Rethinking sustainability in cocoa supply chain in light of SDG disclosure

2.1 Moving towards sustainable supply chain management to have an impact on sustainability transitions

The transition to sustainability is a global challenge. Growing environmental concerns and associated regulatory issues have drawn the attention of professionals and researchers to a system that facilitates sustainability transitions (Geels, 2002; Lynch et al., 2020). Different approaches characterise transitions as long-term technological changes in how social functionalities are arranged. Transitions involve changes in supply chain networks, policies, user practices, internal and external regulations, infrastructure and culture (Geels, 2002, 2019; Hallin et al., 2021; Turnheim and Sovacool, 2020).

The research gap is rapidly advancing at the micro-level (industries, companies, stakeholders) to identify the multiple initiatives and inter-organisational activities oriented towards the transition to sustainability (Cantele et al., 2020). Therefore, research is needed to investigate supply chains and their business ecosystems for activities that effectively enable sustainability transitions (Köhler et al., 2019), especially in SSCM. In addition, we need methods to frame this transition path to provide reliable information to practitioners and researchers.

Sustainability transitions can include changes on various fronts, including food systems, governance and many others (Cherp et al., 2018). Sustainable development initiatives can be focused on low-carbon strategies (O’Neill and Gibbs, 2020; Rosenbloom, 2017), energy efficiency (Grubler, 2012; Khalid and Sunikka-Blank, 2020), agro-food (El Bilali, 2020), governance (Nieminen et al., 2021; Turnheim et al., 2018) and many other macro contexts (Larbi et al., 2021; Schäpke et al., 2018). The relationship between supply chain production and sustainable targets can be captured through transitional impact categories, such as interconnections at different production levels. For this reason, potential sustainable transition actions can be developed to assess the contribution of the supply chain system. This enables corporations to evaluate their processes (self-assessment), effects and impacts, providing an opportunity for learning and generating value for management mechanisms. The links between production processes and sustainable development can help articulate investment in a design that facilitates the delivery of sustainable production processes. SDGs produce synergies and trade-offs in a way that can contribute to achieving targets with the most substantial relationships while facing new challenges to overcome (Schroeder et al., 2019).

The highest barriers to SSCM can be surmounted by transforming the global chain of products into viable relationships between environmental, social and economic systems in harmony. In defending this interdimensional integration from the practical and theoretical perspective of supply chain management, we need to demonstrate the sustainable gains that can be achieved compared to traditional one-dimensional models (Loughlin et al., 2021).

For SSCM to advance, it is necessary to continue resolving the issues related to conventional supply chain management to achieve continuous progress (increasing maturity – process and technology development) and envision the potential benefits of this approach (Ardito et al., 2020, 2019). In this context, sustainable practices contribute to the development of appropriate policies to mitigate growing international environmental concerns, in addition to helping overcome trade barriers (Koberg and Longoni, 2019).

Supply links and industry networks provide infrastructure, additional technologies and inputs to SSCM and promote complex and interdependent impacts (Barometer Consortium, 2016), such as increased local and micro-regional jobs, optimisation, better environmental performance, economic gains and investments linked to the business structure (Loughlin et al., 2021).

Research has empirically demonstrated the impact of SSCM practices on pressuring supply chains to change how companies measure performance, including the growing relevance of environmental, social and economic indicators (Lenuwat and Boon-itt, 2022). The SSCM approach is both a strong challenge and a golden opportunity for key businesses, especially in emerging economies. Sustainability challenges will persist in supply chain management worldwide for many years (Reinhorn, 2013; Tseng et al., 2019).

Although the sustainability transitions field has been growing in recent years, the implications of transition thinking for cocoa companies and their level of disclosure remain limited or non-existent. Therefore, the characteristics of sustainability transitions must be considered according to the contemporary agenda of sustainable development, considering its management model and approach.

Sustainability targets risk falling short of expectations because of the illusion that top-down leadership from governments and intergovernmental organisations can solve global problems alone. From this perspective, sustainability targets need to mobilise new agents of change, such as companies (Hajer et al., 2015), towards a common future. Communication through sustainability reports plays an important role in achieving such audacious goals, and SDGs are a clear path to this achievement.

2.2 Disclosure and reporting for sustainability

Companies and organisations can manage and evaluate different issues and aspects of sustainable development through their interactions with society and the environment (Ba, 2021). We increasingly perceive the need to understand sustainability development in a holistic and expanded way (Kluza et al., 2021). Most stakeholders expect sustainability-oriented practices to be transparently reported and communicated, describing these actions, results and impacts (Aguiar et al., 2020).

Companies are recognised for their sustainability performance, highlighting the sustainability impact of their actions (Kang et al., 2022). In addition, the growing need for information disclosure for governments, communities and other stakeholders where companies develop their businesses increases the importance of reporting sustainability (Tettamanzi et al., 2022). This situational portrait has led managers, researchers and academics to expand their perspectives on communicating relevant information and accountability to develop the mechanisms needed to inform stakeholders about the impact of sustainability, linking sustainability to reporting (Vysochan et al., 2022).

Sustainability reporting came to the forefront of academic attention at the end of the millennium, strengthening the communication process of internal operations (Jindřichovská et al., 2020) and becoming a phenomenon in developing countries (KPMG, 2017). The dissemination of results through reports provided reliable information on sustainability performance, strengthening the process of communicating an organisation’s effects (direct and indirect). Sustainability reports complete the cycle of internal and external communication of sustainable development in companies, reporting performance and the need for possible management and evaluation adjustments. While sustainability reporting and accounting are two distinct concepts, they are complementary accountability tools. Effective communication of actions and results is essential to ensure transparency. For the practical improvement of sustainability performance, the measurement and internal management of performance need to be aligned with the purposes of external transparency. Sustainability results go hand in hand on two fronts:

1. internal – assessing environmental, economic, social and governance risks; and

2. external – communicating to parties outside the organisation with relevant internal data to improve the quality of decisions (Maas et al., 2016).

Many studies have reported on sustainability reporting in the agri-food industry, including cocoa, through case studies (Grumiller and Grohs, 2022). In this context, several companies have incorporated the SDGs into their sustainability reports. However, some companies wear sustainability attire to camouflage their business without taking sustainable actions. Sustainability reports, in this case, are a promotional tool rather than communication, which does not guarantee that the company does believe in ethical behaviour and principles (Jindřichovská et al., 2020). Furthermore, companies’ proliferation of false claims can contribute to stakeholder scepticism towards sustainability disclosures (Nyilasy et al., 2014). The lack of a mandatory normative framework to standardise sustainability reports results in substantial variations in how companies report sustainability (Ali et al., 2017).

2.3 Cocoa industry – multinational business entwined with sustainability challenges

Cocoa fruit originates from the western coast of South America, and its scientific name, Theobroma cacao, is composed of the Greek words Theo (God) and brome (food); Mayan civilisation gave it the status of the food of gods. The first evidence of chocolate dates to the Mayan empire, as far back as 600 BC (Rusconi and Conti, 2010). Cocoa has since become a multibillion-dollar business with a complex global supply chain facing multidimensional sustainability challenges (Recanati et al., 2018).

In the 2021/2022 cocoa season, approximately 4.9 million tonnes of cocoa were produced worldwide (FAO, 2022; Bermudez et al., 2022). In 2022, the global cocoa market reached a value of approximately US$14.5bn (EMR, 2022) and its value is expected to grow to US$16.32bn by 2025 (Voora et al., 2019). In 2022, the leading exporter countries of cocoa were Côte d´Ivoire (US$3.7bn) and Ghana (US$1.5bn) (ICCO, 2022). Other important exporters are Ecuador, Nigeria, Brazil and Indonesia (Beg et al., 2017; Bermudez et al., 2022; FAO, 2022). Cocoa serves as a raw material for a variety of products but is mostly used by the chocolate industry, which surpassed US$100bn in 2021 (Bermudez et al., 2022). The cocoa sector provides income for 40–50 million people. It is a particularly important provider of livelihoods in developing countries. In total, 70% of cocoa is produced by smallholders living in extreme poverty. The cocoa supply chain also employs approximately 70,000 people in importing countries and supports approximately 2,000 companies in the European Union (EU) and 650 companies in the USA (Voora et al., 2019).

A multi-billion industry with a north–south supply chain is organised around cocoa in general and chocolate in particular. It consists primarily of chocolate manufacturers and cocoa traders in Europe and the USA and cocoa producers in West Africa, Asia and South America (Carodenuto, 2019). The largest companies in the cocoa supply chain are cocoa traders and chocolate manufacturers. The three largest cocoa traders and their respective market shares are as follows: Barry Callebaut (20.7%), Cargill (14.6%) and Olam International Limited (13.9%) (IMARC, 2021). Two other notable cocoa trading companies are Blommer Chocolate Company and Mondelez International. Table 1 lists the largest chocolate manufacturers and their US market shares in 2021 (Statista, 2020).

The supply chain of agri-food commodities poses well-known challenges regarding ethical management (Ganesh Kumar et al., 2017). Aligning the “good for the people and the planet” with the financial bottom line is often a challenge. Cocoa is associated with various environmental, social and economic sustainability challenges. For example, it belongs to a group of agricultural commodities (such as coffee, tea, soy, cattle and palm oil) that are considered “forest-risk commodities”, given that they drive deforestation and land degradation in the tropics and subtropics (Grabs and Carodenuto, 2021). In addition, sustainable sourcing practice adoption is challenged by large traders, a largely fragmented network of cocoa suppliers and farmers and the vulnerable voices of low-income populations (Thorlakson, 2018). To tackle the multiple challenges facing the cocoa sector, voluntary sustainability standards and corporate initiatives, largely focusing on farmers and farmer groups, are often implemented by public–private–civil society partnerships within the value chain (Ingram et al., 2018).

However, not all companies follow obligatory or voluntary codes of conduct. The partnerships and collaboration programmes with different associations are not regular or linear and can benefit companies and farmers differently (Lalwani et al., 2018). Partnerships have created new governance arrangements with an increased focus on sustainable practices throughout value chains. Initiatives that result in a living income and optimise productivity while simultaneously limiting environmental impacts require sectoral transformation, continued partnerships and a range of other policy instruments to address the persistent, wicked problems in the cocoa supply chain (Ingram et al., 2018). Constraints in technology, lack of knowledge and regulatory incentives are some of the reasons that can make the current practices less sustainable. Potential benefits concerning product quality and providing a competitive edge for the future of cocoa production can, in turn, have a stronger positive influence (Saltini et al., 2013).

The composition of the cocoa industry fails to support smaller players, as wealth is very unevenly distributed. The market is dominated by a small group of largely vertically integrated multinational corporations. Cocoa farmers are the weakest link in the chain and receive only a dwindling revenue share (Grabs and Carodenuto, 2021). It is necessary to increase competitiveness and optimise the power of export-oriented products to strengthen the position of the least-developed economies within the value chain (Fahmid et al., 2022). In addition, policies governing cocoa trading can become counterproductive factors that obstruct a government’s call to upgrade the cocoa value chain (Aboah et al., 2021). Customs procedures, systems and techniques used at each stage of the cocoa supply chain must be reviewed. Organic cocoa cultivation, fair trade, sustainable production and the environment should be priorities (ITC - International Trade Center, 2002).

Farming management practices applied by cocoa farmers at the beginning of the supply chain strongly influence several quality parameters of the finished product. A more sustainable cocoa sector has become increasingly possible and achievable in recent years (Saltini et al., 2013). Globally, the cocoa industry is better organised, considering government initiatives and national cocoa market regulations. Various organisations and stakeholders have been striving to improve the livelihoods of smallholder cocoa farmers. Consumers are increasingly aware of how their consumption affects producers and the environment. We can increasingly perceive the role of partnerships in seeking sustainability. SDG 17 reminds us how partnerships between stakeholders can help us achieve much more through a holistic vision (Lescornec, 2018).

3.1 Text mining analysis

In the first step, we used data from the most representative cocoa traders and chocolate producers, prioritising the companies listed in “Trends in the Implementation of Ethical Supply Chains: A Snapshot of the Cocoa Sector” (Rothrock et al., 2021). We excluded from the analysis companies without sustainability reports. In other words, we chose to analyse only companies that reported the three dimensions of the triple bottom line, providing more richness in the data analysis. A total of seven cocoa traders and seven chocolate manufacturers were considered for the examination. We developed a two-phase procedure, beginning with automatic text mining and then manual content analysis of sustainability reports (Bozzolan et al., 2015; Miotto and Vilajoana-Alejandre, 2019; Corazza et al., 2020). We analysed the 14 reports using the Leximancer text mining tool (Spry and Dwyer, 2017). The analysed reports were the most up-to-date available versions (February 2021).

We used Leximancer’s default settings for text mining according to two main features of the application – concept mapping and topic guides (Sotiriadou et al., 2014). This approach has been used across many contexts (Crofts and Bisman, 2010), including studies on the perception of sustainable supply chains (Kim and Kim, 2017). It is detailed in the following sections.

3.2 Exploring sustainable development goals linkages

In this step, we part from the outputs of the topic guides analysis. We labelled the first three topics tiers one, two and three, scaling them from more intense to less intense. Then, the constitutive phrases and sentences (topics guides) were diverted into keywords matched with specific SDGs. The matching was done by screening the topic guides and searching for matching words among the SDGs. The consensus of an expert panel, made up of the authors of this paper, established the topic connected with the SDGs, in a manner similar to that used by Fuso Nerini et al. (2018) and Bisaga et al. (2021) with the energy industry and SDG synergies and trade-offs.

The connections identified were tabulated in a spreadsheet with columns labelled “source” (topic guide theme) and “target” (SDGs). The results were converted into a graph using the network analysis tool Gephi (Bastian et al., 2008; Akhtar, 2014). The nodes in the graph represent the keywords, and the edges or lines represent the links between them. Using the keyword interface for qualitative reasoning, we conducted a modularity analysis (Grandjean, 2015) through Gephi to highlight the most frequently recurring topics linked to the SDGs. The network visualisation was improved using the Force Atlas algorithm (Grandjean, 2015) from Gephi tool defaults. Its spatial distribution and modularity clustering provided a visual understanding of the connections within and between the clusters.

4.1 Most relevant topics: cocoa traders

The following paragraphs describe the most frequently recurring topics in cocoa traders’ reports. The concept maps (Figures 3 and 4) indicate how the themes appear together throughout the texts of the reports analysed. The excerpts illustrate the placement of the topic connection.

Child and general labour concerns appear as the main themes in the social dimension. In the economic dimension, there are plenty of initiatives to increase farmers’ income. In the environmental dimension, we found forest preservation, carbon footprint and waste reduction. Decent work and child labour prevention can be found in excerpts such as the following from the report from cocoa traders 01, 02 and 03:

• “One child performing work that is dangerous or might harm their health or education is one too many. As cocoa farming countries and communities vary, there is no one-size-fits-all solution to prevent child labor. We are now tailoring our approach to the Indonesian context”. (Cocoa trader 01 Report)

• “Access to education and freedom from child labour are basic human rights, and we believe that these problems should be addressed simultaneously because they are inextricably linked”. (Cocoa trader 03 Report)

The terminology “Child Labour Monitoring and Remediation System (CLMRS)” appears in several reports as part of an international effort to deal with the issue by monitoring households and considering the contextual challenges of each country:

• “95.000 farmers covered by CLMRS […] In partnership with the Fair Labor Association (FLA) and the International Cocoa Initiative (ICI), we have established Child Labour Monitoring and Remediation Systems (CLMRS) in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. This involves a combination of educating cocoa growing communities, household and farm visits to collect data and track child labor instances, educating them about the need to protect children, and remediating to withdraw them from hazardous situations”.

• “This year, we expanded the range of cocoa farmers covered by monitoring and remediation systems to 39,909 (+139%). Our approach at remediation is aimed towards addressing some of the root causes of child labor, focusing on education, social and gender issues”. (Cocoa trader 02 Report)

The economic dimension also appears to be connected to decent work. The linkage between farmers’ training and child labour prevention can be observed in the concept mapping [Figure 3(a)] when both themes transition to each other and towards “Farm Business Plans”. Another excerpt highlights the connection:

• “An example of activities implemented by the Foundation include the coaching of farmers, the joint development of Farm Business Plans, the mapping of farms, and the generation of community action plans to eliminate child labor”. (Cocoa trader 02 Report)

The connection highlighted above suggests that training farmers is one of the vectors identified as practical for fighting child labour and modernising local business sustainably. The linkage bridges decent labour standards with financial concerns from the economic dimension of the analysis.

We also found connections between cooperative farming and forest preservation. Initiatives such as the one mentioned above reflect the large overlap between the concepts of “resources” and “forests” [Figure 3(b)] and the overlap between “cocoa”, “Farm Business Plans” and “farmers” [Figure 3(a)]. Hence, thriving farmers’ communities and awareness about forest preservation are the main disclosure vectors for the environmental dimension. The following excerpts illustrate the connections:

• “[…] to scale agroforestry further in our programmes, we have collaborated with La Société Foncier-Foresterie-Agriculture (FOA) to supply 129,001 seedlings to 6,808 farmers from 24 cooperatives”. (Cocoa trader 04 Report)

• “[…] collaborated with cocoa suppliers in the indirect supply chain in Côte d’Ivoire to raise awareness about deforestation and introduced measures that can be taken to prevent further encroachment of cocoa farms into protected areas”. (Cocoa trader 04 Report)

• “[…] another partnership with FOA to co-develop a medium-density agroforestry model (25–50 shade trees/ha) as an optimal alternative to the lower-density agroforestry systems (10–15 shade trees per ha). This agroforestry project also includes the distribution of Payment for Environmental Services to farmers involved to maximise tree survival in the early years when trees are most sensitive […]” (Cocoa trader 04 Report)

The keyword “shade” also appears frequently in the reports. It refers to agricultural inter-cropping with shade-grown cocoa that allows farmers to optimise the environmental services of the preserved forest.

4.2 Most relevant topics: chocolate manufacturer

Chocolate manufacturers focus on labour, child and gender issues, which we categorised as part of the social dimension of analysis. Another aspect is linked to certification and stakeholder involvement. These items can be observed as interconnected in the context mapping of CM01 [Figure 4(a)]. CLMRS is also mentioned as the driver for fighting child labour. A slightly different approach highlights the challenges involving supply chain monitoring:

• “[…] the strong potential of CLMRS and the positive impact of our collaboration with chocolate and cocoa industry peers and cocoa suppliers – mutually sharing our knowledge is a win-win for everyone along the cocoa supply chain”. (Chocolate manufacturer 01 Report)

Gender and education programmes are also widely disclosed items in the reports. “We have found examples of management programs focusing on promoting ‘gender balance across our total workforce and for women to hold 40 to 42% of people leader roles by 2025’” (Chocolate manufacturer 05 Report). In addition, some programmes, such as the Gender Action Learning at Scale training programme, are focused on protecting women in the mainstream of the supply chain (Chocolate manufacturer 03 Report):

• “The percentage of women farmers in our supply chain has remained constant at 7%. However, two figures have increased: - the percentage of land they own has increased from 7% to 12%, and - women in decision-making positions in coops has increased from 8% to 17%”. (Chocolate maker 03 Report)

The economic dimension approaches themes such as sustainable production promotion and farmer’s livelihood improvement, as seen in the overlapping area between “cocoa” and “financial” [Figure 4(b)]. The reports show that the companies offer training and financial products for village savings and loan associations (VSLA):

• “In 2019, over 2,000 farmers participated in VSLA groups, and 5,600 farmers were offered financial products such as pension schemes”. (Chocolate producer 04 Report)

Certification and supply monitoring criteria drive the environmental dimension for chocolate manufacturers. We highlight the interconnections between data, governments and deforestation identified in the chocolate manufacturers 04 report [Figure 3(b)], illustrated by the following excerpts:

• “Besides sourcing certified as sustainable cocoa, the mapping of our cocoa supply chain and the traceability to farm-gate level are cornerstones of our approach to end deforestation […] The Governments of Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana establish national strategies, policy environments, and governance structures for CFI implementation”. (Chocolate maker 04 report)

The Cocoa and Forests Initiative (CFI) is a public–private partnership that appears throughout the reports because it has several signatories and operates as a management-supporting organisation, guiding the members to use more sustainable indicators.

4.3 Sustainable development goals linkages

The topic guide analysis of the reports bridged the main topics to some of the SDGs. The SDGs linkages were based on the recommendations of an expert consensus panel (Fuso Nerini et al., 2018). The cocoa traders’ reports are connected to 18 targets and the chocolate manufacturers’ reports are related to 30 targets as shown in Figure 5. The portrayal of the SDG grid is inspired by a model developed by Vinuesa et al. (2020). The matching with the SDGs targets indicates some intriguing subjects. SDG 3 (good health and well-being), SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure) and SDG 14 (life below water) do not have any demonstrable links with the data in the reports, pointing to a research gap that can be addressed in the future. The SDGs related to food and agriculture (SDG 2), education (SDG 4), sustainable management (SDG 12) and decent work (SDG 8) appear more frequently and diversely in the reports.

The connections between the reports and the SDGs are illustrated in graphical form (Figure 6) that makes it possible to identify the following main clusters:

Cluster 1 – Focal point on SDG Target 15.2, specifically addressing deforestation and sustainable forest management in the company reports. Most of the reports lead to questions about the environmental services tropical rainforests provide, which are essential for cacao to grow. The CM04 and T04 reports resulted in the same cluster, connected to Target 15.2 because of its focus on the environmental dimension and forest preservation. The reports also identify agroforestry as a key driver, thus connecting the cluster to Target 15.3 (restoration of land and degraded soil) and native seedlings development/distribution (Target 2.5).

Cluster 2 – In this group, the focus is the report from chocolate manufacturer 01 (CM01), which displays in its topic guides the concern with hazards related to child labour and general non-decent labour standards. The topic guide uses the keyword International Labour Organization (“ILO”), referring to data and standards from the ILO to define eradicated forced and hazardous child labour (Targets 8.7 and 8.8). The same report also highlights actions related to building educational infrastructure (Target 4.a), fostering vocational education for children and offering financial services to impoverished farmers (Target 1.3).

Cluster 3 – We find CM03 to be a focal point in this set. The data from the topic guides analysis refer to forced labour and slavery (Targets 8.7 and 8.8). The same cluster also is associated with two more chocolate manufacturers (CM05 and CM06). CM06 uses as one of the strongest keyword phrases CLMRS, whereas CM05 highlights the negative impacts on the SDGs that persistent child labour reflects and identifies education for youth (Target 4.1) as a driver of a change in local community engagement (Target 11.a).

Cluster 4 – This group exhibits connections between traders T01 and T02 and chocolate manufacturer CM02 to climate action (Target 13.2) through sustainable food production (Target 2.4). For instance, the T01 topic guide results identify the keywords “Good Agricultural Practices”, “one-on-one”, “training” and “coaching”, which can be summarised and clarified by this excerpt from the report:

“We reached more than 210,000 farmers with training to strengthen their capacity on Good Agricultural Practices, we scaled one-on-one coaching to farmers in all five sourcing countries, and we reached a total of 2,491 communities with tailored community programs”. (Cocoa Trader 01 report)

Cluster 5 – This group is associated with traders T03 and T06 linked to Target 12.6, which is related to SSCM dimensions such as sustainable procurement, certification, clean manufacturing, monitoring and risk assessment in the supply chain. For example, the T03 topic guide uses the keyword phrase “Natural Capital Protocol”, which refers to the toolkit designed by the company for evaluating the overall environmental impact of the operations in dimensions such as the land and water footprint, greenhouse gas emissions and fertiliser levels.

5.1 Social dimension: child, labour and gender issues

Child labour is a tier-one issue in reports T02 and T03 and a tier-two or tier-three issue in all other reports. While eliminating child labour addresses specific points, it is connected to and has implications for several other SDGs (Ansong, 2020). The issue arises in discussions about working to eradicate child labour. For example, the CM01 report raises the topic in the following context: “Work/Labour: Children, Hazardous, International Labor Organization”. It is often linked to education policies, suggesting that education is hindered by an unmonitored supply chain and a vector for promoting a fair and sustainable supply chain. In the T03 report, for example, the keyword “labour” is associated with the keywords “education access”, “hazardous”, “labour” and “problems”, suggesting a linkage with the use of child labour, which appears as a tier-one issue in the reports T02, T03, CM03 and CM06.

However, it primarily affects the targets related to decent and fair working conditions in association with SDG Target 4.2 – “By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education” – indicating that child labour is a crucial concern in the cocoa industry. Many studies have highlighted important implications for child labour in cocoa production (Luckstead et al., 2021), including eliminating and remediating this practice in the cocoa industry (Bello-Bravo et al., 2022). In addition, many responsible private-sector business initiatives in the cocoa industry can help understand and resolve the problem of child labour through soft-law mechanisms, stimulating reforms (Guzman and Meyer, 2010). The laws have been discussed and enforced in line with World Trade Organization rules to encourage responsible business initiatives.

Women’s low representation among smallholder farmers is well known (FAO, 2011), as well as its specific constraints in accessing services and land ownership (Lee et al., 2022). Another dimension addressed in the reports is gender equality. The documents show different concerns and focus on various stakeholders. Chocolate manufacturers such as CM05 highlight their goals in promoting gender balance in leadership positions, whereas CP03 shows the impact of its programmes to grant land rights to female farmers. In emerging economies, VSLAs can be tailored to address financial services shortcomings that affect women (Amponsah et al., 2022). It can also be applied to the cocoa chain, as shown in the report from CM01. The reports indicate that in the North/Western chocolate manufacturers’ landscape, gender equality focuses on sustainable human resources management approaches, addressing issues such as the glass ceiling (Fuhrmans, 2019) and commodities sourcing. In the South, gender equality refers to fundamental human rights, such as land rights, forced/non-paid labour and access to financial services.

5.2 Economic dimension: empowering communities and managing global chains

Fostering local communities, smallholders and farmers is the main way to encourage sustainable economic growth (SDG 8), as disclosed in reports. Coaching and training of farmers appear in the T02, T03 and CM03 reports as the primary vector for economic growth aligned with sustainable agriculture (Target 2.4) and forest preservation (Targets 15.2 and 15.3). Improving financial and human capacities has proven to be an effective way to foster smallholder farming in global south markets, such as coffee in Ethiopia (Schuit et al., 2021).

The offering of financial bundles (Target 1.4) for farmers and smallholders appears in the T02, T04, CM01, CM02 and CM03 reports. The CM01 report associates it with a specific Ghanaian livelihood programme, the “VSLA” report and the CM02 report links it to the keywords “empowering” and “future of the forests”. The CM03 report pairs financial aid with coaching initiatives; evidence indicates that offering financial services, such as loans and pensions, is effective for smallholder production of crops in emerging markets, such as the case of tea farming in Burundi (Bitama et al., 2020) and South Africa (Liu et al., 2022).

The literature also indicates the intrinsic bond between profitability, forest preservation and land use, suggesting that smallholders can achieve better yields and safeguard biodiversity than monoculture (Ricciardi et al., 2021). In addition, increasing the income for cocoa farmers is linked to other civilisational challenges, such as climate action (Osei, 2017; Amfo and Ali, 2020) and dwindling biodiversity (Target 15.9). Sustainable food systems are under-financed in global South countries (Apampa et al., 2021); thus, the initiatives disclosed in the analysed reports seem to represent an aligned call for action driven from the economic dimension towards a systematic impact on the 2030 Agenda. Necessary economic evidence from several studies has contributed to growing literature in corporate reporting and SDG research in emerging economies (Erin et al., 2022).

Knowledge about the cocoa supply chain can promote operational reforms and adaptations in the industry, prompting it to use more sustainable production and resource management methods. Green funding, regulatory frameworks, incentives, public policies and private initiatives are crucial for immediate implementation in corporate actors to establish credible sustainability standards using indicators to monitor output and help the industry adopt sustainable transition models (Carodenuto and Buluran, 2021). SSCM-related themes such as sustainable procurement, monitoring and certification recur frequently in the reports. For instance, CM01 highlights that 70% of the cocoa sourced in its supply chain is under CLMRS. CM04 report claims that by 2020 its cocoa beans sourcing will be mapped at the farm level. Cocoa traders such as T03 also report the chain’s total traceability. They are addressing the importance of the certification process alongside the supply chain’s stakeholders, especially international traders (Grabs and Carodenuto, 2021). Certification efforts indicate that key manufacturing matters are receiving greater attention throughout the supply chain, consistent with the literature on the lack of linearity in the certifications and partnerships of cocoa producers (Recanati et al., 2018; Aboah et al., 2021). The results converge around international regulation efforts to cover the global supply chain (Lalwani et al., 2018). The document analysis showed that companies address SSCM in the cocoa industry within different contexts. However, similar indicators emerge, such as the track of deforestation (Targets 15.1, 15.2 and 15.5), CLMRS coverage (Target 8.7), trained farmers on agroforestry (Targets 2.4 and 15.2), seedlings and trees distribution (Targets 2.5 and 15.3), local community empowerment (Targets 11.4 and 15.c), smallholder income increase (Target 2.3) and established VSLAs (Targets 1.4 and 8.3). These items converge to what we perceived as a toolkit for system action that connects the focal points from SSCM reporting (Target 12.6) towards civilisational advance.

5.3 Environmental dimension: agroforestry for climate action

Cocoa-based agroforestry is essential in the global climate environment and to farmers’ livelihoods. However, low yields and ageing trees put its fate at risk. For example, carbon storage in traditional (local) cocoa systems is a suitable approach to improving traditional systems (Ballesteros-Possú et al., 2022). Furthermore, cocoa trees grow better in partially shaded environments. This dynamic offers an interesting metaphor for the underlying shortcomings of the cocoa industry and, as a result, consistently appears in the reports – especially given that the need for shade is a reasonable justification for agroforestry practices. The link between cocoa and agroforestry is far from a novel issue (Duguma et al., 2001) in reports on amplifying carbon capture and highlight (Clough et al., 2009) and promoting seedlings (Target 2.5) and forest diversity (Notaro et al., 2020). “Shade” appears in the T01 and T04 reports alongside agroforestry. The T04 report highlights the coaching of farmers and local cocoa producer associations, and in the T06 report, “shade” appears alongside “services from a tree”, which can be interpreted as environmental services for sustainable agriculture. The CM02 report references shade to tackle the climate crisis, whereas in the CM03 report, it is cited as a vector to halt deforestation (Target 15.2) (Wessel and Quist-Wessel, 2015). Monoculture in the tropics discloses trade-offs between higher profits and losses of ecosystem functionality, including environmental services and biodiversity losses (Target 15.5) (Grass et al., 2020). As a sustainable food production system (Target 2.4) alternative to the monoculture that is suited for cocoa, agroforestry appears as the primary vector of the industry’s sustainability and is proportionally disclosed in the reports.

Protecting forests is a massive factor in mitigating climate change and protecting natural resources and ecosystem services. Thus, the fight against deforestation applies to climate action, human health, environmental stability, economic vitality and community resilience. The literature shows that agroforestry can act as a carbon sink in tropical forests (Panwar et al., 2022). The T03 report describes the Climate Smart Cocoa programme conducted in Ghana, which is also referred to in the literature as adequate to address deforestation, climate action and increase livelihood incomes (Nasser et al., 2020). Training and innovation for reforestation are also associated in some reports with a climate action metric. For instance, the T04 report shows a figure of 29,000 farmers trained, whereas the T02 report describes a reforestation programme that uses technology for seedling distribution and monitoring. Initiatives such as these allow the cocoa industry to integrate international efforts for climate action, such as the EU’s Action Plan on Deforestation and Degradation (European Union, 2018). While cocoa traders seem to focus on reforestation directly (Target 15.2), chocolate manufacturers seem to expand the lens to the total footprint of the chain, to be seen as a north–south climate action effort (Targets 13.a and 13.b). For instance, the CM05 report shows this connection when it addresses the SDG 13 objectives using as a benchmark the Paris Agreement and as an action plan its commitment to the CFI’s zero-deforestation, along with improving energy efficiency in its workplaces (Target 7.3), monitoring of CO₂ emissions throughout the chain and strengthening communities’ resilience to climate-related disasters (Target 1.5). T02 published the first carbon footprint assessment for the cocoa chain in 2020. The attention given to climate by cocoa stakeholders suggests that reporting is one of the industries’ milestones for climate action.

6.1 Highlights and important call for action

Cocoa industry reports show a blueprint that explicitly connects the disclosed sustainability actions to 2030 agenda goals. The linkage established to SDG targets is portrayed through the main nexuses:

• Decent labour (SDG 8) is the main topic in the reports and action plans are always disclosed with the systems for monitoring and remediation (CLMRS) to tackle child labour (SDG 12).

• Local capacity building for the livelihood of smallholders promotes sustainable food production systems (SDG 2) and sustainable forest management while increasing farmers’ income (SDG 1).

• From the financial support perspective, VSLAs are mentioned frequently in the reports. They empower communities (SDG 11), grant access to financial services (SDG 1), foster equity (SDG 5 and 10) and aid supply chain monitoring.

• Cocoa plants’ need for shade reflects a nexus between agroforestry (SDG 2), sustainable production (SDG 12) and halting deforestation (SDG 15).

Based on the reports’ highlights, we observe a call for action connecting the nexuses depicted with climate action: what can be done through a blueprint of interconnected topics from social, economic and environmental dimensions. Perhaps binding them together into a monitoring and certification agenda for SSCM reporting could generate potential sustainable systems of production and consumption for the cocoa industry. This systemic pathway and its identified nodes form a blueprint that could be used as a diagnostic tool for new cocoa industry interventions and the supply chains of other forest-based commodities.

Future research could combine other methods with the method developed in this study and highlight the synergies and trade-offs involving different SDGs in the cocoa supply chain. In addition, organisational theories such as disclosure and signalling theory can be layered with the results obtained to empower the theoretical contribution of the framework developed here.

6.2 Research limitations

The research limitations are related to the methodology used. Text mining limitations refer to the diversity of meanings of terms that AI-powered tools cannot always harness. Text mining relies on qualitative content analysis and can be limited by factors such as intercoder reliability. The reports used constitute grey literature, which reflects a single source of evidence, which can also be seen as a limitation. We navigated this limitation by highlighting the nature and purpose of this research, using a panel of experts consisting of the authors of this paper and discussing the grey literature with the support of academic references. In conclusion, the converging limitation is that the non-linkage of some SDG targets in the reports does not mean that the cocoa industry does not communicate or address these issues.