Food Systems At Risk

Transformative Adaptation for Long-Term Food Security

Appendix A. Data and Methodology Used for the Coffee-Vanilla Economic Analysis

A1 Data and Assumptions

This section presents data details and key assumptions that were used to conduct the cost-benefit analysis presented in Box 3.

A1.1 Climate Change Impacts on Coffee Production

Ethiopian coffee is produced within specific agroecological zones over numerous political divisions. There are four typical coffee production systems: forest, semi-forest, garden, and plantation coffees.

  • Forest coffee refers to coffee that grows naturally in primary forests that have not been disturbed or damaged by human interference. Coffee cherries are handpicked, making the productivity of forest coffee the lowest among the four production systems.
  • Semi-forest coffee grows in forests that are semi-managed by humans (e.g., opening up canopies, clearing weeds) but maintain a minimum of 50 percent canopy cover (Partnerships for Forests n.d.). Unlike for forest coffee, farmers use pruning techniques to increase coffee productivity.
  • Garden coffee refers to coffee plants that are transplanted to gardens around farmers’ homes. These plants might come from nearby forests and are typically interplanted with other crops and fruit trees. Garden coffee is found most frequently in southern Ethiopia, including Sidamo and Harerge/Harrar (Craves 2011).
  • Plantation coffee is the most intense method of coffee cultivation, where land is cleared and planted with coffee and managed for yield. Farming practices such as pruning, weeding, applying fertilizer, and providing irrigation management are used to improve productivity.

All are mostly found in the tropical rainforest regions of southern and southwestern Ethiopia between altitudes of 1,000 and 2,400 meters above sea level (see Figure A1). These areas currently have the optimum temperature range for growing arabica coffee, between 15 and 24°C.

Figure A1 | Major Arabica Coffee–Growing Areas of Ethiopia

Source: EIAR 2017.

Coffee production in Ethiopia occurs predominantly within traditional farm management systems, with limited use of fertilizers and pesticides. Coffee cultivation and drying are largely unmechanized. Coffee productivity varies greatly across the four production systems. Table A1 summarizes the coffee production areas under the four growing systems as well as the corresponding productivity levels.

Table A1 | Arabica Coffee Production Areas and Productivity Levels in Ethiopia

Coffee Production System

Total Production Area (ha)

Productivity (kg/ha)

Contribution to National Production

Forest coffee

175,000

400

5–10%

Semi-forest coffee

400,000

610

35%

Garden coffee

300,000

700

45%

Plantation coffee

25,000

1,000

10–15%

Total

900,000

Mean=678

100%

The Adaptation Fund (2017) estimated that the mean temperature in Ethiopia will rise between 1.5 and 3°C by the 2050s, taking into account uncertainties in climate modeling. Global warming, along with intensified droughts and uncertain patterns of rainfall, is projected to have two major impacts on coffee production in Ethiopia: 39–59 percent of productive coffee farms in Ethiopia will be lost by 2050 (Moat et al. 2017); and per-hectare productivity of existing coffee systems will decline due to the rising temperature (USGS and USAID 2012). Craparo et al. (2015) estimated that every 1°C in temperature rise will be associated with a reduction of 137 ± 16.87 kilograms (kg) of coffee production per hectare of land. Hence, the magnitude of per-hectare coffee productivity reduction will depend on how much temperature will actually rise in the future. In other words, the negative impacts of a 1.5°C temperature rise by 2050 on coffee productivity will be lower than those of a 3°C temperature rise. In this study, a 3°C scenario represents a future world with the worst climate impacts on coffee production, whereas a 1.5°C scenario represents a future world with the lowest climate impacts on coffee production. Using this range of temperature projection and assuming a linear rise in annual temperature between 2015 and 2050, we estimated minimum and maximum coffee productivity reductions under 1.5°C and 3°C climate scenarios by 2050, respectively.

A1.2 Coffee Prices

In Ethiopia, local arabica coffee consumption increased, on average, by 11.5 percent between 2011 and 2015, amounting to 56.5 percent of the annual average production for those years, resulting in higher local prices than export prices (EIAR 2017). However, due to a lack of access to local market information, we rely on export data (i.e., total export value and total export volumes) to estimate coffee prices. Statistics between 2005 and 2015 indicate an uptrend in export prices of arabica coffee over time. Coffee prices peaked between 2010 and 2011, following the serious disruptions in coffee production in 2009, which was the second-driest year in Ethiopia since 1971 (Viste et al. 2013). Coffee production stabilized from 2010 onward; however, average arabica coffee prices remained double those prior to the drought year in 2009. Hence, we used the average price of arabica coffee ($3.32/kg) between 2011 and 2015 as a proxy for estimating the total revenues that could be generated from arabica coffee exports in future scenarios. In addition, due to a lack of domestic market information, we assumed that all coffee production in Ethiopia will be used for export to estimate the minimum level of total revenues generated from the coffee sector.

As robusta coffee is not currently grown in Ethiopia, there is no relevant market information available. Therefore, we used the world average price of robusta ($1.96/kg) from Ycharts (2021) to estimate the revenue that could be generated from growing robusta coffee. For the same reason, we assumed an average robusta coffee productivity of 850 kilograms per hectare (kg/ha) in Ethiopia, based on robusta coffee productivity reported in India, approximately 877 kg/ha (Atlas Big n.d.).

A1.3 Coffee Production Costs

Farmers usually need to wait for three to four years from the moment new coffee trees are planted for them to become mature enough to bear fruit. As a perennial crop, a coffee tree will normally produce for approximately 20 to 25 years (Gmünder et al. n.d.). During the full lifecycle of a coffee tree, three categories of costs are incurred by farmers at different stages: establishment costs, maintenance costs before the trees begin producing beans, and maintenance costs once the trees are productive.

Establishment costs refer to the upfront investment costs of planting coffee trees; farmers incur them only in the initial year of establishing a new coffee production system. Maintenance costs before the trees produce beans are incurred in the initial four years of a coffee system establishment when no harvests are reaped. Maintenance costs during the productive period refer to the costs incurred by farmers to maintain production and harvest from the fifth year of new system establishment until the end of the trees’ lifecycle.

Due to severe data constraints in Ethiopia regarding coffee production costs, our cost assessment was based on the coffee costs data reported by Thanuja and Singh (2017) for India. Their study provided detailed cost data for both large and small coffee production systems, including itemized costs incurred from establishing new coffee production systems to maintaining the production during the bearing period. We assumed that coffee production in Ethiopia will follow the same cost structure. Based on this cost structure, we then replaced Indian labor costs with local Ethiopian labor cost data published by ILO (2013) to estimate per-hectare fixed costs and material costs associated with establishing new robusta coffee farms in Ethiopia.

On existing arabica coffee farms (i.e., coffee farms with declining coffee production), we assumed that the costs should be similar to those of robusta coffee. More specifically, we assumed that the cost structure of large Indian coffee farms is similar to those of the intensive plantation coffee farming system in Ethiopia; that costs on small Indian coffee farms are similar to those of garden coffee and semi-forest coffee systems in Ethiopia; and that the Ethiopian forest coffee system has a similar cost structure to the small Indian coffee farming system, except that no fertilizer or shade tree costs are applied to the system. In this study, only maintenance costs during the bearing period were considered for different arabica coffee production systems (see Table A2).

Table A2 | Per-Hectare Costs of Maintaining Arabica Coffee and Converting to Robusta Coffee Production (US$/ha)

 

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Years 6–15

Arabica coffee

           
 

Forest coffee

-

-

-

-

339

339

 

Semi-forest coffee

-

-

-

-

744

744

 

Garden coffee

-

-

-

-

1,120

1,120

 

Plantation coffee

-

-

-

-

1,111

1,111

Robusta coffee

2,657

569

619

703

1,116

1,116

Source: Authors.

A1.4 Vanilla Yields and Costs

Due to a lack of local data, vanilla yields and costs were estimated based on data published by the Indian government (see Table A3).

Table A3 | Estimated Vanilla Yields and Production Costs

 

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Years 6–15

Yield of fresh beans per vine (kg)

   

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

Total yield per ha (kg)

   

1,498

2,996

4,495

5,993

Income ($/ha)

   

11,220

22,440

33,659

44,879

Capital costs ($/ha)

19,086

1,987

2,209

     

Maintenance costs ($/ha)

     

2,406

2,406

2,406

Net income (US$ 2015)

 

 

9,010

21,466

32,686

43,906

Note: Abbreviations: kg: kilograms; ha: hectares.

Source: WRI estimation based on data provided by the Department of Agriculture Development and Farmers’ Welfare, Government of Kerala, India, via http://keralaagriculture.gov.in/htmle/bankableagriprojects/ph/vanilla.htm. Accessed August 2018.

A1.5 Institutional Climate Adaptation Costs

Institutional adaptation costs incurred to adaptation scenarios are costs arising from developing climate adaptation strategies, increasing the awareness of adaptation risks at the local level, and investing in projects to improve capacity, monitoring, evaluation, and local learning, among others. In principle, adaptation may be autonomous or strategy-specific and will depend on a range of factors, including the level of greenhouse gas emissions anticipated (UNEP 1998). In practice, however, it is often difficult to anticipate what level of adaptation will be needed and effective at the local level when climate change impacts are uncertain.

No information was available on costs related to adaptation projects in Ethiopia specifically targeted to reducing climate change impacts on coffee farms. As an alternative, we reviewed climate-smart integrated rural development projects on the Adaptation Fund’s website (https://www.adaptation-fund.org/projects-programmes/) and assumed that adaptation costs associated with climate-smart agriculture in Ethiopia can be used as a proxy for estimating the lower-bound adaptation costs for coffee production. In 2017, the government of Ethiopia requested a total amount of just under $10 million in financing support from the Adaptation Fund for an agricultural adaptation project for a period of 3.5 years (Adaptation Fund 2017). The project targets highly vulnerable smallholder farmers in 14 kebeles (smallest administrative unit of Ethiopia similar to a ward or a neighborhood) and aims to increase ecosystem resilience to climate change and reduce climate risks like drought in Ethiopia. It covers six districts: Oromia; Tigray; Amhara; Harari; Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Regional State; and Dire Dawa. The total area of these districts was then used to calculate the average annual per-hectare costs for each adaptation activity; itemized adaptation costs can be found in Table A4.

Table A4 | Climate-Smart Integrated Rural Development Project Costs

Cost Components

Objective

Expected Outcomes

Amount (US$)

Cost per Hectare per Year ($/ha)

Awareness and ownership of adaptation planning at the local level

Increased awareness, understanding, and ownership of climate risk reduction processes and adaptation planning at all levels; climate-resilient livelihood and water plans; climate-smart agriculture and land-water-forest integration plans

Increased capacity to manage current and future drought risks through improved adaptation planning and sustainable management of agroecological landscapes

367,510

0.0018

Climate-smart agriculture and land-water-forest integration

Climate-smart agriculture implemented at the farm level; integrated watershed management approach used to restore and protect degraded watersheds

Increased capacity to manage current and future drought risks through improved adaptation planning and sustainable management of agroecological landscapes

1,590,227

0.0076

Climate-resilient livelihood diversification

Improved knowledge, understanding, and awareness of livelihood opportunities; increased capacity of target

     

households to participate in climate-resilient, market-oriented enterprises

Increased capacity to manage current and future drought risks through improved adaptation planning and sustainable management of agroecological landscapes

527,371

0.0025

 

Capacity building, monitoring, evaluation, and learning

Increased capacity and knowledge transfer; project results monitored and evaluated and lessons captured; results and lessons communicated to key stakeholders and mainstreamed in local planning processes

Increased capacity to manage current and future drought risks through improved adaptation planning and sustainable management of agroecological landscapes

1,799,288

0.0086

Project execution cost

   

465,405

0.0078

Implementing entity project cycle management fee

   

501,443

0.0084

Total cost

 

 

5,251,244

0.0369

Source: Adaptation Fund 2017.

Start reading