitment are being introduced by reporting of sustainability performance of a company (Higgins and Coffey 2016: 26). The managers’ awareness and consciousness toward social and environmental impacts of the company is being raised, which might lead to significant changes and reconsideration of “how social and environmental activities were embedded in to each organization” (Higgins and Coffey 2016: 19). However, other studies show that these changes did not occur in other companies (Higgins and Coffey 2016: 19).
2.3 A critical perspective: private sector and sustainable development Despite the private sector’s potential in promoting sustainable development, literature has also expressed concerns regarding the role of the private sector as a development actor. Engagement of the private sector in achieving the SDGs occurs within the neoliberal agenda, and critics have raised concerns about the domination of neoliberalism in the development arena (Kumi et al. 2014: 542; Haque 1999). Some scholars argue that neoliberalism undermines the ability of developing countries to achieve sustainable development, as the interest of the market is promoted at the expense of social and environment development (Kumi et al. 2014: 544; Haque 1999). Furthermore, critics reason that through the engagement of the private sector in
18
sustainable development, the needed systematic change, which in their view is needed for sustainable development is not occurring (Agarwal et al. 2017; Scheyvens et al. 2016).
Also, critics state that businesses have a narrow approach to sustainable development, which is business centered and their engagement is “influenced by a managerialist, capitalist and populist logic” (Blowfield and Dolan 2014: 35). This limits the reach and depth of development (Agarwal et al. 2017; Scheyvens et al. 2016; Kourula et al. 2017; Barkemeyer et al. 2014). The sustainable development perspective needs actively pursue the question what the private sector can do to achieve the SDGs and to dominate the private sectors engagement and not vice versa (Agarwal et al. 2017; Scheyvens et al. 2016; Kourula et al. 2017). Additionally, Blowfield and Dolan (2014: 35) argue, “people are no longer recipients but customer and agents” whose “development worthiness are being constructed around what is material, instrumental and comprehensible to business.” Moreover, it is often argued that the short-term business-goals cannot be aligned with the long-term development comprehensible to business.” Moreover, it is often argued that the short-term business-goals (Agarwal et al. 2017; Scheyvens et al. 2016; Chakravorti 2017, Hopkins 2016). Furthermore, the company’s development engagement is often not framed by the ones affected by it (developing countries), but by the headquarters of multinational companies in Western countries (Kourula et al. 2017; Kumi et al. 2014).
2.4 Reconstructing corporate sustainability strategies
The corporate sustainability strategies by Cargill and Barry Callebaut studied in this thesis were analyzed using the policy reconstruction methodology developed by Runhaar et al. (2006). This methodology aims to reconstruct the theory behind a policy document, defined as “the total of causal and other assumptions underlying a policy (Hoogerwerf 1990: 285, cited in Runhaar et al. 2006: 38). This method allows examining the corporate sustainability strategy of each company regarding its content, drivers and implementation. This approach aims to elucidate the logic and reasoning behind a policy program by examining three relationships:
19 1. Causal relations: between causes and effects (‘how they see‘3) What do they see as a problem and what causes this? 2. Normative relations: underlying norms and principles (‘how they like to see‘) How would they like to see it / what is the goal? 3. Final relations: between objectives and means (‘how they see it happen‘) This method is useful especially within the broad concept of sustainable development, as it is taking into account that different actors might perceive a given problem differently (Runhaar et al. 2006: 35). Through the policy reconstruction methodology, the quality as well as the effectiveness of a program can be examined, while it facilitates the understanding of a complex matter (Runhaar et al. 2006: 40). On the other side however, the methodology “overestimates the ‘rational‘ characteristics of policy-making and underestimates aspects of politics, social interaction and conflicting rationalities and interests” (Runhaar et al. 2006: 40). The three sustainability dimensions are explored within each relation in order to demonstrate their relation to each other. 2.5 Conceptual scheme
The main concepts used in this research are:
- Sustainable development: Sustainable development is conceptualized with the three sustainability pillars: environmental sustainability, economic feasibility, and social responsibility. Each dimension has three variables: the instruments, the perception of its effectiveness and their relation to the SDGs.
- Corporate strategy: The corporate (social or sustainability) strategies will be analyzed from three dimensions, in accordance with Runhaar et al.’s policy reconstruction method: the causal relations (‘how they see‘), the normative relations (‘how they like to see‘), and the final relations (‘how they see it happen‘).
These concepts will be analyzed against a general discursive framework of development discourses that explicitly emphasize the important role of the private sector in development. 3 The ‘translation’ into ‘How they see’ etc. is taken from a presentation at the GID meeting by Mirjam A.F. Ros-Tonen and Martha Ataa-Asantewaa on 24 October 2017.
20
Figure 2.1: Conceptual Scheme (Graphic by Christine Moncoquet and Annet Röst)
Key: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility; CSV = Creating Shared Value; SSCM = sustainable supply chain
management; CSP = corporate sustainable performance; SDGs = Sustainable Development Goals.
The international development discourses influence how the private sector designs its corporate strategies. The private sector uses the development discourses to frame its strategies − corporate social responsibility (CSR), creating shared value (CSV), sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) or corporate sustainable performance (CSP). A corporate strategy relates to one or more dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social, and environmental), and may or may not be linked to the SDGs.
The development discourses not only shape corporate strategies, but also the implementation of the SDGs. The private sector was also heavily involved in the process of creating the SDGs, and therefore influenced these. Feedback loops exist between the SDGs and the corporate strategies, whereas corporate discourses influence the framing of the role of private sector in development discourses.
21
3 Methodology
This chapter presents the methodology employed for this study. It first presents the research design (Section 3.1), which is followed by the operationalization (3.2), the units of analysis and observation (3.3), the description of the study area (3.4), data collection methods (3.5), sampling methods (3.6) and a description of how the data was processed and analyzed (3.7). Furthermore, this chapter includes reflections on the validity and reliability of the research (3.8), limitations of the research (3.9), research ethics (3.10) and my positionality (3.11).
3.1 Research design
The research is interested in the content of corporate strategies of cocoa/chocolate companies in Ghana’s cocoa sector, and is exploratory in nature. The purpose of the research is to gain more insight into the role of cocoa-buying companies in Ghana in promoting sustainable development; how the companies integrate the three dimensions of sustainable development in their corporate sustainability strategies; and how the companies operationalize their corporate sustainability strategy in practice. The research is conducted on the basis of purposive sampling (typical case sampling), on the basis of which two cocoa/chocolate companies (Cargill and Barry Callebaut) are analyzed. The two multinational companies Cargill and Barry Callebaut are among the biggest cocoa-processing companies in Ghana (Laven 2010: 59) and both made publicly known that they are very ambitious toward contributing to achieve the SDGs (McCoy 2017; Cargill 2017a).
In order to answer my research questions, a two-step approach method was used to triangulate outcomes, which enhances reliability. The first step (corporate sustainability strategy analysis) fed into the second part of the research, which employed semi-structured interviews, group discussions4, and (structured) obser-vation5 for data collection.
4 The group discussions were with cocoa farmers delivering to the studied companies and were in a form
of an interview in plenum with 10-30 cocoa farmers.
5 The plan was to do structured observations of the company’s sustainability projects and engagement
according to their sustainability strategy, but as there were not yet many projects in place, I observed the company’s operational area and relationship with the farmers.
22
In the first step, the key corporate sustainability strategies of the two selected companies were analyzed using the policy reconstruction method (Runhaar et al. 2006) (see Section 2.5 above for details).
The second stage examined how the two companies implement their corporate sustainability strategies in practice, as well as how cocoa farmers and other actors perceive the companies’ sustainability practices. The research methods for this stage were semi-structured interviews, group discussions and observations in the operational area of the companies and their interactions with farmers. In the analysis I explore how the corporate sustainability strategies relate to the SDGs.
3.2 Operationalization
The corporate sustainability strategies of the two case studies companies were analyzed from three dimensions, in accordance with Runhaar et al.’s policy reconstruction method: the causal relations (what problems and causes thereof does the company see), the normative relations (what norms are underlying the company’s strategy?), and the final relations (what instruments does the company intend to use to implement its strategy?).
Sustainable development is operationalized according to the three sustainability pillars: environmental sustainability, economic feasibility, and social responsibility. Each dimension has three variables: the instruments that are used in practice to implement to strategies; the perceptions of cocoa farmers, governments officials, and experts in the field regarding the effectiveness of the corporate sustainability strategy and of achieving long-term objectives (see Engert et al. 2014); and the relation of the company’s sustainability activities to the SDGs. Due to the indivisible nature of the SDGs they do not easily fit a single dimension and many overlaps therefore exist. Table 3.1 aligns the three dimensions of sustainable development with specific SDGs.
23
Table 3.1 Operationalization table
Concept Dimension Variable Indicators Source/Method
Corporate Sustainability (as framed in their strategies) Causal
relations Problems How does the company see the problems? Corporate Sustainability Strategy Analysis Causes How does the company see the causes of these problems? Normative
relations Underlying norms What norms are underlying the company's corporate sustainability strategy? Corporate Sustainability Strategy Analysis Final relations Means (to implement strategy) How does the company envisage implementing its corporate sustainability strategy? Corporate Sustainability Strategy Analysis [Contribution to] Sustainable Development
Economic Instruments How is the economic dimension of sustainable development implemented in practice? Key respondent interviews; observation of the companies and their interaction with farmers Perceptions Perceptions of effectiveness of the corporate sustainability strategy and of achieving long-term objectives among actors within and beyond the value chain Sustainability reports; Interviews with cocoa farmers delivering to the case study companies and experts in the field Relation to SDGs How does the company contribute to SDGs related to the economic dimension (SDG 1 no poverty; SDG 2 zero hunger; SDG 8 decent work and economic growth; SDG 9 industry, innovation, infrastructure; SDG 12 responsible production and consumption; SDG 17 partnerships) Key respondent interviews; observation of the companies and their interaction with farmers; group discussion with cocoa farmers
Social Instruments How is the social
dimension of sustainable development implemented in practice? Key respondent interviews; observation of the companies and their interaction with farmers Perceptions Perceptions of effectiveness of the corporate sustainability Interviews with cocoa farmers delivering to the case study
24 strategy and of achieving long-term objectives among actors within and beyond the value chain companies and experts in the field Relation to SDGs How does the company contribute to SDGs related to the social dimension (SDG 1 no poverty; SDG 2 zero hunger; SDG 3 good health and well-being; SDG 4 quality education; SDG 5 gender equality; SDG 10 reduced inequalities; SDG 16 peace, justice and strong institutions; SDG 17 partnerships) Key respondent interviews; observation of the companies and their interaction with farmers; group discussion with cocoa farmers
Environmental Instruments How is the environmental dimension of sustainable development implemented in practice? Key respondent interviews; observation of the companies and their interaction with farmers Perceptions Perceptions of effectiveness of the corporate sustainability strategy and of achieving long-term objectives among actors within and beyond the value chain Interviews with cocoa farmers delivering to the case study companies and experts in the field Relation to SDGs How does the company contribute to the SDGs related to the environmental dimension? (SDG 6 clean water and sanitation; SDG 7 affordable and clean energy; SDG 11 sustainably cities and communities; SDG 12 responsible production and consumption; SDG 13 climate action; SDG 14 life below water; SDG 15 life on land; SDG 17 partnerships) Key respondent interviews; observation of the companies and their interaction with farmers; group discussion with cocoa farmers
Key: SDG = Sustainable Development Goal
25
3.3 Units of analysis and observation
The main units of analysis are the corporate sustainability strategies of Cargill and Barry Callebaut, as captured in their vision documents and implemented on the ground. The key document for Cargill’s corporate sustainability strategy analysis was the “Committed to more. The 2016/2017 Cargill Cocoa Promise Global Summary Report” (Cargill 2016). The central document to analyze Barry Callebaut’s corporate sustainability strategy was the “Forever Chocolate. Our Plan to Make Sustainable Chocolate the Norm” (Barry Callebaut 2016). Key actors of the company’s sustainability department, company officials in Ghana and other value chain actors who deal with the two companies (suppliers, purchasing clerks, lead farmers), and key partners complement the analysis of the corporate sustainability strategies of the two companies. Observations of the company and its interaction with the cocoa farmers, as well as group discussions and semi-structured interviews with the cocoa farmers who deliver to the two companies, give an idea of the implementation of the sustainability strategies on the ground. The group discussions and the semi-structured interviews with the cocoa farmers further give impetus on how the company’s interventions are perceived by the cocoa farmer communities.
3.4 Study area
Fieldwork for this study was partly carried out in Kumasi and Accra, where the two selected companies and key partners are based, and partly in farmer’s communities from where the companies source their cocoa (Konongo in the Ashanti Region and Bibiani District in the Western Region), as well as in Amsterdam, where the Cargill Cocoa and Chocolate Sustainability Team is centered. The study area is a hub of cocoa production in Ghana and part of the WOTRO-financed Inclusive Value Chain Collaboration project coordinated by Dr. Mirjam Ros-Tonen of the University of Amsterdam.6
3.5 Data collection methods
A qualitative research methodology was chosen in order to answer the research questions. Semi-structured interviews were held with key respondents of the headquarters’ sustainability department, company officials in Ghana, other value chain
26
actors who deal with the two companies (purchasing clerks, lead farmers), cocoa farmers, key sustainability partners of the companies, as well as experts of cocoa sustainability in Ghana. Through semi-structured interviews, I received an insight into the interviewees’ point of view concerning the instruments used to implement the companies’ corporate strategy, the role the companies seek to play in implementing the SDGs; as well as how they implement their corporate sustainability strategy in practice. Whenever the interview participants agreed and it was feasible (due to noise), the interviews were recorded and transcribed. Alternatively, notes were taken. The transcription and the notes were coded according to topic.
The observations occurred during my visits to the company officials and visits to farmer communities, from where the two companies are sourcing. These observations were also coded. The topic list for the interviews was partially based on the outcomes of the corporate sustainability strategy analysis. It asked about the motivation behind the sustainability engagement (e.g. self-interest in future cocoa supply, philanthropic, stakeholders’ pressure), what they see as a main problem within the cocoa sector and how they identified it, what instruments they use to respond to the challenges, what changes they seek, and what changes they hope for.
Group discussions and semi-structured interviews were organized with cocoa farmers who deliver cocoa to the above-mentioned companies. Through these, the cocoa farmers’ perception of the company’s social, environmental and economic engagement and the changes in the company’s commitment with the cocoa farmers as result of adopting the SDGs could be explored. Furthermore, some interviews were held with cocoa farmers from communities7 where the two studied companies operate, but who do not deliver to them. These interviews completed the perception that cocoa farmers have of the two companies.
Studying these themes allowed elaborating, as well as comparing and contrasting, the different agendas and priorities of actors involved in the value chain of cocoa, as well as to compare and contrast their views. The triangulation of sources and methods increases the validity and reliability of the data.
7 ‘Communities‘ is used in Ghana to mean ‘villages‘. This is not meant to suggest that these villages are
