Cocoa in a Changing Climate:

Projecting Hot Spots of Vulnerability

Rachel Friedman
MPhil in Geography and the Environment
MSc Course: Biodiversity, Conservation, and Management
Word Count: 3,986
Date: 25/04/2014
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Cocoa in a Changing Climate: Projecting Hot Spots of Vulnerability

Abstract
Climate change is a looming threat for many aspects of human society, not the least of which is
agriculture and food. Theobroma cacao, the plant behind the much-loved chocolate bars, is especially
vulnerable to shifts in precipitation and temperature regimes. It also forms the backbone for many
smallholder farmers in tropical areas. This study examines the bioclimatic suitability of current cocoa
growing areas under future climate change projections, and proposes areas to focus further attention
on research. While the cocoa belt as a whole faces declining suitability for growing, some of the most
crucial regions for the cocoa industry – West Africa and the Amazon – are under augmented threat as
the century progresses. With this knowledge as backdrop, it is possible to direct energy not only into
adaptation measures for regions at risk (including alternative management and crop diversification),
but also look to new opportunities for cocoa farming.

Introduction
Between rising temperatures, more variable precipitation, and other biophysical shifts, food systems
are anticipated to face a variety impacts from climate change, both positive and negative alike.
According to the fifth assessment report of the Intergrovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
elevated levels of CO2 and warmer temperatures may positively impact crop yields, while on the other
hand there is high confidence of extreme climatic events negatively impacting food production,
(Porter, et al. 2014). Changes are already evident; yet such extremes are likely to become more
common as the climate continues to change.

Theobroma cacao, the primary raw material for chocolate, forms the basis of an agro-industry with
economic and social connections across the globe. Around three million tons of cocoa beans are
consumed annually, thus representing an important commodity crop in tropical regions (WCF 2014).
Small-scale family farms comprise 80-90% of global cocoa production, which serves as the primary
income source for five to six million smallholders farmers (WCF 2014). While cocoa is distributed
throughout the 15-20°N/S latitude range, African countries currently account for over two-thirds of
the supply of beans, and countries in Asia and Latin America often find niches in artisanal and high-
end chocolate markets (WCF 2014).

Cocoa is a crop grown under a limited set of climatic and biophysical conditions, situated in a narrow
band of temperatures and relatively stable soil moisture content (Anim-Kwampong & Frimpong
2005). Studies have shown that cocoa production is particularly sensitive to precipitation and
temperature extremes, such as prolonged periods of drought. Those are critical variables dictating the
ability of T. cacao to produce flowers and fruit, or to establish itself as a seedling, thus impacting the
regeneration of cocoa stands (Oyekale, et al. 2009). Outside of optimal conditions, tree mortality may
also increase.

Temperatures for growing commercially viable cocoa fall between an average minimum of 18-21°C
and average maximum of 30-32°C, although the optimum within that range depend on other factors,
as well (Anim-Kwapong & Frimpong 2005). An absolute minimum of 10°C limits the viability of the
crop outside of the tropics, but an absolute maximum is unclear due to the relation to moisture and
humidity. In a model developed by Läderach, et al. (2011), maximum temperature of the warmest
month and the annual temperature range explained nearly half of the variation in suitability for cocoa
growing in Ghana and Cöte d’Ivoire.

1
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Studies have shown that rainfall during the driest months is more important than annual average
(Zuidema et al. 2005). In developing a physiological model for cocoa plants, Zuidema, et al. (2005)
found that dry season precipitation and annual radiation could explain 70% of cocoa bean yield
variation, and that water limitation could be responsible for up to 50% of yield decreases. In fact,
when consulting farmers in Nigeria, Oyekale, et al. (2009) found overwhelmingly that rainfall is
considered the single most important climatic factor for cocoa growth and development. More
frequent and severe drought years are also perceived as the expected driving factor in crop declines:
plants cannot sustain three consecutive months of less than 100mm in precipitation without
experiencing negative consequences for production and long-term vitality (Läderach, et al. 2013).

Precipitation, which appears to be the dominant driver in cocoa success, has the greatest impact in
concert with changes in temperature. For example, Läderach, et al. (2013) notes that high
temperatures in humid tropical areas such as in Malaysia are ideal growing conditions for cocoa;
however, production suffers when decreased water availability due to elevated evapotranspiration or
drought conditions coincide with higher temperatures. For example, insufficient rainfall and
increasing variability severely affected the West African and Sahelian regions’ cocoa production
during the 1970’s and 1980’s (Läderach, et al. 2013). While studies have demonstrated that rainfall
and humidity have the strongest impacts on cocoa production, on the other end of the spectrum,
pathogens such as black pod disease (a major culprit of cocoa yield decline) reaches its highest
prevalence following high rainfall and cool temperatures (Oluyole, et al. 2013; Oyekale 2012).

Beyond the biophysical constraints that cocoa production faces, changes in climate will also likely
have considerable impacts on other stages in the chocolate supply chain. Oyekale et al. (2009) argue
that climate changes affect the three phases of cocoa production - seedling, establishment, and
processing - in different ways. For example, cocoa seedlings are particularly vulnerable to drought.
Water deficit can lead to low yields, and prolonged rains can hinder the drying and processing of
cocoa beans, leading to post-harvest losses. However, for the purposes of this study, I only focus on
the first two phases of production.

Considering the commodity’s importance to the economies of many tropical countries, and its
sensitivity to changes in climatic variables, assessing cocoa’s vulnerability to climate change and
potential adaptation measures is garnering increasing interest. Yet researchers have carried out few
studies on climate change and its impacts on cocoa production and farmer livelihoods. Primarily
conducted in Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire, and Nigeria, these studies focus on particular important regions or
countries (Anim-Kwapong & Frimpong 2005; Läderach, et al. 2013; Ojo & Sadiq 2010; Oluyole, et
al. 2013; Oyekale, et al. 2009), while the impacts on global production of cocoa has not received the
same attention.

Other efforts have targeted identifying areas of vulnerability for agriculture and food systems more
generally, using mapping and spatial analysis tools. In some of these studies carried out by the
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), scientists developed maps of
hotspots for climate vulnerability, food insecurity, and poverty, based upon relevant indicators
(Ericksen, et al. 2011; Thornton, et al. 2006). These analyses used generalized climate conditions (e.g.
min/max temperatures, changes in precipitation) in addition to a number of other variables related to
demographics, hunger, and infrastructure, and a range of modeling methods to pinpoint “hotspots” -
specific regions that have surpassed particular thresholds.

This study builds on some of the conceptual elements presented in other mapping exercises and looks

2
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

at the question: within the current range of cultivation regions, what impacts will climate change on
the viability of Theobroma cacao production? It aims to estimate how bioclimatic suitability for cocoa
will change in 2020, 2050, and 2080, and then identify hotspots of vulnerability based on the
importance of the crop for livelihoods and the economy.

Methods
Bioclimatic Variables
In order to address this question, I first developed a foundation map of current cocoa producing
regions (Figure 1). This was based on yield data derived from cocoa figures within particular political
units (e.g. varying from country level to districts/provinces) and satellite observations of plausible
land-use types (Monfreda, et al. 2008). From this data, I manually created polygons to delineate the
approximate range of cocoa cultivation under current climate.

Figure 1. Map of current global distribution of cocoa developed in ArcGIS based on data from Monfreda, et al. (2008).

I examined four bioclimatic variables derived from Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) MK3.5 global circulation model (Gordon, et al. 2010;
Ramirez & Jarvis 2008). These were mean temperature, maximum temperature, precipitation, and
coefficient of variation for precipitation. The CSIRO is well-established in the field of climate
modeling, and the MK3.5 model is an updated version of one used in the fourth assessment report of
IPCC. The actual data was obtained from two different sources. Current climate data (interpolations
from ~1950-2000) came from WorldClim Datasets (Hijmans, et al. 2005). Future projections for the
years 2020, 2050, and 2080 were sourced from the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change,
Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) Global Change Model database, which provides data
processed (spatially down-scaled) for finer scale resolution, and utilised in other studies about climate
impacts on agriculture (e.g. Thornton, et al. 2006). For this study, I looked at one higher emissions
scenario (A2) and one lower emissions scenario (A1B) from the MK3.5 model (Figure 2). Four
different time periods - the current year, 2020, 2050, and 2080 - were examined at a 10 minute-arc
spatial resolution (because the scale of analysis is global rather than local or regional).

3
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Figure 2. IPCC future greenhouse gas emissions scenarios and their associated warming potential (IPCC 2007). The figure
to the left depicts the emissions levels while the image on the right represents the projected coinciding temperature. B1,
A1T, B2, A1B, A2, A1F1 represent different model scenarios based on anticipated technology and social factors that
influence greenhouse gas emissions.

Optimal ranges and threshold values for the four bioclimatic variables were determined based on
available literature and previous studies on the tolerances and performance of Theobroma cacao
explained earlier in the introduction (see Table 1). Because the interactions of temperature and
precipitation were identified as critical determinants of suitable cocoa habitat (Laderäch, et al. 2013), I
employed bioclimatic variables 5 (maximum temperature), 9 (driest quarter mean temperature), 15
(coefficient of variance for precipitation), and 18 (warmest quarter precipitation). As mentioned
earlier, the combination of high temperature and dry periods pose particular strain for growing cocoa.
Therefore in this analysis, temperature (during driest periods) was employed as a proxy for water-
stress. I included the coefficient of variance for precipitation – a marker of how widely precipitation
deviates on a weekly basis from the annual mean – because studies have shown that consistency of
precipitation rather than annual average better predicts overall cocoa success (Kimengsi & Tosam
2013). For socioeconomic parameters, I accessed the FAOStat Database to retrieve the most recent
country-level data from 2012 on the gross production value (in constant 2004-2006 international
dollars) of cocoa beans and agriculture generally, as well as agriculturalist population (FAO 2014).

Data Processing
Each of the four bioclimatic layers within each scenario was reclassified in accordance with the
thresholds of tolerance determined for cocoa (Figure 3, Figure 4a-d). Rather than a binary of suitable
versus unsuitable, I attempted to capture levels of suitability using available information on optimal
and tolerable growing conditions. For the precipitation and temperature layers, I assigned a value of 2
to optimal, 1 for sub-optimal but still tolerable (e.g. 18-32°C is an optimal temperature range, but
reaching 10°C still results in viable production), and 0 for unsuitable conditions. Coefficient of
variance (CoV) remained a binary choice, using a value representative of current major growing
areas. To develop a cut-off value, I extracted by mask (using the cocoa distribution polygon) the
current CoV within the cocoa producing area. Then I identified a baseline cut-off value encompassing
the top three-quarters of all values within the polygon, based on where cocoa is currently grown in
Cote D’Ivoire, Ghana, and Indonesia (the top three producers).

4
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Table 1: Bioclimatic variables derived from climate models and the thresholds applied to the analysis, based on cocoa
production literature.

Bioclimatic Variable Description Thresholds

9 Mean temperature of the driest quarter Suitable:

5 Maximum temperature >10C
<36C
Optimal: 18-32C

18 Precipitation during the warmest quarter Suitable: >100mm

Optimal: 375-750mm

15 Coefficient of variance of precipitation Suitable <8.2%

After reclassifying the bioclimatic variables, I multiplied the four together using the raster calculator,
resulting in a composite map with values of 0, 1, 2, 4, and 8, which were designated as ‘Unsuitable’,
‘Sub-Optimal’ (1 and 2 were combined), ‘Suitable’, and ‘Optimal’, respectively. To narrow in on the
current belt of cocoa production, I used the cocoa distribution polygon to extract by mask. The
attribute tables for each extraction was exported and used to calculate the proportions of area currently
within the cultivation band that would become unsuitable under future climate scenarios. I ran a chi-
squared test on each climate scenario and year, assuming a null hypothesis that nothing would change
from the current suitability. Using the raster calculator tool, I also determined which pixels
experienced negative, positive, or no change in suitability for each future projection.

Figure 3. Descriptive model of process: Reclassification process to assign values of 0, 1, or 2; Raster Calculator used to
multiply layers together; Extract by Mask to pull out information within current cocoa belt.

5
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Figure 4. Maps of bioclimatic variables used in the analysis: (a) Maximum Temperature; (b) Mean Temperature of the
Driest Quarter; (c) Precipitation during the Warmest Quarter; and (d) Coefficient of Variation for Precipitation.

In order to develop an economic indicator for the analysis, I calculated the percent contribution of
cocoa production to total agricultural value for each country (gross productive value cocoa/gross
productive value agriculture) and gross productive value of cocoa per capita of the country’s
agricultural population. After reformating the economic data from the FAO statistics database so that
it was compatible with the base map’s country delineations, I joined the table to the base map. I
selected by attribute the top twenty countries for both criteria, created polygons, and then found where
the polygons intersected the cocoa distribution polygon (Figure 5). Finally, those polygons were used
to extract by mask the suitability maps, and then reclassify into a binary of unsuitable and suitable.

6
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Figure 5. Cocoa’s contribution in gross productive value to agricultural value, by country. Gross productive value of cocoa
per capita (agricultural population) is also included in the delineated top twenty countries.

Results
Trends in Suitability
Under both the A1B and A2 scenarios, there is a consistent overall decline in the area of suitable and
optimal growing conditions within the current range of cocoa production (Figures 6 and 7). By 2080,
A series of Chi-Square tests showed that there is a significant difference between the current growing
conditions and future suitable and optimal growing areas (p<0.001). Comparing individual pixels
rather than the overall change, indicates that the area that becomes less suitable increases with time
(Figures 8 and 9). Geographically, West Africa is hardest hit in the first half of the century. By 2080,
Amazonia is also likely to experience serious negative impacts. While demonstrating some decrease
in suitability, the Southeast Asia region is generally amenable to cocoa production. There appears to
be little difference between the two scenarios in terms of impacts, possibly due to a certain amount of
committed climate change from the similar emissions trajectories prior to 2050.

Figure 6. Change in suitability of cocoa production areas (relative to a baseline of current suitability) from present to 2080,
under the A1B and A2 emissions scenarios.

7
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Figure 7. Maps of bioclimatic suitability for cocoa production (a) at present and in (b) 2020, (c) 2050, and (d) 2080.

Figure 8. The number of pixels that are categorised as less suitable compared to the current baseline conditions is projected
to increase, while only a very small area may experience more favourable conditions.

8
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Figure 9. Maps of suitability change from present to 2080 show the similarity between the (a) A1B and (b) A2 scenarios.

Hotspots of Vulnerability
Hotspots of vulnerability for cocoa production are areas where high economic importance (i.e. within
the top twenty countries for economic indicators) overlap with unsuitable (0 value) regions of the
maps. By 2050, under both scenarios, parts of Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, and Brazil are under serious
threat. Almost the entirety of the cocoa growing areas in those countries, in addition to most of
Nigeria, are the main locations of concern by the year 2080 (Figure 10a-c). Indonesia, while
economically very important, weathers the changes with much less negative effect.

Figure 10. Hotspots of vulnerability for cocoa production occur in two main regions - West Africa and the Amazon - and are
depicted for the years (a) 2020, (b) 2050, and (c) 2080.

Discussion
As this analysis demonstrates, there are considerable challenges ahead for cocoa production and the
farmers who rely on the commodity for their livelihoods. The need for future research on impacts of
climate change on cocoa production at more focused geographic scales, as well as potential adaptation
measures, is apparent. Such a reduction in viability of cocoa production where it is currently a center-
piece of agriculture could affect a way of life for thousands of farmers. That said, there are already

9
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

adaptation mechanisms in use to respond to the experienced weather fluctuations and expected
climatic hurdles for cocoa. These include developing and utilising drought-resistant cocoa varieties,
diversify farming systems and livelihoods, and incorporating lower density and shade-grown
techniques for water conservation (Läderach, et al. 2013). As the photosynthetic capacity of cocoa
declines when surpassing a certain light exposure, agroforestry systems might provide viable
adaptation mechanism to improve water conservation and reduce heat stress (Anim-Kwapong &
Frimpong 2005) and even contribute to mitigating climate change (Sommariba, et al. 2013).

It is also encouraging that certain regions, particularly producers of Southeast Asia and parts of
central Africa and northern South America, will not face as grave of constraints for production under
projected climate regimes. This may provide new or augmented opportunities for farmers in those
areas to enter the commodity market or diversify their current crop portfolio. Where West Africa
currently dominates the market at the moment, the future bioclimatic suitability could lead to more
even distribution of cocoa production across the world.

While the analysis provides a useful starting point from which prioritise more geographically specific
studies and interventions, there are a number of considerations regarding the robustness of the current
analysis and improvements for additional iterations.

Errors and Constraints

The first major challenge is associated with data availability and the spatial scale chosen for analysis.
As mentioned in the introduction, the current global map of cocoa production and associated data
lacks consistent spatial precision. Therefore, the outline of current distribution is necessarily a rough
approximation based on the best available data, and the inclusion of economic data to identify
hotspots fails to account for variation within country. Areas in which cocoa might not be found but
are still within the outlined production belt, may be classified as suitable or even optimal, but have
very little relevance for actual or anticipated production and the farmers who would be affected. Also
because of the global scale of analysis, elevation and topography were not included as variables.
These features affect weather patterns and microclimates, and could lead to pockets of suitable or
unsuitable conditions that would not be accounted for with the use of the chosen bioclimatic variables
or spatial resolution.

Secondly, the classification methods used in the study were predicated on literature outlining suitable
conditions for growing cocoa. If very clear thresholds of bioclimatic variables for cocoa production
existed, a methodology of reclassifying maps into binaries and stacking layers would have been ideal
for producing a final map of suitable-not suitable areas. However, with further exploration of the
literature over the course of the project, it became clear that climatic suitability is much more
complex. Peer-reviewed literature and industry papers often focus on one region or very general
conditions (e.g. warm and wet), and optimal growing conditions differ substantially between – and
even within – these regions (Franzen & Mulder 2007). Given this range of optimal environments, the
variation in timing of seasons (and thus important lifecycle milestones, such as planting, seedling
recruitment, and harvesting) across the growing range, and the complex interplay between a large
diversity of biophysical factors, it was extremely difficult to pinpoint just one maximum/minimum
threshold for the variables examined.

Moreover, even for the widely-accepted crucial variables – temperature and precipitation – studies
failed to reach consensus and the few physiological models for cocoa in existence are context specific
(Ajai, et al. 2010; Oyekale 2012). This was particularly apparent in a major gap in the literature: the

10
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

upper limits of precipitation. The literature is heavily biased towards periods of drought or insufficient
rainfall, and yet there is wide acknowledgement that heavy rain is a precursor to certain detrimental
diseases. Several studies noted that high levels of precipitation in conjunction with cool temperatures
provide optimal incubation conditions for black pod disease, which has considerable negative impact
on cocoa (Ajai, et al. 2010; Oyekale 2012). As no limits for these two conditions were provided,
anything above the acknowledged optimal precipitation range was still considered suitable, if not
ideal. Similarly, for temperature there seems to be no consensus on an upper limit, so 36°C was used
based on current maximum temperatures within major cocoa growing regions.

Additional variables identified as important in some studies (e.g. solar radiation, soil structure, etc.)
were not considered in this study, because they are more characteristic of place - latitude and
geomorphology - and not influential in future climate scenarios. However, these factors could impact
how cocoa trees respond to the stresses that alterations in climate change (and specifically water
shortages) and would result in diminished capacity for commercially viable cocoa production.
For a more robust analysis, I would also run scenarios from multiple global change models, as the
assumptions in each differ and ultimately impact the resulting climate projections.

Based on the complexity in cocoa production, modelled ‘probability of suitability’ (using a general
linear model or mechanistic model, such as Maximum Entropy [MaxEnt]) may have been a more
appropriate method than aiming for a binary. Other studies with similar intentions have employed a
variety of different modeling mechanisms (e.g. MaxEnt) on their own or in conjunction with GIS in
order to develop maps of vulnerability for agriculture and food security. At present, there are few, and
very geographically-specific, physiological models for cocoa, therefore using process-based
information about growing areas and how these might change with time could yield a more nuanced
understanding of where suitable present and future climate conditions lay (Läderach, et al. 2013).

Under the constraints of time, technological capacity, and cocoa knowledge gaps, utilizing ArcGIS
reclassification and map algebra tools made the most sense, although future studies can benefit from
these other methodologies. The tools of ArcGIS, however, could have been employed to provide more
nuance by weighting variables differently using the raster calculator or quantitative detail through
zonal statistics and the socioeconomic data embedded in the attribute table.

It should also be acknowledged that the hotspots of vulnerability identified in this study do not
account for the ability of cocoa farmers to cope with and adapt to changes. Agricultural practices, in
addition to socioeconomic and cultural elements, are key factors in assessing vulnerability (Oyekale,
et al. 2009; Thornton, et al. 2006). Thus, any more regionally focused studies would be able to
account for the adaptive capacity of farming communities and the policies and institutions in place
that impact vulnerability to climate change and dictate the types adaptation activities required.

Because the goals of this project necessitated an examination at global scale, there are tradeoffs
between breadth and depth, and many of the shortcomings above were inevitable. For the purposes of
identifying coarse-scale ‘hotspots’, the weaknesses associated with insufficient data are not
overwhelming; however, for results with more meaning to on-the-ground interventions and adaptation
measures, finer resolution information on production areas and livelihoods would be imperative.

Conclusion and Future Directions

Could climate change mean the end of chocolate? Based on this analysis, many of the major growing
areas face considerable challenges ahead, as the bioclimatic suitability of the regions shift. However,

11
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

with knowledge comes greater capacity to assess and adapt. This exercise (and others like it) provides
a means by which to prioritise regions for development and implementation of adaptation measures,
as well as conduct further research. Because the ways in which bioclimatic factors influence
production are complex and context-dependent, there is considerable opportunity to use a mix of
modeling methods and incorporate other physical and socioeconomic variables into studies of climate
impacts on specific regions. Honing in on target regions would also allow for mapping of potentially
suitable areas into which cocoa farming could migrate as climate changes.

This analysis is simply the tip of the iceberg. Much more can be done in this area to account for the
complex web of anthropogenic and biophysical processes that ultimately have bearing on the success
of cocoa (as well as other commodity crops). Used in conjunction with what we already know and are
learning about agricultural management and tolerances of Theobroma cacao to climatic conditions,
and farmer innovation in the face of change, hotspot mapping serves as a powerful tool in the fight for
the future of chocolate (and all the livelihoods that depend on it).

References
Ajayi, I.R., Afolabi, M.O., Ogunbodede, E.F., & Sunday, A.G. (2010) Modelling rainfall as a
constraining factor for Cocoa yield in Ondo State. American Journal of Scientific and Industrial
Research 1(2): 127-134.
Anim-Kwapong, G.J. & Frimpong, E.B. (2005) Vulnerability of agriculture to climate change: impact
of climate change on cocoa production. Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment under the
Netherlands Climate Change Studies Assistance Programme Phase 2 (NCCSAP). New Tafo
Akim: Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana.
Ericksen, P., Thornton, P., Notenbaert, A., Cramer, L., Jones, P. & Herrero, M. (2011) Mapping
hotspots of climate change and food insecurity in the global tropics. CCAFS Report No.5.
Copenhagen: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security
(CCAFS). Available from: www.ccafs.cgiar.org. Accessed: 8 March 2014.
FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]. 2014. FAOSTAT Database.
Available from: http://faostat3.fao.org/. Accessed: 8 March 2014.
Franzen, M. & Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (2007) Ecological, economic and social perspectives on cocoa
production worldwide. Biodiversity and Conservation 16 (13): 3835–3849.
Hijmans, R.J., Cameron, S.E., Parra, J.L., Jones, P.G., & Jarvis, A. (2005) Very high resolution
interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 25:
1965-1978. Available from: http://www.worldclim.org/current. Accessed: 26 February 2014.
Kimengsi, J.N. & Tosam, J.N. (2013) Climate Variability and Cocoa Production in Meme Division of
Cameroon : Agricultural Development Policy options By Policy options. Greener Journal of
Agricultural Sciences 3(8): 606-617.
Läderach, P., Eitzinger, A., Martínez, A., & Castro, N. (2011) Predicting the impact of climate change
on the cocoa-growing regions of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire. Cali: International Center for
Tropical Agriculture. Available from: http://www.ciatnews.cgiar.org/wp-
content/uploads/2011/09/Ghana_ivory_coast_climate_change_and_cocoa.pdf. Access: 8 March
2014
Läderach, P., Martinez-Valle, A., Schroth, G. & Castro, N. (2013) Predicting the future climatic
suitability for cocoa farming of the world’s leading producer countries, Ghana and Côte
d’Ivoire. Climatic Change 119: 841–854.
Monfreda, C., Ramankutty, N. & Foley, J.A. (2008) Farming the planet. Part 2: Geographic
distribution of crop areas, yields, physiological types, and net primary production in the year
2000. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 22: GB1022. Available from: doi:10.1029/2007GB002947.
Accessed: 26 February 2014. Data available at: http://www.earthstat.org/.

12
Friedman – Unpublished Do Not Cite Cocoa in a Changing Climate

Ojo, A.D. & Sadiq, I. (2010) Effect of climate change on cocoa yield: a case of Cocoa Research
Institute (CRIN) farm, Oluyole Local Government Ibadanoyo State. Journal of Sustainable
Development in Africa 12(1): 350 - 358.
Oluyole, K.A., Emaku, L.A., Aigbekaen, E.O., & Oduwole, O.O. (2013) Overview of the trend of
climate change and its effect on cocoa production in Nigeria. World Journal of Agricultural
Research 1(1): 10-13.
Oyekale, A.S. (2012) Impact of Climate Change on Cocoa Agriculture and Technical Efficiency of
Cocoa Farmers in South-West Nigeria 40 (2): 143–148.
Oyekale, A.S., Bolaji, M.B. & Olowa, O.W. (2009) The Effects of Climate Change on Cocoa
Production and Vulnerability Assessment in Nigeria. Agricultural Journal. 4 (2): 77–85.
Porter, J.R., Xie, L., Challinor, A., Cochrane, K., Howden, M., Iqbal, M.M., Lobell, D., Travasso, M.I., Chhetri,
N., Garrett, K., Ingram, J., Lipper, L., McCarthy, N., McGrath, J., Smith, D., Thornton, P., & Ziska,
L.(2014) Chapter 7. Food Security and Food Production Systems. In: IPCC. (2012) Managing the
Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special
Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Field,
C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-
K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge and New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Ramirez, J. & Jarvis, A. (2008) Disaggregation of Global Circulation Model Outputs. Cali:
International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); CGIAR Research Program on Climate
Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Available from: http://www.ccafs-
climate.org/. Accessed: 26 February 2014.
Somarriba, E., Cerda, R., Orozco, L., Cifuentes, M., Dávila, H., Espin, T., Mavisoy, H., Ávila, G.,
Alvarado, E., Poveda, V., Astorga, C., Say, E., & Deheuvels, O. (2013) Carbon stocks and
yields in agroforestry systems of Central America. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment
173: 46-57.
Thornton, P.K., Jones, P.G., Owiyo, T., Kruska, R.L., Herrero, M., Kristjanson, P., Notenbaert, A.,
Bekele, N. & Omolo, A., with contributions from Orindi, V., Otiende, B., Ochieng, A.,
Bhadwal, S., Anantram, K., Nair, S., Kumar, V. & Kulkar, U. (2006) Mapping climate
vulnerability and poverty in Africa. Report to the Department for International Development.
Nairobi: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).
WCF [World Cocoa Foundation]. (2014) Cocoa Market Update. Washington, DC: World Cocoa
Foundation. Available from: http://worldcocoafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/Cocoa-
Market-Update-as-of-4-1-2014.pdf. Accessed: 8 March 2014.
Zuidema, P. a., Leffelaar, P. a., Gerritsma, W., Mommer, L. & Anten, N.P.R. (2005) A physiological
production model for cocoa (Theobroma cacao): model presentation, validation and application.
Agricultural Systems 84 (2): 195–225.

13