Certifications

October 3, 2013

Certification improves access to credit for farmers

Rainforest Alliance recently announced the release of an important study outlining an overlooked benefit for farmers of achieving certification: the ability to get larger and more frequent small loans. The study, Farmer Bankability and Sustainable Finance: Farm-Level Metrics that Matter, focused on Rainforest Alliance certified coffee and cacao producers, but results are likely to apply to other types of certification.

The study found that loans provided to certified farmers averaged 25% more than those to non-certified producers; the average dollar amount was over $2200 greater. Certified producers were also able to obtain more frequent loans than non-certified producers (1.36 loans annually, versus 0.66).

There is a fairly common group of metrics that lenders require from farmers on loan applications, including information on cash flow, crop volume and production figures, etc. What we as coffee consumers tend to forget is that many coffee farmers have limited literacy and keep very minimal records. For instance, in this study fewer than half of non-certified producers kept revenue records, and not even a third kept expense records. For certified farmers, 90% or more maintained these data.

Certification organizations (in this case Rainforest Alliance and its partners) provide training and technical assistance to farmers to help them achieve certification, as well as to perform the monitoring necessary to continue to renew certification. These improved record-keeping skills are very transferable: with them, the farmer has the ability to not only successfully apply for credit, but show the lender their needs and outcomes. While producers belonging to cooperatives can often obtain this kind of assistance from their organizations, fewer than 10% of small producers (less than 10 hectares) belongs to such an organization. Even so, lenders indicated that these types of records kept at the farm level enhanced the credit-worthiness of cooperatives and improved their access to financing as well.

These types of short-term loans are critical for producers to purchase organic fertilizers, farm equipment, replacement seed and plant stock, and so forth. Since coffee is a once-a-year crop that is so dependent on weather and market prices, coffee farmers can be particularly handicapped without access to credit. Finally, the more detailed records kept by farmers to maintain certification and obtain loans is really essential for them to improve their sustainable farming methods. Win-win for all!

The study compared Rainforest Alliance certified (63) and non-certified producers (57) in Colombia and Peru growing coffee (84) and cacao (26). Various lenders and finance organizations were also interviewed. The report has a lot of interesting information in it, including recommendations for standardization of records kept by producers and required by lenders. You can download the PDF here.

Certifications / Smithsonian Bird-Friendly

July 8, 2013

Get Bird-Friendly coffee at Whole Foods

Two Smithsonian Bird-Friendly certified coffees are now available at Whole Foods Markets nationwide, offered by their wholly-owned subsidiary Allegro Coffee Roasters.

Early Bird Blend

The first is the Early Bird Blend, a special coffee Allegro will keep in rotation to feature Bird-Friendly certified coffees. Currently, it comprised of a blend of Selva Negra from Nicaragua (see below) and the GRAPOS (Grupo de Asesores de Produccion Organica y Sustenable S.C.) co-operative in Chiapas, which is in the buffer zone of the El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve. The Reserve contains the northernmost cloud forests in the world and is considered as one of the greatest biodiversity sites of North America. It’s one of the best of only a few places in the world to see the spectacular and critically endangered Horned Guan.

Allegro plans to utilize other Chiapas farms in the blend, as well as the famous Colombia El Roble (Mesa de los Santos), an origin we first reviewed here, and which has also been used by Birds & Beans in their Chestnut-sided Warbler variety.

Organic Selva Negra

The other is their most recent Origin Direct coffee, Nicaragua Selva Negra. This is the same program that featured the farm El Jaguar earlier this year, where my husband and I did a bunch of bird-banding and insect survey work a couple of years ago. The Origin Direct program (formerly Special Reserve) picks an outstanding source every quarter and awards the producers $10,000 to support community projects.

Selva Negra (the name of the farm is actually La Hammonia) is located near Matagalpa, Nicaragua, and I wrote about it when overviewing that country’s Bird-Friendly certified farms. They also hold Rainforest Alliance and organic certification (the latter necessary for Bird-Friendly certification as well). I have been to Selva Negra twice, and can attest that the 150 ha of preserved cloud forest is fabulous, and contains many unique and rare birds among 280 or so species, plus orchids and other biodiversity. I had two great birding milestones there: my first Resplendent Quetzal, a near threatened species, and my 1000th life bird, a Ruddy Woodcreeper at an ant swarm, which are kind of unusual at high elevations.

Roast and taste

We’ve had an opportunity to try both of these coffees. The Selva Negra is designated as a light roast, although it comes with just a bit of sheen to the beans. The Early Bird Blend is medium. Fans of Birds & Beans light or medium roasts, or generally more robust coffees will find the Early Bird Blend very much to their liking, and it will hold up well to milk and/or sweeteners. The Selva Negra is a bit more subtle, but a perfect every day breakfast coffee. We found both extremely smooth, with several layers of creamy, understated complexity building as they cooled. This was more pronounced with the Selva Negra, which was therefore probably responsible for this characteristic. This quality gave both coffees some of the most lustrous, almost velvety mouthfeels I think I have ever experienced in any day-to-day coffee, versus some much more expensive boutique selections.

Support the Bird-Friendly Early Bird Blend!

There are over 350 Whole Foods Markets; these coffees are currently available bagged and (if there is an Allegro roastery in one of your local stores) fresh in bins ready to be scooped up an enjoyed. This should reduce the number of people I hear saying that Bird-Friendly coffee is too hard to find. You can also buy online from Allegro.

But here is the important part — Allegro is launching the Early Bird Blend to gauge how much this certification resonates with customers. Do you care about the availability of this blend, and want to support the birds and biodiversity emblematic of and the purpose behind Bird-Friendly certification? If so, PLEASE make sure your Whole Foods store manager knows how you feel. Try out the Early Bird Blend and provide feedback to Whole Foods and/or Allegro.

Coffee drinkers have the potential to make a huge impact on the environment and economies of coffee growing nations. This is a terrific opportunity for coffee drinkers concerned about sustainably-grown coffee to stand behind our beliefs.

Certifications / Coffee and the environment / Coffee news and miscellany / Organic coffee

June 4, 2013

A rusty nail in the coffin of organic-certified coffee?

Coffee leaf rust (Hemileia vastatrix) is a highly contagious fungal disease that is devastating coffee production in Latin America, with losses estimated at 15 to 70%, depending on the region. One essential component to combating this disease is the use of fungicides. Copper-based fungicides are relatively inexpensive and are permitted under organic certification. However, they must be reapplied frequently (around every three weeks, or more often if it rains and gets washed off) and are not without ecological risk. If used frequently or in excessive amounts, copper can build up in soils and can also be harmful to aquatic organisms. Some types of synthetic fungicides*, not allowable under organic certification, can be more effective — and in some circumstances may actually be safer for the environment.

Some of the best reporting on the coffee rust crisis is from Michael Sheridan writing at CRS Coffeelands. As I was contemplating writing this post on the connection between coffee leaf rust and organic certification, Michael hit on the topic himself. He notes that farm management [use of shade, planting density, pruning, proper timing of fungicide applications] has as much or more to do with crop losses from rust as does whether the farmer uses organic or conventional production; this was echoed in survey results gathered by Green Mountain Coffee Roasters. The severity of this disease is also very dependent on climate and weather factors such as wind, moisture, and temperature. Still, Michael notes that the “official response to coffee rust in Central America so far seems to have been heavily skewed toward agrochemical-intensive approaches”.

For example, at a recent coffee rust summit, a representative from PROMECAFE, a Central American coordinator for coffee-related technical training, suggested that in the short term, organic farmers might consider leaving organic for conventional production.

nail CRS Coffeelands quotes Miguel Medina of the Guatamalan national coffee organization Anacafé as saying, ”I don’t know how organic coffee can have a future. There is nothing that works to control rust in the field and I am not seeing anyone in the market offering more to create additional incentives for organic farmers.”

Despite a strong commitment by farmers in many Latin American countries to preserve their environment and even a suspicion by a few that chemical companies may be behind the rust epidemic, many farmers may feel compelled to give up their organic certification to fight the rust. With the severity of this threat to their livelihoods — and even survival — the choice between trying to salvage their coffee trees with artificial fungicides or stick with organic certification is straightforward. Many will do what they can to keep afloat and give up organic certification. This not only allows them to use more potent artificial fungicides to try to control the coffee leaf rust, but it also frees them to use pesticides and artificial fertilizers that may be considered necessary to protect or help vulnerable or ailing coffee trees.

Over the past few years, some farmers have already abandoned organic certification because the extra money they receive for it simply does not compensate them for the added expense of producing coffee this way. The rust crisis adds to this dilemma. Eventually, coffee fields are likely to be replanted with rust-resistant varieties, but even those in the ground today will take three to five years to produce a crop. Meanwhile, we as consumers need to brace ourselves for higher coffee prices as crop yields decline, and be that much more willing to pay extra for organic coffee.

Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality — April 2013

ra-seal The Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality recognizes Rainforest Alliance certified coffees, highlighting the linkage between sustainable farm management practices and cup quality. There are two annual cuppings and awards, divided by geography. In December, coffees from the southern hemisphere compete. The April cupping covers countries in Latin America, as well as Ethiopia and India. The following results were announced last week at the annual Rainforest Alliance Sustainable Coffee Breakfast at the Specialty Coffee Association of America’s annual event.

This spring’s cupping included 77 coffees from 12 countries. The top scorers were:

Hacienda La Esmeralda (Panama ) – 89.94. This farm is famously known for its “discovery” (or at least popularization) of the Geisha variety, and it used to sweep all awards where it was entered. The last time it was in this competition was in 2009, when it took first place with a score of 88.99.
Banko Gotiti (Ethiopia) – 89.69. This farm that is part of Ethiopia’s Yirgacheffe Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union (YCFCU), which currently represents over 43,794 farmers belonging to more than 300,000 families.
Inambari (Peru) – 87.38. Inambari is one of the organic cooperatives that is part of CECOVASA (Central de Cooperativas Agrarias Cafetaleras de los Valles de Sandia), a group of Fair Trade cooperatives totaling nearly 5000 members. CECOVASA has also been working with Conservation International. CECOVASA has won coffee quality awards before, with members winning Cupping for Quality awards the past several years, as well as an award for their work preserving biodiversity. The Inambari logo is a stylized hummingbird.
Moredocofe (Ethiopia) – 87.06. Family-owned, also organic and UTZ Certified. Their logo features a Northern Carmine Bee Eater (Merops nubicus).
Teppi Green Coffee Estate (Ethiopia) – 86.84. A very large (10,000 ha) farm managed by Green Coffee Agro Industry. Despite its large size, a portion of the coffee is still grown in fairly rustic conditions, as the company is a major exporter of “forest coffee” in the country.
Ururi (Peru) – 86.05. Another CECOVSA branded coffee.
Manantiales del Frontino (Colombia) – 86.13. Growing 10 varieties (including a Geisha which won the SCAA’s Coffee of the Year in 2011) at 1500-2000 meters; the farm includes 170 ha of forested area. Scored 84.48 in last April’s competition.
Biloya (Ethiopia) – 85.94. Another member of the Yirgacheffe Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union (YCFCU).
Los Cedros (Colombia) – 85.84.
Finca Kassandra (Mexico) – 85.81. In central Veracruz, at 1200 to 1500 m. Scored 85.46 in 2011 competition. Their logo has a stylized bird, perhaps a motmot.

The average score of the 9 past winners from the last 6 years is 87.95, so the winner this spring is above average. The average score of the top ten from the past 6 years is 85.20, while this year it was 87.11.

Previous results are available here in the archives in the Coffee Awards and Competitions category.

Rainforest Alliance / Retail and specialty roasters

April 10, 2013

Caribou Coffee’s new owners: killing the brand?

This post includes important updates, flagged in the text and at the end of the post.

Caribou Coffee, which sources all its beans from Rainforest Alliance certified farms, was acquired by the Joh. A. Benckiser Group (JAB), a private German holding company, in December 2012. Earlier in 2012, JAB acquired Peet’s Coffee & Tea.

When I wrote about the acquisition earlier this year, I stated,

I can only hope that under JAB, Caribou can continue with its transparency, excellent sustainability record, and its all-Rainforest Alliance coffee sourcing.

Unfortunately, it looks like JAB is headed toward sourcing less certified coffee by favoring the Peet’s brand over Caribou and alienating many faithful Caribou customers and employees in the process.

Caribou abruptly announced the closing or rebranding of over a quarter of its 600+ stores. Eighty will be permanently closed in less than a week, including all or most in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, Illinois, eastern Wisconsin and Washington. U.S. states where Caribou will continue to operate (for now) under its own brand will include Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Iowa, Kansas, western Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Colorado.

Another 88 stores will be converted to Peet’s Coffee & Tea stores. Peet’s is not a major purchaser of Rainforest Alliance coffee, or much of any certified coffee, for that matter. Of the 34 varieties currently listed on its website, only one is certified organic, while one is Fair Trade. Peet’s is also known for their very dark roasting (29 of the 34 are designated as “deep roasts”) and rather generically-labeled blends and “single origins.” Just what we need — more over-roasted mystery beans.

These changes have brought the ire of customers, many of whom are taking to social and other online media with responses ranging from dismay to vowing to never set foot in Peet’s to setting up Facebook pages denouncing the abrupt termination of employees. On the company’s own Facebook page, fans are expressing their dislike of the situation, complaining that the company is removing posts and comments, all while corporate Caribou has remained mum on the topic. This ham-handedness demonstrates a lack of sensitivity to Caribou customers, if nothing else. (Update: Forbes published an excellent piece on how poorly the company handled the public in the media, especially Facebook.)

JAB also owns 15% of D.E. [Douwe Egberts] Master Blenders 1753. Douwe Egberts is the Dutch company created when Sara Lee spun off all of its coffee and tea business. As of April 12, 2013, Douwe Egberts has agreed to be acquired by JAB. Allow me to be pessimistic and theorize that if this acquisition goes through, coffee sourcing will be streamlined via the supply chain of Douwe Egberts, one of the largest coffee buyers in the world.

The Douwe Egberts certifier of choice is UTZ Certified, not a bad certification, but very lean on environmental criteria and thus one which I do not consider an eco-certification. In 2012, Douwe Egberts sourced 65,000 tons of UTZ Certified coffee. Their goal is to have 25% of their coffee purchases “certified as sustainable” by 2015. Douwe Egberts gets a “D” grade on sustainability from RankABrand.

Regardless of what happens on the Douwe Egberts front, the recent actions by JAB seem to indicate a move towards away from sustainably-sourced and 100%-certified coffees…just what I was afraid of.

More updates: The Forbes piece mentioned above also talks about further potential changes, indicating what’s happened so far “doesn’t bode well for Caribou’s future.”

We also spoke confidentially to an employee of a local store slated to be converted to a Peet’s. He told us that in a team meeting when staff members brought up questions regarding differences in sustainable sourcing and certifications between Peet’s and Caribou, the management declined to discuss the topic.

Smithsonian Bird-Friendly

April 3, 2013

First Bird-Friendly coffee from Caribbean

The Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center has announced the first Bird-Friendly certified coffee from the Caribbean, from Spirit Mountain Coffee in the Dominican Republic. Several years ago, I wrote a piece about coffee growing on Hispaniola, the island shared by the Dominican Republic and Haiti. There, you can read about Hispaniola’s great biodiversity, including 30 endemic bird species; the importance of the island to birds that winter and migrate through the West Indies and breed in North America; and the critical role of shade coffee in preserving habitat on an island with a very high level of deforestation.

The farm is near the village of La Angostura in the Jarabacoa region. The property is around 140 ha, of which 32 ha at 1100 to 1400 meters is in typica and caturra coffee (some bourbon is being planted). All the coffee is Bird-Friendly/organic certified, and also carries Rainforest Alliance and UTZ certifications. The current owners acquired the abandoned farm in 2003, and have since planted over 50,000 trees of over 30 species that provide both timber and habitat for birds and other flora and fauna, making it ideal to qualify for Bird-Friendly certification.

In addition to coffee, Spirit Mountain keeps 20 bee hives for organic honey production, and also grows a variety of citrus, nut, and timber trees.

Corporate coffee / McDonald's / Rainforest Alliance

March 19, 2013

McDonald’s makes substantial commitment to coffee sustainability

mccafe McDonald’s Corp. recently announced that their North American operations is investing $6.5 million over 4.5 years to provide technical assistance to Guatemalan coffee farmers to increase their capacity for sustainable coffee production. McDonald’s is partnering with the non-profit TechnoServe (which coordinates many coffee-related projects) and SCAN (Sustainable Commodity Assistance Network), a global consortium of 20 organizations that provide an array of support for sustainable agriculture practices. This is another component in the sustainability efforts of the Golden Arches, a number of which are directly related to coffee. These include:

All coffee in the U.K. is from Rainforest Alliance-certified farms (since 2007).
All coffee in the rest of their 39 European markets is from Rainforest Alliance-certified or UTZ Certified farms (since 2007).
All coffee in Australia and New Zealand is from Rainforest Alliance-certified farms (since 2008-2009).
All coffee for espresso-based drinks in the U.S. is sourced from Rainforest Alliance-certified farms (as of March 2013).
All coffee for espresso-based drinks in Canada must be certified by a third party, and is currently 100% Rainforest Alliance.

To get an idea of why I find this so significant, we need put all of this in perspective by comparing it to the largest coffee buyer in the U.S., J.M. Smucker Company.

McDonald’s is a fast food restaurant. They do not directly source or roast coffee (it comes through suppliers). Coffee is not their core business, but makes up just 6% of U.S. sales for the company¹. Smucker’s is a food manufacturer that owns the coffee brands Folgers, Millstone, Dunkin Donuts bagged coffee, Café Pilon, and Café Bustelo. Coffee makes up 44% of their U.S. sales.

McDonald’s certified coffee purchases in 2011 — Rainforest Alliance, UTZ, and Fair Trade — were about 10,400 metric tons, with three-quarters of it being Rainforest Alliance-certified. Although the McDonald’s restaurants in the U.S. lag behind European markets in offering certified coffee, the company expects to buy around 3800 tons for the domestic market. Not a lot, but more than Smuckers (1500 tons) and Nestlé (2000 tons) total certified global purchases combined!

The most recent McDonald’s pledge amounts to $1.4 million a year to provide sustainability support to coffee farmers. That’s 0.06% of its annual coffee sales of about $2.1 billion on U.S. systemwide sales of just over $35 billion. That doesn’t sound like much until you realize that Smucker has opted to support TechnoServe at $150,000 annually², or 0.006% of its annual U.S. retail coffee sales of $2.3 billion. And, as I like to remind everyone, JM Smucker has a dismal environmental sustainability record, and less than 0.5% of the coffee it buys each year carries any type of certification whatsoever.

mcd-love-1

You can let McDonald’s know (on Facebook, for example) that you appreciate their efforts and would like to see more eco-certified coffee in the U.S.

¹Figures provided to me by McDonald’s and are the most recent available; total global coffee purchase information not available at this time. The Nestle and Smucker figures are based on the most recently available data — both of those companies are very guarded about releasing any information to the public. In contrast, McDonald’s was helpful and forthcoming about giving me this data, and also has extensive information at their web site.

²This figure is based on statements made by Smucker’s regarding a continuation of support provided to TechnoServe by Proctor & Gamble, which sold its coffee brands to Smucker. The last time donors were listed in TechnoServe’s annual reports was 2009, and Smucker was listed as a donor in the $100,000 to $499,999 level. I wrote to TechnoServe to verify the amount of support they received from Smucker, but did not receive a reply. I’m sure if Smucker had upped the ante, they’d brag about it, because their 2013 Corporate Responsibility Report touted this relationship…by highlighting the work TechnoServe had done with 170,000 coffee farmers, making it sound as if Smucker should receive lots of credit. TechnoServe receives $3.1 million in corporate and foundation support alone.

Certifications / Corporate coffee / Nestlé/Nespresso

February 1, 2013

Nestlé: Saying no to coffee certifications

Nestlé is the world’s largest food company, with 2011 sales of $94 billion. Some of the most popular of their many coffee brands are Nescafé , Nespresso, and Taster’s Choice. The company buys upwards of 850,000 tons of coffee annually, of which less than 1% is eco-certified.

Nestlé’s most recent corporate responsibility report, Creating Shared Value 2011 (PDF), makes some specific statements about what this big multinational company thinks about sustainability certification.

The company presents its overall position in a section titled Third-party certifications and Responsible Sourcing: “Certification is not an end point in itself, and only one of several ways of Creating Shared Value, promoting sustainable rural development and progressing other development goals in an effective and holistic way.”

In the section specifically devoted to coffee, there is a sub-section titled Marketing certified coffee to consumers. Here’s what it says:

Currently, there are no plans to market certified coffee to consumers (ie, coffee carrying a certification seal on the label). We believe that our own Responsible Sourcing Platform, which combines in-house codes and guidelines, capacity-building teams for key commodities and suppliers, NGO and industry partnerships and third-party certifications, offers a more targeted approach than certification alone.”

Unfortunately for consumers, Nestlé offers few details on their “Responsible Sourcing Platform” so that we can judge whether we think their coffee is really grown in a sustainable manner. They do mention that the “Nestlé Supplier Code is an integral part of any green coffee contract.” This document is publicly available (PDF). It’s easy reading. In fact, it’s only 6 pages, three of which are the covers and title page. Here are the sections on Sustainability and Environment, in their entirety:

Sustainability Nestlé supports and encourages operating practices, farming practices and agricultural production systems that are sustainable. This is an integral part of Nestlé’s supply strategy and supplier development. Nestlé expects the Supplier to Nestlé to continuously strive towards improving the efficiency and sustainability of its operations, which will include water conservation programs.
Environment The Supplier must operate with care for the environment and ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations in the country where products or services are manufactured or delivered.

That’s it. Nothing specific, no standards, guidelines, or benchmarks. In contrast, the basic farm standard of Rainforest Alliance runs 49 pages. Starbucks CAFE Practices has 7 pages of criteria just devoted to environmental leadership for its coffee suppliers.

Nestlé states that “For coffee, biodiversity issues are managed primarily through the use of the 4C Coffee Code and the Nespresso Sustainable Quality AAA programme for coffee sourcing.” Please read this post to learn how 4C compliance merely indicates marginal standards of human and environmental decency. As for the AAA Sustainable Quality program, see this post for an overview of the environmental and social requirements for producers in the Nespresso AAA Sustainable Quality Program, with its low bar for inclusion.

Maybe there’s more to their sourcing guidelines, and they include fabulous safeguards for the environment. I assume if that were the case they’d be making sure we know every last detail, and their coffee would easily qualify for various certifications that consumers would recognize and understand. But Nestlé has made it clear they are not interested in these certifications, and that their way is better. Whatever that is; we’re supposed to take their word for it.

Certifications / Coffee awards and competitions / Rainforest Alliance

January 16, 2013

Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality — Dec 2012

ra-seal The Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality award is designed to recognize exceptional coffees carrying the Rainforest Alliance seal and to highlight the linkage between sustainable farm management practices and cup quality. Two annual cuppings and awards are divided by geography. In December, coffees from the southern hemisphere — including Brazil, Peru, Kenya, Tanzania and Indonesia — compete.

The latest cupping evaluated 51 coffee samples from 9 origins, including one from Malawi, the first entry for that country. Here are the top 10 coffees:

Ndumberi Factory, Kenya — 87.41. One of the coffee processing mills (factories) utilized by the Ndumberi cooperative. This group of over 2500 smallholders in the Kiambu region is also Fair Trade and UTZ Certified. Many of the members — the average size of their plots is 0.15 ha — do grow under some shade.
Tunki, Peru — 86.91. Placed first last year, and second in 2010. Also certified organic and Fair Trade. Tunki is one of the coffees from CECOVASA (Central de Cooperativas Agrarias Cafetaleras de los Valles de. Sandia), a group of cooperatives totaling nearly 5000 members. CECOVASA has been working with Conservation International, and has won an award for their work preserving biodiversity. “Tunki” is the local name for the national bird of Peru, the spectacular Andean Cock-of-the-Rock, depicted in their logo. Equal Exchange has a good article on a visit to CECOVASA.
El Silencio – Luis Fernando Arias Alzate, Colombia — 86.88. Also Fair Trade.
Tegu Factory, Kenya — 86.09. Nyeri district, part of the Tekangu Farmers Cooperative, which has around 900 members. Also UTZ Certified. The co-op has engaged in a community tree planting project.
Quechua, Peru — 86.00. Like Tunki, one of the CECOVASA coffees; also organic and Fair Trade. Came in 5th place in 2010.
Santo Tomas 2, Eibar Jose Rojas Pajoy, Colombia — 85.44.
Gichatha-ini Factory, Kenya — 85.18. Also Fair Trade and UTZ Certified.
Ibonia Estate, Kenya — 84.46. Also UTZ Certified. Placed 6th in 2010.
Coop Sol & Café [Coopertiva de Servicios Multiples Sol & Cafe], Peru — 84.25. Also Fair Trade and organic certified. This 1000+ member cooperative includes cacoa and rice producers.
Yadini Estate, Kenya — 84.23. A 131 ha estate (81 cultivated in cofffee) near Ruiru. Also UTZ Certified, and a Starbucks supplier. Placed 9th in 2010. According to a profile on their web site, “Bio- diversity is also being enhanced on the farm by the ongoing planting of coffee friendly shade trees” and they hope to market shade coffee in the future.

Last year, I began tracking the cumulative data on this competition going back to 2007. The average score for the top ten in this current event was 85.68, which is slightly above the previous average of 85.14. The top score of 87.41 was below the average of previous top scores (88.02). Not all countries have competed each year, but of the countries that have had coffees in at least five events, the highest average score goes to Peru at 86.30 (five events). Colombia (86.05, n=6) and Guatemala (86.04, n=5) came in next.

Search for these coffees online — I have seen quite a few of them offered within the last two crop years.

Certifications / Rainforest Alliance

July 25, 2012

Rainforest Alliance now requires scaling up

Over a year ago, I wrote about an upcoming change to the rules for use of the Rainforest Alliance certified seal. Under the previous (2007) Use of Seal Guidelines, any single-ingredient product, such as coffee, could carry the RA seal so long as it contained at least 30% certified content. The percentage had to be indicated adjacent to the seal.

RA encouraged companies to increase the percentage of certified content over time, even going so far as saying that companies had to agree to these increases. However, there was no specific mandate or requirement in the Guidelines. Thus, we had Yuban Coffee, made by Kraft, that has contained 30% certified beans (and 70% mystery-sourced beans) since 2006.

The good news is that in their new Use of Seal Guidelines, there is explicit language regarding “scaling up” of amounts of certified ingredients. Companies using the RA certified seal on single-ingredient products that have less than 90% certified content must agree to increase the percentage a specific amount over a specific time period. There are two options for doing so. In the first, the amount is increased by 15% of total volume a year. So coffee that starts out at 30% certified goes to 45%, 60%, 75%, and 90% over four years. Terrific!

The “bad” news is that the other option is for companies to sign a “SmartSource” scale-up plan that “allows more flexibility … to work within the realities of sourcing.” The sample plan provided shows scaling up over six years where some years there is no increase, and other years variable amounts.

The lack of a time limit on the SmartSource plan seems like the weak spot in this option. Why not tell companies they can scale up by less than 15% a year some years, but that they have to get to >90% in no more than 6 or 7 years, for instance.

I understand “the realities of sourcing” and also RA’s rationale for working with these large companies. To rehash: a very large roaster sourcing 30% of many tons of coffee has an arguably larger impact than a small company sourcing 100% of two tons, and allowing less-than-total content gets big corporations to the table. Yet many consumers, roasters, and coffee professionals I’ve talked to think that the ”30% rule” (as well as the “10% slippage” issue) tarnishes a great certification, or confuses or misleads consumers. Allowing it in the first place, and providing wiggle room in the scaling up process could be (is) perceived as too much concession to corporate interests.

I’m willing to bet Kraft is using the SmartSource plan, given the volume they purchase and their long-standing 30% plateau. It will be interesting to see how they progress, although we will have to wait years to see the end result. I wonder what will happen to companies that do not scale up on schedule. I presume those companies that fail under option 1 will merely be put on a SmartSource plan. I can’t imagine RA terminating a relationship or yanking a seal as long as there is an open-ended option in place.

So while I’m not discounting this clear step forward with the 30% rule, I’m not sure it “solves” the go-easy-on-big-coffee perception problem. In any event, Rainforest Alliance deserves a lot of credit for the great progress they’ve made bringing certified coffee (and many other products) into the mainstream, and their successful efforts at educating the public about coffee sustainability.

Coffee awards and competitions / Rainforest Alliance

April 20, 2012

Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality – April 2012

The Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality award is designed to recognize coffees carrying the Rainforest Alliance seal and to highlight the linkage between sustainable farm management practices and cup quality. There are now two annual cuppings and awards, divided by geography. In December, coffees from the southern hemisphere compete. The April cupping covers countries in Latin America, as well as Ethiopia and India. The following results were announced this morning at the annual Rainforest Alliance Sustainable Coffee Breakfast at the Specialty Coffee Association of America’s annual event in Portland, Oregon.

This year, the April cupping evaluated 90 coffee samples (highest yet!) from 9 origins. Here are the top ten:

Idido (Yirgacheffe) Ethiopia — 86.13
Wottona Buituma (Sidama), Ethiopia — 84.88. This co-op is one of the Sidama Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union. Also certified organic.
Grupo Supia Zona La Quiebra, Colombia — 84.85
Gidibona Sheicha, Ethiopia — 84.83. Another member of the Sidama Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union. Also certified organic.
Green Coffee Agro Industry, Ethiopia — 84.75
Grupo Aguadas Zona Viboral, Colombia — 84.70
Manantiales del Frontino, Colombia — 84.48. Part of the Colombian Mountain Coffee group, with 138 ha in the Valle de Cauca that includes a number of varietals, including Geisha/Gesha.
El Injerto, Guatemala — 84.45
Adame Gorbota, Ethiopia — 84.18
Las Mercedes, El Salvador — 84.13

That’s a pretty tight pack, with an average score of 84.74. Weird weather made it kind of a tough year in Central America, which may account for the fact that the winning score and the top ten average were both lower than the previous five-year averages (88.28 and 85.20). The winning scores for each country except the Dominican Republic (see the rest below) were also below average.

The top scorers from the other countries represented were:

Nicaragua — La Laguna, 83.65
Mexico — Grupo de Productores AAA, 83.35
Costa Rica — Finca Santa Anita, 83.93
Honduras — Platanares, 82.60
Dominican Republic — Spirit Mountain Ecological Reserve & Organic Coffee Plantation, 82.05

Previous results are available here in the archives in the Coffee Awards and Competitions category.

Certifications / Starbucks

February 3, 2012

Assessments of Starbucks CAFE Practices

Starbucks, through its partner Conservation International, has been assessing the impacts of its CAFE Practices coffee sourcing program. This has included a close look at participating farms and their compliance with the CAFE Practices criteria and their impacts on coffee-growing best practices. The publicly available reports provide an unusually-transparent opportunity to understand a major coffee company’s efforts in ethically and environmentally responsible coffee sourcing.

Recap: What is CAFE Practices?

Starbucks CAFE (Coffee and Farm Equity) Practices is the company’s green coffee sourcing program, started in 2004. The standards were developed in partnership with Conservation International and an independent third-party company, SCS Global Services (SCS). Points are awarded in four categories — product quality, economic accountability, social responsibility, and environmental leadership — to producers that supply Starbucks coffee. Certain criteria are mandatory for all suppliers. Reaching a certain point level confers preferred supplier status, a higher level is awarded strategic supplier status. These suppliers get enhanced pricing and contract terms.

Although CAFE Practices is a proprietary set of sourcing guidelines and not a certification per se, their criteria are available to the public, much like those of various coffee certifications.

Not only do the environmental criteria stack up favorably to some other actual coffee certifications, but Starbucks is on track to source all of its coffee under CAFE Practices by 2015; the 2010 amount was 84% of its coffee, or 103,000 tons.

Criteria met, now what?
Once certification/verification is awarded to a producer under any program, the data available to the public about the scheme is often along the lines of how many farms/hectares are certified, how much certified coffee is sold, and other general information. More in-depth results — most often on the economic benefits to farmers and communities — are typically restricted to academic studies that are often behind pay-walls and thus not readily available to the public. We rarely have an idea of which particular criteria are being met by all/most/some farms, or if the certification is changing the way producers grow coffee. No doubt this is largely due to the sheer logistics of making this information available. Tens of thousands of farms are inspected and evaluated throughout the year by dozens of approved contractors. Analyzing the audit reports, comparing them from year to year, making sense of the results…this task would be monumental and probably require a team of specialists, perhaps adding to the cost of certification. Starbucks is attempting to gather this material, and has been publishing reports on the results.

CAFE Practices assessment reports
Starbucks and Conservation International (CI) have been releasing reports assessing the CAFE Practices program to see how it is impacting best-practices at the producer level and how the program could be improved. The first report, “Assessment of the Coffee and Farmer Equity (C.A.F.E.) Practices Program for FY08 is 143 pages and was released in March 2011. It covered 2008, the first year farm-level data could be sufficiently collected and analyzed. Two 30+ page reports focused on producers in Guatemala and Colombia.

Research, analysis, and reporting were performed by CI and, in the case of the regional reports, local partners. The reports follow a format similar to what is found in peer-reviewed scientific literature. Methods included analyzing farm verification reports submitted by approved third-party auditors (the “scorecards”), and (for the latter two reports) surveying both participating and non-participating farmers. The reports summarized information on participating farms, how farms (and mills) complied with various key social and environmental criteria, and made recommendations on how CAFE Practices might be improved. Results were broken down in various ways, including farm size and geographic area.

I saw a clear progression in the refinement of methodology and results reporting as these reports were produced. I was very impressed with the level of detail and consideration that went into developing the methods. The introductory material, and identification and description of local Important Bird Areas and priority flora and fauna in the two regional reports was accurate and demonstrated a level of understanding of biodiversity beyond the general concepts often bandied about by certification schemes. The quality of the most recent (Colombia) report was better than a lot of consulting, academic, and scientific reports I’ve read over the years.

What has Starbucks accomplished through CAFE Practices?
The sheer volume and detail of data in these reports is too much to go into here. Each report handled analysis a little differently, so it is hard to make general statements on many of the results. Here, I’d like to pull out some noteworthy facts, with an emphasis on environmental data. Overall data is for FY 2008 (the subject of the first report). Survey data from Guatemala is from 2009, Colombia from 2011. Note that CAFE Practices has slightly different criteria for small (<12 ha) farms than for medium (12-49 ha) and large (>50 ha) farms.

There were 140,973 participating farms, of which 99% were under 12 ha in size. Half of all the coffee Starbucks purchased was from small farms.
Participating farms had 102,281 ha designated as conservation areas; 99% of farms had not cleared any forest areas for coffee production in the previous three years.
57% of farms reported using pesticides only as a last resort. Countries with low compliance were Burundi, Panama, and Nicaragua. Countries with high compliance rates included Ethiopia and Peru.
51% of farms did not use synthetic fertilizers; most were small farms — only 8% of large farms did not use synthetic fertilizers. Only 128 medium and large farms were certified organic (it was unclear if this data is collected for small farms).
36% of farms used some shade throughout the production area, 56% used it on at least half.
78% of medium and large farms used shade at 40% or greater canopy cover (this is a level of shade that gives good canopy cover for birds without impacting yield too much). Countries with high levels of compliance here included Ethiopia, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico. This criteria was not used to assess small farms.
63% of farms used native species for at least three-quarters of their shade cover.
In Colombia and Guatemala, more farmers in the CAFE Practices program participated in other certifications compared to farmers not participating.
In Colombia, more participants had natural habitat on their farms than non-participants. Size of natural areas was similar between groups.
In Colombia, use of agrochemicals was common and similar between participants and non-participants; only 53% used protective gear for application (similar between the two groups).
In Guatemala, participants were reducing their use of agrochemicals at higher rates than non-participants.

The assessment concluded that lower compliance in some areas meant that some criteria were not well understood, that farmers did not have the resources to improve their methods, and/or that the CAFE Practices criteria were insufficient to encourage or even evaluate some practices. Some recommendations included:

Additional technical assistance to help farmers understand and implement chemical and disease control, and wildlife management. In particular, areas that required high levels of specialized expertise (for instance, in identifying species living on the farm and developing management plans for them) needed support.
Additional indicators to assess the level of shade canopy cover on farms.
Making forest clearing and highest-toxicity chemical use zero tolerance criteria.
Improving the handling of agrochemicals in Colombia through training or changes in criteria.
Addressing water quality issues in Guatemala and Colombia, since many participants who reporting having problems were not taking steps to remedy them.

It was also determined that certain questions needed to be added or clarified when surveying farmers to better assess particular conditions and resources. Based on the evolution of the reports, I expect those in the future will be more standardized and clearer, and I hope there will be some sort of easily digestible summary one day.

Conclusions
The compliance numbers for most eco-criteria seemed fairly strong to me, especially given the very high numbers and variety of participating farms. In general, most Starbucks suppliers seem to grow coffee in a fairly responsible manner compared to nearby non-participants in the sampled countries. The reports indicate a trend toward improved farm management among participants, in part because of their participation.

Most coffee certification criteria don’t span quite the diversity or record the level of data that are covered in CAFE Practices, nor have I seen similar analyses performed for other sets of standards. Thus, we don’t have anything to compare to these results. The fact that CI, a partner in development of the criteria, identified weaknesses and areas that needed improvement struck me as very positive. While this component obviously should be included in this kind of assessment, it’s not something the public sees very often. Of course, it’s an invitation to for us to see how Starbucks acts on the recommendations, and I know I will be keeping my eyes open.

Starbucks’ goal with CAFE Practices is to drive long-term sustainability of their coffee supply through improvements in environmental conditions and socio-economic status of producers. This is a business decision on the part of Starbucks. While good stewardship of the earth may be part of it, the company doesn’t pretend it launched this initiative out of altruism. While other big coffee companies trumpet their empty sustainability claims, Starbucks releases these reports with a minimum of flag-waving and, from what I’ve seen, no attempt at greenwashing.

I think what Starbucks is doing with CAFE Practices is enormously important. They’ve shown that sustainability can be a good business decision and that ethical sourcing need not be achieved at the expense of profits. Rather than taking what may have been an easy road of obtaining coffee certified under less stringent conditions, they have made a serious effort to develop measurable standards to meet their needs, and committed to sourcing all their coffee under these guidelines. They implemented tools to examine their effectiveness and impact, and have been surprisingly transparent in presenting the results to the public. Whether you like their coffee or not, Starbucks deserves a great deal of credit for their approach to coffee sourcing.

Starbucks cups courtesy of Starbucks Coffee; coffee cherry photo by Neil Palmer/CIAT under a Creative Commons license.

Coffee awards and competitions / Rainforest Alliance

January 21, 2012

Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality – Dec 2011

The Rainforest Alliance Cupping for Quality award is designed to recognize exceptional coffees carrying the Rainforest Alliance seal and to highlight the linkage between sustainable farm management practices and cup quality. There are now two annual cuppings and awards, divided by geography. In December, coffees from the southern hemisphere — including Brazil, Peru, Kenya, Tanzania and Indonesia — compete. These are the results of the December 2011 cupping.

This year, there were 45 coffee samples from eight origins submitted.

Tunki, Peru (87.92). This organic, Fair Trade coffee, from the Tunkimayo sector in Puno, also won in 2009. It consists of mostly typica and bourbon grown at 1300 to 1800 m. Tunki is one of the coffees from CECOVASA (Central de Cooperativas Agrarias Cafetaleras de los Valles de. Sandia), a group of cooperatives totaling nearly 5000 members. CECOVASA has been working with Conservation International, and has won an award for their work preserving biodiversity. ”Tunki” is the local name for the national bird of Peru, the spectacular Andean Cock-of-the-Rock, depicted in their logo. Equal Exchange has a good article on a visit to CECOVASA. Peru is not one of my favorite origins, but I had this coffee at a blind tasting at an SCAA event, and it was outstanding.
Deep River, Kwanyoka Estate, Kenya (86.06).
Ururi, Peru (85.25). This is another organic, Fair Trade CECOVASA coffee (see #1, above), grown at 2000 m from the Pata Inambari Valley. As outlined in this Equal Exchange post, CECOVASA has really been working on quality. Just two years ago, Ururi only scored at 75.48 in the Cupping for Quality competition. What an improvement!
Mihando, Kenya (85.19).
Madan Coffee Plantation, Papua New Guinea (84.56). Located in the Western Highlands of PNG, this 320 ha, privately-owned estate was acquired by Highland Arabicas in 2003. They grow primarily Blue Mountain typica, but also Arusha and Mundo Novo.
Githaka, Kenya (84.50).
Kihuri Estate, Kenya (84.41).
Machure Estate, Kenya (84.33).
Muthaite, Kenya (84.31).
Parry Estate, Kona Gold Coffee Plantation, USA (Hawaii) (84.25). A family-owned, 354 ha estate at 610 m on Kona (not to be confused with Perry Estate, also on Kona).

I have accumulated detailed data on the Cupping for Quality competition going back to 2007. Including these current results, this consists of seven competitions because Rainforest Alliance went from one to two annual cuppings in 2009. While not all countries were represented in each competition, even within the geographically-limited events, the mix of countries changes from one year to the next. So while this isn’t a totally homogenous data set, the numbers I’ve compiled are still interesting.

The average score for the top ten in this current event was 85.08, which is slightly below the previous average of 85.22. The top score of 87.92 was also below the average of previous top scores (88.35). So far (as this data goes), none of the scores has broken 90 points yet. I don’t think this is necessarily a reflection on the quality of Rainforest Alliance-certified coffees in general. Not all farms compete, and some well-known certified farms don’t or haven’t competed for some time. In fact, I suspect that some of the well-known farms don’t feel they need to, and that entrants may be biased toward up-and-comers that are striving for recognition.

Congratulations to all these farms for their commitment to sustainability and quality.

The next round will be announced in late April at the SCAA event, after which I’ll update the averages and perhaps present some additional data.

Certifications / Corporate coffee / Data summary tables

January 16, 2012

Corporate coffee: How much is eco-certified?

How much eco-certified coffee is purchased by the big coffee companies?

Not to be used without permission. Latest update March 2021.

The focus here is on the major world buyers and others with top U.S. market share. These players change over time, and the table is updated to reflect this. The latest update reflects the past several years of major coffee mergers and acquisitions, primarily by JAB Holding and its subsidiaries. As this is a private company, much of the data that was once public is now unavailable.

Certified purchases include only those that include environmental standards. Organic is a primary consideration; since Smithsonian Bird-Friendly must be certified organic, it is included in the organic category. I’ve included Fair Trade if it is also designated as organic. Rainforest Allaince is included, although the new standards for certification have weakened their ecological criteria. Other certifications or considerations are included in the notes.

Data sources will be linked or included in the footnotes. I’ve converted all volumes to metric tons for comparison; some volumes and percentages are calculated or extrapolated from closely related figures. As a point of reference, world coffee production in 2020 was about 10.5 million metric tons.

Company	Purchases	Certified purchases
Nestlé Purchases about 9.1% of world volume. Relatively small U.S. market share (<9%)^1,2	2008: 780,000 2010: 870,000¹ (49,020 tons was Nespresso^3,6) 2013: 860,000³ 2014: 842,000³ 2015: 849,000³ 2017: 870,000 2018: 845,490⁷ 2019: 907,000¹	2010: 2000 Fair Trade, Utz, Rainforest Alliance, and/or organic¹ (0.2%), see note. 2013: 2000 Fair Trade/organic¹ (0.2%). 2017: All certifications combined, including Fair Trade, approx. 81,000 (9%) 2018: Over 56% of their purchases were "sustainable" coffee, but that includes mostly 4C and their proprietary Nespresso AAA purchases, which don't count here as eco-certified.⁷ 2019: 606,000 tons (66.8%) was "sustainable" including 115,000 tons under their own Nespresso AAA plan (see below).¹ Not broken down by other certifications or sustainability schemes.
Nestlé has stated, "There are no plans to market certified coffee to consumers... We believe that our own Responsible Sourcing platform...offers a more targeted approach than certification alone." (2011 "Creating Shared Value" report³.) In their 2015 Creating Shared Value report³, Nestlé reports that 56% of their coffee is traceable back to the farm or plantation, and is therefore "responsibly sourced." They define responsibly sourced green coffee as verified against the 4C Code of Conduct (read about these very marginal standards here) or equivalent or more demanding standards, private or public. In their 2019 Creating Shared Value Report, the company merely states that their 2020 goals of 70% of Nescafe coffee being "responsibly sourced" and 100% of Nespresso coffee being sourced under their AAA program are "in progress" with few metrics provided. Their "no deforesation" commitment and progress does not include coffee. Their private standard is the Nespresso AAA Sustainable Quality program, based on Rainforest Alliance principals (not certification). Their goal is to source 100% of their Nespresso coffee under these standards by 2020. In 2017, approximately 77000 metric tons of coffee was sourced under the AAA program. See this post for details. In 2019, a total of 115,000 metric tons were produced under the AAA program (12.7% of Nestlé's total purchases), but only 87,000 tons were sold as such.¹
JAB Holding Co. I have tried to combine some companies and brands owned by JAB Holding or in which JAB Holding is a majority shareholder, whether under this name or one of its subsidiaries (including Acorn Holdings, Pret Panera, JDE Peet's, Keurig Dr. Pepper, etc.). Purchases at least 7-8% of world volume (this figure is the JDE-Peet's holdings alone). Relatively small U.S. market share (<4%).^1,2,8	2008: 740,000 2010: 700,000¹ 2013: 500,000¹ 2016: 728,000 for JDE alone based on 8% of world production 2017: 710,000 for JDE alone. 2019: 730,000 for JDE Peet's alone¹ 2008-2013 figures are historical and reflect purchases of some acquisitions.	2008: 29,500 Rainforest Alliance (4%) 2010: 50,000 Rainforest Alliance (7%) 2012: 52,000 Rainforest Alliance 2013: 55,000 Rainforest Alliance (11%)¹ 2017: All certifications combined, including Fair Trade, approx. 142,000 (20%) 2019: For JDE Peet's, 153,000 tons (20.9%) were under some sort of "sustainabilty" scheme. This includes 4C, Fairtrade, UTZ, Rainforest Alliance, and other verifications.^1,8 2008-2013 figures are historical and reflect purchases of some acquisitions.
JAB is privately held, and thus data on purchases and certifications is generally not publically available. Some brands are continuing their own sourcing. The CSR report of their JDE division (prior to the merger creating JDE Peet's) in 2019 stated a goal of working towards 100% "responsibly sourced" coffee by 2025 (accompanied by a nice photo of sun coffee.) Rainforest Alliance aids them in their "Common Grounds" responsible sourcing efforts. ⁸ Prior to their purchase by JAB, Caribou Coffee was the first major coffee shop to source 100% Rainforest Alliance certified coffee. For a time, they continued their own sourcing of certified coffee, but now many coffees on their site do not bear the seal of Rainforest Alliance or any other indication of certification, nor do they publish an annual report of their own.
JM Smucker Purchases about 3.6% of world volume. Largest U.S. market share (nearly 20%), nearly all of which is one brand: Folgers.^1,2	2008: 280,000 2010: 250,000¹ 2013: 300,000¹ 2017: 350,000¹ 2019: 360,000¹	2008: 1,500 (0.5%) was certified either Rainforest Alliance, Fair Trade, and/or organic. 2010: Data not disclosed. See note. 2013: Apparently, none.¹ 2015: 10% of some unknown amount from all sources (UTZ, Rainforest Alliance, and Fair Trade.⁴ 2017: Approx. 35,000 UTZ and Rainforest Alliance (10%). 2019: 36,000 tons (10%) were Rainforest Alliance or Utz certified.¹
Smuckers' purchases of various coffee brands now make up the largest portion of the company's product sales. In response to heavy shareholder pressure and criticism -- at the time the Tropical Commondity Coalition¹ noted, "[Smucker's] seems to lack a clear and concise CSR stategy, ... does not provide verifiable procurement figures of certified coffees, has no specific goals for a more sustainable coffee sector, and its future commitment is extremely vague"-- the company set a goal to buy 10% of total retail coffee from certified sources. Upon reaching this goal in 2015, they only committed to maintaining, not improving, this level ⁴. This was reiterated in their 2020 report.
Starbucks Purchases about 3.1% of world volume. U.S. market share data of about 9% includes retail sales which are distributed in North America by Nestlé. I believe Starbucks still sources much of this coffee, but how much is unclear at this time.^1,2,5	2007: 160,000 2008: 175,000 2009: 166,000 2010: 122,000 2011: 193,776 2012: 247,208 2013: 179,623 2014: 209,106 2015: 251,744 2019: 310,000¹	2007: 103,000 CAFE Practices (64%) 2008: 134,000 CAFE Practices (77%) + 4536 organic 2009: 136,000 CAFE Practices (82%) + 6350 organic 2010: 103,000 CAFE Practices (84%) + 4400 organic 2011: 167,000 CAFE Practices (86%) + 4354 organic 2012: 230,878 (90%) CAFE Practices + 3946 organic 2013: 171,004 CAFE Practices (94%) + 1996 organic 2014: 199,696 CAFE Practices (95%) + 2091 organic 2015: 249,929 CAFE Practices + other certifications 2019: 310,000 CAFE Practices produced (99%, although another 140,00 metric tons were produced under CAFE Practices but apparently sold to other buyers).¹
All data comes from Starbucks annual reports unless otherwise noted. Organic totals are provided, but some may be included in CAFE Practices purchases due to multiple certifications, so I've only given percentages for amounts noted in reports as CAFE Practices. Fair Trade purchases are not included in the figures above. The environmental standards of Starbucks CAFE Practices preferred buyer program are more detailed and stronger than many third-party certifications, including Fair Trade and UTZ Certified. See also my post on recent CAFE Practices assessment reports. The Tropical Commondity Coalition¹ noted, "Starbucks appears to be far and away the best in terms of sustainable coffee procurement [of the top ten buyers]..."
Kraft Heinz Large U.S. market share of nearly 10% dominated by one brand: Maxwell House.²	Amount of coffee purchased by Kraft Heinz is unknown.	None of the Maxwell House branded coffee is flagged as certified on packaging, and no information on certified purchases is provided. They did not respond to the 2020 Coffee Barometer survey.¹
For many years, and as it was going through mergers and acquistions, Kraft did not publish a corporate responsibility report, or make mention of coffee on their website. Coffee is still not mentioned on their Environmental Social Governance Strategy & Goals page, or specifically regarding responsible sourcing. In the 2020 Kraft Heinz Environmental Social Governance Report they only highlight their Ethical Bean acquisition, which sources only organic and Fairtrade certified beans. The volume is unknown, but undoubtedly a small enough portion of their total purchases to qualify as greenwash tokenism.

References:

¹The Coffee Barometer Reports supply data approximately every other year. First published by the Tropical Commodity Coalition, they have had several different authors/publishers. Past years are found here: The Coffee Barometer 2009 (PDF). Coffee Barometer 2012, Coffee Barometer 2014 (PDF); 2018 and 2020 (and hopefully future issues) are now available on this page. Much of their data comes now from companies responding to a survey. Their purchase data is used to calculate percentages of world volume, as provided by the International Coffee Organization statistics. However, these figures should be considered approximate due to company self-reporting, and some changes in definitions of volumes and market shares. Nonetheless, they likely accurately reflect ranking and relative proportions and provide adequate context.
²Much market share data derives from statistics updated via Euromonitor International, the global market research company.
³All of Nestlé’s Creating Shared Value Reports as well as other press releases and documents are available on this page.
⁴JM Smucker Corporate Responsibility / Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure reports are available on this page.
⁵Starbucks Global Responsibility / Social Responsibility Reports are available on this page.
⁶Accelerating progress on the Nespresso AAA Sustainable Quality Program in Central America. March 2011.
⁷Global Coffee Platform, Sustainable Coffee Purchases, Snapshot 2018.
⁸JDE Jacobs Douwe Egberts 2019 Corporate Responsibility Report.

Caribou Coffee / Rainforest Alliance / Retail and specialty roasters

January 7, 2012

Caribou Coffee: 100% Rainforest Alliance

Caribou Coffee has achieved its goal of becoming the first major coffee company in the U.S. to source 100% of its coffee from Rainforest Alliance-certified farms. As I verified in 2010, this means every variety of coffee at Caribou consists of 100% RA-certified beans. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the coffee is organic or shade-grown, but Rainforest Alliance farms do comply with a variety of environmental, social, and sustainability standards.

Based on 2010 green coffee purchases, this represents about 9100 metric tons. While this amount of coffee doesn’t even put Caribou in the top ten green coffee buyers in the world, it does mean they purchase more genuinely eco-certified coffee than at least five of the seven biggest buyers that disclose this data. They’ve accomplished this without compromising quality: The average score for the ten varieties reviewed by Coffee Review in the past two years is 90, and in 2008 Caribou’s Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Roastmaster’s Reserve won the Roaster’s Choice award at the annual SCAA event. I think two of their coffees are especially good. A favorite at our workplace is the Guatemala El Paraiso (92 at Coffee Review). One of my favorite coffees of the past year was their Kenya Karibu (93 on Coffee Review), unfortunately now sold out. This coffee is especially noteworthy since eco-certified coffees from Kenya are few and far between.

Caribou Coffee is the second largest coffee shop company, behind Starbucks, with over 550 stores in 20 states as well as some international markets, most in the Middle East*. Caribou plans on adding another 20 to 25 stores in 2012. If you don’t live in a state with a Caribou store, you can shop online. This is a company worth patronizing for their sustainability achievements and great coffee.

You can read other posts I’ve written about Caribou, including reviews, here.

*The Middle Eastern presence was no doubt influenced by the fact that for many years, Bahranian-based Arcapita Bank was Caribou’s major shareholder. This meant that Caribou was a Shari’ah-compliant company which, along with a general paranoia about Muslim ownership, resulted in Islamophobic boycotts of Caribou. As someone who is completely secular but living in the most Muslim city in the U.S., I can tell you that stance is totally asinine. But the hand-wringers can get caffeinated again. As of last summer, Aracapita sold off its remaining stake in Caribou.