Reducing deforestation through value chain interventions in countries emerging from conflict: The case of the Colombian cocoa sector

Abstract

Sustainability commitments by private sector actors are emerging as promising interventions to help reduce global deforestation. Much attention is placed on the forest conservation impact of these interventions in areas where commodity production constitutes a main driver of deforestation. It is however less clearly understood what role they could play in areas where the production of commodities is not evidently leading to the loss of forest, and how they could contribute to other objectives including sustainable rural development and peacebuilding. In this paper, we examine the potential of the cocoa value chain in Colombia in achieving deforestation reduction and peacebuilding simultaneously, as aimed by the country's Cocoa, Forests and Peace Initiative. Results from correlations and spatially explicit analyses show that regardless of its widespread production across Colombia, cocoa is not an important driver of deforestation. This suggest that efforts to end deforestation in the Colombian cocoa sector emerged following global trends, and not because of an evident link between cocoa production and deforestation. Furthermore, results from spatial clustering analyses highlight areas where different types of value chain interventions may be appropriate to parallel forest conservation and peacebuilding, while interviews with key actors in the cacao sector provide clues as to how these interventions should be developed and implemented. Specifically, our results show that narratives around approaches to achieve zero-deforestation from agricultural commodities should (1) be adjusted to local contexts, (2) incorporate location-specific development needs, (3) complement existing rural development efforts, (4) enhance collaboration among actors that operate both within and beyond the value chain, and (5) apply high-resolution data to assess deforestation-commodity relations and verify zero-deforestation commitments. These considerations are particularly relevant in contexts where commodity production is not evidently leading to deforestation, as in the case of cocoa production in Colombia.

Elucidating Pathways and Discourses Linking Cocoa Cultivation to Deforestation, Reforestation, and Tree Cover Change in Nicaragua and Peru

“…Our study is not without limitations. The data we collected represents only one site per country, and did not provide enough geographical and cultivation pathways (i.e., older or newer cocoa fronts, business models across cocoa production areas, and national plans/strategies) to explain the potential role of cocoa cultivation as agent of reforestation or reforestation at country level, yet the combined methodology we described here was useful in pointing out that deforestation and cocoa cultivation cycles need to be carefully analyzed in light of the context where is grown, thus the landscape level is a key unit of analysis (Ruf, 2018;Castro-Nunez et al, 2020).…”

“…Likewise, Rice and Greenberg (2000) pointed out that deforestation and cocoa cultivation cycles need to be carefully analyzed in light of the context where it is grown, for instance in alluvial soils of coastal areas of Indonesia cocoa, displaced agricultural areas, and in other cases, cocoa was planted in previously logged forested areas. More recently, a study found that cocoa farming has not been an important driver of deforestation in the main cocoa growing areas of Colombia and argued that interventions based on commodity value chain approach can support the peacebuilding process and achieve forest conservation/restoration commitments (Castro-Nunez et al, 2020).…”

Uncovering Stakeholder Participation in Payment for Hydrological Services (PHS) Program Decision Making in Mexico and Colombia

“…For instance, the tropical dry forest covers less than 1% of its original area and is considered threatened in the plains and Central Andes [78]. The rate of deforestation has increased in the last decades [79,80] due to economic activities incentivized by the national government [77,78] and illegal armed groups [59,74,75].…”

“Rambo root” to the rescue: How a simple, low‐cost solution can lead to multiple sustainable development gains

“…The Colombian government estimates that roughly 40% of the national territory suffers some form of degradation (United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, 2016). Much of the degraded land represents areas affected by conflict and where the government and its development partners are promoting cacao production as an alternative to illicit coca leaf farming and, in turn, as a vehicle for reducing deforestation and building peace (Castro‐Nunez, Charry, Castro‐Llanos, Sylvester, & Bax, 2020). Research indicates that there are links between coca leaf production, deforestation and the conflict in Colombia (Castro‐Nunez, Mertz, Buritica, Sosa, & Lee, 2017).…”