The Harkin–Engel Protocol, sometimes referred to as the Cocoa Protocol, is an international agreement aimed at ending the worst forms of child labor (according to the International Labour Organization's Convention 182) and forced labor (according to ILO Convention 29) in the production of cocoa, the main ingredient in chocolate. The protocol was negotiated by U.S. Senator Tom Harkin and U.S. Representative Eliot Engel in response to a documentary and multiple articles in 2000 and 2001 reporting widespread child slavery and child trafficking in the production of cocoa. The protocol was signed in September 2001. Joint Statements in 2001, 2005 and 2008 and a Joint Declaration in 2010 extended the commitment to address the problem.
The industry's pledge to reduce child labor in Ivory Coast and Ghana by 70%, as per the Protocol, had not been met by late 2015; the deadline was again extended, to 2020.
Background
In late 2000 a BBC documentary reported the use of enslaved children in the production of cocoa—the main ingredient in chocolate— in West Africa.Wolfe and Shazzie, p. 98 Other media followed by reporting widespread child slavery and child trafficking in the production of cocoa. The cocoa industry was accused of profiting from child slavery and trafficking.Payson 2010, p. 26 The European Cocoa Association dismissed these accusations as "false and excessive" and the industry said the reports were not representative of all areas. Later the industry acknowledged the working conditions for children were unsatisfactory and children's rights were sometimes violatedPayson 2010, pp. 26–7 and acknowledged the claims could not be ignored.
In 2001, US Representative Eliot Engel introduced a legislative amendment to an agriculture bill. This amendment was to give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) $250,000 to develop a label to indicate no child slave labor was used in growing or harvesting cocoa; this label would be similar to the "dolphin safe" labels used for tuna. The amendment was approved in the House of Representatives vote of 291–115.Payson 2011, p. 13 The bill appeared to have similar support in the Senate. The international cocoa industry strongly opposed it and the Chocolate Manufacturers Association hired former senators George Mitchell and Bob Dole to lobby against it. The cocoa industry faced potential consumer boycotts and harmful legislation if the bill were to pass. Mitchell and Dole encouraged the industry to make a deal, and before the bill went to a vote in the Senate, the cocoa industry agreed to address the problem without legislation.
Senator Tom Harkin and Engel negotiated a deal with the cocoa industry to create the Harkin–Engel Protocol. The protocol was signed in September 2001 with the objective to eliminate the "worst forms of child labor" and adult forced labor on cocoa farms in West Africa. It was signed and witnessed by the heads of eight major chocolate companies, Harkin, Engel, Senator Herb Kohl, the ambassador of Côte d'Ivoire, the director of the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labor, and others.
Protocol and 2001 Joint Statement The Harkin–Engel Protocol is a voluntary public-private agreement to eliminate the worst forms of child labor (defined according to the International Labour Organization (ILO)'s Convention 182) in the growth and processing of cocoa in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana.Payson 2011, p. 7 The protocol was a voluntary agreement that partnered governments, the global cocoa industry, cocoa producers, cocoa laborers, non-governmenal organizations. The agreement laid out a series of date-specific actions, including the development of voluntary standards of public certification. The Protocol did not commit the industry to ending all child labor in cocoa production, only the worst forms of it. The parties agreed to a six-article plan: Public statement of the need for and terms of an action plan—The cocoa industry acknowledged the problem of forced child labor and will commit "significant resources" to address the problem. Formation of multi-sectoral advisory groups—By 1 October 2001, an advisory group will be formed to research labor practices. By 1 December 2001, industry will form an advisory group and formulate appropriate remedies to address the worst forms of child labor. Signed joint statement on child labor to be witnessed at the ILO—By 1 December 2001, a statement must be made recognizing the need to end the worst forms of child labor and identify developmental alternatives for the children removed from labor. Memorandum of cooperation—By 1 May 2002, Establish a joint action program of research, information exchange, and action to enforce standards to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. Establish a monitor and compliance with the standards. Establish a joint foundation—By 1 July 2002, industry will form a foundation to oversee efforts to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. It will perform field projects and be a clearinghouse on best practices. Building toward credible standards—By 1 July 2005, the industry will develop and implement industry-wide standards of public certification that cocoa has been grown without any of the worst forms of child labor.
A 2001 Joint Statement extended the protocol to also identify and eliminate forced labor (defined according to ILO Convention 29) in the production of cocoa.Payson 2011, pp. 100–2
The protocol laid out a non-binding agreement for the cocoa industry to regulate itself without any legal implications, but Engel threatened to reintroduce legislation if the deadlines were not met. This agreement was one of the first times an American industry was subjected to self-regulation and one of the first times self-regulation was used to address an international human rights issue.
2005 progress and Joint Statement By July 2005—the deadline date—the cocoa industry made progress on their goal to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. Most of the requirements were achieved by the deadline.Payson 2007, p. 21 Before the protocol was signed, the cocoa industry acknowledged the problem of forced child labor to address part of Article 1. A Joint Statement was made in 2001 to address part of Article 3.Payson 2011, pp. 100–2 The International Cocoa Initiative (ICI) was established in 2002 to address part of Article 5. Through the ICI, $3 million was spent on pilot projects.Payson 2007, pp. 105–16 The International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) was assigned to survey West Africans about children in cocoa production. Pilot projects were formed to monitor child labor.Payson 2011, pp. 107–9 In 2004, the cocoa industry created and funded Verification Working Group. The funding was discontinued in 2006, but another company was contracted to perform verification in 2007.Payson 2007, p. 9
But all the protocol requirements were not met by the deadline. The cocoa industry failed to create and implement an industry-wide certification standard to indicate that cocoa had not been produced with the worst forms of child labor. The chocolate companies were criticized for executing the protocol at the smallest cost, remaining mostly hands-off in the process without changing the process, and maintaining a business model dependent on child labor. More importantly, they did not alter the price of chocolate to enable the cocoa producers to end the practice of slavery. One of the major obstacles to executing the protocol was the Ivorian Civil War. Along with diamonds and timber, cocoa was a conflict resource that made money for the militants.
By July 2005 the extent of child involvement in cocoa production was unclear. It was also unclear if the cocoa industry's efforts were helping the problem.Payson 2007, p. 13 On 1 July 2005, all the parties agreed to an extension of the protocol through a Joint Statement.Payson 2010, p. 28 The 2005 Joint Statement gave the cocoa industry three more years to implement the protocol. The Joint Statement stated industry would form a certification system for half of the growing regions in Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana. The Joint Statement also stated industry would support programs for the local cocoa-growing communities including teacher training programs.
The US Congress was not satisfied with the cocoa industry's response. It gave responsibility to the US Department of Labor to find a university contractor to oversee the efforts to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. In 2006, a $4.3 million contract was awarded to the Payson Center for International Development at Tulane University through 2009.Payson 2011, pp. 13–4 In 2006, the Payson Center reported progress had been made, but children were still working in cocoa production, including performing dangerous tasks, and regularly miss school. The cocoa industry was criticized for a lack of certification standards and the governments of Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana were criticized for a lack of transparency. In 2006, the president of the World Cocoa Foundation said, "While progress has been made and we have learned valuable lessons, much more is required."
After the deadline passed, the International Labor Rights Fund filed a lawsuit in 2005 under the Alien Tort Claims Act against Nestlé, Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland on behalf of three Malian children. The suit alleged the children were trafficked to Côte d'Ivoire, forced into slavery, and experienced frequent beatings on a cocoa plantation. In September 2010, the US District Court for the Central District of California determined corporations cannot be held liable for violations of international law and dismissed the suit. The case was appealed to the US Court of Appeals.
2008 progress and Joint Statement By the revised deadline—1 June 2008—all the objectives were still not met. Some progress had been made; for example, the cocoa industry had provided $10 million to the ICI. In 2006–07 the ICI had 17 training sessions in Côte d'Ivoire and 23 in Ghana to sensitize the governmental officials, police and media about child and adult labor practices. The focus of the Joint Statement was that of certification. The cocoa industry performed data collection had on 50% of the growing areas in both Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana. But independent verification, partially funded by industry, on those areas was not fully completed. The deadline was extended until the end of 2010. At that time, industry was required to have a full certification and independent verification.Payson 2011, pp. 111–4
All parties reaffirmed their commitment to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. The cocoa industry committed to work with the governments of Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana to set up independent certification by the end of 2010; assist the governments to target remediation efforts based on the independent certification; and support the ICI as it expands to more local communities and provide training on safe labor practices.
In 2009, cocoa from Côte d'Ivoire and Nigeria was added to a list of products made by forced child labor maintained by the Department of Labor.Payson 2010, p. 29 This listing stemmed from a request by Anti-Slavery International in 2004 to investigate if Ivorian cocoa should be on this list. Executive Order 13126 requires federal contractors who supply products on the list must prove they have made a good faith effort to determine if the products were produced under forced labor. Thus contractors must prove they have made a good faith effort to determine if cocoa was produced under forced labor. Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana were placed on the 2009 US State Department's Tier 2 Watch List for human trafficking due in part to the trafficking of children in cocoa production.
In 2009 the Department of Labor awarded a second, $1.2 million contract to the Payson Center to continue the oversight through 2011.
2010 Joint Declaration and Framework of Action