Cultivating Sustainable Coffee: Persistent Paradoxes

This chapter discusses the relationship and interconnections among changing the livelihoods of farmers, initiatives for sustainable coffee, and the production of shade-grown coffee. It examines the advantages and opportunities for farmers and producers engaged in coffee certification and diversification programs. The role of Fair Trade and organic networks in creating awareness of biodiversity conservation, the social and environment costs of coffee systems, and the need for supporting small farmers are also discussed. The methods to increase accountability and improve the efficiency of coffee cooperatives are presented in this chapter, as are the importance of understanding the sustainability initiatives and their implications for the regulators, along with the use of land patterns for coffee cultivation

Food security and smallholder coffee production: current issues and future directions

In recent years, there has been growing discussion within the specialty coffee industry about the preva- lence of seasonal food insecurity in coffee growing communities. The idea that coffee producers lack re- sources to feed themselves and their families flies in the face of Fair Trade and other sustainable coffee ini- tiatives, which were designed to ensure a viable livelihood and improved conditions for small-scale coffee farmers around the world. Though these certifications represent an important step toward delivering better prices to farmers, they are inadequate tools to stand alone against the formidable and entrenched barriers faced by this population. Small-scale farmers are esti- mated to produce 70% of the world\u27s coffee supply (Eakin et al, 2009), within an industry supported by up to 25 million coffee producers. If you also include coffee harvesters, processors, and industry workers, the total is closer to 100 million people whose livelihoods depend on the crop in some way (Jha et al, 2011)

Farmer perceptions of climate change risk and associated on-farm management strategies in Vermont, northeastern United States

Little research has been conducted on how agricultural producers in the northeastern United States conceptualize climate-related risk and how these farmers address risk through on-farm management strategies. Two years following Tropical Storm Irene, our team interviewed 15 farmers in order to investigate their perceptions of climate-related risk and how their decision-making was influenced by these perceptions. Our results show that Vermont farmers are concerned with both ecological and economic risk. Subthemes that emerged included geographic, topographic, and hydrological characteristics of farm sites; stability of land tenure; hydrological erosion; pest and disease pressure; market access; household financial stability; and floods. Farmers in our study believed that these risks are not new but that they are significantly intensified by climate change. Farmer responses were heavily focused on adaptation activities, with discussion of climate change mitigation activities notably absent. Psychological distance construal theory and hyperbolic discounting emerged as well-suited frames to explain why farmers reported adaptation activities but not mitigation strategies. Farmers will probably experience an increasing severity of climate-related impacts in the northeast region; therefore, information about climate-related risks coming from farmers\u27 personal experience should be integrated with forecasting data to help farmers plan effective adaptation strategies

Harnessing local strength for sustainable coffee value chains in India and nicaragua: Reevaluating certification to global sustainability standards

Coffee is generally grown in areas derived from forest, and both its expansion and management cause biodiversity loss. Sustainability standards in coffee are well established but have been criticized while social and environmental impact is elusive. This paper assesses the issue-attention cycle of coffee production in India and Nicaragua, including producer concerns and responses over time to concerns (sustainability standards, public regulations and development projects). Systematic comparison of the socioeconomic, environmental and policy context in both countries is then used to explore potential effects of sustainability standards. Results show limits, in local context, to relevance of global certification approaches: in both countries due to naturally high levels of biodiversity within coffee production systems global standards are easily met. They do not provide recognition for the swing potential (difference between best and worst) and do not raise the bar of environmental outcomes though nationally biodiversity declines. Nicaraguan regulations have focused on the socioeconomic development of the coffee sector via strengthening producer organizations, while India prioritized environmental and biodiversity conservation. In India, externally driven sustainability standards partially replace the existing producer–buyer relationship while in Nicaragua standards are desired by producer organizations. The temporal comparison shows that recently local stakeholders harness improvements through their unique local value propositions: the ‘small producer’ symbol in Nicaragua and certification of geographic origin in India. Nicaragua builds on the strength of its smallholder sector while India builds on its strength of being home to a global biodiversity hotspot

Integrating agroecology and participatory action research (PAR): Lessons from Central America

The last decade has seen an increasing advancement and interest in the integration of agroecology and participatory action research (PAR). This article aims to: (1) analyze the key characteristics and principles of two case studies that integrated PAR and agroecology in Central America; and (2) learn from the lessons offered by these case studies, as well as others from the literature, on how to better integrate PAR and agroecology. Key principles identified for effective PAR agroecological processes include a shared interest in research by partners, a belief in collective power/action, a commitment to participation, practicing humility and establishing trust and accountability. Important lessons to consider for future work include: (1) research processes that did not start as PAR, can evolve into it; (2) farmer/stakeholder participation in setting the research agenda, from the outset, results in higher engagement and enhanced outcomes; (3) having the right partners for the desired outcomes is key; (4) intentional and explicit reflection is an essential component of PAR processes; and (5) cross-generational collaborations are crucial to long-term benefits. Key challenges that confront PAR processes include the need for time and resources over longer periods; the complexity of multi-actor process facilitation; and institutional barriers within the academy and development organizations, which prevent shifting investment towards integrated PAR agroecological processes

Mixed methods approach to understanding farmer and agricultural advisor perceptions of climate change and adaptation in Vermont, United States

The relationships among farmers’ belief in climate change, perceptions of climate-related risk, and use of climate adaptation practices is a growing topic of interest in U.S. scholarship. The northeast region is not well represented in the literature, although it is highly agricultural and will likely face climate-related risks that differ from those faced in other regions. We used a mixed methods approach to examine northeast farmers’ perceptions of climate change and climate-related risks over time, and perceived trade-offs associated with on-farm practices. Our investigation shows how northeastern farmers think about climate-risk, and what they are doing to address it

Shade coffee: Update on a disappearing refuge for biodiversity

In the past three decades, coffee cultivation has gained widespread attention for its crucial role in supporting local and global biodiversity. In this synthetic Overview, we present newly gathered data that summarize how global patterns in coffee distribution and shade vegetation have changed and discuss implications for biodiversity, ecosystem services, and livelihoods. Although overall cultivated coffee area has decreased by 8% since 1990, coffee production and agricultural intensification have increased in many places and shifted globally, with production expanding in Asia while contracting in Africa. Ecosystem services such as pollination, pest control, climate regulation, and nutrient sequestration are generally greater in shaded coffee farms, but many coffee-growing regions are removing shade trees from their management. Although it is clear that there are ecological and socioeconomic benefits associated with shaded coffee, we expose the many challenges and future research priorities needed to link sustainable coffee management with sustainable livelihoods. © 2014 The Author(s)

Agroecología e Investigación-Acción Participativa (IAP): Principios y Lecciones de Centroamérica

The last decade has seen an increasing advancement and interest in the integration of agroecology and participatory action research (PAR). This article aims to: (1) analyze the key characteristics and principles of two case studies that integrated IAP and agroecology in Central America; and (2) learn from the lessons offered by these case studies, as well as others from the literature, on how to better integrate PAR and agroecology. Key principles identified for effective PAR agroecological processes include a shared interest in research by partners, a belief in collective power/action, a commitment to participation, practicing humility and establishing trust and accountability. Important lessons to consider for future work include: (1) research processes that did not start as PAR, can evolve into it; (2) farmer/stakeholder participation in setting the research agenda, from the outset, results in higher engagement and enhanced outcomes; (3) having the right partners for the desired outcomes is key; (4) intentional and explicit reflection is an essential component of IAP processes; and (5) cross-generational collaborations are crucial to long-term benefits. Key challenges that confront IAP processes include the need for time and resources over longer periods; the complexity of multi-actor process facilitation; and institutional barriers within the academy and development organizations, which prevent shifting investment towards integrated IAP agroecological processes.En la última década se ha visto un avance y un interés cada vez mayores sobre la integración de la agroecología y la investigación acción participativa (IAP). Este artículo tiene los siguientes objetivos: (1) analizar las características y principios clave de la IAP, usando dos estudios de casos que integraron IAP y agroecología en América Central; y (2) aprender de las lecciones ofrecidas por estos estudios de caso y otros de la literatura, sobre cómo integrar mejor IAP y agroecología. Los principios clave identificados para los procesos agroecológicos efectivos de IAP incluyen un interés compartido en la investigación por parte de los socios, una creencia en el poder / acción colectiva, un compromiso con la participación, la práctica de la humildad y el establecimiento de la confianza y la responsabilidad. Las lecciones importantes a considerar para el trabajo futuro incluyen: (1) procesos de investigación que no comenzaron con un enfoque de IAP, pueden evolucionar para incoporarlo; (2) la participación de los agricultores / partes interesadas en el establecimiento de la agenda de investigación, desde el comienzo, resulta en una mayor participación y mejores resultados; (3) tener los socios adecuados para los resultados deseados es clave; (4) la reflexión intencional y explícita es un componente esencial de los procesos de IAP; y (5) las colaboraciones intergeneracionales son cruciales para los beneficios a largo plazo. Los desafíos clave que enfrentan los procesos de IAP incluyen la necesidad de tiempo y recursos durante períodos más largos; la complejidad de la facilitación de procesos con múltiples actores; y las barreras institucionales dentro de la academia y las organizaciones de desarrollo, que aún no adoptan e inverierten adecuadamente en procesos agroecológicos integrales de IAP

Agroecology: promoting the transition towards sustainability

En este artículo se define agroecología como la aplicación de los conceptos y prinicipios ecológicos al diseño y manejo de los sistemas alimentarios sostenibles. Se presentan los argumentos principales que sostienen la validez, importancia y pertinencia del enfoque agroecológico, no solo para entender los procesos involucrados en la producción de alimentos, sino para proponer alternativas que conduzcan a esos procesos para operar en sistemas sostenibles. El concepto clave, que guía el razonamiento metodológico y epistemológico en este análisis, es el de sostenibilidad. Para alcanzar sostenibilidad la metodología agroecológica no solo se ancla en la Ecología, lo cual se describe en el trabajo, sino que percibe la producción de alimentos como un proceso que involucra a los productores y consumidores interactuando en forma dinámica.In this article agroecology is defined as the application of ecological concepts and principles to the design and management of sustainable food systems. The principal arguments are presented that support the validity, importance, and application of the agroecologial focus, not only in order to understand the processes involved in food production, but also to propose alternatives that help these processes to operate in sustainable systems. The key concept that guides the methodological and epitistemalogical rationale of this analysis is sustainability. In order to achieve sustainability the agroecological methodology not only links to Ecology, as is described in the text, but perceives food production as a process involving producers and consumers operating in a dynamic interaction

Mitochondrial Oxidative Stress Promotes Cardiac Remodeling in Myocardial Infarction through the Activation of Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress

We have evaluated cardiac function and fibrosis in infarcted male Wistar rats treated with MitoQ (50 mg/kg/day) or vehicle for 4 weeks. A cohort of patients admitted with a first episode of acute MI were also analyzed with cardiac magnetic resonance and T1 mapping during admission and at a 12-month follow-up. Infarcted animals presented cardiac hypertrophy and a reduction in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and E- and A-waves (E/A) ratio when compared to controls. Myocardial infarction (MI) rats also showed cardiac fibrosis and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress activation. Binding immunoglobulin protein (BiP) levels, a marker of ER stress, were correlated with collagen I levels. MitoQ reduced oxidative stress and prevented all these changes without affecting the infarct size. The LVEF and E/A ratio in patients with MI were 57.6 ± 7.9% and 0.96 ± 0.34, respectively. No major changes in cardiac function, extracellular volume fraction (ECV), or LV mass were observed at follow-up. Interestingly, the myeloperoxidase (MPO) levels were associated with the ECV in basal conditions. BiP staining and collagen content were also higher in cardiac samples from autopsies of patients who had suffered an MI than in those who had died from other causes. These results show the interactions between mitochondrial oxidative stress and ER stress, which can result in the development of diffuse fibrosis in the context of MI