African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and
Development
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rajs20
Ghana’s pineapple innovation history: An account
from stakeholders in Nsawam Adoagyiri Municipal
Assembly
Daniel Adu Ankrah
To cite this article: Daniel Adu Ankrah (2021): Ghana’s pineapple innovation history: An
account from stakeholders in Nsawam Adoagyiri Municipal Assembly, African Journal of Science,
Technology, Innovation and Development, DOI: 10.1080/20421338.2021.1988414
To link to this article:  https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2021.1988414
Published online: 02 Dec 2021.
Submit your article to this journal 
Article views: 38
View related articles 
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rajs20
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 2021
https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2021.1988414
© 2021 African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development
Ghana’s pineapple innovation history: An account from stakeholders in Nsawam Adoagyiri
Municipal Assembly
Daniel Adu Ankrah
Department of Agricultural Extension, College of Basic and Applied Sciences (CBAS), School of Agriculture, University of Ghana,
P. O. Box LG 68, Legon – Accra, Ghana
*Corresponding author email: dankrah@ug.edu.gh
Despite the pineapple fruit contributing significantly towards Ghana’s non-traditional export, the empirical space
deficiently accounts for innovations within the sector. This article addresses prime questions that beg answering such
as: the origin of innovations, when, how, what conditions facilitate adoption intensity or otherwise, what type of
innovations are systematically associated with pineapple production. This study fills this lacuna by chronicling the
main pineapple innovations using innovation history methodology embedded in an agricultural innovation system
conceptual framing. Relying on a qualitative approach, the findings showed the emergence of two varieties – smooth
cayenne and sugar loaf, overtaken by the MD2 variety. Degreening, forcing, and global Good Agricultural Practices
(GAP) dominate. The Millennium Development Authority programme consolidated business plan development,
efficient marketing, record keeping, and farming as a business. Successes were recorded in some instances with the
transfer of technology extension model, but this article argues that the agricultural innovation system can be prioritized
given the plurality of actors. The innovation history is trivialized, but it is essential for learning and co-learning in
building stronger partnerships. This article underscores a radical use of innovation history both as a methodological
tool and means of documenting innovations, particularly in the global south, where copious record-keeping remains rare.
Keywords: innovation history, pineapple, smallholder farmers, agricultural innovation system, Ghana
Introduction
Agricultural innovation, and how it can be nurtured and Schnebelin, Labarthe, and Touzard 2021). An innovation
up-scaled continue to receive attention in the agrarian system can also be seen as a process in which accumu-
change and innovation literature (Molina-Maturano, lated knowledge is applied by several heterogeneous
Speelman, and De Steur 2019; Leonardo et al. 2020). actors in a complex interaction that hinges on social and
Klerkx and Begemann (2020) summarized innovation as economic institutions (Alaie 2020; Pound and Conroy
the successful application of new ideas, products, and pro- 2017). Pigford, Hickey, and Klerkx (2018) described
cesses. Rogers, Singhal, and Quinlan (2019) viewed inno- AIS as not just a single aggregation of organizations but
vation as anything new successfully integrated into an a group of agents that interact in a learning process in
economic or social process. This presupposes that inno- which the agents or enterprises interact with each other.
vation is not simply about trying new things but the suc- This happens in an environment supported by organiz-
cessful integration of a new idea or product into a process ations and institutions which play the principal role in
that integrates social, technical, and economic com- facilitating and advancing novel products, processes,
ponents. Innovation can be described as neither technol- and new forms of organizations into economic and
ogy nor science but the successful application of varied social use. The AIS encompasses a far broader set of
knowledge to achieve expected economic and social out- actors than the traditional agricultural research, education
comes (Klerkx and Begemann 2020; Pigford, Hickey, and agencies, and extension. Innovation is more holistic in
Klerkx 2018; Alaie 2020). Pound and Conroy (2017) that it takes place throughout the whole economy and
underscored that innovation goes beyond global novelty, emphasizes that not all innovations come from formal
often stressing local ingenuity. In these definitions of science and technology (Klerkx and Begemann 2020;
innovation, it can be deduced that an end user’s final Pound and Conroy 2017). This study takes inspiration
application of a new idea remains prime. New ideas are from two frameworks – innovation history and AIS in
generated and facilitated by various agents in an econ- conceptualizing and analyzing pineapple innovations.
omic, social, technical, policy, institutional, and political Combining these two frameworks provides rigour in doc-
context (Seguin et al. 2021). Innovation can be a umenting pineapple innovation within suitable conceptual
product measured as adoption rates (Rogers, Singhal, and theoretical frameworks.
and Quinlan 2019). Alternatively, it can be viewed as a A vibrant innovation ecosystem is considered essen-
process involving new process(es) in generating new tial in a fast-evolving food system characterized by urban-
ideas (Alaie 2020) or new ways of doing things and ization, technological advancement, and globalization
people adjusting to situations (Schut, Leeuwis, and (Pigford, Hickey, and Klerkx 2018; Alaie 2020). This
Thiele 2020). phenomenon affects agricultural and rural development,
The Agricultural Innovation System (AIS)1 serve as a particularly in most developing countries whose econom-
framework for analyzing agriculture’s technological, ies are agriculture-driven. Indeed, a prominent feature of
institutional, and economic change (Hornum and modern agri-food systems is the occurrence of high
Bolwig 2021; Pigford, Hickey, and Klerkx 2018; rates of innovation. The innovations taking place are
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development is co-published by NISC Pty (Ltd) and Informa Limited (trading as Taylor & Francis Group)
2 Ankrah
manifest along the entire value chain of specific agricul- satisfaction (Krumbiegel, Maertens, and Wollni 2018),
tural commodities. contribution of pineapple production to female empower-
In Ghana, the pineapple fruit constitutes one of the ment (Krumbiegel, Maertens, and Wollni 2020), benefit
most developed non-traditional export crops. Conse- cost analysis of climate adaptation practices among pine-
quently, its production has witnessed significant growth apple farmers (Williams et al. 2020), determinants of
over the past six decades (Krumbiegel, Maertens, and farmers production system choices (Badu-Gyan et al.
Wollni 2020). The pineapple fruit has many innovations 2019), climate variability impacts on pineapple pro-
associated with its production, processing, marketing, duction (Williams et al. 2017), welfare effects of pineap-
and export. The export requirement imposes a lot of strin- ple adoption (Harou, Walker, and Barrett 2017), organic
gent international standards that need to be observed in its production of pineapples (Kleemann 2016; Gbedemah,
production. Swatson-Oppong, and Adanu 2021), pineapple supply
Innovation is one of the core goals of research and chain (Alexander, Anin, and Sarpong 2016), global
development. The realization of this goal requires a firm good agricultural practices compliance (Annor, Mensah-
understanding of how innovation happens or has hap- Bonsu, and Jatoe 2016; Annor 2018), pineapple juice pro-
pened. The innovation history proffers a solution to this cessing (Akonor 2020), contract preferences (Fischer and
by aiding in documenting innovation chronologically Wollni 2018; Wuepper and Sauer 2016), determinants of
and systematically. This notwithstanding, innovation his- MD2 pineapple variety adoption, technology gaps and
tories are rarely written and used. An innovation history technical efficiency (Mensah and Brummer 2015). The
captures a method for documenting and reflecting on an implicit evidence that chronicles Ghana’s pineapple inno-
innovation process. This involves individuals who vation history in chronological order remains principally
jointly construct a written account of innovation based anecdotal and outdated even though innovations in the
on the recall of documents available (Douthwaite and agricultural food systems keep evolving even more
Ashby 2005; Temple, Chiffoleau, and Touzard 2018; quickly. This negligence of the pineapple innovation lit-
Alston and Pardey 2020). erature can lead to current vital innovations going undo-
Whitfield (2017) used oral firm histories to provide a cumented in the empirical space. This is similar to the
limited account of Ghana’s pineapple innovation. Amati, extinction of indigenous knowledge regarding weather
Munson, and Scholnick (2019) applied event histories to patterns, even though Ankrah, Kwapong, and Boateng
understand cultural traits in society. Becker et al. (2013) (2021b) advocated integrating indigenous knowledge pre-
applied it in a workshop to understand solar home dictors in complementing science-based predictors in
systems technology uptake in Kenya. The dedicated lit- daily weather forecasting. Two pertinent research ques-
erature on innovation history in the global south tions arise. First, what implicit systematic innovation
remains scanty and limited. Many authors (Kleemann, history is associated with Ghana’s pineapple production
Abdulai, and Buss 2014; Williams et al. 2017; Krumbie- that presents an updated account? Second, to what
gel, Maertens, and Wollni 2020) have examined the pine- extent can innovation history contribute as a methodologi-
apple business in Ghana, but limited studies exist on the cal tool in the agrarian change literature?
pineapple innovation history. Such a history is particularly In essence, this study bridges the gap in knowledge in
important because it allows stakeholders involved in the four ways. First, it contributes to mitigating the dearth of
innovation processes to reflect on their actions and evalu- literature on pineapple innovation history, particularly in
ate how their actions and other stakeholders contribute to the global south, where copious record-keeping remains
better outcomes. Secondly, they allow external stake- a challenge, by chronicling the trajectories associated
holders to learn by examining experiences involving an with pineapple production.
individual or a collection of cases. Despite the plethora Second, it contributes to the methodological use of
of innovations associated with pineapple production in innovation history in Ghana’s pineapple industry and,
Ghana, there are still limited accounts (Fold and Gough by extension, sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), which can be
2008; Kleemann, Abdulai, and Buss 2014; Danielou and extended and used for food, cash crops, livestock, and
Ravry 2005) of innovation history in Ghana’s pineapple even the non-agricultural sector. For instance, Becker
industry. The accounts that exist remain largely outdated. et al. (2013) applied the innovation history method in a
Vagneron, Faure, and Loeillet (2009) presented the his- solar home system uptake workshop in Kenya.
torical dynamics involved in fresh pineapple value Third, it adds to contextual relevance in applying
chains, including Ghana. innovation histories in Ghana, hence re-igniting the con-
Recent studies on pineapple production in Ghana have versation on the recognition and radical use of innovation
largely failed to implicitly examine pineapple innovations histories in the global south. This study improves previous
but rather examined other aspects of production such as studies (Douthwaite and Ashby 2005; Dorward, Galpin,
technical efficiency and productivity (Ofori-Appiah, and Shepherd 2003; Whitfield 2017; Whitfield 2012)
Onumah, and Asem 2021), pineapple value chains (Kola- that have remained limited, skewed, and sparse
valli 2019; Asante-Poku 2017), use of participatory bud- (Douthwaite and Ashby 2005).
geting in gross margin analysis in pineapple production Finally, it provides evidence that can help actors in the
(Ankrah, Boakye, and Agyei-Holmes 2021a), determi- pineapple industry to co-learn through either studying
nants of choice of climate change adaptation practices single cases or comparing past experiences with a
(Antwi-Agyei et al. 2021; Wuepper, Zilberman, and shared vision that propels a mechanism for agrarian
Sauer 2020), role of Fairtrade in pineapple workers’ job change as supported in earlier work (Douthwaite et al.
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 3
2006). This article aims to chronicle Ghana’s pineapple drew responses from farmers in farmer-based organiz-
innovation history from a diverse stakeholders’ perspec- ations (FBOs) that benefited from the Millennium Devel-
tive. Specifically, it contributes to using innovation his- opment Authority (MiDA) intervention and farmers that
tories as a methodological tool and a medium of did not (non-MiDA). This was deliberately done to
documenting innovations by chronicling innovations assess spill-over effects of innovation on non-beneficiary
associated with pineapple production, which appears to groups and afford a more balanced perspective of inno-
be the most developed horticultural crop in Ghana. vation from different categories of farmers. The MiDA
However, it ironically possesses limited, incoherent, and FBOs were located in Pokrom, Nsawam, Dobro, and
rare innovation history. From a multi-stakeholder per- Fotobi, while the two non-MiDA FBOs were located in
spective, the study validates, triangulates, enriches, and Fotobi and Ahodjo.
presents robust results in the less-threaded empirical The study involved a total of seven FGDs made up of
space. This study essentially contributes to the pineapple a minimum of six farmers. This was done to collect infor-
innovation history and agrarian change literature and mation on pineapple innovation history from farmers.
seeks to open further avenues for more innovative Purposive sampling was used to select five MiDA FBOs
research in different agricultural commodity value chains. from the existing 14 based on the criteria of adequate
knowledge about past and current pineapple innovations,
Methodology fair representation of the young (25–32 years) – 25%,
Research design middle-aged (33–59 years) – 25%, with the majority
The study employed a qualitative research design invol- (50%) being older farmers (>60 years). The gender mix
ving Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Infor- ensured 30% inclusion of women. Two FGDs were con-
mant Interviews (KIIs). Lewis (2015) underscored that ducted involving two non-MiDA FBOs bringing the
qualitative research enquiry allows researchers to investi- total number of 42 farmers for both categories of FBOs.
gate a given phenomenon in greater depth by understand- The use of random sampling afforded an equal chance
ing meanings, processes, and basically the ‘why’, ‘by of selection and reduced selection bias. The second
who’, ‘how’, etc. An exploratory survey was conducted level was to randomly select six farmers through a
from January to March, 2012. The main study was under- lottery system within each FBO. The FGDs were used
taken between April and October 2012. This was comple- to document innovation history associated with pineapple
mented with triangulation of data in March, 2016 and production. A semi-structured interview guide was used
February, 2021. The exploratory survey involved a recon- to guide discussions on pineapple inputs, where inputs
naissance study to identify the pineapple production inno- (pineapple varieties, fertilizers, weedicides, agro-chemi-
vations and other innovations associated with maize, cals, tractors) originated from, source of the innovation
pawpaw, and cassava. The main actors involved in the (whether it was self-started or introduced by an external
cultivation of these crops were identified and engaged in source), motivation/factors that facilitated the innovation,
FGDs and KIIs. year of the introduction of the innovation, innovations
The exploratory survey was undertaken in the associated with land preparation activities, planting, agro-
Nsawam Adoagyiri Municipal and Effutu District based nomic activities, harvesting, transportation, fertilizer
in the based in the Eastern Region and Central Region application, weed control, storage, processing, exports,
of Ghana, respectively. The exploratory findings showed and policy regulatory frameworks. Participants were
that pineapple was the only crop with diversified inno- made to collectively engage in actor-network mapping
vations compared with the other crops cultivated at the using flip charts to identify actors, establish relationships
two study sites. Therefore, the Nsawam Adoagyiri and flow of resources provided. A conscious effort was
Municipal Assembly was subsequently selected because made to encourage participants to express themselves
of its rich history of pineapple production, which dates freely and to ensure that not only a few participants domi-
back to the early 1970s. The study particularly engaged nated the discussions. In line with this, the researcher
a broad segment of actors in a systematic storyline moderated the discussions and was assisted by a reporter
approach on innovations surrounding pineapple. Filimo- who recorded proceedings.
nau, Beer, and Ermolaev (2021) indicated that this A total of 30 key informants were drawn from the
approach provides content validity, increases salience, MiDA, Central Management Consultants (CMCs), Tech-
innovation, creativity, and horizontal consistency. nical Training Service Providers (TTSPs), Blue Skies
Additionally, it reduces unplanned biases associated Ghana Ltd, Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA),
with individual background, preferences, interests, and Department of Agriculture, Combined Farmers Ltd, mem-
knowledge (Ernst et al. 2018). This study, therefore, bership of MiDA, and non-MiDA FBOs (see Table 1).
ensured broad stakeholder engagement in covering The selection of the key informants was based on
many actors who represented different parts of the pineap- identified individuals with a good wealth of knowledge
ple value chain. concerning the issues under investigation. Variables cap-
The study was conducted in Pokrom (5°49′N 0°19′ tured under the key informant guide included a narration
W), Fotobi (5°48′N 0°16′W), Nsawam (05°48′00″N 00° of the emergence of the pineapple varieties, how and why
21′00″W), Dobro (5.78001,- 0.34106) and Ahodjo an actor got involved in a specific task, how tasks were
(5.8061 -.316), towns in the Nsawam Adoagyiri Munici- undertaken – whether in isolation or collaboration with
pal Assembly, which lies between latitude 5.45’N and other actors – the strength of such associations, challenges
5.58’N and longitude 0.07’W and 0.27’W. The study existing among actors, how and where inputs were
4 Ankrah
Table 1 : Summary of key informant interviews.
Institution of key informants Number Profile of Key Informants
MiDA 2 Agricultural Support Officer & Research Economist.
Central Management Consultants 1 A Central Management Consultant responsible for drafting the training manuals for the
(CMCs) MiDA programme.
Technical Training Service 3 Two senior lecturers with the Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness
Providers (TTSPs) of the University of Ghana who acted as a consultant for ACDI/VOCA and an
agricultural Officer with ACDI/VOCA.
Blue Skies Ghana Ltd 2 Agronomist and an Assistant Agronomist with Blue Skies Ghana Ltd.
MoFA/DoA 6 Three Agricultural Extension Officers & a Management Information Systems (MIS)
Officer with the Department of Agriculture – Nsawam Adoagyiri Municipal Assembly.
Combined Farmers Ltd 2 Farm manager & a Farm-hand at Combine Farmers Ltd.
MiDA FBOs
Adonten 2 A member of Adonten FBO as well as a chief of Pokrom village and a chairperson of
Adonten FBO.
Nsabah 2 A chairperson and a member of Nsabah FBO.
Fotobi 2 A chairperson and a member of Fotobi FBO.
Apesika 2 A secretary and a member of Apesika FBO.
Pokrom Patriotic 2 A chairperson and a member of Pokrom FBO.
Non-MiDA FBOs
Oman Vegetables 2 A chairperson and a member of Oman FBO.
Enkakyi 2 A chairperson, secretary, and a member of Enkakyi FBO.
Total 30
Source: Ankrah and Freeman (2021) Fieldwork, 2012, 2016 & 2021
acquired for pineapple production, as well as type of fer- with varied expertise, skills, and opinions were inter-
tilizers and timing of fertilizers, weedicides, agro-chemi- viewed (see Table 1).
cals, tractors, and source of the innovation (whether it was
self-started or introduced by an external source). Motiv- Innovation histories
ation/factors that facilitated the innovation, adoption Innovation history is a method in which people involved
intensity, year of the introduction of the innovation, inno- in an innovation jointly reflect on and record detailed
vations associated with land preparatory activities, plant- written accounts of an innovation process (Douthwaite
ing, agronomic activities, harvesting, transportation, and Ashby 2005). This method was the best-suited
fertilizer application, weed control, storage, processing, method because it allowed the researcher to compare
sucker production, exports, and policy regulatory frame- experiences and accounts on innovation across different
works were also included. These variables were FBOs involving several cases. It also allowed the
embedded in the agricultural innovation system and inno- researcher to study an individual innovation in detail.
vation history frameworks. Participants engaged in actor Spielman, Ekboir, and Davis (2009) postulated that inno-
mapping using flip charts provided. vation history is a valuable method that captures impor-
Key informants were therefore purposively selected in tant events. Detailed accounts of pineapple innovations
a participatory manner. At the end of every focus group were solicited from farmers belonging to both MiDA
discussion, participants were made to nominate individ- and non-MiDA FBOs, agri-business, MoFA, and a com-
uals from their group or institution, individuals who mercial farm present in the study area. A total of seven
they believed possessed the requisite knowledge in pine- innovation histories were conducted through FGDs with
apple innovation trajectories. These individuals had fiveMiDA and two non-MiDA FBOs. The innovation his-
between 10–30 years’ experience in pineapple production tories obtained from the FGDs were further triangulated
and policy implementation. Therefore, the focus group from representatives from Blue Skies Ghana Ltd (an agri-
shaped the selection of the key informants (see the business), MoFA, and Combined Farmers Ltd in the study
summary in Table 1). Policy actors identified through area.
the focus group interviews were followed-up. A deliberate
attempt was made to have varied opinions within and Analysis of data
across institutions, actors, gender, executives, and ordin- The analysis of data was done with the Nvivo2 12 soft-
ary members. The main study in 2012 yielded 25 key ware. Based on a thematic analysis approach, a coding
informants. Further triangulation and studies in 2016 system was generated in grouping themes as major or
and 2021, led to 5 additional key informants who sub-themes. This was after an initial familiarization was
brought in new and different perspectives to the issue done on the data captured in Nvivo. This helped categor-
under investigation. The total number of 30 key infor- ize major and sub-themes based on an inductive approach,
mants was guided by theme saturation, i.e., once no new as suggested by Kayapinar (2014). Information was cap-
themes emerged from the issue under investigation, the tured in Nvivo as nodes underpinned in the agricultural
researcher found no basis to engage additional key infor- innovation system and innovation timeline conceptualiz-
mants in the interviews. The total key informants cut ation. Whenever a new theme emerged, it was captured
across gender that intersected with class, seniority, age, as a new node in Nvivo. The first level of coding involved
ethnicity, and religion. Institutions, policy actors, FBOs elemental coding techniques entailing descriptive,
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 5
structural, and Nvivo coding (Saldaña and Omasta 2016). household income in Ghana. It will be useful if deliberate
This resulted in major themes such as pineapple variety efforts are made to address women’s differential access.
emergence and source, policy and regulatory frameworks, Additionally, most farmers possessed farm sizes that can
agribusinesses formation, collapse and their roles, FBOs be characterized as small-scale (less than 5 hectares),
and their roles, input sources, land preparatory activities, but there is a current transitioning of smallholder
weed control measures, fertilizer application, agronomic farmers into medium-scale (5–10 hectares). Kwapong
practices, farm mechanization/tractor usage, harvesting, et al. (2021) give credence to this finding in their study
storage, processing, post-harvest handling activities on maize and cassava in Ghana.
including cooling, adoption intensity or otherwise, In the 1960s, two pineapple varieties emerged – the
sucker multiplication, production, etc. Overlapping smooth cayenne and the sugar loaf. These two varieties
codes were merged as a single code. This process was fol- were brought into Ghana from Hawaii by Dr
lowed until other sub-themes emerged, and finally, no new W. S. Abutiate, a researcher who worked with the Crop
themes emerged: theme saturation. Thematic analysis was Research Institute. Dr Abutiate facilitated the commercial
conducted, and statements illustrative of themes were multiplication of these two pineapple varieties for com-
quoted in the results and discussions. mercial farms belonging to the Nsawam Canneries Ltd,5
and Kokobin Farms. The researcher was instrumental in
Results and discussions lots of field trials in the commercial multiplication of
Table 2 gives an account of the innovation timeline the two varieties. The trials were carried out in
associated with pineapple production in Ghana. Various Mampong-Ashanti, Wenchi, Ohawu, and Pokuase. In a
innovations have evolved with the production of pineap- focus group discussion, farmers indicated that:
ples in the study area emanating from different sources.
In the 1960s, the smooth cayenne and sugar loaf pineap-
The innovation history method and the AIS are used to ple varieties were introduced to us by Dr W. S. Abutiate.
foreground the discussions conceptually. The AIS particu- Most smallholders got these two varieties from Nsawam
larly permits an analysis among actors involved in inno- Canneries Ltd and Kokobin farms. Gradually, all small-
vations, how innovations have emanated over time, holders got suckers to plant. (Pokrom Patriotic FBO,
processes of adoption or non-adoption coupled with FGD/22nd/04/2012)
factors accounting for adoption or otherwise. Reflective The smooth cayenne remains prominent in the Nsawam
processes are involved in innovation generation, use and Municipal Assembly. Indeed Krumbiegel, Maertens, and
exchange, farmers’ participation in the innovation pro- Wollni (2018) showed that smooth cayenne was a domi-
cesses and use, etc. The actors in the pineapple value nant variety. The variety was introduced to the assembly
chain include exporters who doubled as farms/producers from a small town (Samsum) along the Accra to
(Bomarts Farms Ltd, Koranco Farms Ltd, Golden Nsawam highway. Danielou and Ravry (2005) indicated
Exotics Ltd, Greenspan Farms Ltd, Chartered Impex that the smooth cayenne was introduced into Ghana
Ltd, Combined Farmers Ltd,3 Jei-River Farms, Farmapine during the early 1960s. The sugar loaf features promi-
Ltd),4 a trade association notably, the Sea-Freight Pineap- nently in Effutu and Awutu districts in the Central
ple Exporters of Ghana (SPEG), government ministries – Region of Ghana. The sugar loaf is locally christened as
Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ministry of Trade and fante-fante6 because it came from the Central Region. A
Industry (MoTI) – agribusinesses (Nsawam Canneries key informant from the Department of Agriculture
Ltd, Blue Skies Ghana Ltd), processors (HPW Fresh (DoA) reported that:
and Dry Ghana Ltd, Blue Skies Ghana Ltd, PEELCO
Ltd), Ghana Export Promotion Council/ Ghana Export The smooth cayenne came to our municipal from Efuttu
Promotion Authority responsible for regulatory and and Awutu districts in the Central Region, even till now
policy issues, Agricultural input companies (Weinco the Central Region remains a dominant producer of the
smooth cayenne. (DoA KII, 8th/02/2012)
Ltd, Chemico Ltd, Agrimat). The agro-input companies
were responsible for supplying agricultural inputs (fertili- The rapid multiplication of the pineapple suckers and the
zers, weedicides, chemicals for forcing, dipping, and subsequent production of the pineapple fruit was led by
drenching) to farms. Dr W. S. Abutiate of the Crop Research Institute (CRI),
The innovations associated with pineapple production giving credence to the vital role research institutes play
include grading, dipping, drenching, removal of basal in agricultural development. The full adoption and upscal-
leaves, decrowning, forcing, plot labelling, diversification ing of the two pineapple varieties was sustained by the
of farm business, development of business plan, value external demand in the American and European
chain approach, drying of pineapple fruits, green label markets. Implicitly higher profit margins were obtained
certification, planting MD2 without the use of plastic from pineapple production, hence the characterization as
mulch but cover crops and mulch. Generally, an obser- a high-value crop. This incentivized more smallholder
vation was made about the domination of pineapple pro- farmers to get involved in pineapple production. The
duction by males. A plausible reason could be local market ironically had a minimal role to play in
differential access to productive resources such as land, shaping the direction and requirements in the industry.
as corroborated by Ankrah, Freeman, and Afful (2020). This was because the pineapple produced targeted the
Krumbiegel, Maertens, and Wollni (2020), however, export market. Pineapple fruits that did not meet the
observed that female employment in the pineapple indus- export market requirement found their way on the local
try had a statistically significant and positive effect on market. This birthed the institution, the Ghana Export
6 Ankrah
Table 2: Pineapple innovation timeline from stakeholders in the Nsawam Adoagyire Municipal Assembly
Adoption
Year of intensity/
innovation Type of innovation Origin Key Actors involved success
1950 The emergence of the Smooth Cayenne Hawaii Researcher - Dr. W.S. Abutiate – Fully
and Sugar Loaf pineapple varieties by (Crop Research Institute), Combined Adopted
Dr. W.S. Abutiate, a researcher with Farms Ltd, Koranco Farms Ltd,
Crop Research Institute. He brought the Nsawam Canneries Ltd Farms,
varieties from Hawaii. The two Kokobin Farms
pineapple varieties were made available
to commercial farms such as Combined
Farmers Ltd, Koranco Farms Ltd,
Nsawam Canneries Farms Ltd and
Kokobin Farms.
1960 Forcing pineapples with the use of MoFA Independent Researcher – Dr. W.S. Fully
calcium carbide. MoFA introduced this Abutiate (Crop Research Institute), Adopted
and commercial farms such as Nsawam Nsawam Canneries Ltd, MoFA
Canneries Farms Ltd. Dr. W.S. Abutiate
was also very instrumental in the training
of farmers on forcing.
1980 Planting of pineapple in rows. This was MoFA Nsawam Canneries Ltd, Independent Fully
introduced by Nsawam Canneries. Mr. Consultant – Mr. Toluchi Adopted
Toluchi was very active in training
farmers on planting in rows.
1980/1985 Use of tractor for ploughing and Combined Farmers Ltd Combined Farmers Ltd, MoFA Partially
harrowing. This was introduced by Adopted
Combined Farmers Ltd. The use of
tractors during this period was not
widespread among farmers.
1986 Degreening. This was introduced by Exporters High-end European Supermarkets Fully
exporters and commercial farms. (Tesco and Marks & Spencer), Adopted
Exporters
1987–1990 The institution of the Pineapple Ghana MoTI, GEPC Successful
Production Expansion programme led by
the Ministry of Trade and Industry
(MoTI) and the Ghana Export Promotion
Council (GEPC).
1990 Fertilizer and Agro-chemical usage. The MoFA MoFA, Combined Farmers Ltd, Fully
use of fertilizer was introduced by MoFA Nsawam Canneries, Kokobin Farms Adopted
and commercial farms like Combined
Farmers Ltd, Nsawam Canneries Ltd,
and Kokobin Farms Ltd.
1990 Nnoboa Farmer-led Farmer-led, NGOs Partially
Adopted
1991–1999 Agriculture Diversification Programme – GEPC & MoFA GEPC, MoFA, World Bank, Successful
Horticulture Development Component
led by GEPC and MoFA ($16.5 million)
1993–1998 Introduction of the Trade and Investment USAID, AMEX USAID, AMEX International Successful
Programme (TIP) by USAID International
1998–2004 The continuation of TIP with a Trade and USAID USAID, AMEX International, Successful
Investment Reform Programme by Technoserve, Care International
AMEX International, Technoserve, Care
International funded by USAID ($60
million)
1994 Dipping and Drenching. MoFA MoFA MoFA, Department of Agriculture Fully
introduced this. Adopted
1994 The establishment of the sea freight for USAID Trade and USAID, AMEX International Successful
export of pineapples known as Sea- Investment Programme
Freight Pineapple Exporters of Ghana led by AMEX
(SPEG) International
1994 Sea freight of pineapples commenced SPEG, USAID, AMEX SPEG, USAID, AMEX International Successful
International
1995 Decrowning. Exporters introduced this Exporters High-end European Supermarkets, Fully
as a way of encouraging large fruit sizes Exporters Adopted
and also meeting customer
specifications.
1997 Use of liquid fertilizer. This was Farmer-led, MoFA MoFA, Department of Agriculture, Fully
introduced largely by farmers and MoFA Farmer-led Adopted
supported it.
(Continued )
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 7
Table 2: Continued.
Adoption
Year of intensity/
innovation Type of innovation Origin Key Actors involved success
1997 Use of Neem tree leaves (Azadirachta Farmer-led Smallholder farmers Discarded
Indica) as an insecticide. This is a
farmer-led innovation. It is a case of an
individual farmer using this type of
innovation. It is not widespread among
farmers.
1997/1998 Establishment of Blue Skies Ghana United Kingdom (UK) Blue Skies Ghana Ltd, Ghana Free Successful
Limited – an agribusiness firm that Zones
processes fresh fruit cuts for export and
domestic market.
1999 The establishment of Farmapine Ghana MoFA, World Bank, World Bank, MoFA, Ministry of Discarded/
Limited – a farmer-owned company Government of Ghana, Finance and Economic Planning, Collapsed
composed of five FBOs and two Ministry of Finance, FBOs, Gabrho Ltd, Kokobin Farms.
producers and exporter companies FBOs
(Gabrho Ltd and Kokobin Farms) funded
by the World Bank.
1999 Grading. This involves the MoFA MoFA Fully
categorization of pineapple suckers into Adopted
sizes, i.e., small, medium, and large.
Farmers and MoFA introduced this.
1999 Use of recommended planting distance MoFA, CRI MoFA, CRI Fully
for cultivating pineapple. This was Adopted
introduced by MoFA and also
commercial farms.
1999 Planting pineapple suckers based on the MoFA, CRI, FBOs MoFA, CRI, FBOs Fully
gradient of the land. This involves Adopted
planting big suckers at the apex of the
slope, medium suckers at the mid base of
the slope, and small suckers at the base
of the slope. This is an innovation
introduced by farmers.
1999 Global GAP Certification. Blue Skies GiZ, MoFA MoFA, GiZ, European Supermarkets Fully
Company Ltd was the first to introduce (Marks & Spencer, Tesco) Adopted
GLOBAL GAP certification to farmers.
MoFA and NGOs such as
TECHNOSERVE, care International,
GTZ/GIZ, and Farmapine Ghana
Limited vigorously trained farmers to
become GLOBAL GAP certified.
1999 Use of plastic mulch for cultivating MD2 MoFA, GAEC, Bomarts MoFA, GAEC, Bomarts Farms Ltd Fully
pineapple variety. This was used on a Farms Ltd Adopted
small scale by very few farmers’.
1999 There was the introduction of the queen Jei River Farms Jei River Farms Discarded
pineapple variety by Jei River Farms.
1999–2005 Fairtrade certification by George Field European Supermarkets George Field Farms, Prudent Fully
Farms, Prudent Exports, Milani Ltd, Exports, Milani Ltd, Bomarts Farms Adopted
Bomarts Farms Ltd, Jei River Farms, Ltd, Jei River Farms, Volta River
Volta River Estates Ltd, Gold Coast Estates Ltd, Gold Coast Fruits, Bio
Fruits, Bio Exotica Co. Ltd. Exotica Co. Ltd
2000 The establishment of the Export Government of Ghana Government of Ghana Successful
Development Agriculture and
Investment Funds (EDAIF).
2000–2007 Establishment of the Cotonou Agreement Government of Ghana, Government of Ghana, European Successful
that permitted the export of fresh fruit European Union Union (EU)
pineapples to Europe duty-free.
2002/2005 The introduction of MD2 by Del Monte MoFA, GAEC, Bomarts MoFA, GAEC, Bomarts Farms Ltd Fully
from Costa Rica. MoFA imported large Farms Ltd Adopted
quantities for farmers and institutions
like the Ghana Atomic Energy
Commission (GAEC) and Bomarts
Farms Ltd for multiplication.
2004/2005 Gouging by TIPCEE, GiZ, MoFA. USAID-TIPCEE, GiZ, USAID-TIPCEE, GiZ, MoFA Fully
MoFA Adopted
2002/2005 Bed making for the cultivation of the MoFA MoFA Fully
MD2. This was introduced by MoFA. Adopted
(Continued )
8 Ankrah
Table 2: Continued.
Adoption
Year of intensity/
innovation Type of innovation Origin Key Actors involved success
2004/2005 Use of cooling vans in transporting fresh Koranco Farms Ltd, Koranco Farms Ltd, Blue Skies Partially
pineapples to ports by Koranco Farms Blue Skies Ghana Ltd, Ghana Ltd, HPW, George Fields Adopted
Ltd, Blue Skies Ghana Ltd, HPW, HPW, George Fields
George Fields.
2006 Use of cassava peels as weedicide. This Farmer-led Farmer-led Low
was introduced by an individual farmer.
The innovation is not widely practiced
among farmers.
2007 The expiration of the Cotonou Government of Ghana Government of Ghana Successful
Agreement was continued with the
Economic Partnership Agreement
between Ghana and the European Union.
2008 Efficient marketing through the MiDA MiDA Fully
formation of marketing sub-groups Adopted
within FBOs. Securing the market for
produce even before the commencement
of production. Better bargaining power
within FBOs and fixing a common price
for pineapple fruits within FBOs. This
also involves comparing prices for
agricultural inputs from different agri-
inputs outlets before the purchase of
inputs. MiDA introduced this.
2008/2012 Diversification of farm activities. MoFA MoFA, MiDA MoFA, MiDA Fully
introduced this. Adopted
2008/2012 Development of business plans. MiDA MiDA MiDA Partially
introduced this. Adopted
2008/2012 Value chain approach. MiDA introduced MiDA MiDA Partially
this. Adopted
2008/2012 Provision of packhouses for storage of MiDA MiDA Discarded
pineapple fruits
2013/2014 Drying of pineapple fruits by HPW, HPW, Bomarts Farms HPW, Bomarts Farms Ltd Partially
Bomarts Farms Ltd. Ltd Adopted
2016/2018 Green Label Certification. MoFA, GIZ/ MoFA, GIZ/Hortifresh MoFA, GIZ/Hortifresh Fully
Hortifresh introduced this. Adopted
2019 Planting MD2 without plastic mulch but Prof. Kofi Boah/GIZ Prof. Kofi Boah, GiZ Partially
using cover crops and weeds as mulch Adopted
Source: Fieldwork, 2012/2016/2021.
Promotion Council in 1969, an autonomous institution plants to ripe uniformly using ethylene/calcium carbide
that promoted the non-traditional export crops. The (Espinosa et al. 2017). The forcing innovation was a col-
capacity of the CRI was strengthened in sucker multipli- laborative research effort between Dr Abutiate, and the
cation and pineapple production. The initial approach Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA). Nsawam Can-
used aligned with the Transfer of Technology (ToT) neries Farms Ltd contracted MoFA to undertake various
model, where a national research institute (CRI) took studies into best agronomic practices associated with the
the lead in the technology development and subsequent production of pineapples. The output of this research
transfer to farmers. There was full adoption by farmers, work resulted in innovations such as planting in rows,
given the novelty of the crop and the lack of experience use of recommended planting distance, and fertilizer
by farmers in the production. This shows that if inno- usage. Planting in rows and recommended planting dis-
vation is new but profitable, coupled with farmers tance, was introduced by Nsawam Canneries Farms Ltd,
limited experience, it can probably enhance full adoption. MoFA, Dr Abutiate and an individual researcher – Mr
Within the AIS7 lens, there was a strong relationship Toluchi in 1999. Planting in rows was initially introduced
between research, farmers, and the limited actors in the to commercial farms and later to small-scale farmers. The
chain that allowed an effective collaboration and network- initial planting distance was 1.2 metres by 1.2 metres,
ing among the actors. There is strength in numbers, but it with an estimated plant population of 6800 per hectare.
often complicates relationships among actors. Effective Given that most pineapples produced were meant for
coordination of actors in a chain is essential. the export market, best practices formed a strong foun-
The long gestation period for the maturity of the pine- dation for the production practices. Private sector actors,
apple fruits led to further research to reduce the gestation therefore, invested in public partnership with MoFA,
period. An innovation known as forcing came into prac- Crop Research Institute, in determining the recommended
tice in the 1960s. Forcing is the inducement of pineapple planting distance required for optimum pineapple fruiting.
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 9
The Transfer of Technology (ToT) was the sole medium pineapple industry and continues to influence the dom-
of technology dissemination. Consequently, national estic market in the present day time. This has not comple-
research institutions led supported by big commercial tely departed from Ghana’s agricultural food system
farms. Farmers, therefore, remained at the receiving influenced by colonialization and the liberalized market
end. However, innovations such as forcing, planting in system. Degreening was fully adopted because it was an
rows remained fully adopted. The strict export require- export market requirement. Non-compliance meant low
ment and the private sector financial investment into the prices for pineapple fruits because of the non-competitive
sector could explain this. Additionally, the industry was prices offered by the local market. At the time, few pro-
relatively new, therefore farmers lacked adequate knowl- cessing companies existed, so basically, value addition
edge and experience in the sector and had to oblige with was not an option. Most commercial farmers and small-
the best scientific practices. Innovations that appear holder farmers produced fresh fruits for the export
novel tend to work with the ToT, but usually, when market. A useful lesson is to develop the domestic
farmers get more experienced, the systems thinking market to absorb rejected pineapple fruits that do not
could be helpful in dealing with the multiplicity of meet the export market. This can offer competitive
actors involved. In a focus group discussion with Fotobi prices similar to what the exporters offer. This implies
FBO, they indicated that: creating domestic demand for pineapple juice. Actors in
the pineapple value chain need to interact in a reflective
We remember that the pioneers in pineapple cultivation
told us that they learned about sowing in rows from the manner (systems thinking) on how best to harness the
big commercial farms in the municipal, some farmers optimum domestic benefits from pineapple production
who also worked as labourers on the big commercial through processing to offer competition.
farms learned how to sow in rows and the recommended In 1987, the Pineapple Production Expansion pro-
planting distance. They simply transferred this infor- gramme was established led by the Ministry of Trade
mation to other farmers. (Fotobi FBO, FGD/ 8th/02/
2012) and Industry (MoTI) and the Ghana Export Promotion
Council (GEPC) with the main objective of scaling up
From 1980 to 1985, Combined Farmers Ltd pioneered the pineapple production. This remained successful in provid-
use of farm tractors for ploughing and harrowing. The use ing the needed regulatory framework.
of tractors during this period was not widespread among Farming in rural areas is characterized by communal
commercial farms. Generally, its adoption remained rela- living. The communal living arrangements influenced an
tively low or partial but popular among the commercial innovation known asNnoboa.8 This practice gained promi-
farms. Factors accounting for the low adoption included nence in the 1990s. The Nnoboa practice was widely
the high financial capital needed for purchases of tractors. reported among the MiDA FBOs. This observation can be
The government, in bridging this gap launched input sub- attributed to the importance that the MiDA programme
sidies on tractor purchases and the establishment of agri- placed on the Nnoboa practice during the farmers training
cultural mechanization centres (Diao and Takeshima programme. Interestingly, Nnoboa innovation was pio-
2020). The affordability of technology significantly neered by farmers, indicating that farmers self-innovate.
affects the adoption of a given technology, and a useful This resonates with findings (Ankrah and Freeman 2021;
lesson is to consider simple and affordable technologies. Ankrah 2014) that showed that farmers self-innovate. The
The use of systems thinking can pick up such valuable Nnoboa practice gained less traction partly because agricul-
information from key actors in reflective processes that ture is recognized as a business involving heavy reliance on
could probably generate cheaper and simple tractors that hired labour. It was reported in an interviewwith a represen-
properly address smallholder needs. Farmers in a focus tative from the Department of Agriculture that:
group discussion reported that:
We did not have the money, and even for the few who had Nnoboa practice is less dominant among farmers’
money to purchase tractors, they did not know where to because farming has witnessed a transformation to the
purchase the tractor. More so, we could not operate a level where farmers approach farming as a business.
tractor even if we did purchase one. It was Combined Pineapple produced in the districts goes to supermarkets
Farmers Ltd that first brought tractor into our community, hence, farmers have seen the need to approach it as a
so the workers that they employ to work on the tractor business. Additionally, farmers involved in pineapple pro-
taught us how to operate tractors over time. (Apesika duction are better off than food crop farmers. Therefore,
FBO, FGD/ 12th/02/2012) they can afford the services of hired labour. (DoA KII,
8th/02/2012)
Another milestone that featured in 1986, was the inno-
vation of degreening. The quest to attain uniform ripening In a focus group discussion, farmers corroborated that:
Nnoboa practice has diminished from our system gradu-
led to inducing uniform ripening of the pineapple fruits ally. In the 1990s it was widely practiced among farmers,
with ethylene known as degreening. This innovation ori- and it saved us labour costs. Currently, most farmers
ginated from exporters and high-end European supermar- prefer to use the services of hired labour on our farms.
kets (e.g., Tesco and Marks & Spencer), and both Sometimes, most farmers produce generally around the
commercial farms and smallholder farmers implemented same time, so relying on peer farmers as labourers on
farms does not appear convenient. (Apesika FBO, FGD/
it. This innovation was not a requirement for the domestic 12th/02/2012)
market. However, fruits that did not find their way on the
export market had to be diverted to the local market even This phenomenon, to some extent, increases production
though such a technology did not readily serve the needs cost because labour cost, which would have otherwise
of the local market. The export market drove the been free, has to be paid. Conversely, other farmers who
10 Ankrah
work as labourers make economic gains through their ser- MoFA’s continuous engagement with farmers’ led to
vices as hired labourers. This innovation was fully the introduction of dipping and drenching in 1994.
adopted in the 1990s, but it became partially adopted in Dipping is done before the pineapple suckers are
the 2000s when the pineapple industry became more prof- planted, whereas drenching is done after planting the
itable, hence farmers could easily afford the services of pineapple suckers. Dipping involves placing the pineap-
hired labourers. The MiDA programme later on (2008) ple suckers into a mixture containing fungicide, while
re-ignited the implementation of Nnoboa among the drenching involves placing the suckers in an insecticide
MiDA FBOs. This innovation is however, received to prevent insect damage to suckers. This is an innovation
partial adoption. The Nnoboa was partially adopted, that emanated from formal science (National agricultural
implying that farmer-led innovation does not necessarily research systems – Crop Research Institute, Food
lead to full adoption even among farmers. A complex Research Institute). MoFA implemented this, and it was
set of factors intersects to influence adoption, and efficient fully adopted by farmers because it minimizes losses
networking, and collaboration among actors help with the due to insects and fungicide attacks. Adoption, was
success or otherwise of innovation. System thinking however low among few low-resourced farmers. The
appears useful in facilitating innovation. cost associated with technologies is a valuable factor to
In the 1990s, there was increased production of pine- consider in the introduction of a given innovation. This
apples in the study area which led to the MoFA and com- should be a useful starting point and lesson for future
mercial farms like Combined Farmers Ltd, Nsawam innovations within the remit of systems thinking.
Canneries Ltd, and Kokobin Farms to introduce the use In 1994, there was the establishment of the Sea-
of fertilizers and various agrochemicals. Fertilizers Freight Pineapple Exporters of Ghana (SPEG) tasked
during this period were not used in substantial quantities with the responsibility of the sea freight export of pineap-
since most farmlands were fertile. Given the commercial ples. Whitfield (2017) confirmed SPEG formation in
nature of pineapple production, the need to meeting 1994. The pioneering members of SPEG were John Lawr-
export demand obliges the intensive use of agrochemicals. ence Farms, Jei River Farms Ltd, Integral Farms Ltd,
This was led by MoFA/DoA, Combined Farmers Ltd, Combined Farmers Ltd, and Greentext Farms Ltd. The
Nsawam Canneries Ltd, Kokobin Farms Ltd. This was Horticulturists Association of Ghana (HAG) collaborated
fully adopted by most farmers due to the knowledge closely with SPEG since members of SPEG were inciden-
given by national research institutes about the best agro- tally members of HAG as well. This was led by SPEG and
nomic practices. Farmers had no issues with the export AMEX International with funding from USAID. SPEG
rejection of the pineapples fruits. This bolstered the con- achieved success which has been sustained till now.
fidence in the use of agro-chemicals. The innovation There is however, weak coordination with smallholder
was fully adopted. farmers. This needs addressing in improving actor net-
In 1991–1999 the Ghana Export Promotion Council works and linkages in encouraging reflective thinking.
spearheaded the agriculture diversification programme – In 1995, decrowning was introduced. Decrowning
horticulture development component with a World involves removing the crowns of the pineapple fruits to
Bank, IDA $16.5 million credit facility that targeted hor- induce bigger fruits and reduce crown sizes. Decrowning
ticulture development. A horticulture unit was established is performed with a gouging tool to remove crowns from
under MoFA that ensured the implementation of horticul- the pineapple fruit. It emanated from exporters who con-
tural sector development programmes. The project formed with the requirements from European retail outlets
achieved success in promoting the horticultural sector. (supermarkets –Marks & Spencer, Tesco). The practice of
1993–1998 also witnessed the introduction of the decrowning was fully adopted among FBOs. The super-
Trade and Investment Programme (TIP) funded by markets ensured strict conformity to decrowning as an
USAID but implemented by AMEX International. It tar- export requirement, failure to do so resulted in the rejec-
geted export industries, horticultural crops, and provision- tion of pineapple fruits. This, therefore, obliged farmers to
ing of finance for value chain actors. The programme was produce according to specification. This points to the
successful and led to a continuation of the Trade and direction that stringent export requirement is a factor
Investment Reform Programme. that facilitates the adoption of innovation.
In 1998–2004 based on the success of TIP, the Trade In 1997, the pineapple industry witnessed liquid ferti-
and Investment Reform Programme focused on the lizer application. This was in response to boost the com-
inclusion of private sector actors. This was led by Techno- mercial production of pineapple in the Nsawam
serve, AMEX International, and Care International with Municipal. Farmers became more innovative as a result
funding ($60 million) from USAID. Provision of of the high expenditures associated with the use of solid
funding is an aspect that is usually neglected in most pro- fertilizers. The liquid fertilizer came up as a way of mini-
grammes. Production tends to be over-emphasized in gov- mizing fertilizer expenditure. It involves the mixing of
ernment programmes. This programme, therefore, solid fertilizer with an insecticide. The liquid fertilizer
targeted micro-enterprises and smallholders into pro- also constitutes a mixture of solid fertilizer and water.
duction and marketing targeted value chains for exports. This affords the fertilizer or mixture to be applied to a
From an AIS perspective, it was good integrating the larger area in smaller or appropriate quantities compared
private sector and financial components into the value to solid fertilizer. This was a farmer-led innovation that
chain, particularly in addressing marketing constraints. had its efficacy confirmed by the MoFA and the Depart-
This programme was also successful. ment of Agriculture – Nsawam Municipal Assembly
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 11
and subsequently approved. In a key informant interview Perhaps, the Blue Skies Ghana Ltd model can be
with an officer with the Department of Agriculture, it was studied to provide valuable lessons on how the company
reported that: managed to thrive throughout its inception. Such a
useful lesson is what the innovation history seeks to docu-
Farmers informed us about a practice that they carried
out by mixing solid and liquid fertilizer, as a department ment for the agrarian change and innovation literature.
we carried out trials on a demonstration farm, and we The grading of pineapples was introduced in 1999 by
have seen the merit in it, so we have approved for MoFA. The grading of suckers involves the categorization
farmers to use. (DoA/ KII, 12th/02/2012) of suckers into small, medium, and big suckers. Generally,
The use of liquid fertilizer indicates how farmers self- both categories of farmers practice grading because it
innovate and collaborate with MoFA and DoA in facilitat- allows for the uniform growth of suckers. This eventually
ing innovation. More such collaborations are needed to helps in the harvesting of the pineapple fruits at a uniform
confirm farmer-led innovations. This innovation, there- time. Farmers in 1999 brought up the innovation of plant-
fore, was fully adopted among FBOs. Farmer-led inno- ing pineapple suckers on the land area based on the gradi-
vations usually receive full adoption, even though this is ent of the land surface. The bigger suckers are planted at
not given. This is seen in the next innovation (Neem the apex of a slope; the medium suckers are planted at the
tree leaves). mid-base of a slope, with smaller suckers planted at the
The use of Neem tree leaves as an insecticide came up base of a slope. The rationale is that the smaller suckers
in 1997 as well. This involves the grinding of Neem tree use the soil nutrients that are leached to the base of the
leaves and mixing with water. The use of Neem tree slope. This innovation was fully adopted among both
leaves was, however not widespread among FBOs. It con- the MiDA and non-MiDA FBOs. The topography of the
stituted an isolated case of an individual farmer innovat- land for pineapple cultivation coupled with the fact that
ing. This confirms findings by (Ankrah, Freeman, and farmers easily resonate with this innovation constituted
Afful 2020; Ankrah 2014; Ankrah and Freeman 2021) some plausible reasons for the high adoption rate among
that indicated that farmers self-innovate. The low adop- FBOs. It came up from the FGDs that both FBOs prac-
tion of this innovation could be attributed to the ease of ticed this innovation on their farms.
getting commercial quantities of the Neem tree leaves. In a FGD with an FBO that did not benefit from the
This makes the innovation beneficial but not one that MiDA programme, farmers indicated that:
can easily be up-scaled. A useful lesson, is however to We learned how to grade pineapple suckers from Ata
consider the commercial production of Neem trees to Mudzi Farms. News spread among us that small
serve this purpose. Actors in the pineapple value chain suckers have to be planted at the base where the farmland
need to reflect on this from an AIS perspective leading has a slope, the bigger suckers need to be planted at the
to the generation and use of innovation. The universities apex of the slope. This is because, in the case of run-off
leading to leaching, the smaller suckers at the base of
and research centres can undertake a benefit–cost analysis the slope can benefit and catch up in growth with the
of this innovation relative to the inorganic insecticides. nigger suckers planted at the apex of the slope.
This is useful given the current drive for organic (Enkakyi Cooperative, FGD/6th/December/2011)
production.
In another FGD with a MiDA FBO, farmers indicated
In 1997/1998, Blue Skies Ghana Ltd was established
that:
as an agri-business company exporting fresh fruit cuts The Department of Agriculture around 1999 taught us
to the United Kingdom (UK). The agribusiness is still in that we needed to grade our pineapple suckers before
existence and strongly shaping fresh fruit pineapple planting. The rationale underlying grading was to plant
export and processing in Ghana. The company’s success smaller suckers at the base of slopes and the bigger
can partly be attributed to the private foreign and domestic suckers at the apex of the slope. (Nsabah FBO, FGD/
8th/02/2012)
partnership between a Ghanaian and British entrepreneur,
i.e., it is entirely private-sector led and devoid of govern- In 1999, farmers were introduced to the recommended
ment direct control and leadership. planting distance based on trails led by Dr. Abutiate of
In 1999, there was the establishment of Farmapine CRI. Pineapple plants were spaced 60 cm between rows
Ghana Ltd. This was modelled around a farmer-owned and 90 cm apart. A spacing of 45 cm was recommended
company (cooperative-based); therefore, it was composed within rows. This innovation was fully adopted, given
of 5 FBOs made up of 450 farmers, medium-scaled pro- its novelty and farmers’ inexperience.
ducer-export companies (Kokobin Farms Ltd & Gabrho Civil society organizations, mainly Non-Governmen-
Ltd). The Ministry of Finance secured a loan of $1.5 tal Organizations (NGOs), greatly influenced the commer-
million from the World Bank. Farmapine recorded cial production of pineapples and the improvement in the
growth and success from its humble beginnings. Indeed, livelihoods of the rural poor small-scale farmer. The quest
between 1999–2004, the company accounted for a to improve farmer livelihoods in the past triggered lots of
23.5% market share of fresh pineapple exports in capacity-building programmes. The training involved
Ghana. It was the second- largest exporter of pineapples training in proper farm record-keeping, training in
in the year 2000 (Kolavalli 2019). The success was, Global Good Agricultural Practices (GlobalGAP). In
however not sustained due to bad governance, high oper- 1999, NGOs such as TECHNOSERVE, Care Inter-
ating costs, management challenges, diversion of fruits by national, Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
FBO members, low input recovery from farmers, etc. (GTZ/GIZ) trained farmers’ on record keeping and Global
12 Ankrah
GAP/EUREPGAP9 certification. Whitfield (2012) indi- crow metal bar or iron rod to trigger the growth of lateral
cated that Global GAP strict compliance, however buds. This prevents the plant from bearing flowers and
become more effective in 2005. Farmapine Company fruits but rather channels such nutrients into the formation
Limited,10 and MoFA also corroborated the efforts of of suckers (Muimba-Kankolongo 2018). This innovation
these NGOs in their training programmes. Indeed, increased significantly during the introduction of the
studies (Fold and Gough 2008; Kleemann, Abdulai, and MD2 when there was the need to multiply more planting
Buss 2014; Krumbiegel, Maertens, and Wollni 2020) materials. Ankrah, Boakye, and Agyei-Holmes (2021a)
gives credence to this funding of capacity building by showed that the multiplication of pineapple suckers is a
civil society. The Global GAP innovation was fully viable business that generates comparative farm profits
adopted among farmers against a background that it even though it is neglected. This was introduced by
became a pre-requisite for exports of fresh pineapples. GiZ, USAID Trade and Investment for a Competitive
Farmers were therefore obliged to conform to the strin- Export Economy (TIPCEE), and MoFA. This innovation
gent standards. This points to the direction that, when was fully adopted, given the need to multiply more
strict measures are enforced, farmers conform. This can MD2 varieties. Demand for products is a major driver
be a useful lesson in the innovation literature. for innovation. It is therefore vital to create a sustained
In 1999, few farmers were introduced to the cultiva- demand for products through systems thinking.
tion of the MD2, even though the variety existed in In 1999, Jei-River Farms introduced the queen pineap-
1961 through the invention by the Pineapple Research ple variety. Different variants exist with the queen variety.
Institute (PRI) in Hawaii. The research institute was For instance, Victoria (Queen) is prominent in Saint
created by Maui Pineapple Company, Del Monte, and Pierre, Reunion Island, South America (Soler et al.
Dole. However, Del Monte Company patented and com- 2021), Honey Queen is famous in Indonesia (Afifah
mercially produced the MD2 on the world market in 2020) and the Tripura Queen variety is prominent in
1996 (Paniagua-Molina and Solís-Rivera 2020). The cre- north east India (Das et al. 2021). However, these varieties
ation of the MD2 signals the resolve of the private sector fizzled out quickly on the Ghanaian production sites
in innovation. The use of the MD2 during this period was because they appeared not to be a preferred variety in
not widespread among Ghanaian farmers’. The MD2 the export market destinations. The taste and preferences
became more prominent in 2002/2004 due to the shift in of consumers are important factors to consider according
consumer preference for this variety (See Table 2). to the adoption literature. This innovation was therefore
MoFA imported commercial quantities of the MD2 pine- discarded based on a low consumer preference for the
apple suckers from Costa Rica and tasked institutions variety. The use of systems thinking would have other-
such as the Ghana Atomic Energy Commission wise have identified an apparent dislike of the variety in
(GAEC), Bomarts Farms for the commercial multipli- Ghana’s export destinations. Weak linkages and coordi-
cation of the suckers. Farmers were also introduced to nation among actors need addressing.
the construction of beds to cultivate MD2 in the same In 1999–2005, Fairtrade certifications were intro-
year (2002/2004). The MD2 was fully adopted because duced as a direct fall-out from the GLOBAL GAP/
it became the preferred variety on the export market, EURPGAP certifications. Fairtrade is a trading partner-
hence farmers were compelled to produce. Taste and pre- ship based on mutual benefit and respect that seeks to
ference on the international market constitute a significant ensure equity in countries where pineapples are produced
drive in shaping the pineapple innovation literature. It is through transparency in minimizing inequalities in North–
helpful for new entrants to monitor international prefer- South trade (Raynolds 2020). Actors along the value
ences and shifts to keep abreast with international chain must be certified by Fairtrade Labelling Organiz-
demands. The systems thinking will permit early signals ations International (FLO). This was led by George
to be picked up for stakeholders to conform or contest. Field Farms, Prudent Exports, Milani Ltd, Bomarts
In the year 2004/2005, there was the introduction of Farms Ltd, Jei River Farms, Volta River Estates Ltd,
cooling car vans that cooled the fresh fruits pineapples Gold Coast Fruits, and Bio Exotica Co. Ltd. This helped
up until the airport. Controlling respiration leads to main- to provide social amenities, such as toilet facilities,
taining good quality fruits. Higher temperatures influence supply of books and computers to schools, and scholar-
the respiration process, therefore cooling minimizes the ship schemes that supported brilliant but needy children,
rate of respiration and prevents fruits deterioration etc., in the communities where production took place.
(Behdani, Fan, and Bloemhof 2019). Cooling vans were Some challenges included meeting compliance, i.e., certi-
implemented by well-endowed and established farms/pro- fication cost and how this translates into sustainable pro-
ducers, such as Koranco Farms Ltd, Blue Skies Ghana duction without excessive spending on certification. This
Ltd, HPW, and George Fields. The innovation was par- notwithstanding, the Fairtrade market offered higher
tially adopted since the innovation targeted a few high- prices than the conventional ones. This innovation was
end supermarkets in Europe. The cost and the unstable fully adopted given the higher prices offered, it attracted
electricity supply contributed to making the innovation more farmers. Additionally, the money for community
unpopular. These challenges need addressing from the development incentivized farmers. Stakeholder incentives
system thinking perspective. need to be given recognition within systems thinking in
In 2004/2005, gouging was introduced. This involves facilitating innovations.
forcing plantlets to develop through the destruction of the In the year 2000, there was the establishment of the
apical growing point (eye) of the vegetative plants with a Export Development Agriculture and Investment Funds
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 13
(EDAIF) by the government of Ghana to provide dedi- once the cassava peelings have been used, there is no need
cated finance to the pineapple sector players to make to apply chemicals to supplement the control of weeds on
smallholder farmers more competitive. The EDAIF trans- the farmland. The farmer who brought up the innovation
formed into the Ghana EXIM Bank in 2016 with a explained that there is no known side effect using the
mandate to position Ghana as an export-driven cassava peelings as weedicide since he started using it.
economy. Despite the EDAIF support for farmers, the However, the farmer indicated that in swampy soils or
export sector did not perform creditably against the muddy soils, the application of the cassava peelings
benchmarks expected (Appiah et al. 2019). This signals could lead to the growth of maggots which can impede
an increased need for incorporating systems thinking the successful use of the cassava peelings as a weedicide.
into development programmes that allow for reflective The adoption of this innovation, however, was low among
thinking and remedial actions. farmers because the municipal is not a major producer of
From 2000 to 2007, the establishment of the Cotonou cassava which brings into question the ease of accessing
Agreement permitted the export of fresh fruit pineapples enough quantities of the cassava peels for upscaling.
to Europe duty-free. This agreement was facilitated Access to commercial quantities of raw materials is an
between the government of Ghana and the European important consideration for innovation adoption and
Union (EU). This was successful, and it enhanced upscaling. Valuable lessons need to be drawn from this
increased exports to the EU. This agreement benefitted from the system thinking perspective.
most exporters to increase exports to the European In 2007, the Cotonou Agreement expired, and it was
market. Weak linkages among the value chain actors did continued with the Economic Partnership Agreement
not allow other actors to have mutual benefits. There (EPA) between Ghana and the European Union (Hurt
was an unbalanced benefit that advantaged the exporters. 2020). This partnership was successful, but it primarily
A useful lesson is to harness the full benefits of the value benefited exporters at the expense of the value chain
chain and allow for effective forward and backward lin- actors. Actors’ interests need to be fairly managed and
kages among the actors. In this direction, reflective learn- aligned with other actor interests in ensuring innovation
ing processes are encouraged. adoption.
In 2006, farmers came upwith an innovation of remov- From 2008–2012, MiDA facilitated innovations such
ing basal leaves of pineapple suckers before planting. This as efficient marketing, diversification of farming activi-
practice helps to hasten the growth of the pineapple ties, the development of business plans, and the value
suckers. A farmer introduced this innovation in 2006 but chain approach among FBOs. Both MiDA and non-
did not receive the needed patronage because of its labor- MiDA FBOs engaged in FGDs attributed the source of
ious nature. It appears time-consuming to peel off the basal these innovations to be the intervention from the MiDA
leaves for thousands of suckers. This innovation, there- programme. This is corroborated in other studies
fore, was not fully adopted. Another farmer also intro- (Abdul-Rahaman and Abdulai 2018; Ankrah and
duced the use of cassava peelings to smoother the Freeman 2021). Efficient marketing involves forming a
growth of weeds on his farm. This innovation did not marketing sub-group to bargain for better and fairer
gain traction among farmers. The use of cassava peelings prices for the fruits. MiDA FBOs were introduced to the
serves a dual purpose; first it helps smoother weeds, and idea of securing a market for their pineapple fruits even
secondly helps to fertilize the soil. The practice involves before the start of production. This involves signing a
spreading cassava peelings in rows to a thickness of one contractual agreement between the FBO member and
inch on the land surface. The cassava peelings are just the exporter or buyer to harvest agreed quantities of the
left on top of the soil to decompose. The more the pineapple fruits. MiDA FBOs, given their capacity build-
cassava peelings keep on decomposing, the more one ing, compared prices of agri-inputs from different market
has to keep on topping up to maintain the one-inch thick- outlets before making purchases.
ness. The use of cassava peelings helps one to harvest Diversification of farm activities involves ploughing
without weeding the farm. The use of cassava peelings back profit from one farming activity into either a farm
also helps to trap water vapour which helps to conserve or non-farm activity. Funding for diversification could
soil moisture. The use of cassava peelings could be done also be borrowed capital. This would help to secure diver-
twice yearly. It is interesting to observe self-innovations sified sources of income for the farmer. The development
put forth by farmers giving credence to the notion that of a business plan involved production activities and the
they self-innovate, as confirmed by Ankrah and Freeman associated expenditures that need to be presented to a
(2021). It is therefore imperative to consider farmers’ financial institution for a loan. FBOs did this innovation
innovation to be non-trivial in the design of technologies. collectively but largely failed due to the inconsistencies
Indeed, Kwapong et al. (2020), in their study, found peer- between the requirement expected by the financial insti-
to-peer learning as an important source of agricultural tutions and what the outcomes farmers achieved in the
extension. Some of the relevant literature (Ankrah 2014; technical training they received from service providers
Tambo et al. 2020; Shah, Grant, and Stocklmayer 2016) (Ankrah and Freeman 2021). The value chain approach
shows that farmers self-innovate. Innovations that are involved recognizing the various activities involved in
laborious and time-consuming need addressing to facili- pineapple production and how a farmer can be well posi-
tate innovation adoption. tioned to add value to the various production segments
The application of cassava peelings can be undertaken involved in the chain (see Table 2). The value chain
on a particular land for five years. In the subsequent years, approach was partially adopted because of differential
14 Ankrah
actor interest, and inadequate money to facilitate strong Nsawam Municipal Assembly. Main actors associated
linkages among actors and actors who do not mutually with pineapple innovations include agribusiness
interact. The full or partial adoption of innovation needs (Nsawam Canneries Ltd, Milani Ltd, Bomarts Farms,
to address challenges among actors, and the systems Gold Coast Fruits Ltd, and Blue Skies Ghana Company
thinking affords a platform for reflecting thinking Limited), Crop Research Institute, exporters, the Ministry
among actors in addressing bottlenecks. of Food and Agriculture, Ghana Export Promotion
In 2008–2012, MiDA facilitated the provision of Council/Authority, Department of Agriculture under the
packhouses to store pineapple fruits before export to the decentralized Nsawam Municipal Assembly, commercial
countries of destination. The location of the packhouses farms (Kokobin Farms, Prudent Farms, Georgefield
appeared inappropriate. This is because farmers preferred Farms, Combined Farmers Ltd, Koranco) and NGOs
a location close to Accra, where fruits stored could easily (GiZ, Technoserve, Care International). Farmers were
be transported to the port or Accra for final distribution to found to self-innovate as exemplified in innovations
destinations. This rendered the use of the packhouses non- such as Nnoboa, removal of the basal leaves of pineapple
effective in achieving its intended purpose. It is important suckers, the use of Neem tree leaves as an insecticide, and
to draw useful lessons in engaging value chain actors in cassava peelings in smothering weeds. The adoption of
reflective processes to have a broader consensus on decid- these innovations, even though farmer-led, did not result
ing on the location of communal projects. Even though it in full adoption. Getting adequate raw materials for com-
is generally difficult to achieve consensus among stake- mercial up-scaling is a major driver for innovation adop-
holders, it appears to be a helpful resort in innovation tion. However, the recognition and harnessing of the ideas
adoption. This innovation was not fully adopted/ and knowledge of farmers remain essential, but it can
discarded. potentially be lost unless a rigorous effort is made to
In 2013–2014, HPW and Bomarts Ltd introduced the document an innovation history that can guide actors in
drying of pineapple fruits. This innovation was partially Ghana’s pineapple value chain and, by extension, in
adopted. It was not fully adopted owing to the small sub-Saharan Africa. Given the system thinking frame-
market share of dried pineapple fruits. Consumers’ taste work, it is important to include all the multiple value
and preference for fresh pineapples far outweighed their chain actors in knowledge generation and use reflectively
desire for dried ones. Drying, however preserves the pine- in facilitating agricultural innovations’ adoption.
apple fruit and improves shelf life. The integration of The MiDA programme consolidated innovations such
systems thinking can help upscale this technology adop- as business plan development, efficient marketing, diver-
tion since this innovation provides a solution to the perish- sification of farming activities, and value chain approach
ability associated with the fruit. to agriculture. Global Good Agricultural Practices (GAP)
In 2016–2018, green label certification was intro- remained a dominant standardization requirement. The
duced by MoFA, Hortifresh, Ghana Standards Authority, study finds a vacuum in pineapple innovation history
Trade Related Assistance and Quality Enabling Pro- even though pineapple constitutes one of the most devel-
gramme (TRAQUE) of the European Union, Christian oped non-traditional export crops in Ghana, thus Fold and
Aid, Quin Organics, Agro Eco Louis Bolk Institute, and Gough (2008), Kleemann, Abdulai, and Buss (2014),
GiZ – Market Oriented Agriculture Programme Krumbiegel, Maertens, and Wollni (2018) have attempted
(MOAP). This was intended to promote safe food pro- to document Ghana’s pineapple history. However, their
duction, distribution, and post-harvest handling through studies remained partial and non-coherent in systemati-
sustainable agricultural practices. This innovation is cally presenting a chronology of Ghana’s pineapple inno-
fully adopted and even gaining ground in the domestic vation history. The use of innovation history affords rich
market. This is because pineapple fruits that are green documentation of origin, year of innovation, and all inno-
labelled certified have a better shelf-life. Unlike other vations in the pineapple value chain. Finally, the inno-
innovations, the green label targets the local market as vation history provides evidence that can help actors in
an entry point to reach out to the international market. the pineapple industry to co-learn by either studying
In 2019, Prof. Kofi Boah and GiZ introduced the single cases or comparing past experiences with a
planting of the MD2 variety without plastic mulch and shared vision that can potentially propel a mechanism
raised beds. This innovation involves using natural for change, as supported in the earlier work of Douthwaite
cover crops such as mucuna and weeds to serve as et al. (2006). Even more compelling is embedding inno-
mulch to smother weeds. This innovation is partially vation history in an agricultural innovation system con-
adopted (see Table 2). This is because most farmers are ceptual framework.
already used to planting the MD2 with plastic mulch A recommendation is made that the innovation history
and raising beds. With time given the cost-saving com- methodology is used radically to help stakeholders in the
ponent, smallholders, in particular, are expected to adopt pineapple value chain to document and co-learn, and to
fully. Information asymmetry is affecting upscaling. provide new entrants an opportunity to understand the
This needs addressing from the systems thinking industry, including challenges and how innovations
perspective. emerged that can shape the future of the pineapple value
chain (input supply, production, distribution, processing,
Conclusion marketing, and post-harvest technologies) and agrarian
Smooth cayenne and MD2 constitute the dominant pine- change. This is essential in the global south, where
apple varieties cultivated in commercial quantities in the copious record-keeping is limited among smallholder
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 15
farmers and the broader value chain actors, thus empha- Afifah, D. N. 2020. “Total Lactic Acid Bacteria, Fiber Content,
sizing the need to embrace innovation history as a and Physical Properties of Nata de Pina Between Various
useful agricultural methodology in the global south. Parts of Honey Pineapple Variety (Ananas Comosus [L.]
Merr. Var. Queen).” Food Research 4: 24–30. https://doc-
Beyond Ghana, African governments, smallholder pak.undip.ac.id/2509/1/Turnitin-BAL-Nata-de-Pina.pdf.
farmers, national research institutes, policymakers, and Akonor, P. T. 2020. “Optimization of a Fruit Juice Cocktail
all other pineapple stakeholders are encouraged to make Containing Soursop, Pineapple, Orange and Mango Using
deliberate efforts in a reflective manner that inclines Mixture Design.” Scientific African 8: e00368. https://doi.
towards the Agricultural Innovation System conceptual org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00368.
Alaie, S. A. 2020. “Knowledge and Learning in the Horticultural
framing to promote profitable innovations that will inure Innovation System: A Case of Kashmir Valley of India.”
particularly to smallholder farmers who often remain dis- International Journal of Innovation Studies 4 (4): 116–
advantaged in the value chain. 133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2020.06.002.
Alexander, O. F., E. K. Anin, and K. O. Sarpong. 2016.
“Assessing and Mapping the Supply Chain of Pineapple
Acknowledgement Production in Ghana.” Journal of Economics,
I acknowledge the use and further development of a research Management and Trade, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.9734/
objective of my PhD thesis submitted to the University of BJEMT/2016/16955.
Reading, United Kingdom (UK). The reference has been duly Alston, J. M., and P. G. Pardey. 2020. Innovation, Growth, and
acknowledged in-text. Structural Change in American Agriculture. Paper pre-
sented at the The Role of Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Disclosure statement in Economic Growth Conference, 7-8 January, Computer
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the History Museum, 1401 N Shoreline Blvd, Mountain View,
CA. USA. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/
author. c14376/c14376.pdf.
Amati, V., J. Munson, and J. Scholnick. 2019. “Applying Event
History Analysis to Explain the Diffusion of Innovations in
Notes Archaeological Networks.” Journal of Archaeological
1. In this study, we consider the AIS, also known as systems Science 104: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2019.01.006.
thinking (the two terms are used interchangeably) to Ankrah, D. A. 2014. “Effects of MiDA Programme on
include all pineapple value chain actors. An examination Innovation System and Processes Amongst Small Scale
is made about the type of relationships existing, the level Pineapple Farmers in the Nsawam Adoagyire Municipal
of interaction among actors that leads to the generation Assembly of Ghana.” PhD Thesis, University of Reading,
and use of knowledge, processes involved in knowledge Reading, United Kingdom.
generation, who champions innovation, what influences Ankrah, D. A., A. A. Boakye, and A. Agyei-Holmes. 2021a.
innovation generation and use, the level of reflectivity “Participatory Farm Budgeting – A Case of Pineapple
involved in the processes leading to the generation and Farmers in Ghana.” African Geographical Review, 1–22.
use of knowledge. Inferences are made about valuable https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2021.1958691.
lessons derived from the level of adoption or otherwise Ankrah, D. A., and C. Y. Freeman. 2021. “Operationalizing the
of varied pineapple innovations. Agricultural Innovation System Concept in a Developing
2. Nvivo is a software program used to analyze unstructured Country Context – Examining the Case of the MiDA
text, images, videos, and audio information within the Programme in Ghana.” The Journal of Agricultural
qualitative research domain. Education and Extension, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/
3. In the 1980 and 1990s, Combined Farmers Ltd was the 1389224X.2021.1915828.
largest producer, and exporter of fresh pineapples in Ankrah, D. A., C. Y. Freeman, and A. Afful. 2020. “Gendered
Ghana. Access to Productive Resources–Evidence from Small
4. Farmapine is no longer in operation. Holder Farmers In Awutu Senya West District of Ghana.”
5. Nsawam Canneries Ltd was a government-owned fruit Scientific African 10: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.
processing company engaged in canning pineapple juice 2020.e00604.
for the export and domestic market. Ankrah, D. A., N. A. Kwapong, and S. D. Boateng. 2021b.
6. Fante is a local name meaning the local dialect for the “Indigenous Knowledge and Science-Based Predictors
people hailing from the Central Region. Reliability and Its Implication for Climate Change
7. The Agricultural Innovation System (AIS) is also known Adaptation in Ghana.” African Journal of Science,
as systems thinking. Technology, Innovation and Development, 1–13. https://
8. Nnoboa is a group practice where individual farmers come doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2021.1923394.
together to constitute a group to weed each other’s farm in Annor, B. P. 2018. “Smallholder Farmers’ Compliance with
an agreed successive arrangement. Global GAP Standard: the Case of Ghana.” Emerald
9. GLOBALGAP constitutes a private standard established Emerging Markets Case Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/
in 1997 as EurepGAP by a collection of European retai- EEMCS-03-2017-0043
lers. The standard has the sole aim to establish a universal Annor, B. P., A. Mensah-Bonsu, and J. B. D. Jatoe. 2016.
standard for Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) (Klee- “Compliance with GLOBALGAP Standards among
mann, Abdulai, and Buss 2014). Smallholder Pineapple Farmers in Akuapem-South,
10. Farmapine Company Limited was a farmer-owned Ghana.” Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and
company established in 1999 with funding from the Emerging Economies. https://doi.org/10.1108/JADEE-05-
World Bank (Fold and Gough 2008). 2013-0017
Antwi-Agyei, P., E. A. Wiafe, K. Amanor, F. Baffour-Ata, and
S. N. A. Codjoe. 2021. “Determinants of Choice of
References Climate Change Adaptation Practices by Smallholder
Abdul-Rahaman, A., and A. Abdulai. 2018. “Do Farmer Groups Pineapple Farmers in the Semi-Deciduous Forest Zone of
Impact on Farm Yield and Efficiency of Smallholder Ghana.” Environmental and Sustainability Indicators 12:
Farmers? Evidence from Rice Farmers in Northern 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2021.100140.
Ghana.” Food Policy 81: 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Appiah, K., C. Osei, H. Selassie, and E. Osabutey. 2019. “The
j.foodpol.2018.10.007. Role of Government and the International
16 Ankrah
Competitiveness of SMEs: Evidence from Ghanaian non- Experimental Evidence from the Ghanaian Pineapple
Traditional Exports.” critical Perspectives on Sector.” Food Policy 81: 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
International Business.https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-06- foodpol.2018.10.005.
2018-0049 Fold, N., and K. V. Gough. 2008. “From Smallholders to
Asante-Poku, N. A. 2017. “Global Value-Chain Participation Transnationals: The Impact of Changing Consumer
and Development: The Experience of Ghana’s Pineapple Preferences in the EU on Ghana’s Pineapple Sector.”
Export Sector.” In Future Fragmentation Processes, edited Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional
by J. Keane, and Baimbill-Johnson, 96–102. London, Geosciences 39 (5): 1687–1697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
United Kingdom: Commonwealth Secretarait. geoforum.2008.06.004.
Badu-Gyan, F., J. I. Henning, B. Grové, and E. Owusu-Sekyere. Gbedemah, S. F., S. Swatson-Oppong, and S. K. Adanu. 2021.
2019. “Examining the Social, Physical and Institutional “Sustainability Practices and Motivation for Adopting
Determinants of Pineapple Farmers’ Choice of Production Organic Pineapple Farming in the Ekumfi District of the
Systems in Central Ghana.” Organic Agriculture 9 (3): Central Region of Ghana.” In Sustainability in Natural
315–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-018-0233-y. Resources Management and Land Planning, edited by W.
Becker, S., R. Byrne, D. Ockwell, N. Ozor, A. Ely, and K. C. Leal Filho, U. M. Azeiteiro, and S. A.F.F., 149–167.
Urama. June, 2013. Re: Adapting the Innovation Histories Basel, Switzerland: Springer, Cham.
Method for A Workshop on Solar Home Systems Uptake Harou, A. P., T. F. Walker, and C. B. Barrett. 2017. “Is Late
in Kenya. Message posted to http://steps-centre.org/wpsite/ Really Better Than Never? The Farmer Welfare Effects of
wp-content/uploads/Low-Carbon-Development-briefing. Pineapple Adoption in Ghana.” Agricultural Economics
pdf. 48 (2): 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12322.
Behdani, B., Y. Fan, and J. M. Bloemhof. 2019. “Cool Chain and Hornum, S. T., and S. Bolwig. 2021. “A Functional Analysis of
Temperature-Controlled Transport: An Overview of the Role of Input Suppliers in an Agricultural Innovation
Concepts, Challenges, and Technologies.” Sustainable System: The Case of Small-Scale Irrigation in Kenya.”
Food Supply Chains, 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Agricultural Systems 193: 103219. https://doi.org/10.1016/
B978-0-12-813411-5.00012-0. j.agsy.2021.103219.
Danielou, M., and C. Ravry. 2005. The Rise of Ghana’s Hurt, S. R. 2020. “African Agency and EU-ACP Relations
Pineapple Industry. Washington DC, USA: https:// Beyond the Cotonou Agreement.” Journal of
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.406. Contemporary European Research 16 (2), https://doi.org/
7945&rep=rep1&type=pdf. 10.30950/jcer.v16i2.1075.
Das, U., R. Bhattacharyya, D. Sen, P. Bhattacharjee, and P. Kayapinar, U. 2014. “Measuring Essay Assessment: Intra-Rater
Choudhury. 2021. “Organic Pineapple Production and Inter-Rater Reliability.” Eurasian Journal of
Technology in Tripura-The Lone AEZ for Fruits in North Educational Research 57: 113–135. https://doi.org/10.
East India.” International Journal of Agriculture, 14689/ejer.2014.57.2.
Environment and Biotechnology 14 (2): 149–158. https:// Kleemann, L. 2016. “Organic Pineapple Farming in Ghana: A
doi.org/10.30954/0974-1712.02.2021.4. Good Choice for Smallholders?” The Journal of
Diao, X., and H. Takeshima. 2020. Agricultural Mechanization Developing Areas, 50 109–130. https://www.jstor.org/
in Ghana: Alternative Supply Models for Tractor Hiring stable/24737422.
Services, edited by X. Diao, H. Takeshima, and X. Zhang. Kleemann, L., A. Abdulai, and M. Buss. 2014. “Certification
Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research and Access to Export Markets: Adoption and Return on
Institute. Investment of Organic-Certified Pineapple Farming in
Dorward, P., M. Galpin, and D. Shepherd. 2003. “Participatory Ghana.” World Development 64: 79–92. https://doi.org/10.
Farm Management Methods for Assessing the Suitability 1016/j.worlddev.2014.05.005.
of Potential Innovations. A Case Study on Green Klerkx, L., and S. Begemann. 2020. “Supporting Food Systems
Manuring Options for Tomato Producers in Ghana.” Transformation: The What, why, who, Where and how of
Agricultural Systems 75 (1): 97–117. https://doi.org/10. Mission-Oriented Agricultural Innovation Systems.”
1016/S0308-521X(02)00034-3. Agricultural Systems 184: 102901. https://doi.org/10.1016/
Douthwaite, B., and J. Ashby. 2005. Innovation Histories: A j.agsy.2020.102901.
Method for Learning from Experience (5). Montpellier, Kolavalli, S. 2019. “Developing Agricultural Value Chains.” In
France: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/ Ghana’s Economic and Agricultural Transformation, Vol. 1,
70176/ILAC_Brief05_Histories.pdf?sequence= edited by D. Xinshen, P. Hazell, S. Kolavalli, and D.
1&isAllowed=y. Resnick, 210–240. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford
Douthwaite, B., A. Sikka, R. Sulaiman, J. Best, and J. Gaunt. University Press.
2006, March. Learning with Innovation Histories. LEISA- Krumbiegel, K., M. Maertens, and M. Wollni. 2018. “The Role
LEUSDEN, 42–43. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/65908. of Fairtrade Certification for Wages and job Satisfaction of
Ernst, A., K. H. Biss, H. Shamon, D. Schumann, and H. U. Plantation Workers.” World Development 102: 195–212.
Heinrichs. 2018. “Benefits and Challenges of Participatory https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.09.020.
Methods in Qualitative Energy Scenario Development.” Krumbiegel, K., M. Maertens, and M. Wollni. 2020. “Can
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 127: 245– Employment Empower Women? Female Workers in the
257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.026. Pineapple Sector in Ghana.” Journal of Rural Studies.
Espinosa, MEÁ, R. O. Moreira, A. A. Lima, S. A. Ságio, H. G. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.05.012
Barreto, S. L. P. Luiz,… J. L. González-Olmedo. 2017. Kwapong, N. A., D. A. Ankrah, D. Boateng-Gyambiby, J.
“Early Histological, Hormonal, and Molecular Changes Asenso-Agyemang, and L. O. Fening. 2020. “Assessment
During Pineapple (Ananas Comosus (L.) Merrill) of Agricultural Advisory Messages from Farmer-to-
Artificial Flowering Induction.” Journal of Plant Farmer in Making a Case for Scaling Up Production: A
Physiology 209: 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph. Qualitative Study.” The Qualitative Report 25 (8): 2011–
2016.11.009. 2025. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2020.4241.
Filimonau, V., S. Beer, and V. A. Ermolaev. 2021. “The Covid- Kwapong, N. A., D. A. Ankrah, E. Vuckey, and J. N. Anaglo.
19 Pandemic and Food Consumption at Home and Away: 2021. “Determinants of Scale of Farm Operation in the
An Exploratory Study of English Households.” Socio- Eastern Region of Ghana.” Agriculture & Food Security
Economic Planning Sciences, 101125. https://doi.org/10. 10 (31): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-021-00309-6.
1016/j.seps.2021.101125. Leonardo, E., P. Dorward, C. Garforth, C. Sutcliffe, and F. Van
Fischer, S., and M. Wollni. 2018. “The Role of Farmers’ Trust, Hulst. 2020. “Conflict-induced Displacement as a Catalyst
Risk and Time Preferences for Contract Choices: for Agricultural Innovation: Findings from South Sudan.”
African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 17
Land Use Policy 90: 104272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Innovation for Societal Outcomes.” Agricultural Systems
landusepol.2019.104272. 184: 102908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102908.
Lewis, S. 2015. “Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Seguin, R., M. G. Lefsrud, T. Delormier, and J. Adamowski.
Choosing among Five Approaches.” Health Promotion 2021. “Assessing Constraints to Agricultural Development
Practice 16 (4): 473–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/ in Circumpolar Canada Through an Innovation Systems
1524839915580941. Lens.” Agricultural Systems 194: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.
Mensah, A., and B. Brummer. 2015. Determinants of MD2 1016/j.agsy.2021.103268.
Adoption, Production Efficiency and Technology Gaps in Shah, M. M., W. J. Grant, and S. Stocklmayer. 2016. “Farmer
the Ghanaian Pineapple Production Sector. Paper presented Innovativeness and Hybrid Rice Diffusion in Bangladesh.”
at the International Conference of Agricultural Economists, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 108: 54–62.
Milano, Spain. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.04.015.
212454. Soler, A., P.-A. Marie-Alphonsine, P. Quénéhervé, Y. Prin, H.
Molina-Maturano, J., S. Speelman, and H. De Steur. 2019. Sanguin, P. Tisseyre,… R. G. Rodriguez. 2021. “Field
“Constraint-based Innovations in Agriculture and Management of Rotylenchulus Reniformis on Pineapple
Sustainable Development: A Scoping Review.” Journal of Combining Crop Rotation, Chemical-Mediated Induced
Cleaner Production, 119001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Resistance and Endophytic Bacterial Inoculation.” Crop
jclepro.2019.119001. Protection 141: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2020.
Muimba-Kankolongo, A. 2018. “Chapter 12 - Fruit Production.” 105446.
In Food Crop Production by Smallholder Farmers in Spielman, D. J., J. Ekboir, and K. Davis. 2009. “The art and
Southern Africa, edited by A. Muimba-Kankolongo, 275– Science of Innovation Systems Inquiry: Applications to
312. London, United Kingdom: Academic Press. Sub-Saharan African Agriculture.” Technology in Society
Ofori-Appiah, Y., E. E. Onumah, and F. E. Asem. 2021. 31 (4): 399–405.
“Efficiency and Productivity Analysis of Pineapple Tambo, J. A., E. Baraké, A. Kouevi, and G. T. Munthali. 2020.
Farmers in the Akwapim-South District of Ghana: A “Copyright or Copyleft: An Assessment of Farmer-
Distance Function Approach.” African Journal of Science, Innovators’ Attitudes Towards Intellectual Property
Technology, Innovation and Development, 1–11. https:// Rights.” Journal of Rural Studies 74: 133–141. https://doi.
doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2020.1857544. org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.01.004.
Paniagua-Molina, J., and L. R. Solís-Rivera. 2020. “Effect of Temple, L., Y. Chiffoleau, and J.-M. Touzard. 2018. A History of
“Golden Pineapple Innovation” on Costa Rica’s Pineapple Innovation and its Uses in Agriculture, edited by G. Faure,
Exports to US Market: An Econometric Approach.” Y. Chiffoleau, F. Goulet, L. Temple, and J.-M. Touzard.
International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics Versailles, France: Editions Quae.
(IJFAEC) 8 (1128-2020-1528): 219–231. https://doi.org/ Vagneron, I., G. Faure, and D. Loeillet. 2009. “Is There a Pilot in
10.1016/10.22004/ag.econ.305325. the Chain? Identifying the key Drivers of Change in the
Pigford, A.-A. E., G. M. Hickey, and L. Klerkx. 2018. “Beyond Fresh Pineapple Sector.” Food Policy 34 (5): 437–446.
Agricultural Innovation Systems? Exploring an Agricultural https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.05.001.
Innovation Ecosystems Approach for Niche Design and Whitfield, L. 2012. “Developing Technological Capabilities in
Development in Sustainability Transitions.” Agricultural Agro-Industry: Ghana’s Experience with Fresh Pineapple
Systems 164: 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018. Exports.” Journal of Development Studies 48 (3): 308–
04.007. 321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2011.635198.
Pound, B., and C. Conroy. 2017. “The Innovation Systems Whitfield, L. 2017. “New Paths to Capitalist Agricultural
Approach to Agricultural Research and Development.” In Production in Africa: Experiences of Ghanaian Pineapple
Agricultural Systems, 2nd ed. edited by Academic Press, Producer–Exporters.” Journal of Agrarian Change 17 (3):
371–405. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. 535–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12152.
Raynolds, L. T. 2020. “Fair Trade.” In International Williams, P. A., O. Crespo, C. J. Atkinson, and G. O. Essegbey.
Encyclopedia of Human Geography (Second Edition), 2017. “Impact of Climate Variability on Pineapple
edited by A. Kobayashi, 9–14. Oxford, United Kingdom: Production in Ghana.” Agriculture & Food Security 6 (1):
Elsevier. 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0104-x.
Rogers, E. M., A. Singhal, and M. M. Quinlan. 2019. “Diffusion Williams, P. A., S. Karanja Ng’ang’a, O. Crespo, and M. Abu.
of Innovations 1.” In An Integrated Approach to 2020. “Cost and Benefit Analysis of Adopting
Communication Theory and Research, 3rd ed, edited by Climate Adaptation Practices among Smallholders: the
D. W. Stacks, M. B. Salwen, and K. C. Eichhorn, 415– Case of Five Selected Practices in Ghana.” Climate
434. Oxfordshire, United Kingdom: Routledge. Services 20: 100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2020.
Saldaña, J., and M. Omasta. 2016. Qualitative Research: 100198.
Analyzing Life, 1st ed. edited by S. Helen. Carlifornia, Wuepper, D., and J. Sauer. 2016. “Explaining the Performance
USA: Sage Publications. of Contract Farming in Ghana: The Role of Self-Efficacy
Schnebelin, É, P. Labarthe, and J.-M. Touzard. 2021. “How and Social Capital.” Food Policy 62: 11–27. https://doi.
Digitalisation Interacts with Ecologisation? Perspectives org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.05.003.
from Actors of the French Agricultural Innovation Wuepper, D., D. Zilberman, and J. Sauer. 2020. “Non-cognitive
System.” Journal of Rural Studies 86: 599–610. https:// Skills and Climate Change Adaptation: Empirical Evidence
doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.023. from Ghana’s Pineapple Farmers.” Climate and
Schut, M., C. Leeuwis, and G. Thiele. 2020. “Science of Development 12 (2): 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Scaling: Understanding and Guiding the Scaling of 17565529.2019.1607240.