Coffee regions

Climate change / Coffee regions / Research on coffee growing

Climate change threatens east African coffee via borers

Some like it hot: The influence and implications of climate change on coffee berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei) and coffee production in east Africa. Jaramillo et al. 2011. PLoS One.

An important new paper published this week outlines the threat posed by the expansion of coffee berry borers in east Africa due to climate change.

This paper follows up research by the authors that was published in 2009. That paper looked at life history characteristics of the coffee berry borer (CBB), one of the worst pests of coffee, and how they might react to various climate change scenarios. This paper built on that data, looked at current distribution of CBB in east Africa, and modeled the change in distribution by 2050 based on two climate change scenarios.

The models indicated that CBB infestation will be worse in the arabica coffee producing regions of Ethiopia; the Ugandan part of the Lake Victoria and Mt. Elgon regions; Mt. Kenya, particularly in the coffee-producing areas of Embu and Meru, and the western part of Kenya, around Kitale and the Kenyan aide of Mt. Elgon; and most of Rwanda and Burundi. Further, it appears that increasing temperatures will likely double the number of generations of CBB per year in all current arabica-producing areas. Both models (using slightly different projections of climate change) are very similar, one figure is reproduced below.

Suitability of climate for CBB, year 2050. EI values indicate suitability, where 0 is unsuitable, and 100 is perfect. Click to enlarge. From Jaramillo et al. 2011.

Lest you view climate modeling (or climate change) with skepticism, the authors note that as recently as ten years ago, CBB were not reported above 1500 m. Now, due to increasing temperatures in coffee growing regions around the world, CBB can be found at higher altitudes, where arabica coffee is typically grown. CBB have been documented 300 m higher in Tanzania than they were ten years ago. The authors note that some of the changes predicted in their earlier paper, such as increased number of generations and broader distribution, seem to already be occurring.

The damage an increase in CBB to now-untouched coffee growing areas is serious and sobering. These impacts do not even incorporate other changes that are likely to take place with increasing temperatures: a change in the distribution of biological enemies of CBB, and the impact of changes in rainfall patterns, disrupted seasonality, and thermal stress to coffee plants.

The authors state,

We suggest that the best way to adapt to a rise of temperatures in coffee plantations could be via the introduction of shade trees in sun grown plantations.

They note adding shade trees can lead to a decrease in the temperature around coffee berries by up to 4°C, which in turn may reduce the rate of increase in CBB by 34%.  They go on to say shade coffee agroecosystems can serve as a refuge for beneficial arthropods, leading to higher levels of biological control of CBB, and they create a diversified and therefore more resilient system that will perform better under climate change. They conclude that while it is only one of many adaptation strategies, the use of shade trees is “… rational, affordable, and relatively easy for coffee farmers and other stakeholders to implement.”

The paper is open access, and you can read it the whole thing and view all the maps here. A link to an abstract in Spanish is available near the end.

Jaramillo, J., Muchugu, E., Vega, F., Davis, A., Borgemeister, C., & Chabi-Olaye, A. (2011). Some Like It Hot: The Influence and Implications of Climate Change on Coffee Berry Borer (Hypothenemus hampei) and Coffee Production in East Africa PLoS ONE, 6 (9) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024528

Coffee news and miscellany / Coffee regions

New Kenyan coffee varietal

Last year the Coffee Research Foundation (CRF) in Ruiru, Kenya released a new disease-resistant arabica varietal that has been in development for more than an decade. Named after the highest peak on Mt. Kenya, Batian is resistant to coffee berry disease and coffee leaf rust, the two common fungal diseases affecting coffee in Kenya and much of Africa.

The parentage of Batian is predominantly arabica, and it is closer genetically to the well-regarded SL28 and SL34 varieties than Ruiru 11, the rust-resistant varietal introduced in 1985. Varieties used in the development of Batian include SL4, N39, N30, Hibrido de Timor, Rume Sudan, and K7. They were repeatedly backcrossed with SL28 and SL34. The Hibrido de Timor is the naturally-occurring hybrid of arabica and robusta, and is often used in disease-resistant breeding due to its robusta heritage.

Of course, it is the robusta lurking in the background that tends to lower cup quality. According to the CRF, however, Batian cups far better than Ruiru 11 and even the parental SL varietals. Here’s a slide from a presentation by Dr.  Joseph Kimemia of the CRF (click to enlarge):Should we take that with a grain of salt (so to speak)? A tasting of these four varietals by the guys from Tim Wendelboe at the CRF did find Bastian rising to the top, but the cupping was a little suspect (e.g., poor examples of the SL28, for instance).

Why a new varietal?

Kenyan coffee production has been declining since at least 2001. There are a number of reasons for this, but in recent years part of the problem has been instability in the weather. Drought and heavy rain disrupt flowering and fruiting, and wet conditions also cause an increase in fungal diseases. Thus, a varietal that has more resistance to these diseases is welcomed by farmers.

In the case of Batian, it also matures faster than other varieties — in two years versus three. It is high yield, but Batian’s ability to boost production is in large part due to the fact it can be planted at twice the density of other typical varietals in Kenya, up to 2500 trees per ha. The end result is a yield of up to 5 tons per ha under optimal management, versus an average of 2 tons/ha. Batian also has a large bean size, which must also contribute to yield estimates.

What does this mean for the environment?

On the plus side, if Batian does show good resistance to fungal diseases (one news piece implies Batian has complete resistance), it may reduce the use of copper fungicides. While often considered allowable under many organic standards, their extensive and prolonged use on coffee in Kenya has resulted in soil contamination. Copper fungicides are already applied many times a year on Kenyan coffee. If rain is frequent, it must be reapplied more often because it is washed off (and fungal diseases are worse in wet conditions). If dependence on fungicides can be reduced or eliminated, this would be a huge accomplishment, and very positive for the environment.

There is a growing movement in Kenya, where most coffee is grown in the sun, to plant shade trees and also reforest many areas. I am not sure it is possible to grow many shade trees and also grow Batian at the recommended density, which is essentially a coffee tree every 2 m. But, (as pointed out in the comment section below and amended here) if farmers don’t have to worry about fungal diseases they may be more apt to plant shade trees.  (I will do a post on coffee berry disease and shade similar to the one on coffee leaf rust some time this fall.)

The CRF and government is also encouraging the planting of Batian in areas where it is currently not being grown, particularly in western Kenya.  Bungoma, Kasii, and Nyanza are current western coffee regions and I have not found details on whether these are the areas being targeted, or some other districts. It’s my understanding that west Kenya gets more rain than the central region where most coffee is grown, and that may be why Batian is being pushed there — coffee planted at high densities usually requires more moisture. Unfortunately, densely planted coffee often also requires heavy fertilization and the trees need to be replaced more often.

Combating diseases, declining yield, and climate change while maintaining quality in a sustainable manner is a challenge to coffee growers worldwide. One can hardly fault farmers for wanting to sustain or improve their livelihoods, or governmental agencies for working to stabilize or increase the production of a primary export crop.  Is another potentially sun-grown, high-input varietal the answer, or environmentally sustainable? We will have to wait and see.

Update: Download a PDF of a detailed 2012 presentation from the Coffee Research Institute seminar series.

Birds and other biodiversity / Coffee regions

Cloud forest coffee at Finca El Jaguar

Because of the elevation of the farm and transpiration of the surrounding cloud forest, El Jaguar is covered with these misty clouds for at least a portion of nearly every day. Light levels and humidity, therefore, do not allow the coffee itself to be grown under multiple layers of shade, such as would be required by Smithsonian Bird-Friendly certification. Yields would decline and fungal diseases would increase. Rather, 80% of the property has been set aside in cloud forest reserve, and multiple bird research projects take place here since the owners are dedicated to conservation. El Jaguar is Rainforest Alliance certified.

Finca El Jaguar is located in northern Jinotega, Nicaragua, about 188 km north of the capital Managua. The property (Reserva Silvestre Privada El Jaguar) was acquired in 1991 by Georges Duriaux and Liliana Chavarria from Lili’s brother.  At about 100 ha (247 ac), it is both a private reserve registered with the Nicaraguan ministry of natural resources, and a coffee farm. Eighty ha of the farm is preserved forest, and 20 ha are in coffee.

Coffee in shadows of foreground, a portion of the large forest reserve in the background.

The coffee consists of caturra and some catuai grown at 1300 to 1350 meters. El Jaguar has been certified by Rainforest Alliance since 2006, and Allegro Coffee (owned by Whole Foods) is the exclusive buyer. The farm employs 15 to 20 people year-round, and 30 to 40 additional people during coffee harvest. Of particular pride to Georges and Lili is the fact that several of the workers’ children are involved in bird research activities.

Over 270 bird species have been recorded at El Jaguar. More than 50 are Neotropical migrants (those that primarily breed in the U.S. and Canada and winter in the tropics), including an amazing 27 species of “our” warblers — Golden-winged Warbler, the endangered Golden-cheeked Warbler, and the Cerulean Warbler among them. Due to this rich bird life, El Jaguar was designated as an Important Bird Area by BirdLife International in 2006.

In addition to preserving habitat and providing eco-lodging for birders, Georges and Lili have worked tirelessly on bird conservation projects. Since 2002, they have operated two of the eleven wintering bird banding stations in Nicaragua that are part of the important MoSI project (Monitoreo de Sobrevivencia Invernal — Monitoring Overwintering Survival).  One is in the forest, and one in the coffee production area. This project is an essential tool that enables researchers to gain insight into what bird species winter in an area, the habitats they use, and their overwinter survival. A sister project monitors resident birds from April to October.

This is the coffee, planted with bananas and other trees, next to the bird banding station in the coffee area.

Georges and Lili Duriaux—Chavarria record bird data.

Additionally, Georges and Lili are involved in special projects including the Golden-winged Warbler Working Group and similar project to benefit the Wood Thrush.

The colorful Rufous-winged Tanager (Tangara lavinia) was just one of the birds banded in the forest reserve during our visit.

Jean-Yves Duriaux, a recent graduate of EARTH University, has a wealth of knowledge about sustainable agronomy he is applying to the farm.

Until recently, El Jaguar’s coffee was also certified organic. Due to burdensome new (?) rules that we heard about in multiple places, their ability to adequately fertilize their coffee by organic means meant that they had to make the difficult decision to drop organic certification. This is being repeated at other farms in Nicaragua, and will be the topic of another post. Georges and Lili, and their son Jean-Yves who is managing the farm, are still just committed to conserving biodiversity. This year’s increased yield (over triple last year’s, due in large part to using conventional fertilizers) provided the income needed to continue preserving the current forest acreage and stay afloat.

During our visit, we talked a lot about Rainforest Alliance certification.  The Duriaux—Chavarria’s were enthusiastic supporters, and it gave us much-needed perspective on the impact of RA certification on the ground. Although El Jaguar has had long-term contracts with Allegro for years, they explained that RA certification strengthens their position and helps them negotiate a better price. The certification process improves quality and sustainability, and RA provides guidance and assistance. In fact, RA has held workshops at El Jaguar for neighboring farmers, and the next step is working with them to get them certified. This dovetails with training Georges and Lili have already provided to neighbors on biological resources and sustainable production, as well as a grant they received to help provide native trees to reforest nearby properties and encourage other farmers to pursue certification.

Coffee was already flowering last week at El Jaguar.

There are challenges ahead for El Jaguar and other coffee producers. Of note was the fact that the weather, influenced by La Nina conditions, caused early flowering and fruiting. Harvest was early this season, and complete by the time we arrived. Meanwhile, the coffee was again beginning to flower while we were there, which means the next harvest will be around two months earlier than “usual.” Café loco.

As we did two years ago, we also stayed at Finca Esperanza Verde. At a few hundred meters lower in elevation, the coffee all over that area was greatly defoliated by fungal disease, also exacerbated by wet weather. They are usually treated with copper-based fungicides. Some of these have typically been permitted under organic certification, but, again, we heard that now farmers were told they were not allowed to use them. If that’s really the case, it’s hard to see how producers will be able to afford to keep organic certification.

Read more about El Jaguar, birds, shade coffee, and Georges and Lili in this wonderful Audubon Magazine article.

UPDATE: Read about how Finca El Jaguar is now a model farm for sustainabilty in a project spearheaded by Jean-Yves!

Birds and other biodiversity / Coffee regions

How “wild” is Ethiopian forest coffee?

Ethiopia is the birthplace of coffee.  Coffea arabica originates in and still grows wild in Ethiopia in areas which are included in the Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity hotspot.  This hotspot — which also covers areas in the coffee-growing regions of Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi — has been reduced to 10% of its original extent. In Ethiopia, only about 2000 sq km of high-quality forest with wild arabica coffee remains.

As coffee consumers, we often hear about this “wild” coffee, or the generally rustic way in which coffee is typically grown in Ethiopia, and so we generally feel good about enjoying Ethiopian coffee from an ecological point of view. Technically, coffee is wild if it grows and reproduces or regenerates on its own within natural habitats.

How much Ethiopian coffee is grown in forests? Is it really coming from a pristine environment? Is this method of coffee production really preserving biodiversity?

A number of publications over the past few years help shed some light on this topic, and the results are a bit surprising.  The diagram at right is one I constructed using data from several sources (list at end of post). It indicates the different methods of coffee cultivation in Ethiopia, with rough approximations of the frequency of occurrence of each. Below are the characteristics of each method. This is all necessarily simplified, but most sources are in general agreement.

Plantation coffee (10%). This is the most intense method of coffee cultivation, where land is cleared and planted with coffee and managed for yield, which ranges from 450 to 1200 kg per ha annually (around 750 seems “average”). This includes larger estates, but may also involve small holders.

Garden coffee (or “semi-forest plantation”) (50%). Here coffee plants are transplanted to gardens around farmers’ homes. These plants might come from nearby forest, or farmers may exchange seedlings best adapted to an area or microhabitat; some may originate from a different region. Coffee is typically interplanted with other crops and fruit trees. Garden coffee is found most frequently in southern Ethiopia, including Sidamo, and well as Harerge/Harrar. Yields range from 200 to 700 kg/ha/yr.

Forest coffee (5%).  I think this is what most people probably envision when they hear about “wild” coffee. Here, coffee is harvested from trees growing in the forest, with virtually no management of the surrounding forest or vegetation, except perhaps some removal of undergrowth to facilitate access to the coffee trees. However, it should be noted that several authors have stated that coffee is managed in some way virtually wherever it occurs. Even among locals, “forest coffee” is broadly and variously defined. It may mean old overgrown plantations, or a single coffee tree in a pasture that was once forest. In any event, yields are well below 200 kg per ha, often between a mere 7 to 30 kg.

The Abyssinian Ground-thrush (Zoothera piaggiae) is a very secretive montane forest bird of the Bonga forest, thought to be declining due to habitat loss. Image: Wikimedia Commons.

Semi-forest coffee (35%). Most “forest coffee” is probably really in this category, termed semi-forest coffee. Here, the forest is altered and managed, often quite substantially.  The canopy is thinned once to several times a year to allow more light to reach the coffee and increase yields (which vary greatly depending on the extent of management, but are under 400 kg per ha per year). Trees with open, wide-spreading canopies are favored since fewer trees are needed to provide the preferred amount of shade. Undergrowth, competing shrubs, and emerging seedlings of other plants are removed to make harvesting easier and to make room for more coffee. The coffee grows wild, but is also supplemented by shrubs transplanted from elsewhere. Usually this means from a nearby forest, but occasionally even government-supplied cultivars are utilized.

While semi-forest coffee is better than a coffee monoculture with no canopy cover, several studies have shown that the managing of these forests does have serious consequences. Schmitt et al. (2010) found that in the Bonga region, 30% of canopy trees and most undergrowth was removed in these systems, severely disturbing forest structure.  Although the overall number of plant species increased by 26% in comparison with intact forest, it was due to secondary and pioneer species, mostly herbaceous species and vines. Forest species declined. Of special concern is the reduction in the number of tree ferns, an ancient family of plants which require shady, moist conditions that are becoming rare in some locations. In Jimma, Aerts et al. (2011) found a near-absence of a true upper canopy >15 m tall, and many climax forest species have nearly disappeared, as they are removed and seedlings are not allowed to regenerate.

Increasingly, forest coffee is being managed as semi-forest coffee, and semi-forest coffee is being managed and harvested with increasing intensity as coffee prices rise. The increasing management intensity has profound impacts on the forest and biodiversity. This diversity includes the genetic resources of wild races of Coffea arabica, as the practice of swapping and transplanting coffee, and any interbreeding, erodes the integrity of wild genotypes.

Volkmann (2008) did an analysis of the areas used by two dozen cooperatives that are part of the Kafa Forest Coffee Farmers Cooperative Union, and concluded that the designation “forest coffee” was probably inappropriate for the output of almost half of them, as they are highly degraded forests, or mostly garden coffee. However, in 2010, this area was designated as UNESCO biosphere reserve. Like other biosphere reserves, the goal is to have a core area that is protected, and buffer zones in which sustainable practices are allowed. Planned projects include reforestation.

Coffee is a main source of income in for people who live in regions where it grows wild. The solution isn’t prohibition, but probably some sort of incentive or compensation to manage the coffee in such a way that forest integrity and species are conserved. One idea being explored is some sort of certification that includes a production ceiling (so that managing for higher yields is not encouraged). The International Standards for Sustainable Wild Collection of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants might be a starting point.

There is much more on the coffee forests of Ethiopia at the web site of the Conservation and use of wild populations of Coffee arabica in the montane rainforests of Ethiopia project web site.

Papers cited and additional resources:

Aerts, R., Hundera, K., Berecha, G., Gijbels, P., Baeten, M., Van Mechelen, M., Hermy, M., Muys, B., and Honnay, O. 2011, in press. Semi-forest coffee cultivation and the conservation of Ethiopian Afromontane rainforest fragments Forest Ecology and Management DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.12.025

Gole, T.W., T. Borsch, M. Denich, and D. Teketay. 2008. Floristic composition and environmental factors characterizing coffee forests in southwest Ethiopia. Forest Ecology and Management. 255: 2138-2150.

Gove, A.D., K. Hylander, S. Nemomisa, A. Shimelis. 2008. Ethiopian coffee cultivation — Implications for bird conservation and environmental certification. Conservation Letters 1:208-216.

Hylander, K., and S. Nemomissa. 2008. Home garden coffee as a repository of epiphyte biodiversity in Ethiopia. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 6: 524-528.

Labouisse, J., Bellachew, B., Kotecha, S., and Bertrand, B. 2008. Current status of coffee (Coffea arabica L.) genetic resources in Ethiopia: implications for conservation Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 55:1079-1093. DOI: 10.1007/s10722-008-9361-7

Schmitt, C., Senbeta, F., Denich, M., Preisinger, H., H. Boehmer. 2010. Wild coffee management and plant diversity in the montane rainforest of southwestern Ethiopia African Journal of Ecology 48: 78-86.  DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2028.2009.01084.x

Volkmann, J. 2008. How wild is Ethiopian forest coffee? The disenchantment of a myth. Conservation and use of wild populations of Coffee arabica in the montane rainforests of Ethiopia (CoCE) Project Report, Subproject 5.4. Center for Development Research (ZEF), University of Bonn, Germany.

Wiersum, K.F., T.W. Gole, F. Gatzweiler, J. Volkmann, E. Bognetteau, and O. Wirtu. 2008. Certification of wild coffee in Ethiopia: experiences and challenges. Forests, Trees, and Livelihoods. 18: 9-22.