28 CLIMATE CHANGE
Joint project focuses on
climate-friendly coffee farming ‘Climate-friendly farming,’ a pilot project initiated in 2009 and completed earlier this year has provided farmers with tools to help them grow coffee in the most environ- mentally-friendly manner possible. The project, which was led by by Efico, Anacafé, the Rainforest Alliance and the Efico Foundation, has helped farmers in Guatemala develop climate-friendly farming practices, and is now being rolled-out in other coun- tries and with other crops. Five co-operatives on the Fraijanes plateau and a medium-sized farm in San
Marcos participated in the project, implementing good agricultural practices to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, increase the level of carbon stored on their farms and enhance their capacity to adapt to climate change. A total group of 376 coffee farmers, families and communities benefited from the initiative. The project evolved into a climate-friendly farming initiative, the results of which
are now being disseminated as a model for use with new crops, including cocoa and tea, and in new regions, including West Africa, East Africa and Southeast Asia. By encouraging the use of best practices, the cost of production was reduced and
farmers’ incomes increased. Climate-friendly farming methods improve a farm’s prof- itability by reducing energy and water consumption, generating new products from agricultural waste and enhancing the use of fertilizers.
The project has also The companies behind the project
believe the climate module will benefit
farmers and other play- ers in the value chain
helped farmers identify risks caused by climate change, adapt and respond, train workers in climate- friendly practices and col- laborate with neighbouring communities on issues such as emergency pre- paredness and capacity- building.
During the project a number of activities were undertaken, including measuring
carbon storage on selected farms (soil carbon, carbon in shade trees and coffee plants); testing best management practices to reduce GHG emissions; organising stakeholder workshops and consultation events; developing ways to foster imple- mentation of climate-friendly practices; developing a climate module; developing training and verification tools; and developing ways to leverage the market for climate-friendly coffee. The climate module was officially launched in February 2011 as a voluntary, add-
on module to the Rainforest Alliance’s Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) stan- dard. Gianluca Gondolini, a project manager in the Rainforest Alliance’s sustainable
agriculture team in Latin America, said farmers can play a fundamental role in miti- gating the impact of climate change. The module, will, he explained, enhance the impact of SAN standards and add value to Rainforest Alliance certification whilst facilitating the transition to low-carbon production. Apart from improving their ability to adapt to climate change the project is expected
to have many benefits for farmers, including: an increase in the ‘carbon balance’ on their farms; access to sustainable markets; market recognition for climate-friendly busi- ness practices; and eligibility for programmes such as payment for environmental serv- ices. The benefits for coffee roasters will include: products that comply with corporate social and environmental responsibility strategies; coffees sourced from farms with low environmental impact and positive climate benefits; secure production through close collaboration with coffee growers implementing climate friendly practices; and a con- nection with consumers interested in mitigating the effects of climate change.
Classification of the farmers’ views on aspects of climate change
indeed occur during long intense dry seasons. Finally for Brazil, most large coffee farmers will reject shade for an entirely non-climatic rea- son: because it would impede mechanical harvesting and as things stand at the moment in Brazil farmers are more concerned about labour costs than climate change.
This example illustrates some basic pit-falls of toolkit building: What might work for one farmer, may well not work for another even in the same zone What might work for one climate problem, may well not work for another What might work for climate change might be counterproductive for entirely unrelated reasons. The upshot is that it’s relatively easy to
come up with ideas for tools – there are dozens or even hundreds that are possible – but it is much more difficult to put them together into a toolkit that a farmer might want to use. Ideally we would like to study the utility of
tools through field research and extensive test- ing. But it is beginning to look like we are run- ning out of time, farmers need help now and we don’t know with any certainty what the
May 2011 C&CI
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52