Protection of biodiversity through coffee

certification? The case of forest coffee in

Short title: Certification for forest coffee, Ethiopia

Key Message: Certification initiatives need to be carefully designed to address local socio-
economic and ecological concerns. Suitability of certification standards, information
exchange and independent monitoring are essential to avoid detrimental ecological effects.

Suggested citation: TEEBcase by T. Stellmacher, U. Grote and J. Volkmann (2010)

The problem: Poverty and loss of wild coffee forests

Ethiopia is the origin of worldwide Arabica coffee. The coffee forest ecosystem presents a
biodiversity hotspot of worldwide importance. Ethiopia is the 6th largest coffee producing
country in the world. An estimated 30% of Ethiopia’s coffee production originates from forest
coffee cultivation systems, contributing about 10 to 20% of the country’s total export
earnings.1 Forest coffee has the advantage that it originates from an organic and shaded
production area – a quality increasingly important for coffee drinkers worldwide. The
montane rainforests in Southern Ethiopia are the only place in the world where coffee still
grows wild in its natural habitat. For this reason, these areas require protection.

Despite the value and demand for coffee, Ethiopian forest coffee producers live in extreme
poverty. Their livelihood traditionally depends on low-yielding subsistence agriculture and the
sale of forest coffee for income. However, coffee prices are low and highly fluctuating.
Simultaneously, Ethiopian coffee forests are experiencing deforestation at annual rates of up
to 9%. This is mainly due to the gradual expansion of smallholder agriculture and over-
utilization of forest products. There is a trend of extensive wild coffee collection moving
towards semi-forest plantation coffee production. From a coffee producer’s viewpoint, the
transformation of primary forests into coffee plantations makes economic sense because
coffee generates immediate cash income while other forest services do not.

The approach: Certifying forest coffee to provide incentives for sustainable

The certification of coffee started in Ethiopia in the late 1990s with the certification of
agricultural producer cooperatives by Addis Ababa based branches of European certification
agencies. The first forest coffee producing cooperative was certified in 2002. In May 2007, a
total number of 12 forest coffee cooperatives in remote areas of southwestern Ethiopia were
certified according to Fairtrade, organic (EU standard) and Utz Certified standards

1
www.luxner.com/cgi-bin/view_article.cgi?articleID=279;
www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601116&sid=ado2JY67Gknk;
www.fairtrade.org.uk/producers/coffee/oromia_coffee_farmers_cooperative_ethiopia/default.aspx

1
Version 1.1; Last update: November/2010 TEEB case available online at: www.TEEBweb.org
respectively. Inspectors from the certification agencies visit the cooperatives at least once a
year to check for compliance with the standards.

Effects of certifying forest coffee on biodiversity in the Ethiopian rainforests and the
role of local governments:

Field research conducted in the coffee forest areas of southwestern Ethiopia (Bench Maji
and Kaffa Zone) in 2007/08 show that forest coffee certification activities do not adequately
promote conservation of the coffee forest ecosystem and its biodiversity. This is mainly due
to the fact that certification standards are principally designed to target agricultural coffee
production systems and do not adequately consider the specific ecological and socio-
economic circumstances of Ethiopian forest coffee. Organic certification, for example, can
confirm the absence of chemical contamination but not the sustainable use of a forest
ecosystem. The study shows that higher prices paid to producers for certified coffee provides
an incentive for farmers to intensify their coffee production by slashing undergrowth and
cutting down larger trees – thereby promoting destruction of the rainforest and its
biodiversity.

The study also shows that there is little transparency and information exchange amongst
actors in the value chain. As a consequence, the majority of cooperative members have
neither knowledge nor understanding of the concept of certification. Some associate the visit
and the examinations by certification inspectors with the cooperatives’ concern to increase
coffee quality rather than with standard monitoring. Coupled with this is the problem that
farmers have long waits for promised bonus payments – sometimes even waiting in vain.
Certification fees of several thousands of US dollars per year are covered for the most part
by donor-financed development and trade promotion programs, raising questions of the
financial sustainability of certification initiatives.

While certification is not a panacea, it can have substantial positive impacts. In order to avoid
unintended consequences, certification approaches and standards need to be context
specific – speaking to the characteristics of the commodity: the socio-economic situation and
the agro-ecological conditions under which it is produced.

In the case of Ethiopian forest coffee, it has been suggested that certifying the ecosystem
rather than just the coffee or coffee cooperatives makes more sense. Sustainable forest
management and related environmental services can be rewarded with a price premium. To
assure sustainable production, coffee needs to be traceable. Otherwise, there is the risk that
the price premium usually connected with certification provides an incentive for producers to
boost production by intensifying forest management activities.

Local governments are mostly concerned with agricultural initiatives that aim to increase
quantities and quality of agricultural products. Beyond this, they should actively promote
more integrated and bottom-up approaches of certification, and take a leading role as
mediator between local and external actors and interests. Smallholder producer groups tend
to have the least power in the value chain, even when the product is certified. Local
governments can help them by improving their organizational and business capacities.
Concomitantly, external actors (international traders in particular) need to better understand
the local conditions under which products are produced and certified. This combination would
allow more sustainable, tailor-made certification and more equal partnerships.

To further understand the circumstances under which certification can be a suitable measure
for sustainable use of forest coffee, the Institute for Environmental Economics and World

2
Version 1.1; Last update: November/2010 TEEB case available online at: www.TEEBweb.org
Trade at the University of Hanover are conducting a three year research project 2 which
comparatively analyses the effects of forest coffee certification on socio-economic aspects of
sustainability in Ethiopia, India and Nicaragua.

Acknowledgement: Alice Ruhweza for reviewing the case

2
For more information see http://www.iuw.uni-
hannover.de/projekt.html?&L=1&tx_tkforschungsberichte_pi1[showUid]=42&tx_tkforschungsberichte_
pi1[backpid]=282&cHash=3dbd16d343

Also see: The German-Ethiopian research project “Conservation and use of wild populations of coffea
arabica in the montane rainforest of Ethiopia” (CoCE); www.coffee.uni-bonn.de

3
Version 1.1; Last update: November/2010 TEEB case available online at: www.TEEBweb.org