Climate Change and The Coffee Industry: Technical Paper

technical
paper
CLIMATE CHANGE AND

THE COFFEE INDUSTRY
Revised edition
Street
Street address
Street
address
address P: +41
P: +41
P:22+41
730
22 730
22
0111
730
0111
0111 Postal Postal
Postal
addressaddress
address
International
International Trade
Trade
International Centre
Centre
Trade Centre F: +41
F: +41
F:22+41
733
22 733
22
4439
733
4439
4439 International
International
International Trade
Trade
Trade Centre Centre
Centre
54-56
54-56 Rue Rue
54-56 de de
deRue Montbrillant
Montbrillant
Montbrillant E: itcreg@intracen.org
E: itcreg@intracen.org
E: itcreg@intracen.org Palais Palais
Palais
desdes des
NationsNations
Nations
12021202 Geneva,
Geneva,
1202 Switzerland
Switzerland
Geneva, Switzerland www.intracen.org
www.intracen.org
www.intracen.org 121112111211 Geneva
Geneva
Geneva 10, 10, 10, Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
The International Trade Centre (ITC) is the joint agency of the World Trade Organization and the United Nations.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND
THE COFFEE INDUSTRY
REVISED EDITION
CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE COFFEE INDUSTRY
Abstract for trade information services
ID= 42957 2012 SITC-071 CLI
International Trade Centre (ITC)

Climate Change and the Coffee Industry (revised edition)
Geneva: ITC, 2012. ix, 23 pages (Technical paper)
Doc. No. SC-12-222.E
Paper focusing on the contribution of the coffee value chain to climate change and the effects of climate
change on global coffee production with particular reference to smallholder coffee producers in developing
and least developed countries – reviews the opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
from the coffee industry; provides examples of individual initiatives to reduce product carbon footprints
and the opportunities for mainstreaming these in the coffee value chain; critically assesses the relevance
of carbon credit markets for smallholder farmers; highlights the possible effects of climate change on
coffee quality, yield, pests and diseases and irrigation; presents the urgent needs of coffee producers for
adaptation to climate change; lists relevant ongoing initiatives and information sources.
Descriptors: Coffee, Climate Change, Production, Environment.
For further information on this technical paper, contact:

Alexander Kasterine, Head of the Trade and Environment Programme at ITC, kasterine@intracen.org
Morten Scholer, Senior Adviser Market Development Adviser in ITC, scholer@intracen.org
Hein Jan van Hilten, main author of The Coffee Exporter’s Guide, coffeeguide@sco.eastcoast.co.za
English, Spanish (separate editions)
The International Trade Centre (ITC) is the joint agency of the World Trade Organization and the United
Nations.
ITC, Palais des Nations, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland (www.intracen.org)
Views expressed in this paper are those of consultants and do not necessarily coincide with those of
ITC, UN or WTO. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this paper do not
imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the International Trade Centre
concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the
delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
Mention of firms, products and product brands does not imply the endorsement of ITC.
This technical paper has not been formally edited by the International Trade Centre.
Digital images on the cover: © International Trade Centre, © Fotolia - Coffee cherries, © Glenna Gordon –
Roaster machine and © ITC
© International Trade Centre 2012
ITC encourages the reprinting and translation of its publications to achieve wider dissemination. Short
extracts of this technical paper may be freely reproduced, with due acknowledgement of the source.
Permission should be requested for more extensive reproduction or translation. A copy of the reprinted or
translated material should be sent to ITC.
ii SC-12-222.E
Foreword
This document is based on Chapter 13 of The Coffee Exporter’s Guide – Third Edition. First published in
1992 and subsequently updated in 2002 and 2011, this practical handbook has become the world’s most
extensive and authoritative publication on the international trade of coffee. With neutral, hands-on
information about the mechanics of trade in green coffee, the guide addresses value chain stakeholders in
both coffee-producing and coffee-importing countries.
A detailed overview of the world coffee trade is accompanied by advice on marketing, contracts, logistics,
insurance, arbitration, futures markets, hedging, trade credits, risk management, quality control, e-
commerce, sustainability schemes, climate change and more.
We have published this technical paper entitled Climate Change and the Coffee Industry to further create
awareness about the risks posed by climate change to the coffee industry, the opportunities to mitigate
greenhouse gas emissions within the value chain, and the urgent needs for adaptation to climate change,
particularly at the producer level. Indeed, smallholder producers are already experiencing the effects of
climate change – in the form of abnormal rain patterns and an increased frequency of severe weather
events affecting coffee yield and quality – yet they generally lack the resources to overcome them.
If the coffee industry is to continue to foster job creation and economic development in some of the world’s
least developed countries, urgent actions are required involving all stakeholders to mitigate and adapt to
climate change. This paper provides an overview of some of the ongoing initiatives and the opportunities
for mainstreaming these in the coffee value chain.
It is our hope that this technical paper will serve as an essential training and knowledge-sharing tool, and
contribute to enable producers, exporters and those who support them in coffee-producing countries
around the world to successfully meet the challenges posed by climate change.
SC-12-222.E iii
Acknowledgements
Hein Jan van Hilten is the principal author of The Coffee Exporter’s Guide as well as the previous editions
from 1992 and 2002. He has spent some 50 years in the coffee industry, first as an exporter in East Africa
and subsequently as an independent Coffee Development Consultant in numerous producing countries.
Currently he serves on the Executive Board of the 4C Association, a mainstream sustainability initiative for
the coffee industry.
Alexander Kasterine, Head of the Trade and Environment Programme at ITC, provided technical and
editorial support to the Climate Change chapter of the Coffee Guide.
Dominic Stanculescu, Consultant at ITC, revised and updated the original text of the relevant chapter of
the Coffee Exporters’ Guide for the production of this technical paper.
Morten Scholer, Senior Market Development Adviser in ITC, was responsible for overall management,
coordination and strategic direction of the work on The Coffee Exporter’s Guide in ITC.
Parts of this technical paper are based on the report Climate Change and Coffee published by the
International Coffee Organization (ICO) in September 2009. The ICO’s permission to make use of this
report is gratefully acknowledged. The section on the potential effects of climate change on coffee
production is based on the article Global warming: the impact on global coffee (May 2007) by Dr. Peter
Baker and Dr. Jeremy Haggar.
We wish to thank the many industry experts, companies and institutions that have contributed in various
ways to The Coffee Exporter’s Guide – Third Edition. We are particularly grateful for the support from the
ICO, which has shared its knowledge for all three editions of the guide, and also has cooperated with ITC
in other coffee projects over the years.
iv SC-12-222.E
Contents
Foreword iii
Acknowledgements iv
Note vii
Executive summary ix
Introduction 1
1. The impact of coffee production on climate change 1
1.1. Agriculture as a source of greenhouse gas emissions 1
1.2. The coffee value chain as a source of greenhouse gas emissions 1
2. Mitigation of coffee value chain emissions 2
2.1. Technical options to reduce production emissions 2
2.2. Market incentives to reduce coffee value chain emissions 3
2.2.1. Product carbon footprint standards 3
2.2.2. Carbon market opportunities for coffee 3
2.2.3. Tools for carbon projects 7
2.2.4. Climate mitigation funds 8
3. Impact of climate change on coffee production 8
3.1. The agronomy of coffee 8
3.2. Forecasting climate change 8
3.3. Impacts of specific climate changes 8
3.3.1. Erratic rain patterns 9
3.3.2. Extreme weather events 9
3.3.3. Increased temperatures 9
4. Options to adapt to climate change 10
4.1. Adaptation by smallholder farmers 10
4.1.1. Short-term technical solutions 10
4.1.2. Long-term strategies 11
4.2. Adapting to climate change in practice 12
4.2.1. Responses to past crises in Mesoamerica 12
4.2.2. The 4C Climate Code 13
4.2.3. The Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) Climate Module 13
4.2.4. Climate mapping and modelling 14
SC-12-222.E v
Appendix I Relevant websites for additional information 15
Appendix II Overview of ITC’s Trade and Environment Programme 18
Appendix III Overview of The Coffee Exporter’s Guide (2012) 19
Appendix IV Question and answers at www.thecoffeeguide.org 21
Box 1. The Kyoto Protocol 4

Box 2. Carbon sinks and carbon sequestration 7
vi SC-12-222.E
Note
The following abbreviations are used:
ALM Adaptation Learning Mechanism

CATIE Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza in Costa Rica
CDM Clean Development Mechanism
CER Certified Emission Reduction
CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
CO2 carbon dioxide
COC Carbon Offset Credits
CORE Carbon Offset Research and Education Initiative
COSA Committee on Sustainability Analysis
CRC Carbon Reduction Credits
EU ETS European Union Emissions Trading Scheme
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FAST Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade
FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility
FONAFIFO Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento Forestal
GAP Good Agricultural Practices
GBM Green Belt Movement
GEF Global Environment Facility
GFTN Global Forest and Trade Network
GHG Greenhouse gas
GIZ / GTZ German International Cooperation
IAC Instituto Agronômico de Campinas, Brazil
ICO International Coffee Organization
IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISEAL International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliance
ITC International Trade Centre
IWMI International Water Management Institute
NGO Non-governmental organization
PCF Product carbon footprint
REDD Reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
SASA Social Accountability in Sustainable Agriculture
SCAN Sustainable Commodity Assistance Network
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VCS Verified Carbon Standard Association
VER Verified Emission Reduction
WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development
WTO World Trade Organization
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
SC-12-222.E vii
viii SC-12-222.E
Executive summary
The coffee value chain contributes to climate change through the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG)
at the various production and processing stages from the farm to the coffee cup. A rationalization in the
use of agricultural inputs and greater efficiencies in processing and brewing coffee are essential to reduce
GHG emissions from the coffee industry. Certain roasters in consumer countries, in particular, have
launched initiatives to reduce the “carbon footprint” of a cup of coffee as part of their marketing strategies.
In addition, the fast growing carbon markets potentially provide economic incentives to farmers to mitigate
emissions and sequester GHG at the farm level, but processes and requirements for generating carbon
credits appear very onerous, in particular for smallholders. Many of the mitigation initiatives, moreover, are
small-scale and require mainstreaming into the coffee industry as a whole.
Conversely, the industry is also strongly affected by the alterations in climate. The complexity and
uncertainty inherent to climate change and crop responses prevent researchers from making precise
forecasts with regard to how producer regions and global output will be affected. However, scientists
forecast that climate change will significantly disrupt arabica and robusta coffee production in all regions.
Rising temperatures are expected to render some producing areas less suitable or completely unsuitable
for coffee cultivation thereby further concentrating coffee production and heightening the risk of output
volatility. Incidences of pests and diseases are likely to increase; and changes in rain patterns will pose
difficulties for drying parchment and may require coffee to be grown under irrigation in the future. The
quality and yields of coffee production will undoubtedly suffer, and the costs of production are likely to rise.
With the support of the industry, short and long-term solutions and strategies are being identified for
adaptation to climate change. These should continue to focus on the smallholder farmers in the developing
world; they produce the majority of the world’s coffee and are arguably the most vulnerable group to the
impacts of climate change.
Finally, it is important that the stakeholders of the coffee value chain realize that the international
negotiations to address climate change under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC) aim to limit further warming, and not to reverse the climate change that has
already taken place. Consequently, the coffee industry must increasingly contribute to mitigating GHG
emissions, and urgently prepare for further adverse changes in the climate through collaborative actions
across the value chain.
SC-12-222.E ix
Introduction
New scientific evidence suggests that climate change is accelerating at a much faster pace than previously
thought and that important tipping points, leading to irreversible changes in major Earth systems and
ecosystems, may already have been reached or even overtaken.1 Furthermore, the International Coffee
Organization (ICO) considers climate change to be one of the most important factors affecting future global
coffee production.
This paper – targeting stakeholders of the coffee value chain in coffee producing countries, including
farmers, traders and exporters – aims to give a general overview on the topic of climate change as it
relates to the production and trade of coffee, and to orient the interested reader to relevant sources of
additional information.
Sections 1 and 2 of this technical paper highlight the sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from
within the coffee value chain and describe opportunities for mitigating these. We provide a critical overview
of the main economic incentives for smallholder farmers to reduce emissions, including the mandatory and
voluntary carbon markets. Section 3 of the document describes the threats of climate change to the coffee
industry, and discusses the potential impacts of alterations in temperature levels and rain patterns on
coffee cultivation. Finally, section 4 provides an overview of certain short-term technical options for
adapting to climate change at the farm level, and describes the key points of a longer-term and necessary
strategic response to climate change by the coffee industry as a whole.
1. The impact of coffee production on climate change
1.1. Agriculture as a source of greenhouse gas emissions

Agricultural activities, including coffee production, contribute to climate change by emitting greenhouse gas
emissions (GHGs). Based on a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
agriculture accounts for about 14% of total global GHG emissions, not including the emissions produced
from deforestation for agricultural purposes. Moreover, agriculture emits some of the most potent GHGs:
the sector emits 84% of the world’s nitrous oxide (N2O) and 52% of the world’s methane (CH4); these
respectively trap 310 and 21 times more heat than carbon dioxide (CO2). Coffee cultivation, however, is not
the foremost agricultural emitter: nitrous oxide is emitted mainly from fertilizer and manure applications to
soil, while methane is emitted mainly in livestock production (fermentation in digestion), rice production and
manure handling.
1.2. The coffee value chain as a source of greenhouse gas emissions

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is used to determine the stages within a value chain with the greatest impact
on the environment. The LCA approach is also used to determine the product carbon footprint (PCF) of a
product, for example a cup of coffee. The PCF is the sum of the “CO2 equivalents” emitted by a product or
service at each stage of the value chain, including consumption. In the case of the cup of coffee, the value
chain includes the coffee cultivation and associated activities (notably the production and transport of
agricultural inputs), processing of coffee cherries, transport of parchment, hulling, shipping of green beans,
roasting, packaging, distribution, brewing, etc.
The PCF estimates of a cup of coffee vary greatly, not least because each calculation is based on different
assumptions and methodologies for the inclusion of indirect emissions. Moreover, the difficulty of tracing
individual coffees back to their original production site (given that so much coffee is mixed at origin and is
shipped overseas in bulk) complicates the measurement of PCF. Without consistency in the methods for
calculation and reporting of PCF it is difficult to compare published footprints. Finally, the process is also
very costly and complex.
1
Text taken from the foreword by Mr Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General, to the Climate Change Science Compendium 2009,
published by the United Nations Environment Programme.
SC-12-222.E 1
Nonetheless, PCF assessments generally seem to agree that the carbon footprint of a cup of coffee
depends on a large part on the brewing process. Evidence shows that capsule coffees, for example, have
a very high PCF estimate (due to the emissions involved in the production of the metal capsules), and that
the type and efficiency of the coffee brewing machine also impacts the PCF to a large extent. Finally,
adding a dash of milk to the coffee or serving it in a paper cup can easily double or triple the PCF value
(See also: How Bad Are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything by Mike Berners-Lee, 2010).
One very detailed carbon footprint assessment conducted by the PCF Pilot Project Germany, based on the
on-farm processes at a private coffee estate in the Republic of Tanzania and the final coffee consumption
in Germany, arrives at similar findings (see: www.pcf-projekt.de/main/results/case-studies). This study
shows that the upstream processes (notably the production of agro-chemicals) and the actual consumer
stage (i.e. shopping and coffee preparation) are the main sources of emissions. Other PCF estimates for a
cup of coffee are available at the following sites: www.get-neutral.com/carbon_footprint.html?locale=en
and www.nestle-nespresso.com/ecolaboration/sustainability/carbon-footprint
In sum, the coffee cultivation and coffee consumption stages are likely to be “hot spots” of GHG emissions
within the life cycle of the coffee cup, but the various PCF analyses provide evidence that initiatives to
reduce GHG emissions can be taken at each level of the value chain.
Finally, it is also important to note that various efforts are underway to harmonize methodologies for
measuring carbon footprints in order to ensure transparency and credibility of PCF statements. For
example, the PCF Pilot Project Germany (www.pcf-projekt.de) aims to formulate recommendations for the
methodical development and international coordination of a transparent and scientifically substantiated
method for measuring PCF. The Carbon Disclosure Project (see www.cdproject.net) also intends to
increase transparency by collecting information on the carbon footprint of some 2,500 large companies
worldwide, including the world’s leading multinational roasting companies. Participating companies of this
project measure and disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and climate change strategies, and monitor
their achievement of emissions reduction targets.
Additional tools and sources of information on PCF include the following:
ITC’s publication Product Carbon Footprinting Standards in the Agri-Food Sector (2012) provides
guidance on measuring PCF. http://www.intracen.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=58175
The Cool Farm Tool is a free GHG calculator for farmers to help them measure the carbon footprint
of crop and livestock products. It has been used at the smallholder level in Kenya on 25 coffee
farms. http://www.coolfarmtool.org/
The Sustainable Agriculture Initiative is also developing carbon footprinting methodologies.

www.saiplatform.org/activities/alias/climate-change
2. Mitigation of coffee value chain emissions

The mitigation of coffee value chain emissions requires participants in the value chain to take actions that
reduce emissions or sequester GHGs. The life-cycle analysis described above highlights that such
potential actions can be taken along the entire coffee value chain, i.e. from the farm to the cup. We
describe some of the technical options that can be adopted below. However, as this section also makes
clear, the economic incentives for the various players of the value chain to take actions to mitigate GHG
are arguably not yet strong enough without appropriate legislation.
2.1. Technical options to reduce production emissions

A complete description of technical options to reduce emissions in the coffee value chain is beyond the
scope of this paper. However, we present some key ideas below.
Regarding coffee cultivation in particular, it is important to note that the various coffee production systems
(e.g. forest coffee, smallholder plots, commercial plantations, coffee with or without shade, with or without
intercropping, etc.) do not have the same level of GHG emissions. A key determinant of the level of GHG
2 SC-12-222.E
emissions is the amount of chemical inputs used, because of the high carbon footprint inherent in the
production of these inputs. Thus, the key to mitigating GHG emissions is likely to be a rationalization of the
usage of chemical inputs through the adoption of Integrated Crop Pest Management (ICPM), Good
Agricultural Practices (GAP) or similar techniques. Moreover, the maintenance of soil structure enabling a
reduction in the use of synthetic fertilizer (an important source of nitrous oxide) is one of the most important
components of these practices in terms of reducing GHG emissions. Note that the main certification and
verification standards (e.g. 4C, UTZ CERTIFIED, Rainforest Alliance, Organic, etc.) advocate the adoption
of such practices, and therefore inherently contribute to reduce GHG emissions.
In addition to reducing their own GHG emissions, coffee farms have the potential to “sequester” or trap
carbon from the atmosphere. Coffee farms in many countries can increase their tree cover, either through
the planting of (more) shade trees or by extending the total on-farm forest cover. Farmers could even be
compensated for these initiatives if they generate marketable “carbon credits” (see section 2.2.2).
The Rainforest Alliance and the Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) with the support from EFICO – a
coffee trading company – have developed a Climate Module detailing a number of climate-friendly
agricultural techniques. The climate module aims to make farmers more aware of the impacts of climate
change and to promote the adoption of good agricultural practices that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, increase carbon sequestration and enhance the capacity of farms to adapt to climate change.
More information is available at this website: clima.sanstandards.org/
Regarding the coffee value chain as a whole, many of the initiatives that deal with PCF reduction in
industry in general also apply to the coffee sector, including building efficiencies into logistics networks,
using recycled materials, adopting energy efficient technologies, etc. Information on best practices is
available on various websites, including www.cdproject.net
2.2. Market incentives to reduce coffee value chain emissions

The implementation of the GHG mitigating practices described above arguably result in additional costs,
particularly during the transition phase from conventional practices. Thus, if these practices are to be
mainstreamed in the industry there must be strong economic incentives. As described below, PCF
standards and carbon market opportunities offer some economic incentives for the industry. But it is
questionable whether these current market incentives are strong enough.
2.2.1. Product carbon footprint standards

Consumers in the developed world are increasingly aware of the “carbon footprint” of their consumer
choices, and some are even ready to pay a premium for “carbon neutral” coffee. In response, the retail end
of the coffee industry is increasingly looking across the supply chain to reduce their products’ carbon
footprints. A small but growing number of roasters are now appealing to consumers by publicizing their
investments in technologies to reduce emissions at various levels of the supply chains. Some roasters are
even offering “Zero Carbon Footprint” coffee largely achieved by purchasing “carbon off-sets,” meaning
that the GHG emissions produced for the product are offset by investing in carbon emission reduction or
sequestration activities elsewhere (i.e. not within the coffee value chain). However, if coffee products with
low PCF values are to emerge from a niche to become mainstream products, appropriate legislation in
consumer countries is arguably required (as is likely to be true for all consumer products).
2.2.2. Carbon market opportunities for coffee

There has been much enthusiasm for so-called “carbon-markets” in the hope that these would offer
economic incentives for the various players in the coffee value chain to mitigate GHG. However, it is
important to recognize the current limitations of these rapidly developing markets for the coffee industry,
and smallholder producers in particular.
Carbon markets are the various platforms of exchange of emission reduction or removal units, generally
called “carbon credits.” A carbon credit is equal to one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e)
sequestered or reduced. (Note: the main GHGs are converted into CO 2e by taking into account their
respective global warming potentials). Key to carbon markets is that these intangible carbon credits that
are for sale be produced in a credible way. A “carbon project” that generates carbon credits must therefore
SC-12-222.E 3
implement accepted standards and procedures, i.e. monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV)
processes. (See www.adapcc.org/download/LPedroni-Carbon-Credits.pdf). As a result, developing “carbon
projects” to create “carbon credits” for sale on “carbon markets” is often complicated, costly and time
consuming. Consequently, carbon projects are often inaccessible to small enterprises – including
smallholder farmers – and even unprofitable (given a low price of carbon). The two main types of emission
reduction credits most relevant to players within the coffee industry are described below.
Certified emission reductions
Certified emission reductions (CERs) are carbon credits that can be used by industrialized countries to a
meet a part of their mandatory emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol (see box 1). They can
also be purchased by regulated operators in the European Union to meet their obligations under the
European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS). CERs are generated by GHG mitigation projects in
developing countries approved and verified by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that was
established as part of the Kyoto Protocol. In practice these credits are owned by the sponsors of the
project and acquired by governments or firms to meet their mitigation commitments through purchases on
“compliance markets” for carbon. CDM projects must demonstrate their “additionality,” i.e. any GHG
reductions from the project are ‘in addition’ to what would have happened anyway without the project (See:
cdm.unfccc.int)
Box 1. The Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC). The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37
industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These
amount to an average of five per cent against 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012.
Recognizing that developed countries are principally responsible for the current high levels of GHG emissions in
the atmosphere as a result of more than 150 years of industrial activity, the Protocol places a heavier burden on
developed nations under the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities.”
Parties with commitments under the Kyoto Protocol have accepted targets for limiting or reducing emissions.
These targets are expressed as levels of allowed emissions, or “assigned amounts,” over the 2008-2012
commitment period. Emissions trading, as set out in the Kyoto Protocol, allows countries that have emission
units to spare – emissions permitted them but not "used" –to sell this excess capacity to countries that are over
their targets.
Moreover, under the Kyoto emissions trading scheme additional units can be created and transferred, each
equivalent to one tonne of CO2. These include “removal units” (RMU) on the basis of land use, land-use change
and forestry (LULUCF) activities such as reforestation; “emission reduction units” (ERU) generated by a Joint
Implementation project; and “certified emission reductions” (CER) generated from a Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM) project activity.
Thus as a result of the Kyoto Protocol a new international market was created for the trade in emission
reductions or removals units. Since carbon dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas, people speak simply of the
“carbon market.” Carbon is now tracked and traded like any other commodity.
During the latest Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC in Durban, South Africa, in December 2011 (COP
17) it was agreed to work towards a new legal agreement on climate change as soon as possible, and no later
than 2015. In the meantime the Kyoto Protocol was renewed for several more years.
Source: www.unfccc.int
Thus in theory, coffee producers could obtain and sell CER credits by reducing the emissions on their
farms. In practice, however, agricultural land-use projects are scarce under the CDM. The stringent rules
set out under the Kyoto Protocol and the difficulties in assessing GHG impacts of different agricultural
techniques make such projects prohibitively complicated and costly. Indeed, only 3% of the CDM projects
are agriculture projects. Moreover, the small-holder nature of coffee production makes it even more difficult
4 SC-12-222.E
to achieve the scale required for a CDM project. By mid-2011 only one CDM project (the Coopeagri
Forestry Project in Costa Rica) listed coffee growers among its indirect beneficiaries. Given the
complexities surrounding CDM, the general consensus appears to be that the so-called “voluntary” carbon
markets present the better option for coffee growers and smallholder farmers wishing to earn carbon
credits.
Readers should also note that the price of CERs is currently very low. This is due to a decline in the
economic growth in countries with commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and an over-supply of emission
allowances under the past phases of the EU ETS; these have the effect of decreasing the demand for
CERs by governments and regulated EU operators.
Verified emission reductions
Verified emission reductions (VERs) (also called “Voluntary Emission Reductions”) are carbon credits that
are generated by projects outside of the Kyoto Protocol framework. These are generally purchased by
firms or individuals that wish to “off-set” their carbon emissions on the “voluntary markets” for carbon.
These credits are not issued by the CDM, but are often verified by private entities accredited by the
UNFCCC. The originating carbon projects generally do not require as much documentation and financial
investment as the CDM projects. Prices of VERs vary considerably and are a function of their “quality,”
which in turn is determined by the stringency of the standards implemented by the project. As with CERs,
VERs must meet the “additionality” requirement: they must represent real emissions reductions in addition
to the business-as-usual scenario. Moreover, top quality VERs are verified for their contribution to local
sustainable development. One should note that the production of VERs is a multibillion dollar business for
carbon development companies and carbon funds that aggregate the credits from individual projects to sell
to commercial or individual customers interested in lowering their carbon footprint on a voluntary basis.
Voluntary market standards that have emerged for VERs include:
Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) is the widely used minimum standard for VER projects. The
website has a useful section on agricultural land management (coffee trees, vegetation, soil and
waste water). www.v-c-s.org
Voluntary Gold Standard is a premium quality label which ensures the successful integration of
stakeholder feedback, and integrity of environmental impact assessments. It was designed to ensure
that emissions reductions that back up carbon credits are not only real and verifiable, but that the
project activities make a measurable impact on sustainable and social development in local
communities. www.cdmgoldstandard.org
CarbonFix Standard sets out a quality benchmark for climate forestation projects.
www.carbonfix.info
Plan Vivo sets out a standard for designing and certifying community-based payments for
ecosystem services (PES) programmes. Its Scolel Té project in Mexico includes the production of
credits through shade trees in coffee plantations. www.planvivo.org
The Chicago Climate Exchange verifies projects based on a comprehensive set of established
protocols, including Forestry Carbon Sequestration. www.theice.com/ccx.jhtml
The Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB) Alliance Standards include three quality levels for
VERs: Approved, Silver and Gold. This premium verification is complementary to one of the other
voluntary standards. www.climate-standards.org
See also Making Sense of the Voluntary Carbon Market: A Comparison of Carbon Offset Standards
at www.co2offsetresearch.org
It appears that the voluntary carbon market is more appropriate for small or medium sized initiatives that
lack the capacity and knowledge to develop fully fledged CDM-type projects. Indeed, a number of projects
with the aim of generating VERs have been launched by and with coffee farmers. These are based on
simple GHG sequestration or emission reductions initiatives, including the introduction of intercropping with
suitable GHG absorbing plants, the planting of additional shade trees, and the rehabilitation of degraded
lands and hillsides. These projects include:
SC-12-222.E 5
The CarbonFix Standard AdapCC initiated Sierra Piura reforestation project in Peru and run by the
CEPICAFE cooperative. www.carbonfix.info/RSP
The Scolel Té project in Mexico. www.planvivo.org/projects/registeredprojects/scolel-te-mexico
Nevertheless, by mid-2012 there were very few carbon projects involving the coffee sector. As mentioned
above, the calculations to determine impacts on net GHG emissions are costly and complex even in the
case of VERs, making it difficult for individual smallholders to participate. A clear lesson from these
projects is that producer organizations must be strengthened if smallholder farmers are to access the
potential benefits offered by the carbon markets.
REDD
Reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD), is a scheme particularly relevant to
the coffee sector. The principle idea of REDD is to create a financial value for the carbon already stored in
forests (see box 2), thereby offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions created by
deforestation, or in other words: incentives not to cut the forests down. “REDD+” goes beyond
deforestation and forest degradation, and includes the role of conservation, sustainable management of
forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.
Emissions avoided by reduced deforestation or forest degradation are not eligible for CER credits under
the CDM of the Kyoto Protocol. Proponents of REDD aim to fix this apparent shortcoming. They argue that
mitigating climate change will be practically impossible to achieve without reducing emissions from the
forest sector. Indeed, deforestation and forest degradation – through agricultural expansion, conversion to
pastureland, infrastructure development, destructive logging, fires etc. – account for nearly 20% of global
greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, they argue that the financial flows for greenhouse gas emission
reductions from REDD could also support new, pro-poor development, help conserve biodiversity and
secure vital ecosystem services. (Sources: www.un-redd.org) On the other hand, many organizations
critical of REDD fear that the mechanism will allow developed countries to continue emitting GHG (by
purchasing off-sets from REDD projects) and conversely restrict the advancement of developing countries.
Moreover, they fear that the financial compensations for the avoided deforestation will be captured by
elites, while those who bear the costs of conserving forests – notably the poor rural populations in
developing countries – will be made worse-off (Also see: www.redd-monitor.org)
REDD is relevant to the coffee sector for primarily two reasons. Firstly, the expansion of coffee cultivation
in many producer countries involves the conversion of forests into agricultural land. With the
implementation of REDD at national levels, governments would receive funds for limiting the conversion of
forests. The resulting impact on the incomes of farmers is not clear: a restriction in agricultural areas may
increase the price of coffee, but expansion of farms would be curtailed. In any case, the growing global
demand for coffee would have to be met by sustainable increases in coffee yields, but with only limited
access to agricultural extension services and credit, farmers will continue to struggle to raise yields.
Secondly, REDD+ could promote shade grown coffee by compensating farmers for not cutting down or
maintaining shade trees through carbon credits. Coffee farms under shade harbour more carbon than
coffee grown in direct sunlight, but at the cost of lower yields. Currently, shade grown coffee farmers are
generally not compensated for this “environmental service” that they provide.
Efforts are continuing to create enabling environments for REDD at national levels and discussions are
ongoing for the inclusion of REDD principles into a future international treaty on climate change. Moreover,
the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) Association – one of the leading GHG crediting programmes in the
voluntary carbon market – has approved several methodologies that can be used to account for the GHG
benefits of REDD projects aiming to generate carbon credits for the voluntary markets. A variety of REDD
demonstration projects are already being implemented on the ground with the support of the voluntary
carbon markets and multilateral REDD programmes, including:
The Avoided Deforestation in the Coffee Forest in El Salvador Project www.climate-standards.org

“Una REDD para Chiapas” involving Mas Café. www.adapcc.org/en/mexico.htm
6 SC-12-222.E
The BioCarbon Fund is a public/private initiative established as a trust fund administered by the
World Bank to demonstrate projects that sequester or conserve carbon in forest and agro-
ecosystems. The portfolio includes afforestation, reforestation as well as REDD projects, and is
exploring innovative approaches to agricultural carbon. go.worldbank.org/IVUUKC9210
Further information on REDD is also available at: www.theredddesk.org and the Project Developer’s
Guidebook to VCS REDD Methodologies (November 2011) by Conservation International.
www.conservation.org
Box 2. Carbon sinks and carbon sequestration

Carbon sinks are natural or constructed reservoirs that can absorb or ‘sequester’ carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere and include forests, soils, peat, permafrost, ocean water and carbonate deposits in the deep ocean.
The most commonly referenced form of carbon sink is that of forests. Plants and trees absorb carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere via photosynthesis, retain the carbon component as the building block of plant fibre and
release oxygen back into the atmosphere. Therefore, long-lived, high biomass plants, such as trees and forests
represent effective carbon sinks as long as they are maintained.
Carbon sequestration is the process of increasing the carbon content of a carbon reservoir other than the
atmosphere. Biological approaches to sequestration include direct removal of carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere through land-use change, afforestation, reforestation, and practices that enhance soil carbon in
agriculture. Physical approaches include separation and disposal of carbon dioxide from flue gases or from
processing fossil fuels to produce hydrogen- and carbon dioxide-rich fractions and long-term storage
underground in depleted oil and gas reservoirs, coal seams and saline aquifers. Basically any process, activity
or mechanism that removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol, or a precursor of a greenhouse gas or aerosol from
the atmosphere can be considered a carbon sink.
Source: www.sccommonlanguage.eu
2.2.3. Tools for carbon projects

Credible carbon accounting methodologies for coffee farms have only recently been developed. Yet
several pilot projects should in due course facilitate extending carbon projects to the majority of coffee
producing countries. It may be assumed that progress will accelerate provided the necessary capacity
building and legislative support in those countries is forthcoming. Certain interesting tools are described
below.
The Rainforest Alliance has produced a manual entitled Guidance on Coffee Carbon Development
using the simplified Agroforestry Methodology to facilitate the creation of carbon projects involving
coffee farmers. This comprehensive manual deals with the entire carbon project sequence from its
identification to marketing the resulting carbon credits. It can be downloaded in English and in
Spanish at www.rainforest-alliance.org/climate/documents/coffee_carbon_guidance.pdf
CATIE, the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza in Costa Rica, developed a
technical manual (2004–2006) on how to estimate carbon entitled: Carbon Capture and
Development of Environmental Markets for Indigenous Cocoa Farms and Other Agroforestry
Systems. CATIE is also working with the Costa Rican Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento Forestal
(FONAFIFO) on a Payment for Environmental Services Scheme to establish criteria for
environmental payments to shaded coffee farms. www.catie.ac.cr
The Global Forest and Trade Network (GFTN) is a WWF Global initiative and offers information,
contacts and tools in respect of sustainable forest management and forest certification.
www.gftn.panda.org
SC-12-222.E 7
2.2.4. Climate mitigation funds

Recognizing that carbon projects are not always profitable, particularly in the early start-up phase (i.e. the
credits generated do not cover the costs of the project), a multitude of national, bilateral and multilateral
carbon project financing mechanisms have been created. The Climate Funds Update website provides
information on climate finance initiatives designed to help developing countries address the challenges of
climate change. The list includes funds that finance mitigation and adaptation projects, as well as REDD
projects in particular. www.climatefundsupdate.org
3. The impact of climate change on coffee production
3.1. The agronomy of coffee

Temperature and rainfall conditions are the main drivers when it comes to coffee yield. In this respect the
two main species, arabica and robusta, which together account for about 99% of world production, have
different requirements.
Arabica coffee evolved in the cool, shady environment of the Ethiopian highland forests where there is a
single dry season coinciding with the winter months. The optimum temperature range is somewhere
between 15° and 24° C. Much higher temperatures tend to impact negatively on both yield and quality.
Rainfall requirements are between 1,500 mm and 2,000 mm per annum, although the use of irrigation
today allows arabica to be grown also in areas with otherwise insufficient rainfall.
Robusta coffee evolved across lowland Equatorial Africa, particularly in the forests of the Congo River
Basin and around the Lake Victoria Crescent in Uganda. It grows best in areas with abundant rainfall of
around 2,000 mm per annum, at altitudes ranging from sea level to about 800 m. Rainfall must be well
distributed throughout most of the year because the robusta tree has a relatively shallow root system. The
optimum temperature ranges from 22° to 26° C and the species is less tolerant of very high as well as very
low temperatures than arabica.
3.2. Forecasting climate change

Global climate change models make projections about future regional climates based on current
understanding of what drives climate change. Climate change scenarios have been developed by the
IPCC based on four different storylines of different future worlds. These differ in terms of projections in
population growth, world gross domestic product changes, differences in per capita income between
developed and developing countries, and the energy level of the economy (related to emission levels).
See: www.ipcc.ch
Experiments in controlled environments where variables can be varied (e.g. gas concentrations in the
atmosphere, water availability, and temperature levels) are crucial to understanding how climate change
affects individual crops, particularly cereal crops given the importance of global food security. In addition,
analysis of past climates is also used to determine the impact of climate change on crop production.
However, incorporating the results into integrated climate-crop models remains wrought with uncertainty.
Models have to simplify certain parameters, some of which may have large implications on their outcomes.
Furthermore, there is a substantial scale-gap between global and regional climate models, and local
farming systems: the large scale models generally do not offer detailed forecasting for changes in climates
for particular localities and at particular altitudes. Moreover, exogenous factors like changes in land use
may also affect local climates as well. Finally, current climate modelling studies are biased towards
countries that have more data; these often do not include coffee producer countries.
3.3. Impacts of specific climate changes

Climatic variability has always been the main factor responsible for the fluctuation in coffee yields in the
world. However, climate change as a result of global warming is expected to lead to actual shifts on where
and how coffee may be produced in future. This will affect millions of producers as well as all other
participants in the value chain – right up to the end-consumer – and presents a major challenge to the
coffee industry. Coffee growers are by far the most numerous and most vulnerable of the affected groups
8 SC-12-222.E
in the coffee industry. At the farm level, climate change is already manifesting itself through changes in rain
patterns and the occurrence of extreme weather events. These manifestations and their impacts on coffee
quality and yield are described below.
The primary source for this section is the document: Global warming: the impact on global coffee (Peter
Baker and Jeremy Haggar, May 2007). For additional information see the report entitled: Impacts of
Climate Change in Four Pilot Countries of the Coffee & Climate Initiative (Jeremy Haggar and Kathleen
Schepp, June 2011). See: www.coffeeandclimate.org/research.html
3.3.1. Erratic rain patterns

Climate change impacts seasonal rain patterns and overall precipitation levels. In a warmer world the
hydrological cycle is expected to become more intense, likely to result in ‘very wet’ and ‘very dry’ areas in
the world. Unseasonal rain during flowering affects fruit set, whereas rain during the harvest season will
complicate the sun drying of coffee and affect quality. Areas currently not requiring irrigation may do so in
the future due to increased evaporation that reduces the soil’s moisture content. Heavy rainfall, in addition
to a likely increase in the frequency of stronger winds, will lead to greater soil erosion negatively affecting
crop production.
3.3.2. Extreme weather events

An important cause of extreme weather is the El Niño / La Nina Southern Oscillation phenomenon,
referring to the periodic warming and cooling of the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. The oscillation between
warming and cooling happens irregularly and dramatically affects the weather in many parts of the world,
causing floods and droughts. Evidence shows that the El Niño phenomenon could become more intense
with global warming. If extreme weather events occur during sensitive periods of the life of the crop, for
example during flowering or fruit setting, then yields will be adversely affected, particularly if accompanied
by reduced rainfall.
The impact of El Niño events on coffee production has been closely studied in Colombia. During El Niño
years rainfall decreases in the Andean region of Colombia, whereas sun intensity and temperatures
increase. This causes production to fall in some regions, particularly in low-lying areas where rainfall is less
than 1,500 mm/year, moisture retention is low and crop exposure to sunlight is high. Reduced rains during
the critical stages of fruit development raises the risk of black beans, small beans and other defects, and
increases the incidence of pests such as the coffee berry borer.
3.3.3. Increased temperatures

As temperature rises, coffee ripens more quickly causing a drop in inherent quality. This statement is
supported by the fact that low-grown arabica from tropical areas with higher temperatures generally shows
less quality in the cup compared to the same coffee grown at higher altitudes. The beans are softer and
may well be larger but lack that quality. Conversely, it is estimated that with an average global temperature
increase of 3°C by the end of this century (some experts believe an increase of up to 5°C is likely) then the
lower altitude limit for growing good quality arabica will rise by some 15 ft (5 m) per annum. This means
that over time areas that are currently too cold for coffee cultivation could become suitable. However, this
theoretical migration of coffee production areas is highly problematic given the increasing competition for
fertile land across all regions.
Higher temperatures will also favour the proliferation of certain pests and diseases, and their spreading to
regions where they were not normally present. Research suggests that the incidence of pests and
diseases such as coffee berry borer, leaf miner, nematodes, coffee rust and others will increase as future
temperatures rise. The consequent need for greater pest control measures will make coffee production
both more complex and costly.
Events of recent years are early evidence of the effects of climate change described above. Both floods
and droughts are on the increase in a number of coffee producing countries, whereas there are
widespread reports of pests and diseases moving into areas where they previously did not exist. Individual
farmers in different countries complain of unseasonal rainfall affecting flowering and fruit set, while others
cite drying and quality problems due to rain during the harvest season.
SC-12-222.E 9
4. Options to adapt to climate change

The complexity and uncertainty of climate change limit sciences’ ability to make precise forecasts on its
impacts on coffee production. Nevertheless, there is a real possibility that fewer parts of the world will be
suitable for growing coffee. If so, then the already evident growth in the concentration of production areas
would be accentuated. This in turn could make global production more prone to high fluctuations, as any
severe disruption in output from one of the major producers would curtail global output. The cost of
production will increase and competition from other crops for available arable land may rise.
4.1. Adaptation by smallholder farmers

Smallholders – responsible for the majority of the coffee produced in the world – are among the most
vulnerable groups to the potential impacts of climate change: they depend heavily on agriculture for their
incomes; they generally have little access to alternative livelihoods; and they have limited resources to
adapt to its impacts. It is clear that the coffee industry cannot afford a severe reduction in smallholder
coffee production, neither in terms of quantity nor in terms of quality and quality diversity. This again
confirms the need for concerted industry-wide initiatives.
Not all views on how to go forward concur, but it would seem reasonable to argue that in addition to GHG
mitigation activities, there are two main areas for action as suggested in Adaptation for Smallholders to
Climate Change by Mario Donga and Kathleen Jährmann – www.adapcc.org/en/downloads.htm – a joint
project of Cafédirect and German International Cooperation (GIZ). Action areas include:
Short-term technical solutions for adapting coffee production and processing to current climate
variability – aimed at producers;
Long-term strategies to improve framework conditions for adaptation to future climate risks and to
build the necessary capacities – aimed at all players in the value chain, but mostly producers.
Before presenting some of these solutions and strategies we emphasize that the UNFCCC also assists
least developed countries to identify their immediate priorities for adaptation. Over 40 countries have
received assistance to prepare their National Adaptation Programmes of Action. See a list of proposed
project details and plans at www.unfccc.int/national_reports/napa/items/2719.php
Moreover, various financial mechanisms are available to implement climate change adaptation strategies
and projects. A list of such financial mechanisms is available at www.climatefundsupdate.org
4.1.1. Short-term technical solutions

Short-term technical solutions for adapting coffee production and processing to current climate variability
will vary across and within coffee producing countries. It is important to note that farmers know their
circumstances better than anyone and many have innovative ideas on how to combat at least some of the
effects. In other words, external assistance is needed, but to be successful it should complement initiatives
of local stakeholders.
In general, short-term adaptation strategies include better farming practices and more efficient on-farm
processing. Good farming practices automatically help conserve soil and water, and in so doing serve to
adapt to global warming while at the same time lessening its impact. Most progressive farmers apply these
practices as a matter of course, but smallholders do not always have the necessary resources and/or
know-how to do so. Hands-on technical options include the following:
In the field
− Mulching to reduce evaporation, avoid erosion and improve soil fertility;
− Terracing/contouring, drainage and trapping/storing run-off rain water;
− Planting hedges and contours to mitigate wind and water damage;
10 SC-12-222.E
− Improving irrigation and water resources management;

− Shading to mitigate increased solar brilliance, reduce temperature variations and help retain
moisture.
Processing
− Reducing water usage with eco-friendly pulpers;

− Improving wastewater management and disposal;
− Making effective use of all compostable materials;
− Using solar energy, i.e. sun drying where feasible;
− Using renewable energy sources for mechanical drying;
− Making better use of dry milling by-products (fuel, charcoal briquettes, boards).
The list above is obviously not exhaustive. Many – if not all – of the options are of course also promoted by
the different certification and verification standards as Organic, Rainforest Alliance, UTZ CERTIFIED, 4C
Association and corporate standards as the Nespresso’s AAA program, the Starbucks Coffee Company
initiated C.A.F.E. (Coffee and Farmer Equity) Practices, and others.
4.1.2. Long-term strategies

Long-term strategies to improve framework conditions for the adaptation to climate risks – including
financials mechanisms – are essential for the coffee industry. Many of these strategies are identified and
discussed in the ICO’s paper on Climate Change and Coffee, 2009. They require major industry backing
as well as supporting legislation. Note that the Coffee Issues Management Forum in March 2009
(organized by the National Coffee Association, USA) identified producer sustainability as the top priority
issue, with adaptation to climate change listed as the most important sub-issue under this heading.
Long-term strategies include:
Strengthening institutions. Strong institutions are necessary for the coordinated and coherent
implementation of adaptation strategies, notably at the farmer level. These institutions can also
serve to mobilize the existing bilateral and multilateral funds available for adaptation projects on
behalf of smallholder farmers.
Strengthening capacities. For the implementation of the short-term technical strategies described
above, it is evident that farmer’s capacities must be strengthened through appropriate agricultural
extension services.
Mapping potential climate change impact on coffee areas. These mapping exercises should
determine which crops and techniques are best suited, and could help ensure that government
guidance and assistance are correctly targeted. Specifically, this would also serve to forecast the
spread of certain pests according to the likely impact of climate change and enable preventive
actions to be taken.
Improving access to climate data. This includes making the mapping information described above
available to producers through the appropriate extension services and institutions thus enabling
them to make informed decisions.
Improving soil fertility. A major long-term initiative is required in most producer countries to
improve soil fertility as part of the effort to adapt to climate change. The current trend in soil
degradation must imminently be reversed.
Examining different production models. High density planting, vegetated soils and irrigation are
production models that aim to maintain and/or increase organic matter and soil water retention
capacity, thereby enhancing the viability of cultivation under adverse climatic conditions. These
models should be further developed and disseminated.
SC-12-222.E 11
Encouraging shade management systems. Although originally a shade tree, coffee also prospers
without shade in zones with adequate climate and soils. However, shade management is highly
advisable when coffee is grown in less desirable areas, or in areas that will become affected by
climate change. The main effects of shading are decreased air temperatures (as much as 3°–4° C),
decreased wind speeds and increased air humidity levels. Shading also helps avoid large reductions
in night temperatures at high elevations, or in high latitudes such as Parana State in Brazil.
Consequently, widespread restoration of shade cover is a form of adaptation to climate change.
Developing and planting disease and drought resistant varieties. Selective breeding has
enabled the development of higher yield, better quality and stronger varieties of coffee plants.
Genetic improvement efforts are also needed to develop varieties resistant to climate change,
including varieties that are productive in drier conditions and at higher temperatures.
Shifting production to more suitable areas where feasible. Latitudinal migration (northwards or
southwards) of coffee production in search of more appropriate climatic conditions will be difficult
given the susceptibility of both arabica and robusta to changes in the intensity and availability of
sunlight that impact on the photosynthesis process. (Note: Coffee does grow in areas outside the
‘normal’ tropical distribution range of coffee cultivation, e.g. Nepal and China’s Yunnan province).
Effects range from a noticeable decrease of the growth phase to an inhibition of flower development.
Altitudinal migration (i.e. a move to higher altitudes) may be more suitable. However, relocation of
coffee cultivation may be restricted due to competition by alternative crops.
Diversify out of coffee where necessary. Diversification has proven particularly challenging,
mainly because of the lack of adequate substitute crops. However, with increasing demands for food
crops these may be a competitive alternative guaranteeing farmers’ livelihoods.
Developing financial mechanisms to facilitate all or some of the above. Certainly the adaptation
activities above require funds. A growing number of bilateral and multilateral financial mechanisms
are available to finance adaptation activities. The latest COP of the UNFCCC also led to the
establishment of a Green Climate Fund to aid developing countries adapt to climate change (see:
www.climatefundsupdate.org). Moreover, considering that many techniques for adaptation also limit
GHG emissions, links to carbon markets should be established.
Although considerable preparatory progress has been made in the development of methodologies and
tools, it is obvious that the coffee industry as a whole is still in the preliminary stages of developing
strategies and translating these into widespread action.
4.2. Adapting to climate change in practice
4.2.1. Responses to past crises in Mesoamerica

As previously mentioned, it is important to appreciate that smallholder farmers collectively possess a vast
amount of practical farming knowledge and understanding of the historical changes in their areas. The
value of this human capital should not be ignored. A survey and policy brief in this regard, published by the
Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE) in Costa Rica – www.catie.ac.cr,
identifies the main responses by Mesoamerican coffee growers to past crises and ongoing change in the
coffee sector (Building resilience to global change for coffee farmers in Mesoamerica by Hallie Eakin,
Edwin Castellanos and Jeremy Haggar, September 2009). Based on the results of the surveys they list five
areas of action for adaptation to climate change, starting with the most important:
Changes in agricultural practices, directed at reducing costs, improving soil fertility, or meeting
sustainability criteria for new markets;
Social organization, necessary for small producers to access new markets, technologies or support
programmes, and to help farmers recover or respond to global changes;
Participation in new marketing strategies, to help them identify and develop the social and
environmental value of their products.
12 SC-12-222.E
Participation in new economic activities, including diversification to non-agricultural activities and

even migration to urban centres or more developed countries.
Adjustment of farm investment choices, such as adopting more profitable crops, decreasing the
area dedicated to coffee, lessening labour and input use.
Moreover, the study proposed some strategic recommendations, including:
Improving access to information, including market information, farming technology etc., and
developing the ability to interpret such information.
Establishing financial mechanisms, including climate insurance, access to micro-credit to

facilitate adaptation, i.e. organic, substitute crops, new varieties, shading, etc.
Investing in social capital, i.e. build structures that enable smallholders to access the resources
necessary to adapt to climate change, access new markets and exploit the social and environmental
value of their farming activities.
A number of projects elsewhere in the world have conducted or are conducting similar surveys. The
indications are that the results may not be all that different.
4.2.2. The 4C Climate Code

The 4C Climate Code is an example of the work being done by a number of organizations to bring climate
change adaptation and mitigation closer to the coffee producer. The (voluntary) add-on module identifies
15 principles and provides accompanying step by step indicators to measure progress from red
(unacceptable) to green (compliant) in four main areas: Enabling Environment; Natural Resource
Management; Soil and Crop Management; and GHG Emissions and Stocks.
Although the module is subject to further refinement, it nevertheless represents a practical roadmap for
growers wishing to implement climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. The module is largely
based on work done by a three-year public-private partnership in Kenya by Sangana Commodities Ltd and
German International Cooperation. Further partners were the 4C Association, Tchibo GmbH and the World
Bank’s Bio-Carbon Fund.
The module, training manuals and further information, also on climate change generally, are available at
www.4c-coffeeassociation.org/our-services/work-on-climate-change.html
4.2.3. The Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) Climate Module

The Rainforest Alliance and the Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) recently developed a voluntary
“Climate Module.” The module was developed in collaboration with the Guatemala's Inter-American
Foundation for Tropical Research (FIIT); SalvaNATURA, the National Coffee Association of Guatemala
(Anacafé), the Efico Foundation and the Universidad del Valle; and with the financial support from the
Rockefeller Foundation, Efico and Caribou Coffee. Certified producers in Latin America, Africa and Asia
can now adopt this set of voluntary climate change adaptation and mitigation certification standards;
compliance with the module can be verified together with compliance with the SAN standard. Those
farmers that achieve compliance with the module are able to (i) assess the risks posed by climate change
to their farms and communities, (ii) analyse their practices to quantify and reduce the greenhouse gas
emissions generated by growing, harvesting and processing activities, (iii) increase the levels of carbon
stored on their farms through the restoration of degraded lands, reforestation and improved soil
conservation, and (iv) better adapt to altered growing seasons and other conditions resulting from the
effects of climate change. The module highlights that agricultural practices that mitigate GHG emissions
often also strengthen the resilience of farms to climate change. Several coffee farms in Central America
and Brazil have already been "Climate Module" verified. In 2012, the partners embarked on a project to
certify more than 600 producers and 3,000 ha of coffee in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and Costa
Rica. More information is available at this website: clima.sanstandards.org/
SC-12-222.E 13
4.2.4. Climate mapping and modelling

The CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) provides
examples of climate mapping applications with the aim of preparing for and facilitating the adaptation to
climate change by agricultural producers. The programme is a collaboration between several institutions,
including the Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) in Colombia. See: www.ccafs-climate.org
and ccafs.cgiar.org/resources/tools-maps-models-and-data
Instituto Agronômico de Campinas (IAC) in Brazil also provides examples of climate mapping applications
for adaptation purposes: www.iac.sp.gov.br
14 SC-12-222.E
Appendix I Relevant websites for additional information
General information and terminology
www.unfccc.int/2860.php – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). Home of

the Kyoto Protocol – supports all institutions involved in the climate change process. Offers overviews of
the Kyoto Protocol, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and data on greenhouse gases, national
reports, and science and CDM projects.
www.unfccc.int/essential_background/glossary/items/3666.php The United Nations Framework Convention

on Climate Change (UNFCC) offers an extensive glossary of climate change related acronyms and
terminology.
www.unep.org/climatechange – United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Offers a wide range of

insights and information on climate change related news and activities, including financing of climate
change mitigation and adaptation.
www.fao.org/climatechange/en – Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

Information and resources related to climate change with particular emphasis on food security and
agriculture. Includes an extensive glossary of climate change terminology.
www.un.org/wcm/content/site/climatechange/gateway – This United Nations site offers a gateway to the

work of over 30 UN organizations in the field of climate change, including a link to the World Meteorological
Organization’s Global Climate Observing System: www.wmo.ch/pages/prog/gcos/index.php?name=about.
www.gtz.de/en/themen/umwelt-infrastruktur/umweltpolitik/4859.htm – The German International

Cooperation (GIZ, previously GTZ) provides a very useful listing of a large number of annotated and
thematically sorted links to websites focusing on climate protection and development (Note: With the
change from GTZ to GIZ existing GTZ website links are likely to change).
Product carbon footprint
www.pcf-projekt.de – The Product Carbon Footprint Pilot Project Germany aims at the methodical
development and international coordination for implementing transparent and scientifically substantiated
methods for measuring PCF. Site offers explanations of how PCF are measured and a number of
downloadable studies, including one on coffee from the United Republic of Tanzania.
www.carbonfootprint.com – Carbon Footprint Ltd is a carbon management and offset consultancy. Site
includes calculator and management tools.
Carbon credits and carbon markets
http://cdm.unfccc.int/index.html – The Clean Development Mechanism allows emission-reduction (or

emission removal) projects in developing countries to earn Certified Emission Reduction (CER) credits,
each equivalent to one ton of CO2. CER can be traded and sold and used by industrialized countries to
meet a part of their emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol.
www.carboncatalog.org offers a list of CDM projects.
go.worldbank.org/9IGUMTMED0 The World Bank’s Carbon Finance Unit website provides useful
information and tools in respect of the development and financing of CDM projects. It offers assistance with
both capacity building and project preparation and it lists registered service providers. Project assistance
includes preparation of the carbon documentation necessary to create a ‘carbon asset’ that will deliver
marketable VERs (verified emission reductions) or CERs (certified emission reductions).
www.v-c-s.org – Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) Association aims to standardize and provide
transparency and credibility to the voluntary offset market, thereby enhancing consumer and government
confidence in voluntary offsets, by creating a trusted and tradable voluntary offset credit, the Verified
Carbon Unit (VCU). VCS provides much information on standards for the reduction of GHG, project
regulations and certification, and the marketing of Certificates of Emission Reduction or CER.
SC-12-222.E 15
www.carbontrust.co.uk/Pages/Default.aspx – The Carbon Trust is a United Kingdom Government initiative

to accelerate the move towards a low carbon economy. It offers advice on reducing carbon footprints and
helps develop low carbon methodologies and products. In particular look for the report entitled The Carbon
Trust three-stage approach to developing a robust offsetting strategy.
www.cdmgoldstandard.org – The Gold Standard Foundation is a civil society initiative that operates a
certification service for premium carbon credits. Apart from the Gold Standard the site also lists accredited
service providers in different fields, including project development financing.
www.carbonneutral.com – The Carbon Neutral Company is a private sector carbon offset and
management business.
www.ieta.org – The International Emissions Trading Association aims to develop a functional international
framework for trading in GHG emission reductions. The site offers a number of publications and
explanations.
www.chicagoclimatex.com and www.ecx.eu are formal exchanges for the pricing and trading of carbon
offsets. They offer information on how and by whom this can be done.
REDD and environmental services
www.ecosystemmarketplace.com – The Ecosystem Marketplace, a private initiative of Forest Trends, is a

leading source of news, data, and analytics on markets, prices and payments for ecosystem services such
as water quality, carbon sequestration and biodiversity. The site offers wide-ranging information on
environmental markets, ecosystem markets and carbon markets and a comprehensive glossary. It also
offers a number of tools.
www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/fcp – Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) provides information on

ways to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (called REDD) by providing value to
standing forests.
Mitigation
www.sustainablecommodities.org – The Sustainable Commodity Initiative (a joint venture by IISD and

UNCTAD) aims to promote sustainable practices in commodity production and trade. Site links into FAST
(Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade), SCAN (Sustainable Commodity Assistance Network), SSI
(Reporting: State of Sustainability Initiatives) and COSA (Committee on Sustainability Analysis).
www.isealalliance.org – The International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliance
(ISEAL) is the global association for social and environmental standards systems. Site includes the
complete output and documents of the Social Accountability in Sustainable Agriculture project (SASA) and
is of interest to coffee growers generally.
www.wbcsd.org – The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) is a global
business initiative. Although not directly relevant to coffee the site nevertheless offers interesting
information, for example on water and forest products.
www.climatestandards.org – The Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCB) is a private sector-
civil society partnership. It aims at setting standards to be used for the identification of projects that
simultaneously address climate change, support local communities and conserve biodiversity.
www.solutions-site.org – The Horizon Solutions Site is a collaborative programme with UNDP, UNEP,
UNFPA, UNICEF, the IDRC, Yale and Horizon’s colleagues at Harvard that presents answers to problems
in environment, health, population and development, in case-studies (peer-reviewed), articles and exhibits.
www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/environment-and-global-climate-change – The United States Agency for

International Development (USAID) supports climate change initiatives in a number of countries.
climatechange.worldbank.org – The World Bank offers the entire text of its report Development and
Climate Change – 2010.
16 SC-12-222.E
Adaptation
clima.sanstandards.org – The SAN Climate Module is a set of voluntary climate change adaptation and
mitigation certification criteria for application at the farm level.
www.undp.org/climatechange/adapt – United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Provides

resources in respect of the programming of climate change adaptation projects and their integration into
mainstream development. Also offers an Adaptation Learning Mechanism (ALM). The web site is a global
knowledge-sharing platform, mapping good practices and information on climate adaptation.
www.adaptationlearning.net – The United Nation’s Development Programme’s Adaptation Learning

Mechanism is a knowledge-sharing platform on climate change.
www.ccdcommission.org – The International Commission on Climate Change and Development offers a

comprehensive overview of climate change and disaster risk reduction and offers recommendations to
strengthen the resilience of vulnerable countries and communities in a comprehensive report entitled
‘Closing the gap.’
www.odi.org.uk/themes/climate-change-environment/default.asp – Overseas Development Institute (ODI).

Independent think tank on development issues, active in research on climate change issues.
www.gefweb.org – Global Environment Facility (GEF). Intergovernmental organization offering project

funding for a large range of climate change and environment related issues to developing countries and
countries with economies in transition.
www.cgiar.org – The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is a strategic

partnership whose 64 members support 15 international research centres for which links and contact
details are provided.
www.iwmi.cgiar.org – The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) is one of the 15 CGIAR-linked
research centres. Its mission is to improve the management of land and water resources for food,
livelihoods and nature. Look for its Water Policy Brief at
www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Water_Policy_Briefs/PDF/WPB31.pdf
www.ifpri.org – The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) is another of the CGIAR-linked
research centres and concentrates on food security issues. Their report entitled ‘Climate change: Impact
on agriculture and costs of adaptation’ presents research results that quantify climate-change impacts,
assesses the consequences for food security, and estimates the investments that would offset the negative
consequences for human well-being. Although not directly coffee-related, this analysis brings together, for
the first time, detailed modelling of crop growth under climate change with insights from an extremely
detailed global agriculture model, using two climate scenarios to simulate future climate.
Climate change forecasting and impact modelling
www.ipcc.ch – The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading scientific body for
the assessment of climate change. It reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and
socioeconomic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. Very
informative technical insights in the origin, potential effects and mitigation of GHG emissions are available.
www.climatehotmap.org/index.html – An initiative by a number of concerned NGO’s, including the World

Wildlife Fund, and offers an interactive ‘Early Warning Signs’ map, detailing a number of potential global
warming effects by region.
sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportal/index.cfm – The World Bank’s Climate Change Data Portal. Provides

information on climate change and a number of tools.
SC-12-222.E 17
Appendix II Overview of ITC’s Trade and Environment

Programme
ITC’s Trade and Environment Programme
Assisting developing country exporters in exploring environmental market opportunities

Environmental niche markets represent a considerable market opportunity for developing countries.
However, small and micro enterprises often face difficulty meeting environmental related standards,
limiting their market access. The International Trade Centre’s Trade and Environment Programme offers
capacity building support to developing country exporters to assist them in overcoming barriers to
environmental markets, strengthening their international competitiveness and improving environmental
outcomes.
The Trade and Environment Programme works through three modes of support:
Capacity building for companies and trade support institutions on meeting market requirements;
Strengthening market linkages through trade fair preparation and participation;
Publishing market studies and guides on sustainability related markets.
Currently, the Trade and Environment Programme focuses on two main areas of the environmental
market:
Biodiversity, and
Climate change
All publications produced by the Trade and Environment Programme can be accessed free of charge
online at: www.intracen.org/projects/tccep/publications
Recent publications include:
Product Carbon Footprinting Standards in the Agri-food Sector (2012)

The North American Market for Natural Products with Highlights on Selected Andean and African Products (2012)
Labelling of Natural Products – The United States Market (2011)
Claim Statements for Natural Products – The United States Market (2011)
Cotton and Climate Change, Impacts and Options to Mitigate and Adapt (2011)
Trends in the Trade of Certified Coffees (2011)
For further information on the Trade and Environment Programme, please visit:
 Website: www.intracen.org/projects/tccep
 Blog: www.intracen.org/itc-environment-blog
 Twitter: @ITCenvironment
Funding for the Trade and Environment Programme is graciously provided by the Government of
Denmark.
18 SC-12-222.E
Appendix III Overview of The Coffee Exporter’s Guide (2012)
The Coffee Exporter’s Guide is the world’s most extensive source of information on all aspects of
international coffee trade. The guide covers the following topics:
Chapter 1 World coffee trade – An Trends in global trade

overview Grading and classification
Stocks and consumption patterns in producer countries
Trends in global consumption and inventories
The International Coffee Organization (ICO)
Chapter 2 The markets for coffee The structure of the international coffee trade
The structure of the retail markets
The evolution in demand for various types of coffee products
Value addition in producer countries
Chapter 3 Niche markets, The specialty market
environment and social Exclusive marketing arrangements
aspects
The production and trade of organic coffee
Mapping technology for coffee marketing
Trademarking and geographical indications
The main sustainability schemes in the coffee sector
Sustainability and gender
Chapter 4 Contracts Commercial or “front office” aspects: quality, delivery time, weights,
payments conditions, intermediaries, etc.
Documentation or “back office” aspects: letters of credit, shipping, bill of
lading, certificates, etc.
Standard forms of contract: ECF and GCA contracts
UCP 600 in sales contracts
Incoterms
Chapter 5 Logistics and insurance Shipping services and hubs
Ocean freight, surcharges and terminal handling charges
Bills of lading and waybills
Carrier’s liability and obligations
Options and logistics for small lots
Shipping in containers: condensation, bulk, lining & filling, discharge,
sampling, weights, customs, seals, etc.
Insurance: risks, standard insurance contracts and claims
Chapter 6 E-commerce and supply The ICE eCOPS system
chain management Supply chain security and efficiency
Paperless trade: legal framework, title registry, compliance and verification
Dispute resolution
Chapter 7 Arbitration Types of disputes and claims
Common errors
Arbitral proceedings in the United Kingdom, Germany, France and the
United States
Chapter 8 Futures markets Price risk and differential
Volatility and leverage
Clearing houses
The main futures markets for coffee: The New York arabica contract, the
London robusta contract, the Bolsa de Mercadorias & Futuros (Brazil) and
the Singapore Exchange Ltd
SC-12-222.E 19
Chapter 9 Hedging and other The buying and selling hedge

operations The price to be fixed (PTBF) contract
Options
Arbitrage and commodity speculation
Technical analysis of futures markets
Chapter 10 Risk and the relation to Types of risk
trade credit Credit insurance
Conditionalities for credit
Risk management
Trade credit in producing countries
Letters of credit
Collateral management
Credit and risk for smallholders
Microfinance
Chapter 11 Coffee quality Processing methods
Quality segmentation
Quality and production techniques
Chapter 12 Quality control ICO minimum export standards
ISO Quality systems
Hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP) systems
Food safety and bio-terrorism
Mycotoxins, residues and contamination
Obsolete pesticides
Mould and OTA prevention
Coffee tasting (liquoring)
Chapter 13 Climate change and the Possible effects of climate change on coffee production
coffee industry Possible interventions and support measures
From strategy to actual responses
Carbon credits and markets
Chapter 14 Questions & Answers Selections from the over 240 detailed answers in English, French and
Spanish offered by the Q&A service on the Coffee Guide Website
www.thecoffeeguide.org
Download the Guide: www.intracen.org/The-Coffee-Exporters-Guide---Third-Edition/
Find us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ITCcoffeeguide
20 SC-12-222.E
Appendix IV Questions and answers at www.thecoffeeguide.org
Find detailed answers to many more questions on the Coffee Guide Website –
Q&A service in English, French and Spanish at www.thecoffeeguide.org
Sample Q&A
Q&A 192: Can coffee growers, especially smallholders, benefit from carbon offsets?
Background We hear more and more of the possibility of turning reductions in carbon and greenhouse gases
emissions into profit but we find it difficult to get information on how coffee growers can benefit from
any of this? How can smallholders growing coffee join in this and benefit? After all we already have
the plantations and trees that help to reduce greenhouse gases…
Asked by Extension Officer – East Africa
Answer Answer posted on May 15, 2008.
The carbon-offset or carbon-credit market would appear to offer potential for coffee growers.*
Supermarket chains, other retailers and consumer organizations are asking the coffee distribution
chain (roasters, importers, others) to move to what is called a carbon-neutral product footprint
(carbon dioxide or CO2). This is a situation wherein the carbon emissions the coffee chain produces
are offset by carbon-reducing activities. And yes, in theory coffee growing offers potential for such
activities but it must be stressed that as yet agri-based offsets are not widespread.
Greenhouse gases (GHG) like carbon dioxide (CO2), contribute to global warming. Other such
gases are Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O), Hydro Fluorocarbons – HFCs, Per Fluorocarbons
PFCs and Sulfur Hexafluoride – SF6. Defining mechanisms for isolating GHG from the atmosphere
and goals for limited GHG emissions were needed and the global response was materialized in a
document called The Kyoto Protocol.
The Kyoto Protocol** created what is known as the Clean Development Mechanism or CDM.
This allows developed countries to invest in projects in developing countries to reduce GHG
emissions, and to promote sustainable development by structured projects that can result in the
selling of certified emission reductions or CER. CDM projects must demonstrate their additionality,
i.e. they have an additional/added value effect in the GHG scenario. Under the additionality concept,
coffee farms would have to prove that they create GHG savings which are additional to anything that
might happen anyway. The additionality margin is always confronted against a baseline that is traced
comparing the farms with and without the CDM Project.
Different ecosystems each have a distinct potential to trap carbon atoms. A tropical forest will
isolate more carbon than a temperate forest, or grasslands or an agricultural ecosystem. In the same
way, different agricultural coffee systems have distinct potential to trap carbon atoms: forest coffee,
smallholder plots, commercial plantations, coffee with or without shade, with or without intercropping
etc. To note that only net absorptions of GHG will be taken into account as agricultural practices also
produce GHG emissions, for example when tractors or electric motors are used. Because of such
leakages every CDM project should consider the entire farming process to calculate the net
reduction, including the impact the seasonality of some of the agricultural practices has on the total
GHG reduction.
Put differently…
Established stands of both coffee and shade trees are not taken into account as they are part of
an already existing situation. However, the conservation of existing forest cover and
improvement of general agricultural practices, resulting in more eco-friendly coffee stands, are
other avenues towards earning carbon credits, provided net GHG gains can be shown.
New activities such as the introduction of intercropping with suitable GHG absorbing plants, the
planting of additional shade trees and the rehabilitation of degraded lands and hillsides can
count. This could include the planting of additional coffee and shade trees but only if it can be
proven that the land in question had previously been in a prolonged state of degradation…
The calculations to determine the net result of different activities are complex and the final result
may only justify the effort if larger areas are covered. This makes it difficult if not impossible for
individual smallholders to participate directly in carbon offsets.
SC-12-222.E 21
The advantage of the CDM process is that it results in "certified" carbon credits with traceability and
credibility as set out in the Kyoto Protocol procedures. These credits can be traded on established,
formal markets with transparent pricing procedures. In practical terms however the CDM approach
may not be the best suited for smallholder coffee because of the difficulty to measure the different
coffee production processes accurately in terms of GHG impact.
An alternative is to search for answers in the voluntary markets…
These markets do not require as much documentation and financial investment as do the mandatory
(CDM) markets. However, prices are highly variable because the project developers have the
freedom to adopt standards or not, to create new methodologies, and to have or not have third part
verifications.***
However, this freedom of negotiation affects the prices of the credits as these are directly related to
the quality and credibility of the methodology that was used, and the degree of verification by third
part audits or other assurance mechanisms. Critics refer to a lack of regulated methodologies for
setting up the credits and the impossibility of tracing back the volume of GHG alleged. Lack of
regulations could result in double counting of credits, intentionally or unintentionally, and having to
trust that already purchased credits will be accounted for in the future. After all, projects can fail
whereas standards and verification systems could turn out to be inadequate.
Even so, the voluntary route may be more appropriate for small or medium sized initiatives (projects)
that may lack the capacity and knowledge to develop true coffee carbon credits. Widening the sphere
of activities and extending the target areas might then also result in more people or communities
being able to participate.
Standards that could potentially be adopted by coffee growers include The Voluntary Carbon
Standard, which has a section of Agricultural Land Management (coffee trees, vegetation, soil and
waste water); and the CCB – Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance Standards (www.climate-
standards.org). CCB includes three kinds of credits: Approved, Silver and Gold depending on the
findings of the audit process. But, as yet we are not aware of any concrete examples where
application is taking place in the coffee sector.
However, The Starbucks Company (www.starbucks.com), together with Conservation International
(www.conservation.org), recently announced the launch of a pilot project that aims to combine best
agricultural practices on coffee farms with protection of the land, water and forests that surround
them. The project will be governed by the CCB standards and will focus on promoting tree protection
and increasing forest cover. One expectation is that these activities may ultimately create
opportunities for farm income diversification through access to emerging international carbon
markets. Go to www.conservation.org, click on Press Releases and go to the 19 March 2008 article.
To summarise: It is not possible to 'sell coffee or shade trees' but, it is possible to work
towards producing carbon credits that can be traded, either through the mandatory CDM
process, or through voluntary arrangements. For individual smallholders though pure coffee
carbon credits may be very difficult if not impossible to achieve. The better route is probably
through 'umbrella projects' that encompass larger areas and take a holistic approach to the
issue.
* This question highlights the fact that little concrete information exists on this complicated issue for coffee
growers. As a result the answer is unusually long whereas the information provided is certainly not complete.
Readers' comments are therefore invited by email to coffeeguide@sco.eastcoast.co.za in an attempt to gather
more information on what may actually be happening on the ground.
** Defining mechanisms for isolating GHG from the atmosphere and goals for limited GHG emissions
were needed and the global response was materialized in a document called the Kyoto Protocol. The most
publicised source of global warning are fossil fuels (electricity generation, manufacturing, transport etc.) but
deforestation in non-industrialized countries also contributes quite considerably as it reduces the available tree
park. Trees are efficient absorbers of CO2 whereas burning them releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere...
Industries and others that produce GHG can calculate their emissions and offset these against certificates of
emission reduction or CER. For example by investing in planting new trees or sources of renewable energy,
either directly or (mostly) through the purchase of offset or renewable energy certificates generated by others who
engage in these activities. The international market for such certificates is developing rapidly and is generally
referred to as the emissions offset market. Much background information is available at www.v-c-s.org.
*** Exchanges trading in carbon allowances include: the Chicago Climate Exchange at
www.chicagoclimatex.com, the European Climate Exchange at www.europeanclimateexchange.com, Nord Pool
at www.nordpool.com and BlueNext at www.bluenext.eu
Related 03 – Niche markets, environment and social aspects

chapter(s) 02 – The markets for coffee
13 – Climate change and the coffee industry
22 SC-12-222.E
Q&A 235: Does (organic) coffee production affect climate change?

Background How can coffee production affect climate change? As known we in Ethiopia are the original growers
of organic arabica coffee and as such we did not contribute to climate change, especially in coffee.
Asked by Producer/trade Association – Ethiopia
Answer Answer posted on January 08, 2010
To some degree coffee production, including organic, contributes to climate change. The
extent will depend on how it is grown, processed, exported and consumed.
First, for coffee to be certified organic it must be grown as part of an intensive, holistic agricultural
production management system that includes the composting of organic materials, mulching, shade
regulation and biological pest control. Such a system is based on the principle that a value
corresponding to that harvested should be returned to the soil. It excludes the use of agro-chemicals
(a major contributor to climate change in coffee production). Of course, in this respect organic
production contributes (much) less to climate change than does the industrial type growing of
commodity or mainstream coffee.
Nevertheless, there are other activities, also in the organic coffee chain, that contribute to the
emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) or carbon dioxide (CO2). Within the producing country for
example: using tractors, processing equipment, transport vehicles and shipping abroad. And at the
consumption end: roasting, packaging, distribution, grinding/brewing, consumption and waste
disposal. All these contribute in different ways to GHG emissions and so the coffee industry as a
whole should not only focus on coping with climate change (helping producers to adapt), but also on
mitigation (reduce its own contribution to GHG emissions).*
Coffee growing, especially that by smallholders, is of course not a great contributor to GHG
emissions. In fact the industry should be able to earn marketable Carbon Reduction Credits (CRCs)
through the biosequestration of carbon, for example through afforestation and reforestation since
trees capture CO2. Such carbon or GHG saving activities are possible in many coffee-growing areas
but, they will only qualify for CRCs if it can be proven that they are additional to anything that might
happen anyway. This concept of additionality makes it difficult for coffee growers, especially
smallholders, to benefit from the growing carbon-offset or carbon-credit market.
But, requiring coffee farmers to plant additional trees (at a cost!) before they may qualify for
any carbon credits seems not only to ignore the environmental services they already perform,
but also disregards the fact that for the vast majority such additional investments are hardly
feasible in today's coffee economy. This raises the question why, as is the case for conserving
existing forests, maintaining shaded coffee farms, i.e. conserve existing shade trees and their carbon
capturing potential, should not count towards earning carbon credits. After all, it can be argued that
coffee farms under shade capture and conserve more carbon but at the cost of lower yields and,
therefore, lower farmer incomes when compared with coffee grown in direct sunlight.**
The foregoing is but a very brief resume of the complexities coffee growers face when aspiring to
develop carbon projects, also for organic coffee. Nevertheless more tools and credible monitoring
methodologies are now coming to the fore, including a number of ongoing pilot projects that should
facilitate extending carbon projects to the majority of coffee producing countries. Provided that the
necessary capacity building and legislative support in those countries is forthcoming it may be
assumed that progress will accelerate from 2010 onwards.
For more information and resources on Climate change and the coffee industry please read
Chapter 13 of the Coffee Guide. Posted early January 2010 this provides not only an overview
of how climate change may affect the industry, but also lists ongoing initiatives and
information sources that may assist coffee growers.
* The total contribution to GHG emissions, from tree to cup, is called the product carbon footprint or PCF.
This describes the sum of greenhouse gases accumulated during the full life cycle of a product (good or service)
in a specified application. For an example of how to calculate a PCF for coffee, in this case Tanzania, visit
http://www.pcf-project.de/main/results/case-studies.
** CATIE, the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza in Costa Rica – www.catie.ac.cr,
is working with the Costa Rican Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento Forestal (FONAFIFO) on a Payment for
Environmental Services Scheme to establish criteria for environmental payments to shaded coffee farms.
Related 01 – World coffee trade

chapter(s) 03 – Niche markets, environment and social aspects
13 – Climate change and the coffee industry
SC-12-222.E 23
technical
paper
CLIMATE CHANGE AND

THE COFFEE INDUSTRY
Street
Street address
Street
address
address P: +41
P: +41
P:22+41
730
22 730
22
0111
730
0111
0111 Postal Postal
Postal
addressaddress
address
International
International Trade
Trade
International Centre
Centre
Trade Centre F: +41
F: +41
F:22+41
733
22 733
22
4439
733
4439
4439 International
International
International Trade
Trade
Trade Centre Centre
Centre
54-56
54-56 Rue Rue
54-56 de de
deRue Montbrillant
Montbrillant
Montbrillant E: itcreg@intracen.org
E: itcreg@intracen.org
E: itcreg@intracen.org Palais Palais
Palais
desdes des
NationsNations
Nations
12021202 Geneva,
Geneva,
1202 Switzerland
Switzerland
Geneva, Switzerland www.intracen.org
www.intracen.org
www.intracen.org 121112111211 Geneva
Geneva
Geneva 10, 10, 10, Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
The International Trade Centre (ITC) is the joint agency of the World Trade Organization and the United Nations.

Climate Change and The Coffee Industry: Technical Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Climate Change and The Coffee Industry: Technical Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

technical

CLIMATE CHANGE AND

Abstract for trade information services

ID= 42957 2012 SITC-071 CLI

International Trade Centre (ITC)

Descriptors: Coffee, Climate Change, Production, Environment.

For further information on this technical paper, contact:

English, Spanish (separate editions)

ITC, Palais des Nations, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland (www.intracen.org)

© International Trade Centre 2012

Appendix I Relevant websites for additional information 15

Appendix II Overview of ITC’s Trade and Environment Programme 18

Appendix III Overview of The Coffee Exporter’s Guide (2012) 19

Appendix IV Question and answers at www.thecoffeeguide.org 21

Box 1. The Kyoto Protocol 4

The following abbreviations are used:

ALM Adaptation Learning Mechanism

1. The impact of coffee production on climate change

1.1. Agriculture as a source of greenhouse gas emissions

1.2. The coffee value chain as a source of greenhouse gas emissions

Additional tools and sources of information on PCF include the following:

The Sustainable Agriculture Initiative is also developing carbon footprinting methodologies.

2. Mitigation of coffee value chain emissions

2.1. Technical options to reduce production emissions

2.2. Market incentives to reduce coffee value chain emissions

2.2.1. Product carbon footprint standards

2.2.2. Carbon market opportunities for coffee

Certified emission reductions

Box 1. The Kyoto Protocol

Verified emission reductions

Voluntary market standards that have emerged for VERs include:

The Avoided Deforestation in the Coffee Forest in El Salvador Project www.climate-standards.org

Box 2. Carbon sinks and carbon sequestration

2.2.3. Tools for carbon projects

2.2.4. Climate mitigation funds

3. The impact of climate change on coffee production

3.1. The agronomy of coffee

3.2. Forecasting climate change

3.3. Impacts of specific climate changes

3.3.1. Erratic rain patterns

3.3.2. Extreme weather events

3.3.3. Increased temperatures

4. Options to adapt to climate change

4.1. Adaptation by smallholder farmers

4.1.1. Short-term technical solutions

− Improving irrigation and water resources management;

− Reducing water usage with eco-friendly pulpers;

4.1.2. Long-term strategies

Long-term strategies include:

4.2. Adapting to climate change in practice

4.2.1. Responses to past crises in Mesoamerica

Participation in new economic activities, including diversification to non-agricultural activities and

Moreover, the study proposed some strategic recommendations, including:

Establishing financial mechanisms, including climate insurance, access to micro-credit to

4.2.2. The 4C Climate Code

4.2.3. The Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) Climate Module

4.2.4. Climate mapping and modelling

Appendix I Relevant websites for additional information

General information and terminology

www.unfccc.int/2860.php – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). Home of

www.unfccc.int/essential_background/glossary/items/3666.php The United Nations Framework Convention

www.unep.org/climatechange – United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Offers a wide range of

www.fao.org/climatechange/en – Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO).