 So welcome to this webinar on Cocoa Producer Agency and the Living Income Differential, lessons from civil society organisations. My name is Matt Wright. I'm going to be providing the technical support today. I'm going to hand over to my colleagues and hope you have a great webinar. Thank you very much. Good morning, good afternoon and good evening everyone. My name is Emily Pollak and I'm a researcher at the International Institute for Environmental Development and I'd like to welcome everyone to the seventh webinar in the series we've been running on approaches to empowering producers in commercial agriculture. It's fantastic to see so many people could join us today from all over the world and wonderful for the first time in this series we've been able to welcome French speakers to the webinar. So welcome to everyone whether joining for the first time or if you're returning after previous ones in the series. For those who can't be here and for the information of all attending today as Matt said we'll be recording and we'll also put out a blog item on the discussion following the event for others to capture. This webinar series on empowering producers in commercial agriculture is supported by a four-year project led by IAED in collaboration with partners in Nepal and Malawi and it's funded by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office. And so a key part of this endeavour that we've been working on is gathering evidence from around the world on just how small scale farmers are exercising agency to address challenges and strengthen their position in their trading relations. And this of course happens in a myriad of ways. In this work we define agency as the ability to make choices and affect change according to one's own priorities and that can be individually or collectively. And this is in response to a context where small scale farmers are persistently facing information and power symmetries. But there are certain approaches and forms of legal empowerment that can challenge these and particularly if an agency approach is taken and that's really what we're exploring. And that means approaches that enable farmers to be in the driving seat or at least be engaging and interacting with public and private sector actors from a position of strength. Undoubtedly given the systemic and structural challenges that seeking a better price or negotiating a better deal face addressing agency is about addressing power and power relations. So previous webinars have explored strategies to overcome challenges associated with contract farming arrangements or negotiating new contracts in the context of very adverse arrangements with large international buyers. Also on what types of digital platforms or dialogues along the value chain might create a more even playing field at least for negotiations and for setting up the trading arrangements. The previous webinar in the series looked at producer agency in the context of voluntary sustainability standards. And this discussion of course touched on issues of minimum pricing and strategies that seek to promote a living income for farmers selling into global value chains. And so today's event builds on this a little and explores the notion of producer agency in the context of West African cocoa. And more specifically in the context of the recent living income differential pricing mechanism, which was introduced through the Abidjan Declaration signed by the governments of Ghana and Cote d'Ivoire in 2018. And the declaration aimed at better defending the interests of cocoa producers as well as the economies of both countries. So it's intended to help producers earn a living income through a premium. It was first implemented in the cocoa growing season 2021. And is a bold new move by the governments to make to try and make a fundamental change to the structure of global markets, tackle poverty and ensure rural producers receive a living income. So today's event is going to explore the extent to which producers have been involved in the design of the LID, its implementation monitoring oversight that will touch on how the LID is functioning in reality and what this tells us about the spaces for producer power and agency within the sector, but also share key lessons that will go beyond living income debates in cocoa alone. It will also touch on alternatives to the LID for improvements to livelihoods in cocoa sector. So just for a bit of clarity, this event is not a broad debate about a living income in general terms, but about the LID in particular, and what we can learn from this experience about ways in which governments and their electorate might address the mental power imbalances in supply chain. I'm delighted to say we have a fantastic panel of speakers with us today to share perspectives from civil society to tackle this question of farmer agency. First up, we have Evelyn Barn, the policy advisor on human rights and business for Incota in Germany. Evelyn has over 15 years experience on human rights issues in global supply chains, focusing on violations in the cocoa supply chain. Following Evelyn Zai, we'll talk. Pauline is director of the Inardis Formation Côte d'Ivoire. Pauline holds a degree in agronomy specializing in crop protection. And Inardis Formation is a network of Pan-African associations that works for equitable and sustainable development in Africa. Then we'll have Sandra Puabea-Saqua, who is a project officer at SEND Ghana and also coordinator of the Ghana Civil Society Cocoa Platform. SEND specializes in policy research and advocacy, focusing on pro-poor policy and development programs, monitoring in Ghana and service delivery through the promotion of livelihood security. And then we have Ismaela Pomasi, who is chairperson for the Cocoa Apropo Association in Ghana and member of the Ghana Civil Society Cocoa Platform. And CAA is an independent organization for and buy cocoa farmers from Ghana, which seeks to create a better life for its members. So those are our four panelists. And the speakers are going to share their insights during the first 30 minutes. And then we'll have, a little under an hour, as Matt introduced previously, please make use of the Q&A box as we go. Use the chat box for more general comments and sharing of information. And then we'll pick up on those questions in the Q&A. So I'd first like to welcome Evelyn Van and then Thierry, my colleague, will take over with introducing the panel. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you, Emily. And also to the whole team of IIED for the event invitation to this event. I and in quarter highly welcome that IIED is giving some spotlight on the role of local civil society organizations in the discussion on the living income differential. And I think the most important part of today's event will be the input of Sandra, Pauline and Ismael, because they can give their position and the position of CSOs in Ghana and Kootiwa and from produce, producer organizations on what their lessons are from the living income differential discussion. I would rather give some background what my observation is on how civil society is involved in political decision making processes in the cocoa sector. And I have been working in cocoa since about 10 years now, before I have worked on human rights issues in other global supply chains like in textiles. And actually, I would say I don't know of any sector where there are more dialogue platforms than in cocoa. There are platforms where only industry players get together like the World Cocoa Foundation. Others are multi stakeholder initiatives where industry players, governments and civil society sit around the table, like the German initiative for sustainable cocoa. And they're all aimed to improve the livelihoods of cocoa farmers. Then there are countless conferences on cocoa topics, sometimes with the focus on living income, then again on deforestation, on child labor, all together. What I have observed when I started working on cocoa almost 10 years ago was that rarely representatives of the producers themselves were sitting at the negotiation table or local civil society organizations, non-governmental organizations from Europe or the US and international NGOs were invited. But NGOs from the producing countries, local NGOs and their representatives were, and I would say still are often underrepresented in the discussion. So in many of those conferences and round table discussions, we all talk about the cocoa farmers, but they themselves are not asked what to change to improve their lives or to protect their environment. The problems in the cocoa production are analyzed and actions are developed from industry players, from international NGOs or political stakeholders. But the real experts, the cocoa farmers and their representatives are often not involved. And in quotas uses as a crucial point to strengthening producer organizations and local civil society and the political dialogue. And what does that mean? What are their needs to become part of the political dialogue discussions? We figured that first of all, producer organizations and civil society need to have access to information on developments in the cocoa sector, not just what is happening in their countries because those information that have easier access to, but what is globally happening to understand issues. You need to understand the global supply chain. So you need the information from both sides of the supply chain. But also producer organizations and local NGOs need the access to political decision making processes. And many times we see that civil society in the producing countries are even informed if new processes are started, for example, in the EU or in the US. And how can we address this? What is our approach to strengthen civil society organizations? We believe that we need strong partnerships between NGOs in Europe and civil society in Ghana and Kortiwa to work together. And we have strengthened those kind of partnerships, like some people who are here and working in cocoa might know the voice network. Also, the voice network was for some years not really connected to local civil society organizations, but that has improved a lot. And we have strengthened our positions together with our partners in Ghana and Kortiwa. A lot of exchange information is needed. And yeah, basically on both sides of the supply chain, CSOs communities need to work together. And then we also realized that besides the access to information, there's often a lack of logistical and financial possibilities to participate in decision making processes, like in conferences and meetings. It starts already with the cost for travel expenses or the procurement of visas. I would say there's definitely a misbalance of power in the cocoa sector if it comes to financial and logistical resources of the different stakeholders. And I think that is also a field for development interventions by public development agencies to support the advocacy work of CSOs in the producing countries. I think that should also be in the interest of all stakeholders, because the buy-in and decisions will highly depend on whether those affected, such as the cocoa farmers themselves, support those decisions. And if they are not involved in the decision making process, that is weakening their buy-in and the decision. And now I'm coming to the living income differential, which was initiated by the governments in Ghana and Kortiwa. And from all the discussions I had with CSOs in Ghana and Kortiwa, it is highly welcomed and it's seen as a very important process. But also their civil society was and is still insufficiently involved. And I think Sandra, Pauline and Ismail will have more to say about this. From my side, I would like to make a call on all governments in Europe and in the producing countries as well as representatives of the cocoa and chocolate industry to take into account the opinions and experience, and especially also the innovative ideas of local producer organizations and local civil society in future debates for a sustainable cocoa sector. And I think that is the key to have really a sustainable cocoa sector in the future. So, yeah, with this final call, I would like to pass on the input, I think to Sandra. Pauline, in fact. Okay, madame Zay, if you're ready, I'll let you speak. Thank you very much, Eveline. Well, thank you. Thank you to the IID for inviting us to this webinar and thank you to Eveline for this general context on the situation. I'm trying to share my screen with you. I hope that everybody can see my screen. So I have prepared a very short PowerPoint presentation to present the lessons learned by the civil society with regards to this issue of the living income differential and the lessons that we have learned. This concept of the LID is something that has begun to be very much present in the civil society sector in Côte d'Ivoire since 2019. There were studies carried out in 2017-2018 with regards to this living income. And there were decisions to try to evaluate the level of income of producers and in particular the differences that exist. And this follows on therefore from the negotiations between Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana to try to agree this living income at $400 per ton. This was something that generated a lot of hope, but also a lot of questions. The main question that was asked was how exactly can we ensure that there will be an effective implementation of the living income differential? So we saw that there were challenges that needed to be faced. One of the first challenges was in terms of the organization of the civil society and in particular this concept of the LID and having a participation in general discussions around this. So with regards to the civil society organizations, there have been several meetings, the Côte d'Ivoire Council and so on that we took part in. And this enabled us to get a clearer idea around the LID. And we also talked, we had a working group that worked on the living income issue and we tried to support the different producing organizations to implement the LID. And we needed first and foremost to get them involved in the discussion to have a good understanding of what this living income concept means. And we also needed to discuss the legitimacy and representation within the discussion context that has already been a reference made to the fact that this legitimacy and representativeness is not necessarily obvious. There are some cooperatives that do take part in discussions. There are cooperatives at different levels. There are some that are at the very basic level but the issue around the legitimacy of these organizations for representation is something that we really need to think about because to date we cannot really say that the producing organizations are fully represented in the discussion. We also need to think about the capacity for self-monitoring in terms of the implementation of the LID. This is partly ensuring that the cooperatives once the decisions have been made can be implemented. When it comes to civil society, I believe that there really is a sensitivity of the civil society organizations around the concept of the living income differential. I think that this concept is not something that is new but the actions to really support producers to enable them to improve their income and to reach a living income, a decent level of income, is something that really requires the involvement of civil society organizations, at least in Côte d'Ivoire. We can see that within the cocoa sector we really need to be able to involve the producers at the different levels. I think that it is the limitations to these actions that took place in the past which means that we have a response that really needs to boost the achievement of these results that we are all seeking. So that means that these civil society organizations really need to get involved in the actual implementation of the LID. On the ground in Côte d'Ivoire, we can see that there are many actions that have been undertaken to enable the improvement of the income level of producers. There are different activities that are implemented on the ground which mean that we then have an implementation throughout the sector through the cooperative organizations. There are different activities for producers in terms of organizing their activities. We obviously need to also improve the agricultural practices to improve their yield and there are also some agricultural practices to protect the environment and to ensure that the sustainability will be real throughout the sector and there are also many other approaches that exist. So all this means that the improvement of capacity and there are some actions for improvement of the income but there's also some action to improve the activities in terms of representation and we need to be able to have a more general view of the stakes within the agricultural context particularly in the cocoa sector so that we can reach the stage where we are able to inform the producers on the ground and this is something that is currently being developed and which we are needing to improve the communication to ensure that producers are truly informed of any changes and developments within the cocoa sector so this is an action that we are implementing in the context of a specific project that we have organized with in quota and this focuses on the capacity of civil society organizations and producers organization for them to be able to take part in the dialogue. So within this project we have grouped we have this we have set up this platform and we try to follow what's happening with this campaign for cocoa and we try and follow what's happening in the cocoa sector and we produce notes proposals and so forth to ensure that the decision makers we gather the decision makers so this gives us the possibility to be able to express our point of view and this platform is truly works in a very inclusive participative way and the notes produced reflect truly the position and the life of these cooperative members of this platform so as regards the scope we have so that the voice of producers can be better heard I would say this scope is fairly weak fairly small as I said earlier there is always this questioning this interrogation on the legitimacy of OPA representatives in the discussion platforms what is the mode of designations how are they appointed are the representatives appointed it's not always a transparent approach it's not always very clear people are not always very sure of how legitimate these representatives are and also the scope is also small and weak because there's a very low sensitivity as regards the the peasant power the the actual farmers do not realize the power they have to influence the management of the running of their own sector because they were always represented or they always represent themselves as being the weakest the leak wing of the value chain where in fact they are the first and foremost link without whom this sector would not exist so there is a whole lot of work to do regarding the mentality so that producers can recognize more their own power and agency and ensure they take their their rightful place in the management of this sector there's also a very weak communication regarding the dialogue process ongoing dialogue process regarding with the regarding the producers so there was a dialogue launched between the ivory coast and the european union regarding the ability capacity of the sector but we note that that regarding a kaco organization the representation was poor so they can't really express their opinion i was telling you earlier as regards this this project we have we are running at the moment there were several proposals made regarding to ensure that we could ever there was an inclusive participative approach including the producers these are some of the proposals made regarding the living income differential so what came out the proposal that came out of our of our discussion platform that we had set up that we need to have really reliable statistics regarding producers and kaco farmers in ivory coast this is truly important it's difficult to project to the future and to set up to create strategies that are truly that are a good fit and when there was a missale when there was this big campaign to commercialize in 2020-2021 we actually asked the members of the platform to gather and they analyzed the projects that had been realized with the kaco cocoa and coffee council chair to to to sort of see what the situation was and therefore the cocoa sector in ivory coast has to take into account the changes that are coming and they should really integrate and represent the system the commercial system and the role of cooperatives within the purchase of cocoa but also the supply for producers and chocolate companies so this really the situation actually has fragile eyes has made the there are a lot of stakeholders a lot of players in ivory coast regarding the industrial and farmers for cocoa so this role should be devolved to the cooperative but they are weakened and this is really a source of weakness for the producers it was also suggested that we would fix the price that you would have you would have prices that would be fixed taking into account the production fees but we advise the council the cocoa council that they should really set the price that would be a remuneration for the producers taking into account the cost of production and what came out the price of 1000 francs was well received by the producers but this price covered barely covered their cost to produce cocoa so therefore we need to this so we have we still need to work towards this living income differential therefore the producers suggested that the warranty fund the guarantee fund which exists for the cocoa coffee council and this should compensate the losses incurred by the producers if there is a missale so we are we're able to activate this warranty fund financing and also improve the capacity of internal storage for cocoa production and also so the producers suggested to foster and support transforming transformation the actual local consumption of cocoa but the missale in 2020-2021 pushed a certain number of cooperative to actually work in the transforming industry transformation industry and that was in order to improve the revenue of the income of the producers now the lessons the takeaways if you want is that reaching living income for producers depends a lot on the goodwill of multinationals but also of procedures to guarantee the transparency of the sector management inclusivity and it was not effective and producers really suffered from that what we have noticed is that cooperative were in sustainability programs working in in that and they did not truly fail this crisis there was during the 2020-21 campaign but conventional cooperative it was fairly difficult for them so the LID was not we really need to go towards prices that are lucrative and in every cost so we will share the slides after the the event so you can and there's a one-hour discussion session so we can continue the chat afterwards anyway so it is not lost at all thank you thank you so much and apologies for interrupting you so Sandra if you to everyone so I'm Sandra Sakwa and I work with Saint Ghana but also I play very instrumentary in the Ghana social society cocoa platform so that is a platform that you know brings on board different civil society actors including cocoa farmers civil society organizations NGOs media but also trade unions and we have some individuals in there basically to foster advocacy to influence cocoa sector policies in Ghana I'm very excited to be part of this webinar and to give my thoughts on issues centering around the living income differential I think the earlier speakers have you know tackled on the the basis for the living income differential and giving a picture of of the initiative so if I have the privilege I would want to just delve into the conversation straight off I think that we all acknowledge the significance of the the LID in short the living income differential and how impactful this policy is unspated to be on on farmers livelihood so we we also acknowledge as a society that it is not an all-in-all solution to farmers plight or to the cocoa sector but then we must admit and also recognize the fact that it is a very key and critical you know policy to help improve farmers livelihood in trying to implement this initiative Ghana and as Côte d'Ivoire I mean that the deal there has been some challenges surrounding it but particularly with farmers voices or producer voices and I would want to speak to some of the challenges that we have observed around this context we acknowledge that there has been some involvement of some farmers in the LID discussions at especially the inception's emanate community of practice so sorry about that here I have some internet challenges so I have myself my video turned off so yes we acknowledge some level of participation and our involvement of cocoa farmers in the discussions around the living income differential in the early stages I remember it's somewhere in June July 2019 when the discussions had to take place in Accra and then advancing it also in Côte d'Ivoire some farmers confirmed that they participated in these discussions however the question to be asked is who is representing farmers and or producers at these levels are these representations acknowledged by the larger producer population and if they are present in these meetings and do they represent and or present the minds and demands of the Nuno Small Holder Coco farmers so these are questions that I think we need to reflect on when we talk about farmers voices being heard around implementation of the living income differential and or even the design of the of the policy but then also the approach to including producers in the design of the LID has not been comprehensive so in some cases I think that farmers have confirmed that it was a bottom-up approach that needed to be you know used and or employed other than the top-down approach so farmers consider themselves as you know takers of price in this instance where the calculation you know was done somewhere indoors with just a few you know representations coming from farmers and in the end they hear a particular you know figure coming out as that differential so in Saint Ghana for instance and we conducted a recent study which proposed that one of the approaches that should be you know used by our government and here I'm talking about the regulator or Cocoa Board must find a way of using a bottom-up approach in sourcing or soliciting for you know input of views of cocoa farmers and when it comes to determination of prices of cocoa and farm gate prices and and even for other and related sector policies so these are also very critical things that I think we've seen as far as the design of the LID is concerned but then also you know one challenge has been that farmers have not had that ability to you know have that common front that would help them you know and have a common voice that when they speak it you know exerts a louder voice and amasses some kind of you know that would get policy makers to make that immediate change and then responding to their needs and so there is you know that need for we to as civil society as other sector players to supporting cocoa farmers you know to having that common front of voice and I think that there are some current interventions on board to get to speak to responses from civil society regarding the LID over the past few years civil society you know fraternity has made deliberate efforts to contribute to initiatives and all discussions to improving and farmers income therefore the late is of core importance to us and in Ghana for instance there has been the establishment of a civil society alliance and that is linking producer groups to civil society organizations NGOs and media trade unions and that is the Ghana civil society cocoa platform that I mentioned earlier and associated myself as a member and we are undertaking critical advocacy engagement to influencing cocoa sector policies to enhance farmers livelihood again the alliance you know or the platform continues to support Ghana and then could devour government on the late and we have undertaking you know consistently some advocacy interventions and all initiatives like issuing price statements to supporting the late individual organizations on the ground are also undertaking very critical and innovative activities you know providing information on the living income differential to farmers at the community level within companies and we are collaborating to do quite a number of things to just you know get farmers well informed on the living income differential and there is more to be done we are also you know through other forms of advocacy activities trying to demand consistently from companies to as it is redeem their commitments to paying the living income differential and going to the fact that the recent and cocoa season has faced a challenge with implementation of the of the differential we if we look at the scope and all the the what is happening currently there are quite a number of approaches and or leverages that we can tap into as not just producing countries or you know as farmers but I think to all all of us as key sector players and so we we foresee they're already you know Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire as the two producer giants who are taking this initiative as a very you know significant and bold step and well however think that to go or having a more strategic way of you know influencing and or pursuing the implementation of the late there will be the need to also bring on board the other producing countries like Cameroon Nigeria you know to make sure that and we broaden the scope and for that matter and there is a huge voice being amassed to to influence and or push for the sustenance of the living income differential there is also that scope and all that leveraging on the ongoing EU and trade regulations and the discussions and to ensure that companies support the living income differential implementation and personally for me I am really looking at seeing the late you know actually being seen or surfacing somewhere within the regulations such that we we get companies to you know really commit to to supporting the living income differential so if if there are all these interventions coming from the EU level we producing countries and specifically coming from civil society actors who actually have this call to demand for a portion that will speak specifically on the living income differential and what produces you know few needs to be done to ensure that they receive the living income differential and one is to really you know get our government you know to be transparent and accountable to to to farmers but then also to the public on how implementation of the late you know is being done and so it even boosts and or give that kind of you know backing to the government where civil society actors with informed you know and all with a lot of information from government can give that support where companies are failing to support and the implementation of the late a lot of stakeholders including civil society actors can actually back government you know in making sure that this policy actually leaves or is being sustained and so that call to government producing government is really one of our priorities and then also we civil society are actually demanding and or calling for that huge investment to support and farmers you know initiate alternative livelihoods in a more you know comprehensive way so that we don't have quite an ad hoc base of alternative initiatives that could also you know support the living income differential and in a whole it could increase and or improve the living income of cocoa farmers and in the end improving their living standards so some of the lessons civil society is that of course we know how challenging implementation of the late has been in the past one year one or half years if I may put it um farmers must own the living income differential policy that is one key lesson I pick from from from this policy and so where we see government you know actually leading the policy design of formulation and implementation we also see the outside world and I'm talking about you know um um um consuming countries for instance seeing government dominating and probably it gives that it raises a lot of question so where we have producers themselves actually owning and then leading the front speaking out and demanding you know for the implementation consistently um gives a lot of weight to um implementing um the policy and so there is this um efforts from civil society for instance to make sure that we support producers or cocoa farmers to have um um um mobilize themselves and to have that common void where they could you know um um lead the entire um advocacy or demand for um um um um um how do you put it consistent implementation of the living income differential linking lessons from the flex and vpa um must also be brought on board um in the cocoa sector um where we see um cocoa governance you know um structures being aligned to ensure that we have um communities we have um um cocoa farmers voices head um in in policy decision as we witness in the forestry um um sector so transparency from government is also key I think um Pauline mentioned that and I wouldn't want to um echo on that again and this means that um our government must employ an inclusive approach that will engender farmer our producer ownership of the living income differential and other sector policies thank you very much Sandra thank you so much and you I was going to ask you to wrap up which you just did that's fantastic um Ismaila I hope you still you're still here and yes you are here and um yes so thank you Sandra for your presentation Ismaila over to you um good morning and uh my regards to all my co-analysts my name is Pomasi Ismaila I'm the chairperson of the co-author association which is a farmer based organization in Ghana our the current membership of over 10,000 members of Britain in all the cocoa growing regions in the country now what we do as an association I mean our main objective is to improve the livelihood of farmers who have subscribed to the the package that we give them and um as part of our objective we we have extension offices yeah what I'm saying is that I'm the chairman of Cocoa of our association um is a farmer based organization in Ghana with the current membership of over 10,000 operating in all the cocoa growing regions in the country our main objective is to improve the livelihood of our cocoa farmers members who are part of this association so we um actually giving farmers you know training uh on good agricultural practices we also do certification we undertake community development projects and then we also operating pensions team what call it kukua rapa pensions team where members will contribution and then uh this contribution we we we we we we we think that eventually it will secure the future you know uh income for for cocoa farmers after their retirement so this is what we do in our association now um or this particular um discussion that we are having i'm a virtual discussion on the living income differential which has come to stay i have to borrow the waste of my tea living income differential has come to stay now let's all try to look at why this living income differential and why it must come to stay when we look at all the sustainability challenges that we are facing with talk of child labor talk of deforestation and living income i have consistently maintained that the engine of the industry is pricing pricing that would actually guarantee a living income for cocoa farmers when you are able to deal or solve the problem of living income for cocoa farmers then all other sustainability challenges can be addressed we've had series of discussions on deforestation on child labor and all of that but most of times what baffles me is the low level of discussion that we have on on on living income anytime living income discussion comes up the only assurance we give farmers is that farmers should look at alternative livelihood you know uh programs what what this tells us is that we are admitting that the cocoa cannot for the current price the cocoa cannot guarantee a farmer a living income and for that matter the farmer needs to also undertake other projects that would also you know bring some level of income to the farmer and for me i think that this narrative has always been bad we cannot ensure sustainability when the very work the farmer does cannot guarantee him a living income when you look at the value chain all the players along the value chain how many of these players have been told to engage in other alternative livelihoods to guarantee him a living income apart from the work that he's doing it is only the farmer that we have all come to accept that the cocoa and the price of the cocoa cannot guarantee you a living income and for that matter engage yourself in other alternative livelihood programs many researchers have come to show clearly that especially Ghana could evolve and i think that for us one of the reasons why these two countries champion this living income differential discussion is because many of the production of cocoa the very farmers who are producing cannot assure themselves of a living income then where lies the sustainability how can we break the generation gap that we have how do we ensure that at the moment farmers who are working in the cocoa farms when they grow old their children will take up the work that they are doing how are we going to attract the youth to go into the sector when it is so clear that these farmers are not getting a living income this tells us clearly that there was something urgently needed to be done to be able to at least start solving the problem and i think that is why these two countries the leadership of these two countries decided that they have to come out with something that would actually top up the current price for farmers to at least begin to see some level of a living income we are not saying that we want to live a luxurious life we want to get income that would actually sustain us to make a living what i think is a fundamental human rights so if we're doing this work and we are not able to guarantee ourselves a living income for me i will once again see that there's sustainability there is a big question about sustainability but come to think about the approach these two countries undertook initially there was some kind of a threat to the industry that if you do not accept this all other sustainability projects will hurt them and for me this living income differential discussions should have started on that note because all the industry players all of us we agree that we need to make sure farmers improve their their livelihood we need to make sure the farmers are getting a guaranteed living income but these two producing countries are coming up with a project that will help us address the problem that we are all trying to solve but we saw some kind of resistance coming from other big players i don't think that that was that was a good precedent to start with a discussion of the on the living income it has now come to stay garner we saw some level of increment in our producer price and this increment was as the result of the living income differential we welcome it and ways that no future discussion will come to erode the successes this living income differential is talking of course there are some challenges with the implementation of the living income one of the challenges for me that we are unable to assess the situation fairly to know whether it is as a result of the implementation of the living income or the coven 19 if it's that globally we are all experiencing we are we are told that global demand for chocolate you know cocoa products has gone down and it's really affecting customers to buy more cocoa beans and it's really giving some kind of a problem to garner co diva cocoa farmers this year we had a problem of at a point we were not even getting paid for the cocoa that we're selling and one of the reasons that that that that we're giving was that the the the coven 19 situation is affecting all right what i'm saying is that yes we accept the discussion on living income we hope and pray that it will come to stay but we are also appealing to these two countries garner co diva our leadership to also put in such as to ensure ensure that the living income differential would come to stay and we have that serious commitment from our customers and that we can measure this commitment to actually know whether they are deviating from helping to implement this living income differential or not and like sandra said i mean this came from these two countries that are probably global that we also believe that too so what i'm what i'm saying is that going forward we we wish that garner co diva would also involve other producing countries to also come on board and help champion the course of this living income differential the living income differential is not an end to itself it's a certain point we believe that going forward the discussion that we need to hold globally should be what price normal international price that would actually secure a living income co co farmers globally and not something called a living income differential because if you are not careful a time will come that this living income differential with the adjectives that it has would also come in fadeouts we want something that we can all make sure that it has come to stay and it is a price a global price that gives us that living income and not a living income differential 400 they say when it goes for co-price is below 2600 dollars a ton then we bring in the living income i am i am pretty sure that if this is the narrative then the industry will make sure that the co-price at the international level will not go beyond 2600 and that is what we should avoid so let us bring all countries on board to have a serial discussion on what price minimum price will guarantee the farmer a living income and not a living income differential thank you thank you so much is merely an apologies for the connection that's always a risk we're facing we we're very late we're moving now to the discussion part of this event and please feel free to type in questions in your q and a box i can see there are already two very interesting questions one from Catherine one from Emma um so i will uh ask the question from Catherine um in both um either country um are there any producer organizations apache organizations and if so how does your society support them to ensure this bottom of participation in decision making i don't know who uh wants to start i'm sure you all have um a view about this but uh yeah i i don't know madame zay sandra evelino ismaili who wants to take this first question so i'm very interesting question um if if you take the case of gana um there is an already existing um you know supposed farmer um you know umbrella organizational body um but that the issue has got to do with um its representation and its um formation so it's seen as a government led you know um initiative or governments leading the formation of this group and so um a lot of smallholder farmers down there do not um you know acknowledge its its dealings um as representing all smallholder koko families so that has been the issue and in the interim there is this um other you know school of thoughts trying to come on board with um a kind of neutral and farmer led umbrella body um if you've you've heard of world koko farmers organization we have a gana chapter and so that is one of such bodies that we probably if um they are having um some support from all of us um they might be in the position to you know um represent that apex farmer um um organization that kathryn is asking for so in the interim um this is the two um cases i have presented to you um on the gana side thank you sandra um madame zay for the codivoire well with regards to codivoire i think that there is a uh group of exporters the gpex which is the export group i think this was something that was explained uh in the debate around the koko sector but i think that it is a bit of an intermediary between the multinationals and the producers so the civil society organizations are focused more on the producers organizations which are the ones that most need the support in order to truly take part in the dialogue this is what we are trying to do and what i was explaining earlier in the context of our project we've already um developed a platform through which we are trying to include as many cooperative organizations as possible so that they are first and foremost informed but also that they are represented and we can try to translate their ideas into proposals so this is a process to become much more inclusive and this is a bottom-up approach that we are trying to implement the process is being developed so there are a lot of agencies if you want organizations that are not always included within the process so what we are doing is we are actually proposing the fact that these organizations can be part of the dialogue because we feel that this would be through them through these channels if you want that the koko farmers and producers will be able to get the point of view heard and also express themselves okay very good um i think on my case i can speak about myself um i've been the chairman of the association i've had all the association the leadership of the association has had some collaboration with um and ganna which is also a civil society organization of course i'm also a member of ganna proposed civil society platform where we've had periods of training i believe just about a month ago we had training on the calculation of this living income differential we had about two three days training that actually you know took us through what went into the calculation of the living income differential which helped us express ourselves with the knowledge of on on how this living income you know came about and and i've also had some engagement with koko board on most of their discussions on other sustainability projects we do recognize the fact that you know cooperative is the way to go just about two years ago koko board also realized that there is a need to um assist farmers to form cooperatives so they launch nationwide you know cooperative where they encourage farmers to join cooperatives to be able to do directly and also to assess information from koko board currently we have an umbrella organization uh which is koko she is is is koko farmers and say uh i'm not farmers association yes but like sandra said the process of appointing who represents us at that level has not been that transparent and i'm sure it's one of the reasons why koko board itself realized they need to help come to the grassroots and then encourage farmers to form you know associations so that they can have that better engagement with with with farmers going forward so yes we have found some level of if there's you know uh uh cooperative discuss and that has not been that transparent for us thank you isnaela would everyone want to add anything else yeah i i realize what i observe that we have like a lot of discussions like who is the real representative of farmers and i i find this discussion a little bit difficult because even if we look into european countries obviously there are umbrella organizations of farmers but usually in each of the countries at least also for germany we have two or three different umbrella organizations so to think there will be one single unique national koko farmers organization i i think we should take a step back from that i think what's important is that cooperatives are professionalized are well equipped with information that they are able to understand the whole global supply chain and um becoming more and more and having more and more the capacity to to become involved in decision-making processes and that obviously starts already with like having a democracy in their own cooperative to have like elections of leaders in their cooperative and then we might have like you know a bunch of um umbrella organizations but not just only one single ghanai and koko farmers organization or irorean koko farmers organization you know i i think we also have to see that the majority of koko farmers are not even organized yet in a structured way so there's still a way to go and i think like the the um the need of other stakeholders we want to talk with one organization um is also a little bit because it's easier for us if we have like one organization to talk with and think okay they represent all koko farmers but there's a diversity of koko farmers so that's not going to be the easy way forward and i think we as stakeholders have to deal with that um yeah but i think there are also other important questions and that under q&a maybe we have time to also address those absolutely thank you so much another question and i've seen it's been uploaded four times so i'm going to read it both in in english and i will translate into french for madame zay so both ghanai and ivory course governments have a stake in decisions on the lid can we see from the presentations that cso's matter in this discussion if you want to make progress the challenge is both governments um have not been welcoming or open and allowing cso participation cso in in these discussions what approach are we talking uh are we taking to make the governments to see cso's as allies in pushing this agenda leading to their involvement in this issue and i will translate quickly yes so i think that there is always there's always been a collaboration between all stakeholders for the koko sector whether it be to for the for to reform the sector or for a certain amount of decision taking decision making but when we talk about some critical points in particular how to fix the price and the ongoing discussion in gana for instance about this or management management of commercialization the commercialization campaign trade campaign there are also always there there is a certain weakness and some limitation because there's a lack of transparency at some level at certain levels so as regards every course how do we collaborate with the decision makers and with multinationals i will give you a few examples i would say that with multinationals this is more a case of program development projects for instance that are set up and then carried out in favor of the cooperative so these projects for instance are funded by multinationals and and implemented by the civil society organization with the support of the government and the government can also sometimes through civil civil society organization sets up programs interaction projects with the koko farmers so this reinforces the the capacity that koko farmers and producers have and cooperative in the field as regards the advocacy and participating to the decision making process we also there is also a participation of different osc which are implemented either through governments or through other technical agencies or development agencies and but regarding advocacy i would say often we have to fight to ensure that we can take part within those spaces this platform and we really must be able to knock at the right door and have a dialogue with the right people to be included so i would we we truly try to create this link between the government multinationals and civil society organizations so that we the true beneficiaries are the the koko farmers so that they can be better supported and that what their worries are taken into account but indeed we always find that there are challenges on the horizons always difficulties to implement things to ensure that this system because institutional this collaboration is because institutionalized and ensures that it tackles issues in a satisfactory manner yes yeah um what i want to add to what um the other speaker said is that yes civil society or you know their work should be seen as a way of also helping koko board here i'm in Ghana so i make reference to koko board to also appreciate the fact that they are also playing an important role in their area of work it is not all the time that civil society organizations criticizes you know criticize government sometimes they also you know do a constructive criticism which um um government must also accept this issue of living income differential i can tell you that most of the explanation that farmers got from the living income differential came from civil society organization they organized series of workshop took farmers through and help farmers understand all the elements that went into the uh how do you call it the living income differential they are doing a lot of work but sometimes uh the government also saying that these these these organizations are just in to criticize the work cannot be done by government alone we all have to come on board to help solve their usability issues that confront us as as as as as you know koko produces many civil society organizations have organized series of training to build capacity of you know farmer corporates the leadership of farmer corporates to be able to understand the issues that you know uh go on with the value chain many of these discussions have been championed by civil society organizations i would want to look forward to see a situation where government would would would open their doors freely in a transparent manner to allow civil society organizations to also augment uh the work that they are doing because many of them are really helping farmers thank you can i just add on to absolutely yes so quickly um yeah yeah so um great i i think that um in in Ghana um we as civil society have actually you know registered and or um affirmed our position on the living income differential and how um we support um this policy intervention um i think that done consistently in itself possessing the position where um already government and here i'm referring to koko board you know recognizes that support um that okay surely and CSOs are supporting and or back the the the initiative um what we can do um trying to you know respond directly to this question um most of us um undertake you know evidence um base approach to advocacy and so um you know receiving some of the feedback emanating from um that um i send Ghana and that it has you know um resulted to um um some responsiveness from from koko board we may want to employ that mechanism by you know researching or looking more into the implementation of the living income differential as we progress with implementation and we you know mobilized and or put these um findings um from these research work before koko board and then you know dialogue with them i think that the key word is to dialogue and or discuss with them you know in a very strategic manner meaning the people who really matter must be around the table um not necessarily you know coming out into the media space but then we we try and engage them on what we have seen with issues to you know transparency and all participation or involvement of farmers and civil society and so forth and i think they they are going to open up their their doors and receive some of these feedback to you know um shaping the policy implementation i would also like to add something here um and i would like to bring it back to my um input in the beginning i think we have to look a little bit back where we're coming from and in koko um in ivory coast and in Ghana um 10 years ago 15 years ago when the debate on sustainable koko production was already highly discussed in europe and in the us um civil society groups in Ghana and kote war were not involved at all and i think we have moved already a great step forward um that at more and more conferences and um a good example are the latest developments um organized by the european commission with high level um consultations of all stakeholders and civil society organizations are becoming involved they're asked for their opinion they're asked for giving a position paper to be part of the discussion still i think there's a long way still to go because many stakeholders if they organize a conference if they organize consultations it's not the first thing they think about okay can we consult producers or CSOs from Ghana from kote war and that's where i think also is a task for european NGOs like encota to raise awareness on that to continuously supporting CSOs and producer organizations to open those doors polin has talked about to knock on those doors and tell them if you talk about koko you should not talk about koko if you don't involve local CSOs and the koko producing organizations and i think in both countries um we have seen a development where there are platforms or working groups where a lot of where a lot of NGOs came together i think in Ghana it's about 15 and you know i think five or six of the big producer organizations in kote war it's about 20 organizations and CSOs um where they come together to to form a common position and a common strategy on how to influence koko policies and this has not existed like five years ago so i think that's a start and as more as everybody is raising the awareness that there is civil society and there are producer organizations who really have an opinion on what is happening the better it is and i think they have to be loud i mean if you don't if you're not loud you're not seen um yeah so that's basically my my final statement here thank you so much and we do need to to wrap up i will however read the comments from a couple of comments which are books an important question the multinational you have to correct the symmetry of the information and a comment from Debra sorry i'm swedish english now i think the CSO is a very important developing farmer lives looking at my cooperatives there have been a lot of development and improvement in farmer lives from community development to alternative livelihoods which has helped farmers to get additional income source and it's a very helpful comment from Debra from Asuna for cooperative thank you so much we are running out of time unfortunately and i know we could spend another two hours even two days on this topic but my colleague Emily from ied is going to very quickly wrap up hi again and this is really just to say a big thank you i can't possibly give justice to the to the presentations and discussions but what we will do is hand capture a lot of this in a blog and share that with everybody as Jehi said the conversation could go on a lot longer but i think what this has done is and a lot of the presenters alluded this to this at the start is actually at this level international dialogue we're not hearing farmers and and cooperatives voices and that's happening at all levels but that is also changing so that this kind of discussion that raising this agency in the sector voices within the sector is key in its own right let alone tackling the the decision that the issues at hand so I think broadly what we've heard and raised this very clearly was that this is of course welcome this development on the LID and we've heard that it's facing many challenges at many many levels but that it needs to be recognised as the starting point and a starting point to establish pricing as one of the key issues and it's caught up in power within the value chain and it's caught up in where there's been distraction towards other issues and the feeling is that with pricing other sustainability issues can flow from there so we absolutely have to pick this up and build on it and run with it and a lot of what we've heard today is the work that people are doing on building information an information base at the farmer level building organisation at the farmer level building legitimate representation at the level of cocoa farmers so that that power is the power that is there is recognised and can be voiced and can be heard so we move from how it can be built up to how it can be heard by governments and whilst there is a long way to go this has triggered a lot of action but also we need to recognise the progress that has been made to date and that certainly is sounding very strong but we know that there are continued and persistent challenges in actually making shifts in the way the markets are structured and the power dynamics within them so there's been a big effort on making organisations more inclusive and more representative and that work is due to continue and all the panellists today have been very generous in their sharing of reflections on both the challenges they're facing the successes in the work they're doing and the work that is going to be done and I think everyone recognises the confusion in the last year particularly about what some of the causes of the challenges in the LID implementation are because we've had changes in cocoa demand affecting the price so there's a lot of aspects that will play out in time over the next year as well but it's certainly been a fascinating discussion from our point of view and one that we very much look forward to continuing and to continue this focus on agency how can farmers who may feel caught in a particular value chain recognise their own power and be supported to take action according to their own priorities as individual farmers or collectively so apologies again for perhaps not enough time to to discuss as much as we'd want to and for technical issues which have made some aspects challenging to hear but we'll certainly try and iron those out in the capturing of the event and we've shared some links in the chat but please do get in touch if you would like to hear more about the Empowering Producers in Commercial Agriculture project and we look forward to continuing the dialogue in other forms so thank you very much to all the speakers and to the interpreters and I'll hand back over to Thierry to say any further closing words or thanks that I've forgotten. Yes thank you Emily thank you to all the panelists and the interpreters participants I'm going to close now just to say that we're going to write a very a blog that will summarize these discussions including a link of recording of the presentations the slides from Madame Zay and I would also be sending very shortly a very quick survey for you know so you can tell us how what you thought about this event and you know the things we did well or not so well so yeah and look forward to the next event.