Sustainability in the cocoa sector in Ghana

Sustainability in the cocoa sector

in Ghana

P. Hernandez, K. Stants & M. Vermeulen

30 May 2018

---Abstract

This paper answers the following question: how sustainable is cocoa production in Ghana? To answer this question an interdisciplinary research has been done. The following research methods have been used: a literature review, a participant observation and an interview with several key experts. One key element in this paper has been the doughnut of economics (Raworth, 2012). This doughnut has a planetary boundary for several concepts concerning ecosystem usage and pollution and a social foundation that visualizes the needs of humanity in the present. In between these boundaries is a safe and just space for humanity to live in. When one of these or both of these boundaries are exceeded or are not met the situation can be called unsustainable. The research has led to the conclusion that the food security, education and income needs of Ghanaian farmers are not met. The production is also unsustainable because cocoa production causes deforestation, loss of biodiversity, excess of nitrogen and phosphorus, chemical pollution and a reduction of soil quality. Thus the social foundation is not met and the planetary boundaries exceeded. These factors have been found to be interconnected as farmers want to acquire more farmland & higher yields due to the unmet social foundation exacerbating the pressures already faced by the ecosystem.

---Table of content

Chapter 2: Fertilizer and pesticide input ​9

Conclusion _​11

Acknowledgements 12

Introduction

The consumption of cocoa has increased rapidly during the last decades and is expected to keep increasing in the near future (Wessel & Quist-Wessel, 2015). Ghana is one of the greatest producers of cocoa worldwide, together with Côte d'Ivoire, Nigeria and Cameroon it produces almost 70 percent of the total cocoa production worldwide. In addition, cocoa cultivation is a major source of income for Ghana and therefore of considerable importance for the growth of the Ghanaian economy. Although the production of cocoa in Ghana has increased from 300,000 tons in 1995 to 900,000 tons in 2014, this increase might not be enough to meet the future global demand (Wessel & Quist-Wessel, 2015). Moreover, recent research shows that this increase in production is owed to new cultivation methods (Ibid.). However, a number of authors question the sustainability of these methods. According to Griggs et al. (2013), they do not coincide with the continuing nature necessary to be considered sustainable. In addition, Asare (2006) argues that new methods are a major cause of biodiversity loss and other environmental problems as poverty drive the mentality that the need for high yields on the short-term outweighs the need for sustainability. However, in order for the cocoa production to maintain its influence on the growth of the Ghanaian economy, it is of considerable importance to examine how to create a sustainable cocoa production in Ghana.

Thus, the current sustainability of the cocoa sector in Ghana and the reasons why the cocoa sector might not be sustainable must be examined. Thus, this is the main goal of this research. Therefore, the research question in this paper is: why is cocoa production in Ghana not sustainable? The different aspects of the cocoa sector are researched by means of an interdisciplinary approach in order to accurately analyse the sustainability of the current cocoa production in Ghana. Interdisciplinary research is often obstructed by the complexity that befalls the topic when different disciplines examine it and attempt to find common ground on which to evaluate it, while it is these complex problems that require interdisciplinary research to construe them in the first place (Van den Besselaar & Heimeriks, 2001). When many different factors and many different stakeholders play their part in a problematic system, it cannot be solved solely by looking at one segment of the full problem. The cocoa sector in Ghana might be such a system due to the many factors influencing the system and many stakeholders with different gains who play a part. The complexity is illustrated as followed.

The increased demand for cocoa (Wessel & Quist-Wessel, 2015) might seems positive for cocoa farmers. However, the question remains whether farmers profit from the latter as farmers often live in poverty (Laven, 2016). When living in poverty, food security may become a major issue and thus poverty might be a driver for farmers to increase their production. This often leads to issues such as child labor since families unable to call upon this extra labor, are unable to provide for themselves (Vignery & Serram, 2016). Without proper education, the individual growth of these minors is restricted. Moreover, when driven by poverty, the need for long-term farming methods might seem less important than the short-term need to secure yourself of primary necessities of life. Therefore, farming methods were adopted that present quick and large yields, but do so for a short period of time before completely depleting the soil of all nutrients. When the production exceeds the carrying capacity of the land on which they are farming, ecological impacts limit them even further.

Fertilizers and pesticides are used in large amounts which in the long run impacts the environment. New farming land must then be found, resulting in deforestation, on which the same methods are used until complete soil depletion presents itself again (Aneani et al, 2017). In short, farmers seem to be caught in a vicious circle in which they try to provide for themselves, while poverty increases, deforestation increases and several environmental impacts form a constricting pressure on cocoa production (Laven, 2016).

What becomes clear from this description is that the system is complex, it needs to be analysed and illustrated properly, meaning that different angles, disciplines, and the interconnectedness between these need to be taken into account, in order to gain an overview and draw a conclusion of the sustainability in the cocoa sector in Ghana.

To do this, the ‘doughnut of economics’, introduced by Kate Raworth (2017) (see figure 1) is used. It provides a useful platform for this interdisciplinary research since it focuses on both social and environmental aspects. The doughnut of economics is explained in the Theoretical Framework section. In this case, the doughnut is applied to the cocoa sector in Ghana; thus, only relevant aspects of it are examined in this research. The chosen segments are clarified later on in the theoretical framework section.

Initially, the research discusses how deforestation exacerbated due to poverty and farming methods and looks into the effect on biodiversity. In this part, concepts from the social foundation and the ecological ceiling meet and a clear biological explanation is given on how poverty affects deforestation and how deforestation then leads to biodiversity loss. Secondly, the way the policy surrounding fertilizer and pesticide input influences the sustainability of cocoa production is looked into. Here a concept of the social foundation meets several other concepts of the ecological ceiling, namely ‘nitrogen and phosphorus loading’, ‘diversity loss’ and ‘soil quality’. Finally, a conclusion is drawn about the overall sustainability of the cocoa sector in Ghana.

Theoretical Framework

The aim of this paper is to examine the sustainability of the cocoa industry in Ghana. While many different interpretations and definitions of sustainability exist, this paper analyzes it through the planetary boundaries frame as provided by Rockstrom et al, (2009) that was elaborated on by Raworth, (2012). Human activities increasingly influence the Earth’s climate (International Panel on Climate Change (IPPC, 2007a). According to Rockstrom et al. (2009), the Earth has entered a new era, named the Anthropocene, where humans are the main driver of change to the Earth. The human population has increased exponentially, and the increasing pressures caused by human activity have pushed societies towards inequality and ecosystems towards collapse. The realization that the destabilization of important biological systems and irreversible environmental changes would be deleterious or even catastrophic for human well-being. According to Stern (2007), This dilemma is profound because the predominant paradigm of social and economic development remains largely oblivious to the risk of human-induced environmental disasters at continental to planetary scales. For this reason, the concept of the doughnut in figure 1 was presented as a novel concept for estimating a safe operating space for humanity with respect to the functioning of the Earth System (Leach, Raworth & Rockström, 2013; Raworth, 2017).

The ecological ceiling in the doughnut of economics (see figure 1) consists of nine planetary boundaries, as set out by Rockstrom et al (2009), beyond which lie unacceptable environmental degradation and potential tipping points in Earth systems. The twelve dimensions of the social foundation are derived from internationally agreed minimum social standards, as identified by the world’s governments in the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015. Between social and planetary boundaries lies an environmentally safe and socially just space in which humanity can thrive. The hole at the Doughnut’s center reveals the proportion of people worldwide falling short on life’s essentials, such as food, water, healthcare and political freedom of expression – and a big part of humanity’s challenge is to get everyone out of that hole. At the same time, however, we cannot afford to be overshooting the Doughnut’s outer crust if we are to safeguard Earth’s life-giving systems, such as a stable climate, healthy oceans and a protective ozone layer, on which all our well being fundamentally depends. Getting into the Doughnut’s safe and just space between these social and planetary boundaries is humanity’s 21st century goal (Raworth, 2017).

Sustainability is then defined as “meeting the needs of the present while maintaining the earth’s systems in the future” (Griggs et al, 2013). In the diagram, this is seen as the safe and just space for humanity. A sustainable production is then defined as production in which there is no excessive exploitation of environmental resources and basic human needs are met. From the social point of view, poverty inhibits people to reach this just space for humanity. Poverty is a term that is difficult to define since it is a diverse and relatively vague concept. There is currently no international consensus on the definition of poverty (UNESCO, 2011). Often poverty is seen as making less than some kind of minimum wage in a certain time frame. Think of the extreme poverty line of 1,25 USD adjusted for PPP a day (UNESCO, 2011).

Another way to define poverty would be to look at it as a lack of material possessions or access to goods (UNESCO, 2011). An example would be that someone unable to obtain food or clean water or clothes could be considered poor, even if they had a fair income. Poverty is also a geographic concept. What constitutes poverty changes on the one defining poverty and it changes because of their experience in the spaces they have been exposed to or made aware of. As these spaces change the perception of poverty the definition of poverty depends on who is defining it (Chambers, 1995). While poverty itself is a rather abstract concept, some things are clearly part of poverty. According to the Multidimensional Poverty Index, some key indicators of poverty are: years of schooling, school attendance, sanitation, nutrition, water, energy, and child mortality (Alkire & Santos, 2014). Looking at all these indicators is outside of the scope of this paper, but because of the interdisciplinary focus of this paper, a definition is needed that touches upon both the social as the environmental foundations. Therefore, Raworth’s (2017) social foundation that forms the center of the diagram is used as the definition of poverty in this paper. Not meeting this foundation is thus considered to be poverty.

Environmental foundations, provided by Rockstrom et. al (2009) as the planetary boundaries are also segments of this paper. In the analysis section, it is examined what planetary boundaries are relevant for the cocoa sector in Ghana.

Methods

Interdisciplinary integration

As mentioned before, due to the complexity and interlinking socio-economic and environmental pressures interdisciplinary research has been necessary to gain a thorough understanding of the sustainability of cocoa production in Ghana (Dormon et al., 2004). To do this three papers from different disciplines have been written in a monodisciplinary manner on the sustainability of the Ghanaian cocoa sector. Afterwards, the three papers have been combined into one paper that gives an overview of the full problem and its complexity. These papers have been integrated into this final report by examining where the individual papers overlap in the doughnut of economics and where they influence each other. These overlapping and interlinking concepts and processes were then used to write a cohesive interdisciplinary paper and can be read about later in the paper. With the results from the individual papers the researchers also chose several key concepts that influence the sustainability of the cocoa sector and used these concepts to make their own (less pretty) schematic of the doughnut of economics concerning the topics analyzed in this paper which is provided below:

Research methods

Several different research methods have been used. The first one is a literature study of the scientific, governmental and private literature on the topic. The governmental documents are important because they give an overview of the policy set in place by the Ghanaian government but they also reveal the biases in the government policy (Bryman, 2012). Besides the governmental documents, documents from NGO’s or other actors will be analyzed in much the same way. However, with both documents, it is important to keep in mind that the documents cannot be seen as entirely objective accounts of the situation and that the researchers keep in mind that the documents must be viewed in the context of other data (Bryman, 2012).

Another method that has been used is a group interview with two cocoa experts. The original plan was to do a semi-structured interview with Anna Laven, an expert on inclusive development, gender, value chains and sustainable farming. However, this interview turned out to be more of an unstructured group interview because Anna Laven took along Bas Verhoeven to the meeting. Because of this, an adaption of the research methods proved necessary. To be able to have the room to inquire about relevant theories, concepts and ideas mentioned by Laven and Verhoeven. In the end, the interview could be best described as an unstructured group interview due to the interaction between participants and researchers, the group size and the time investment (Bryman, 2012).

The last research method used has been a participant observation of the Chocoa 2018 conference. Two scientists assumed the role of volunteers at the conference and made minutes for it. This was a good way to observe the situation and key stakeholders in the cocoa setting as it allowed the researcher to make notes about what people said while at the same time getting access to a conference that they would otherwise not have had. Participant observation allowed the researchers to see what different stakeholders in the cocoa sector had to say about the recent developments in the cocoa market and the sustainability of the sector (Bryman, 2012). As the hosting organization knew about our research on cocoa production in Ghana it cannot be said that the researchers practiced covert participant observation (Ibid.). In the end, the participant observation gave the researchers a good overview of what is going on in the broader cocoa sector and an idea of what to focus on in the Ghanaian case. This has contributed to the analysis that will now follow.

Analysis

Now that the methods are discussed, an analysis can be done by means of the gathered information.

Chapter 1: Deforestation

Recent agricultural techniques have been trying to keep up with the increase of cocoa demands and have adopted practices in which large patches of forest are cleared completely for the sake of creating farming lands (Montagnini,2018).

However, the increase in cocoa demands is not the only reason for the clearing of forest patches. In Ghana, there are almost 850,000 cocoa farmers (Laven et al., 2016). These cocoa farmers on average have a plot of land of 2.5 hectares, making cocoa farming in Ghana very small scale when compared to other kinds of agriculture worldwide. This is because cocoa farms are most profitable for farmers between 1.3 and 6 hectares (Vignery et al, 2016). Considering the size of the average farm and the average yearly production in Ghana, Ghanaian farmers should get about 1917 USD annually from their cocoa production on average (70 % of FOB * average yearly production in tons)(Laven et al, 2016). Note that this the income is without accounting for labor costs and other inputs. Real income is thus likely to be far lower. Interesting to note is that the cocoa price in Ghana is set by the government at the start of the year but due to high inflation in Ghana farmers get about 10% less real income for their crops due to inflation (Laven, 2016). When adjusting this to the number of people in an average Ghanaian household, farmer households live below the absolute poverty line of 1.25 USD PPP a day (1917 / 365 / 5 = 1,05 USD/day/person). Looking back at the doughnut of sustainability it can be said that the social foundation concerning income is not met.

Because of this farmers might try to obtain as high yields as possible, which in the shorter term might provide them with better living conditions due to a larger income. However, growth in yields is always limited by water - and nutrient availability, and when the soil gets completely exploited for the sake of high yields, these yields will be short-lived due to nutrient shortages (Sadava et al., 2009). Usually, when farming lands start to experience nutrient shortages, they remain fallow and cultivation moves to other patches of farmland until nutrient levels return to normal. However, the providing pressures for farmers make them deplete the nutrients level for the sake of high yields to such a high degree, that recuperation often takes much longer or is no longer a possibility because the carrying capacity of the soil has been overstepped too much. Consequently, farmers need to expand their farmlands and need to clear out patches of forest to do so (Ruf, 2011; Gockowski & Sonwa, 2011).

As labor is often too expensive for farmers to hire they often use their families to help on the farm when this proves to be necessary (Vignery & Serram, 2016). On average the children of Ghanaian farmers skip one school day per week to help on the farm (Ibid.). Children are also hired by other families to work on their farms to acquire some income for their family (Vignery & Serram, 2016). Besides cocoa food crops are generally the 2nd most important source of income for cocoa farmers (Schouten, 2016). These crops provide income and food in the months when cocoa is not sold and harvested (Ibid.) Research by Schouten has found that increased income due too UTZ-certification schemes does not lead

to decreased meal skipping by farmers. Thus, a better income does not necessarily lead to higher food security for farmer families. Thus, this social foundation in the doughnut of economics is also not always met. A system trap can also be seen here: Farmers want larger cocoa farms as they provide a larger income to work themselves out of poverty; subsequently, these farms require more labor which the farmers can’t afford, so the demand for child labor increases. This means that the social foundation concerning education is not met. Besides the fact that increasing the yields on the farms of the farmers will also increase nutrient shortages eventually leading to lower yields and a lower income, it will also hurt the soil quality on the farms of these farmers. Increasing the plot sizes of the cocoa farm might also decrease the food security of farmers as they might have less land available for food crops reducing their food security.

Environmental impacts and biodiversity

As farmers continue to experience the pressures named above they will want more farmland for food or cocoa crops to increase their incomes and decrease general poverty, causing soil depletion and deforestation. As a result, deforestation unintentionally accompanies the cocoa sector in Ghana, affecting the biodiversity of the Ghanaian forests. Deforestation causes habitat loss and habitat fragmentation, which are one of the leading causes of biodiversity loss in Ghana (Asare, et. al, 2014).

In other words, farmers living in poverty want to obtain as high yields as possible in order to provide for themselves and their families. In order to do so, farmers often overstep the carrying capacity of the soil on which they farm, leaving the soil depleted and unable to be used for cultivation. As a result, farmers must clear out patches of forest to create new farming land, fragmenting the habitat of many species as they go. This is one of the leading causes of biodiversity loss.

One of the major ways that habitat fragmentation - defined by Fahrig (2003) as the breaking apart of a continuous habitat into distinct pieces due to habitat destruction - affects biodiversity is by reducing the amount of suitable habitat available for organisms. As the remaining habitat patches are smaller, they tend to support smaller populations of species. Fluctuations in the environment such as climate change or fluctuations in resources, would usually remain unnoticed and corrected quickly when on a minor scale and in large populations. However, these same minor fluctuations can become catastrophic in small, isolated populations since smaller populations are at greater risk to extinction simply due to the small number of individuals (Gallagher et. al, 2015). For example, if 20 individuals die due to incompatibility with warmer weather in a population of n=600. The effects on the population scale are low. However, if the same number of deaths would occur in a population of 23 individuals, you have quickly reached a catastrophe for a population.

Also, small populations are at an increased risk of a variety of genetic consequences that influence their long-term survival. What happens is, when a population size decreases, so does the diversity, in other words; only a subset of the genetic diversity found in the previously continuous habitat is present in a fragmented habitat (Keller & Largiader, 2003). In a continuous habitat, there are certain mechanisms in place that act upon the maintenance of genetic diversity. These as adaptation and migration. When a habitat becomes fragmented, the gene pool becomes smaller and thus contains fewer alleles to adapt and maintain fitness in fluctuating environments. Usually, populations maintain genetic diversity through migration which forms the construct for gene flow. In

continuous habitats, migrating species have few barriers to establish themselves in the habitat of diversified populations. In fragmented habitats, however, the separation between two habitats disrupts migration, and therefore constricts gene flow and limits the capacity of populations to migrate to each other’s habitat and diversify their genetics (Yeaman & Whitlock, 2011).

With less migration, you end up with inbreeding. A population with high migration also has a higher level of heterozygosity because populations speciation has led to the mutation of different alleles. The offspring that come out of the breeding between these two populations that have undergone a certain degree in speciation to allow diversification, but not enough to create new species entirely, are often heterozygotes. Heterozygosity often increases the flexibility with which an individual can endure many environmental fluctuations and thus, are stronger competitors and therefore strengthen the overall fitness of a population. However, because habitat loss and habitat fragmentation lead to a decrease in migration and thus a decrease in gene flow, levels of homozygosity increases, which facilitates the expression of deleterious alleles that reduce the fitness of the population. This phenomenon is called inbreeding depression and it is one of the main factors causing populations to spiral down to extinction (Freeman & Herron, 2007).

Furthermore, modern agricultural practices are dominated by a monoculture. The reduced plant diversity in monocultures, as opposed to polycultures, negatively influence the resilience of the agricultural ecosystem because they lack the genetic diversity to recuperate from pests and diseases. To make up for this, higher inputs of pesticides are used by farmers, which in turn affect wildlife, pollinators and decomposing (micro)organisms and thus decrease biodiversity even more (Ruf & Schroth, 2004). Thus current farming methods in Ghana are unable to meet the social foundation and exceed the planetary boundaries at the same time. It is interesting to note that the inability to meet the social foundation also seems to place higher demands on the ecosystem increasing the intrusion on the planetary boundaries where they are often seen as a trade-off instead of a reinforcing feedback loop.

Chapter 2: Fertilizer and pesticide input

In the Ghanaian case pesticide usage in current farming methods is necessary to the Ghanaian farmers as it has been found that between 70 and 90 percent of the annual production of Ghanaian crops could be to lost to pests like the black pod disease if no steps were undertaken to control them (Acebo-Guerrero et al., 2012). To combat pests like the black pod disease the Ghanaian government started the cocoa disease and pest control programme (CODAPEC), which had a significant impact on increasing the cocoa production in Ghana (Kumi & Diamond, 2015). In this program, the Ghanaian government provides and applies pesticides to Ghanaian farmers and farms for free. This coupled with the price increases of cocoa during that period have resulted in higher household incomes for Ghanaian farmers, reducing the rate of absolute poverty among them (Cocoa Barometer, 2017). Overall the CODAPEC programme thus had a positive impact on the livelihoods of Ghanaian farmers (Kumi & Diamond, 2015). However, the program is not always as effective as it should be. One example is that the pesticides necessary to combat pests like the black pod disease need to be sprayed between July and September and a significant proportion of the farmers got their farms sprayed in September or even in November (Kumi & Diamond, 2015). This makes the pesticide largely ineffective has by then already taken its toll. Another

problem is that the spraying gangs hired by the Ghanaian government to spray the cocoa pods of the farmers don’t always spray the cocoa plants in the appropriate fashion or sometimes even steal the pesticides to sell them on the black market (Kumi & Diamond, 2015). While the Ghanaian governments CODAPEC program is somewhat effective improvements could thus be made.

Apart from the socio-economic impact, the CODAPEC also causes environmental impacts. According to Cowell & Clift (1997) and Ntiamoah, A., & Afrane, G. (2008) the program has led to great harm to soil flora and fauna since the used pesticides caused chemical and physical deterioration. As a result, there is a considerable loss of biodiversity of native species. In addition, leakage of pesticides into water and air might cause the pesticides to disperse over a greater area, causing the same damage to native species at places other than on the cocoa farms. The latter effect might be intensified if the spraying gangs hired do not spray the cocoa plant in the appropriate way (Ibid.). Therefore, it can be said that ‘diversity loss’ and ‘chemical pollution’ and ‘soil quality’ in our version of the doughnut are not sustainable.

Besides CODAPEC the Ghanaian government also wants to encourage fertilizer usage as it sees the lack of fertilizer usage as one of the problems causing low productivity on Ghanaian farms (Information Services Department of Ghana, 2016). The government states that low farmer income is the reason for the low prevalence of fertilizer usage in Ghana (Ibid.). Thus, it subsidizes fertilizer prices to make them more accessible for farmers (Banful, 2011; Information Services Department of Ghana, 2016). These subsidies are not universal but provided to smallholders farmers via vouchers (Banful, 2011).

However, these vouchers are often given to the farmers too late in the year when they have already purchased fertilizers for their crops or when these fertilizers are no longer useful (Banful, 2011; Aneani et al, 2017). Another problem is that more vouchers are sent to places where the Ghanaian opposition gets more votes, which could be seen as an attempt at vote buying by providing fertilizers to farmers to make them more likely to vote for the ruling party (Ibid.). The uneven distribution of fertilizers is problematic as one of the key problems causing low productivity on cocoa farms is the depletion of nutrients in the Ghanaian soil (Aneani et al, 2017; Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana, 2014). When crops are harvested, nutrients are removed from the soil. Since nutrients are essential for plant growth it might be of considerable importance to cycle nutrients back into the soil in order to maintain high yields. Fertilizer contains nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous which might be important for crop growth (Vereijken, 1992; Sahrawat et al., 2001). Recent studies suggest that in recent years the yield has indeed increased in Ghana (Wessel & Quist-Wessel, 2015); however, it cannot be said with certainty whether this was a result of the fertilizers vouches provided by the government since other aspects had an influence on the production of cocoa. In addition, it is suggested that fertilizer may prevent soil exploitation (Sahrawat et al., 2001). Soil exploitation is a considerable problem in Ghana since it causes less land availability for cocoa production and thus deforestation may take place in order to create more land (Boahene, 1998). In addition, soil exploitation on itself causes considerable damage to the environment. Often, the soil is abended by the farmer as a result of a considerable decrease in cocoa yield. At this stage, the soil might be damaged to such an extent that it requires human action to reverse this process and regain the tropical rainforests on this land (Hobbs, 2012). Thus, this is yet another reason why ‘soil quality’ in our version of the doughnut is an unsustainable segment. It is suggested that deforestation

may be prevented by preventing the latter process and by maintaining a high yield. When a high yield is achieved on a relatively small area and by preventing exploitation and abandonment of land, it is said that creating more farmland becomes unnecessary and thus deforestation might be prevented (Boahene, 1998; Laven, 2018). However, recent studies show that deforestation may occur even when yields are high since there are more incentives for farmers to use more lands since they could produce more cocoa on it (Ibid.). These incentives might be correlated with social or management issues (Laven, 2018).

Another problem with the current policy of fertilizer application is that farmers often do not stick to the appropriate rate and manner of application (Aneani et al, 2017). Overuse and inappropriate use of fertilizer might cause nutrient leakage, in which the nutrients might be transported via the groundwater into lakes and the ocean. These nutrients mostly include nitrogen and phosphorous, which might provide food for some species like certain algae; as a consequence, algal blooms may occur which might disturb the ecosystem in the lake or ocean (Howarth, 2000). Thus, ‘nitrogen and phosphorus loading’ in our version of the doughnut is an unsustainable segment and thus overshoots in the doughnut.

It is suggested that in order to prevent nutrient leakage, better irrigation methods are necessary in addition to appropriate fertilizer usage. In addition, this may also decrease soil erosion (Palmquist & Danielson, 1989). It is suggested that, since low yields cause a low income, farmers lack investments into the soil as a result of poverty (Laven, 2018). Due to a lack of soil protection and poor irrigation nutrients leach out of the soil and soil erosion increases. Due to soil erosion, the rate of exploitation of the soil increases and the yield decreases (Vereijken, 1992; Palmquist & Danielson, 1989). However, the question remains whether soil protection and other necessary investments take place when poverty decreases since there are again other incentives included (Laven, 2018).

Conclusion

Looking back at the research question: How sustainable is cocoa production in Ghana? it can be concluded that the cocoa production in Ghana is not sustainable. Looking back at Raworth’s doughnut of economics adjusted to our case it is clear that several problems exist. The current systems generally exceed the environmental ceiling through deforestation and incorrectly applied fertilizers and pesticides. There are also problems with meeting the social foundation in the doughnut as farmer families generally have little income, child labor problems and a lack of food security leading to meal skipping and thus malnutrition. The aforementioned problems are also interconnected. Low farmer income increases deforestation because farmers will want to earn more money and have plenty to eat. Therefore, they cut down parts of the forest to increase their farm size leading to deforestation but also to an increasing incidence of child labor as they are not always able to take care of their entire farm alone. It can thus be concluded that the current situation in Ghana is not in the safe and just space for humanity and is unsustainable because it does not meet the needs of the present and it also doesn't maintain the earth's systems in the future.

A possible solution to these problems might be a fairer cocoa price for cocoa farmers, increased access to markets and a different system of food production. This would allow farmers to have increased income and more access to food through the markets where they can buy food from the money earned with the cocoa production. This will also reduce the dependency on child labor for the farmers. It is however important that the agricultural

practices change with this increase in income as it otherwise could increase the overshoot of the environmental ceiling. This is where agroforestry could come into play as agroforestry can allow the soil time to recuperate from farming and new nutrients can then be absorbed in the soil. Further research is therefore recommended for these topics. Other topics worth further research is what poverty is. This paper has held a rather limited view of poverty by reducing it to three indicators: child labor, low income and food security but poverty can be a lot broader than that. However is the concept of poverty still useful when it becomes that broad?

There is also the problem that the indicators chosen in this paper might not reflect the local view on poverty. This is also part of another problem: this paper has had trouble looking at the situations of different cocoa farmers. They have mostly been treated as a homogenous group which they in practice are not. While this paper can thus still give an overview of the current problems in the sector it should not be seen as an exhaustive research into the causes and consequences of poverty in Ghana. Especially as a lot of other factors have not been researched but are also involved like poor infrastructure, sanitation & water access or political agency.

Another important aspect of this research has been the doughnut of economics. This doughnut is originally meant to analyze planetary boundaries and not as a tool to analyze sectors within nations with. However, throughout the research, the doughnut proved useful to the research because it enabled the researchers to integrate their findings into an interdisciplinary final report. The doughnut has also been useful as a lens to analyse sustainability with. Especially the concepts concerning the social foundation and thus meeting the needs of the present have been useful to give insight into unsustainability due to poverty and how poverty worsens the overshoots of the planetary boundaries. However, when using the doughnut it is difficult to determine where the boundary for unsustainable behavior is. When are planetary boundaries exceeded and when is the social foundation met? Adapting the doughnut to a smaller scale also means that it is necessary to redefine these boundaries. This is one of the reasons why this paper has been unable to quantify the overshoot or the shortcomings in the doughnut of economics. Another reason is that this is simply outside of the scope of this report. This is why the doughnut has been purposely left blank to not give the reader a misled view of the current situation. However, this paper has made it clear that the current situation is not sustainable even when it is unclear by how much.

Acknowledgements

Appointed to us by Jaap Rothuizen, to whom deep appreciation is in order for his guidance in the writing process of this paper along with Alison Gilbert, we would like to express our sincerest gratitude to Anna Laven from the instituut van de Tropen who was kind enough to share her impressive knowledge on cocoa agriculture and to her connection: Cedric Steijn, organizer of the 2018 Cocoa conference, for allowing us access to the conference and the opportunity to participate in taking minutes.

Bibliography

Acebo-Guerrero, Y., Hernandez-Rodriguez, A., Heydrich-Perez, M., El Jaziri, M., & Hernandez-Lauzardo, A. (2012). Management of black pod rot in cacao (Theobroma cacao): A review. _​Fruits​, 41-48.

Alkire, S., & Santos, M. (2014). Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index. World Development, 251-274.

Aneani, F., Adu-Acheampong, R., & Sakyi-Dawson, O. (2017). Exploring

Opportunities for Enhancing Innovation in Agriculture: The Case of Cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) Production in Ghana . _{​Sustainable Agricultural} Research_​, Unkown.

Anglaaere CNL, Cobbina J, Sinclair FL, McDonald MA (2011) The effect of land use systems on tree diversity: farmer preference and species composition of cocoa-based agro- ecosystems in Ghana. Agroforest Syst 81:249–265. Asare, R., Afari-Sefa, V., Osei-Owusu, Y., & Pabi, O. (2014). Cocoa agroforestry for

increasing forest connectivity in a fragmented landscape in Ghana. Agroforestry systems, 88_​(6), 1143-1156.

Banful, A. (2011). Old Problems in the New Solutions? Politically Motivated Allocation of Program Benefits and the “New” Fertilizer Subsidies. _{​World Development​}, 1166-1176.

Boahene, K. (1998). The challenge of deforestation in tropical Africa: reflections on its principal causes, consequences and solutions. Land Degradation & Development, 9(3), 247-258.

Chambers, R. (1995). Poverty and livelihoods: Whose reality Counts. Environment and Urbanization, 173-204.

Cocoa Barometer. (2017, April 20). _{​Raising Farm Gate Prices.​} Opgehaald van cacoabarometer:

http://www.cocoabarometer.org/Download_files/Raising%20Farm%20Gate%2 0Prices%20Cocoa%20Barometer%20Consultation%20Paper%20170419.pdf Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana. (2014). _{​Ghana cocoa farmers newspaper.}

Bi-annual technical information for Cocoa Farmers. ._​ Ghana Cocoa Board. Cowell, S. J., & Clift, R. (1997). Impact assessment for LCAs involving agricultural

production. _{​The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2​}(2), 99-103.

Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. _{​Annual review of}

ecology, evolution, and systematics_​, _​34​(1), 487-515.

Fosu-Mensah, B. Y., Vlek, P. L., & MacCarthy, D. S. (2012). Farmers’ perception and adaptation to climate change: a case study of Sekyedumase district in Ghana. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 14(4), 495-505.

Gockowski, J., & Sonwa, D. (2011). Cocoa intensification scenarios and their predicted impact on CO 2 emissions, biodiversity conservation, and rural livelihoods in the Guinea rain forest of West Africa. _{​Environmental}

management_​, _​48​(2), 307-321.

Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O., Rockstrom, J., Ohman, M.,

Shyamshundar, P., . . . Noble, I. (2013). Policy: Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature, 305-307.

Hobbs, R. J. (2012). Old fields: dynamics and restoration of abandoned farmland. Island Press.

Houghton, J. T., Callander, B. A., & Varney, S. K. (Eds.). (1992). Climate change 1992. Cambridge University Press.

Howarth, R. W., Anderson, D. B., Cloern, J. E., Elfring, C., Hopkinson, C. S., Lapointe, B., ... & Walker, D. (2000). Issues in ecology: Nutrient pollution of coastal rivers, bays, and seas.

Kumi, E., & Diamond, A. (2015). Farmers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the Cocoa Disease and Pest Control Programme (CODAPEC) in Ghana and its effects on poverty reduction . _{​American Journal of Experimental Agriculture​}, 257-274.

Laven, A. (2018). Personal contact. Royal Tropical Institude.

Laven, A., Buunk, E., & Ammerlaan, T. (2016). _{​Market Concentration and Price} Formation in the Global Cocoa Value Chain._​ Amsterdam: SEO.

Leach, M., Raworth, K., & Rockström, J. (2013). Between social and planetary boundaries: Navigating pathways in the safe and just space for humanity.

World social science report_​, _​2013​, 84-89.

Montagnini, F. (2018). Integrating Landscapes: Agroforestry for Biodiversity Conservation and Food Sovereignty (Vol. 12). Springer.

Ntiamoah, A., & Afrane, G. (2008). Environmental impacts of cocoa production and processing in Ghana: life cycle assessment approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(16), 1735-1740.

Palmquist, R. B., & Danielson, L. E. (1989). A hedonic study of the effects of erosion control and drainage on farmland values. _{​American journal of agricultural} economics, 71_​(1), 55-62.

Rawort, K. (2012, Februari). A safe and just space for humanity. Retrieved

from igentaconnect.com:

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/oxpp/oppccr/2012/00000008/0

0000001/art00001

Raworth, K. (2017).

_{​Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a}

21st-century economist

_{​. Chelsea Green Publishing.}

Rockstrom, J. (2009, december). Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Retrieved from jstor.org:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26268316.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Af01b773d 91cf22577ce42cbccd99000b

Ruf F, Schroth G (2004) Chocolate forests and monocultures: a historical review of cocoa growing and its conflicting role in tropical deforestation and forest conservation. In: Sch- roth G, da Fonseca GAB, Harvey CA, Gascon C, Va- sconcelos HL, Izac A-MN (eds) Agroforestry and biodiversity conservation in tropical landscapes. Island Press, Washington

Ruf, F. O. (2011). The myth of complex cocoa agroforests: the case of Ghana.

Human Ecology_​, _​39​(3), 373.

Sahrawat, K. L., Abekoe, M. K., & Diatta, S. (2001). Application of inorganic

phosphorus fertilizer. Sustaining soil fertility in West Africa, (sustainingsoilf), 225-246.

Schouten, E. (2016). _{​Household food security of Ghanaian cocoa producers: the} impact of UTZ-certification._​ Retrieved from Utrecht University Repository: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/339348

Schroth, G., Läderach, P., Martinez-Valle, A. I., Bunn, C., & Jassogne, L. (2016). Vulnerability to climate change of cocoa in West Africa: Patterns,

opportunities and limits to adaptation. Science of the Total Environment, 556, 231-241.

Schroth G, Gustavo AB, da Fonseca GAB, Harvey CA, Gascon C, Vasconcelos HL, Izac A-MN (eds.) (2004) Agroforestry and biodiversity conservation in tropical landscapes. Island Press, Washington 523 pp.

Swanson, T. M. (Ed.). (1998). The economics and ecology of biodiversity decline: the forces driving global change. Cambridge University Press.

UNESCO. (2011, April 19). LEARNING TO LIVE TOGETHER: Poverty. Retrieved from unseco.org:

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/internation al-migration/glossary/poverty/

Van den Besselaar, P., & Heimeriks, G. (2001, July). Disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary: Concepts and indicators. In ISSI (pp. 705-716).

Vereijken, P. H. (1992). A methodic way to more sustainable farming systems. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science, 40(3), 209-224.

Vignery, M., & Serram, R. (2016). _{​Researching the Impact of increased cocoa yields} on the Labour market and child labour risk in Ghana and Cote D' Ivoire. unknown: International Cocoa Initiative.

Wessel, M., & Quist-Wessel, P. F. (2015). Cocoa production in West Africa, a review and analysis of recent developments. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 74, 1-7