Integrating diversity of smallholder coffee cropping systems in environmental analysis

Abstract

Purpose Coffee represents an important trade asset internationally. Around 70% of global coffee production is provided by 25 million smallholders farmers. In recent decades, coffee systems have been transformed into more intensified systems of coffee monoculture. The general objectives of this paper are to provide a better picture of the traditional coffee cropping systems and postharvest processes on-farm and to assess the environmental impacts, integrating the diversity of smallholder cropping systems.Methods A Life Cycle Assessment from cradle to farm gate was performed for three cropping systems representative of Colombian coffee cultivation according to the associated crops and shadow trees: coffee alone (CA), coffee with transition shade (CTS), and coffee with permanent shade (CPS). The system studied includes inputs, agricultural production and postharvest operations using the wet method. The final product of farms is parchment bean coffee at farm gate. The technology used is representative of the average practices of smallholder coffee growers in the region. To address multiple functions of coffee, three functional units (FU) were selected: area by time (ha*year −1 unit area), productivity (ton of parchment coffee) and farmers income (1000 USD$). Seven midpoint categories were selected: climate change, acidification, terrestrial eutrophication, freshwater eutrophication, marine eutrophication, freshwater ecotoxicity, and water resource depletion. Results and discussion We present the life cycle inventory and impact assessment results from three types of cropping systems CA, CTS and CPS. For all FU, the CPS system has the lowest potential impact, excepted for marine eutrophication. CPS also has the highest coffee yields, however it has also the highest costs. Even if cropping system diversification is only one of multiple factors that influence environmental performance, agroforestry seems to be a promising path to reduce and mitigate environmental impacts by decreasing off-fam contributions (input fabrication). Conclusions Results show the possibility that diversified cropping systems have an influence when assessing potential environmental impacts of coffee at farm gate and differences found might be influenced by shading in traditional coffee systems. Future work is needed to consider the real potential of CTS cropping system including land use and carbon dynamics. Assessments including social indicators and the rest of the value chain in particular coffee industrial transformation and utilization are also needed since the consumption stages are also a key driver to reduce the environmental footprint of coffee.

How to quantify the impacts of diversification on sustainability? A review of indicators in coffee systems

“…Despite the general association between yield reduction and diversification in our review, we also reported cases where it was possible to maintain or even increase crop productivity in diversified systems compared to less diversified ones (Jaramillo et al 2013;Nesper et al 2017;Rahn et al 2018b;Acosta-alba et al 2020;Gidey et al 2020). Contrary to the global trend, positive effects of diversification on agricultural production were reported more frequently than negative ones in Asia and Africa.…”

A step towards sustainability: Life cycle assessment of coffee produced in the indigenous community of Ocotepec, Chiapas, Mexico

“…On the other hand, some investigations were identi ed, such as those carried out by Acosta-Alba et al [39]; Birkenberg and Birner [28]; Brenes-Peralta et al [40]; Barrera-Ramírez et al [41] and Giraldi-Díaz et al, [42] where they apply LCA in regions of Colombia, Costa Rica and Mexico, including a production analysis approach based on local consumption or small producers that may or may not export or be consumed in the country of origin.…”

Environmental and economic evaluation of coffee residues

“…In recent decades, coffee cropping systems have been transformed into more intensified systems of monoculture. These might lead to important losses of biodiversity (ACOSTA-ALBA et al, 2020).…”