Pauw, Karl; Randriamamonjy, Josee; Thurlow, James; Ellis, Mia; and Diao, Xinshen. 2023.

1. Ghana’s Agrifood System
Structure and Drivers of Transformation
Xinshen Diao, Mia Ellis, Karl Pauw, Josee Randriamamonjy, and James Thurlow
International Food Policy Research Institute
This diagnostic analysis was conducted by IFPRI with financial support from USAID.
July 2023

2. Four Parts to the Diagnostics
• Current structure
What does Ghana’s food system look like today?
• Decomposing value chains
How are different products contributing to the broader agrifood system?
• Growth and market structure
How is Ghana’s agrifood system growing and transforming?
• Future drivers of inclusive agricultural transformation
Which value chains could be most effective?
2019
2009-2019
2019+

3. Summary
Ghana’s agrifood system (AFS) diagnostic results
Ghana’s AFS has been transforming
• Agricultural share of total GDP fell in 2009–2019
• Off-farm components have a similar size as primary agriculture in AgGDP+, but agriculture is still much larger in employment
AFS growth has been mainly driven by domestic-market-oriented value chains
• Less-traded value chains dominated the AFS with above-average growth
• Domestic consumption patterns (and changing diets) are therefore important drivers of agricultural transformation
Looking forward, the structure of AFS growth will be crucial in driving development outcomes…
(e.g., poverty, dietary improvements, employment creation, and growth)
… but no single value chain is the most effective at driving all these development outcomes
• Horticulture and pulses are most effective at reducing poverty; horticulture is best for improving diet quality; maize has strong
employment effects; and rice has large growth multiplier effects
Jointly promoting maize, horticulture, pulses, rice, and livestock would offer an effective way to
achieve multiple development outcomes
• cc

4. Framework | Agrifood Systems (AFS)
Primary agriculture
Agroprocessing
Trade and transport
Food services
Trade and transport
Input supply Demand
Consumption of own-
produced goods
Purchase of primary
agricultural goods
Purchase of processed
agrifood goods
Purchase of ready-made
foods outside of home
Imports
A
C
B
D
E
Includes agriculture, plus all upstream/downstream sectors
• Five major components (A to E)
• Same format as standard economywide datasets (e.g., national accounts)
• Allows us to measure AFS structure and performance using actual data
Agrifood System GDP (AgGDP+)
Total value added generated by all agricultural
value chains (in constant dollars)
Agrifood System Employment (AgEMP+)
Total number of workers who are primarily
employed in an agricultural value chain

5. Structure2019 | Ghana’s Agrifood System Today
GDP
($ billions)
Employment
(millions of workers)
Total economy 63.9 100% 14.8 100%
Agrifood system 21.5 33.6% 6.8 45.9%
Primary agric. (A) 11.8 18.5% 4.3 29.2%
Off-farm AFS 9.6 15.1% 2.5 16.7%
Processing (B) 2.6 4.0% 0.7 4.8%
Trade & transport (C) 4.2 6.6% 1.0 6.5%
Food services (D) 2.2 3.5% 0.7 4.6%
Input supply (E) 0.6 0.9% 0.1 0.8%
Rest of economy 42.4 66.4% 8.0 54.1%
GDP and employment in Ghana’s agrifood system (2019)
• Part 1 focuses on the current size and
structure of the national agrifood system
• Latest AgGDP+ and AgEMP+ estimates
• Decomposed into five AFS components
• Situates AFS within the broader economy
• Uses official data sources
• GDP from national accounts
• Employment from various sources (i.e., population
census, labor force surveys, ILO, etc.)
• Ghana estimates indicate that
• AFS makes up one-third of GDP
($21.5 billion AgGDP+) …
• … and near half of total employment
(6.8 million AgEMP+)
• Primary agriculture (A) is still large, while off-farm
components (B–E) have been catching up
(near half of AgGDP+, 40% of AgEMP+)

6. Structure2019 | Comparing to Other Countries
• Importance and structure of the AFS varies at different stages of development
Ghana is a lower-middle-income country (LMIC)
• A: Ghana’s AgGDP+ share of total GDP lies between low-income countries (LICs) and LMICs
• B: Ghana’s primary agriculture component of AFS is lower than the LMIC average
• C: Ghana’s agro-processing is smaller than expected, while the food services component is large
Share of total GDP (%) Share of AFS GDP (%) Share of off-farm AFS GDP (%)
LIC = low-income countries | LMIC = lower-middle income | UMIC = upper-middle-income | HIC = high-income Source: IFPRI Agri-Food System Database
A B C
4.2
26.4
16.9
7.1
1.2
18.5
8.2
13.4
11.9
10.6
6.6
15.1
All LIC LMIC UMIC HIC Ghana
Primary agriculture Off-farm AFS
34.0
66.2
58.6
40.2
15.6
55.1
66.0
33.8
41.4
59.8
84.4
44.9
All LIC LMIC UMIC HIC Ghana
Primary agriculture Off-farm AFS
33.7 37.8 38.4
46.9
26.1 27.1
31.7
42.8 38.6 21.4
35.9
43.7
23.1
13.7
11.2
18.2 27.8
23.0
11.4 5.8 11.8 13.5 10.3 6.2
All LIC LMIC UMIC HIC Ghana
Processing Trade and transport
Food services Input supply

7. Structure2019 | Supply vs. Demand Sides of the Agrifood System
Agrifood GDP vs. consumption
Primary, processed, and other product shares (%)
• AgGDP+ defines the AFS on the supply side
• Household demand and trade (imports) capture AFS structure on the demand side
• Agrifood processing is more important on the demand side than the supply side in the AFS
AgGDP+ Household demand
Agrifood exports vs. imports
Primary and processed product shares (%)
Exports ($2.28 bil.) Imports ($3.41 bil.)
55.1%
12.1%
32.7% $0.66 bil.
29.0%
$1.62 bil.
71.0%
Primary agriculture
Agrifood processing
$2.23 bil.
65.3%
$1.18 bil.
34.7%
44.8%
37.5%
17.7%
Primary agriculture
Agroprocessing
Other off-farm

8. Value Chains2019 | Contributions & Trade Orientation
• Part 2 decomposes the AFS across broad value
chain groupings
• Classify value chains based on trade orientation
• Exportable value chains have above-average export-output
ratios (> 7.0%)
• Importable have above-average import-demand ratios (>
10.2%)
• Less traded value chains make up the rest
• Five less-traded value chains dominate primary
agriculture (54.7% of total); but they have relatively
small off-farm components (17.9% of total)
• Six importable value chains account for a
disproportionate share of off-farm AFS (50.3%); these
value chains compete with processed agrifood imports
• Among exportable value chains, both cocoa and
horticulture have smaller off-farm components than
their on-farm GDP share – exports dominated by
primary products
Promoting some importable value chains could be
effective in driving agricultural transformation by
boosting value added and employment in off-farm AFS
Share of total GDP (%) Exports /
output
(%)
Imports /
demand
(%)
Total
AFS
Primary
agric.
Off-farm
AFS
Total 100 100 100 7.0 10.2
Exportable 24.0 23.4 24.6 23.4 5.1
Horticulture 6.9 7.8 5.7 7.5 8.8
Cocoa 6.3 8.9 3.0 63.4 6.2
Forestry 10.8 6.6 16.0 9.8 9.8
Importable 34.6 21.9 50.3 3.2 16.9
Rice 5.5 3.4 7.5 0.1 21.1
Other oilseeds 5.3 4.0 6.8 8.4 11.2
Other crops 7.4 3.7 12.0 2.9 21.9
Poultry and eggs 1.8 2.4 1.1 0.0 28.4
Other livestock 6.2 3.3 9.6 0.4 10.2
Fish 8.5 5.0 12.8 5.1 13.9
Less traded 38.2 54.7 17.9 0.1 0.3
Maize 6.9 7.0 6.9 0.4 1.2
Pulses 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.2 2.7
Groundnuts 2.0 3.0 0.7
Roots 26.1 40.3 8.7 0.0 0.1
Small ruminants 2.5 3.6 1.2
Breakdown of Ghana’s agrifood system (2019)

9. Growth2009-2019 | Agrifood System Performance
Ghana’s AFS has been transforming
• Agricultural share of total GDP fell between 2009 and 2019 (25.1% to 18.5%)
Share of agricultural employment fell more than the share in agricultural GDP (45.8% to 29.2%)
• An indication of structural change in the economy and rising agricultural labor productivity
Agricultural GDP, agrifood system GDP, and employment shares (2009–2019)
• Part 3 analyzes AFS performance and contribution of the contribution of different value chains to AFS growth
25.1
45.6 44.8 45.8
18.5
33.6
44.9
29.2
Agricultural GDP share AgGDP+ share Off-farm share of AgGDP+ Agricultural employment
share
Share
(%)
2009 2019

10. Growth2009-2019 | Value Chain Performance
• Modest AgGDP+ growth (3.4% p.a.) during 2009–
2019 compared to national GDP growth of more
than 6%
• Less-traded value chains dominated AFS growth with
above average growth (4.3%), contributing 48% of
AFS growth in 2009–2019
• Importable value chains made an important
contribution to AFS growth with their large size and
at the average growth (3.4%)
• Value chains with above-average growth (*)
• Many value chains had above-average growth because
the three value chains with worst performance are large
in total AFS (oilseeds, fish, and forestry)
• Two importable value chains – rice and other livestock –
and three less traded value chains – pulses, groundnuts,
and small ruminants – had growth rates close to or more
than twice of AFS average growth
• Off-farm and on-farm had similar growth rates
among the fast-growing value chains
• But processing often grew more rapidly
Value chain growth in Ghana (2009–2019)
Average annual GDP growth rate (%)
Total
AFS
Primary
agric.
Off-farm
AFS
Process-
ing
Total AFS 3.4 3.3 3.4 6.5
Exportable 2.2 2.3 1.7 8.9
Horticulture* 3.7 3.3 4.4 14.7
Cocoa* 3.6 3.2 5.2 9.8
Forestry 0.4 0.3 0.4 7.6
Importable 3.4 2.0 4.2 7.2
Rice* 10.0 12.3 9.0 7.0
Oilseeds 0.9 -1.8 3.5 8.5
Other crops* 4.7 5.4 4.4 3.2
Poultry* 4.7 4.7 4.7 9.2
Other livestock* 6.0 2.7 7.9 8.6
Fish -0.2 -1.4 0.4 12.2
Less traded 4.3 4.4 3.8 1.9
Maize* 4.5 4.6 4.3 1.8
Pulses* 6.0 6.5 5.3 9.8
Groundnuts* 7.4 7.7 5.8
Roots* 3.7 3.9 2.6 9.8
Small ruminants* 9.2 8.7 11.3

11. Future Drivers2019+ | Modeling Faster Growth
• IFPRI’s RIAPA model is used to analyze different sources of agricultural growth
• Expand production in different value chains
• Increase on-farm productivity growth rates in targeted value chains
• Achieve same overall growth in agriculture GDP (e.g., 1.0%)
• Track linkage effect within value chain and spillover effects to other value chains
• Assess outcomes
• Poverty – Poverty-growth elasticity in percentage points based on $2.15-a-day
• Hunger – Hunger-growth elasticity in percentage points based on prevalence of undernourishment
• Diet – Diet quality to growth elasticity in % derived from Reference Diet Deprivation index (REDD)
• Jobs – Employment multiplier in thousand employed persons associated with US$1 million growth in targeted value chain
• GDP – GDP growth multiplier in US$ millions associated with US$1 million growth in targeted value chain
• Average across outcomes
• The value of outcome indicators (elasticity or multiplier) is expected to differ across value chain growth; not all value chains are
equally effective at achieving all outcomes
• Normalizing the individual outcome scores
• The values of each outcome indicator are scaled so that the most effective value chain is given a score of one and the leasteffective is given a
score of zero. A value chain with adverse impact is also given a score of zero.
• An average score with equal weights is used to measure the total impacts across all value chains

12. Future Drivers2019+ | Prioritizing Agricultural Growth
Poverty
(change in %-point)
Hunger
(change in %-point)
Jobs
(change in 1,000)
Diet quality
(change in %)
Average across outcomes
(averaged normalized scores, reordered)
GDP
(change in bil. $)
Individual outcomes
(per unit change in agriculture GDP, ordered by poverty outcome)
1.07
1.95
2.58
0.77
1.41
1.15
2.69
1.04
1.08
1.14
0.02
0.06
0.79
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.08
0.03
0.04
0.00
Horticulture
Pulses
Maize
Cocoa
Small ruminants
Groundnuts
Rice
Root crops
Oilseeds
Poultry
1.82
0.29
0.03
0.03
0.33
0.20
0.06
0.01
0.27
0.07
Horticulture
Pulses
Maize
Cocoa
Small ruminants
Groundnuts
Rice
Root crops
Oilseeds
Poultry
-0.02
-0.52
-0.37
-0.10
0.05
-0.40
-0.13
-0.10
-0.12
0.00
-0.26
-0.23
-0.22
-0.19
-0.15
-0.14
-0.11
-0.07
-0.06
-0.05
Horticulture
Pulses
Maize
Cocoa
Small ruminants
Groundnuts
Rice
Root crops
Oilseeds
Poultry
0.68
0.54
0.43
0.35
0.26
0.19
0.17
0.10
0.07
0.06
Maize
Horticulture
Pulses
Rice
Small ruminants
Groundnuts
Cocoa
Oilseeds
Root crops
Poultry
Total
Maize
Horticulture
Pulses
Rice
Small ruminants
Groundnuts
Cocoa
Oilseeds
Root crops
Poultry
Poverty Growth Jobs Diets

13. Future Drivers2019+ | Key Messages
AFS growth is pro-poor
• Growth led by most value chains reduces poverty, but horticulture and pulses are most effective
AFS growth is effective in improving food security (hunger) and diet quality
• Most value chains reduce hunger; pulses and groundnuts are most effective
• Most value chains improve diet quality; horticulture is most effective
Agricultural growth creates jobs but not necessarily on-farm
• All value chains are associated with an increase in total employment, but most AFS jobs are created off-farm
• Maize is the most effective value chain in creating jobs in the overall economy
Agricultural growth has strong growth multiplier effects, generating income beyond agriculture
• Rice has the strongest growth multiplier effect both for AFS income and for total GDP growth
In conclusion, promoting multiple value chains can achieve broad impact
• No single value chain group is the most effective in achieving all the outcomes we consider
• Maize, horticulture, and pulses rank highly in combined outcome scores of poverty, diet, jobs, and growth
• Promoting these value chains together would offer an effective way to achieve broad-based outcomes

14. Note: Value Chain Groups and Agricultural Sectors in Individual
VC Groups
Value chain group and their
share of AgGDP+
Individual products and their share of group's Agriculture GDP
Maize (6.9%) Maize 100%
Rice (5.5%) Rice 100%
Groundnuts (2.0%) Groundnuts 100%
Other oilseeds (5.3%) Other oilseeds 100%
Pulses (0.6%) Pulses 100%
Roots (26.1%) Cassava 44.2% | Sweet potatoes 0.5% |Other roots 35.3% |Plantains 20.1%
Horticulture (6.9%)
Leafy green vegetables 14.9% | Other vegetables 14.8% | Nuts 20.1%| Fruit bananas 9.1% |
Other fruits 41.1%
Cocoa (6.3%) Cocoa 100%
Other crops (7.4%)
Sorghum & millet 45% | Sugarcane 0.4% | Cotton & fibers 0.9% | Tobacco 0.6%| Cut flowers
0.4% | Rubber 0.4% | Other crops 52.3%
Small ruminants (2.5%) Small ruminants 100%
Poultry & eggs (1.8%) Poultry meat 44.9% | Eggs 55.1%
Other livestock (6.2%) Cattle meat 4.4% | Raw milk 6.7% | Other livestock 88.9%
Fish (8.5%) Aquaculture 32% | Capture fisheries 68%
Forestry (10.8%) Forestry 100%