This paper is an attempt to provide a more concrete vision of what we mean by sustainable coffee. It is based on the discussions of a criteria working group at the First Sustainable Coffee Congress. I first outline definitions, guiding principles, and more specific areas of concern. I then discuss some suggested guidelines and criteria. I have included a brief comparison of the guidelines developed to those in systems that exist or in the planning phase. This paper is meant to be a starting point for debate. The opinions expressed here are my own, although they are based upon the work and discussion of the working group.
What is Sustainability?
Sustainable coffee is produced on a farm with high biological diversity and low chemical inputs. It conserves resources, protects the environment, produces efficiently, competes commercially and enhances the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.
A sustainable coffee should be developed with the following guiding principles:
1. Practices shall promote the protection of biological diversity, soils, and clean water, and enhance global carbon sequestration, not only through farm management but also by the protection of watershed vegetation and other patches of natural vegetation, reforestation, minimal use of agrochemicals and compliance with wildlife protection laws and the integrity of existing parks and reserves.
2. All interested parties should have input into the development of criteria, particularly the farmers themselves.
3. Sustainable practices should be verifiable by disinterested party.
4. The quality of the product shall be maintained or enhanced during the process of conversion to more sustainable systems.
5. Producers should have fair access to information and credit necessary to shift to more sustainable systems.
6. Producers should have ready access to new markets developed for sustainable coffee.
7. System should promote the economic diversification of producer families.
Production should comply with internationally recognized standards of treatment of
workers and their families.
9. Practices should promote the protection of cultural diversity, particularly locally-based knowledge systems of farmers.
APPLICATION SYSTEMS
As we work to define criteria, we have to keep in mind how they will be used, the application systems Do we want to just reward the best producers or encourage many producers to improve? Should the standards be so strict that only the top five percent of producers can comply, or should they be flexible to engage the greatest number of producers? In the interest of fairness, we advocate a ranking system that places farms in categories such as good, better and best Four-star systems, for example, are commonly used to rate hotels, movies and records coupled with a set of minimum criteria that must be met. Such a graded system could easily be adapted to existing classifications of shade management (see below) or to transitional versus formerly certified organic practices.
It should be remembered that not all of the production criteria are under the control of the farmer. Some, particularly those involving trade practices, should be seen as characterizing the relationship between farmer and merchant in the marketplace. Finally, some of the goals of establishing sustainable coffee fall outside of the power of the farmer or merchants and may need to be addressed outside of the following production criteria.
SPECIFIC ISSUES
Environmental Issues
Management of shade trees and other on-farm vegetation, such as riparian corridors and forest remnants to conserve biodiversity.
Provide healthy environments for workers and downstream communities.
Protect waterways (buffer zones along streams, for example) and sources of drinking water.
Reduce soil erosion through shade management, employing agronomic techniques, and planting on hills with appropriate slopes.
Manage and reduce or eliminate pesticide and chemical fertilizer use through use of biological control and other organic practices.
Use a pruning regime that will have minimal impact on biological diversity.
Minimize use of fuel wood for drying.
Encourage use of traditional varieties and varieties that are resistant to pests.
Protect wildlife from direct threats such as hunting and collecting.
Control pollution at mills, both wet and dry.
Maintain machinery and equipment to avoid contamination from fuel, fluids and lubricants.
Social Issues
Guarantee a fair and stable prices for producers.
Provide access to credit to producers employing sustainable technologies.
Promote democratization and community participation in all aspects of sustainable coffee production.
Provide technical assistance and environmental education for farmers shifting to sustainable technologies.
Insure adequate wages, housing, and health care for workers.
Provide access to markets for all producers, irrespective of farm size.
SUGGESTED CRITERIA
Shade Management
To maximize biological diversity, shade trees of coffee plantations should be taxonomically and structurally diverse, provide shade over most of the farm throughout the year, and support abundant epiphytes, mosses, lichens, and parasitic plant assemblages. Tree pruning should be kept to a minimum and whenever possible be conducted at the onset or during the rainy season. Snags and dead limbs should be maintained as much as possible. Native and evergreen tree species should be used as much as possible.
Quantitative measurement of these parameters, however, may be logistically difficult and the development of specific values is probably beyond what is currently possible with existing peer-reviewed research results. Therefore, we recommend that a gestalt classification of coffee agro-ecosystems be employed, similar to the one currently used in Mexico. This system recognizes distinct nodes in the gradient of coffee plantation diversity (Figure 1) and can be modified to include additional systems (such as monocultural deciduous shade, and monocultural Grevillea plantations. In a graded system we would set the minimum at commercial, evergreen, polycultural shade and provide additional achievement stars for traditional polycultural and rustic plantations.
In addition, buffer zones of unmanaged native shrubs and trees should border watercourses. These buffer zones should be scaled to either farm or stream size. A hedge row or living fence should border the plantation and plantation roads. The question of forest protection is complex. Although I discussed the possibility of a prohibition against converting forest to shade coffee plantation, it is possible that such a restriction would under some circumstances encourage deforestation to other land uses (such as cattle pasture).
Agrochemical Use
In the long run, most chemicals are damaging to the environment and all efforts should be made to eliminate their use. Organic growing techniques should be the first option used. The endpoint for the sustainable coffee criteria should be the prohibition of chemical use except in emergency situations. Such an allowance is made under organic certification if a) all non-chemical techniques have been implemented and failed; b) only the least toxic chemicals are used with carefully controlled applications; and c) application is conducted with the consultation and oversight of the certifier. In addition, it is recommended that the following classes of chemicals should never be used: herbicides, nematocides, and chlorinated hydrocarbons. The use of organic techniques for soil improvement should be emphasized and chemical fertilizers avoided. When chemical fertilizers are used they should be mixed with organic fertilizers and direct application to waterways avoided. A graded system could be adopted where farms using small quantities of pesticides in an Integrated Pest Management system and low levels of chemical fertilizers receive a one star rating and strictly organic or transitional organic a two star rating.
Pollution Control and Energy Conservation in Processing
Certification must be separate for the farm mills since the producer often has little control over post-harvest processing. Agrochemicals should never be used in processing or storage. Coffee pulp should be used as natural fertilizer and never dumped directly into waterways. Mills should employ waste processing and water-saving systems. When the appropriate technology for residual water is available it should be phased in. Pollution control to reduce air contamination should be phased in as well. Fuel wood for drying should be minimized and obtained from sustainable harvested sources. Patio drying should be used whenever feasible. Alternative fuels, such as coffee husks and trimmings or solar energy should be used as much as possible.
Social and Economic Relationships
Brokers or roasters should provide a fair and stable price for producers using existing formulae developed by fair trade organizations as a starting point. The price should include all costs that are incurred to transform and maintain environmental sustainability including the cost of certification itself.
Help ensure access to credit for production, processing, marketing and conversion to environmentally sound technologies.
Technical assistance and environmental education should be available to all members of coffee growing communities.
The formation and maintenance of democratically run producer cooperatives should be supported.
Laborers should receive wages equal to or greater than the legally mandated minimum wage for agricultural workers. When workers are provided housing it should provide adequate living conditions. Health care and proper sanitation should also be provided.
All producers should have fair access to the newly forming sustainable
coffee markets. Particular attention should be paid to small-scale producers
through the fostering of more direct relationships between producer and
roaster.
A Comparison of Systems
Table 1 compares the recommended guidelines of this working group (Sustainable) to some systems that are either in existence or far along in the planning process: organic, Fair Trade, Rainforest Alliance's ECO-OK label, Conservation International's coffee program guidelines, and the point system of Thanksgiving Coffee.
Diagnosis
Two strategies exist for the promotion of sustainable coffee in the marketplace. We can work with the above existing systems (organic and fair trade) which already have a significant market share, name recognition, and an established infrastructure. Or we can develop a new, more holistic program that incorporates, from its inception, all of the aspects of sustainable coffee.
Strategy 1. Working with existing seals
Overall, Organic and Fair Trade certification address different and complementary aspects of coffee production. The two systems already interact to a great degree, particularly in the European market. Together the two seals cover many of the concerns of sustainable coffee. However, they do not address all of the possible aspects of sustainable production. Most notably missing from the environmental side of the equation are criteria concerned specifically with shade management and the conservation of vegetation buffer zones and forest patches. In addition, organic certification does not directly address many of the aspects of pollution control at the mill.
In terms of social issues, since fair trade targets small producers in cooperatives, there is little leverage for addressing the concerns of farm labor--an issue that faces many coffee farms, but particularly larger farms. In addition, for a variety of reasons, many de facto organic farms are not certified and therefore receive no particular compensation for what is essentially good land stewardship in the market place. Although all issues that are not addressed by current seals probably cannot be incorporated, many can. Discussions should begin with groups involved with organic certification and fair trade to consider addressing some of the issues that have fallen between the cracks. Already OCIA has expressed an interest in incorporating shade management in organic certification.
Strategy 2. Creation of New Seals
Although the Thanksgiving Coffee system takes an innovative approach which incorporates many facets of sustainable production, it is not designed to be systematically verified or certified by a disinterested party and so I will not consider its merits further here. This leaves the ECO-OK certification system and the Conservation International program as two existing alternative programs. The advantage of promoting these new approaches is that the full complement of issues underlying sustainable production can be incorporated from their inception, rather than added on. I have already listed some of the issues not currently addressed by Fair Trade or Certified Organic.
Conservation coffees tend to be more inclusive in their approach, attempting to impact as much land under management as possible. In order to achieve this, the systems tend to be more flexible or set lower minimum performance levels. However, this may result in undermining the work that has already gone into the existing programs. ECO-OK, for example, replaces strict adherence to certified organic practices with a more flexible and less rigorous approach to agrochemical inputs. In addition, issues pertaining to small-scale farmers are largely ignored and a greater emphasis is placed on enlisting large producers. By doing this ECO-OK may be addressing a relatively larger area initially and might also have some impact on the treatment of workers and worker families on large plantations. ECO-OK calls for relatively minimal changes in shade management practices and appears to rely more on informal incentives and further education to promote more diversified shade systems. How ECO-OK could dovetail with Organic Certification is unclear.
The Conservation International program begins to incorporate the concept of a graded system and allows for the incorporation of organic certification. Similar to ECO-OK, the CI program allows for entry with minimally diverse shade management and calls for improvement of shade up the scale to traditional polycultural shade after inclusion into the program. However, the program has no specific requirements or marketplace incentives for this to occur. While not embracing Fair Trade, CI proposes some progressive economics including guarantee of price over cost of production and access to credit for small farmers.
Final Comment
We may find it impossible to develop a fully unified approach to certifying and promoting sustainable coffee. My feeling is that the mission of Fair Trade is so focused and well defined that it will have to stand separately as the environmental criteria are hammered out. Because the infrastructure and markets already exist, I would argue that all efforts should be made to broaden the issues approached in Organic Certification. When shade management is fully incorporated into Organic Certification using a graded classification system, then these coffees can be promoted to the larger potential markets concerned with such issues as bird conservation. Thinking of the systems in the broader sense, it seems that the more flexible guidelines of conservation coffee and the more rigorous criteria of Organics could be incorporated into a broader graded system that is able to include more farmers, but offers more compensation to those farmers practicing the most sustainable agriculture.