|
Who's Online |
|
We have 32 guests online |
|
|
Home  Articles Shade-Grown Coffee: Helping an Industry Turn Over a New Leaf
|
|
Shade-Grown Coffee: Helping an Industry Turn Over a New Leaf |
|
|
|
|
Friday, 29 July 2005 |
By April Pojman
from Fresh Cup Magazine
In recent years, sustainability has become a hot topic in the specialty
coffee industry. But as discussions about organic and fair-trade coffee
have been intensified, it has become increasingly clear that the
lesser-known "third leg" of the coffee sustainability stool—shade—is
wobbling and in need of repair.
While the organic movement has become practically mainstream and
fair-trade coffee has enjoyed unprecedented growth since 1999, shade
coffee has lagged behind. According to Daniele Giovannucci's 2001
Sustainable Coffee Survey of the North American Specialty Coffee
Industry, 98.7 percent of businesses contacted were aware of organic
coffee, and 82.5 percent knew about fair trade, but only 76.4 percent
were familiar with shade-grown coffee. Moreover, only three percent of
specialty coffee drinkers reported having purchased shade coffee.
Why the lack of awareness? Despite shade-grown coffee's biological
value and potential as a conversation-oriented marketing tool, it has
been plagued by confusion, criticism, and slow acceptance. Clearly,
there's plenty to learn about shade coffee, its position in the
sustainable coffee arena and its enormous marketing potential for
unique specialty coffees.
Shedding Light on Shade
Traditionally, coffee grows in the "understory" beneath the
forest canopy, as part of a larger ecosystem. Different layers of
vegetation provide food and shelter for animals and insects, soil
replenishment through leaf litter, microclimate stabilization, and
protection from soil erosion and water run-off. Under natural
conditions, coffee is one of the most environmentally benign and
ecologically stable cash crops in the world.
But not all shade is equal. There is a broad variety of shade coffee
systems, ranging from monocultures—a single species shade tree—to
highly diverse polycultures with many species. The greater the number
and type of shade tree, the greater the biodiversity of plant and
animal species in a given area.
Although an undisturbed area is always preferable for conservation
purposes, extensive and reliable scientific studies have shown that
shaded coffee plantations can serve as important migration corridors or
alternative habitats for native and migratory animals. In return, shade
trees provide many benefits to coffee farmers, including less need for
chemical inputs, and production of wood, food, and medicinal products
that diversify the family economy.
At the same time, shade trees provide what re known as "ecosystem
services." These are natural environmental functions—such as air
purification, nutrient recycling and soil formation—that are very
difficult and costly to achieve without the help of natural processes.
According to a 1997 Nature article entitled "The Value of the World's
Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital," ecosystem services are
estimated to be worth some $33.3 trillion. The article goes on to
compare that figure to the total combined gross national product of all
of the world's economies—only $18 trillion. Some argue that farmers
should be paid shade premiums based on this idea.
To Certify or Not to Certify?
Shade-grown coffee has enjoyed the spotlight only sporadically in
certain parts of the United States. One of the main reasons is that
shade lacks a worldwide champion like the International Federation of
Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) or Fair Trade Labeling
Organizations International (FLO), both of which have created widely
accepted and enforceable definitions and standards for their
certification systems.
Some critics contend that the term "shade" itself is a misnomer that
prevents its widespread acceptance and that the concept should be
re-branded as "habitat-friendly" or "ecosystem-friendly" to convey the
benefits it provides. Others take the opposite tack, arguing that the
shade concept should refer to the problems it addresses, such as
deforestation.
The U.S. has two separate shade certification systems intended to
ensure that Latin American shade-grown coffee is produced under a set
of scientific guidelines. One is Eco-OK program development by the
Rainforest Alliance and a network of Latin America environmental
organizations, and the other is the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center
(SMBC) criteria. Both systems' standards require a minimum of 40
percent shade coverage, as well as specified tree heights and numbers
of non-deciduous native tree species.
Eco-OK is a stand-alone certification that covers many aspects of
farming. It requires a minimum of 12 species of native trees and at
least 70 trees per hectare (one hectare equals 2.47 acres). It also
includes regulations regarding agrochemical use, water resource, soil
and waste management, hunting, working conditions, and community
relations. Within the next year, Eco-OK auditors will begin to certify
for organic and fair-trade criteria as well.
SMBC guidelines focus exclusively on shade. In September 2000, SMBC
began a series of workshops to standardize the definition of shade and
to align itself with organic certifiers so that a single technician can
inspect for shade and organic standards in one visit. Currently, all
SMBC-certified farms must also have organic certification.
Francisco Mena, a general manager of the Lomas Al Rio coffee farm,
recently went through this new certification process, making Lomas Al
Rio the first SMBC-certified farm in Costa Rica. He explains that an
organic inspector visiting his farm had completed one of the SMBC
workshops, so during his inspection for organic, he recommended that he
also inspect for SMBC standards. Mena approved his idea, and the total
cost for certification was around $320.
The trend toward integrating certification systems is occurring in
other areas as well. For example, FLO criteria for bananas already
includes some environmental standards. And the Eco-OK's Sustainable
Agriculture Network is working with FLO, IFOAM, and Social
Accountability International to develop a "Social Accountability in
Agriculture" program. These initiatives are important, because many
farmers find the preparation, transition to compliance, and
certification difficult and costly. For example, farmers seeking Eco-OK
certification must pay for the technicians to perform site visits and
evaluations ($7.50 per hectare), and they must cover the technicians'
travel-related expenses ($100-$150 per day plus travel expenses,
depending on where the nearest inspector is located). Achieving and
maintaining more than one certification is simply beyond the economic
capacity of most producers.
For this reason, a "super seal" concept that combines organic, shade
and fair-trade criteria is gaining support among importers, roasters,
and retailers. In the Sustainable Coffee Survey, nearly two-thirds of
the specialty coffee industry supported a "super seal" as a simpler way
of communicating sustainability in the marketplace.
Still, there are many other areas of confusion and contention regarding
shade in the coffee industry. In the Sustainable Coffee Survey report,
nearly 45 percent of the companies claiming to carry shade-grown coffee
did not even know who their shade-certifying agency was. Many
importers, roasters and retailers add to the confusion by selling
"verified shade" coffee, which comes from plantations that have not
been certified by Eco-OK or SMBC but have been visited by someone—often
an importer—who, without scientific guidelines, checks to make sure
shade trees are present on the farms. Most people seem to agree that
certified-shade is the clearest way to convey the concept in the
marketplace and provide a transparent method of ensuring validity of
shade claims.
Shade From Below
There are four broad elements of shade certification that the industry agrees upon:
> Certification should not increase the financial burden on farmers.
> Producers who go through the certification process should get a premium price.
> Certification criteria should be developed with input from farmers.
> Certification should be based on valid scientific data to ensure that shade increase biodiversity.
Because of the lack of coordination surrounding shade coffee, most of
these points have not been implemented, and they are actually the
source of many farmers' complaints about shade certification. For
example, many producers are interested in being certified, but they
cannot afford it. "When we wanted to get certified, the price of coffee
had already gone down, so it wasn't very attractive for the producers,"
says Lorena Calvo, a conservation biologist studying coffee farms in
Guatemala. "[Farmers] have to pay for the certification, make the
changes on the farm and then look for a market for their coffee."
Farmers also often feel that if they cannot get a higher price for
shade-certified coffee, the time and expense involved in the
certification process cannot be justified. Asked what the benefits of
certification are for farmers, Francisco Mena answers, "We don't know
yet. I expect someone [might be willing to pay an] additional premium.
We're all making and effort for the good of the whole, but we need
motivation."
"A lot of certified coffee ends up in the market at conventional
prices," acknowledges Christopher Bacon, a doctoral student in
environmental studies at the University of California-Santa Cruz who
works with coffee cooperatives in Nicaragua. "We've been discussing
with growers their decision to become certified, because there is a
risk that they won't realize price premium. They need to consider other
positive impacts of shade production, such as reducing costs or
improving working conditions."
For many coffee producers, there simply isn't enough demand for shade
coffee. "Our idea is to start certifying just a few producers, because
the market seems small," says Nicolas Eberhart, marketing coordinator
for the PROCAP coffee cooperative in Ecuador." Only one importer has
inquired up to now. [We will] begin with the producers who already have
organic certification. The only problem is the shade seals—there is so
much confusion about them in Ecuador."
In fact, according to the Sustainable Coffee Survey, of the 6.6 million
pounds of coffee that were shade-certified globally in 200-2001, only
2.1 million pounds were sold as such. Importers agree that shade
certification doesn't often bring farmers premium prices, but it may
help their coffee sell more quickly. All other factors being equal,
roasters are more likely to purchase certified-shade coffee over an
equivalent uncertified coffee.
A Shady Future
In order to gain wider appeal, shade-grown coffee needs a unified
front to champion a biodiversity- and farmer-friendly definition of
shade and to coordinate compliance and education around that
definition. This is hardly a quick fix, but it's the only way that
shade will gain more respect and popularity.
In May 2001, five non-profit organizations that work on coffee
conservation issues (Conservation International, Consumer's Choice
Council, Rainforest Alliance, Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center, and
the Summit Foundation) took a step toward creating a unified front by
releasing a document entitled "Conservation Principles for Coffee
Production." The principles were designed to provide common ground for
conservation groups to work with other environmental movements and
coffee businesses. They can also help importers and roasters develop
sourcing guidelines and assist banks and foundations in deciding which
coffee development projects to fund and how to evaluate them.
There also remains a need for a widespread educational campaign to
establish a single definition of "shade." Many growers still don't know
what the shade standards are or how to get certified. As a result, some
retailers are carrying coffee with "shade-grown" claims that cannot be
verified. More importantly, even with all of the debate in the industry
over shade-grown coffee, most consumers don't even know that it exists
or what it means. The concept of shade-grown coffee can be difficult to
explain on a supermarket shelf to consumers who lack prior knowledge
about how coffee is produced and what a difference shade can make.
There are hopeful signs, however. A 1999 survey by the Hartman Group
indicates that 86 percent of American consumers believe that there is a
connection between the health of the environment and their own
well-being. And a March 2002 survey by the Songbird Foundation shows
that 75 percent of Seattle-area coffee drinkers are likely to switch to
shade-grown coffee if they understand the implications. Based on their
experiences, 83 percent of those who have purchased sustainably
produced coffee say they would buy it again.
Clearly, the coffee industry's move toward sustainability will not be
complete until the shade "leg" of the stool in securely affixed. |
|
|
|
|
Subscribe |
Keep yourself updated with our FREE newsletters now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
