Nestlé/Nespresso

The Mexican government and the multinational food conglomerate Nestlè have partnered to increase the production of robusta coffee in nine of Mexico’s states. The majority of  coffee grown in Mexico is arabica. Robusta is grown by about 19,000 families on 34,000 hectares of land in the states of Chiapas, Oaxaca, Puebla, and Veracruz. Current estimates are that Mexico produces 150,000 to 240,000 60-kg bags of robusta annually, roughly 5% of total coffee production in the country.

The plan is to increase robusta production to 500,000 bags by 2012, with 2000 hectares being planted with new robusta trees this year*. Nestlè is supplying the high-yield stock, and ultimately the output will go to supply their Nescafè soluble coffee plant in Toluca, outside of Mexico City. Nestlè plans to increase the capacity of this plant by 40%, which will make it the largest instant coffee production facility in the world. Currently, 450,000 bags of coffee are imported into Mexico to fuel the instant coffee beast.

Many of Mexico’s coffee farmers are not happy about this plan, concurring with a 2006 FAO recommendation that robusta production in the country not be increased due to concerns about oversupply and farmer income. Let me add my environmental concerns to the mix.

Unlike arabica coffee, which can (and is, in much of Mexico) grown as an agroforestry crop under mixed shade, robusta is grown in the sun and will require the clearing of valuable lowland forests, no doubt substantial amounts of fertilizer and pesticides, and cause collateral environmental damage.

Deforestation is already a problem in Mexico; between 1990 and 2005, the country lost nearly 7.5% of its forests and woodlands. The problem is especially severe in the state of Veracruz with a loss of 22% of forested lands between 1993-2000.

Ironically, this will also impact arabica production in the highlands. At least one study [1] has shown that deforestation of tropical lowland areas reduces the moisture of the air flowing up adjacent mountains. This decreases montane humidity and increases the elevation of the cloud deck, altering the highland forested areas where arabica coffee is grown (not to mention impacting all the other biodiversity associated with these habitat changes). Simulations indicate that “…inland cloud forests like those of southern Mexico may be profoundly influenced by regional deforestation.”

Perhaps Mexico needs to rethink this strategy. The biggest beneficiary will be Nestlè’s profits. Although some farmers may see short-term gains, in the long run deforestation contributes to climate change, food insecurity, and loss of biodiversity. That’s a big price to pay for more cheap unsustainable instant coffee.

*It will require 9400 to 79,000 ha to produce a half million bags, with the low figure representing the production of some of Nestle’s highest yielding varieties, based on yields in the Philipines.

[1] Lawton, R. O., U. S. Nair, R. A. Pielke, Sr., and R. M. Welch. 2001. Climatic impact of tropical lowland deforestation on nearby montane cloud forests. Science 294:584-587.

Instant coffee photo by mat300 under a Creative Commons License.

Several months ago, Nespresso, a division of the giant Swiss multinational food corporation Nestlé, announced a major sustainability initiative they are calling Ecolaboration. Nespresso manufactures espresso machines that use proprietary single-use aluminum coffee capsules.

Ecolaboration has three main goals they aim to achieve by 2013:

1. To reduce its carbon footprint by 20% per cup, primarily by developing “greener” espresso machines.
2. To increase its capacity to recycle its aluminum capsules to 75% (this does not mean 75% will be recycled, see note 1 below and this post) and to “co-convene an industry roundtable on improving the sustainability performance of the aluminum.”
3. Source 80% of its coffee from Rainforest Alliance (RA) certified farms (previously, RA was only helping assess farms in their compliance with Nespresso-specific standards, not certifying them; see note 2).

I’m only going to address the coffee sourcing aspect, as sustainably-grown coffee is the focus of this blog.

First, I read Nespresso’s fact sheet on “protecting coffee ecosystems.” A third of the document explains the importance of shade and biodiversity, while the rest neglects to specify any criteria or concrete measures proposed by the company protect the environment.

Thus, the Rainforest Alliance certification criteria will have to act as surrogate for Nespresso’s sustainability efforts. That’s fine, but exactly how much coffee does that “80% certified” represent? Specifically, and importantly, how much as a percent of coffee purchased by parent Nestlé, a company famous for its dismal corporate responsibility ratings [3]?

(Updated August 2010 to reflect actual published figures) In 2008, Nestlé purchased 780,000 tons of green coffee, similar to previous years and typical of their annual volume [4]. In 2010, Nespresso purchased 490,000 bags (60 kg each) or 29,400 tons under their “AAA Sustainable Quality Program” which includes, but is not exclusively, Rainforest Alliance certified farms [5]. This represents 60% of Nespresso’s purchases, but just under 3.8% of Nestlé’s total purchases. Their stated goal is now to source 80% of Nespresso coffee from the AAA program by 2013 (again, not exclusively Rainforest Alliance certified), which would be 5% of Nestlé’s total purchases.

The commitment to sustainably-grown, eco-friendly coffee by Nespresso is an extremely small percentage of Nestlé’s total purchases. This situation qualifies for what I consider to be the most offensive of the four greenwashing criteria set forth by Greenpeace: Dirty Business. This criteria states “Touting an environmental program or product, while the corporation’s product or core business is inherently polluting or unsustainable.”

I don’t even have to dig any farther into the elaborate hoopla on the Ecolaboration site (which frankly sounds like a rip-off of General Electric’s Ecomagination program). I cannot support such a meager effort, in particular from a company with such a long track record of disregard for labor and human rights, environmental protection, honesty in labeling and marketing, and other unethical business practices.

Notes:

[1] Nespresso offers recycling of the aluminum (home and office type only) capsules in several European countries. Even when Nespresso has expanded recycling efforts, it fails to create any meaningful increase in recycling rates. Due to technical constraints, the capsules themselves are not made from 100% recycled aluminum. This post explains that the whole pod recycling issue is greenwashing.

[2] Nespresso first partnered with Rainforest Alliance (RA) in 2003, and signed a five-year pact in 2006. In the first phase of this partnership (known as the Nespresso AAA Sustainable Quality Coffee Program), RA developed guidelines specifically for Nespresso to improve quality and sustainablity practices on farms supplying Nespresso. These farms were not being certified by RA under their usual criteria. RA appraised the farms to see if they were “implementing better methods and are decreasing their impact on the natural world.” Nespresso must have been happy with the partnership, as they routinely donate tens of thousands of dollars to RA (see annual reports). Under the Ecolaboration project, the goal is for 80% of the coffee to actually come from certified farms meeting RA’s standards. Update 2015: here is a post on the environmental and social requirements for producers in the AAA program. Note the low bar for entrance into the program.

[3] Corporate Watch lists numerous corporate crimes; another laundry list is at Global Investment Watch; Responsible Shopper outlines some boycotts and alerts; Source Watch lists more problems; and Ethical Corporation provides an article skeptical of Nestlé’s CSR report. Add it all up, and you get an award for least responsible company in 2005 (nomination here).

[4] Coffee Barometer 2009, linked to and summarized here; Ethical Sourcing – Creating Shared Value, 2008, Nestlé (PDF).

[5] Nestlé’s Nespresso Ecolaboration Progress Report, June 2011 (PDF).

Photo by svet under a Creative Commons license.

A report recently announced that Nestlè’s research and development facility in France has developed clones of Robusta coffee plants specific to particular countries. They are distributing them to “countless coffee growers across the globe.” These producers are suppliers of green beans to Nestlè’s instant coffee division, Nescafe, and the plants are developed to increase yield and income.

Each plant is genetically identical, as they are produced in a lab by somatic embryogenesis, a form of tissue culture. Therefore, should a pest, disease, or pathogen infect a farm planted with a particular clone of coffee plant, it is likely to wipe out every genetically identical tree on the farm, as well as every genetically identical tree planted within reach of the infection.

Tissue culture is not uncommon in agriculture, or even in coffee production. But as this statement in an article on the American Phytopathological Society web site succinctly states,

“The modern emphasis on monoculture of  genetically identical crops,
commercial propagation, and worldwide distribution of improved
varieties increases the likelihood that a chance infection will lead to
the development of a disease epidemic and the attendant crop losses.”

One only needs to look at the Irish potato famine, Dutch elm disease, southern corn leaf blight, or the current banana crisis for examples of the dangers of genetic homogenization. The dichotomy in the coffee industry is quite amazing. On the one hand, this mass production of identical plants, geared toward high yield and profits in instant coffee. On the other, a push to save wild varieties of coffee, and the pursuit of beautiful microlots and unique tastes by true coffee lovers. I know which “hand” I’m in!