Cocoa Bill: Can Farmers Still Change Their Cocoa Farms To Other Crops?

ACCRA, Ghana — Ghana's new Cocoa Board Bill, 2026 has triggered fresh controversy over the future of cocoa farms, with farmers and opposition figures raising concerns about restrictions on converting cocoa land to other uses before President John Dramani Mahama decides whether to assent to the legislation.

The Bill, passed by Parliament on July 30 under a Certificate of Urgency, would give cocoa farms protected status and make unauthorised conversion of protected cocoa land a criminal offence.

The legislation has not yet become law. It is currently awaiting presidential assent.

At the centre of the controversy is a question that affects thousands of cocoa farmers:

What happens if a cocoa farm becomes too old or unproductive and the farmer wants to use the land for something else?

The answer under the Bill

Under the proposed framework, cocoa farms would receive protected status, meaning farmers could not simply convert them to another use without the required approval.

That provision has attracted particular attention because unauthorised conversion could attract a prison sentence of up to 20 years, according to reporting based on the text of the Bill.

The provision is separate from the Bill's tough measures against illegal mining and other activities that damage protected cocoa farms.

This distinction is important.

The legislation does not mean that every farmer who plants another crop automatically receives a 20-year prison sentence.

The legal issue is whether a protected cocoa farm has been converted without the authorisation required under the proposed law.

Why the provision is causing concern

For supporters of the Bill, the restriction is about protecting Ghana's cocoa industry.

For some farmers and their representatives, however, the concern is about what happens when the economics of cocoa farming no longer work.

A farmer may have an ageing farm with declining yields, rising labour costs and increasing production expenses.

If cocoa is no longer providing enough income, the farmer may want to consider another crop or another lawful use of the land.

That is where the new legislation creates a difficult question.

If the farmer cannot simply change the use of the land, what practical alternative is available?

Farmers want clarity before assent

The issue has now moved beyond Parliament.

Cocoa farmer representatives have called for a review of the Bill before presidential assent, arguing that farmers need greater clarity and consultation on provisions that could directly affect their livelihoods.

The concern is not necessarily that farmers want to abandon cocoa.

Rather, farmer representatives want to know what happens when a farm becomes unproductive and whether there will be a clear process for dealing with such farms.

That is a critical distinction.

A farmer who wants to escape an unproductive farm is not necessarily the same as someone seeking to destroy cocoa land through illegal mining.

NPP asks Mahama not to assent immediately

The political opposition has also entered the debate.

The New Patriotic Party has urged President Mahama not to assent to the Cocoa Board Bill immediately, calling for broader stakeholder consultation before the legislation becomes law.

The NPP argues that a law affecting cocoa farmers across the country should receive wider consultation before implementation.

The opposition's position has added pressure on the government at a time when the cocoa sector is already facing serious financial and production challenges.

But the criticism has a direct counterpoint.

COCOBOD has maintained that stakeholder engagements have been conducted as part of the broader cocoa-sector reforms.

The disagreement, therefore, is no longer simply about the contents of the Bill.

It is also about whether farmers were adequately heard before Parliament approved it.

Government's argument: protect cocoa land

The government's case for stronger protection is straightforward.

Ghana has been losing agricultural land to illegal mining and other competing uses.

Cocoa farms destroyed through galamsey can be extremely difficult to restore.

The Bill therefore seeks to make the destruction and unauthorised conversion of cocoa farms much more difficult.

Parliament has also linked the legislation to wider efforts to protect Ghana's cocoa industry and environment.

For policymakers, the concern is that allowing cocoa land to disappear could weaken Ghana's ability to maintain cocoa production in the future.

But what about an ageing cocoa farm?

This is where the legislation faces its biggest practical test.

Consider a farmer whose cocoa trees are decades old.

The harvest has fallen.

The farmer has limited access to capital.

Labour costs have increased.

The farm requires rehabilitation.

At the same time, another crop may appear more profitable.

What should that farmer do?

The answer cannot simply be:

“You cannot change the farm.”

If Ghana wants farmers to keep their land under cocoa, then the state must also make cocoa farming economically viable.

That means rehabilitation support, improved seedlings, disease control, access to inputs, financing and reliable extension services.

Otherwise, protecting cocoa farms on paper could leave farmers facing increasingly difficult economic choices.

The 70% farmer-price guarantee

The farm-conversion controversy is only one part of the new Bill.

Another major provision is the proposed guarantee that cocoa farmers receive at least 70% of the gross Free-on-Board price realised by COCOBOD.

Parliament said the measure is intended to give farmers a greater share of the international value of their cocoa.

The provision is significant because cocoa farmers have long argued that the person producing the crop should receive a fairer share of the value generated from it.

But implementation will matter.

Farmers will want to know how the gross FOB price is calculated, how the amount they receive is determined and what mechanisms will ensure transparency.

The Bill goes beyond farm restrictions

The proposed legislation also introduces wider changes to Ghana's cocoa sector.

Among the measures reported in connection with the Bill are reforms to cocoa financing and marketing, stronger protection of cocoa farms, arrangements intended to support farmers and provisions aimed at increasing local processing.

That means the legislation is not simply a criminal law targeting farmers.

It is intended to restructure important aspects of the cocoa industry.

The question is whether those reforms will produce the balance farmers are looking for.

Protecting the land without trapping the farmer

This is ultimately where the controversy lies.

Ghana needs to protect cocoa land.

The country also needs to fight galamsey.

But the farmer needs a viable livelihood.

If a cocoa farm is productive, there is a strong argument for protecting it.

If a farm has become unproductive, however, the farmer needs a clear legal pathway.

That could mean rehabilitation.

It could mean government support.

Or, where the law permits it, a transparent approval process for another use.

What farmers cannot afford is uncertainty.

The political argument is only beginning

With the Bill still awaiting presidential assent, the controversy is unlikely to disappear soon.

The NPP wants broader consultation.

Farmer representatives are asking for review and clarity.

COCOBOD is defending the broader reform process.

And the government must now decide whether to assent to the legislation as passed or address concerns raised before it becomes law.

For President Mahama, the decision carries consequences beyond politics.

The cocoa sector supports hundreds of thousands of farming households, making any major change to the industry's legal framework a matter of national economic importance.

What should farmers watch for?

For cocoa farmers, several issues will be particularly important if the Bill becomes law:

First, what exactly constitutes unauthorised conversion?

Second, what approval process will farmers have to follow?

Third, what happens to old and severely unproductive cocoa farms?

Fourth, how will the 70% FOB guarantee work in practice?

Fifth, what support will be available for farmers who want to rehabilitate ageing farms?

And perhaps most importantly:

Will farmers have a meaningful voice in how the new law is implemented?

The bigger question for Ghana

The debate over the Cocoa Board Bill should not be reduced to NDC versus NPP.

It is a debate about the future of one of Ghana's most important agricultural industries.

The country needs to protect cocoa farms from illegal mining and uncontrolled conversion.

But it also needs to ensure that cocoa farming remains attractive enough for farmers to continue investing in their farms.

Because protecting the cocoa tree while neglecting the farmer would solve only half the problem.

The real test of the new legislation will be whether Ghana can achieve both objectives:

Protect the cocoa farm — and protect the farmer.

For now, the Bill remains before President Mahama for assent.

And for cocoa farmers watching the debate, one question remains at the heart of everything:

If my cocoa farm is no longer productive, what can I legally do with it?

That is the answer farmers deserve before the new rules take effect.

Global Pulse GH will continue to monitor the Cocoa Board Bill, the President's decision and reactions from cocoa farmers and industry stakeholders.