The recent narrative pushed by the Institute of Economic Research and Public Policy (IERPP), under the signature of its Executive Director, Professor Isaac Boadi, regarding cocoa producer pricing is a flawed, politically motivated attempt to attack President John Dramani Mahama’s administration.
Disguised as public policy analysis, the IERPP’s commentary selectively manipulates financial figures to mislead the public, undermine state institutions, and create artificial discontent among cocoa farmers.
A critical review of commodity market dynamics, exchange rate realities, actual procurement volumes, and Prof. Boadi’s record reveals a clear pattern of partisan commentary, Adnan Adams Mohammed, Award-Winning Financial and Economic Journalist has exhumed.
1. Incomparability of Exchange Rates Across Seasons
The IERPP’s insistence on comparing farmgate pricing between 2024, late 2025, and 2026 relies on a false macroeconomic equivalence:
Exchange Rate Shifts: Fluctuations in exchange rates between 2024 and early 2026 mean that direct nominal cedi comparisons are methodologically invalid. Using cedi figures across different exchange rate environments to claim underpayment ignores foreign exchange transmission mechanisms and global purchasing power parity.
Commodity Pricing Currency: Cocoa is priced internationally in US dollars. Judging local farmgate returns without adjusting for macro-stabilization, currency movements, and inflation indexes over the respective crop years creates a completely distorted narrative.
2. Distortion of Actual Cocoa Purchase Volumes
The claim that farmers were largely underpaid at GH¢2,500 per bag is a deliberate misrepresentation of actual seasonal procurement metrics:
Over 70% Purchased at Premium Rates: COCOBOD purchased more than 70% of the entire season’s cocoa beans at the significantly higher producer price structure—starting at GH¢3,228.75 per bag (GH¢51,660 / US$5,040 per tonne based on 70% of gross FOB) and subsequently adjusted upward to GH¢3,625 per bag (GH¢58,000 per tonne).
Minority Share at Lower Rate: The GH¢2,500 per bag rate accounted for less than 30% of total purchases across the season. Framing an temporary or minor volume tranche as representative of the entire season’s payout is an intellectually dishonest trick designed to mislead discerning Ghanaians.
3. Misrepresentation of Futures Markets and Overhead Costs
The IERPP’s insistence on comparing producer prices to peak spot prices reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of agricultural commodity trading:
Forward Contract Sales: Ghana’s cocoa crop is hedged and forward-sold on futures markets to protect farmers from sudden market crashes. Comparing peak short-term spot market surges to guaranteed, year-round producer prices is economically unsustainable.
Absorbed Operational Costs: Gross export returns cannot be paid raw to farmers without accounting for shipping, quality control, logistics, and COCOBOD’s non-cash farmer support programmes. COCOBOD fully absorbs the costs of liquid/granular fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, spraying equipment, and flower inducers, alongside social safety nets like the Tertiary Education Scholarship Scheme for cocoa farmers’ children.
4. Partisan Bias Against President Mahama’s Administration
Prof. Isaac Boadi’s public commentaries demonstrate a consistent partisan agenda aimed at discrediting President John Dramani Mahama and his administration:
Selective Data Manipulation: By cherry-picking figures, ignoring exchange rate context, and misrepresenting purchase volumes, Prof. Boadi weaponizes economic commentary to incite public panic and undermine the administration’s agricultural management.
Intellectual Dishonesty: Functioning as a political mouthpiece under the guise of an independent think tank weakens the credibility of public policy research in Ghana. Sensationalist claims of exploitation are designed purely to score political points against the Mahama presidency.
Institutional Accountability and the Stand of UPSA
Academic freedom should never serve as a shield for partisan commentary disguised as objective economic research. The persistent use of speculative, distorted narratives by Prof. Isaac Boadi to attack President Mahama’s government directly undermines the institutional integrity of the University of Professional Studies, Accra (UPSA).
UPSA must review the reputational risks associated with high-ranking academic personnel utilizing their status to advance politically biased agendas that throw dust in the eyes of Ghanaians and undermine critical national economic policies.
By Adnan Adams Mohammed,
Award-Winning Financial and Economic Journalist
