To label or not? Governing the costs and benefits of geographic indication of an African forest honey value chain

Geographical Indication (GI) has been proposed as a development tool, benefitting producers, consumers and local communities by creating value, improving market access, protecting local knowledge and natural resources and contributing to social cohesion as producers work together to solve common problems. However, scientific evidence on the socio-economic and environmental effects of governing value chains and origin landscapes through this voluntary, market-based arrangement is scarce. Honey appears ideal for GI labelling: having unique, physically identifiable and geographically localisable properties dependent upon the local ecosystem and beekeeping practices. White honey from the Kilum-Ijim forest in the Cameroon Highlands was GI registered in 2013 aiming to guarantee product quality, increase beekeeper selling prices and protect the forest. Panel data from stakeholder interviews, market surveys and participatory action research, shows the extent to which the GI benefited beekeepers, and how the honey value chain and landscape developed since registration. Although honey production and productivity remained steady, profits augmented as prices increased and sales became more nationwide, improving beekeeper’s living standards, appearing attributable to the GI. Deforestation however continued, and imposter brands abound, signalling potential supply shortages, increased input costs and competition which could affect future profits and the GI reputation; changing the distribution of benefits to suppliers rather than beekeepers. This suggests that whilst the Oku white honey GI has had a short-term positive livelihood effects, longer-term positive impacts conserving the landscape have been ineffective, and the durability of economic impacts is questionable. Although multiple arrangements govern the value chain and landscape, even together they are insufficient to balance the many demands on this productive landscape, suggesting the limits of weak institutions and non-state governance to protect vulnerable landscapes and ecosystems, and producer’s livelihoods. This reality check of the benefits from the Oku white honey GI highlights the importance of coherent, effective governance of both landscapes and the markets for its products

The impact of certification on the natural and financial capitals of Ghanaian cocoa farmers

While an increasing number of large food companies commit themselves to source only certified cocoa, research on the impacts of certification on cocoa farmers is falling behind. We investigate how Rainforest Alliance (RA) certification of smallscale cocoa farmers in Ghana has affected both the financial and the natural capitals of the farmers. Across two villages, certified farmers were compared to conventional farmers, using both qualitative and quantitative data collected through farmer and key informant interviews and participatory rural appraisals. A combination of the Sustainable Livelihood Framework and the input–output–outcome–impact framework was used for the analysis. Results indicate that the RA certification scheme has a positive influence on the certified farmers in terms of cocoa production, yield, income, and farmers’ perception of changes in their natural and financial capitals. The positive influence is a result of inputs from the RA certification, including financial support, information and knowledge, technical assistance, and increased access to farm inputs and credit. However, these positive impacts are conditioned by the presence of active farmer organizations and access to agricultural inputs and credit through associations and government institutions, and may be undermined by certified farmers who sell their produce outside the premium value chain