IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v162y2018icp179-190.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of shade and input management on economic performance of small-scale Peruvian coffee systems

Author

Listed:
  • Jezeer, Rosalien E.
  • Santos, Maria J.
  • Boot, René G.A.
  • Junginger, Martin
  • Verweij, Pita A.

Abstract

Tropical agroforestry systems provide a number of ecosystem services that might help sustain the production of multiple crops, improve farmers' livelihoods and conserve biodiversity. A major drawback of agroforestry coffee systems is the perceived lower economic performance compared to high-input monoculture coffee systems, which is driving worldwide intensification practices of coffee systems. However, comprehensive cost-benefit analyses of small-scale coffee plantations are scarce. Consequently, there is a need to improve our understanding of the economic performance of coffee systems under different shade and input management practices. We provide a comprehensive economic analysis of Arabica coffee farming practices where we compare productivity, costs, net income and benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of 162 small-scale, Peruvian coffee plantations under different shade and input management practices along an elevation gradient. By using a cluster analysis, three shade and three input classes (low, medium and high) were defined. We found similar economic performance for all shade classes, but reduced net income and BCR in the High-Input class. More specifically, there was no difference in net income or BCR between low, medium and high shade classes. The High-Input class had significantly lower net income and BCR, mainly due to increased costs of (hired) labour, land, and fertilizer and fungicides; costs which were not fully compensated for by higher coffee yields. Coffee yield decreased with elevation, whereas gate coffee price and quality, as well as shade levels, increased with elevation. Additional revenues from timber could increase farmers' income and overall economic performance of shaded plantations in the future. Our analysis provides evidence that for small-scale coffee production, agroforestry systems perform equally well or better than unshaded plantations with high input levels, reinforcing the theory that good economic performance can coincide with conservation of biodiversity and associated ecosystem services. Additional comprehensive and transparent economic analyses for other geographic regions are needed to be able to draw generalizable conclusions for smallholder coffee farming worldwide. We advise that future economic performance studies simultaneously address the effects of shade and input management on economic performance indicators and take biophysical variation into account.

Suggested Citation

  • Jezeer, Rosalien E. & Santos, Maria J. & Boot, René G.A. & Junginger, Martin & Verweij, Pita A., 2018. "Effects of shade and input management on economic performance of small-scale Peruvian coffee systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 179-190.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:162:y:2018:i:c:p:179-190
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X17306285
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bravo-Monroy, L. & Potts, S.G. & Tzanopoulos, J., 2016. "Drivers influencing farmer decisions for adopting organic or conventional coffee management practices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 49-61.
    2. Unknown, 2014. "Cover Matter," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(3), pages 1-8.
    3. Unknown, 2014. "Cover Matter," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1).
    4. Bacon, Christopher, 2005. "Confronting the Coffee Crisis: Can Fair Trade, Organic, and Specialty Coffees Reduce Small-Scale Farmer Vulnerability in Northern Nicaragua?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 497-511, March.
    5. Jezeer, Rosalien E. & Verweij, Pita A. & Santos, Maria J. & Boot, René G.A., 2017. "Shaded Coffee and Cocoa – Double Dividend for Biodiversity and Small-scale Farmers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 136-145.
    6. Gobbi, Jose A., 2000. "Is biodiversity-friendly coffee financially viable? An analysis of five different coffee production systems in western El Salvador," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 267-281, May.
    7. Beuchelt, Tina D. & Zeller, Manfred, 2011. "Profits and poverty: Certification's troubled link for Nicaragua's organic and fairtrade coffee producers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1316-1324, May.
    8. Perfecto, Ivette & Vandermeer, John & Mas, Alex & Pinto, Lorena Soto, 2005. "Biodiversity, yield, and shade coffee certification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 435-446, September.
    9. Vellema, W. & Buritica Casanova, A. & Gonzalez, C. & D’Haese, M., 2015. "The effect of specialty coffee certification on household livelihood strategies and specialisation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 13-25.
    10. Padrón, Benigno Rodríguez & Burger, Kees, 2015. "Diversification and Labor Market Effects of the Mexican Coffee Crisis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 19-29.
    11. Unknown, 2014. "Cover Matter," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(2).
    12. Unknown, 2014. "Cover Matter," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(4), pages 1-6.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicolò Golinucci & Nicolò Stevanato & Federica Inzoli & Mohammad Amin Tahavori & Negar Namazifard & Lamya Hussain & Benedetta Camilli & Matteo Vincenzo Rocco & Emanuela Colombo, 2020. "Comprehensive and Integrated Impact Assessment Framework for Development Policies Evaluation: Definition and Application To Kenya," Reports, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, November.
    2. De Leijster, Vincent & Santos, Maria João & Wassen, Martin J. & Ramos-Font, Maria Eugenia & Robles, Ana Belén & Díaz, Mario & Staal, Maartje & Verweij, Pita A., 2019. "Agroecological management improves ecosystem services in almond orchards within one year," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Yen Pham & Kathryn Reardon-Smith & Shahbaz Mushtaq & Geoff Cockfield, 2019. "The impact of climate change and variability on coffee production: a systematic review," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 609-630, October.
    4. Nicolò Golinucci & Nicolò Stevanato & Negar Namazifard & Mohammad Amin Tahavori & Lamya Adil Sulliman Hussain & Benedetta Camilli & Federica Inzoli & Matteo Vincenzo Rocco & Emanuela Colombo, 2022. "Comprehensive and Integrated Impact Assessment Framework for Development Policies Evaluation: Definition and Application to Kenyan Coffee Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, April.
    5. Jezeer, Rosalien E. & Santos, Maria J. & Verweij, Pita A. & Boot, René G.A. & Clough, Yann, 2019. "Benefits for multiple ecosystem services in Peruvian coffee agroforestry systems without reducing yield," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    6. Adolfo Vicente Araújo & Caroline Mota & Sajid Siraj, 2023. "Using Genetic Programming to Identify Characteristics of Brazilian Regions in Relation to Rural Credit Allocation," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, April.
    7. Jules Ngango & Seung Gyu Kim, 2019. "Assessment of Technical Efficiency and Its Potential Determinants among Small-Scale Coffee Farmers in Rwanda," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, July.
    8. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Alice Fitch & Rebecca L. Rowe & Niall P. McNamara & Cahyo Prayogo & Rizky Maulana Ishaq & Rizki Dwi Prasetyo & Zak Mitchell & Simon Oakley & Laurence Jones, 2022. "The Coffee Compromise: Is Agricultural Expansion into Tree Plantations a Sustainable Option?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
    10. De Leijster, V. & Verburg, R.W. & Santos, M.J. & Wassen, M.J. & Martínez-Mena, M. & de Vente, J. & Verweij, P.A., 2020. "Almond farm profitability under agroecological management in south-eastern Spain: Accounting for externalities and opportunity costs," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    11. Rebecca L. Rowe & Cahyo Prayogo & Simon Oakley & Kurniatun Hairiah & Meine van Noordwijk & Karuniawan Puji Wicaksono & Syahrul Kurniawan & Alice Fitch & Edi Dwi Cahyono & Didik Suprayogo & Niall P. Mc, 2022. "Improved Coffee Management by Farmers in State Forest Plantations in Indonesia: An Experimental Platform," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, April.
    12. Francesco Bandarin & Enrico Ciciotti & Marco Cremaschi & Giovanna Madera & Paolo Perulli & Diana Shendrikova, 2020. "Which Future for Cities after COVID-19 An international Survey," Reports, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, October.
    13. Lenka Ehrenbergerová & Marie Klimková & Yessika Garcia Cano & Hana Habrová & Samuel Lvončík & Daniel Volařík & Warbota Khum & Petr Němec & Soben Kim & Petr Jelínek & Petr Maděra, 2021. "Does Shade Impact Coffee Yield, Tree Trunk, and Soil Moisture on Coffea canephora Plantations in Mondulkiri, Cambodia?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-17, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jezeer, Rosalien E. & Santos, Maria J. & Verweij, Pita A. & Boot, René G.A. & Clough, Yann, 2019. "Benefits for multiple ecosystem services in Peruvian coffee agroforestry systems without reducing yield," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Pio Baake & Helene Naegele, 2017. "Competition between For-Profit and Industry Labels: The Case of Social Labels in the Coffee Market," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1686, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Barjolle, Dominique & Quiñones-Ruiz, Xiomara F. & Bagal, Monique & Comoé, Hermann, 2017. "The Role of the State for Geographical Indications of Coffee: Case Studies from Colombia and Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 105-119.
    4. Frohmann, Alicia, 2017. "Defining product environmental standards in international trade," Documentos de Proyectos 41987, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    5. Millard, Edward, 2017. "Still brewing: Fostering sustainable coffee production," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 7, pages 32-42.
    6. Barham, Bradford L. & Weber, Jeremy G., 2012. "The Economic Sustainability of Certified Coffee: Recent Evidence from Mexico and Peru," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 1269-1279.
    7. Kitti, Mitri & Heikkila, Jaakko & Huhtala, Anni, 2006. "Fair policies for the coffee trade - protecting people or biodiversity?," Discussion Papers 11858, MTT Agrifood Research Finland.
    8. Valencia, Vivian & García-Barrios, Luis & Sterling, Eleanor J. & West, Paige & Meza-Jiménez, Amayrani & Naeem, Shahid, 2018. "Smallholder response to environmental change: Impacts of coffee leaf rust in a forest frontier in Mexico," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 463-474.
    9. Villegas, Laura, 2017. "Shady Business: Why do Puerto Rican Coffee Farmers Adopt Conservation Agriculture Practices?," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 259136, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Anna Milford, 2014. "Co-operative or coyote? Producers’ choice between intermediary purchasers and Fairtrade and organic co-operatives in Chiapas," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(4), pages 577-591, December.
    11. Johanna Gather & Meike Wollni, 2022. "Setting the standard: Does Rainforest Alliance Certification increase environmental and socio‐economic outcomes for small‐scale coffee producers in Rwanda?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1807-1825, December.
    12. Diego Valbuena & Julien G. Chenet & Daniel Gaitán-Cremaschi, 2021. "Options to Support Sustainable Trajectories in a Rural Landscape: Drivers, Rural Processes, and Local Perceptions in a Colombian Coffee-Growing Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-20, November.
    13. Bravo-Monroy, L. & Potts, S.G. & Tzanopoulos, J., 2016. "Drivers influencing farmer decisions for adopting organic or conventional coffee management practices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 49-61.
    14. Pinto, Luís Fernando Guedes & Gardner, Toby & McDermott, Constance L. & Ayub, Karim Omar Lara, 2014. "Group certification supports an increase in the diversity of sustainable agriculture network–rainforest alliance certified coffee producers in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 59-64.
    15. Chiputwa, Brian & Spielman, David J. & Qaim, Matin, 2015. "Food Standards, Certification, and Poverty among Coffee Farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 400-412.
    16. Thi Minh Chi Nguyen & Li-Hsien Chien & Shwu-En Chen, 2015. "Impact of certification system on smallhold coffee farms` income distribution in Vietnam," Asian Journal of Agriculture and rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 5(6), pages 137-149, June.
    17. Ninon Sirdey & Sylvaine Lemeilleur, 2021. "Can fair trade resolve the “hungry farmer paradox”?," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 81-106, March.
    18. Valkila, Joni, 2009. "Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua -- Sustainable development or a poverty trap?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 3018-3025, October.
    19. Jorge Sellare & Eva‐Marie Meemken & Christophe Kouamé & Matin Qaim, 2020. "Do Sustainability Standards Benefit Smallholder Farmers Also When Accounting For Cooperative Effects? Evidence from Côte d'Ivoire," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 681-695, March.
    20. Balineau, Gaëlle, 2013. "Disentangling the Effects of Fair Trade on the Quality of Malian Cotton," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 241-255.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:162:y:2018:i:c:p:179-190. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.