Comments on: Survey: Coffee Farmers and Consumers Have Different Perspectives on Sustainability

By: Ernesto Q

Ernesto Q — Thu, 01 Jun 2023 15:13:22 +0000

One of the aspects mentioned in this article, that I loved, is the fact that it addresses
* living income
* migration = labor availability
* fair prices
* climate change
which are some of the most frequent things every producer has to deal with that are out of his control, and some of them can be tackled by being fair with the prices roasters and consumers pay for coffee. It is interesting that consumers have that “nimby” mentality of sustainability where the producer must comply with these many requirements. Still, they don’t believe increasing the price for that compliance is fair. I believe there is still a lot to be taught about sustainability on all sides of the supply chain, which needs to be addressed fairly and honestly.

By: CoffeeSam

CoffeeSam — Thu, 01 Jun 2023 14:25:54 +0000

Value is implied by the degree of meticulous sorting, processing, and elimination of defects. In the specialty sphere, a detailed understanding of this implied valuation is crucial to the success of cooperatives and small farms. Access to capital is the biggest hurdle presented to smallholders, so investing in the farm year over year by the importer or roastery can literally be the difference in their success or their starvation.

The access of information for the farmers needs to be more ubiquitous than it has traditionally been. The transparency of the coffee supply chain is beneficial to the farmers, and we should push for open and honest communication between all participating parties. It is as a coalition of coffee communities, we can generate real, lasting changes to the coffee world. The whole system is predicated on the capitalist exploitation of the working class due to their lack of means. Unless the workers ARE the owners (such as in a cooperative), the system and our participation in it is a farce built upon flowery language and imperialist dogmatism.

Valuation in coffee is intrinsically connected to this exploitation, and the perpetuation of this cycle is what allows for the capitalist class to net massive wealth while the workers are subjected to the peaks and valleys of the market. In short, worker conditions in the imperial periphery will not improve so long as the large corporate stakeholders hold the keys. This unequal exchange must not be overlooked when determining the path forward. The problem with economic sustainability is it always comes at the expense of the working class.

This neo-feudalism that penetrates every level of the coffee market is the antithesis of sustainable.

By: andy carlton

andy carlton — Wed, 31 May 2023 05:22:11 +0000

You don’t say! Well knock me down with a feather!

The developed world uses the word “sustainability” to mean environmental sustainability, in the main. In the developing world we are also concerned about that. After all, it is our coffee harvest that suffers from recurring drought, increasingly violent storms, hail, unseasonal rain, super-high temperatures, blights of various kinds, etc. But if farmers cannot live from the income of their coffee, if we cannot invest in our crop and also in our children because of volatility in the price of coffee and lack of reliable income, then environmental sustainability must take second place. That would be the same in the developed world, wouldn’t it?

So the issue for us is first: how to make a living from coffee, and then: how to address climate change.

Sustainable certifications are often a form of greenwashing, and they are also expensive and very onerous for us as producers, while supporting certification companies who charge us high fees. Certification certainly allows us to access more markets, but the cost-benefit is questionable.