Can economic forces be harnessed for biodiversity conservation? The answer hinges on characterizing the value of nature, a tricky business from biophysical, socioeconomic, and ethical perspectives. Although the societal benefits of native ecosystems are clearly immense, they remain largely unquantified for all but a few services. Here, we estimate the value of tropical forest in supplying pollination services to agriculture. We focus on coffee because it is one of the world's most valuable export commodities and is grown in many of the world's most biodiverse regions. Using pollination experiments along replicated distance gradients, we found that forest-based pollinators increased coffee yields by 20% within ?1 km of forest. Pollination also improved coffee quality near forest by reducing the frequency of peaberries (i.e., small misshapen seeds) by 27%. During 2000/2003, pollination services from two forest fragments (46 and 111 hectares) translated into ?$60,000 (U.S.) per year for one Costa Rican farm. This value is commensurate with expected revenues from competing land uses and far exceeds current conservation incentive payments. Conservation investments in human-dominated landscapes can therefore yield double benefits: for biodiversity and agriculture.

Can economic forces be harnessed for biodiversity conservation? The answer hinges on characterizing the value of nature, a tricky business from biophysical, socioeconomic, and ethical perspectives. Although the societal benefits of native ecosystems are clearly immense, they remain largely unquantified for all but a few services. Here, we estimate the value of tropical forest in supplying pollination services to agriculture. We focus on coffee because it is one of the world's most valuable export commodities and is grown in many of the world's most biodiverse regions. Using pollination experiments along replicated distance gradients, we found that forest-based pollinators increased coffee yields by 20% within ≈1 km of forest. Pollination also improved coffee quality near forest by reducing the frequency of “peaberries” (i.e., small misshapen seeds) by 27%. During 2000–2003, pollination services from two forest fragments (46 and 111 hectares) translated into ≈$60,000 (U.S.) per year for one Costa Rican farm. This value is commensurate with expected revenues from competing land uses and far exceeds current conservation incentive payments. Conservation investments in human-dominated landscapes can therefore yield double benefits: for biodiversity and agriculture. • bees • ecosystem service • landscape • pollination

Agroforestry has importance as a carbon sequestration strategy because of carbon storage potential in its multiple plant species and soil as well as its applicability in agricultural lands and in reforestation. The potential seems to be substantial; but it has not been even adequately recognized, let alone exploited. Proper design and management of agroforestry practices can make them effective carbon sinks. As in other land-use systems, the extent of C sequestered will depend on the amounts of C in standing biomass, recalcitrant C remaining in the soil, and C sequestered in wood products. Average carbon storage by agroforestry practices has been estimated as 9, 21, 50, and 63 Mg C ha?1 in semiarid, subhumid, humid, and temperate regions. For smallholder agroforestry systems in the tropics, potential C sequestration rates range from 1.5 to 3.5 Mg C ha?1 yr?1. Agroforestry can also have an indirect effect on C sequestration when it helps decrease pressure on natural forests, which are the largest sink of terrestrial C. Another indirect avenue of C sequestration is through the use of agroforestry technologies for soil conservation, which could enhance C storage in trees and soils. Agroforestry systems with perennial crops may be important carbon sinks, while intensively managed agroforestry systems with annual crops are more similar to conventional agriculture. In order to exploit this vastly unrealized potential of C sequestration through agroforestry in both subsistence and commercial enterprises in the tropics and the temperate region, innovative policies, based on rigorous research results, have to be put in place.

This paper analyzes the potential of sustainability standards to address this situation through the lenses of Global Value Chain (GVC) analysis. How do sustainability standards affect the structure of the coffee marketing chain? Do they actually address and/or solve problems of sustainability in its economic, social and environmental aspects? Can different sustainability standards be coordinated or harmonized to improve their actual impact? Can sustainability be addressed in mainstream markets as well as in niche markets? Is there a role for public regulation (national and international) for the development, harmonization and/or implementation of sustainability standards?

This paper analyzes the potential of sustainability standards to address this situation through the lenses of Global Value Chain (GVC) analysis. How do sustainability standards affect the structure of the coffee marketing chain? Do they actually address and/or solve problems of sustainability in its economic, social and environmental aspects? Can different sustainability standards be coordinated or harmonized to improve their actual impact? Can sustainability be addressed in mainstream markets as well as in niche markets? Is there a role for public regulation (national and international) for the development, harmonization and/or implementation of sustainability standards?

This paper presents a hedonic approach for estimating paid price for fair trade and organic coffee within the British coffee market. The authors also present an original Quantity Based Demand System (QBDS) model and also model the information using the Almost Ideal Demand System (AIDS) to predict the demand of different coffees.

In this article the authors present coffee as one of the most important traded commodities in terms of volume and the source of income for millions of rural households in the developing world. The Brundtland report (1947) is introduced as the international definition of sustainability. Given the tight relationship between the producers in the developing world and the various institutions involved in the supply chain of coffee, a sustainable development at the local, regional and global level is therefore of utmost importance. The scholars of the international institute for international development structure a parallel between what has been done in the past in term of sustainability, and what is the current scenario. The concept of integrated approach is announced as the result of the Rio Earth Summit when international consensus was reached to simultaneously engage with all the three pillars of sustainability in a coherent and holistic manner. Finally, the scholars concentrate on introducing Fair Trade Labelling and the potential for international cooperation. This effort translates into five principles for sustainable development in coffee trading. These five pillars generate benefits at both micro and macro level. This article could be of interest for policy makers and development agencies.

Research article on removal of COD, BOD, TSS and fecal matter using pilot-scale constructed wetlands in rural villages.

In this paper, Rappole, King, and Rivera probe into the ecological impacts of “certified shade grown” coffee and how impactful the perceived benefits of shade actually are. The authors describe the shade-grown movement in the US as a promotional campaign that has glossed over a fairly complex matter – and they acknowledge that full sun coffees are not beneficial to environments. However, shade grown coffees are not true substitutes for wild forests, and the authors worry that this certification would encourage deforestation in favor of shaded coffee plots. They explain that a plot with pruned shade trees of five to six meters are roughly the same as sun coffee plots to avian populations. Their work is ultimately challenging the industry to push sustainability standards further and examine which types of shade are truly the most environmentally sustainable. Readers interested in shade grown coffee and ecosystems of coffee regions will find this article interesting.

This research article is focused on identifying the agronomic performance and profitability of intercropping robusta with some food varieties. The study was undertaken in Ghana with the objective of also understanding the production levels of the coffee plants and the rationale for farmers to grow coffee intercropped and have better economic earnings from both plantations. The plots were planted in 1996 and the monitoring terminated in 2001. The study was conducted intercropping coffee with plantain, jack bean, maize, cassava and cowpea separately, in addition to two sole coffee plots, one with manual and the other with chemical weed control. Results showed that soil properties variation as well as plant growth were non-significant, yields were higher with jack bean and maize compared to sole coffee plots. In terms of economic benefits farmers would benefit from incorporating cassava and plantain into the system. However, for mainly interesting in commercialisation would benefit more by intercropping with maize or jack bean. This research article might be of interest for agronomists or cooperatives working on intercropping scenarios.

Through the case study of specialty coffee, this paper examines the role of different kinds of standards in determining the governance features of international trade. The specialty coffee industry is the most vibrant and fast growing segment of a global coffee market that is otherwise marred in a deep crisis. Has this growth been beneficial to coffee farmers? To what extent? For which groups of farmers and in what countries? What has been the role of standards in this process? What kinds of specialty coffees have more potential to promote a more equal distribution of value added along the marketing chain?

Fair trade and other alternative markets have become viable options for small coffee farmers in developing countries. This case study evaluated the potential benefits and limitations derived from fair trade networks in two contrasting coffee cooperatives of western El Salvador. One of the cooperatives is already selling through fair trade channels, while the second is in the process of insertion. In both cases, the Association of Small Coffee Producers of El Salvador (APECAFE), a second level organization with a key role in fair trade linkages, has mediated this process.

The research was carried out through focus groups, semi-structured and informal interviews, and direct observation. Data from an on-going study on shade coffee, livelihoods and conservation was used to complement this information. Interviews and/or revision of secondary data were done at three different levels: 1) key international (FLO) and national second level organizations (APECAFE) associated to fair trade; 2) the board of directors of each of the two coffee cooperatives; 3) interviews with individual members of the two cooperatives.

Coffee has lost much of the economic importance it once held in El Salvador. This sector is currently suffering not only from the price crisis, but also from a significant decrease in the support it once received from the state. The majority of coffee farmers in El Salvador are small growers and farmers grouped in collectively managed cooperatives. Some of these cooperatives are tapped into alternative markets. These commercialization networks are increasingly perceived as one of the few ways to survive the current price crisis.

An in-country representative from the Federation of Fair Trade Labeling Organizations (FLO), and APECAFE facilitate fair trade networks in El Salvador. Participating cooperatives get registered in FLO through APECAFE. This allows them to sell to fair trade buyers in different countries. Only four cooperatives in El Salvador are currently registered in FLO, and of these only two have been able to place coffee in fair trade markets. The main reasons for low registration are the small size of the fair trade markets, and its selectivity for very high quality coffee. For this reason, FLO and APECAFE are supporting the convergence of fair trade cooperatives with certification to other alternative market labels (mainly organic). In the past, APECAFE membership was limited to agrarian reform cooperatives, but the organization has recently opened to other types of farmer associations. This change is expected to bring the benefits of fair trade and other alternative markets to a larger number of farmers.

The two coffee cooperatives studied represent two different organizational models. One is collectively managed and established through the agrarian reform of 1980 (Las Colinas). The other is a farmer association created by the growers themselves (El Sincuyo). Las Colinas has been selling coffee through fair trade since 1998. The income generated by these sales is very important to this cooperative. Individual members acknowledge the benefits of fair as a source of income and as a source of advantageous credit for the cooperative. The main benefit perceived from fair trade by cooperative members is through the use of this income for the payment of their salaries. The main limitations perceived are the long time it takes to receive coffee payments (and therefore their salaries) and the limited size of the market.

El Sincuyo cooperative is currently seeking fair trade registration. Members perceive the main potential benefit as a better price. Since farmers own and manage individual plots, this directly translates to higher incomes for the households. The main limitation perceived is their lack of understanding of how fair trade networks function.

Tapping into fair trade networks represents an advantageous strategy for coffee cooperatives in El Salvador. Key limitations that can be pointed to are the delay in payments to the cooperatives; the limited size of the market; and a somewhat homogeneous treatment of different types of cooperatives. Some important improvements that could be done within fair trade are: 1) to better integrate it with other development initiatives; 2) provide farmers with better information on the nature of the network and on coffee quality issues; and 3) support the convergence of fair trade with organic and other alternative markets.

The self-pollinating African shrub Coffea arabica, a pillar of tropical agriculture, was considered to gain nothing from insect pollinators1, 2. But I show here that naturalized, non-native honeybees can augment pollination and boost crop yields by over 50%. These findings, together with world coffee-harvest statistics and results from field studies of organically shade-grown coffee, indicate that coffee plants would benefit from being grown in habitats that are suitable for sustaining valuable pollinators.

To what extent is global economic change mediated by national-level policies? Are global corporations adopting the same strategies in different countries or do they address varying local circumstances in different ways? Do governments in developing countries have any meaningful regulatory powers left? This paper seeks to address some of these issues by examining the dynamics of coffee-market reforms in three East African countries against the background of recent restructuring of the global coffee marketing chain. The paper focuses on two relatively neglected areas of inquiry: (1)changes in the identity, market share and organization of the actors involved in commodity markets and their contractual/power relationships in the marketing chain; and (2)changes in the assessment, monitoring and valuation of quality parameters in commodity trade. The author highlights the consequences of different trajectories of domestic market reforms and considers whether the preservation of quality and reputation is possible in deregulated markets.

Coffee plants can go it alone, but they do better with help from bees. Insect-pollinated bushes yield over 50% more beans than plants that are shielded from bees.

This surprise finding could lead to changes in coffee production. Coffee (Coffea arabica) is self-pollinating - insects were thought to make little difference to yields.

"If you want to make the most of your coffee harvest you should maintain a bit of natural habitat and not spread insecticide about," says entomologist David Roubik of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama1.

Roubik found that the main coffee pollinators in Panama are introduced African honeybees. "This bee from Africa seems to be the most important pollinator of this plant from Africa - it's the rematch," he says.

Insects probably increase the quantity of pollen that is transferred. Yields may also be higher from plants that are cross-pollinated.