Child Labor in West African Cocoa Production: Issues and U.S. Policy

CRS Report for Congress
Child Labor in West African Cocoa Production:
Issues and U.S. Policy
July 13, 2005
Tiaji Salaam-Blyther, Coordinator
Foreign Affairs Analyst
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Charles Hanrahan
Senior Specialist in Agriculture Policy
Research, Sciences, and Industry Division
Nicolas Cook
Specialist in Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division

Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Child Labor in West African Cocoa Production: Issues
and U.S. Policy
Summary
Stories of children being trafficked to work under horrific conditions in West
African cocoa fields emerged in 2000. Shortly thereafter, in 2001, Congress passed
H.Amdt. 142 to P.L. 107-76, FY2002 Agriculture, Rural Development and Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) Appropriations, which would have provided $250,000
to the Food and Drug Administration, to be used to develop a label for chocolate
products indicating that no child slave labor had been used in the growing and
harvesting of cocoa in a product so labeled. A Senate companion bill was never
introduced, in part because after House passage of the bill, representatives of the
cocoa industry, the International Labor Organization (ILO), several private labor
rights groups, and Members of Congress, negotiated “a comprehensive, six-point
problem-solving” protocol aimed at ending the “use of abusive child labor in cocoa
growing.” Signatories to the protocol committed to developing a certification
process that would ensure that no abusive child labor would be used in cocoa
production. It is currently being debated whether the protocol has been implemented
in full by its July 1, 2005 deadline. Critics contend that the cocoa/chocolate industry
fell short of its commitments, as it has only developed a pilot certification scheme in
Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire — which does not encapsulate the entire West African
cocoa producing region. The industry counters that significant progress has been
made, the affected governments have contributed significant resources towards this
endeavor, and that this is a work in progress. According to a joint statement released
by Senator Tom Harkin, Representative Eliot Engel, and the cocoa/chocolate industry
on July 1, 2005, the cocoa/chocolate industry has committed to expanding its pilot
certification system to cover 50% of the cocoa growing areas of Cote d’Ivoire and
Ghana within three years.
There has been a wide range of suggestions in countering the use of abusive
child labor in cocoa production. Some advocate revoking trade preferences. Others
point to the root cause of child labor: poverty. Those analysts suggest boosting
investments in education, and boosting world cocoa prices. Still some observers
assert that conflict and political instability will hinder any effort to counter abusive
child labor.
This report outlines how and where cocoa is produced, discusses the use of
abusive child labor in the industry, efforts by Congress to counter abusive child labor
— including the Harkin-Engel Protocol, and initiatives by affected governments and
international organizations to address the problem. This report also provides possible
policy options that might undertaken to stop the use of child labor in cocoa
production. This report will be periodically updated.

Contents
Introduction ......................................................1
Cocoa: Background............................................2
U.S. Imports..............................................4
Production Methods and Farm Labor..............................5
Child Labor in the West African Cocoa Sector.......................6
The Six Steps of the Harkin-Engel Protocol.....................7
Findings of the Study.......................................8
Child Trafficking in West African Cocoa Production.................10
Role of Congress.................................................12
Harkin-Engel Protocol.........................................13
Current Initiatives to Counter Child Labor in Cocoa Production............15
Sustainable Tree Crops Program.................................15
Combating Trafficking of Children for Exploitive Labor..............16
West Africa Cocoa/Commercial Agriculture Program ................16
Fair Trade Certified^TM Cocoa....................................18
Policy Options...................................................18
Trade Agreements............................................18
Enhance Harkin-Engel Protocol..................................19
Encourage Enforcement of U.S. Tariff Act of 1930..................20
Other Framework Agreement Models.............................21
Multilateral Poverty Reduction Strategies..........................22
Other Issues.....................................................22
Impact of Political Instability....................................22
Limited Educational Infrastructure...............................23
Low World Prices for Cocoa....................................23
Appendix .......................................................24
Definitions and Concepts Related to Child Labor and Used in the IITA
Study ..................................................24
List of Tables
Table 1. World Cocoa Production.....................................2
Table 2. Cocoa Production in West Africa..............................3
Table 3. Sources of U.S. Unground Cocoa Bean Imports by Value and Share,
2000-2004 ...................................................5
Estimates of Working Children at High Risk by Selected
Activities and Characteristics in Study Areas of West Africa............9
List of Figures
Figure 1. Cocoa Prices, 1960-2004....................................4

Child Labor in West African Cocoa
Production: Issues and U.S. Policy
Introduction
In 2000, a series of media accounts reported that children were being trafficked
and forcibly used in the West African cocoa sector. Shortly thereafter, the House
passed H.Amdt.142 to P.L. 107-76, FY2002 Agriculture, Rural Development and
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Appropriations, which would have provided
$250,000 to the Food and Drug Administration to be used to develop a label for
chocolate products indicating that no child slave labor had been used in the growing
and harvesting of cocoa in a product so labeled. A Senate companion bill was never
introduced, in part because after House passage of the bill, representatives of the
cocoa industry, the International Labor Organization (ILO), several private labor
rights groups, and Members of Congress, negotiated “a comprehensive, six-point
problem-solving” protocol aimed at ending the “use of abusive child labor in cocoa
growing.”¹ The protocol, known colloquially as the as the Harkin-Engel Protocol
(discussed below) after Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Eliot Engel, outlines
six steps that the industry formally agreed to undertake in order to end abusive and²
forced child labor on cocoa farms by July 2005. To date, the first five steps of the
Protocol have been completed. There are differences of opinion on whether the final³
step, the development of a certification system, has been completed. It is possible
that if Senator Harkin and Representative Engel, after consulting with the industry
signatories and witnesses to the Protocol, find that the signatories have not met their
commitments under the Protocol, they may initiate renewed legislative efforts to
address the problem of child labor in cocoa production.
This report provides background on the production of cocoa and discusses the
issue of child labor in the industry, efforts by Congress, including the Harkin-Engel
Protocol, and those of other governments, international organizations, and non-
governmental groups to address the problem. It also discusses potential policy
options that might accomplish that end.

¹ Senator Harkin, “Senator Harkin, Congressman Engel Announce Child Labor Agreement
With Global Chocolate Industry,” Oct. 1, 2001,
[http://harki n.senate.gov/ news .cfm?id=178880].
² The six steps are outlined in the section entitled, Harkin-Engel Protocol.
³ Certification refers to a system of continuous monitoring, corrective action, and regular
reporting on child labor practices in a country’s cocoa farming sector.

Cocoa: Background⁴
Cocoa, used in chocolate products, is obtained from the processed beans of fruit
pods produced by the tropical evergreen cacao tree (Theobroma cacao), a plant of
New World origins. There are three main varieties of cacao tree: Criollo, Trinitario,
and Forastero; the latter predominates in West Africa. Each pod contains 20 to 40
large, fat-rich seeds. Cacao trees are grown in rainy, tropical equatorial zones, within
20 degrees of the Equator, primarily in West Africa, Southeast Asia, and South and
Central America.
West Africa produced about 72% of the total global supply in 2003/04, a year
which yielded a rapid, nearly 10% production increase, a record harvest, according
to the International Cocoa Organization (ICCO). During the last three production
years, Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana produced about 43% and 16% of world output,
respectively, and about 62% and 22% of total African cocoa production. Other key
producers are Indonesia, with about 14% of global production, followed by Nigeria,
Cameroon, and Brazil, each producing about 5% of world output. Recent global and
Africa-specific production trends are shown in tables 1 and 2.
Table 1. World Cocoa Production
(1000s of metric tonnes and percent share of world production)

2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05(f orecast)

Country/region
Tonnes Share Tonnes Share Tonnes Share Tonnes Share
Ivory Coast1,21843%1,36743%1,50044%1,27541%
Ghana 371 13% 498 16% 605 18% 530 17%
Nige ria 170 6% 170 5% 165 5% 170 5%
Came roon 131 5% 155 5% 150 4% 150 5%
Other Africa311%371%381%391%
Total Africa1,92068%2,22770%2,45872%2,16470%
Indonesia 453 16% 430 14% 420 12% 415 13%
Malays ia 15 1% 24 1% 25 1% 26 1%
Other Asia612%642%652%672%
Total Asia/Oceania52819%51816%51015%50816%
Brazil 124 4% 163 5% 163 5% 164 5%
Ecuador 83 3% 87 3% 100 3% 93 3%
Other America1636%1675%1655%1705%
Total Americas37013%41613%42813%42714%
World Total2,819100%3,161100%3,396100%3,099100%
^Source:^B^{ill Gu}^y^t^oⁿ^{, “}^F^ig^u^r^e¹^:^W^o^rld^P^r^o^d^u^ctioⁿ^Fo^{recast,” Co}^m^m^o^d^{ities — Co}^co^{a Rev}ⁱ^ew^{, W}^o^rld
^C^o^{coa Fou}ⁿ^d^ation^,^{N.D. an}^{d C}^R^{S calcu}^lation^s^.

⁴ Data on cocoa production and trade are drawn from a number of sources, including, the
International Cocoa Organization, the Food and Agricultural Organization, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, and the World Cocoa Foundation.

Table 2. Cocoa Production in West Africa
(1000s of tonnes and percent share of African production)
Country 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05(f orecast)
AF RICA Tonnes Share Tonnes Share Tonnes Share Tonnes Share
Ivory Coast1,21863%1,36761%1,50061%1,27559%
Ghana 371 19% 498 22% 605 25% 530 24%
Ni geria 170 9% 170 8% 165 7% 170 8%
Cameroon 131 7% 155 7% 150 6% 150 7%
Other Africa312%372%382%392%
Total Africa1,920100%2,227100%2,458100%2,164100%
^Source:^B^{ill Gu}^y^t^oⁿ^{, “}^F^ig^u^r^{e 1}^:^W^o^rld^P^r^o^d^u^ctioⁿ^Fo^{recast,” Co}^m^m^o^d^ities^—^Co^co^{a Rev}ⁱ^ew^{, W}^o^rld
^C^o^{coa Fou}ⁿ^d^ation^,^{N.D. an}^{d C}^R^{S calcu}^lation^s^.
In general, world cocoa production is expected to gradually increase in the
medium term. The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has projected a growth
rate of about 2.2% annually during the present decade, compared to a growth rate of
about 1.7% per year during in the 1990s, and expects production to reach about 3.7
million tonnes by 2010. Opinions are mixed over the extent to which Africa will
contribute to this expected growth. In 2003, the ICCO projected that Africa would
continue to provide the bulk of cocoa production, and that Africa, along with the
Americas, would produce the largest proportional increases in production in the near
future. The FAO, by contrast, projects that Africa’s share of world production will
drop by about a 1% in the period up to 2010. Despite expectations of generally rising
cocoa production trends, a slight drop in production is forecast for 2004/2005 due to⁵
lower harvest levels.
Cocoa prices experienced a moderate rise after slumps in the early 1990s and
1999-2001, but have recently been flat or have slightly declined. Historical price
trends are shown in Figure 1.

⁵ ICCO, “What are the trends in cocoa production?,” September 2003,
[http://www.icco.org/questions/production3.htm]; and Economic and Social Depart.,
“Cocoa Commodity Notes,” Food and Agriculture Organization, May 2005.

Figure 1. Cocoa Prices, 1960-2004

(US$ cents/lb.)
¹⁷⁵
¹⁵⁰
¹²⁵
¹⁰⁰
⁷⁵
⁵⁰
²⁵
⁰
¹⁹⁶⁰¹⁹⁶⁵¹⁹⁷⁰¹⁹⁷⁵¹⁹⁸⁰¹⁹⁸⁵¹⁹⁹⁰¹⁹⁹⁵²⁰⁰⁰²⁰⁰⁴
^Ye^a^r^s
^So^ur^c^e^:^I^C^C^O^,^"^I^C^C^O^M^ont^hl^y^a^{nd A}^nnua^l^A^v^e^r^a^g^e^s^of^D^aⁱ^l^y^P^rⁱ^c^e^s^of^C^o^c^o^a
^B^e^aⁿ^s^,^1960-²⁰^03,^"^[ht^t^p:^/^/^w^w^w^.ⁱ^c^c^o^.^o^rg/prⁱ^c^e^s^/^prⁱ^c^e^s^a^v^e^.^ht^m^]
U.S. Imports. Most U.S. imports of unprocessed cocoa beans come from Côte
d’Ivoire, Indonesia, and the Dominican Republic. Ghana, the second largest global
producer is the fifth largest source of U.S. cocoa beans, but only supplied 4.20% of
such imports from 2000-2004. The leading sources of U.S. cocoa bean imports are
shown in Table 3. Côte d’Ivoire exports more than 75% of its annual cocoa bean
production although an increasing proportion of its cocoa is exported in the form of
higher value products such as cocoa cake, cocoa paste, cocoa butter, cocoa powder
and chocolate. European Union countries are the leading export destinations for Côte
d’Ivoire cocoa, accounting for about 65% of the country’s total exports. Among EU
countries, the Netherlands is the largest importer. The United States gets about 20%
of total Ivorian cocoa exports. Other cocoa importing countries, e.g., Canada and a
number of European countries, however, are the major suppliers to the United States
of products processed from cocoa beans (paste, cake, powder, butter, chocolate,
chocolate containing products). Cocoa beans enter the U.S. market duty free, but
higher tariffs are applied to processed cocoa products.

Table 3. Sources of U.S. Unground Cocoa Bean Imports by
Value and Share, 2000-2004
($ millions and country percentage share by quantity and value)
GlobalCountryValue ($ Millions)Quantity ShareValue Share
Rank

1Côte d’Ivoire1,406.3848.72%51.51%

2 Indonesia 728.93 29.60% 26.70%

3Dominican Rep156.525.91%5.73%

4 Ecuador 152.47 5.35% 5.58%

5 Ghana 114.80 4.74% 4.20%

6Papua New Guinea65.802.48%2.41%

7 Nigeria 48.60 1.43% 1.78%

8 Singa pore 25.25 0.70% 0.92%

9 Haiti 12.95 0.52% 0.47%

10 Mexico 6.20 0.17% 0.23%

— Others12.430.38%0.46%
T otals 2730.33 100% 100%
^{Data Source:}^In^t^e^rn^atⁱ^oⁿ^a^l^T^r^{ade C}^o^m^mⁱ^s^sⁱ^on^T^r^{ade D}^a^t^a^{Web report}^s^of^U^.^S.^a^nnual^g^eⁿ^e^ral
^im^ports^of^{cocoa by}^v^o^lu^m^e^an^{d v}^a^lu^e.
Production Methods and Farm Labor⁶
After harvest, cocoa beans are fermented, which kills the bean and helps
develop the distinct taste of cocoa; dried; and then roasted. They are then typically
used to produce semi-processed cocoa paste (also known as cocoa liquor or mass),
further refined products, such as cocoa butter and cocoa cake (paste with most cocoa
butter removed), cocoa powder, and chocolate.
Prior to processing, the farm-based work of cultivating and harvesting cocoa is
labor-intensive. In West Africa, cocoa farming typically begins with the thinning or
partial clearing by hand of primary or mature tropical forest growth, which is used
to shelter the cocoa trees. Although some varieties of cacao trees can thrive in sun
if sufficient nutrients and water are present, shade also helps to reduce damage by
certain types of tree pests and diseases, and helps retain adequate moisture. Such
forest areas are also used because they provide a ready-made source of shade that
does not require planting of cover plants, and because forest areas are rich in
nutrients resulting from the decomposition of organic forest detritus. The tropical
soils in many areas of West Africa where cocoa is grown are thin and easily leached
of their nutrients. Mature forest is also cleared because a widespread local traditional

⁶ Sources for this section include J. E. K. Amoah, Development of Consumption,
Commercial Production and Marketing, Accra-North: Jemre Enterprises, 1995; Robin
Dand, International Cocoa Trade, 2nd ed., Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1999; Sarah A. Laird,
Cosmos Obialor, Elizabeth A. Skinner, An Introductory Handbook to Cocoa Certification:
a Feasibility Study and Regional Profile of West Africa, New York, N.Y.: Rainforest
Alliance, 1996; Research Papers on Shade Grown Cacao, in association with Smithsonian
Institution workshop on sustainable cacao farming, March 1998, [http://nationalzoo.si.edu]
and Robert A. Rice; Russell Greenberg, “Cacao Cultivation and the Conservation of
Biological Diversity,” Ambio, Vol. 29 No. 3, May 2000; and ICCO, “Questions and
Answers,” various entries, [http://www.icco.org/menuqa.htm], inter alia.

agricultural technique is to open new or long-disused land to farming, use it until the
soil is exhausted, and then leave it in regenerative fallow for lengthy periods,
sometimes many years. Such practices are changing in many areas; the application
of chemical fertilizers and, alternatively, the use of organic growing methods, are
becoming more common, increasingly allowing more intensive farming to take place.
Traditional land use methods, however, remain widespread, and in many areas cocoa
farming continues to be undertaken by clearing mature forest areas.
Planting of seedlings, which are usually transplanted after propagation and take
three to five years to reach productive fertility, also takes place by hand, as does
weeding — which is especially intensive in the year or so after forests are cleared for
planting — and the application of fertilizers and pesticides. Harvesting, which is
usually on-going during several months of the year, is also labor-intensive. Cocoa
pods must be cut carefully from the cacao tree branches, known as brooms, so as not
to damage the flower “cushion” from which the fruit grows. Pods are then usually
split and emptied by hand to remove the seeds and pulp for purposes of fermentation
and drying, which are typically undertaken at the farm level. It is in the harvesting
process that child labor has been reportedly most commonly found.
Child Labor in the West African Cocoa Sector⁷
Reports of children being trafficked to work on cocoa farms, and stories of
children working under abusive conditions began to emerge in 2000. Following
these reports, some began calling for boycotts and other punitive actions against the
cocoa and chocolate industries. In response, the cocoa and chocolate industries, in
conjunction with international labor organizations, other non-governmental
organizations, U.S. government agencies, and affected African governments
developed a protocol entitled, Protocol for the Growing and Processing of Cocoa
Beans and their Derivative Products in a Manner that Complies with ILO
Convention 182 Concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the
Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor, to end the use of abusive child labor
in cocoa production.⁸ The Protocol, widely known as the Harkin-Engel Protocol after
Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Eliot Engel, outlines six steps the industry
formally agreed to undertake to end abusive and forced child labor on cocoa farms
by July 2005. The Protocol is voluntary and non-legislative.

⁷ IITA, Summary of Findings from the Child Labor Surveys in the Cocoa Sector of West
Africa: Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Nigeria, July 2002, available at
[http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1151&context=ke y_w
orkplace].
⁸ See section entitled, Harkin-Engel Protocol for more information.

The Six Steps of the Harkin-Engel Protocol.
1.Issue a public statement of the problem and develop the terms of an
action plan.
2.Form a multi-sectoral advisory group to investigate labor practices in
West Africa, and develop appropriate remedies for the elimination of
the worst forms of child labor in the growing and processing of
cocoa.
3.Sign a Joint Statement on the need to end the worst forms of child
labor in cocoa production, and identify alternatives for children
removed from the cocoa sector.
4.Develop a memorandum of cooperation that establishes a joint action
program of research, information exchange, and steps to enforce the
internationally-recognized and mutually-agreed upon standards to
eliminate the worst forms of child labor in cocoa production.
Establish an independent system to monitor and report compliance
with standards.

5.Establish a joint international foundation to manage and sustain anti-

child labor efforts, promote field projects, and establish a
clearinghouse of best practices to eliminate the worst forms of child
labor.
6.Develop an industry-wide certification process that ensures that cocoa
beans and their derivative products have not been grown and/or
processed with any of the worst forms of child labor.
A critical component of the Protocol was to ascertain the extent to which
abusive child labor and trafficking occurred in cocoa production, as the numerous
reports on the practice were largely anecdotal. In July 2002, the International
Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) completed a study to determine the extent of
child labor in the four major cocoa producing countries of West Africa. The study
was carried out with the support of the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID), the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), the World Cocoa Foundation, the
International Labor Organization (ILO), and the governments of Cameroon, Côte
d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Nigeria. The study was conducted under the auspices of the
Sustainable Tree Crops Program (STCP) of IITA (discussed below in this report).
IITA is one of a number of international agricultural research centers funded by a
consortium of multilateral and bilateral donors, including the World Bank, the United
Nations Development Program, the United States and a number of other developed
countries.
Surveys were carried out in all four countries and included Baseline Producer
Surveys conducted in 203 villages in Cameroon, Ghana, and Nigeria. Producer-
Worker Surveys (PWS) and Community Surveys were conducted in Côte d’Ivoire.
The PWS were more detailed surveys conducted in Cote d’Ivoire only. The surveys
covered the entire cocoa producing region and 1,500 producers were interviewed.
USAID, which funded the study, established a Technical Advisory Committee of 16
independent experts drawn from other international research centers, the World
Bank, United Nations agencies, national research organizations, trade unions, and
NGOs to oversee the study.

The ILO expressed concern that full details of the survey results were never
released, although a “synthesis” was made public. Consequently, the organization
has questioned the validity of the data, and plans to conduct its own survey of Cote
d’Ivoire and the cocoa-producing sector. ⁹ Nonetheless, the survey provides the most
comprehensive data to date on the use of children in the West African cocoa sector.
Findings of the Study. Cocoa production occurred most often on small
family farms, typically smaller than 6 hectares (about 15 acres) in size. The average
cocoa farm sizes were 4.9, 5.7, 6.3, and 4.7 hectares in Côte d’Ivoire, Cameroon,
Ghana, and Nigeria, respectively. Average annual quantities produced per household
ranged between 900 kg (1,980 lbs) and 1700 kg (3,740 lbs). Approximately 284,000
children were found to be working under hazardous conditions, the large majority in
Cote d’Ivoire (200,000). The survey only indicated the number of children found to
be working under hazardous conditions, not how many children were found on the
farms overall. The survey also did not provide extensive information on non-paid
working children. Detailed information was provided, however, on salaried child
workers.
Farmers hiring salaried child workers had produced nearly twice as much cocoa
as those who did not. Larger farms were also found to use significantly more
children from within farm families. An estimated 4,630 farmers were employing
some 5,120 children as full-time permanent workers in Côte d’Ivoire (versus 61,600
adults). In Ondo State, Nigeria, 1,220 children (versus 11,800) adults were full-time
workers. All of the salaried child workers in Côte d’Ivoire originated outside of the
cocoa-producing zone. Sixty-two percent (756) of the salaried child workers
expected to be paid personally, while 32% (390) reported that their earnings were
received by their family members, and 6% indicated that payment was made to the
intermediary who had brought the child to the work site. The latter situation may, in
some cases, be an indicator of the use of indentured labor.
Child Labor in Cocoa Farming. The study also found that:
^!In West Africa, children in rural areas have traditionally worked in
agriculture as part of the family unit. Family labor is the only type
of labor employed on 31% of the cocoa farms in Côte d’Ivoire, 23%
of Cameroonian farms, 17% of Ghanaian farms, and 10% of
Nigerian farms.
^!Family labor is the most used labor type, e.g., in Côte d’Ivoire 87%
of permanent labor in cocoa farming came from the family, with
family children accounting for 24% of household labor. These
children are the most likely to be unpaid.

⁹ ILO, “Combating Child Labor in Cocoa Growing,” February 2005.
[ ht t p: / / www.i l o.or g/ publ i c / e ngl i s h/ st andar ds/ i pec/ t hemes/ c ocoa/ downl o a d / 2005_02_cl_c
ocoa.pdf]

^!Some children working on cocoa farms have no family ties to the
farmers — some 4% (12,000 children) in Côte d’Ivoire. The ILO
speculates that these children were most likely trafficked.¹⁰
^!Children are engaged in almost all tasks/activities involved in cocoa
farming.
^!Boys are more likely to work in cocoa farming. Fifty-nine percent
of children in cocoa farming are boys.
^!More than 60% of children working in cocoa farming are below the
age of 14.
Children in Potentially Hazardous/Exploitative Situations. Other
findings included that:
^!Children work in a variety of tasks, which depending on conditions,
may or may not be detrimental to the child’s well-being.
^!Children with no family ties and those recruited through
intermediaries are more likely to be at risk for exploitation. An
intermediary was involved in the recruitment process for an
estimated 41% (2,100) of the 5,120 salaried child workers in Côte
d’Ivoire. In Nigeria, an estimated 29% of the 1,220 salaried child
workers were recruited through intermediaries. An intermediary
could be a known family friend or trafficker. The survey does not
make a determination.
Estimates of Working Children at High Risk by Selected
Activities and Characteristics in Study Areas of West Africa
CharacteristicCôte d’IvoireCameroonGhanaNigeria
Application of Pesticides142,6105,500 — 4,600
Recruited through2,10000354
intermediaries
Used machetes (under 15)109,29916,19218,1892,325
Children without family11,994 — — —
ties
^Source:^ST^CP^Sur^v^ey^s

¹⁰ ILO, “Combating Child Labor in Cocoa Growing,” February 2005.
[ ht t p: / / www.i l o.or g/ publ i c / e ngl i s h/ st andar ds/ i pec/ t hemes/ c ocoa/ downl o a d / 2005_02_cl_c
ocoa.pdf]

Child Labor and Education. In relation to education, the study found that:
^!In Côte d’Ivoire, one-third of school-age children (6 to 17 years)
living on cocoa farms have never attended school.
^!In Côte d’Ivoire, children working in all cocoa farming tasks were
less likely to be enrolled in school (34% enrollment rate) compared
to those children who did not work (64% enrollment rate).
^!In Côte d’Ivoire, children of immigrant cocoa farmers also are less
likely to be enrolled in school.
^!In all four countries, girls have lower enrollment rates than boys.
Farmers’ Income and Child Labor. Compensation trends were also
covered in the study, which found that:
^!In West Africa, cocoa production is labor-intensive.
^!Most production is by small-scale farmers with few resources who
often use the entire family to contribute to cocoa farming.
^!Average annual cocoa revenues ranged from $30 to $205 per
household member. However, wages varied significantly. In Côte
d’Ivoire, child workers reported a mean annual payment of $80,
while adult workers reportedly received $135 per year. In Nigeria,
children reportedly earned $115 annually, while adult workers were
paid an annual average salary of $205.
^!Cocoa accounts for a large share of total household income among
cocoa farmers — 50% in Cameroon, 55% in Ghana, 66% in Côte
d’Ivoire, and 68% in Nigeria.
^!Even though cocoa farming is the main source of income, the
quantity of cocoa production is relatively low, making it difficult for
families to have sufficient income to meet their needs.
Child Trafficking in West African Cocoa Production
The practice of trafficking of children to work in West African cocoa production
is widely acknowledged, but information about its extent is not widely available.
Much of the information is anecdotal and focused on Côte d’Ivoire, the largest cocoa
producing country.¹¹ For example, in 2000, the BBC broadcast a documentary that
portrayed children being trafficked from Mali into Côte d’Ivoire and made to work
on cocoa farms where almost all children involved in cocoa production and

¹¹ Save the Children (Canada), an international non-governmental organization, surveyed
media accounts of child trafficking in West Africa. Its summary is available at
[ h t t p : / / www.s a ve t h e c h i l d r e n.c a / wha t we do/ a d vo c a t e / t r a f f i c k/ c hi l d l a bor .ht ml ]

harvesting are often exposed to hazardous conditions (as revealed in the IITA child
labor survey above).¹² In July 2001, Knight Ridder published a series of reports on
young boys who had been tricked, sold or trafficked to Ivoirian cocoa farmers.
Among other things, these reports of child trafficking gave impetus to the Harkin-
Engel Protocol discussed in this report.
The extent to which West African cocoa producers employ child labor is, in
part, a function of economic factors.¹³ The extent of child trafficking is likewise
affected by such factors, these include low cocoa prices, low incomes of family
farmers, and large numbers of small holder farmers who cannot afford to engage
hired labor. Lack of adequate school facilities in cocoa producing areas also plays
a role. Cultural factors are involved too. Sociologists point out that not only is there
a tradition of children participating in household and farm work from an early age
(the IITA study), but there is a strong tradition in West Africa of child migration both
within countries and across borders. Such migratory patterns make it difficult to
monitor and control child trafficking.¹⁴ A study of Malian children points out that
children are often sent to live outside the family, village or country for work, family
solidarity, or education and concludes that migration is a rite of passage, and a
financial necessity for many.¹⁵
Acknowledging that reliable and verifiable data on child trafficking in West
African cocoa production are very scarce, one non-governmental organization —
Save the Children — proposes that anti-trafficking efforts should be undertaken
along two tracks: prevention and protection.¹⁶ Preventive measures would include
such actions as developing and implementing national action plans to combat
trafficking, including legal and legislative frameworks to make child trafficking a
crime. It would be up to national governments to provide care for intercepted and
repatriated children, most likely in cooperation with local and international NGOs
working in regions where children are at risk.

¹² The IITA study itself noted that in Côte d’Ivoire, 2100 children had been recruited by
intermediaries and that almost 12,000 children working on cocoa farms had no ties to the
family owners of the farms. Some have suggested that this in itself is evidence of child
trafficking, although IITA did not draw that conclusion in its report.
¹³ See ILO/IPEC, Synthesis report on Combating trafficking in children for labor
exploitation in West and Central Africa, 2001, available at
[http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/fairtrade/cocoa/iloChildLabor2001.pdf], as well
as the IITA study cited above.
¹⁴ See Sandra Castel, “International Migration of Young Malians: Tradition, Necessity or
Rite of Passage?” available, along with other studies of child migration in West Africa, at
[http://ltte-i voire.org/ download.html #rapports].
¹⁵ Ibid.
¹⁶ Save the Children, Combating Child Trafficking at
[ ht t p: / / www.save t hechi l dr e n.ca/ what wedo/ advocat e/ t r af f i ck/ t r af f i ck4.ht ml ] .

Role of Congress¹⁷
Congress has consistently expressed interest in and supported efforts to abolish
and counter child labor, particularly the worst forms of child labor. Congress has
funded programs to combat child labor, expand the United States’ role in the global
fight against child labor, and include clauses that require eliminating child labor in
trade agreements. In 1997, Congress prohibited the importation of goods made with¹⁸
forced or indentured child labor. Later in 2000, Congress amended Section 307 of
the Tariff Act of 1930 — which prohibited the importation of goods made with
forced or indentured labor — to ensure that the statute applied to goods made with
forced or indentured child labor.¹⁹ Congress also added child labor stipulations to
foreign aid legislation through the Export-Import Bank Re-authorization Act of
1997.²⁰ This law integrates child labor into the list of criteria for denying credit by
the Export-Import Bank. Another law relating to child labor abuses is the Victims
of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000.²¹ The law provides punishment
for traffickers, as well as assistance and protection to trafficking victims, with a
special emphasis on women and children, both in the U.S. and abroad.
Congress has used various international trade agreements to fight child labor.
The Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) is a program that extends duty-free
entry to a wide range of products from more than 140 countries and territories. The
Trade and Development Act of 2000 expanded the GSP ineligibility criteria to
include the Worst Forms of Child Labor.²² The act prohibits any country from GSP
consideration if “[s]uch country has not implemented its commitments to eliminate
the worst forms of child labor.”²³ The Office of the United States Trade
Representative (USTR) is required to conduct a yearly review of countries receiving
these benefits to determine, among other things, whether they are implementing their
commitments under International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 182 to
eliminate the worst forms of child labor. The Trade Act of 2002 amended the²⁴
Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) to add child labor criteria. The North
American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC), the labor supplement to the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), also has a child labor component.
The agreement seeks to promote fundamental labor standards, including those
addressing child labor, compliance with labor laws, and the enforcement of those
laws in each country. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative states that the

¹⁷ For information on Congressional actions to eliminate child labor in all sectors see CRS
Report RL31767, Eliminating International Child Labor: U.S. and International Initiatives.
¹⁸ P.L. 105-61
¹⁹ P.L. 106-200
²⁰ P.L. 105-121
²¹ P.L. 106-386
²² P.L. 106-200
²³ Ibid.
²⁴ P.L. 107-210

NAALC has enhanced transparency and public debate on labor law and enforcement
issues.²⁵
In 1993, Congress directed the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL)
International Child Labor Program (ICLP) to investigate and report on child labor
around the world. Since then, Congress has continued to fund the USDOL-ICLP
research and reporting efforts. It has expanded the ICLP’s mandate to include
administering grants to organizations engaged in efforts to eliminate child labor and
to improve access to quality basic education; and raising public awareness and
understanding of child labor issues. Congress appropriated $79 million in FY2005
to ICLP for the elimination of international child labor. Congress has also enhanced
U.S. efforts to fight child labor by adding child labor responsibilities to a host of U.S.
agencies including, USAID, U.S. Department of State, and U.S. Customs Service.
Harkin-Engel Protocol
In 2001, a number of news reports were released that described children being
trafficked and forcibly used in the West African cocoa sector. In the wake of these
reports, and the increasing publicity about the use of child labor in the cocoa sector,
a range of policy initiatives and efforts to combat the practice were initiated by a mix
of non-governmental development and human rights organizations, firms in the
cocoa industry, and governments. In the United States, congressional efforts to create
a public-private response to the use of abusive child labor in cocoa production were
among the most prominent attempts to achieve this goal. On June 28, 2001, the
House passed H.Amdt.142, which provided $250,000 to the Food and Drug
Administration. The funds were intended to develop a label for chocolate products
indicating that no child slave labor was used in the growing and harvesting of cocoa.
A Senate companion bill to H.Amdt. 142 was never introduced, in part, because
following passage of the House bill, policy advocates affiliated with the cocoa
industry, the International Labor Organization (ILO), several private labor rights
groups, together with three Members of Congress, negotiated “a comprehensive,
six-point problem-solving” protocol aimed at ending the “use of abusive child labor
in cocoa growing,” known as the Harkins-Engel Protocol.
At this date there is consensus that the first five steps have been completed.
There are differences of opinion on whether the final step, the development of a
certification system, has been completed.²⁶ After representatives of the chocolate
industry informed Senator Harkin that they will not meet the July deadline,²⁷ the
Senator reportedly warned that Congress might again take legislative action related

²⁵ USTR website, Chapter 3: Worker Rights: Cooperation and Labor Law Enforcement.
[http://www.ustr.gov/], September 12, 2002.
²⁶ Certification refers to a system of continuous monitoring, corrective action, and regular
reporting on child labor practices in a country’s cocoa farming sector.
²⁷ Senator Tom Harkin website, “Harkin: consider flowers this Valentine’s Day.” February

11, 2005. [http://harkin.senate.gov/press/]

to the issue.²⁸ Some speculate that the Senator might reintroduce a bill analogous to
S.1551, the Child Labor Deterrence Act (Harkin, 106th Congress). It would have
prohibited the importation into the United States of manufactured and mined goods
that are produced by abusive child labor.²⁹ Companies violating the prohibition
against importing these products would have been subject to stiff penalties. The
legislation was referred to the Senate Finance Committee but did not receive further
action.
According to representatives of the cocoa/chocolate industry, anti-child labor
programs in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana have made significant progress toward
fulfilling the terms of the Harkin-Engel Protocol.³⁰ The President of the World
Cocoa Foundation points out that the Ivorian Government has funded a child labor
monitoring pilot program in the Oumé District and field staff have been trained using
International Labor Organization (ILO) question guides. The cocoa/chocolate
industry is reportedly spending $5 million annually to support the development of a
region-wide certification process, and for programs to improve the economic well-
being of the cocoa farming families in West Africa.³¹ Data is now being collected
and compiled into a certification report which will be reviewed by the National
Steering Committee. In Ghana, a similar process has also been undertaken in five
districts. Finally, the surveys used to monitor the use of child labor will be carried out
on an on-going basis, during the harvest periods. Ultimately the industries and the
Governments hope to refine and scale up the monitoring efforts to include a
statistical representation of cocoa communities across the countries.
The non-governmental organization, Global Exchange, released a progress
report on implementation of the Protocol. Instead of reporting success, that
organization asserted that the industry had failed to fully implement the Protocol.³²
Key areas of concern cited by Global Exchange, include:
^!Substitution of pilot certification efforts for the an industry-wide
certification system;
^!Failure to address the root cause of abusive child labor — poverty;

²⁸ Coelho, Jeff, “US chocolate makers ready plan to end child labor.” May 26, 2005.
Reuters. [http://za.today.reuters.com/news/default.aspx]
²⁹ Similarly titled bills have included H.R.1328 (Frank, 105th Congress), S.332 (Harkin,

105th Congress), S.340 (Harkin, 105th Congress)

³⁰ Interview with Bill Guyton, President of the World Cocoa Foundation, and representatives
of country anti-child labor programs, June 22, 2005.
³¹ Senator Harkin website, “Joint Statement from U.S. Senator Tom Harking, Representative
Elito Engel and the Chocolate/Cocoa Industry on Efforts to Address the Worst Forms of
Child Labor in Cocoa Growing.” July 1, 2005.
[http://harki n.senate.gov/ news .cfm?id=240245]
³² Global Exchange, “The News on Chocolate is Bittersweet: No Progress on Child Labor,
but Fair Trade Chocolate is on the Rise,” June 2005, [http://www.globalexchange.org].

^!The use of pre-existing anti-child labor programs (Combating
Trafficking in Children for Labor Exploitation in West and Central
Africa and Sustainable Tree Crops Program, described below) that
have had minimal success; and
^!Lack of enforcement and compliance mechanism after full
implementation.
On July 1, 2005, Senator Tom Harkin, Representative Eliot Engel, and the
Chocolate/Cocoa Industry released a joint statement on efforts to address the worst
forms of child labor in cocoa growing. In the statement, the industry highlighted the
positive steps taken since signing the Protocol, and committed to ensuring that 50%
of cocoa growing areas would be under a certification system within three years.
Senator Harkin and Representative Engel also expressed their disappointment that
the Protocol was not implemented in full, but stated their willingness to work with
the industry to ensure full implementation.³³
Current Initiatives to Counter Child Labor in Cocoa
Production
The first three programs described herein are complementary initiatives that
work together to combat the use of child labor in cocoa production. They are all
implemented through the ILO with U.S. and international support.
Sustainable Tree Crops Program
The Sustainable Tree Crops Program (STCP) is a public-private partnership that
seeks to raise the income and quality of life in cocoa-producing communities. The
cocoa/chocolate industry addresses abusive child labor through its efforts to improve
agricultural marketing and production, and support farmers’ organizations. The U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID), along with the World Cocoa
Foundation (WCF), the International Labor Organization (ILO), the Governments of
Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, and Nigeria, and local agribusiness firms,
share in the management and implementation of the program. In Cote d’Ivoire, the
government reportedly funds the trainers in the Farmer Field Schools discussed
below.
Recognizing that abusive forms of child labor are often a symptom of poverty,
STCP aims to increase access to environmentally friendly technology that raises
profitability, productivity and efficiency of smallholder tree crop systems. According
to STCP representatives, farmers who have participated in pilot programs in Côte
d’Ivoire and Ghana have experienced boosted crop yields of between 20% and 50%.³⁴
As a result, STCP staff report that some farmers have been able to afford school fees
for their children. Additionally, STCP staff report that more than 4,000 farmers have

³³ See Senator Harkin’s website, [http://harkin.senate.gov/news.cfm?id=240245].
³⁴ Interview with Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana STCP staff on June 22, 2005.

been sensitized in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana on the dangers of abusive child labor.
Key activities of the program include:
^!Farmer Field Schools - where farmers work together to solve crop
disease and pest problems;
^!Spraying minimization;
^!Crop rotation techniques;
^!Agribusiness skills training;
^!Child labor sensitization; and
^!HIV/AIDS awareness.³⁵
Combating Trafficking of Children for Exploitive Labor
The U.S. Department of Labor’s International Child Labor Program (ICLP)
implements a regional anti-trafficking program in West Africa through the ILO to
stop child trafficking within the affected countries and across the borders. The
program received $225,525 in FY1999, $7.3 million in FY2001, and $2 million in
FY2004. Upon completion in 2007, the initiative will have been implemented in
Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Mali, and Togo. Key activities of the
project include:
^!Rescue and rehabilitate trafficked children (rehabilitation includes
placing rescued children in educational and/or vocational programs);
^!Establish awareness-raising campaigns among at-risk groups;
^!Develop sub-regional and bilateral coordination mechanisms for the
prevention of child trafficking, withdrawal from exploitative labor,
and reintegration;
^!Facilitate the development of a national legal environment that
would implement actions against child traffickers;
^!Train border authorities to detect and intercept child trafficking; and
^!Provide non-formal education, referral to local schools, or
occupational skills training.³⁶
West Africa Cocoa/Commercial Agriculture Program
ICLP also implements through the ILO a complementary West African regional
program to prevent and eliminate the use of child labor in the cocoa sector. The
West Africa Cocoa/Commercial Agriculture Program (WACAP) received $5 million
from DOL in FY2002. Upon completion in January 2006, the program would have
been implemented in Cameroon, Ghana, Guinea, and Nigeria. To date WACAP has

³⁵ For more information on STCP, see [http://www.treecrops.org/index.htm].
³⁶ Project Summary provided by Department of Labor staff on June 17, 2005.

reportedly reached more than 25,000 people through its awareness raising and
capacity building activities. Also, according to Ivorian and Ghanaian STCP officials,
more than 3,000 of the targeted 9,000 children below age 13 involved in child labor
have been identified, counseled, withdrawn from work, and placed in educational or
vocational training facilities.³⁷ Ultimately, the project seeks to:
^!Develop a National Plan of Action for prevention and elimination of
hazardous and exploitative child labor in the cocoa/agriculture
sector;
^!Prepare and launch awareness raising campaigns to combat and
prevent child labor in the cocoa/agriculture;
^!Inform local communities and local administrative authorities about
national child labor legislation;
^!Educate approximately 9,700 children who have been withdrawn
from work under the program;
^!Provide skills to at least 500 adult family members to enhance their
income-earning potential;
^!Train children 12 years and older in marketable skills;
^!Monitor the use of child labor in the cocoa sector;
^!Prevent/protect about 70,000 children between 13 and 18 years from
engaging in hazardous work;
^!Rehabilitate children removed from hazardous work through
education and vocational training provisions;
^!Establish an independent child labor monitoring/verification system
in participating countries; and
^!Integrate labor inspection programs with child labor
monitoring/verification system.³⁸
Since launching WACAP, Cote d’Ivoire has ratified the ILO Minimum Age
Convention 138 and the ILO Worst Forms of Child Labor Convention 182, has
established a national steering mechanism for a country-wide anti-child labor
program, set up a national Cocoa Task Force, and has integrated Convention 182 into
its national laws. Nigeria and Ghana have also initiated national anti-child labor
programs.

³⁷ Interview with STCP officials on June 22, 2005.
³⁸ Project Summary provided by Department of Labor staff on June 17, 2005.

Fair Trade Certified^TM Cocoa
In an effort to combat the use of child labor in cocoa production, Fair Trade
Label Organizations International (FLO) encourages the formation of farmer
cooperatives. Participating farmers are guaranteed a minimum price per pound
through direct sales to Fair Trade buyers under long-term contracts. Specifically,
farmers who sell to Fair Trade buyers receive a minimum of $1,750 per metric ton
($1,950 per metric ton organic). If the world price rises above $1,600 per metric ton,
the Fair Trade price meets the world price and adds a $150 premium per metric ton
($200 premium per metric ton for organic). In exchange for receiving above market
price sales, farmers must not use forced or child labor. This process is certified by
the Fair Trade Label Organizations International (FLO). Additionally, farmers are
required to reserve a portion of their revenues for social projects, such as community
development and technical training. To date, 42,000 cocoa farmers and their families
participate in eight Fair Trade cooperatives in Ghana, Cameroon, Bolivia, Costa Rica,
Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, and Ecuador³⁹. Additional key elements of the
cooperatives include:
^!Promotion of environmentally sustainable practices, such as shade
cultivation, composting, and minimization of chemical inputs;
^!Encouragement of crop diversification;
^!Regular farm inspection to ensure compliance of labor standards;
^!Access to credit for labor and production costs; and
^!Training in marketing and record keeping.⁴⁰
Some economists point to fair trade schemes or to labeling schemes as effective
ways to raise labor standards, including discouraging child labor, while providing
producers with increased returns and compensation for increased costs (from not
using children).⁴¹ A difficulty with Fair Trade approaches, however, is that their
scope may be limited by the numbers of producers involved and by the number of
consumers willing to pay a higher price for a “fairly traded” product.
Policy Options
Trade Agreements
The Trade and Development Act of 2000 (PL. 106-200) expanded the
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) eligibility criteria to include barring the

³⁹ Lobe, Jim, “Activists Target Chocolate, Gold on Valentine’s Day.” Heine Brothers’
Coffee website, February 13, 2005. [http://www.heinebroscoffee.com/newsfeb04.htm]
⁴⁰ Global Exchange website, “Fair Trade Cocoa Cooperatives.” Downloaded on June 14,

2005. [http://www.globalexchange.org]

⁴¹ Robert M. Stern discusses such approaches in “Labor Standards and Trade,” in New
Directions in International Economic Law: Essays in Honor of John H. Jackson, edited by
Marco Bronckers and Reinhard Quick. The Hague; Boston: Kluwer Law International,

2000.

worst forms of child labor.⁴² The act prohibits any country from GSP consideration
if “[s]uch country has not implemented its commitments to eliminate the worst forms
of child labor.”
Some trade analysts advocate the recision of trade benefits for countries that
continue to use child labor in cocoa production. The Africa Growth and Opportunity
Act (AGOA), seeks to offer sub-Saharan African countries greater access to the U.S.
market. Although Côte d’Ivoire gained GSP/AGOA status in 2002,⁴³ according to
the USTR, on January 1, 2005, Côte d’Ivoire’s AGOA beneficiary status was
“terminated for reasons related to lack of progress on key economic reforms and the
Ivorian government’s decision to unilaterally violate the U.N. monitored cease-fire
in November 2004.” Côte d’Ivoire is also subject to U.S. sanctions under Section

508 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, that bar bilateral U.S.

assistance, with some exceptions. These sanctions are in place due to a change of
government by military coup in 1999, and because the subsequent election won by
President Laurence Gbagbo in 2000 was administered by the government formed as
a result of the 1999 coup. The election was not seen as free and fair by the United
States. Consequently, there may be a relative paucity of options to impose further
assistance or trade-based sanctions on Côte d’Ivoire (the largest producer of cocoa)
for its use of abusive child labor. Furthermore, as cocoa beans enter the U.S. market
on a duty free basis, they are not included in GSP/AGOA preferential schemes.
Nonetheless, advocates of a trade-based solution underscore that the child labor
provision should be considered for the other cocoa-producing countries, and for Côte
d’Ivoire if and when Côte d’Ivoire’s GSP/AGOA status is restored. Furthermore, it
has been pointed out that a number of cocoa containing products do enter the United
States under these preferential schemes. One option may be to withdraw preferences
for cocoa containing products on the basis that the exporting countries are not
abiding by their child labor commitments.
Enhance Harkin-Engel Protocol
The Harkin-Engel Protocol calls for the establishment of a certification system
in cocoa-producing countries by July 1, 2005. Critics maintain that the Protocol
should be augmented to include enforcement mechanisms. Since the Protocol is a
voluntary, self-regulatory agreement, advocates of tougher measures argue that the
Protocol may have a minimal impact on the use of abusive child labor. Furthermore,
observers note that national governments may not have the capacity nor the will to
ensure that the worst forms of child labor are not used in cocoa production. Some
advocates are calling for an outline stipulating how a certification process could
work, and detailing who might fund such an effort.

⁴² The Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) is a program that extends duty-free entry
to a wide range of products from more than 140 countries and territories. See CRS Report

97-389, Generalized System of Preferences.

⁴³ U.S. Trade Representative, 2005 Comprehensive Report on U.S. Trade and Investment
Policy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa and Implementation of the African Growth and
Opportunity Act, May 2005.

Industry proponents say that it is premature to consider alternatives to the
industry certification plan that was slated to begin on July 1, 2005. It appears that the
industry certification plan will begin as a series of pilot projects in Côte d’Ivoire and
Ghana with a focus on farm level conditions, rather than on the other supply chain
components including sorting, transport, and storage networks.⁴⁴ Industry
spokespersons say that given the size of the sector — there are 1.5 million cocoa
farms in the two countries — it will not be possible to certify that all cocoa beans
have been produced and harvested without child labor.⁴⁵ However, according to a
July 1, 2005, press release issued by Senator Harkin, Representative Engel, and the
cocoa/chocolate industry, 50% of all cocoa producing areas will be certified by 2008.
Encourage Enforcement of U.S. Tariff Act of 1930
Child rights advocates claim that legislation already exists to prevent the use of
abusive child labor in cocoa production. Proponents argue that the U.S. Customs
Service should prohibit the importation of cocoa derivative products from some
sources, citing the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. In 2000, Congress amended the
Tariff Act to explicitly state that the statute applied to goods made with forced or
indentured child labor.⁴⁶ Supporters assert that the U.S. Customs Service is failing
to enforce this anti-child labor law. Non-governmental organizations, Global
Exchange, the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF), and the Fair Trade Federation
have reportedly filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Customs Service to force the Service
to act under the Tariff Act.⁴⁷
Using Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to ban imports of
cocoa from Côte d’Ivoire or other producing countries raises a number of potential
law implementation concerns. Trade analysts differ as to whether such a ban to
enforce child labor standards could withstand a challenge in a World Trade
Organization (WTO) dispute settlement.⁴⁸ Some maintain that WTO agreements do
not include labor standards and that violation of labor standards, with one exception,
is not covered under WTO rules. The only specific mention of a labor standard is in
Article XX(e) of GATT 1994 which permits exceptions to GATT obligations in cases
where prison labor has been used to produce a product. Conversely, others argue that
U.S. imposition of an import ban, because of the use of abusive child labor in
production could withstand WTO challenges because of more general language in

⁴⁴ Reuters News, “Europe Chocolate Lobby Hopes to Stop Child Labor.” June 8, 2005.
⁴⁵ Ibid.
⁴⁶ P.L. 106-200.
⁴⁷ Global Exchange, “The News on Chocolate is Bittersweet: No Progress on Child Labor,
but Fair Trade Chocolate is on the Rise.” June 2005. [http://www.globalexchange.org]
⁴⁸ For a wide-ranging discussion of trade and labor strategies under WTO rules, see Trade-
Based Strategies for Combatting Child Labor by Frank J. Garcia and Soohyun Jun,
Research Paper no. 59, February 9, 2005, Boston College Law School, Legal Studies
Research Paper Series; the issue of using Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 is addressed
specifically in “Outlawing the Trade in Child Labor Products: Why GATT Article XX
Health Exception Authorizes Unilateral Sanctions,” by Matthew T. Mitro, American
University Law Review, 51Am.U.L.Rev.1223, August 2002.

article XX(b) which permits exceptions to GATT rules in order to protect human
health. This position is based on the notion that abusive child labor is injurious to
health, and that children have been reportedly found to be using pesticides without
adequate protection. Proponents of banning cocoa imports because they are produced
using abusive child labor practices also argue that recent WTO dispute panel
decisions validate a broad approach to enforcement of a member country’s laws when
health considerations are involved.
Some contend that an import ban on cocoa produced using abusive child labor
might contribute little to improving the lot of children in rural Côte d’Ivoire or other
cocoa producing countries. Critics do not argue that abusive or unsafe child labor
practices should be ignored, but rather that the underlying cause of child labor is rural
poverty which should be the focus of efforts to improve the lot of children.
Questions of targeting and fairness are also at issue. As trade data above show, while
the United States imports about 1/4 of its cocoa beans from Côte d’Ivoire, about 65%
of Ivorian cocoa goes to Europe, from which the United States imports cocoa
products. To what extent would an import ban cover imports of products from
Europe manufactured from cocoa beans produced under conditions of abusive child
labor, as well as to the bean-producing countries?
Other Framework Agreement Models
The Harkin-Engel Protocol is an agreement by which two cocoa/chocolate
industry groups committed themselves and their members to the goals outlined in the
protocol. Their pledge was witnessed by the government of Côte d’Ivoire, Members
of Congress, the International Labor Organization (ILO), and several private labor
rights groups.
Were the Protocol to experience implementation challenges, or if broader
participation were found to be useful, based on Protocol implementation experience,
the creation of other cooperative action plans or framework agreements could
conceivably be pursued. One possible model for such an effort is the Kimberley
Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), an international voluntary agreement that
seeks to regulate the trade in rough diamonds through the creation of a closed system
of trade between “legitimate” traders of rough diamonds, as defined under the
KPCS.⁴⁹ The system is based upon the use of certificates issued by state participants,
which accompany and vouch for the legitimacy of diamonds that they import or
export. The aim of the KPCS is to prevent trade in “conflict diamonds” (diamonds
sold by rebel groups to fund armed insurgencies, mostly in Africa) while helping to
protect the legitimate rough diamond trade. The KPCS is comprised of states and
regional economic integration organizations that are eligible to trade in rough
diamonds under the KPCS. The diamond industry and civil society groups act as
observers to the KPCS, and actively take part in monitoring and improving the
scheme. The KPCS, which could be viewed as a restraint on trade under World

⁴⁹ For more information on the Kimberley Process, see the official website of the KPCS
[http://www.kimberleyprocess.com] and CRS Report RL30751, Diamonds and Conflict:
Background, Policy, and Legislation.

Trade Organization (WTO) rules, has a temporary WTO waiver that expires in 2006.
Observers expect a further WTO waiver to be sought to continue the Process.⁵⁰
While the KPCS has what some observers see as drawbacks,⁵¹ it is undergoing
continued review by Participants and Observers. Some may argue, however, that
creating a similar process aimed at ending abusive labor processes in the cocoa
industry could delay implementation of efforts to achieve that goal, since the time
that would likely be involved in negotiating such an agreement could be lengthy. In
addition, such an effort could lead to the adoption of “lowest common denominator”
labor standards, since implementation of such a framework would likely be arrived
at by voluntary consensus by participating governments, some of which may lack the
capacity or legal mechanisms to ensure adherence to strict labor standards. In
addition, some non-participating countries might object to such a scheme as a
restraint on trade under WTO rules, and challenge it in the WTO. While a waiver
similar to that under the KPCS could potentially be sought, some observers believe
that WTO rule exceptions related to public health and morals might not be applicable
to such a cocoa trade regime; from this perspective, such a regime might not conflict
with WTO rules.
Multilateral Poverty Reduction Strategies
Researchers note that cocoa-producing countries could use findings about cocoa
agricultural labor patterns for their benefit. The use of child labor in cocoa
production, for instance, could be seen as an indicator of poverty. Consequently,
countries could potentially incorporate education-based anti-child labor initiatives
into their country Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS). According to STCP officials,
Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire have already programmed some of their revenues gained
through the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative to bolster their
education infrastructure, and thereby address one of the basic goals of anti-child labor
efforts.⁵²
Other Issues
Impact of Political Instability
Ivorian officials maintain that their country is committed to ending the use of
abusive child labor in cocoa production, and that they are working vigorously to
combat the problem and expand anti-child labor efforts, but face significant
challenges in doing so. They note that large parts of key cocoa-growing areas in
western Côte d’Ivoire are the site of instability and armed conflict related to the

⁵⁰ WTO, Waiver Concerning Kimberley Process Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds
- Decision of 15 May 2003, WT/L/518.
⁵¹ These are cited as a lack of independent monitoring and oversight; statistical anomalies
pertaining to reporting requirements, and lack of internal controls and tracking of diamonds
domestically from “mine to export point” in some countries
⁵² Interview with STCP officials on June 22, 2005.

larger civil conflict that afflicts the country.⁵³ The government of Côte d’Ivoire has
reportedly spent more than $1 million on countering abusive child labor in cocoa
production — largely through STCP.⁵⁴
Limited Educational Infrastructure
Analysts point out that even in instances when children can be removed from
the worst forms of child labor, there may not be educational institutions available to
them. Many farms in West Africa are in rural areas where educational infrastructure
is limited, and transport to schools over long distances is limited or virtually non-
existent. Furthermore, many farmers are unable to afford school fees, uniforms,
and/or books. Although in Ghana primary education is free and compulsory, the
government reportedly does not enforce the law because it knows that there are not
enough schools to service all children. Many of the teachers in the country are
obtained through the compulsory national service, a limited service program.
Low World Prices for Cocoa
Interviews conducted during the IITA survey revealed that greater employment
of family labor was a common response to the drop in cocoa prices during the 1990s,
and the resulting decline in cocoa incomes. In addition to the substitution of family
labor for paid labor, farmers have also reduced the use of purchased inputs, such as
fertilizers. The net effect of both of these factors has led to lower productivity and
incomes, and to reduced household investments in children’s education. Some
analysts argue that the fall of world cocoa prices led to an increase in the use of child⁵⁵
labor. Labor rights advocates argue that if farmers could gain greater profits from
their crops, then they would be less likely to use children in cocoa production. (For
prices trends, see Figure 1, above.)

⁵³ See CRS Report RS21989, Côte d’Ivoire Divided: Civil War Reprise?
⁵⁴ Interview with STCP officials on June 22, 2005.
⁵⁵ International Cocoa Organization (ICCO), [http://www.icco.org].

Appendix
Definitions and Concepts Related to Child Labor and Used in
the IITA Study
^!Child labor, as derived from ILO Convention 138, is any economic
activity performed by a person under the age of 15. Not all work is
considered harmful to or exploitative of children. Child labor is
work that prevents children from attending and participating
effectively in school or is performed by children under hazardous
conditions that place their healthy physical, intellectual, or moral
development at risk.
^!The worst forms of child labor, as defined in ILO Convention 182,
is the use of any individual under the age of 18 for the purposes of
debt bondage, armed conflict, commercial sexual exploitation, drug
trafficking, and other types of work identified as hazardous to
children by ratifying members.
^!Working children are those who carried out at least one task/activity
on the cocoa farm, i.e., clearing ground; weeding; maintaining cocoa
trees; applying pesticides; spreading fertilizer; harvesting;
piling/gathering up; pod breaking; fermenting; transporting; drying;
and other activities.