Toeldo Final

This article was downloaded by: [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria], [VICTOR TOLEDO]
On: 23 March 2012, At: 12:07

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Sustainable Agriculture

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjsa20
Coffee and Sustainability: The Multiple

Values of Traditional Shaded Coffee
a b
Víctor M. Toledo & Patricia Moguel
a
Antigua Carretera a Pátzcuaro, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de
México, CIECO, Morelia, Mexico
b
Etnoecologia, AC, Morelia, Mexico
Available online: 23 Mar 2012
To cite this article: Víctor M. Toledo & Patricia Moguel (2012): Coffee and Sustainability: The Multiple
Values of Traditional Shaded Coffee, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 36:3, 353-377
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2011.583719
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 36:353–377, 2012
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1044-0046 print/1540-7578 online
DOI: 10.1080/10440046.2011.583719
Coffee and Sustainability: The Multiple

Values of Traditional Shaded Coffee
Downloaded by [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria], [VICTOR TOLEDO] at 12:07 23 March 2012
VÍCTOR M. TOLEDO1 and PATRICIA MOGUEL2

1
Antigua Carretera a Pátzcuaro, Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México, CIECO, Morelia, Mexico
2
Etnoecologia, AC, Morelia, Mexico
Coffee is grown widely throughout the tropics on about 5 million

farms from 85 countries. Several studies carried out during the last
decade revealed the importance of traditional shaded coffee for
biodiversity maintenance and protection. However, there is only
biological and no interdisciplinary exploration of the multiple val-
ues and benefits of these agroforestry systems. We identify and
review four kinds of nonbiological values, which complement its
tested importance as a refuge for tropical biodiversity, as a con-
tribution to the complete valuation of traditional shaded coffee.
By briefly describing a case study in Mexico, we show how tradi-
tional shade-grown coffee is critical for areas where sustainable
projects are being implemented. This article concludes by explor-
ing three key dimensions of sustainability: economy, landscapes,
and livelihoods.
KEYWORDS shaded coffee, indigenous peoples, biodiversity

conservation, sustainability, tropical regions
The authors are grateful to P. Alarcon-Chaires for technical assistance, including the
figure art, and to F. Eccardi, V. Evangelista, and E. Leyequien for providing useful data.
N. Barrera-Bassols gave provided critical suggestions and editorial advice. The research in
the Sierra Norte of Puebla was carried out as part of Project EO-018, supported by CONABIO
(Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad) of Mexico. The authors
thank I. Nigh, and especially Susanne Eckholm, for the English edition. This article was greatly
benefited by the constructive suggestions of an anonymous reviewer.
Address correspondence to Víctor M. Toledo, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de
México, CIECO, Antigua Carretera a Pátzcuaro, Morelia 58090, Mexico. E-mail: vtoledo@
oikos.unam.mx
353
354 V. M. Toledo and P. Moguel
INTRODUCTION
Coffee is widely grown throughout the tropics on about 5 million farms.

It is estimated that more than 20 million people throughout the world earn
their living from coffee, the majority of them involved in its production
(Eccardi and Sandalj 2002). Small-scale family farms produce over 70% of
the world´s coffee in 85 Latin American, Asian, and African countries. Over
2 billion people are estimated to be coffee consumers on a regular basis.
Coffee is, therefore, the most important legal export commodity, surpassed
only by petroleum and its derivatives.

Coffee-growing regions largely fall within areas identified as biodiversity
hotspots (Myers et al. 2000). Thus, despite the relatively small area dedicated
worldwide to the cultivation of coffee (Coffea spp.), just about 11 million
ha, the industry has an impact on biodiversity which is disproportional to
its area (Donald 2004). The links between shade-grown coffee and conser-
vation have been abundantly documented and debated in the last 15 years,
especially the conservation value of traditional coffee gardens (see key con-
tributions in Perfecto et al. 1996; Moguel and Toledo, 1999; Wiersum 2004;
McNeely and Schroth 2006; Bhagwat et al. 2008; and Philpott et al. 2008).
Coffee certification programs, based on both biological and social research,
have also proliferated as ways to protect biodiversity and to promote better
life conditions for farmers.
Despite this outstanding interest of conservationists and biological sci-
entists on shaded coffee, the various benefits of these agroforestry systems
have not been sufficiently investigated. As a contribution to the interdisci-
plinary valuation of shade-grown coffee, this article: a) defines traditional
shaded coffee by briefly reviewing the coffee varieties used in the planta-
tions worldwide and by adopting a general typology of coffee landscapes
based on vegetation physiognomy and species composition; b) identifies and
briefly discusses four kinds of ecological and social values of shade-grown
coffee agroforests; and c) examines an outstanding case in Mexico that illus-
trates the benefits discussed in the second section. This article concludes
by examining the importance of these outcomes for designing sustainable
projects in tropical regions, including issues such as ecological services, cul-
tural values, economic, social, and political empowerment, and landscape
agroecology.
DEFINING TRADITIONAL SHADED COFFEE
In general, there is an absence of scholar conceptualization examining coffee

systems. As a consequence, authors tend to use the vague label “shaded
coffee,” without defining it and without establishing features to made basic
distinctions among the different systems. In order to understand correctly
the role played by traditional coffee plantations, we need to briefly examine
Traditional Shaded Coffee and Sustainability 355
two key aspects of coffee producing systems: ecogeographical distribution

of coffee varieties and coffee landscapes. Despite the fact that there are
more than 100 species in the genus Coffea, world coffee production relies
almost exclusively on two species: Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora or
robusta. Native to equatorial Africa, C. robusta is typically grown in flatlands
from sea level to 1,000 m, and C. arabica prospers best at elevations of
600–1,600 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l.) in cool but frost-free mountain
areas. Consequently, although temperatures of 15–24◦ C are ideal for growing
C. arabica, C. robusta thrives in temperatures of 24–30◦ C.
With the exception of two Brazilian regions (Espírito Santo and

Rondonia), where C. robusta coffee is preferred, all Latin American areas
grow C. arabica. Although C. robusta dominates vast areas of Africa,
Indonesia, and Vietnam, C. arabica is cultivated in Southeast Africa, India,
and some parts of Indonesia (Eccardi and Sandalj 2002). However, no direct
correlation has been established between C. robusta or C. arabica (and
each of their varieties) and the different coffee-producing systems (sun- and
shade-grown), nor their impact on biological diversity.
We assume that C. robusta, which is commonly used in the instant
coffee industry, might have a more negative impact on biological diver-
sity than C. Arabica because it is planted in tropical lowland forests on
flatlands where the industrial model based on monocropping is more suit-
able. On the other hand, C. arabica is primarily planted in tropical mountain
cloud forests or perennial and subperennial tropical forests that can facilitate
the creation of shaded environments. However, in this second case, growers
must prevent coffee bush diseases that are induced by high humidity. For
example, crop management of different combinations of shade and coffee
shrub density may strongly influence coffee diseases such as that caused
by rust (Hemileia vastatrix) (Avelino et al. 2004). Thus, at high elevations
(1,000–2,000 m.a.s.l.) there is a tension between the desirability of the shade
habitat and the need to maintain disease-free coffee plantations.
Reducing the discussion about coffee systems to the sole distinction
between sun- and shade-grown coffee, or “modern” and “traditional” coffee-
growing systems (e.g., Donald 2004) is, at best, an oversimplification. Rural
coffee landscapes have been built through a complex set of environmental
and social processes as well as international commodity market relationships
(Trujillo 2008). Based on criteria such as vegetation structure, species vari-
ety, and species composition, as well as on the impact and magnitude of
human manipulation on the original vegetation across a gradient of intensi-
fication, we proposed five main types of coffee-producing landscapes over
one decade ago (Moguel and Toledo 1999). We briefly describe this typology
because of its usefulness and conceptual coherence.
1. Traditional Rustic System. In this system, coffee bushes are sim-

ply inserted into the understory of a native forest (secondary or
mature), substituting or complementing those plants (both, shrub-like
and herbaceous species) growing on the floor of tropical or temperate

forests. This system affects the original forest ecosystem in a minimum
way. This implies that the original tree cover is maintained and coffee
bushes are simply implanted at floor level. This first system resembles the
original mode of management of Coffea arabica, a shrub that is indige-
nous to the understory of the montane rainforest of Ethiopia. Ethiopian
farmers harvest coffee from nondomesticated coffee shrubs in more- or
less-managed forests. The intensity of management varies between little
or no interventions in “forest coffee” systems and the annual slashing of
understory plants other than coffee and that of the selective thinning in
the upper canopy in “semi-forest coffee” systems (Aerts et al. 2011).
2. Traditional Polyculture System (“Coffee Gardens”). This type represents
the most advanced stage of manipulation of the native forest ecosys-
tem, including shade and topographic relief management and soil fertility
maintenance. Coffee bushes are introduced under the cover of the origi-
nal forests, but combined alongside with numerous useful plant species.
The result is an exuberant “coffee garden” with a great variety of arboreal,
shrub-like, and herbaceous species, stemming from natural and intro-
duced (as wild and domesticated) vegetation that are selected or favored
by producers, and used by producers either for subsistence or markets.
3. Commercial Polyculture System. This system is created through the total
elimination of the original forest trees and the introduction of a set of
shade trees appropriate for coffee cultivation. The forest cover is made
up of arboreal species that are used because of their primary usefulness
as shade trees, but have secondary uses as well. For example, many
leguminous trees can add nitrogen to the soil or have other commercial
importance.
4. Shaded Monoculture System. This system exemplifies the modern coffee
producing systems. In this case, trees of a single species are exclusively
used as shade for the coffee bushes. A specialized plantation is then
created under a canopy of a single species. The use of agrochemical
products is almost an obligate practice and production is exclusively a
market-oriented practice.
5. Sun Coffee (or Non-Shaded Coffee). This system exemplifies the modern
coffee producing systems as well. With no tree cover at all and the coffee
bushes being exposed to direct sunlight, this is an agricultural system
that has lost the agroforestry character displayed in the previous systems.
Converted into a specialized plantation, it requires genetically ameliorated
varieties, high inputs of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, machinery and
intensive labor during the entire year.
Each of the types of shade-grown coffee systems described above reflects

specific combinations of biological, ecological, cultural, agronomic, and
social factors. A clear difference exists between the two shade-grown
coffee systems established under a multilayered and multispecies canopy

of native trees that generally are creations of indigenous, small-scale grow-
ers (traditional rustic polyculture and traditional polyculture) and the
two coffee systems established under planted trees, which correspond to
either small- and medium-scale farmers or large-scale owners who are
highly involved in the production of specialized cash crops (commercial
polyculture; commercial monoculture). (See Figure 1.)
Thus, we must distinguish between the two types of traditional shade-
grown coffee from the two types of commercial shade-grown coffee grown
under a canopy of planted trees (often legume species), where native forest
has been removed. The first two types of shade-grown coffee represent
FIGURE 1 The five main coffee producing landscapes distinguished by vegetation structure,
species variety, and composition, as well as by the impact of human manipulation (color
figure available online).
a sort of humanized natural forest, and the two other types are artificial
agroecosystems.
Although the above typology is a classification based on a qualitative
approach, it is, however, appropriate and useful when analyzing the coffee-
growing areas of many areas of the world (see Eccardi and Sandalj 2002).
Theoretically rooted in an ecological economics approach of peasant pro-
duction (Toledo 1990), and inspired by the work of Nolasco (1985), who
built up a first typology from a national survey of 1,070 coffee farms located
in 378 municipalities of Mexico, our typology offers a general concep-
tual framework that should be tested by applying multivariate analysis and

correlated with another social and economic factors. Unfortunately, quanti-
tative classification systems for coffee landscapes are scarce and based on
a very low number of farms, such that their results only explain the pat-
terns of a given or selected studied area (see Guadarrama-Zugasti 2008;
Hernández-Martinez et al. 2009).
FOUR VALUES OF TRADITIONAL SHADE-GROWN COFFEE
The following sections examine those agroforestry systems labeled as tra-

ditional shade-grown coffee where C. arabica is generally cultivated and
where the coffee bushes are maintained under a modified forest canopy of
the forest and with many other useful tree species, shrubs, epiphytes and
herbs, both natives and introduced ones.
Ecological Services
Beyond biodiversity conservation, traditional coffee systems have several
positive ecological contributions. Shaded-coffee plantings store carbon from
the atmosphere and protect watersheds by slowing down runoff. Also, these
systems avoid or reduce deforestation by maintaining forest cover. The role
of these systems in the maintenance of the quality of natural water sources,
soil fertility, capture of carbon and rain, biological control agents, pollinators,
possible positive effects on climate balance, must be taken into account.
Consider, for example, the positive effects on soils and water. In regions
where coffee is grown on mountain slopes and steep areas, shade-grown
coffee systems guard against soil degradation and maintain water quality
through vegetative cover. Organic matter from the shade trees reduces ero-
sion and provides natural mulch, offering nutrients to the soil and reducing
the need for chemical fertilizer. Most of the coffee-growing areas of the
world overlap with several kinds of forests of the most important mountain
systems in Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Indonesia, India, the Andean region,
Mexico, and Central America (Table 1). Another overlooked environmental
service of traditional shaded-coffee systems is derived from its ecological
TABLE 1 Mountains associated with coffee production areas
Mountains associated with coffee production areas

Regions and countries (Sea level meters)
Africa
Côte d’Ivoire Nimba (1,000)
Kenya Kenya (5,199), Kilimanjaro (5,963)
Congo/Ruanda Virunga volcanic system and Karisimbi (4,512)
Ethiopia Batu (4,305)
Uganda Margherita Peak (5,109)
Cameroon Cameroon (4,070)

Asia
Vietnam Annamese (2,600)
Indonesia Puncak Jaya (5.040); Ganag Leuser (3,380)
India Western Ghats (>1000)
Philippines Sicapoo (2,351); Apo (2,954)
Thailand Khao Luang (1,783)
Mexico & Central America
Mexico Sierra Madre Oriental (average 3,664), Sierra Madre
Occidental (average 4,300), Sierra Madre del Sur
(average 3,500).
Nicaragua
Costa Rica Chirrido (3,819), Turrialba (3,340)
Guatemala Raxón (2,986)
Honduras Celaque (2,848)
Panama Santiago (2,825)
South America
Ecuador Cordillera de Los Andes (6,267)
Colombia Alto Ritacuba (5,493), Nevado de Huila (5,750), Nevado
de Ruiz (5,320)
Peru Cordillera de Los Andes (6,600)
Venezuela Pico Bolívar (5,000); Platillón (1,928)
Bolivia Nevado Sajama (6,519)
Sources: Ecardi and Sandalj (2002) and selected websites
complexity. As shown recently by Vandermeer et al. (2010), complex inter-

actions among many species, buffers coffee production systems against pests
and diseases.
Tropical deforestation and forest degradation are considered to be
important sources of greenhouse gases, contributing to almost 20% of the
global emissions (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2007).
Tropical agroforestry’s potential for mitigating the effects of greenhouse
gases has been well documented (Albrecht and Kandji 2003). In gen-
eral, agroforestry systems accumulate considerably more carbon than the
monocultures of annual crops or pastures, but lower than that accumu-
lated by natural forests. Traditional shaded coffee can act directly on the
atmosphere as carbon sequestration systems and, indirectly, by decreas-
ing human pressure on natural forests. These systems are, therefore, key
landscape units for carbon-sequestration projects of tropical regions. There
are examples of such initiatives in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Mexico, Colombia and Indonesia (www.coffeehabitat.com/2008/03/coffee-

and-carb). Two well-known projects are those developed in San Juan,
Guatemala (Powell and Delamey 1998), and in the Highlands of Chiapas,
Mexico (Scolel-te pilot project; Dejong et al. 1995).
Results of a study of shade-grown coffee systems in Indonesia (Ginoga
et al. 2002) indicate that the amount of carbon fixed by aboveground
biomass, soil and litter is between 80 and 100 tC/ha/year. On the other
hand, a recent study carried out by Soto-Pinto et al. (2010) of the Scolel-te
program in Mexico, demonstrated that agroforestry systems such as shaded
coffee improved fallow and taungya systems and contained more carbon
than traditional maize and pastures without trees. In the above research,
three shaded-coffee prototypes reach the highest values of total carbon fixed
by organic soil, dead organic matter, and living biomass.
Another important ecosystem service refers to pollination, which is a
fundamental ecological process for the maintenance of the viability and
diversity of flowering plants. Conservation of native pollinators within
agroforestry landscapes is particularly important and urgent, given the strate-
gic role of pollination services within these systems. Based on our typology
of coffee landscapes, Vergara and Badano (2008), carried out a study on
the effects of insect pollinator diversity on coffee fruit production along a
gradient of management systems in central Veracruz, Mexico. They found
that low-impact management systems (rustic coffee) have higher species
richness and relative diversity of pollinators than high-impact management
systems (specialized shaded and sun coffee). In all cases, coffee fruit produc-
tion was positively related with species richness and diversity of pollinators.
More recently, Jha and Vandermeer (2010) found that the most predictive
factors for bee abundance and species richness were the number of tree
species, the number of tree species in flower, and the canopy cover of
the agroforestry system, when evaluating the impacts of coffee agroforestry
management on tropical bee communities. In summary, traditional shaded-
coffee systems maintain a diversified pool of pollinators (mostly insects and
birds), which also contributes to the improvement of coffee production itself
(Roubik 2002; Ricketts 2004).
Cultural Importance
Coffee, the most important agricultural commodity worldwide, is produced
mainly by smallholders, many of whom belong to a given indigenous cul-
ture (Eccardi and Sandalj 2002). Shade-grown coffee production is especially
maintained in many countries considered culturally megadiverse (Indonesia,
India, Mexico, Cameroon, Philippines). Based on the geographical distribu-
tion of languages, we estimate that some 820 indigenous cultures live in
coffee regions of 17 countries with large tracts of shaded coffee (Table 2),
showing that these agroforestry systems are inextricably linked to indigenous
TABLE 2 Estimated number of languages spoken in coffee-growing areas of

17 selected countries. The estimate was based on the geographical overlap of
language areas identified in the 14 edition of Ethnologue (2004; http://www.
ethnologue.com/) with the coffee growing areas reported by Eccardi and Sandalj
(2000), and with additional information of Toledo (2001)
Estimated number of
Green coffee Number of languages in coffee
Region production (Mt) languages growing areas
Africa
Ivory Coast 280,000 77 39

Ethiopia 228,000 82 32
Uganda 197,410 43 15
Cameroon 77,000 279 193
Asia
Vietnam 800,000 94 47
Indonesia 376,800 726 208
India 301,200 387 63
Philippines 129,790 169 82
Thailand 90,000 75 30
Mexico & Central
America
Mexico 330,000 288 28
Guatemala 275,700 54 7
Honduras 205,545 11 3
Panama 12,354 14 4
South America
Ecuador 146,457 22 9
Peru 158,200 92 38
Venezuela 69,000 40 4
Bolivia 24,667 37 18
territories. In fact, coffee that is cultivated under a canopy of native trees is

so closely linked to the indigenous modes of natural resource management,
that any analysis of these systems should necessarily take cultural diversity
into account. Thus, traditional shaded-coffee agroforests not only conserve
living beings, but they also preserve living cultures.
From a cultural perspective, the most important fact is that in various
indigenous territories, coffee and many others cash-crops are simply inserted
within previously existent agroforestry systems. These shaded-coffee sys-
tems, which from our own western perspective are called traditional coffee
systems, are indeed landscape designs that indigenous peoples have cre-
ated, managed, maintained, and used for hundreds and even thousands of
years in their tropical territories.
Several studies have demonstrated the cultural importance of these tra-
ditional agroforests (with or without coffee bushes), which are also called
domestic forests (Michon et al. 2007) or forest gardens (Wiersum 2004). This
is the case of the Shambas of Uganda (Eccardi and Sandalj 2002), the Kebun-
talun of West Java (Christanty et al. 1985), the Pekarangan, Ladang, and
Pelak of Sumatra, Indonesia (Aumeeruddy 1994), and of the Te’lom and

the Kuajtikiloyan of Huastec and Nahuat Indians, respectively, of Mexico
(Alcorn 1983; Moguel and Toledo 2004; Toledo et al. 2004). The design and
management of these agroforests are the result of a long-term manipula-
tion of vegetation masses and plant species and of the sum of individual
and collective cultural memories. Given the above, one overlooked benefit
of traditional shaded coffee has been its role as a long-term laboratory for
the creation and evolution of agrodiversity. Only recently are some authors
examining this important issue (see Mendez, Bacon, Olson, Morris, et al.
2010). Agrodiversity is synonymous with terms such as useful biodiversity

and agricultural biodiversity and may be defined as the many ways people
use biological diversity for production. The above implies understanding
how biological diversity is supported by smallholder farmers and how, in
turn, their livelihoods are delineated by biological diversity.
The design and construction of these native agroforestry systems
implies, in addition, the application of a sophisticated reservoir of local
knowledge on plant species, water cycles, and ecological processes, such
as vegetation succession and taxonomies of living beings, soils, relief, veg-
etation, and landscapes. Therefore, these systems are at the same time
sources and products of intellectual operations realized by local produc-
ers and reproduced through cultural mechanisms of transmission, invention,
and co-evolution.
These agroforestry designs managed by indigenous peoples are, in
turn, segments of larger multiple-use management systems, which com-
bine several land use practices. For instance, in Sumatra, Indonesia, coffee
gardens are locally combined with wet-paddy rice fields, fallows, mature
forest, and homegardens (Aumeeruddy 1994). Similarly, in many tropical
areas of Mexico, shaded-coffee agroforests are managed in conjunction
with maize fields (milpa), cash crops, small-scale cattle raising, old-growth
forests, fallows, and homegardens (Alcorn 1983, 1989; Beaucage and Taller
de Tradición Oral 1997; Bandeira et al. 2002; Toledo et al. 2003). Local eco-
logical knowledge, especially knowledge related to soils, vegetation units,
microclimates, plant and animal species, and ecological processes, is critical
for the design of these coffee gardens, for their other productive activities,
and for the entire system (Beaucage and Taller de Tradición Oral 1997;
Beaucage 2009; Bandeira et al. 2002). In conclusion, shaded-coffee agro-
forests constitute just one segment of indigenous multiple-use systems and,
therefore, cannot be analyzed outside of this cultural and economic rationale
(Toledo 2001).
Livelihood Value
The economic and subsistence values of the agro-diversity and its contribu-
tion to the local growers and family welfare have received scant attention.
Only recently the role of traditional coffee gardens in household and com-
munity livelihoods has started to be examined (see Mendez, Bacon, Olson,
Morris, et al. 2010). Besides their ecological and cultural values, agroforests
of shade-grown coffee are very important to local livelihoods because they
offer a myriad of resources other than coffee.
According to the pioneering contribution of Rice (2008), data presented
from surveys with coffee growers in Peru and Guatemala show that the
consumption and sale of all non-coffee products account for one fifth to
one third of the total monetary value realized from the agroforestry system.
Therefore, any attempt to measure the productivity of a traditional coffee

garden by calculating only coffee yields is spurious because it leaves out a
myriad of products for domestic consumption (shadow prices).
Smallholders, indigenous or not, take advantage of the diversified agro-
forests to generate products for their own consumption and for the market.
Like other peasant farmers all over the world, small-scale coffee growers
are immersed in a dual economy: They produce commodities for sale in the
market and buy goods with the cash received and, at the same time, they
produce basic goods for their own subsistence. This economic strategy of
small-scale farmers has positive implications, both biological and ecological
because it fosters diversified systems (Toledo 2001), and could explain the
long-term presence of several cultures in tropical regions.
Many studies document the local utility of large numbers of plant
species. These species contribute greatly to household subsistence in terms
of food, firewood, medicines, lumber, housing materials, tools, and fodder.
The variety of resources for domestic consumption is related, principally,
with density and diversity of shade trees, a feature that can be in conflict
with the coffee (or cash crop) yields, as shown by Mendez et al. (2009).
Moreover, if these traditional agroforestry systems are playing an impor-
tant role in biodiversity conservation of human-dominated areas, they should
be maintained, reinforced, and expanded, regardless of the kind of cash
crop being grown (in many regions coffee is combined with or replaced by
other commercial products such as rubber, cinnamon, macadamia, allspice,
clove, plantain, and citrus). Within the above perspective, each managed
plant species has both an ecological value (e.g., offering food to animal
groups) and an economic value. In economic terms, the useful products
of each managed plant species end up being consumed by the household
or commercialized in different market niches: local, regional, national, and
global; and organic, Fair Trade, or conventional. In a global market domi-
nated by specialization and maximization of production and profits in the
short term, the structurally diverse shaded-coffee agroforests are an obstacle
for the normal processes of global accumulation. At the same time, they can
be the basis for a new kind of production that allows the local accumulation
of wealth without negatively affecting or destroying the surrounding natural
resources.
Social and Political Implications

Traditional agroforests of shade-grown coffee also have social and political
implications. Their presence contributes to social justice by reinforc-
ing local self-sufficiency and indirectly promoting local self-governance.
In tropical regions, where local farmers maintain multiple-use systems,
local or regional peasant organizations recognize, defend, and promote
these diversified systems because they are identified as buffer mecha-
nisms against economic disturbances and political pressures. Both landscape
mosaics and biological diversity thus operate as two factors that serve
as the material basis for strong community institutions, and the devel-
opment of so-called social capital at local and regional levels (Pretty
2003), a dimension that should be integrated with other social, cultural
and political factors shaping democracy of peasant organizations (see Fox
1992).
Two interesting examples are the social movements developed by
indigenous and small-scale producers in Indonesia and Mexico. Indigenous
communities living in the interior of Borneo (Kalimantan) have promoted
strong local and regional organizations that share the belief that self-reliance,
solidarity, and appropriated local management of natural resources are the
key to social prosperity and empowerment. This movement has promoted
the use of maps to guarantee conservation and economic success. The maps
show land use, animal species, special tree species, rivers, sacred areas, set-
tlements, and topography. Over 160 communities in more than 700,000 ha
of territory have been mapped in recent years, protecting over 500,000 ha
of tropical forests (Alcorn et al. 2003).
In Mexico, the National Alliance of Coffee-Producing Organizations,
a network of 114 independent organizations, works to benefit some
75,000 small-scale, predominantly indigenous producers, who generate
almost 20% of the national coffee crop. This organizational umbrella
includes advisers and scientists, technicians, and nongovernmental organi-
zations, and it promotes the social wellbeing of small-scale producers and
their families by empowering local organizations, advocating environmental
protection, and promoting certified organic coffee grown in traditional
shaded agroforests (see www.cnoc.org).
An interesting case is the described by Bacon (2010), who made
a comparative study between conventional and alternative coffee coop-
eratives in Nicaragua, where Fair Trade and organic cooperatives have
grown rapidly in the past decade. Bacon analyzed how the coffee cri-
sis influenced three smallholder cooperatives. Although no mention is
made about the specific type of shaded-coffee systems being adopted, he
concluded that the access to Fair Trade and organic international mar-
kets has offered better opportunities for local empowerment and gender
equity.
MULTIPLE VALUES OF SHADE-GROWN COFFEE:

A MEXICAN EXAMPLE
Mexico produces one fifth of the total volume of organic coffee exported
worldwide and is the leader of certified organic coffee production. Mexican
organic coffee is grown without agrochemicals and under the shade of a
forest canopy, which helps preserve the natural habitat and, consequently,
biodiversity, soil quality, and water runoff. According to recent statistics,
Mexican organic coffee is produced by some 128,000 small-scale producers,
most of them belonging to indigenous cooperatives of the states of Chiapas,

Oaxaca, Guerrero, Puebla, and Veracruz, in a production area of above
400,000 has (Gómez-Cruz et al. 2009). Mexican organic coffee is exported
and consumed by countries such as the United States, Canada, France, the
Netherlands, Germany, and Japan.
One of these indigenous organizations is the Tosepan Titataniske
Cooperative (TT Cooperative) from the Sierra Norte of Puebla. With an esti-
mated 18,000 members, it comprises basically families of Nahua Indians
living in 66 villages. The northeastern mountain range of Puebla is one of
the hottest, wettest, and biologically richest areas of tropical Mexico, and
the fourth coffee region of the country in terms of production. The region is
located near the northernmost limit of the Neotropical rain forest, includes
46 coffee growing municipalities with 548 villages (Evangelista et al. 2010)
and is situated on the eastern migratory path of Neartic-Neotropical birds
that winter or refuel in Mexico.
Founded in 1978, the TT Cooperative has created a strong regional orga-
nization of small-scale coffee growers and has achieved an impressive level
of biological, ecological and social success, promoting a better quality of life
for its members and contributing to a healthy regional environment. A few
decades ago, the TT Cooperative implemented a program for achieving cer-
tified organic production and Fair Trade markets based on the maintenance
and management of traditional coffee gardens, called Kuojtakiloyan (“pro-
ductive or useful forests”) in the Nahuat language. These shaded-coffee
plantations are located at altitudes that range between 250 and almost
1000 m.a.s.l. Shaded-coffee plantations are part of a regional landscape
mosaic that includes milpa or cornfields, fallow lands, grazing lands, and
remnants of tropical evergreen and temperate forests.
The first outstanding feature of these traditional shaded-coffee agro-
forests is biological richness of both wild and cultivated species. A botanical
survey of 31 Kuojtakiloyan plots in several villages of the region, carried out
by the authors and colleagues (Moguel and Toledo 2004; Toledo et al. 2004),
revealed an outstanding floristic richness: between 25 and 140 morpho-
species (or local taxa) per plot, and an average of 69.3 morpho-species
per plot, with an estimated total of 250–300 species, of which 96% are use-
ful species. Findings from the survey showed that 80% of the shaded-coffee
fields had an extension of 2 ha, or less (for details, see Toledo et al. 2004).
The study also revealed relations between local ecological knowledge

and the architecture, composition, and maintenance of these coffee gardens.
For example, previous and ongoing ethnobotanical studies recorded 319
(Martínez-Alfaro, Evangelista, Mendoza-Cruz, et al. 1995; Martinez-Alfaro,
Evangelista, Basurto, et al. 2007) and 626 (Beaucage 2009) Nahuat names for
plants belonging to the regional flora. Similarly, two participatory workshops
carried out with selected indigenous coffee growers and TT Cooperative pro-
moters allowed the reconstruction of the Nahuat plant taxonomy, a subject
extensively researched by Beaucage (2009). The indigenous coffee growers
distinguish and name 18 main plant “families” (and one of mushrooms),

being most of them components of the shade-grown coffee plantations
(Figure 2) and playing different roles in the structure and dynamics of these
agroforestry systems created by indigenous families.
FIGURE 2 Shade-grown coffee agroforests of the Sierra Norte of Puebla, Mexico, are, in
reality, reconstructed tropical forests, called Kuojtakiloyan, in which Nahua Indians have
manipulated a large number of plant species since ancient times. In these coffee gardens,
where wild and cultivated plants coexist, the structural characteristics and ecological pro-
cesses of natural forests are preserved, although the species composition has been adapted
to suit the needs of the producers. The architecture of these agroforestry systems is created
through the combination of species belonging to the 13 main Nahuat plant families or “life
forms” (Beaucage 2009), each playing a specific role in the agroforestry dynamics as well as
in the subsistence strategy of households. Encircled numbers indicate the number of useful
plant species. Source: Toledo et al. (2004) (color figure available online).
The Koujtakiloyan play a pivotal role for local livelihoods by pro-

viding goods for the household’s own consumption as well as for the
local, regional, national, and global markets. According to our data, about
half of the recorded plants, that is, 125 species of these coffee gardens,
are staple foods (tropical fruits, bananas, citrus, yams, greens, and oth-
ers). Almost 40 herbal medicines are also obtained from the shaded-coffee
parcels. Ornaments, reeds, firewood, honey, and a selected group of cash-
crop species (cinnamon, allspice, macadamia, mango, as well as coffee), are
also some of the products derived from these coffee gardens. As a result,
the indigenous households consume and/or sell a variety of goods, and as a

cooperative could integrate an innovative economic modality: a multi-market
strategy based on the diversity of products of the Kuojtakiloyan (Figure 3).
As part of the landscape mosaics created in the region by Nahua Indians
over the course of decades (Beaucage 2009), the Kuojtakiloyan contributes
to the regional floristic richness with as much as one third of the regional
floristic richness, calculated as about 1,000 plant species, and half of the
FIGURE 3 From the shaded-grown coffee agroforests (Kuojtakiloyan), Nahua Indians of

the Sierra Norte of Puebla, Mexico, obtain a diversified production. Besides foods (about
100 species and varieties), they maintain ornamental plants, reeds, and cash crops. Each one
of the goods obtained has an actual and a potential market. They are consumed at home or
commercialized in different market niches, from local to global. C: consumed. P: potential
markets. Source: Toledo et al. (2004) (color figure available online).
useful plant species recorded in the region: 603 species (Martínez-Alfaro,

Evangelista, Mendoza-Cruz, et al. 1995).
The traditional coffee agroforests also serve as corridors and refuges
for many plant species of the forests threatened by land use change
and, especially, operate as germplasm reservoirs of useful plant species.
In fact, coffee gardens also preserve the genetic variability of many tropical
fruits, such as avocados, zapotes, soursops, cherimoyas, guavas, and sev-
eral species of Malpighiaceae. They also maintain nectar sources for both
the native, stingless bees (Melipona beecheii), and the introduced European
honeybees (Apis mellifera).

The Kuojtakiloyan also harbor the highest numbers of bird species
recorded for any traditional shaded-coffee plantation. In a survey carried
out within the traditional shade-coffee gardens of the region (Leyequien
and Toledo 2009; Leyequien et al. 2010), 181 bird species were recorded,
of which 124 (69%) were resident and 57 (31%) were migrant; this rep-
resents almost 20% of all Mexican birds (around 1,000 species). In the
area, a remarkable group of edible fruits constitute food resources for
birds: zapotes (14 species), avocados (8 species), berries (17 species), citrus
species (17 varieties), bananas (12 varieties), as well as several species with
nectar sources.
Another benefit of the Kuojtakiloyan is related to the forest cover.
During the last five decades, huge tracts of Mexican tropical mountainous
forests have been converted to crop fields and pastures, so that type of
deforestation is the more common process found in these areas. Opposite
to the above tendency, a phenomenon of forest recovery occurred between
1988 and 2003, according to the analysis carried out by Evangelista et al.
(2010), through the interpretation and classification of Landsat satellite
images. In fact, recorded land use cover changes during 1988–2003, indi-
cate the final balance between deforestation and reforestation was favorable
to the latter, as shown in Figure 4. The above resulted mainly from the
FIGURE 4 Dynamics of the land use and cover change in the period 1988–2003 in the Sierra
Norte of Puebla, Mexico. The change analysis was realized through a supervised classification
of two Landsat satellite images. Source: Evangelista et al. (2010) (color figure available online).
increase of the shade-grown coffee surface, which was achieved by incor-

porating tropical secondary forest land (9,274 ha), cornfields (13,054 ha),
and especially grasslands (20,947 ha) to the agroforestry production (a total
of 43,275 ha). The total surface under coffee (43,275 ha), plus the amount of
forest recovery land (18 152 ha), reach a grand total of over 60,000 hectares
with some kind of forest cover.
Finally, and in social terms, the TT Cooperative has created an educa-
tional center inspired by the principles of sustainability and cultural defense,
programs of eco-tourism, an environmental education project linked to
reveal the importance of the Kuojtakiloyan for children from primary

schools, and a successful regional credit union with over 18,000 mem-
bers (see www.tosepan.com). Also, special programs are promoted among
women members for inducing gender equity. Besides, the cooperative main-
tains a very active political participation at local, regional and national levels.
All these socio-ecological efforts were honored by the Mexican government
with the National Prize for Ecological Merit in 2001.
DISCUSSION
Today, one of the main challenges to overcome the social and ecological cri-
sis at a global scale is the design and management of food systems capable
of balancing natural resource use and biological and environmental protec-
tion with the needs of production, economic viability, and social wellbeing
(Gliessman 2009). With 20–25 million producers around the world that suffer
from a prolonged crash in coffee prices, coffee production is facing both a
social and ecological crisis (Bacon, Méndez, Gliessman, et al. 2008). Based
on the facts, data and assumptions presented and developed in this arti-
cle, we can identify three strategic fields where suitable changes should be
implemented (see below). These changes are, in turn, framed by the general
umbrella of sustainability. Unlike most of the profligate users of the concept
of sustainability, we define it as the grassroots for redesigning the relations
among humans and between humans and nature, through social or civil
empowerment in concrete territories (Toledo 2010). Thus, we believe that
only by establishing or improving social power at local or regional levels
(as described in our case study), is it possible to create sound sustainable
territories, where their inhabitants may be capable of resisting, avoiding
and/or surviving the destructive processes induced by markets and/or public
policies.
i. “Sustainable Economy”
The main mechanisms applied to overcome the ongoing coffee crisis have
been the premium prices offered by new and special niche markets, princi-
pally organic, Fair Trade, eco-friendly and shaded-coffee markets. Globally,
approximately half of the Fair Trade coffee is also organically certified and
vice versa (Valkila 2009). Unfortunately, scholars that are recently analyz-
ing the global coffee crisis coincide on the fact that the emergence of
significant new markets for organic and fairly traded coffee has not been
sufficient to overcome the chronic poverty suffered by the large number of
small-scale coffee producers in the developing world (Calo and Wise 2005;
Bacon 2005; Jaffee 2009; Valkila 2009; Mendez, Bacon, Olson, Petchers, et al.
2010). For instance, in a case study from Oaxaca, Mexico (Calo and Wise
2005), it is shown that the organic premium paid to producers generally
fails to cover the added costs associated with organic certification and main-
tenance. The certification schemes do not represent just a market-based

mechanism, which assess the work of small-scale coffee producers from a
limited and biased perspective. In brief, the niche markets alone are unlikely
to provide a sound solution to the social situation of small-scale coffee pro-
ducers, because the markets do not recognize the full value of traditional
shaded-coffee production.
As discussed, several years ago during the First Sustainable Coffee
Congress celebrated at Washington, DC (Rice et al. 1996), the real price
of a true “sustainable coffee” would include the payment of at least ecolog-
ical services, including biodiversity maintenance and cultural values. Our
results suggest that many other plant resources other than coffee, such
as fruits, medicines, honey, ornamentals, greens, lumber, house materials
(bamboos), should be also considered in these special markets. If tradi-
tional coffee gardens are only adaptations of ancient agroforestry systems to
the opportunities of modern cash-crops markets, which are based on pro-
ductive specialization and massive production of a single or few products,
then new kinds of markets are needed to commercialize all the products
with economic value generated within these systems. This option could take
advantage of the fact that any certified coffee parcel also certifies the rest of
the non-coffee plant goods grown within this polyculture.
Although national governmental agencies and international institutions
should support programs to incentivize and reinforce the selling of the
dozens of all of these products that share a place with coffee crops in the tra-
ditional agroforestry systems, we believe that at best, and perhaps the only
sound option, is the establishment of local and regional markets created and
maintained by grass-roots organizations that link rural producers with urban
consumers. All the above implies the creation of a new type of “sustainable
market” based on the diversity of activities, products and merchandises,
organic and Fair Trade, and the shortening of commercial circuits.
ii. “Sustainable Livelihoods”

As pointed out by Calo and Wise (2005), any of the solutions to the
global coffee crisis will look very much like the peasant economy itself;
this is to say, as a patchwork of diverse survival strategies, starting with
the multiple use of natural resources (Toledo 1990; Toledo et al. 2003).
The very high diversity of non-coffee resources that coexist in the tra-
ditional shaded-coffee system may be the starting point for the adoption
of a diversified production, which would combine subsistence and cash
crops, unpaid family labor on the farm, off-farm employment, market-based
opportunities, and government programs.
Our results suggest multiple and integrated initiatives based on aspects
such as changes in rural development policies at the national and regional
levels, new kinds of credits, empowerment of local institutions, and self-
organization of households, communities, and cooperatives in a multilevel

scheme. Sustainable livelihoods are synonymous of local empowerment, and
that only can be reached by maintaining healthy relations between local
people and its surrounding natural resources and by maintaining local insti-
tutions and mechanisms to avoid negative effects of the global economy and
national policies.
iii. “Sustainable Landscapes”

The third issue refers to what can be called “sustainable landscapes,” an
idea very close to the concept of landscape balance coined and developed
by landscape ecologists. A central question for sustainable agriculture is
how production can be intensified without causing serious and irreversible
environmental damages. This challenge must be addressed not only at the
individual field scale but also at the landscape level. Once again, the indige-
nous or peasant strategy of the multiple uses of natural resources operates
as the basis for landscape design. As pointed out in this article, coffee gar-
dens are but a segment of a landscape matrix that includes agricultural
parcels, small-scale cattle raising areas, homegardens, and mature and suc-
cesional forests, in indigenous communities. This traditional strategy based
on landscape heterogeneity match almost perfectly with the proposals of the
new currents of conservation that invoke biodiversity preservation beyond
reserves (Toledo 2005; Vandermeer and Perfecto 2007; Chazdon et al. 2009).
In this new strategy, relatively isolated protected areas are comple-
mented by buffer zones, corridors, multiple-use areas, and other benign
modes of land use and natural resource management, so that the regional
landscape matrix as a whole, not the park alone, consequently becomes the
main conservation unit. Thus, a new vision of conservation that is emerging
shifts the focus from the remaining patches of apparently natural habitat to
the landscape matrix in which they occur (Vandermeer and Perfecto 2007;
Perfecto and Vandermeer 2008).
Within this new perspective, both “untouched” and human-managed
areas are considered equally important to conservation, because they are
segments of landscape dynamics and processes. Thus, human-managed
landscapes, such as agricultural and agroforestry systems, post-agricultural
succession areas, forest fragments and remnants, and other manipulated

habitats are also included in conservationist actions, policies and initiatives,
linking, in turn, conservation with production processes and, finally, with
the new paradigm of sustainability (Toledo 2005; Bacon, Méndez, and Fox,
2008).
In a regional landscape design, traditional agroforests of shade-grown
coffee should operate as intermediate forests, corridors, and buffer zones
between protected areas and well-preserved habitats, as well as more
intensively used areas such as agricultural fields, forestry plantations, and
cattle-raising areas. This implies the design of an appropriate landscape that

is capable of creating archipelago systems on a regional scale in which each
of its islands represent different modalities of land use management in an
intensification gradient (Halffter 2005).
Shade-grown coffee is already being considered as a key piece for
regional conservation projects in Indonesia, Mexico, and Central America.
In Indonesia, coffee gardens, together with rubber, cinnamon, fruit, and
benzoin agroforests, are highly valued as buffer areas surrounding the
national parks of west Kalimantan (Lawrence et al. 1994) and central and
north Sumatra (Aumeeruddy 1994; García-Fernández et al 2002). In Chiapas,
Mexico, there is a clear geographical overlap between most of the indige-
nous cooperatives engaged in organic shade-grown coffee production and
areas to be included in the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor initiative
(Toledo 2003).
Concluding, the multiple benefits of traditional shade-grown coffee that
are revealed in this article using an interdisciplinary framework, show the
value increase of these agroforestry systems, offering new elements for
the design of sustainable markets, sustainable livelihoods, and sustainable
landscapes at local and regional scales. All of these should be basically
oriented by the axiom, “Produce while conserving and conserve while
producing.”
REFERENCES
Aerts, R., K. Hundera, G. Berecha, P. Gijbels, and M. Baeten, et al. 2011. Semi-forest
coffee cultivation and the conservation of Ethiopian Afromontane rainforest
fragments. Forest Ecology and Management 261:1034–1041.
Albrecht, A., and S. T. Kandji. 2003. Carbon sequestration in tropical agro forestry
systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 99:15–27.
Alcorn, J. 1983. El Te´lom huasteco: pasado, presente y futuro de un sistema
agroforestal indígena [The Té lom: past present and future of an indigenous
agroforestry system]. Biótica 8:315–331.
Alcorn, J. 1989. An economic analysis of Huastec Mayan forest management. In
Fragile lands of Latin America, ed. J. O. Browder, 188–203. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Alcorn, J., S. Bamba, I. Masiun, R. Natalia, and A. Royo. 2003. Keeping ecological
resilience afloat in cross-scale turbulence: An indigenous social movement nav-
igates change in Indonesia. In Navigating social-ecological systems: Building
resilience for complexity and change, eds. F. Berkes and C. Folke, 303–327.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Aumeeruddy, Y. 1994. Local representations and management of agro forests on
the periphery of Kerinci Seblat National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. People and
Plants Working Paper (UNESCO) 3:1–46.
Avelino, J., L. Willocquet, and S. Savary. 2004. Effects of crop management patterns
on coffee rust epidemics. Plant Pathology 53:541–547.

Bacon, C. 2005. Confronting the coffee crisis: can Fair Trade, organic, and specialty
coffees reduce small-scale farmer vulnerability in Northern Nicaragua? World
Development 33:497–511.
Bacon, C. 2010. A spot of coffee in crisis: Smallholder cooperatives, Fair Trade
networks, and gendered empowerment. Latin American Perspectives 37:50–71.
Bacon, C., V. E. Méndez, and J. A. Fox. 2008. Cultivating sustainable coffee:
Persistent paradoxes. In Confronting the coffee crisis, Fair Trade, sustainable
livelihoods and ecosystems in Mexico and Central America, eds. C. Bacon, V.
E. Mendéz, S. R. Gliessman, D. Goodman, and J. A. Fox. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Bacon, C., V. E. Mendéz, S. R. Gliessman, D. Goodman, J. A. Fox. (eds.). 2008.
Confronting the coffee crisis, Fair Trade, sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems
in Mexico and Central America Cambridge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bandeira, F. P., J. L. Blanco, and V. M. Toledo. 2003. Tzotzil Maya ethnoecology:
Landscape perception and management as a basis for coffee agroforest design.
Journal of Ethnobiology 22:247–272.
Beaucage, P. 2009. Body, cosmos and environment among the Nahua Indians of the
Sierra Norte of Puebla, Mexico. Montreal: Lux/ Humanities. [in French]
Beaucage, P., and Taller de Tradición Oral. 1997. Integrating innovation: The tra-
ditional Nahua coffee-orchard (Sierra Norte de Puebla, Mexico). Journal of
Ethnobiology 17:45–67.
Bhagwat, S. A., K .J. Willis, H .J. B. Birks, and R. J. Whittaker. 2008. Agroforestry: A
refuge for biodiversity? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23:261–267.
Calo, M., and T. A. Wise. 2005. Revaluing peasant coffee production: Organic and
Fair Trade markets in Mexico. Medford, MA: Tufts University.
Chazdon, R. L., C. A. Harvey, O. Komar, D. M. Griffith, B. G. Ferguson, M.
Martínez-Ramos, et al. 2009. Beyond reserves: A research agenda for con-
serving biodiversity in human-modified tropical landscapes. Biotropica 41:
142–153.
Christanty, L., O. S. Abdoellah, G. S. Marten, and J. Iskandar. 1985. Traditional
agro forestry in West Java: The Pekarangan (Homegarden) and Kebun-Talun
(Annual-Perennial Rotation) cropping systems. In Traditional agriculture in
Southeast Asia: A human ecology perspective, ed. G. G. Marten, 135–158.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Dejong, B. H., G. Montoya, L. Soto-Pinto, K. Nelson, J. Taylor, and R. Tipper. 1995.
Community forest management and carbon sequestration: A feasibility study
from Chiapas, Mexico. Interciencia 20:504–511.
Donald, P. 2004. Biodiversity impacts of some agricultural commodity production

systems. Conservation Biology 18:17–37.
Eccardi, F., and V. Sandalj. 2002. The coffee: A celebration of diversity. Trieste, Italy:
Sandalj Editions.
Evangelista, V., J. López-Blanco, J. Caballero-Nieto, and M. A. Martinez-Alfaro. 2010.
Patrones de cambio y uso del suelo en la región cafetalera de la Sierra Norte
de Puebla, Mexico [Land use changes in a coffee producing region of sierra of
Puebla, Mexico]. Investigaciones Geográficas 71:63–77.
Fox, J. 1992. Democratic rural development: Leadership accountability in regional
peasant organizations. Development and Change 23:1–36

García-Fernández, C., M. A. Casado, and M. Ruíz Pérez. 2002. Benzoin Gardens
in North Sumatra, Indonesia: Effects of management on tree diversity.
Conservation Biology 17:829–836.
Ginoga, K., Y. C. Wulan, and M. Lugina. 2002. Potential of agro forestry and planta-
tion systems in Indonesia for carbon stocks: An economic perspective. Working
Paper CC14. ACIAR Project. http://www.une.edu.au/feb1/Economics/carbon/
(accessed October 18, 2007.)
Gliessman, S. 2009. Building sustainable livelihoods while conserving biodiversity.
Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 33:359–360.
Gómez-Cruz, M. A., R. Schwentesius, and L. Gómez-Tovar. 2009. Organic culture in
Mexico. Paper in the Workshop on Organic Agriculture. Universidad Autónoma
de Chapingo, México. http://portal.chapingo.mx/contenidos/content/view/
103/2 (accessed March 9, 2010). [in Spanish]
Guadarrama-Zugasti, C. 2008. A grower typology approach to assessing the environ-
mental impact of coffee farming in Veracruz, Mexico. In Confronting the coffee
crisis, Fair Trade, sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems in Mexico and Central
America, eds. C. Bacon, V. E. Mendéz, S. R. Gliessman, D. Goodman, and J. A.
Fox, 127–154. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Halffter, G. 2005. Towards a culture of biodiversity conservation. Acta Zoológica
Mexicana (n.s.) 21:133–153
Hernández-Martínez, G., R. H. Manson, and A. Contreras-Hernández. 2009.
Quantitative classification of coffee agroecosystems spanning a range of pro-
duction intensities in central Veracruz, Mexico. Agriculture Ecosystems and
Environment 134:89–98
Jaffee, D. 2009. Brewing justice: Fair Trade coffee, sustainability and survival.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Jha, S., and J. H. Vandermeer. 2010. Impacts of coffee agroforestry management on
tropical bee communities. Biological Conservation 143:1423–1431.
Lawrence, D., M. Leighton, and D. R. Peart. 1995. Availability and extraction of
forest products managed and primary forest around a Dayak village in West
Kalimantan, Indonesia. Conservation Biology 9:76–88.
Leyequien, E., W. F. de Boer, and V. M. Toledo. 2010. Bird community com-
position in a shaded coffee agro-ecological matrix in Puebla, Mexico: The
effects of landscape heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales. Biotropica 42:
236–245.
Leyequien, E., and V. M. Toledo. 2009. Floras y aves de cafetales: ensambles de
biodiversidad en paisajes humanizados. Biodiversitas 83:7–10.
Martinez-Alfaro, M. A., V. Evangelista, F. Basurto, M. Mendoza, and A. Cruz-Rivas.

2008. Las plantas útiles de la Sierra Norte de Puebla, México. Revista Mexicana
de Biodiversidad 78:15–40.
Martinez-Alfaro, M. A., V. Evangelista, M. Mendoza-Cruz, G. Morales-García, G.
Toledo-Olazcoaga, and A. Wong-León. 1995. Catalogue of useful plants of the
Sierra Norte of Puebla, México. Cuadernos 27, Instituto de Biología, Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City. [in Spanish]
McNeely, J. A., and G. Schroth. 2006. Agroforestry and biodiversity conservation:
Traditional practices, present dynamics and lesson for the future. Biodiversity
and Conservation 15:549–554.

Mendez, V. E., C. M. Bacon, M. Olson, K. Morris, and A. Shattuck. 2010.
Agrobiodiversity and shade coffee smallholder livelihoods: A review and syn-
thesis of ten years of research in Central America. The Professional Geographer
62:357–376.
Mendez, V. E., Ch. M. Bacon, M. Olson, S. Petchers, D. Herrador, C. Carranza,
L. Trujillo, et al. 2010. Effects of Fair Trade and organic certifications on small-
scale coffee farmer households in Central America and Mexico. Renewable
Agriculture and Food Systems 25:236–251.
Méndez, V. E., E. N. Shapiro, and G. S. Gilbert. 2009. Cooperative management and
its effects on shade tree diversity, soil properties and ecosystem services of
coffee plantations in western El Salvador. Agroforestry Systems 76:111–126.
Michon, G., H. de Foresta, P. Levang, and F. Verdeaux. 2007. Domestic forests: A
new paradigm for integrating local communities’ forestry into tropical forest
science. Ecology and Society http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art1
(accessed February 22, 2011).
Moguel, P., and V. M. Toledo. 1999. Biodiversity conservation in traditional coffee
systems in Mexico. Conservation Biology 13:1–12.
Moguel, P., and V. M. Toledo. 2004. Conserving while producing: biodiversity,
organic coffee and productive gardens. Biodiversitas 55:1–7. http://www.
conabio.gob.mx/institucion/conabio_espanol/doctos/num55_conservar_
produciendo.html (accessed October 27, 2009). [in Spanish]
Myers, N., R. A. Mittermeier, C. G. Mittermeier, G. A. B. da Fonseca, and J.
Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:
853–858.
Nolasco, M. 1985. Café y Sociedad en México. Mexico City, Mexico: Centro de
Ecodesarrollo.
Perfecto, I., R. A. Rice, R. Greenberg, and M. E. Van der Voort. 1996. Shade coffee:
A disappearing refuge for biodiversity. BioScience 46:598–608.
Perfecto, I., and J. Vandermeer. 2008. Biodiversity conservation in tropical agroe-
cosystems: a new conservation paradigm. Annales of the New York Academy of
Sciences. 1134:173–200.
Philpott, S. M., W. J. Arendt, I. Ambrecht, P. Bichier, T. V. Dietsch, C. Gordon,
R. Greenberg, et al. 2008. Biodiversity loss in Latin American coffee land-
scapes: Review of the evidence on ants, birds, and trees. Conservation Biology
22:1093–105.
Powell, M. H., and M. Delamey. 1998. Carbon sequestration and sustainable coffee
in Guatemala. Winrock International, Arlington, VA. Final Report. http://www.
winrock.org/REEP/carbonReport.html (accessed March 9, 2000).
Pretty, J. 2003. Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science
302:1912–1914.
Rice, R. 2008. Agricultural intensification within agroforestry: The case of coffee and
wood products. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 128:212–218.
Rice, R. A., A. Harris, and J. McLean (eds.). 1996. Proceedings of the First
Sustainable Coffee Congress. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Migratory Bird
Center.
Ricketts, T. H. 2004. Tropical forest fragments enhance pollinator activity in nearby
coffee crops. Conservation Biology 18:1262–1264.
Roubik, D. W. 2002. Tropical agriculture: The value of bees to the coffee harvest.
Nature 417:708.
Soto-Pinto, L., M. Anzueto, J. Mendoza, G. Jimenez-Ferrer, and B. de Jong. 2010.
Carbon sequestration through agroforestry on indigenous communities of
Chiapas, Mexico. Agroforestry Systems 78:39–51.
Toledo, V. M. 1990. The ecological rationality of peasant production. In Agroecology
and small-farm development, eds. M. Altieri and S. Hecht, 51–56. Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press.
Toledo, V. M. 2001. Biodiversity and in digenous peoples. In Encyclopedia of
biodiversity, eds. S. Levin, G. Daily, R. K. Colwell, J. Lubchenko, H. A. Mooney,
E. Schulze, and D. Tilman, 1181–1197. San Diego: Academic Press.
Toledo, V. M. 2003. The indigenous peoples: Strategic actors for the
Mesoamerican biological corridor. Biodiversitas 47: 8–15. http://www.conabio.
gob.mx/institucion/conabio_espanol/doctos/pueblos_indigenas.html (accessed
October 18, 2010). [in Spanish]
Toledo, V. M. 2005. Re-thinking conservation: protected natural areas or bioregional
conservation?. Gaceta Ecológica 77:67–82. [in Spanish]
Toledo, V. M. 2010. Las claves ocultas de la sostenibilidad. In La Situación del Mundo
2010, ed. E. Assadourian, 355–377. Barcelona: The Worldwatch Institute and
Icaria Editorial.
Toledo, V. M., L. Durán, M. L. Albores, P. Moguel, A. Ayón, A. Rodríguez-Aldabe,
L. García, and M. Hernández. 2004. The economic potential of the useful flora
of the coffee systems of Sierra Norte of Puebla. Final technical report. Proyecto
AE019 de la Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad
(CONABIO). Mexico City. [in Spanish]
Toledo, V. M., B. Ortiz, L. Cortés, P. Moguel, and M. J. Ordóñez. 2003. The multiple
use of tropical forests by indigenous peoples in México: A case of adaptive
management. Conservation Ecology 7(3):9. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/
vol7/iss3/art9/index.html (accessed October 5, 2010).
Trujillo, L. 2008. Coffee-production strategies in a changing rural landscape: A case
study in Central Veracruz, Mexico. In Confronting the coffee crisis, Fair Trade,
sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems in Mexico and Central America, eds.
C. Bacon, V. E. Mendéz, S. R. Gliessman, D. Goodman, and J. A. Fox, 69–98.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Valkila, J. 2009. Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua—
Sustainable development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics doi:10.1016/
j.ecolecon.2009.07.002
Vandermeer, J., and I. Perfecto. 2007. The agricultural matrix and a future paradigm
for conservation. Conservation Biology 21:274–277.
Vandermeer, J., I. Perfecto, and S. Philpott. 2010. Ecological complexity and pest
control in organic coffee production: Uncovering an autonomous ecosystem
service. Bioscience 60:527–537.
Vergara, C., and E. L. Badan. 2009. Pollinator diversity increases fruit set in Mexican
coffee plantations: The importance of rustic management systems. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 129:117–123.
Wiersum, K. F. 2004. Forest gardens as an intermediate land-use system in the
nature-culture continuum: Characteristics and future potential. Agroforestry
Systems 61:123–134.

Toeldo Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toeldo Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria], [VICTOR TOLEDO]

On: 23 March 2012, At: 12:07

Journal of Sustainable Agriculture

Coffee and Sustainability: The Multiple

Available online: 23 Mar 2012

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2011.583719

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Coffee and Sustainability: The Multiple

VÍCTOR M. TOLEDO1 and PATRICIA MOGUEL2

Coffee is grown widely throughout the tropics on about 5 million

KEYWORDS shaded coffee, indigenous peoples, biodiversity

Coffee is widely grown throughout the tropics on about 5 million farms.

only by petroleum and its derivatives.

DEFINING TRADITIONAL SHADED COFFEE

In general, there is an absence of scholar conceptualization examining coffee

two key aspects of coffee producing systems: ecogeographical distribution

With the exception of two Brazilian regions (Espírito Santo and

1. Traditional Rustic System. In this system, coffee bushes are sim-

and herbaceous species) growing on the floor of tropical or temperate

Each of the types of shade-grown coffee systems described above reflects

coffee systems established under a multilayered and multispecies canopy

tual framework that should be tested by applying multivariate analysis and

FOUR VALUES OF TRADITIONAL SHADE-GROWN COFFEE

The following sections examine those agroforestry systems labeled as tra-

TABLE 1 Mountains associated with coffee production areas

Mountains associated with coffee production areas

Cameroon Cameroon (4,070)

complexity. As shown recently by Vandermeer et al. (2010), complex inter-

Mexico, Colombia and Indonesia (www.coffeehabitat.com/2008/03/coffee-

TABLE 2 Estimated number of languages spoken in coffee-growing areas of

Ivory Coast 280,000 77 39

territories. In fact, coffee that is cultivated under a canopy of native trees is

Pelak of Sumatra, Indonesia (Aumeeruddy 1994), and of the Te’lom and

2010). Agrodiversity is synonymous with terms such as useful biodiversity

Therefore, any attempt to measure the productivity of a traditional coffee

Social and Political Implications

MULTIPLE VALUES OF SHADE-GROWN COFFEE:

most of them belonging to indigenous cooperatives of the states of Chiapas,

The study also revealed relations between local ecological knowledge

distinguish and name 18 main plant “families” (and one of mushrooms),

The Koujtakiloyan play a pivotal role for local livelihoods by pro-

the indigenous households consume and/or sell a variety of goods, and as a

FIGURE 3 From the shaded-grown coffee agroforests (Kuojtakiloyan), Nahua Indians of

useful plant species recorded in the region: 603 species (Martínez-Alfaro,

honeybees (Apis mellifera).

increase of the shade-grown coffee surface, which was achieved by incor-

reveal the importance of the Kuojtakiloyan for children from primary

tenance. The certification schemes do not represent just a market-based

ii. “Sustainable Livelihoods”

organization of households, communities, and cooperatives in a multilevel

iii. “Sustainable Landscapes”

succession areas, forest fragments and remnants, and other manipulated

cattle-raising areas. This implies the design of an appropriate landscape that

on coffee rust epidemics. Plant Pathology 53:541–547.

Donald, P. 2004. Biodiversity impacts of some agricultural commodity production

peasant organizations. Development and Change 23:1–36

Martinez-Alfaro, M. A., V. Evangelista, F. Basurto, M. Mendoza, and A. Cruz-Rivas.

and Conservation 15:549–554.

You might also like