Coffee on a Hot Planet

Abstract

Researchers are predicting that the spatially uneven distribution of climate change risks will further exacerbate the inequalities of environmental change in the coming decades. This case study of coffee offers a window into the feedback loops of ecological health, agricultural economies, and social well-being on a quickly warming planet. Drawing from a review of research across disciplines, we explore three human-driven factors that have increased the risks of loss for coffee producers in the face of climate change. These three characteristics of the coffee commodity chain—geographical consolidation, genetic variation, and market factors—enmesh social, ecological, and economic expectations of coffee as a high-value agricultural product. Considering the impact of climate change on coffee production sheds light on how climate change interacts with preexisting ecological, social, and economic challenges of global, agricultural production.

Full text

The nal version of this article can be found in Case Studies of the Environment, (5)1.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/cse.2021.1367248
Title: Coffee on a hot planet: How climate change exacerbates existing inequities in the global
coffee commodity chain
Short title: Climate change and coffee
Authors
*Amanda McMillan Lequieu, Drexel University
Katy Vieira, Drexel University
*corresponding author: mcmillanlequieu@drexel.edu
Word count: 5100 (including in-text citations)
Abstract
Researchers are predicting that the spatially-uneven distribution of climate change risks will
further exacerbate the inequalities of environmental change in the coming decades. This case
study of coffee offers a window into the feedback loops of ecological health, agricultural
economies, and social wellbeing on a quickly-warming planet.Drawing from a review of
research across disciplines, we explore three human-driven factors that have increased the risks
of loss for coffee producers in the face of climate change. These three characteristics of the
coffee commodity chain—geographical consolidation, genetic variation, and market factors—
enmesh social, ecological, and economic expectations of coffee as a high-value agricultural
product.Considering the impact of climate change on coffee production sheds light on how
climate change interacts with pre-existing ecological, social, and economic challenges of global,
agricultural production.

Introduction
By the end of the century, global temperatures are predicted to rise by 5° Celsius.Climate
change along with its induced variability in rainfall pattern, rise in temperature, and higher
prevalence of extreme weather events, will have serious impacts on agriculture.1Coffee is an
excellent ‘case of’ social and economic cycles of risk and consequence of climate change.Coffee
is a high-valued global commodity that serves as an important source of revenue for producer
and consumer nations. More than 100 million people depend on some part of the coffee
commodity chain for their livelihood.2,3Approximately 25 million of them are the farmers who
manage the agricultural component of coffee production.4While climate change is a serious
threat to all agricultural productivity, coffee has been categorized as a plant species highly
sensitive to progressive climatic change. Commercially successful coffee requires a narrow
window of ideal growth conditions including cool temperatures, fertile soils with appropriate
acidity, specific altitudes, and a balanced combination of rainy and dry seasons.5,6
Climate change is predicted to alter the capacity of current coffee lands to offer these
ideal conditions. Not only will traditional coffee-growing regions in the tropics experience an
increased average temperature of at least 2° Celsius by 2050,4,7 researchers predictthat the
spatially-uneven distribution of climate change risks will further exacerbate the spatial
inequalities of environmental change in the coming decades. Warmer growing seasons will alter
the coffee production cycle, hastening fruit maturationand producing lower-quality beans.6
Across the coffee-growing tropics, water availability is predicted to decrease, droughts and dry
seasons to extend, and rainfall to be less frequent but more intense. These severe seasonal
changes will stress coffee trees, predisposing them to pests and disease.8,9,10,11 Thisreduced
climatic suitability for coffee at certain geographical locations will require a reorientation of
2

global commodity chains. As temperatures increase, coffee farms near the equator and at low
elevations will become too hot and dry, while higher elevations that were once ill-suited for
coffee trees will become more attractive to growers.
Through the case of coffee, this paper examines how human-caused climate change
exacerbates risksthat are inherent to the modern coffee commodity chain. By risks, we mean
those “hazards and insecurities induced and introduced by modernisation itself,” in the words of
sociologist Ulrich Beck.12We contend that the current economic, social, and ecological
characteristics of the global coffee commodity chain shift the burden of the most immediate and
significant climate change risks onto coffee farmers.Reviewing recent literature, this case study
focuses on how climate change exacerbates three modern risks of globalized coffee:
geographical consolidation, genetic variation, and market disruptions. These three factors
represent a broader web of economic, social, and ecological inequalities that will challenge
coffee production in future decades. After providing a brief history of coffee domestication, we
review the entanglements between climate change and the processes that have made coffee a
global commodity.
Case Examination
The historical roots of a global commoditycrisis
Coffee is more than a beverage—itis an important social signifier and economic
commodity. Endemic to sub-Saharan Africa, wild coffee was likely domesticated and cultivated
for trade as early as 575 CE.13 Written records trace the commercialization of Arabica coffee,the
most popular coffee varietal today,to Yemen in the 15th century. Muslim scholars valued its
stimulant properties for prolonged religious devotion. Domesticated coffee was imported to
Indonesia in the late 17th century by the Dutch and to South America by the Spanish, driven by
3

increased European consumption.14,15 European coffeehouses in the 17th and 18th centuries served
this luxury beverage to middle- and upper-class men as they shared ideas, transacted business,
and proposed revolutionary politics.15,16 Coffee became accessible to the working classwhen
Arabica plantations expanded to the Global South in the 19th century.16Today, ubiquitous coffee
shop chains and widespread consumption reiterate how coffee remains integral to society. It
serves as a breakfast staple, an athletic performance-booster, a mechanism for socialization or
productivity, and a culturally-embraced stimulant.
Consumption and production of this agricultural commodity are unevenly distributed
across the globe. In 2018, Europe imported more than half of global coffee stocks; the U.S.
imported nearly a quarter.18In contrast, coffee production is concentrated in the warm, humid
regions of Latin America, Africa, and Asia, where 25 million farmers cultivate more than 11
million tons of coffee yearly3, or approximately 3.3 pounds (1.5 kilograms) per person per
year.17While the regional disparity between where coffee is grown and where it is most
consumed reflects the ecological requirements of agriculture, the spatially-uneven distribution of
economic gains and environmental risks characterizes the inequality of modern, agricultural
commodity chains.Due to value-added sales of the coffee industry, coffee generates more
revenue for consumer nations than for producing nations. Once roasted, branded, and packaged
with ancillary add-ons like sweeteners, coffee cups, and brewing machines, coffee can be sold
with significantly higher profit margins than can green coffee beans.19, 20 The U.S. generates the
highest coffee-related gross revenue with a projection of over $67 billion for the year 2020. In
contrast, Brazil, the top exporter of green(raw) coffee beans, generates only $51 billion.
Revenues of most producing countries, such as Columbia, Ethiopia, and Indonesia, are
consistently less than one billion.17Nations characterized by small farms, such as Uganda, with
4

nearly two million coffee farmers,21bring in between $300 and $500 million annually from coffee
products.17,22,23
Furthermore, the people and places that will be most hurt by climate change will be
farmers and their land, not consumers. Small-scale coffee farmers tend to rely directly on
ecosystem goods and services for their subsistence, making them particularly vulnerable to
environmental change.2,4While consumers may notice shifts in prices and changes in acidity and
flavor of their value-added coffee products, as both attributes are highly influenced by the
environmental conditions of the sites where coffee is grown, producing nations will bear the
brunt of the costof environmental changes.25 According to the Global Agro-Ecological Zones
land-use dataset, between 63-75% of lands suitable for growing the two dominant coffee
varietals, Arabica and Robusta, will become unsuitable for coffee cultivation within the next
thirty years due to climate change.9, 27Across growing regions, climate change is predicted to
decrease crop yields24and beverage coffee quality,25 reduce wild populations of coffee necessary
for crossbreeding, increase the incidence of pests,26 and exacerbate social, ecological, and
economic vulnerabilities in agriculturally-dominant countries.
In the remainder of this case study, we highlight three forms of human-driven factors that
have increased the risks of loss for coffee producers in the face of climate change. These three
characteristics of the coffee commodity chain—geographical consolidation of large-scale
producers, the intersection of monoculture cultivation and consumer demand, and the collision of
market forces and the ecological requirements of growing coffee—are in and of themselves
recognizable characteristics of high-value, agricultural products. When combined with the
predicted and concurrent effects of climate change, these three factors put coffee producers in
challenging positions.Synthesizingmulti-disciplinary research, we suggest coffee serves as a
5

‘canary in the mine’ of environmental change. The implications of climate change on coffee raise
questions about the hazards, risks, and feedback loops of ecological health, agricultural
economies, and social wellbeing on a quickly-warming planet.
Risk Factor 1: Geographical consolidation of coffee production
The geography of coffee production—and the relationship among production locations—
is central to the uneven distribution of risk in the face of climate change. Climate change will
impact some locations in the tropics more than others, putting certain coffee farms at risk of a
complete loss. The ecologies of coffee production intersect with a concerning, socioeconomic
trend of geographical consolidation of coffee production. Coffee is produced and exported in
nearly fifty countries,47 but two countries account for more than half of global coffee
production.49 Although Africa claims the oldest varieties of wild coffee and millions of
smallholder coffee farmers, between 1962 and 2017, Africa’s share of global bean supply
steadily decreased from 25% to 11%.8 Vietnamese production has doubled in the past three
decades,9,48 while Brazil maintains top rank, having produced 35% of the global coffee supply in
the 2018/19 crop year. Global demand for coffee is projected to increase by 26% in the next
decade, three-quarters of which is estimated to be fulfilled by Brazilian and Vietnamese
production alone.9The location of coffee production, as well as soil and weather, impacts not
only the flavor of coffee beans, but also local economiesand the individuals directly involved in
the coffee-growing process. Climate change will exacerbate the socioeconomic vulnerabilities of
the coffee supply chain duein partto this increasing geographic consolidation.
The consolidation of coffee production to Vietnam and Brazil has been enabled by a
confluence of expanding acreage in production (extensification) and investing in mechanization
that increases per-acreage productivity (intensification). These two capital-heavy maneuvers
6

have been assisted through private contracting and state-based tax and subsidy supports for
farmers to invest in expensive technology, expand consumer relations, and use improved
production methods.Investments from multinational corporations, like Nestlé, Cooxupé, and
Cooperaiso, enable farmers to expand their landholding and benefit from economies of scale
deriving from plantation-style monoculture farming, chemical fertilizers, and intense
mechanization.9,50In the short term, these shifts in cultivation methods have allowed Brazilian
and Vietnamese coffee producers to offer low prices and high volume to consumers, thus fueling
these two countries’ monopolization of the coffee market. However, increasing production to
meet rapidly growing demand forces coffee growers to withdraw the necessary environmental
resources at a rate exceeding the rate of return, resulting in significant ecological destruction.51
These more industrialized farming models involve removal of shade layers and growth in full
sun. In general, open-field agroforestry lacks the multi-species forest’s moisture-conserving,
carbon-sequestering, and nutrient-producing shade and biodiversity.9,37,52,53
[insert Figures 1, 2, 3 approximately here]
7

Figure 1: Full sun coffee plantation offers greater efficiency and vulnerability. Licensed for public use by Rainforest Aliance/UTZ
Certified resources, "Outlook coffee plantation (Brazil)", https://utz.org/?attachment_id=9173.
Figure 2: Partial sun coffee cultivation offers moisture-conserving growing conditions. Licensed under CC BY-NC-
ND 2.0. Photo by N. Patterson.
8

Figure 3: Shade grown coffee creates microclimates that minimize pests and moisture loss. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Photo
by Anand Osuri.
Such global consolidation of large-scale coffee production has two key implications
beyond Brazil and Vietnam. First, the highly competitive context of the global coffee market has
encouraged a global shift from smallholder farms intermixed in existing forests to large-scale,
open-field cultivations that permit machine-aided irrigation, pesticide application, and large
harvests. For instance, until the 1970s, wild Arabica coffee endemic to Ethiopia was
predominantly shade cultivated as an understory tree in larger forests. However, the development
of more sun-resistant varieties of Arabica coffee encouraged multigenerational coffee farmers to
eliminate shade trees on their plantations and increase intensive cultivation.2
Second, while the average production and geographical scale of coffee farms has
expanded, the total area of coffee cultivation has significantly decreased in certain
countries.54Most African and Central American coffee farms consist of small, forested land plots
that rely on hand cultivation, household labor, and small harvests. Not only do most of these
9

farmers lack the capital needed to extensify or intensify production, but, as we will discuss
further in the next section, these smallholder coffee farms are limited in their ability to negotiate
profitable prices with exporters. Unless smallholder farmers regain access to market protection
or consumers through direct trade, many are transitioning away from coffee towards more
profitable crops.9,55,56,40 Over the past several decades in Ethiopia, at least 60% of coffee land has
been converted to cultivation of khat (a plant that is frequently used as a chewed drug stimulant
in the Middle East and North Africa).57,58 Other small farmers are completely abandoning
agricultural production due to geographical limitations, such as mountainous landscapes, that
hinder mechanized cultivation.9,56 Honduras has lost nearly 20,000 hectares of coffee-cultivated
land since the 2018-2019 harvest year as farmersmigrate for better economic opportunities.59The
loss of these smallholder coffee farmers has long-term effects on local landscapes. In Ethiopia,
Musangi (2019) links the insubstantial profit from forest coffee to the diminishedincentive to
protect the forest amidst increased pressure by the more successful logging industry.60
Taken together, the large-scale production and geographical concentration of coffee
further increase farm susceptibility to the ripple effects of climate change. Intensive agriculture
demands significant energy inputs to produce chemical additives, manufacture and run
mechanized equipment, and transport food to market. Large-scale agricultural production that
demands homogenous cultivation, pestcontrol, and harvest methods allows little flexibility to
changing ecological needs. Modern agricultural methods may further increase the rate of
localized temperature increases and reduce species diversity and tree-cover that may offset
climate crises. Thus, any event devastating large-scale producers can drastically reduce the
global coffee supply.For example, in 2014, a prolonged drought caused wide-scale Robusta crop
failure in Brazil and a ripple effect across the coffee commodity chain. Not only did the drought
10

depressBrazil’s production for the subsequent three years,61,62 but Arabica prices spiked by more
than 50%, shipping plummeted, and many coffeeindustry workers lost their jobs.63,64 Climatic
crises in small producer countries is also detrimental to the industry. Hurricane George
decimated coffee farms in Puerto Rico in 1998, resulting in a 38% harvest reduction the
following season.37Amongclimate-related disasters, declining smallholder farms, and
increasingly erratic weather, coffee supply has just barely met demand in recent years.65,66
Risk Factor 2: Monocultures and Genetic Concerns
A second characteristic of the modern coffee commodity chain illuminates the
intersection of ecological requirements, social expectations, and economic structures. Two
species of coffeeaccount for 99% of coffee production worldwide:28Coffea arabica L. (Arabica
coffee) and C. canephora Pierre ex A. Froehner (Robusta coffee).Coffee buyers and certifiers
have encouraged producers to plant these single varietals in large monocultures. Arabica, a
hybrid prized for its mild flavor and consistent yields, comprises 60% of coffee bean sales and
draws a higher price.29,30 It is also the more climatically sensitive of the two species, flourishing
in annual mean temperatures between 18° and 22°C (∼64°–72°F). By 2050, Laderach et al.
(2017) predict that the suitability of areas to grow Arabica coffee in Central America will shift
approximately 300meters up the altitudinal gradient. Already, as heat and precipitation increase
in the lowlands, trees are experiencing increased fungal diseases and decreased harvests. Farmers
at these lower elevations are switching to the more heat-tolerant Robusta varietal,25 which can
thrive in temperatures up to ∼27°C (80°F) but is more bitter in flavor.
That the vast majority of coffee trees are Arabica or Robusta species intensifies certain
risks in light of climate change. Large stands of single-varietycoffee trees risk increasing the
rapid spread of plant diseases. Like in all agricultural settings, growing hundreds of acres of one
11

variety of coffee—such as the consumer-preferred Arabica—makes large-scale disease
transmission between plants more likely.31For instance, coffee leaf rust, a fungal disease that
causes coffee trees to drop their leaves, can destroy 50-80% of a coffee plantation in a single
season. In 1869, the first case of leaf rust so decimated Sri Lanka’s Arabica plantations that the
country permanently changed their beverage export crop to tea.32,33 Historically, this disease has
been managed by a combination of fungicides and genetic hybridization. Crossbreeding Arabica
varietals with Robusta, which is more resilient to leaf rust, has produced disease-resistant
varieties like the Timor Hybrid.13,33,34 However, today’schanging climate—higher humidity, hotter
days, more rain—creates conditions that make coffee farms, particularly in Latin America,
hospitable to fungal diseases.19,35,36
To address the risks of disease and pests exacerbated by single varietal monocultures,
coffee farmers in many regions relyon hybrid varietals.37Wild coffee varieties found in Africa,
Asia, Australia, and the Indian Ocean Islandscan be used to improve trait diversity, enhancing the
resilience of domesticated crops to heat, drought, and various insects, and serving as critical
reserves for commodity monocultures depleted by pest and disease.13,29,38Crossbreeding has long
served as a solution to problems caused by pests, diseases, and small-scale environmental
changes. For instance,in 1964, Kenyan farmers used Ethiopian landraces, or wild varietals, to
develop coffee trees resistant to plant diseases wreaking havoc on Kenya’s coffee industry.39As
Davis et al.(2018) put it, “every 40 years or so we have gone back to wild populations to use
wild genetic diversity to solve specific production problems.”40 Unfortunately, more than half of
wild coffee species are critically endangered or vulnerable.20, 41
The effects and drivers of anthropogenic climate change are threatening thisvaluable pool
of genetic diversity. Scientists project the loss of more than 80 native species—or 60% of all
12

known species—dueto ecological and economic factors, such as rapid deforestation, land loss,
and decreased rainfall.42, 38Wild species are especially sensitive to climate change and
environmental quality, each characterized by a highly “restricted niche specificity.”29 The most
threatened species are found in Africa, with the largest rates of plant loss in Madagascar,
Tanzania, and Cameroon.29 Even Ethiopia, a historically important source of fresh genetic
material for Arabica, is losing its endemic species. The loss of wild coffee species means the loss
of available traits for pest and disease resistance, flavor, and productivity. Davis warned that
when “you start losing species, you start losing options.”43 Without a rich, genetic pool to
crossbreed positive traits into monocultures of Arabica and Robusta varietals, commercial
growers foresee new generations of less resilient coffee plantswhile climatic conditions
exacerbate threats from diseases and pests.
Options do exist for maintaining genetic diversity. Germplasm preserves wild coffee
seeds for future hybridization use. Already, seeds from over half of all known coffee species are
conserved ex-situ through cold storage or cryopreservation. Yet these seeds may be neither
genetically viable nor accessible to farmers who will need them in the future.29 In contrast, in-situ
conservation of endemic coffee species within their natural habitats guarantees genetic viability
and tree availability but has its challenges. While representative plants of three-quarters of wild
coffee species are found in protected areas in Africa, such as national forests or conservation
zones, habitat destructionand changing precipitation patterns threaten the long-term survival of
these genetic treasure troves.29
While the protection of genetic material for increasing plant, resilience is an important
climate adaptation strategy, there are threesignificant limitations to hybridization. First, there are
limited scientific and financial resources for systematically banking genetic material or
13

hybridizing coffee. When compared to large-scale commodity crops such as soy or maize, coffee
has historically lagged on strong seed programs and private funding, onlyhaving acquired
momentum in the last two decades.44,45Factors contributing to limited breeding programs include
inconsistent production of disseminated varieties, limited farmer access to and affordability of
new hybrids, and persistent skepticism among coffee traders regarding the quality of new
varietals.46Also, aswild coffee varieties become extinct in the coming decades, the genetic
resources needed for crossbreeding diminish.29 Second, crossbreeding is a short-term solution to
broader problems of constantly evolving diseases, pests, and genetic mutations, the reproductive
inconsistency of hybrid plants, andthe increasingenvironmental unsuitability for coffee due to
climate change. Indeed, climate models indicate that coffee-growing regions will shrink
considerably in the coming decade, and the limited climatic range of coffee species makes it
unlikely that hybridizing coffee without mitigating climate changeoffers a long-term solution. At
the same time, the timeline for genetic hybridization may be too slow to account for
environmental changes. Coffee is a perennial agroforestry crop—the slowest form of agricultural
production. Replacing agroforestry species is a multi-year commitment as new trees require
multiple seasons after planting to achieve peak production.25
Risk factor 3: Markets, pricing, and smallholder farming techniques
Just as geographical consolidation and genetic variation unevenlydistribute climate
change risk factors among producing countries, so too do economic factors of coffee
production.Between 1962 and 1989, the International Coffee Organization (ICO), whose
members consist of coffee exporters and importers, was a crucial regulatory force controlling
supplies and stabilizing the market price through a quota system.67 Economic disputes arose as
exporters disagreed on a fair quota and market share relative to their type and amount of
14

exported coffee. These standstills resulted in failed renegotiations of the ICO agreements,
encouraging the U.S., the primary quota-stabilizer, to leave the organization and ultimately
dismantle the system.67,68 Without a quota system, coffee farmers have faced an increasingly
volatile market and price crashes, as seen in the early 1990s and 2000s.69
Since 2006, prices for coffee in its commodity market (C-Market) has been steadily
declining despite increasing production costs.70Prices for raw coffee beans depend not only on
supply, demand, and standard quality requirements but also on speculation of future coffee
quality.14,70 Unlike standard purchasing contracts, speculative (futures) contracts trade coffee for a
price that is negotiated in advance of actual production. This offers farmers a form of protection
against the risks of a volatile market, regardless of price fluctuations.72Futurescontracts are
managed through government-regulated commodity trading platforms, like the Intercontinental
Exchange,71 and are tradednot only by those directly in the coffee industry but also by global
commodity traders. An unforeseen lack of delivered quality can be resolved between parties,
especially in the case of a force majeure (a major event like drought, disease, etc.) that hinders
the delivery of expected bean quality.71Coffee sold in the futures market must still meet quality
requirements to be certified a certain grade, but these standardized grades do not necessarily
reflect the unique flavor or taste of a specific harvest.72 Futures contracts are often adopted as a
means for producers to manage the increasing risks of climate change by giving them time to
make production decisions and remediate profit loss in the face of poor harvests or costincreases.
Unfortunately, the structure of futures contracts compounds economies of scale with
geographical consolidation and monoculture productionto further marginalizesmallholder
farmers. The C-Market sells contracts for specific amounts of coffee—typically 37,500 pounds
of coffee for large-scale producers or 12,500 pounds for smaller-scale producers.73The latter
15

amount still typically exceeds a smallholder farmer’s yearly production, which falls between 150
and 1800 pounds of coffee. Even estates that could be considered large-scale often produce short
of contractual minimums for futures contracts.8While smaller producers can avoid futures
markets by selling directly to coffee bean roasters, such direct trade arrangements are
vulnerableto the risksof selling beans at a loss if supply outstrips demand and drives the price
down. Producers embedded in larger cooperatives or farms are better prepared to weather lean
years and allocate portions of larger profit margins during good years. In contrast, smallholder
farmers face much tighter margins, not only lacking financial resources to change their
production processesin response to price fluctuations,but alsorelying on smallquantities of coffee
beans for subsistence—crops that, when sold on short-term contracts, risk economic loss. The
flavor of green coffee decreases quickly between harvest and exportation, such that farmers
cannot store their product in hopes of achieving a better price.70
Climate change will further exacerbate coffee price fluctuations in two ways.On one
hand, the consolidation of coffee production in certain countries has a profound influence over
the current and future coffee market. For instance, in the 1990s, Brazil managed to attract private
investments due to its geographical advantage of generous lowlands, allowing the country to
dramatically increase acreage production of coffee. Because Brazil is the primary global coffee
producer, it strongly influences market prices for beans.9 Thus, climatic events reducing
Brazilian coffee production canreducethe availability of coffee so much that prices sharply
increase. When droughts in 2014 decreased Brazilian production, market prices jumped from
$1.09/lb. to over $2/lb.75,76 While increased prices temporarily benefit smaller producers, such
short-term gains are rarely sufficient to offset long-term costs and low rates of production.76 As
climate change renders the Brazilian lowlands increasingly inhospitable to coffee and other
16

producing countries with greater variation in altitude begin to expand theirplantations upward,
the futures price system may fundamentally alter across the commodity chain.77
On the other hand, economic competition can further encourage large-scale, coffee
production techniques. When coffee prices are highly volatile, producers using modernized
agricultural methods to produce large quantities of coffeeare generally able to minimize long-
term, economic loss. In contrast, smallholder farmers producing small harvests can be
permanently affected by price dips. One seasonof lost profits can not only drivesmall farmers out
of business but also propel state and agricultural experts to strongly encourage the exchange of
traditional cultivation practices for modern, large-scale production practices. For example, full-
sun techniques were formally encouraged by Puerto Rico’s government78,79 in an attempt to
increase yields. From 1982 to 2007, shade-grown coffee production in Puerto Rico declined by
70%, and coffee became the country’s most economically important crop.80Yet, as Fain et al.
(2018) observed, this cultivation intensification increased the crop’s vulnerability to storm
damage,81 as evidenced by a nearly 40% decline in production following Hurricane George in
1998.37Production never fully rebounded. Between 2002 and 2007, the number of coffee farms in
Puerto Rico declined by 40%.82The pursuit of gaining an economic foothold in the competitive
coffee market rendered the island more ecologically fragile and increased economic risks for
coffee producers.9
The coffee market is highly volatile, more so than manycommodities.83 This economic
volatility increases risks for farmers because it reduces their ability to predict future prices and
make production decisions to improve profits.84As climate change alters the coffee plant cycle,
increases crop losses, and weeds out the smallest farmers from the market, economic competition
is becoming all the more threatening to the livelihoods of many coffee farmers.
17

Solutions: Building adaptations
Given theuneven distribution of economic and ecological risk, no single solution to
climate change is sufficient. Based on ourliteraturereview, we highlight three promising climate
change adaptations at various scales of intervention that aim to address the entangled
socioecological risks that will challenge the coffee commodity chain for years to come.
First, researchers suggest that coffee farmers themselves can improve the ecological
resiliency of their plantations byshifting cultivation methods. For instance, the practice of
introducing shade trees into coffee plantations is considered a sound adaptation strategy against
rising temperatures.2,52 Shade trees offer a buffer to coffee plants, protecting the commodity crop
from microclimate variability, humidity fluctuations, reduced soil water availability, and solar
radiation. Studies have indicated the potency of shade-grown plantations to reduce air
temperatures when compared to sun-grown plantations and maintain more suitable coffee areas
for years to come.2,85,86Rigal et al. (2020) suggest that shade-planted yields could exceed
monoculture yields long-term, given appropriate selection and maintenance of shade-
trees.52Evenif the yield does not surpass that of open-sun growth, study models indicate that
converting just part of a farmer’s land to shade can increase profit, thus providing economic
incentive in making the transition.87Other scholars and practitioners suggest preemptive
geographical shifts in coffee plantation location. To offset the projected temperature increases in
the lowlands and maintain high-quality coffee, farmers can move their plantations to higher-
elevatedlands that will becomeincreasingly suitable for coffee production.7,52,87There are several
limitations to this adaptation. Not only is farmland, and its associated land tenure, immobile, but
18

moving perennial trees requires monetary investments. State-based assistance to farmers would
be necessary to enable those willing to relocate to manage such a geographical shift.
Second, climate change will likely permanently reorganize coffee production across the
world. Although no country would necessarily experience improved suitability in a warming
climate, there may be countries less negatively affected by warming temperatures and changing
precipitation, such as East Africa and Indonesia.9,77One preventive measure that national
governments and international buyers could consider is to preemptively provide more market
access to coffee farms. Specifically, state and elites of capital could coordinate price and
purchasing guarantees for small-scale farmswithin these less-affected regions while
simultaneously working with the mostaffected regions, such as Latin America, to shift to other
agricultural commodities. For their part, consumers could address the economic challenges faced
by smallholder farmers by supporting coffee brands engaged in direct trade arrangements, eco-
and labor-focused certification programs, and small farm cooperatives. These three options allow
participating smallholder farms to increase profit, access pools of capital for investments in
climate mitigation methods, and gain protection from a volatile market. Widespread market
participationand farmer-centered trade and certification may counteractthe effect of climate
change and geographical consolidation on coffee pricing.9
Finally, even though genetic crossbreeding efforts are slow to return benefits, new
varietals promise some long-term adaptations. Indeed, as threats of high-quality coffee shortages
have caught the attention of consumers, public and private entities have increased investments in
developing different coffee varieties to meet market demand. This is important because the
market influences not only what coffee varieties are produced but also increased market value for
coffee from certain regionsover others. As niche varieties grow in popularity, some researchers
19

see promise in developing hybrid coffee varieties that are more climate resilient while
maintaining consistent similar flavor profiles across locations. In the next several decades,
farmers in various locations may be able to plant new varietals that are more resilient to changes
in temperature, weather, and their effectswithout fearing a loss of buyers.44,88,89
Conclusions
This case of coffee sheds light on how the entangled feedback loops of modern,
agricultural production will exacerbate and concentrate the consequences of climate change in
geographically-uneven ways. For coffee farmers, Beck’s “hazards and insecurities” of modern
society are intensified by where and how coffee is grown, how consumer taste interfaces with
genetic resiliency, and how stakeholders in the coffee market interact with shifting environmental
risks of a warming planet.12
While adaptationsby farmers, breeders, or consumers might reduce the impacts of a
changing climate on coffee production, real change requires a coordinated effort among various
stakeholders. This is especially true for the institutional transformations that is necessary to
address increased temperatures, changing precipitation, and intensified pest and disease
risks.90Producer-directed efforts at managing environmental losses from coffee cultivation are
moot if climate change renders coffee-native regions of the world too hot and arid. Deep
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, through international, regulatory frameworks and
willing participation of large greenhouse gas emitters, such as oil and gas companies, may limit
the increase in global temperatures tobelow 1.5oC by 2050.91,34,93 Full-scale attempts to support
these environmental goals are crucial in mitigating the consequences of climate change.
20

This case study articulates only some of the many interconnected variables implicated in
the relationship between climate and coffee. However, by focusing specifically on how climate
change exacerbates the risk factors embedded the global coffee commodity chain, we illustrate
how risks are rooted in existing socio-ecological and economic histories. From the consolidation
of monoculture production in non-native regions to the historical, globally uneven distribution of
consumption and production, to the loss of regulatory frameworks, this is an exemplary case of
the entangled relationships of economies and environments.
21

Case Study Questions
1. How does climate change exacerbate existing risks of coffee production?
2. How are agricultural commodities different than other commodities, like a car or clothing?
How do these differences show up in the economics of coffee production and consumption?
3. This case study only discussed the entanglement of certain ecological, geographical, and
socioeconomic components of coffee as a commodity. What might be other variables or steps in
the coffee commodity chain that might be impacted by and/or exacerbate climate change?
4. Latin American coffee farms are predicted to be significantly impacted by warming
temperatures. Take the role of a small-scale coffee farmer in Latin America. What resources
(information, financial support, legal guidance, etc.) might you need to adapt your coffee
production process to a changing climate? Why might you choose to stay or leave coffee farming
altogether?
Author Contributions
Katy Vieira conceived of, researched, and prepared the initial draft of this case study. Amanda
McMillan Lequieu contributed additional research, analysis, and coordinated revisions.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Artur Vieira, Marissa Cecil, and katrinaquisumbing king for their
thoughtful feedback on early versions, as well as helpful comments from two peer reviewers and
the section editor for CSE.
N/A: Funding, Competing Interests
22

References
1. IPCC, 2007: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z.
Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
2. Jaramillo J, Setamou M, Muchugu E, Chabi-Olaye A, Jaramillo A, Mukabana K, et al.
Climate change or urbanization? Impacts on a traditional coffee production system in
East Africa over the last 80 years. PLoS ONE. 2013:8(1).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051815
3. International Coffee Organization. Coffee Development Report 2019. London, England:
ICO; 2019. http://www.ico.org/documents/cy2018-19/ed-2318e-overview-flagship-
report.pdf.
4. Gokavi N, Mote K. Impact of climate change on coffee production: An overview.
Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2020; 9(3): 1850-1858.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342889035_Impact_of_climate_change_
on_coffee_production_An_overview
5. The Optimal Coffee Environment: Best Climate Conditions for Growing Coffee Beans.
Coffee Research website. http://www.coffeeresearch.org/agriculture/environment.htm.
Accessed January 4, 2021.
23

6. Scott M. Climate & Coffee. NOAA Climate.gov.https://www.climate.gov/news-
features/climate-and/climate-coffee. Published June 19, 2015. Accessed January 4, 2021.
7. Baca M, Läderach P, Haggar J, Schroth G, Ovalle O.An integrated framework for
assessing vulnerability to climate change and developing adaptation strategies for coffee
growing families in Mesoamerica. PLoS One. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0088463
8. Wege, O. Commodities at a Glance; Special Issue on Coffee in East Africa 10th ed. 2018;
UNCTAD. https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditccom2018d1_en.pdf.
9. Sachs J, Cordes KY, Rising J, Toledano P, Maennling N. Ensuring Economic Viability
and Sustainability of Coffee Production. Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment.
2019. http://ccsi.columbia.edu/files/2018/04/Ensuring-Economic-Viability-and-
Sustainability-of-Coffee-Production-CCSI-2019.pdf.
10. Arias A, Downey A. Coffee Stem Water Potential Under Stress & Recovery. ICT
International. http://ictinternational.com/casestudies/coffee-continuous-monitoring-of-
stem-water-potential-under-drought-stress-and-recovery/. Accessed January 4, 2021.
11. World Bank Group. Commodity Markets Outlook, October. Washington, DC: World
Bank; 2019. https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets#2.
12. Beck, U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE
Publications, Inc. 1992. P. 12.
24

13. Ferreira T, Schuler J, Guimarães R, Farah A. Introduction to coffee plant and genetics.
Coffee Production, Quality and Chemistry. London, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry;
2019:1-25. DOI: 10.1039/9781782622437-00001
14. Clarence-Smith WG, Topik S. The Global Coffee Economy in Africa, Asia and Latin
America, 1500-1989. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2003. eISBN:
9780511095276.
15. Tucker CM. Coffee Culture: Local Experiences, Global Connections. New York, NY:
Taylor & Francis Group; 2010. eISBN: 9780203831243.
16. Kors AC. Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press;
2005. DOI: 10.1093/acref/9780195104301.001.0001.
17. Coffee (HS: 0901) Product Trade, Exporters and Importers. OEC.
https://oec.world/en/profile/hs92/coffee. Published 2018. Accessed January 4, 2021.
18. Workman D. Coffee Imports by Country. World's Top Exports.
http://www.worldstopexports.com/coffee-imports-by-country/.Published September 26,
2019. Accessed January 4, 2021.
19. National Coffee Association USA. The Economic Impact of the Coffee Industry.
http://www.ncausa.org/industry-resources/economic-impact. Accessed January 4, 2021.
20. Gereffi G, Lee J. Why the world suddenly cares about global supply chains. Journal
ofSupply Chain Management. 2012;48(3):24-32. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2012.03271.x
25

21. Kimani M. Uganda's Plan to Become One of the World's Biggest Coffee Producers. Daily
Coffee News by Roast Magazine. https://dailycoffeenews.com/2018/07/12/ ugandas-
plan-to-become-one-of-the-worlds-biggest-coffee-producers/. Published July 12, 2018.
Accessed January 4, 2021.
22. Coffee - worldwide. Statista. https://www.statista.com/outlook/30010000/100/coffee/
worldwide. Accessed January 4, 2021.
23. Fobelets V, Rusman A, de Groot Ruiz A. Assessing Coffee Farmer Household Income.
Fairtrade International. 2017. https://www.fairtrade.net/library/assessing-coffee-farmer-
household-income.
24. Craparo ACW, van Asten PJA, Läderach P, Jassogne LTP, Grab SW. Coffea arabica yields
decline in Tanzania due to climate change: global implications. Agric For Meteorol.
2015;207:1–10. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2015.03.005.
25. Läderach P, Ramirez–Villegas J, Navarro-Racines C, Zelaya C, Martinez-Valle A, Jarvis
A. Climate change adaptation of coffee production in space and time. Climatic Change,
2017;141(1): 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1788-9
26. Avelino J, Cristancho M, Georgiou S, Imbach P, Aguilar L, Bornemann G, et al. The
coffee rust crises in Colombia and Central America (2008–2013): impacts, plausible
causes and proposed solutions. Food Sec. 2015; 7:303–321.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0446-9
26

27. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. GAEZ Agricultural Suitability
and Potential Yields. http://www.fao.org/nr/gaez/about-data-portal/agricultural-
suitability-and-potential-yields/en/#. Accessed January 4, 2021.
28. DaMatta F M, Rahn E, Läderach P, Ghini R, Ramalho JC. Why could the coffee crop
endure climate change and global warming to a greater extent than previously estimated?
Climatic Change.2019;152(1), 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2346-4
29. Davis AP, Chadburn H, Moat J, O'Sullivan R, Hargreaves S, Lughadha EN. High
extinction risk for wild coffee species and implications for coffee sector sustainability.
Sci. Adv. 2019;05(01). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aav3473
30. International Coffee Organization. World coffee consumption.
http://www.ico.org/trade_statistics.asp. Published 2020. Accessed January 4, 2021.
31. Ekroth, A.K.E., Rafaluk-Mohr, C., King, K.C. Diversity and disease: evidence for the
monoculture effect beyond agricultural systems. bioRxiv. 2019.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/668228
32. McCook S, Vadermeer J. The big rust and the red queen: Long-term perspectives on
coffee rust research. Phytopathology. 2015;105(9):1164-1173.
https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-04-15-0085-RVW
33. Koehler J. “Coffee Rust Threatens Latin American Crop; 150 Years Ago, It Wiped Out
An Empire.” NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/10/16/649155664/coffee-
27

rust-threatens-latin-american-crop-150-years-ago-it-wiped-out-an-empire. Published
October 16, 2018. Accessed January 4, 2021.
34. Arabica Coffee. World Coffee Research. https://varieties.worldcoffeeresearch.org/info
/coffee/about-varieties/main-types. Accessed January 4, 2021.
35. Aime MC, Bell CD, Wilson AW. Deconstructing the evolutionary complexity between
rust fungi (Pucciniales) and their plant hosts. Studies in Mycology. 2018;89, pp. 143-152.
36. Adhikari M, Isaac EL, Paterson R, Maslin MA. A review of potential impacts of climate
change on coffee cultivation and mycotoxigenic fungi. Microorganisms. 2020; 8(10),
1625. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8101625
37. Fain SJ, Quiñones M, Álvarez-Berríos NL, Parés-Ramos IK, Gould WA. Climate change
and coffee: assessing vulnerability by modeling future climate suitability in the Caribbean
island of Puerto Rico. Climatic Change. 2018;146(1–2), 175–186.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-1949-5
38. IDH. Coffee production in the face of climate change: Country profiles. 2019.
https://www.idhsustainabletrade.com/publication/coffee-production-in-the-face-of-
climate-change/. Accessed January 4, 2021.
39. Hindorf H, Omondi CO. A review of three major fungal diseases of Coffea arabica L. in
the rainforests of Ethiopia and progress in breeding for resistance in Kenya. Journal of
Advanced Research. 2011;2(2):109-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2010.08.006
40. Davis AP, Wilkinson T, Challa ZK, Williams J, Baena S, Gole TW, Moat J. (2018).
Coffee Atlas of Ethiopia. Richmond, UK: Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew. eISBN 978-1-
28

84246-661-2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317898089_Coffee_ Atlas_ of_
Ethiopia. Accessed January 4, 2021.
41. IUCN Red List: Coffee. IUCNredlist.org https://www.iucnredlist.org/search/stats?query=
coffee&searchType=species. Accessed January 4, 2021.
42. What Does 'Endangered Species' Mean? World Wildlife Fund.
https://www.worldwildlife.org/pages/what-does-endangered-species-mean. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
43. Mega ER. Wild Coffee Species Threatened by Climate Change and Deforestation.
Nature. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00150-9. Published January 16, 2019. Accessed January
4, 2021.
44. Montagnon C, Marraccini P, Bertrand B. Breeding for Coffee Quality. In: Specialty
Coffee: Managing Quality. IPNI; 2012: 93-122.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
234107354_Breeding_for_coffee_quality
45. F1 Hybrid (EN). (2019). CafCaf. https://www.cafcaf.de/kaffeeinterviews/world-coffee-
research-f1-hybrid/. Accessed January 4, 2021.
46. van der Vossen H, Bertrand B, Charrier A. Next generation variety development for
sustainable production of arabica coffee (coffea arabica L.): A
review. Euphytica, 2015;204(2), 243-256.
29

47. Coffee Producing Countries 2020. World Population Review.
http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/coffee-producing-countries/. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
48. International Coffee Council. Country Coffee Profile: Vietnam. 2019. 124th session.
http://www.ico.org/documents/cy2018-19/icc-124-9e-profile-vietnam.pdf. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
49. United States Department of Agriculture: Foreign Agricultural Service. Coffee: World
Markets and Trade. Washington, DC: USDA; 2020.https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/
coffee-world-markets-and-trade. Accessed January 4, 2021.
50. de Almeida LF, Zylbersztajn D. Key success factors in the Brazilian coffee agrichain:
Present and future challenges. Int. J. Food System Dynamics. 2017; 8(1):45-53. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.18461/ijfsd.v8i1.814. 33.
51. Schnaiberg A, Pellow DN, Weinberg A. The treadmill of production and the
environmental state. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy. 2002;10.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-1152(02)80004-7.
52. Rigal C, Xu J, Hu G, Qiu M, Vaast P. Coffee production during the transition period from
monoculture to agroforestry systems in near optimal growing conditions, in Yunnan
Province. Agricultural Systems. 2019;177:102696. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102696.
30

53. Yune T. How Your Coffee Habit Could Be Contributing To Climate Change. Mic.
https://www.mic.com/p/how-bad-is-coffee-for-the-environment-19188956. Published
November 20, 2019. Accessed January 4, 2021.
54. Haggar J, Medina B, Aguilar RM, Munoz C. Land use change on coffee farms in
southern Guatemala and its environmental consequences. Environmental management.
(2013):51(4):811-823. DOI:10.1007/s00267-013-0019-7.
55. Borrella I, Mataix C, Carrasco-Gallego R. Smallholder farmers in the speciality coffee
industry: Opportunities, constraints and the businesses that are making it possible. IDS
Bulletin. 2015;46(3). doi:10.1111/1759-5436.12142.
56. Teixeira M, Nguyen P, Cobb JS. How Brazil and Vietnam are tightening their grip on the
world's coffee. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-coffee-duopoly-insight/how-
brazil-and-vietnam-are-tightening-their-grip-on-the-worlds-coffee-idUSKCN1VC079.
Published August 21, 2019. Accessed January 4, 2021.
57. Al-Juhaishi T, Al-Kindi S, Gehani A. Khat: A widely used drug of abuse in the Horn of
Africa and the Arabian Peninsula: Review of literature. Qatar Med J. 2013;2012(2):1-6.
doi:10.5339/qmj.2012.2.5.
58. Woldu Z, Belew D, Benti T. The coffee-khat interface in eastern Ethiopia: A controversial
land use and livelihood change scenario. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology
B5. 2015:149-169. doi: 10.17265/2161-6264/2015.03.001.
31

59. Palencia G. Honduras coffee exports to fall as farmers; plight deepens – industry.
Reuters. September 19, 2019. https://www.reuters.com/article/honduras-coffee/honduras-
coffee-exports-to-fall-as-farmers-plight-deepens-industry-idUSL2N26B03S. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
60. Musangi C, Partnerships for Forest, TechnoServe& Ben Aschenaki. How Coffee Can
Save Ethiopia's Forests. https://www.technoserve.org/blog/how-coffee-can-save-
ethiopias-forests/. Published January 25, 2019. Accessed January 4, 2021.
61. Lewis JT, Dunn K. Drought Leaves Brazil's Southeastern Coffee Farmers Parched. The
Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/drought-leaves-brazils-southeastern-
coffee-farmers-parched-1480871395. Published December 4, 2016. Accessed January 4,
2021.
62. Barros S. Brazil Coffee Annual. Report BR19006. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service;
2019.https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/brazil-coffee-annual-4. Accessed January 4, 2021.
63. Rochas AF, Samora R. Brazil Water Supply, Crops Still at Risk a Year after Epic Drought.
Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brazil-water-supply-
crops-still-at-risk-a-year-after-epic-drought/. Published January 9, 2015. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
64. Ewing R. Drought drains Brazil's robusta warehouses of coffee, forces layoffs. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-coffee-warehouses/drought-drains-brazils-
robusta-warehouses-of-coffee-forces-layoffs-idUSKCN11X219. Published September 27,
2016. Accessed January 4, 2021.
32

65. International Coffee Organization. Crop year production by country. London, England:
ICO; 2020. http://www.ico.org/prices/po-production.pdf. Accessed January 4, 2021.
66. International Coffee Organization. Coffee Market Report. London, England: ICO; 2020.
http://www.ico.org/Market-Report-19-20-e.asp. Accessed January 4, 2021.
67. Dubois P. The International Coffee Organization 1963-2013: 50 Years Serving the World
Coffee Community. London, UK. 2013. http://www.ico.org/icohistory_e.asp. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
68. The Economics of Coffee. PBS. https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blackgold/
economics.html. Accessed January 4, 2021.
69. Jaffee D. Weak coffee: Certification and co-optation in the fair trade movement. Social
Problems. 2012;59(1):94-116. doi:10.1525/sp.2012.59.1.94.
70. What is the Coffee C Market? A Practical Guide. Craft Coffee Guru.
http://www.craftcoffeeguru.com/what-is-the-coffee-c-market/. Published August 17,
2019. Accessed January 4, 2021.
71. The International Trade Centre. The Coffee Exporter’s Guide. 3rd Edition. 2011.
Switzerland.
72. NYBOT Coffee C Rules. Commodities Future Trading Commission.
https://cftc.gov/sites/default/files/files/submissions/dcodcm/dcmnybotvcoffeec.pdf.
Accessed January 4, 2021.
33

73. May PH, Mascarenhas GCC, Potts J. Sustainable coffee trade: The role of coffee
contracts. 2004. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. International
Institute for Sustainable Development. Manitoba, Canada.
https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/
sci_coffee_contracts.pdf
74. Contract rules: Ice futures robusta coffee futures contract. ICE Futures Europe. 2016.
https://www.theice.com/publicdocs/circulars/18064_attach_1.pdf/. Accessed January 4,
2021.
75. Vollmer T, con Cramon-Taudabel, S. The influence of Brazilian exports on price
transmission processes in the coffee sector: A Markov-switching approach.
Diskussionsbeitrag, No. 1904, University of Goettingen, Department for Agricultural
Economics and Rural Development. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/200261. Accessed
January 4, 2021.
76. Watson K. Drought hits Brazil’s coffee industry. BBCnews. https://www.bbc.com/news/
business-27623535. Published May 29, 2014. Accessed January 4, 2021.
77. Ovalle-Rivera O, Läderach P, Bunn C, Obersteiner M, Schroth G. Projected shifts in
Coffea arabica suitability among major global producing regions due to climate change.
PLoS ONE.2015;10(4):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124155.
78. Abruno F, Vicente J, Servando S. The effect of different fertility levels on yields of
intensively managed coffee in Puerto Rico. Jour Agric Univ Puerto Rico. 1959;
43(3):141-148. https://doi.org/10.46429/jaupr.v43i3.12574.
34

79. Guiscafre-Arrillaga J, Gomez LA. Effect of solar radiation intensity on the vegetative
growth and yield of coffee.Jour Agri Univ Puerto Rico. 1942;26(4):73-
90.https://doi.org/10.46429/jaupr.v26i4.13586.
80. Borkhataria R, Collazo JA, Jordan-Garcia A, Groom MJ. Shade-grown coffee in Puerto
Rico: Opportunities to preserve biodiversity while reinvigorating a struggling agricultural
commodity. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environments. 2012. 149:164-170.
DOI:10.1016/j.agee.2010.12.023.
81. Philpott SM, Jha S, Brines SJ. A multi-scale assessment of hurricane impacts on
agricultural landscapes based on land use and topographic features. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment. 2008;128(1-2):12-20. DOI:10.1016/j.agee.2008.04.016.
82. Coffee Cultivation and Economic Development in the Castaner Region, May 2012.
Sergio M Marxuach, Center for the New Economy.
83. Cashin P, McDermott CJ. The LongRun Behavior of Commodity Prices: Small Trends
and Big Variability.49(02).IMF Staff Papers. 2002: 175-199.
84. Segerstrom TM. Global climate change, fair trade, and coffee price volatility. Gettysburg
Economic Review. 2016;9(6). https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/ger/vol9/iss1/6.
85. Moreiera SLS, Pires CV, Marcatti GE, Santos RHS, Imbuzeiro HMA, Fernandes RBA.
Intercropping of coffee with the palm tree macauba, can mitigate climate change effects.
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. 2018;256-257: 379-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.agrformet.2018.03.026.
35

86. Gomes LC, Biachi FJJA, Fernandes RBA, Fernandes Filho EI, Shulte RPO. Agroforestry
systems can mitigate the impacts of climate change on coffee production: A spatially
explicit assessment in Brazil. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 2020;294.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106858.
87. Hernandez-Aguilera JN, Conrad JM, Gómez MI, Rodewald AD. The economics and
ecology of shade-grown coffee: A model to incentivize shade and bird conservation.
Ecological Economics. 2019;159:110-121. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.015.
88. Bertrand B, Guyot B, Anthony F, Lashermes P. Impact of Coffea canephora gene
introgression on beverage quality of C. arabica. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2003; 107:387-
394.
89. Bertrand B, Etienne H, CilasC, Charrier A, Baradat P.Coffea arabica hybrid
performance for yield, fertility and bean weight. Euphytica. 2005; 141:255-262.
90. Erburg R, Rahn E, Verweji P, van Kuijk M, Ghazoul J. An innovation perspective to
climate change adaptation in coffee systems. Environmental Science &
Policy.2019;97:16-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.03.017.
91. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Climate and Energy. https://www.unsdsn.
org/climate-and-energy. Accessed January 4, 2021.
92. Williams JH, Haley B, Kahrl F, Moore J, Jones AD, Torn MS, et al. Pathways to Deep
Decarbonization in the United States. Vol 1. The U.S. report of the Deep Decarbonization
Pathways Project of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network and the Institute for
36

Sustainable Development and International Relations. Revision with technical
supplement, November 16, 2015. http://usddpp.org/usddpp-reports/. Accessed January 4,
2021.
93. International Energy Agency. Global Energy & CO2 Status Report 2019.
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-co2-status-report-2019. Published March 2019.
Accessed January 4, 2021.
37