By Dannica Eirren Batoon
Once a fragile gamble, cacao in Cameroon and the Ivory Coast now pays off sweetly for families thanks to sustainable certifications and training programmes. For cacao farmers René Etoua Meto and Kobe Nan Koffi Kouman, the certification not only improved their incomes through environmental premiums and higher yields but also changed how their community worked together. Farmers organised into monitored systems that tracked the origin of cocoa. Deforestation decreased due to fewer incentives to clear forests for new farms. Over time, forest loss around participating villages slowed. Certification became a shared agreement to protect the forest, improve farming methods, and gain access to better markets. Today, smallholders manage over 99 percent of certified farms.
Sustainable certifications, such as Fairtrade, Rainforest Alliance, and EU Organic, also became gatekeeping mechanisms. The Ivory Coast produces around 40 percent of the world's cocoa. Yet, companies in Europe and the U.S. make the largest profits by processing, branding, and selling chocolate. In 2023, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) was formally adopted and came into force. The EUDR blocks cocoa products that lack geolocation data and fail legal compliance requirements. Large agribusinesses can absorb these costs. However, smallholder farmers—who produce most cocoa in West Africa—often cannot meet certification requirements without external support, including assistance from large manufacturing and trading companies that also help shape market standards and pricing structures.
This essay examines the opposing view on the effects of sustainable certifications on Cacao farmers. First, we explore why ethical certifications still fail farmers. We highlight how sustainable certifications reproduce colonial economic structures. Second, we examine how multinational companies use sustainability standards to shift risk onto smallholders. We argue that "ethical cocoa" is fundamentally about power.
Why Ethical Certifications Still Fail Farmers
Ethical certifications often fail because they do not change the underlying power imbalance in the cocoa value chain. Farmers are expected to comply with sustainability standards. The recent study by Romano, Demaria, and Carbone found that voluntary sustainability standards created modest income gains for farmers. They remain compliers in a system they cannot control. With the EUDR's full implementation, once-voluntary sustainability compliance is now mandatory for the world's largest cocoa importer.
Chocolate companies that already have full traceability systems and are EUDR-compliant are less likely to lose access to the EU market. Cacao farmers and national organisations, such as the Conseil du Café-Cacao, bear the costs of resource-intensive supply chain solutions. Chocolate companies can use their sustainability credibility to justify premium pricing. The competitive advantage can further exacerbate the income difference between chocolate manufacturers and cocoa producers. Multiple certification systems require paperwork, audits, monitoring, and compliance costs that are difficult for small producers to manage. Cacao cooperatives and small exporters in the Ivory Coast are unable to absorb the additional 200 CFA francs per kilogram and may go bankrupt. Noncompliant companies risk hefty financial fines and may be excluded from EU contracts or subsidies.
Certification programmes emphasise productivity training, certification attainment, resilience-building, and sustainable farming practices. They also promote a holistic, community-centred approach. However, they avoid confronting unequal value distribution, unfair contracts, corporate pricing power, and concentrated profits. Farmers are often left to deal with child labour. Programmes educate mothers. A local village savings and loan association (VSLA) supports the education of the neediest children of farmers. But communities remain vulnerable. The VSLA has been found to be effective in improving the lives of female cacao farmers. In the Ivory Coast, school enrolment increased by 8 percent. However, roughly 45 percent of children living in cocoa-growing households in West Africa remain involved in child labour. In the words of the International Cocoa Initiative, "It's not that we've failed, but more that we've not so far fully scaled what's working."
Neocolonialism and Unequal Power Distribution
VSLAs are community-based savings groups in which members contribute small, regular savings. International donors support VSLAs as low-cost mechanisms for poverty alleviation. Aside from school fees, VSLAs also pay for farm inputs and emergency expenses. Loan sizes are also usually too small for major farm rehabilitation and large climate adaptation investments. VSLAs help with short-term resilience. However, they do not fully solve structural poverty.
In Ghana, VSLA participation did not help farmers with land ownership or expansion. Farmers with small landholdings are often more vulnerable to crop failure, price fluctuations, and climate shocks. In the first quarter of 2026, Ghana reduced the price it paid to farmers by 30 percent due to falling global cocoa prices. Cocoa prices hit record highs above $12,000 per tonne late last year, but have since fallen below $8,000 per tonne, making cocoa one of the worst-performing agricultural commodities in 2025. This means they may depend more heavily on loans and savings groups to survive rather than to build wealth.
Sustainability systems are changing faster than what cacao-growing communities can adapt to, which may have premature consequences. Climate adaptation costs are shifted onto farmers. Measures—such as agroforestry, riparian restoration, and regenerative practices required by sustainability programmes—reduce productive land and increase labour demands. Ironically, restricted access to lands due to anti-deforestation measures is often associated with child labour and discrimination against women and indigenous peoples. In Cameroon, the government is pushing for Zero Deforestation Cocoa and for doubling production by 2030. Existing plots may be insufficient or degraded. Thus, farmers rely on unpaid household labour when they cannot expand or increase earnings.
The Government of Ghana acknowledged that decades of exporting raw cacao beans have generated limited economic benefits for the country, with most profits captured abroad. A Ghanaian farmer noted that, for 15 years, farmers have cultivated cacao to help the government internationally, while they cannot afford a bag of cement to build a house. Control is exercised economically. Former colonial patterns of extraction continue through supplier contracts, standards, certifications, and global trade governance.
Multinational Companies Capture 70 Percent of the Value
Since the pandemic began, cocoa farmers in Ghana have seen their incomes drop by about 16 percent. In contrast, the four largest publicly traded chocolate companies have seen their profits rise by roughly the same amount. Globally, cocoa farmers receive only about 6.6 percent of the total value in the supply chain, while manufacturers and retailers take more than 70 percent. However, the issue is not merely about pricing. Farmers earn far less than companies because value is also distributed by labour, control over bottlenecks, and risk. The cocoa value chain operates under monopsonyconditions. Farmers are numerous, fragmented, and price-takers. They sit in the weakest negotiating position. Whereas companies are few, coordinated, and price setters.
In Ghana and the Ivory Coast, the government sets a farmgate price for cacao beans. These countries sell about 80 percent of their produce to international markets in advance each year, setting prices around October. Then prices are adjusted for mid-crops of lower quality.
In the first quarter of 2026, a global surplus and the upfront payment set by the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) for international traders have left several farmers in Ghana unpaid. Meanwhile, cocoa stocks remain unsold in cooperative warehouses in the Ivory Coast. The cost of storage continues to increase for producers, who also experienced pest infestations last year. Both countries plan to expand local chocolate production. However, cooperatives argue that local buyers cannot afford their produce. Demand for cocoa beans stagnated.
Multinational companies continue to enjoy high chocolate prices by employing several market strategies, such as product shrinkage, recipe reformulation, and shifting product portfolios. Other premium mass-market confectionery also positioned their products in gifting seasons. Luxury brands maintain increased sales by turning prices into quality signals. High-income consumers absorb the cost burden. Additionally, products with alternative cocoa ingredients are labelled as "vegan.” Sourcing diversification is no longer geographic. Today, Planet A Foods, an alternative-ingredient provider, has entered partnerships with major chocolate brands.
While cocoa-growing countries aggressively increase production, international companies buy more slowly and more selectively. Large firms use financial instruments to lock in prices and ease short-term volatility. Lastly, regulatory and compliance costs make sourcing more cautious. The crisis in cocoa is therefore not a failure of sustainable production, but a success of a global system designed to concentrate value upward while distributing risk downward.
Author : Dannica Eirren Batoon, Online Marketing MSc Student, King’s Business School.
