Farmer perceptions of REDD+ livelihood interventions as incentive mechanism for reducing deforestation in the Juabuso-Bia cocoa forest landscape

Cocoa production in Ghana remains a vital source of rural livelihoods but is also a major driver of tropical deforestation. This study explored cocoa farmers' perceptions of how livelihood interventions under the Ghana Cocoa Forest REDD+ 1 1 Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, plus the Sustainable Management of Forests, Conservation, and Enhancement of Forest Carbon Stocks in Developing Countries Program (GCFRP) affect their incomes, with a focus on the Juabuso-Bia Hotspot Intervention Area (HIA). Despite GCFRP's stated goals, gaps remain in understanding the equitable distribution of REDD+ benefits and their implications for farmer livelihoods. Using Q-methodology, semi-structured interviews, and focus group discussions, we examined farmers' experiences with GCFRP interventions. Key findings include i) livelihood interventions in the HIA appear inadequate for achieving living incomes; ii) current livelihood-enhancing mechanisms have limited coverage and poorly defined theories of change; iii) a disconnect exists between these livelihood interventions and national policies, leading to irregular and insufficient input supplies for climate-smart cocoa practices vi) farmers are more likely to reach living income status through fair producer price for current yields, rather than through increased production. We conclude that GCFRP interventions currently lack the necessary incentives to deter unsustainable practices contributing to deforestation. These findings highlight the need to revise the program's theory of change and policy alignment to better link emission reduction goals with improved farmer incomes and livelihoods. Further research across other HIAs is recommended to strengthen REDD+ implementation outcomes. • Ghana Cocoa REDD+ can incentivize farmers to reduce deforestation-linked land use. • Weak REDD+ mechanism hinders living income for farmers. • Farmer engagement and resource access are lacking. • REDD+ benefits cannot offset costs of shifting from unsustainable practices.