Social Reproduction and the Politics of Household Production in Agrarian Ghana

In “Social Reproduction and the Politics of Household Production in Agrarian Ghana,” Gertrude Dzifa Torvikey draws on qualitative interview data to explore the impacts of industrial cassava farming on communities in rural Ghana, and the resistance strategies that women in these communities have deployed in order to protect their households from the threats posed by industrial contract-based agriculture.

The “Care under Social Reproduction” series was produced by the Nawi Collective, a Care Economies in Context project partner.

Citation

Torvikey, G. D. (2025). Social Reproduction and the Politics of Household Production in Agrarian Ghana. https://drive.google.com/file/d/10KIwc0fbud3Od5fQV6Eh2AIfhWrk3aKy/view

Abstract

The discussions on how capital and the household exploit women’s labour are relevant to the study of rural household production. The dimension of the double exploitation of women and the contradictions it poses for capital has been
at the centre of social reproduction scholarship. This paper examines the industrial production of cassava in Ghana to reflect on the reasons behind women’s resistance to contract farming and its conditions. The tension between
crop production for domestic consumption and production for industrial use are decisions made by governments through policies that promote them. However, at the household level, a different reality plays out in the context of the cultural appropriation of women’s labour. The study relied on qualitative interviews to draw attention to the social reproduction issues women evoked in Ghana’s industrial cassava production frontier. The paper explores the land and labour questions in their intricate link to women’s incorporation and subsequent revolt. This
work reveals that women’s role as social reproducers, working in the context of diminishing productive agrarian resources, be it land, labour, or technology, have exposed them to more vulnerability in the event of extractive crop flexing. At the same time, women’s reactions to the changes in their production and foodways are sharper and more confrontational than those of their male counterparts. Women and men are exposed to the implications differently, and have distinctively experienced transformations in their communities.