Kathrin Schreckenberg 105
Policy environment
At the time the research was carried out in 1992/3 there was no direct
government intervention in the shea trade in Benin (Table 2). Until the year
before the study, shea kernels had been purchased by a government parastatal,
along with other cash crops such as cotton and cashew nuts, but the practice
was suspended as part of the structural adjustment process. Unlike in many
Sahelian countries, where there has been much external project investment
to promote shea butter as an income source for women, there was no external
support to any shea activities in the study area. The existing international
policies (Table 2) also appear to have little impact on the ground.
The Forest Department encourages
farmers to leave 25 to 40 trees
standing per hectare when clearing
new fields (Fagbémy and Sodeik
1993). Permits are required to fell
shea trees.
Government sets minimum price for
shea kernels each year in an attempt
to ensure a fair deal for sellers and
traders alike.
Production of CBEs is prohibited in
many European countries and the
United States, although the sale of
CBE products is permitted. In the
interests of product purity the
European Union has restricted the
proportion of CBEs in chocolate to
5% (Boffa 1999).
Impact
The regulation mirrors traditional
practice so has no particular impact.
Should traditional practice change, the
Forest Department would not have the
resources to enforce the regulation.
The set price is irrelevant at local level
as it is based on international prices
and does not reflect production levels.
Local market prices may be higher or
lower than the set price depending on
local yields.
There has been much debate within the
European Union about this issue, with
cocoa-producers concerned that
greater acceptance of CBEs will
damage their interests and the
chocolate industry arguing that the
impact on the cocoa trade would be
negligible. The fact that many of the
coastal West African countries export
both cocoa and shea complicates the
story but, largely speaking, they are
still more pro cocoa due to the
unreliable and unmanaged nature of
shea yields from year to year. The
practical impact in the field appears
to be minor. Shea prices continue to
shadow those of cocoa but at a
substantially lower level (Fintrac 1999).
Policy
National
International
Table 2. Impact of national and international policy interventions
06SHEA.P65 105 22/12/2004, 11:04