IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v132y2023ics0264837723002855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate-smart cocoa in forest landscapes: Lessons from institutional innovations in Ghana

Author

Listed:
  • van der Haar, S.
  • Gallagher, E.J.
  • Schoneveld, G.C.
  • Slingerland, M.A.
  • Leeuwis, C.

Abstract

Integrated landscape approaches have been welcomed by scientists and development practitioners as a promising way to address commodity-driven deforestation and associated land degradation and greenhouse gas emissions. They present cross-sectoral approaches to manage trade-offs between multiple land uses and environmental and socio-economic objectives through participatory multi-stakeholder planning and negotiation processes. The success of landscape approaches depends on the larger institutional systems of rules, regulations, and actor networks in which they are embedded. Yet, there remains a critical gap in our understanding of how such enabling conditions can be established. Taking the case of Ghana, this research analyses cross-sectoral institutional innovation in commodity and forestry regimes promoting the enabling conditions to move integrated landscape approaches from theory to practice. As part of its National REDD+ Strategy, Ghana has led the way for jurisdictional REDD+ and has successfully mobilized broad-based stakeholder engagement and funding around a shared purpose: climate-smart cocoa in community co-managed forest landscapes. In this article, we apply a Multi-Level Perspective (Geels, 2002) to analyse the process of institutional innovation under the Ghana Cocoa Forest REDD+ Programme (GCFRP). Despite early signs of regime change and alignment in Ghana’s cocoa and forestry sectors, GCFRP’s success is threatened by, amongst others, frustrated reforms to tree tenure and timber benefit-sharing rights. Our research demonstrates that political commitment for institutional change beyond landscape and jurisdictional scales is essential to enable climate-smart landscape transitions.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Haar, S. & Gallagher, E.J. & Schoneveld, G.C. & Slingerland, M.A. & Leeuwis, C., 2023. "Climate-smart cocoa in forest landscapes: Lessons from institutional innovations in Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:132:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723002855
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106819
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723002855
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106819?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Verina Ingram & Fedes Van Rijn & Yuca Waarts & Henk Gilhuis, 2018. "The Impacts of Cocoa Sustainability Initiatives in West Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Asaaga, Festus A. & Hirons, Mark A. & Malhi, Yadvinder, 2020. "Questioning the link between tenure security and sustainable land management in cocoa landscapes in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    3. Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Braña-Varela, Josefina & Gupta, Aarti, 2017. "A reality check on the landscape approach to REDD+: Lessons from Latin America," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 10-20.
    4. G. Hodgson, 2007. "What Are Institutions?," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 8.
    5. Maria Brockhaus & Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki & Jenniver Sehring & Monica Di Gregorio & Samuel Assembe-Mvondo & Andrea Babon & Melaku Bekele & Maria Fernanda Gebara & Dil Bahadur Khatri & Hermann Kambire & F, 2017. "REDD+, transformational change and the promise of performance-based payments: a qualitative comparative analysis," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 708-730, August.
    6. Leslie Lipper & David Zilberman, 2018. "A Short History of the Evolution of the Climate Smart Agriculture Approach and Its Links to Climate Change and Sustainable Agriculture Debates," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Leslie Lipper & Nancy McCarthy & David Zilberman & Solomon Asfaw & Giacomo Branca (ed.), Climate Smart Agriculture, pages 13-30, Springer.
    7. Irawan, Silvia & Widiastomo, Triyoga & Tacconi, Luca & Watts, John D. & Steni, Bernadinus, 2019. "Exploring the design of jurisdictional REDD+: The case of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    9. Ochieng, Robert M. & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Nketiah, Kwabena S., 2013. "Interaction between the FLEGT-VPA and REDD+ in Ghana: Recommendations for interaction management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 32-39.
    10. Valerie Nelson & David Phillips, 2018. "Sector, Landscape or Rural Transformations? Exploring the Limits and Potential of Agricultural Sustainability Initiatives through a Cocoa Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 252-262, February.
    11. Milder, Jeffrey C. & Hart, Abigail K. & Dobie, Philip & Minai, Joshua & Zaleski, Christi, 2014. "Integrated Landscape Initiatives for African Agriculture, Development, and Conservation: A Region-Wide Assessment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 68-80.
    12. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    13. Satyal, Poshendra, 2018. "Civil society participation in REDD+ and FLEGT processes: Case study analysis from Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and the Republic of Congo," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 83-96.
    14. Saeed, Abdul-Razak & McDermott, Constance & Boyd, Emily, 2018. "Examining equity in Ghana's national REDD+ process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 48-58.
    15. Reed, James & Ickowitz, Amy & Chervier, Colas & Djoudi, Houria & Moombe, Kaala & Ros-Tonen, Mirjam & Yanou, Malaika & Yuliani, Linda & Sunderland, Terry, 2020. "Integrated landscape approaches in the tropics: A brief stock-take," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    16. Belachew Gizachew & Rasmus Astrup & Pål Vedeld & Eliakimu M. Zahabu & Lalisa A. Duguma, 2017. "REDD+ in Africa: contexts and challenges," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(2), pages 92-104, May.
    17. Mengina Gilli & Muriel Côte & Gretchen Walters, 2020. "Gatekeeping Access: Shea Land Formalization and the Distribution of Market-Based Conservation Benefits in Ghana’s CREMA," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, September.
    18. Andrew Wardell, D. & Lund, Christian, 2006. "Governing Access to Forests in Northern Ghana: Micro-Politics and the Rents of Non-Enforcement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1887-1906, November.
    19. Gerring, John, 2004. "What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 341-354, May.
    20. Raven, Rob, 2007. "Co-evolution of waste and electricity regimes: Multi-regime dynamics in the Netherlands (1969-2003)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2197-2208, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee, Junmin & Kim, Keungoui & Kim, Jiyong & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "The relationship between shared mobility and regulation in South Korea: A system dynamics approach from the socio-technical transitions perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Liqiao Wang & Peter Wells, 2021. "Regime Confluence in Automobile Industry Transformation: Boundary Dissolution and Network Reintegration via CASE Vehicles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    5. Hamid El Bilali, 2019. "The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Jasminka Young & Aleksandar Macura, 2023. "Forging Local Energy Transition in the Most Carbon-Intensive European Region of the Western Balkans," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Pekkarinen, Satu & Melkas, Helinä, 2019. "Welfare state transition in the making: Focus on the niche-regime interaction in Finnish elderly care services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 240-253.
    8. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    9. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2023. "Socio-technical barriers to domestic hydrogen futures: Repurposing pipelines, policies, and public perceptions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    10. W.F. Schilpzand & Rob P. J. M. Raven & Q.C. van Est, 2010. "Strategic Niche Management (SNM) beyond sustainability. An exploration of key findings of SNM through the lens of ICT and privacy," Working Papers 10-07, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies, revised Jul 2010.
    11. Røpke, Inge, 2012. "The unsustainable directionality of innovation – The example of the broadband transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1631-1642.
    12. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    13. Jørgensen, Ulrik, 2012. "Mapping and navigating transitions—The multi-level perspective compared with arenas of development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 996-1010.
    14. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Raphaelle Barbier & Skander Ben Yahia & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2022. "Co-Design for Novelty Anchoring Into Multiple Socio-Technical Systems in Transitions: The Case of Earth Observation Data," Post-Print hal-03772981, HAL.
    16. Wiegand, Julia, 2017. "Dezentrale Stromerzeugung als Chance zur Stärkung der Energie-Resilienz: Eine qualitative Analyse kommunaler Strategien im Raum Unna," Wuppertaler Studienarbeiten zur nachhaltigen Entwicklung, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, volume 11, number 11.
    17. Capellán-Pérez, Iñigo & Campos-Celador, Álvaro & Terés-Zubiaga, Jon, 2018. "Renewable Energy Cooperatives as an instrument towards the energy transition in Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 215-229.
    18. Funcke, Simon & Bauknecht, Dierk, 2016. "Typology of centralised and decentralised visions for electricity infrastructure," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 67-74.
    19. Pradeep Racherla & Munir Mandviwalla, 2013. "Moving from Access to Use of the Information Infrastructure: A Multilevel Sociotechnical Framework," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 709-730, September.
    20. Colvin, John & Blackmore, Chris & Chimbuya, Sam & Collins, Kevin & Dent, Mark & Goss, John & Ison, Ray & Roggero, Pier Paolo & Seddaiu, Giovanna, 2014. "In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: A design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 760-771.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:132:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723002855. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.