A
new global analysis reveals a critical oversight in sustainable coffee and
carbon-capture initiatives. These programs incentivize the planting of new
trees yet fail to reward the preservation of mature shade trees in existing
agroforestry farms, despite their far greater carbon storage potential.
According to new research from the
Smithsonian's National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute (NZCBI) and
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI), published today in the journal Communications Earth
& Environment, more
than twice as much carbon stands to be lost through the removal of non-coffee shade trees than might be gained through tree planting—even
if every plantation-style coffee farm in the world planted new shade trees.
Globally, coffee farms cover more than
10 million hectares. Farming systems vary in intensity, from plantation-style
monocultures to agroforestry systems with native trees that provide shade, wildlife habitat and carbon
storage. Planting new shade trees is currently incentivized through
carbon markets, which allow coffee farmers to sell carbon credits generated via
tree planting. However, existing agroforestry systems are rapidly converting to
monoculture plantations, releasing significant amounts of carbon into the
atmosphere while destroying habitat.
Scientists
from NZCBI and STRI identified a critical gap in current carbon markets, which
compensate coffee farmers for planting new trees but not for protecting
standing trees. This potentially creates an incentive to remove existing trees
to plant new ones that store less carbon but would be eligible for
carbon-credit payments.
"There
is a lot of money behind planting trees on degraded coffee farms, yet there are
basically no financial incentives, outside of the Smithsonian Bird Friendly
certification, to protect standing shade trees," said NZCBI ecologist Ruth
Bennett, senior author of the study and leader of Smithsonian Bird Friendly
program, which offers a gold standard certification for coffee and cocoa farms
that conserve high-quality habitat for wildlife.
"To
be clear, planting shade trees on monoculture coffee farms is a positive step,
but our findings show tree planting alone can't make up for what you lose when
you remove mature shade trees."
The
study, conducted in collaboration with The Nature Conservancy and CIRAD, also
found carbon-focused tree planting efforts do not necessarily boost
biodiversity. Carbon sequestration is optimized by maximizing tree density,
while biodiversity benefits more from tree diversity.
"To
protect nature and fight climate change, coffee companies need to focus on
planting a diversity of the right trees, not just planting a high density of
fast-growing trees that capture carbon," said Emily Pappo, the study's
first author and a postdoctoral climate fellow at the Smithsonian.
Prior research demonstrated coffee farms that include a diverse mixture of shade trees harbor roughly four times more bird species than coffee monocultures. Such findings are at the heart of the Bird Friendly coffee certification criteria, which ensure farms maintain dense and diverse shade trees. This certification grants farmers access to specialty markets and enables them to set higher asking prices, rewarding them for conserving biodiversity.
Researchers
wanted to understand just how much carbon is stored in coffee farming
landscapes and evaluate how carbon and biodiversity could change through tree
planting or the removal of shade trees.
The researchers gathered data from 67
scientific studies conducted in coffee regions around the world. They examined
farms across a spectrum—from bare "sun coffee" monocultures with no
trees at all to complex agroforestry systems where coffee grows under a canopy
of native forest trees.
The researchers compared the carbon
stored in each type of farm, then applied these measurements to existing data
on global coffee growing that shows 41% is grown in full sun, 35% with minimal
shade and 24% under diverse tree cover. Finally, the team modeled what might
happen under various scenarios—calculating the maximum possible carbon gains if
every sun farm planted trees, and the potential losses if farms cut down
existing shade trees.
The study estimated coffee farms
currently store 482 million metric tons of carbon above ground. The modeled
scenarios revealed that even if all sun coffee farms added shade trees, they
would sequester only 82–87 million additional metric tons of carbon. In
contrast, if all shade-grown coffee were converted to monocultures, 174–221
million metric tons of carbon could be released into the atmosphere.
These extreme scenarios expose a
fundamental issue with current carbon-market incentives for coffee farms: Mature shade trees store more carbon than newly
planted trees, yet only new trees are incentivized via carbon markets.
Prioritizing tree-planting above conserving existing shade trees could
undermine the effectiveness of the coffee industry's investments in climate
solutions.
"If we don't prioritize
biodiversity on carbon sequestration projects,
it won't accidentally happen," Pappo said. "This means choosing a
diverse suite of shade trees with the aim of conserving biodiversity."
To maximize the potential of coffee
farming to fight climate change and
boost biodiversity, the study authors call for creating carbon payment programs
that reward protecting existing shade trees and ensuring these payments are
accessible to small farms. For tree-planting efforts, researchers recommend
explicitly prioritizing tree diversity in all planting initiatives to support
biodiversity. Without these changes, global coffee agriculture may continue to
lose carbon and biodiversity despite investments in tree planting.
Going forward, Smithsonian researchers are continuing to develop the Shade Catalog, a resource to help coffee farmers select shade trees that work well alongside coffee while providing benefits to wildlife and ecosystem services. Bird Friendly-affiliated researchers are also working on tools to help farmers find the balance between carbon storage, biodiversity and farm productivity.
Source: Carbon markets undervalue shade-grown coffee farms, global analysis shows
No comments:
Post a Comment