Why do cocoa farmers use unapproved pesticides? Empirical evidence from Obuasi Municipality, Ghana

Abstract

To address the growing demand for increased crop yields while mitigating the adverse environmental impacts of agricultural practices, a comprehensive understanding of unapproved pesticide usage among cocoa farmers in Ghana is essential. This study employed a multi-stage sampling technique and administered questionnaires for 400 cocoa farmers. Data analysis encompassed a combination of descriptive and inferential statistics. Generally, the use of unapproved pesticides among the cocoa farmers is relatively low (42%). Cocoa farmers were unsure about their reasons for using the unapproved pesticides (Mean index = 3.41). Agro-chemical shops (79%) serve as the main conduit of information for farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides. The unapproved pesticide mostly used by the farmers was ‘Gramaxone’ (16%). Significantly, the use of these unapproved pesticides was influenced by various socioeconomic factors, including education (5%), farming experience (5%), farm size (5%), access to knapsack sprayers (1%), and access to labour (1%). The study’s key takeaway is the imperative to enhance training programmes for the category of farmers who still use unapproved pesticides. By addressing this issue, it is possible to promote safer and more sustainable agricultural practices while simultaneously improving crop yields, aligning with the broader objectives of sustainable agriculture in Ghana.

Keywords:

• Agro-chemicals
• cocoa production
• perceptions
• pesticides
• socioeconomic factors
• unapproved

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Komalsingh Rambaree
• Department of Social Work and Criminology
• University of Gävle
• Gavle
• Sweden

SUBJECTS:

• Agriculture & Environmental Sciences
• Botany
• Environmental Studies
• Conservation - Environment Studies
• Social Psychology
• Development Studies

Introduction

Without a doubt, cocoa is one of the key and relevant cash crops in most developing nations, and plays a very important role in their foreign exchange generation as well as providing sustainable livelihood sources to many communities in Africa’s food systems (Ayenor et al., 2007; Anang, 2011). Although many developing nations’ economies are being run by their service and industry sectors, cocoa seems to be very relevant in the agricultural sector of these economies, translating its import and export trade balance impacts across the industry and service sectors. As indicated by Aminu et al. (2019), the cash crop is a regional priority in the top ten cocoa-producing nations in making available employment opportunities, foreign earnings, and bringing about socioeconomic development.

Ghana is one of the key players in the world’s cocoa supply chain, maintaining its position as the second-largest producer in the world, with roughly 27% and 20% of supply in Africa and globally, respectively (ICCO, 2017). Concerning the real economic impact of the crop on Ghana’s economy, the sector contributed to about 2.23% of the nation’s gross domestic product (GSS., 2014), with approximate export earnings of 16.48% of the total agricultural export in the year 2013 (ISSER, 2014). In terms of employment, the cocoa food chain in Ghana is estimated to employ about 800,000 farm households, covering about 1.5 million hectares of land for production (Danso-Abbeam et al., 2014). Additionally, Appiah (2004) and Abankwah et al. (2010) estimate that each year, 70% to 100% of the incomes generated by farm households involved in cocoa production are from the crop.

While the country’s efforts to make the most of cocoa (such as being highly recognised for producing high-quality cocoa beans and establishing premium prices in global markets) are recommendable, it is quite unfortunate to highlight that cocoa production in Ghana is characterised by several on and off-farm constraining factors leading to low yields and a decline in economic potential. The prevalence of insects and diseases is one significant contributing factor that has been identified as the major cause of decreasing yield in Ghana’s cocoa production (Ayenor et al., 2007; Ntiamoah & Afrane, 2008; Denkyirah et al., 2016), posing adverse impacts on the economy of the nation.

According to Afrane and Ntiamoah (2011), using pesticides to control cocoa pests and diseases has become an essential approach to enhance and boost cocoa production in Ghana, even though using non-chemical methods is generally advised for health, environmental sustainability, and other reasons. The battle of decreasing crop productivity and yield in recent years due to pests and diseases has necessitated a significant increase in the application of pesticides in Ghana, with extreme usage in cocoa production to increase yield and productivity (Dankyi et al., 2014; Denkyirah et al., 2016). In a study by Dankyi et al. (2014), it was revealed that the high use and application of pesticides in cocoa production was necessitated by the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) mass spraying exercise and the free distribution of pesticides to farmers in the country. This was mainly an effort to manage and avert the impacts of pests and disease infestation on cocoa productivity, promote the responsible use of pesticides for increased production, and reduce and consequently prevent the use of unapproved pesticides on cocoa farms in the country. Nevertheless, because of the increasing scale of the cocoa industry, farmers have abused, overused, and inappropriately applied pesticides (Dankyi et al., 2014). It must be recognised that Ghanaian cocoa farmers’ frequent, heavy, and irresponsible use of unapproved pesticides may leave behind significant amounts of pesticide and chemical residues in the environment, which could have negative effects on human health (Dankyi et al., 2014; Okoffo et al., 2016).

The cocoa industry in Ghana, renowned for its pivotal role in the country’s economy, faces an alarming predicament rooted in the utilisation of unapproved pesticides. This issue casts a shadow over the economic viability of cocoa production and the health and safety of the farming communities. The problem is especially acute because a substantial portion of cocoa farmers in Ghana depend on cocoa cultivation for their livelihoods (Antwi-Agyakwa et al., 2016). The use of these unapproved pesticides poses risks to both the health of farmers (Tanner et al., 2011; Cocco et al., 2013; Gill & Garg, 2014) and their families (Fosu-Mensah et al., 2016), as well as to the environment (Akan et al., 2013; Tanner et al., 2011). It can lead to health problems for farmers, harm the soil and water, and affect cocoa quality (Jin et al., 2017). For instance, Bempah et al. (2011) indicated that pollutants from insecticides and chemicals that find their way into the soil can remain for a very long time, mainly because of their inability to break down into non-toxic forms (Agbeve et al., 2014). These occurrences and inappropriate changes in the natural soil state adversely impact earthworms, microbes, and other natural and biological enemies that serve as decomposing agents of the soil (Ntiamoah & Afrane, 2008). In the same light, the increased and continuous saturation of these chemicals in the food chain poses critical health risks and environmental implications (Gill & Garg, 2014). These could hurt Ghana’s reputation as an exporter of cocoa. To solve this problem, Ghana needs better regulations, oversight, and support for farmers to use safer methods (Antwi-Agyakwa et al., 2016; Fosu-Mensah et al., 2016; Jallow et al., 2017).

While a significant body of literature discusses the use and effects of approved pesticides, there is scant empirical evidence available to expound upon why cocoa farmers continue to utilise unapproved pesticides. The novelty of this study lies in its focus on the underexplored area of cocoa farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides, which represents a significant gap in the existing literature on pesticide usage in agriculture. The use of unapproved pesticides are less regulated, and as such, pose more significant environmental and health risks. While pesticide use in agriculture is a global concern, examining it in the context of cocoa farming in Ghana (one of the world’s major cocoa producers) is relatively unique, and the challenges and dynamics in this context might differ from those in other crops or regions. The study aims to unravel the socioeconomic factors influencing cocoa farmers’ decisions to use unapproved pesticides. The findings are expected to have direct policy implications and can inform interventions aimed at promoting responsible pesticide use among cocoa farmers. Addressing the use of unapproved pesticides could lead to improved farming practices, reduced environmental impact, and enhanced well-being among cocoa farming communities. This study therefore aims to 1) assess farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides 2) assess their reasons for using unapproved pesticides and 3) determine the socioeconomic factors that influence cocoa farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides on their cocoa farms.

Methodology

Study design and study area

The research adopted a cross-sectional survey design, focusing on cocoa farmers to investigate key aspects related to their use of unapproved pesticides. This design allowed for the collection of data at a single point in time, providing a snapshot of the situation among cocoa farmers in the study area. By utilising a survey approach, the study aimed to gather primary data directly from farmers, enabling researchers to explore various factors influencing unapproved pesticide use practices.

The study was conducted in the Obuasi Municipality, a significant cocoa-producing region in Ghana. Obuasi is in the southern part of the Ashanti Region, about 64 km away from Kumasi. It covers an area of 109.5 km² and is bordered by the Upper Denkyira East Municipal, Adansi South District, and Adansi North District (GSS., 2014). This area was chosen due to its prominence in cocoa cultivation and its relevance to the research focus on pesticide usage among cocoa farmers. The Obuasi Municipality provided an ideal setting to investigate the dynamics of pesticide use within the cocoa farming community, offering insights into the challenges and practices prevalent among farmers in this specific geographical context.

Population, sample size and sampling technique

The population of the study was made up of all cocoa farmers in the Municipal. The population of the district is around 104,297, with about 51,885 males and 52,412 females. Among them, 69,034 are literate, and 10,299 are illiterate. There are about 15,257 registered cocoa farmers in Obuasi, who manage around 32,959 farms (GSS., 2014).

A total of 400 cocoa farmers were selected as the study’s sample size. The selection process was conducted in such a way to ensure that it represented a diverse and comprehensive cross-section of cocoa farmers within the Obuasi Municipality. The sample size of 400 was chosen to provide statistically significant results while managing the practical constraints of data collection and analysis. The sample size of 400 cocoa farmers was determined using established statistical techniques, such as the Krejcie and Morgan method, to ensure adequate representation and statistical power. This method considered the estimated population size and desired level of confidence to derive an appropriate sample size for the study.

For this study, a robust multi-stage sampling technique was meticulously employed to ensure the representativeness and validity of the findings. The first stage involved purposive sampling, a deliberate and strategic selection process whereby the Obuasi Municipality was chosen as the study area. This decision was grounded in the municipality’s pivotal role in cocoa production within Ghana, rendering it an optimal focal point for the research endeavour. Moving forward to the subsequent stages, a simple random sampling approach was adopted to identify the diverse communities within the Obuasi Municipality. This method allowed for the random selection of communities, ensuring a fair and unbiased representation of the broader geographical area under study. Furthermore, within each selected community, another round of simple random sampling was conducted to identify specific participants who constituted the sample size for the study. This meticulous approach ensured that each potential participant had an equal chance of being included in the research, enhancing the overall reliability and generalisability of the findings. By employing this multi-stage sampling technique, the study aimed to capture a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of pesticide usage among cocoa farmers in the Obuasi Municipality, thereby contributing valuable insights to the existing body of knowledge in this field.

Data collection

Quantitative data played a pivotal role in this research, and it was gathered to provide valuable insights. The questionnaire used in this data collection process was thoughtfully designed to encompass various dimensions of interest, ensuring a holistic view of the farmers’ experiences. The questionnaire was not a remote or online survey but was administered directly by field researchers who engaged with the cocoa farmers, fostering a more personal and interactive data collection experience. The questionnaire was designed to capture relevant information pertaining to farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides. Questions were structured to elicit responses on pesticide usage patterns, reasons for use, sources of information, socioeconomic factors influencing usage, and perceptions regarding pesticide effectiveness and safety. The questionnaire comprised only closed-ended questions.

Before the actual data collection, the questionnaire was reviewed by other experts from the Department of Agricultural Economics, Agribusiness and Extension, KNUST-Kumasi. This research methodology was implemented with precision and rigor to enable a thorough investigation into the dynamics of cocoa farming in the Obuasi Municipality.

By directly engaging with the cocoa farmers, the study obtained first-hand information on their demographics, perceptions, and pesticide usage. Ethical approval from a committee was not sought for this study. Reasons being that our study did not involve human participants, the data obtained was fully anonymised and cannot be tracked back to the individual participants. Also, respondents willingly participated in the research and provided written consent on the questionnaire before they participated in the study. The objectives of the study were explained to them and they were assured their information would be kept confidential, and their identities would remain anonymous. No data collected could be linked back to individual respondents. Respondents were given sufficient time to give their responses to the questionnaire, without any pressure or coercion. Financial incentives were not offered to influence participation or responses. Participants were encouraged to skip any questions they were uncomfortable answering, but were also advised to approach the questionnaire thoughtfully and deliberately. Importantly, the study did not involve any questions or activities that could cause physical harm or trigger psychological distress such as stress, anxiety, or depression among participants. Finally, we declare that we are the genuine authors of this manuscript.

Face-to-face interactions were conducted by the researchers. Two trained enumerators, familiar with the local context and fluent in the Akan language together with the researchers administered the structured questionnaires to ensure consistency and reliability in data collection. The enumerators followed a standardised protocol to ensure consistency and minimise interviewer bias. Data were collected using paper-based questionnaires, with responses systematically recorded and stored in a secure database. To ensure confidentiality, personal identifiers were anonymised, and access to the database was restricted to authorised personnel only. The surveys were conducted in March-April 2023, over a period of three weeks, to ensure comprehensive data collection while accommodating farmers’ availability and scheduling constraints.

Data analysis and analytical framework

Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation were used to analyse the socioeconomic characteristics of farmers, farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides, types of unapproved pesticides used by the cocoa farmers, and cocoa farmers’ source of information on the unapproved pesticides. In analysing the types of pesticides used by the cocoa farmers, a list of unapproved pesticides was given to farmers for them to indicate whether they use it or not. In analysing farmer’s reasons for using unapproved pesticides, a five-point Likert scale. Cocoa farmers were asked to indicate their perception on a scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). A mean index was then calculated to represent the overall perception of farmers on the use of unapproved pesticides.

To determine the socioeconomic factors influencing farmer’s use of unapproved pesticides, the binary probit model was employed, using STATA. Adopting a strategy used by Denkyirah et al. (2016), we assumed a farmer makes a choice to either use or not to use an unapproved pesticide and this choice is influenced by a set of independent variables. We did this using discrete choice model where the dependent variable takes the form of a dummy variable, thus, 1 if a farmer chooses to use unapproved pesticides and 0 if otherwise. The error term is assumed to have the standard logistic distribution (Bryan et al., 2009). The probit model is specified for this study as: (1) $$\text{Y}=\beta 0+\beta 1X1+\beta 2X2+\beta 3X3+\beta 4X4+\beta 5X5+\beta 6X6+\beta 7X7+\beta 8X8+\beta 9X9+\epsilon$$(1)

Y = dependent variable (1 = unapproved pesticide use and 0 = otherwise), β0 = coefficient of constant term, β1–β9 = coefficient of the independent variables, X1–X9 = explanatory variables, ε = error term.

X1 = Education (years of formal education); X2 = Age (years); X3 = Sex of the farmer (1 = male and 0 = female); X4 = Number of dependents (number of persons depending on the farmer for livelihood) X5 = Farm ownership status (owner -1, not the owner-0); X6 = Farming experience (years of farming); X7 = Farm size (acreage); X8= Farm age (years of farm in existence); X9 = Access to Knapsack sprayer (1 = access, 0 = no access); X10 = Access to Traceability (1 = access, 0 =no access); X11= Access to labour (1 = access, 0 = no access); X12= Membership to cooperative (1 = yes, 0 = no); X13 = Access to extension services (1 = yes, 0 = no); X14 = Income (money earned in GHS); and ε is the error term of the model capturing other noise effects.

Results and discussion

Table 1 presents data on the use of unapproved pesticides among the respondents. Out of the total sample of 385 farmers surveyed, 163 farmers reported ever using unapproved pesticides, constituting 42.34% of the respondents. Conversely, 222 farmers indicated that they had never used unapproved pesticides, accounting for 57.66% of the participants. The findings highlight a significant portion of farmers engage in the use of unapproved pesticides, despite potential risks and regulatory concerns associated with their use (Denkyirah et al., 2016; Antwi-Agyakwa et al., 2016). The research findings of Osei-Owusu et al. (2022) indicate that a significant portion, approximately 30%, of the farmers have persistently employed unapproved pesticides on their agricultural plots. In a news article written by Kuatsinu (2019), it was stated that cocoa farmers in cocoa-growing communities are still using unapproved pesticides on their farms, despite the availability of substances approved by COCOBOD. This trend of pesticide use in Ghana is reported similarly in Cameroon (Mahob et al., 2015). In another study by Boateng et al. (2023), it was rather found that only 9.7% of the cocoa farmers used unapproved pesticides. A likely explanation could be that the approved pesticides are sometimes limited in supply and, therefore, predisposed farmers to buy from the open market to complement what was supplied by the COBCOBOD (Awudzi et al., 2022). The unsafe and unregulated use of pesticides can be hazardous to human health and damaging to the environment (Bhandari et al., 2018; Damalas & Eleftherohorinos, 2011).

Table 1. Use of unapproved pesticides.

Unapproved pesticides	Frequency	Percent
Yes	163	42.34
No	222	57.66
Total	100	100.00

Source: Hyde-Cooper et al., 2023.

Table 2 illustrates the various types of unapproved pesticides mostly used by cocoa farmers, with respondents being able to select multiple options. Among the identified pesticides, the most frequently cited ones include Gramaxone (15.75%), Okumakate (15.5%), and AcetaStar (10.25%). The diversity of unapproved pesticides reported by cocoa farmers in Table 2 highlights the complexity of pesticide use within the agricultural sector. The prevalence of various pesticides, including Okumakate, Gramaxone, and AcetaStar, suggests that farmers may resort to different chemicals to address pest issues in their cocoa farms. This diversity could stem from factors such as accessibility, affordability, perceived effectiveness, and availability in local markets. The widespread use of certain pesticides, such as Okumakate and Gramaxone, at relatively high frequencies raises concerns about their potential health and environmental impacts. These chemicals may pose risks not only to farmers and their families but also to consumers and the broader ecosystem. The presence of these pesticides in cocoa cultivation could lead to pesticide residues in the final cocoa products, potentially affecting food safety and quality (Bhandari et al., 2018; Damalas & Eleftherohorinos, 2011). Moreover, the utilisation of unapproved pesticides like AcetaStar indicates gaps in regulatory enforcement and farmer education regarding safe and sustainable pest management practices. It suggests that farmers may not be adequately informed about the potential risks associated with these chemicals or may lack access to safer alternatives (Antwi-Agyakwa et al., 2016).

Table 2. Types of unapproved pesticides mostly used by cocoa farmers (multiple responses).

Unapproved pesticides	Frequency	Percent
Consider	33	8.25
Super10	21	5.25
Argine	11	2.75
Fastrack	10	2.50
Polythrine	15	3.75
Dursban	16	4.00
Kombat	17	4.25
Pyrethroids	18	4.50
Topsin	19	4.75
Sumitor	19	4.75
Sumico	19	4.75
Lamtor	21	5.25
Controller	22	5.5
Sunpyrifof	23	5.75
Confidiz	29	7.25
Akatesuro	32	8.00
DDT	32	8.00
AcetaStar	41	10.25
Okumakate	62	15.5
Actara	21	5.25
Confider	19	4.75
Gramaxone	63	15.75

Source: Hyde-Cooper et al., 2023.

The research findings of Denkyirah et al. (2016) showed that Akate Suro (Diazinon) and Consider (Imidacloprid) emerged as the most prevalent choices due to their ready availability in the market and affordable pricing. Conversely, Carbamult (Promecarb) and So Bi Hwe (a suspected mixture of multiple active ingredients) were perceived as particularly effective in managing diseases and pests. Meanwhile, other farmers have consistently benefited from the government’s distribution of approved pesticides at no cost. The use of unapproved pesticides by cocoa farmers was attributed to the fact that the Ghana COCOBOD approved and recommended pesticides for cocoa production were not for sale, hence, were not readily available in the market or input shops. In Ghana, the only way a cocoa farmer can have access to the Ghana COCOBOD approved and recommended pesticides for cocoa production is through the Ghanaian government free ‘cocoa mass spraying’ exercise.

Table 3 presents the various sources of information that cocoa farmers rely on concerning unapproved pesticides. The results show that about 79% of the cocoa farmers’ key source of unapproved pesticides was agro-chemical shops. These commercial outlets are critical hubs for farmers seeking agricultural inputs, including pesticides. The prevalence of agro-chemical shops as a key information source underscores the role of agro-input retailers in influencing farmers’ choices regarding pesticide use. In a news article written by Kuatsinu (2019), it was stated that about 80 percent of local agro-input shops sampled had no COCOBOD-approved pesticides on sale but rather sold pesticides that were not registered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or by COCOBOD.

Table 3. Farmers’ source of information on unapproved pesticides.

Responses	Frequency	Percent
Friends and family	18	11.04
Media	11	6.75
Cocoa extension agents	5	3.07
Agro-chemical shops	129	79.14
Total	163	100.0.

Source: Hyde-Cooper et al., 2023.

Secondly, 30% of farmers rely on friends and family for information on unapproved pesticides, which underscores the role of informal networks and word-of-mouth communication within farming communities. This suggests that knowledge transfer among farmers is a vital part of their decision-making processes. These informal channels of information exchange are often based on trust and personal relationships. This reliance highlights the importance of peer-to-peer knowledge transfer and informal communication channels in shaping farmers’ decision-making processes regarding agricultural practices. The fact that a considerable portion of farmers turn to friends and family members for information indicates that they place trust in the experiences and recommendations of those within their social circles who may have first-hand knowledge or insights into the use of unapproved pesticides.

Around 16.75% of farmers obtain information from various media channels, including newspapers, radio, television, and the internet. This signifies the importance of mass media in disseminating information related to agricultural practices. The media serves as a broad-reaching platform, allowing for the widespread distribution of knowledge. It can play a pivotal role in both educating farmers about best practices and raising awareness about the risks associated with unapproved pesticides. The accessibility and reach of media channels make them valuable tools for educating farmers about best practices and raising awareness about the potential risks associated with the use of unapproved pesticides. Through radio broadcasts, television programmes, online articles, and other media formats, farmers can access information on topics ranging from pest management techniques to safety guidelines for pesticide use. The findings of Boateng et al. (2023), which highlight radio broadcasts as a key source of information on pesticides for farmers, further emphasise the importance of media in facilitating knowledge transfer within agricultural communities. Radio, in particular, often serves as a primary source of information for rural populations, providing timely updates, expert advice, and educational content on agricultural topics.

Only 3.5% of farmers seek information from cocoa extension agents. This relatively low percent may indicate that the outreach and effectiveness of extension services in disseminating information about unapproved pesticides could be enhanced. Cocoa extension agents are valuable resources who can provide guidance and support to farmers, particularly in the context of responsible pesticide use. According to a study by Boateng et al. (2023), farmers’ primary source of information for unapproved pesticides was extension officers.

Examining farmers’ perceptions of their use of unapproved pesticides in their production practices is very necessary for comprehensive advocacy for the responsible usage of pesticides in cocoa production, especially through extension engagements (Table 4). The overall mean index of 3.41 suggests that cocoa farmers have mixed feelings about using unapproved pesticides. One possible interpretation of this result is that cocoa farmers may recognise the potential benefits of using unapproved pesticides, while simultaneously acknowledging the associated risks and ethical considerations. The mixed sentiment may reflect differing perspectives among cocoa farmers based on their individual experiences, knowledge levels, and socio-economic contexts.

Table 4. Perception of farmers on the use of unapproved pesticides.

Perceptions of farmers on the use of unapproved pesticides	Mean	Std. Dev
Farmers who use unapproved pesticides should face legal consequences	2.33	1.23
The government should impose stricter regulations on the use of unapproved pesticides	2.64	0.57
The effects of unapproved pesticides are observable	3.11	0.89
Unapproved pesticides are easy to use	3.20	0.85
Unapproved pesticides are compatible with my beliefs and culture	3.35	0.78
I am confident in my ability to identify and avoid unapproved pesticides in the market	3.38	0.80
Unapproved pesticides are more effective than some approved pesticides	3.58	0.79
Unapproved pesticides are more affordable than approved alternatives	3.92	0.03
Unapproved pesticides can be tried on a small scale	4.16	0.81
I trust the safety standards of unapproved pesticides more than approved ones	4.29	0.20
I feel pressured to use unapproved pesticides due to market demands	4.74	0.13
Mean perception index = 3.41

Source: Hyde-Cooper et al., 2023.

The mean score of 2.33 for the belief that farmers who use unapproved pesticides should face legal consequences suggest a recognition of the potential risks associated with non-compliance with regulatory standards. This finding suggests a recognition among some farmers of the potential risks and ethical implications associated with non-compliance with regulatory standards governing pesticide use. The relatively low mean score indicates that a considerable proportion of farmers may not necessarily endorse punitive measures against those who use unapproved pesticides. This divergence in attitudes underscores the complexity of the issue, with farmers likely influenced by a range of factors such as perceived economic necessity, limited access to approved alternatives, or lack of awareness about the legal ramifications of using unapproved pesticides. Despite this, the existence of a significant proportion of respondents advocating for stricter enforcement of regulations highlights a growing awareness of the importance of adhering to legal and ethical standards in agricultural practices (Tanner et al., 2011).

The relatively moderate mean score of 2.64 for advocating stricter regulations on the use of unapproved pesticides reflects a recognition of the need for regulatory intervention to address potential risks to human health, environmental sustainability, and agricultural productivity. This highlights a potential area for policy intervention to improve pesticide governance and ensure sustainable agricultural practices.

The mean score for observable effects, which stands at 3.11 with a standard deviation of 0.89, indicates that cocoa farmers may have uncertainties regarding the potential outcomes associated with using unapproved pesticides. This uncertainty could stem from several factors, including limited information or experience. They may lack comprehensive knowledge about how these chemicals interact with crops, pests, soil, and the surrounding environment. Without adequate information on potential outcomes, farmers may hesitate to use unapproved pesticides, fearing unintended consequences or negative impacts on their crops and land. Again, if they have not previously used these chemicals or have only minimal exposure to them, they may be unsure about their effectiveness, safety, and long-term implications. Lack of first-hand experience may lead to scepticism or caution among farmers, as they may prefer to stick with familiar and approved pesticides to avoid potential risks (Lanaud et al., 2009). Mesnage et al. (2010) and Tanner et al. (2011) rather found that unapproved pesticides gave farmers rapid and observable impacts whenever they applied them, hence their increasing and continuous use of unapproved pesticides.

The perception of ease of use being neutral (mean of 3.20) suggests that farmers neither strongly favour nor oppose the simplicity of employing these pesticides. The mean score of 3.35 for compatibility with user beliefs highlights the importance of farmers’ personal beliefs and attitudes in influencing their decisions regarding pesticide use. This suggests that factors such as cultural norms, traditional practices, or perceived efficacy may strongly influence farmers’ choices, even when faced with potential risks or uncertainties associated with unapproved pesticides. Some farmers may have long-standing traditions or cultural practices related to pest management that favour unapproved pesticides. These practices could be deeply ingrained in the local agricultural heritage. Farmers may have experienced positive outcomes using unapproved pesticides in the past. Such positive experiences can lead to a preference for familiar products, even if alternatives are available. In some cases, farmers might be dealing with pest populations that have developed resistance to approved pesticides. They may turn to unapproved options in search of more effective pest control (Bosompem & Mensah, 2012; Hajjar, 2012; Lanaud et al., 2009).

The mean score of 3.38 for confidence in identifying and avoiding unapproved pesticides in the market highlights a level of uncertainty or lack of awareness among farmers regarding the identification of such products. This underscores the importance of enhancing farmers’ knowledge and awareness regarding the risks associated with unapproved pesticides and improving their ability to make informed decisions. The belief that unapproved pesticides are better than approved ones (mean of 3.58) indicates a tendency among some farmers to view these products as more effective or beneficial, despite their lack of official approval. If farmers perceive that unapproved pesticides provide similar or satisfactory pest control, they may opt for them to save on their expenses (Abankwah et al., 2010). Mesnage et al. (2010) rather found that cocoa farmers perceive unapproved pesticides as easy to use, as they give them rapid and observable impacts whenever they apply them, hence their increasing and continuous use of unapproved pesticides and disregarding their susceptibility to the associated risks both to themselves and the environment.

The mean scores for perception related to the affordability of unapproved pesticides (3.92) highlight the nuanced considerations involved in farmers’ decision-making processes regarding pesticide use. The higher mean score for affordability underscores the economic factors influencing farmers’ choices, with many perceiving unapproved pesticides as more accessible and cost-effective than approved alternatives. This suggests that economic considerations play a significant role in driving the use of unapproved pesticides, particularly among farmers facing financial constraints or seeking to maximize returns on their investment (Hajjar, 2012; Bosompem & Mensah, 2012).

The willingness to try these pesticides on a small scale (mean of 4.16) indicates a cautious approach, with farmers open to experimentation but also aware of the associated risks. While they express a willingness to explore the use of unapproved pesticides to some extent, they do so with a sense of prudence and awareness of the associated risks. This willingness to try on a small scale indicates that farmers are open to experimenting with new pest management methods or products, including unapproved pesticides, to address agricultural challenges. However, the emphasis on trying them on a small scale suggests that farmers are not yet fully committed to widespread adoption. Instead, they prefer to test the efficacy and safety of these pesticides on a limited basis before making larger investments or changes to their farming practices. The cautious approach may stem from farmers’ recognition of the potential risks and uncertainties associated with using unapproved pesticides. While they are willing to explore new options, they do so with a sense of caution and a desire to minimise any negative impacts on their crops, land, and health. By starting small, farmers can assess the effectiveness, suitability, and potential consequences of using unapproved pesticides without exposing themselves to excessive risk (Hajjar, 2012; Khanal & Singh, 2016).

The notable mean score of 4.29, reflecting farmers’ greater trust in the safety standards of unapproved pesticides compared to approved ones, highlights a concerning aspect of farmers’ risk perceptions and decision-making processes. This finding suggests a significant level of scepticism towards the regulatory framework governing pesticide use, which may be influenced by various factors such as perceived efficacy, cost-effectiveness, or lack of awareness about the potential risks associated with unapproved pesticides. The observed lack of confidence in approved pesticides’ safety standards raises questions about the effectiveness of existing regulatory mechanisms and the communication of risk information to farmers. It indicates a need for enhanced education and awareness campaigns to empower farmers with accurate information about the potential hazards posed by unapproved pesticides and the benefits of adhering to approved alternatives. Furthermore, this perception underscores the importance of strengthening regulatory oversight and enforcement mechanisms to deter the use of unapproved pesticides and safeguard public health and environmental integrity (Bosompem & Mensah, 2012; Hajjar, 2012).

The significant pressure perceived by farmers to use unapproved pesticides due to market demands, as reflected in the high mean score of 4.74, highlights a critical issue within the agricultural sector. Farmers are often compelled to prioritize market demands and economic considerations over regulatory compliance and best agricultural practices. This pressure can stem from various factors, including the need to meet market expectations for high yields, address pest and disease pressures swiftly, or simply compete with other farmers in the market. The influence of market forces on farmers’ decision-making processes underscores the complex interplay between economic incentives and sustainability concerns. While farmers may recognize the potential risks associated with unapproved pesticides, such as environmental contamination, human health hazards, or legal repercussions, they may feel compelled to prioritize short-term gains and immediate needs over long-term sustainability.

Table 5 discusses the socio-economic characteristics of the cocoa farmers. The age distribution of cocoa farmers in the study area is a noteworthy observation. With an average age of 54, it is evident that the majority of cocoa farmers are aging. This demographic trend raises concerns about the sustainability of cocoa production in the region. If this ageing trend continues, it is likely that there will be a decline in active cocoa farming activities. This situation is consistent with findings from previous studies by Bosompem and Mensah (2012), Anang et al. (2013), and Okoffo et al. (2016), which similarly reported that cocoa farmers in many cocoa-growing zones in Ghana tend to be between 45 and 50 years old. The average household size of seven and the presence of six dependents on average indicate that many cocoa farmers are responsible for supporting a relatively large number of family members. This suggests that the livelihoods of these farmers are intricately connected to cocoa production. A mean of 22 years of farming experience, along with an average farm age of 21 acres and farm size of 7 acres, illustrates the farmers’ extensive experience in cocoa cultivation. Furthermore, the average of 9 years of education indicates a moderate level of formal education among cocoa farmers. Both education and farming experience are crucial components in shaping farmers’ perspectives and decision-making processes regarding pesticide use. While the number of years spent in formal education is, on average, nine years, substantial farming experience complements this, potentially contributing to the responsible and informed use of pesticides. Notably, the maximum of 16 years of education suggests that some cocoa farmers possess a higher level of education, which can positively influence their decision-making and perception. The average farm income of GHS 6484 in typical cocoa seasons highlights the economic significance of cocoa farming for the surveyed farmers. This income is indicative of the substantial contribution of cocoa farming to their livelihoods.

Table 5. Socio-economic characteristics of farmers.

Continuous variables	Min	Max	Mean	Std. Dev
Age	22	91	54.00	12.76
Household size	1	32	7.30	4.25
Number of dependents	0	30	5.58	4.03
Years of farming experience	1	70	21.86	12.83
Farm age	1	70	20.74	12.52
Farm size	1	32	6.92	5.48
Years of formal education	0	16	9.02	3.37
Income	500	205000	6483.5	15177.69
Discrete variables	Frequency			Percent
Gender
Male	263			65.75
Female	137			34.25
Religion
Christianity	300			75.00
Islam	100			25.00
Marital status
Married	234			58.50
Not Married	166			41.50
Access to Knapsack sprayer
Yes	250			62.50
No	150			37.50
Access to labour
Yes	270			67.50
No	130			32.50
Access to traceability
Yes	237			59.25
No	163			40.75
Access to cooperative services
Yes	343			85.75
No	57			14.25
Access to Extension services
Yes	370			92.50
No	30			7.50

Source: Hyde-Cooper et al., 2023.

Regarding gender distribution, the majority of participants were male, constituting approximately two-thirds of the sample, with 263 male participants (65.75%) compared to 137 female participants (34.25%). This gender disproportionality reflects a common trend in agricultural studies where male farmers often outnumber their female counterparts (Bosompem & Mensah, 2012; Boateng et al., 2014). In terms of religious affiliation, a significant majority of participants identified as Christians, comprising 75.00% of the sample, while 25.00% identified as Muslims. This distribution may influence various aspects of agricultural practices and decision-making processes, given the potential influence of religious beliefs on farming practices. Regarding marital status, the data indicates that 58.50% of participants were married, while 41.50% reported being unmarried. This demographic insight is crucial, as it may reveal differences in farming practices, resource allocation, and decision-making dynamics between married and unmarried participants. Access to agricultural resources and services is vital for farmers’ productivity and livelihoods. The table shows that a majority of participants had access to a knapsack sprayer (62.50%) and labour (67.50%), which are essential inputs for farm operations. Additionally, a substantial proportion of participants reported access to cooperative services (85.75%) and extension services (92.50%), highlighting the importance of organised support structures and agricultural extension programmes in providing knowledge, resources, and assistance to farmers.

The study applied the binary probit model regression to determine the socioeconomic characteristics influencing the farmer’s use of unapproved pesticides. The results of the analysis are given in Table 6. From the analysis, it was known that education (5%), farming experience (5%), farm size (5%), access to knapsack sprayers (1%), and access to labour (1%) were the factors that positively and significantly influenced farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides.

Table 6. Socioeconomic factors influencing farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides.

Characteristics	Coef	Std. Err
Education	0.05**	0.01
Age	0.01	0.03
Sex	−0.07	0.07
Dependents	−0.01	0.01
Ownership status	0.02	0.09
Farming experience	0.21**	0.01
Farm size	0.01**	0.01
Farm age	0.01	0.01
Access to knapsack sprayer	0.05***	0.08
Access to traceability	−0.05	0.07
Access to labour	0.14***	0.08
Membership of cooperative	−0.05	0.10
Access to extension services	0.19	0.13
Income	1.63	2.17
Constant	4.04	0.22

Hyde-Cooper et al., 2023.

NB: ***1%, **5%, *10% Significance level.

Log pseudo likelihood=-51.124; Wald chi²=47.28, Prob > chi²=0.00; Pseudo R²=0.38.

Farmers with higher levels of education and experience who are expected to understand the risks associated with unapproved pesticides and be better informed about safer alternatives are more likely to use unapproved pesticides. According to Nhemachena and Hassan (2007), such farmers sometimes adopt self-intuited practices for their pest management needs, regardless of the possible insecurity and safety implications (Cocco et al., 2013; Fosu-Mensah et al., 2016). Higher educational levels among cocoa farmers can lead to overconfidence in their capacity to use pesticides responsibly. They may think that their education has given them the information and abilities to reduce and manage any hazards that may be associated with the use of unapproved pesticides. In addition, this may also result from pesticide use regulation enforcement being lax or uneven in the study area. Educated cocoa farmers may be more ready to take chances because they are aware that using unapproved pesticides is unlikely to result in any legal repercussions (Ogunjimi & Farinde, 2012). Again, more experienced cocoa farmers may have picked up and incorporated traditional farming techniques from earlier generations. Since they do not perceive them as harmful, they increase their usage on their farms. Cocoa farmers with more experience might develop more risk-tolerant attitudes (Okoffo et al., 2016). Despite being aware of the risks involved in applying unapproved pesticides, they may think that they can handle them safely because of their extensive experience and expertise. Additionally, pests may become more resistant to approved pesticides and insecticides over time (Deressa et al., 2009), and this may also cause experienced cocoa farmers to turn to unapproved pesticides. Experienced cocoa farmers may have grown accustomed to using certain unapproved pesticides over time. Because these unapproved pesticides are easily accessible and reasonably priced, people can keep using them out of habit (Deressa et al., 2009; Okoffo et al., 2016). However, it is expected that long years spent in education and long years of farming experience must have a positive relational link with good farm decision-making and the adoption of safer production practices (Deressa et al., 2009; Okoffo et al., 2016).

The results also show that farmers with larger farm sizes are the ones who are more likely to use unapproved pesticides. Larger farms often face greater economic pressure to maximise yields and profits. When confronted with pest infestations or disease outbreaks that threaten crop yields, farmers may feel compelled to take immediate action to protect their investment. In such situations, they may resort to using unapproved pesticides as a quick and inexpensive solution to control pests rather than investing in more sustainable pest management practices. In an effort to meet market demands and maintain profitability, large-scale farmers may prioritise short-term gains over long-term sustainability by using unapproved pesticides to ensure high crop yields and marketable produce. With a better understanding of the causes of this occurrence, larger cocoa farm sizes can adopt good production practices that encourage more responsible use of pesticides (Danso-Abbeam et al., 2014).

Generally, it is known that the knapsack sprayer is meant to ease the application of pesticides by allowing cocoa farmers to efficiently and conveniently cover a wide range of their crops quickly, saving time and labor. However, access to knapsack sprayers positively influenced the farmers to apply unapproved pesticides to their cocoa farms. This may probably be due to the easy accessibility and relative affordability of the knapsack sprayers, which makes them an attractive application aid and option for cocoa farmers who are economically disadvantaged to solely use approved pesticides due to their cost and, hence, sparingly apply unapproved pesticides. In addition, cocoa farmers may sometimes have convenient access to knapsack sprayers but may not have ready access to approved pesticides in their jurisdiction. The constraint of access to approved pesticides and alternatives exposes farmers to applying any pesticide at their disposal, whether they are approved or unapproved. Proper education and training are needed to debunk the misconception among farmers that the efficaciousness of the sprayer will offset the unapproved pesticide’s lack of safety (Shaw et al., 2000).

The results also show that farmers with access to labour are the ones who are more likely to use unapproved pesticides. Farmers with access to sufficient labour may be more inclined to use unapproved pesticides, as they have the manpower needed to apply them effectively across the farmland. Because they have the workforce to cover a wider area and apply pesticides more thoroughly, their enhanced efficiency may result in the use of more pesticides, including those that are unapproved (Afrane & Ntiamoah, 2011; Denkyirah et al., 2016).

Conclusion

In order to address the escalating need for higher crop yields while concurrently curbing the detrimental environmental repercussions of agricultural practices, it is imperative to gain a thorough comprehension of unapproved pesticide usage among cocoa farmers in Ghana. We conclude that primarily, the prevalence of unapproved pesticide usage among cocoa farmers stands at a relatively low 42%. Notably, farmers exhibit uncertainty regarding their motivations for employing these unapproved pesticides, as evidenced by a mean index of 3.48. Agro-chemical shops emerge as the primary source of information concerning farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides, accounting for 79% of responses. Among the unapproved pesticides, ‘Gramaxone’ emerges as the most commonly used, constituting 16% of reported usage. Importantly, the utilisation of these unapproved pesticides is significantly influenced by various socioeconomic factors, including education (5%), farming experience (5%), farm size (5%), access to knapsack sprayers (1%), and access to labour (1%).

In light of these findings, several recommendations can be drawn to address the observed challenges and promote sustainable agricultural practices. Given that agro-chemical shops are the primary sources of information for many cocoa farmers on the use of unapproved pesticides, these outlets should be monitored to deter them from the importation, sale, and use of unapproved pesticides. They also need to be equipped to provide accurate and up-to-date information on the use of approved pesticides. Partnerships can be formed between governmental agricultural agencies, agricultural extension services, farmer cooperatives, agro-chemical shops, and pesticide manufacturers to ensure the dissemination of reliable information. The Ghana COCOBOD needs to consistently implement educational programmes that target cocoa farmers in order to raise awareness about the risks associated with unapproved pesticides and promote adoption of safer, approved alternatives. The Ghana Cocoa Board must recognise that socioeconomic factors significantly influence farmers’ use of unapproved pesticides. They must therefore develop targeted interventions for specific groups of farmers based on factors such as farming experience, farm size, education level, and labour availability. It is imperative to enhance training programmes for the category of farmers who still use unapproved pesticides. By addressing this issue, it is possible to promote safer and more sustainable agricultural practices while simultaneously improving crop yields, aligning with the broader objectives of sustainable agriculture in Ghana.

Author contributions

Wilhemina Hyde-Cooper was involved in the conception and design, analysis and interpretation, the drafting of the paper, revising it critically for intellectual content; and the final approval of the version to be published. Prince Asiedu was involved in the conception and design, analysis and interpretation of the data, the drafting of the paper, and the final approval of the version to be published. Enoch Kwame Tham-Agyekum was involved in the conception and design, analysis and interpretation of the data, the drafting of the paper, revising it critically for intellectual content; and the final approval of the version to be published. Prince Amoako was involved in the conception and design, analysis and interpretation of the data, and the final approval of the version to be published. John-Eudes Andivi Bakang was involved in the conception and design, analysis and interpretation of the data, the drafting of the paper, and the final approval of the version to be published. All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Akua Yeboah Oduro-Owusu was involved in the conception and design, analysis and interpretation of the data, the drafting of the paper, and the final approval of the version to be published. All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the research conducted and the findings presented in this study. This research was conducted in an unbiased manner and without any financial or non-financial interests that could potentially influence the results or interpretation of the data. The authors are committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and transparency in their research endeavours.

Data availability statement

Data will be made available upon request

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Wilhemina Hyde-Cooper

Wilhemina Hyde-Cooper holds an MPhil degree in Agricultural Extension and Development Communication from KNUST-Kumasi, Ghana.

Prince Asiedu

Prince Asiedu is an MSc student at University of Passau, Germany.

Enoch Kwame Tham-Agyekum

Enoch Kwame Tham-Agyekum (PhD) is a lecturer at the Department of Agricultural Economics, Agribusiness and Extension, KNUST-Kumasi, Ghana.

Prince Amoako

Prince Amoako is a PhD candidate at the Department of Agricultural Economics, Agribusiness and Extension.

John-Eudes Andivi Bakang

John-Eudes Andivi Bakang is a Professor and lectures at the Department of Agricultural Economics, Agribusiness and Extension, KNUST-Kumasi, Ghana.

Akua Yeboah Oduro-Owusu

Akua Yeboah Oduro-Owusu holds an MPhil degree in Agricultural Extension and Development Communication from KNUST-Kumasi, Ghana.