Cocoa Agroforestry for Increasing Forest Connectivity

in a Fragmented Landscape in Ghana

Asare Richard1, Victor Afari-Sefa*2, Yaw Osei-Owusu3, Opoku Pabi4

Cocoa cultivation is a major economic activity and land use system in Ghana. Traditionally, cocoa

was planted under partially cleared forest with remaining trees providing shade to cocoa trees

(Asare 2005; Anglaaere et al. 2011). Recent management practices in new cocoa fields,

particularly by migrant farmers, have been associated with widespread forest clearings where

little or no shade is maintained (Ruf 2011). Given how fast agricultural activities diminish

biodiversity, the major challenge for conservationists/agriculturists in biodiversity hotspots is

how to balance the economically driven agricultural expansion with strategies necessary for

conserving natural resources, and maintaining ecosystem integrity and species viability (Asare

2006). It is estimated that 50-70% of the total areas of protected forestlands in Ghana have

been illegally encroached (Ministry of Science and Environment 2002). In the process, two

protected areas of biodiversity importance in the Western region of Ghana—Bia Conservation

Area (Reserve A) and Krokosua Hills Forest Reserve (Reserve B)—have been encroached through

lumbering for timber, cocoa production and other agricultural land expansions (Oates et al.

2000; Oates 2006). To address the impact of increased cocoa area expansion in the two

protected forest areas, a multidisciplinary study involving biophysical and socio-economic

assessments within a GIS framework was undertaken to delineate possible candidate sites for

cocoa agroforest corridors to link the two forest reserves.

A. INTRODUCTIONA. INTRODUCTIONA. INTRODUCTIONA. INTRODUCTION

BBBB. OBJECTIVE. OBJECTIVE. OBJECTIVE. OBJECTIVE

• identify suitable corridors and recommend compatible cocoa-timber

species to connect the forest fragments with cocoa agroforest corridors

• assess opportunity costs of alternative farming systems and offer

appropriate conditions/incentives for farmers to undertake cocoa

agroforestry

In terms of delineation of the agroforestry corridor, there is a management regime within 5 km by

the Forestry Commission beyond the boundaries of the forest reserves. Accordingly a 5 km buffer

was generated beyond the boundaries of the forest reserves. This zone (shaded light green in Fig.

3) captured all manner of landforms and land-use/cover formations in a 5-km radius outside the

forest reserves. Thus, between the Reserve B, Bia National Park and Bia North Forest Reserves is a

central zone (shaded yellow in Fig. 3), which was considered an area of exclusion. More favorable

conditions based on vegetation cover, fewer settlements, and low annual cropping exist in the

area between Bia North Reservation area and Bia National Park (Fig. 2). The GIS analysis indicated

that two areas are most favorable (Fig. 3): The gap between Bia National Park and Bia North Forest

Reserve referred to as the northern site (Fig. 2) with a distance of 4 km and, the gap between the

southeastern tip of the Bia Resource Reserve (south of Reserve A) and southwestern tip of

Reserve B, referred to as the southern site, with a distance of 5.5 km. Baseline socio-economic

scenario results indicate that no-shade cocoa is the highest in terms of profitability (Table 1). The

second best enterprise to no-shade cocoa is cocoa agroforests, under the assumption of legality of

timber sales after a 20-year production cycle. Oil palm and rice production are break even

propositions. Results from the economic analysis and farmers’ perceptions of biodiversity

conservation acknowledges the need for environmental payments to support cocoa agroforest

corridor creation.

D. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIOND. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIOND. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIOND. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

C. MATERIALS AND METHODSC. MATERIALS AND METHODSC. MATERIALS AND METHODSC. MATERIALS AND METHODSThe study area lies within latitude 3.2720 N and latitude 2.5870 W. The western boundary of the

area forms part of the western boundary with Cote d’Ivoire (Fig. 1). Relevant spatial information

such as water bodies, land cover, topography, forest reserves, etc. were procured as shape files

generated from analogue topographic maps with a scale of 1:50,000 and transformed to an

adopted remote sensing coordinate system. The corridor delineation was carried out in ArcGIS in

a raster format. Landsat ETM+ data was used to develop the land-use/cover map. Figure 2 is a

direct output of the classification process, which includes built-up areas like settlements and

exposed grounds, annual cropping and fallow lands with cocoa-tree formations among others.

Socioeconomic analysis primary data collected from 100 randomly stratified selected farm-

households. A standard cost-benefit analysis of a cocoa agroforests with cocoa as the dominant

crop (Gockowski et al. 2013) was applied to analyze the opportunity costs of alternative farming

systems by including revenues accrued from shade trees used as permanent shade in the

production cycle using the representative farm approach. The net present value (NPV), benefit-

cost ratio (BCR) and internal rate of return (IRR) were calculated based on discounting procedures

on a per-hectare basis using standard formulae (Gittinger 1982). Timber trees (Terminalia

superba) are assumed to be sown under the temporary shade canopy provided by plantains

planted at a density of 1,600 per ha and assumed to be sold legally in an approach similar to that

proposed by Somarriba et al. 2014. In the base scenario, we compared cocoa production systems

with other alternative cropping systems using standard bulk cocoa prices without any premium

price. We include payments for environmental and ecosystems services in a hypothetical scenario

analysis (Table 1).

E. CONCLUSIONE. CONCLUSIONE. CONCLUSIONE. CONCLUSION

• Multidisciplinary biophysical and socio-economic assessments undertaken

proved useful in establishing the baseline status for delineation of potential

corridor sites to link Reserves A and B and provide an economic and financial

paradigm to incentivize farmers in a cocoa agroforestry setting.

• The base scenario of the socio-economic study established that no-shade cocoa

production is the most important economic activity in the area in comparison

with competing alternatives, namely cocoa agroforestry, oil palm and rice. The

second best enterprise to no-shade cocoa is cocoa agroforests, under the

assumption that farmers will sell timber after the 20-year production cycle.

• Cocoa agroforest premiums alone are not attractive enough for farmers to shift

from no-shade cocoa to cocoa agroforestry. Paying farmers premium prices for

the cocoa produced along with substantial off-farm environmental and

ecosystem services (e.g., rewards for carbon sequestration and biodiversity

conservation) under agroforestry systems can tip the balance towards the

adoption of sustainable biodiversity friendly agricultural practices.

2AVRDC - The World Vegetable Center (AVRDC)

Eastern and Southern Africa

P. O. Box 10 Duluti, Arusha, TANZANIA

Corresponding author: E-mail: victor.afari-sefa@worldveg.org;

Tel: +255-27-255-3093

1Department of Geoscience and Natural Resource

Management, University of Copenhagen, Denmark and

International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA),

Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) – INSTI

Building, Airport Residential Area, P. O. Box M#2, Accra,

GHANA

3Conservation Alliance, P. O. Box KIA 20436, Airport,

Accra, GHANA

4Institute for Environment and Sanitation, P.O Box LG 209,

University of Ghana - Legon, Accra, GHANA

Figure 2: Land use cover of the northern

part of the Reserve A, Reserve B and Bia

North Reserve

Figure 3: Map showing circled areas of

shortest distances for locating corridors

Crop/Farming systemYield of main crop

in kg ha-1 year-1

Total Production

Cost

(¢GHC ha-1)

Total Revenue

(¢GHC ha-1)

Economic Profitability Indicators

NPV

(¢GHC ha-1)

BCR IRR

(%)

No-shade cocoa 948.88 1,429.15 2,247.33 1,025.12 1.26 45.0

Cocoa-agroforestry* 553.28 896.73 1,489.36 781.12 1.19 40.0

Oil palm 3,745.00 1,152.08 1,498.33 607.13 1.04 36.0

Rice+ 881.47 569.66 837.40 345.32 1.02 34.0

Cocoa-agroforestry (with

no premium cocoa price)*553.28 896.73 1,489.36 781.12 1.19 40.0

Cocoa-agroforestry (with

premium cocoa price)*553.28 896.73 2,105.34 945.67 1.24 43.5

Cocoa-agroforestry (with

premium cocoa price plus

carbon)**

553.28 896.73 2,297.02 1,317.76 1.32 45.9

Cocoa-agroforestry (with

premium cocoa price +

full environmental

benefits)***

553.28 896.73 2,609.22 1,657.41 1.40 51.3

Table 1: Computed economic indicators of scenarios on premium price and assumed

environmental benefits per annum

REFERENCESAnglaaere 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 agroecosystemsin Ghana. Agroforest Syst 81:249-265

Asare R (2006) A review on cocoa agroforestry as a means for biodiversity conservation. Paper Presented at the World Cocoa FoundationPartnership Conference. May 2006, Brussels, Belgium.

Asare R (2005) Cocoa agroforests in West Africa. A look at activities on preferred trees in the farming systems. Forest and Landscape Denmark Working Papers No. 6-2005, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Bennett AF (1998) Linkages in the Landscape: the role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge U.K

Forestry Commission (2009) Manual of procedures - harvesting schedule. Forestry Commission, Resource Management Support Centre. Kumasi, Ghana

Gittinger JP (1982) Economic analysis of agricultural projects. Baltimore, MD, USA: John Hopkins University Press.

Gockowski J, Afari-Sefa V, Sarpong DB, Osei-Asare BY, Agyeman FN (2013). Improving the Productivity and Income of Ghanaian Cocoa Farmers While Maintaining Environmental Services: What Role for Certification? International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 11 (4): 331-346.

Laurance GWS (2001) Landscape connectivity and biological corridors. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 2072, Balboa Ancón, Republic of Panama Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project, National Institute for Amazonian Research (INPA), C.P. 478, Manaus, AM 69011-970, Brazil.

Ministry of Environment and Science (2002) National Biodiversity Strategy Action Plan. Ministry of Environment and Science, Ghana. [online] URL: www.cbd.int/doc/world/gh/gh-nbsap-01-en.pdf

Oates JF (2006) Primate Conservation in the Forests of Western Ghana: Field Survey Results, 2005–2006. Report to the Wildlife Division, Forestry Commission, Ghana.

Oates JF, Abedi-LarteyM, McGraw WS, StruhsakerTT, WhitesidesGH (2000) Extinction of a West African red colobusmonkey. Conservation Biology 14: 1526–1532.

Ruf FO (2011) The myth of complex cocoa agroforests: the case of Ghana. Human Ecology 39:373-388.

SomarribaE, Suárez-Islas A, Calero-Borge W, Villota A, Castillo C, Vílchez S, Deheuvels O, Cerda R (2014) Cocoa - timber agroforestry systems: Theobroma cacao - Cordia alliodora in Central America. Agroforestry Systems 88 (6):1001-1019.

Figure 1: Study area showing

administrative districts,

settlements, roads, and

protected forest reserves