Biodiversity Implications of Growing Coffee in the Sierra de Manantlan's Biosphere Reserve
By Santiago Lobeira

Home | Mexico | Mexico Travel Services | Mexico News Sources | Mexico Books | Mexico Ecotourism Network | Biodiversity Implications | Related Links

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2. OVERVIEW OF THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE: SIERRA DE MANANTLAN
2.1 Description, objectives and limitations of the Biosphere Reserve
2.2 A historical background; the environmental and social spectrum
2.3 Threats to biodiversity

3. COFFEE GROWING AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC ALTERNATIVE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
3.1 Shade coffee as a strategy for conservation
3.1.1 Coffee and agroforestry systems in Manantlan
3.1.2 The role of shade coffee in protecting biodiversity.
3.1.3 Coffee and chemical inputs
3.2 Coffee growing as a strategy for development
3.2.1 The economic importance of shade coffee to locals
3.2.1.1 Economic risk reduction
3.2.1.2 Market accesibility
Organic coffee
Fair trade markets
Environmentally bird friendly coffee
3.3 Trade-offs and limitations to this alternative

4. CONCLUSIONS

5. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. INTRODUCTION

In this study I aimed to investigate the role that coffee production plays in biodiversity conservation in traditional farms that integrate agro-forestry systems. I will describe some of the biological and economic advantages to both development and biodiversity. I will also discuss some of the trade offs and limitations to this alternative and give some concluding remarks.

2. OVERVIEW OF THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE: SIERRA DE MANANTLAN

2.1 Description, objectives and limitations of the Biosphere Reserve

The Biosphere Reserve's main objective is to integrate ecological conservation with regional sustainable development, based on active participation and cooperation among stakeholders, local communities, governmental agencies and academic institutions. It is important to comment that the creation of this reserve did not involve land expropriation. It was basically a zoning regulation that established land use restrictions. The creation of the Manantlan Reserve without changes in the tenure regime, imposes a limitation of jurisdiction over land. This represents a major problem for local populations because they still own the land but cannot harvest its resources in restricted zones. In other words, they have conservation obligations but with no formal compensation. This issue is critical in those communities where all their forested lands fell within core zones. The effectiveness of this regulatory approach is questioned especially considering that the government only owns 1% of the area, private owners 39% and communal landowners or ejidos 60%. Another interesting fact is that approximately 33,000 people that have rights over land within the reserve area. Approximately 50% of the private owners have land tenure conflicts with the local communities, and there are internal problems within the communities themselves (Rosas, 1997). The rigid zoning regulations have also restricted the implementation of management measures needed to restore sites affected by fires and past logging activities. They also prohibit in some areas, low-level traditional extractive activities that are not damaging to the ecosystem such as the collection of blackberries and mushrooms.

2.2 Environmental and Social Spectrum: Conservation vs. Development For many years, the local indigenous communities struggled with private logging companies for the control of land and forest resources. For many decades, large companies exploited old growth forests and left to the local communities deforested lands and depleted soils, internal conflicts and corruption. In the late 70's a strong local peasant movement increased the struggle against the powerful lumber companies. They were successful to halt logging in parts of the Sierra but were prosecuted and repressed in the following years.

In 1979, the primitive corn Zea diploperennis or "teocintle" was discovered and in 1984 the government established the Las Joyas Research Center. In the following years, scientists and biologists from the University of Guadalajara proposed to create a Biosphere Reserve. This action was seen by local communities as an opportunity to establish communication with governmental agencies that had historically ignored them. At first, they believed they would gain an ally in the struggle to defend forest resources from the logging companies. In 1987, the government declared the Biosphere Reserve "Sierra de Manantlan" and the following year took up its management responsibilities by establishing a directorship of the reserve. This action initiated a consultation process between institutions and states to redefine the management of the reserve and to develop a comprehensive conservation and development plan for the region. Currently the lack of coordination among governmental and academic institutions in developing management strategies and implementing projects is still a major hurdle.

2.3 Threats to biodiversity

• Transformation of forest cover to pastures and agricultural plots.
• Illegal logging
• Excessive harvest of firewood for fuel.
• Forest fires caused by agricultural burns especially during dry seasons
• Overgrazing and browsing in forests
• Poaching mammals and bird species to sell in the black market

It has been extremely difficult to bring up solutions that allow communities to develop without affecting the natural environment. One of the alternatives has been forest management, however this strategy has been really difficult to implement due to Manantlan's great landscape heterogeneity, lack of technical knowledge about species composition and biological processes and lack of money, among others. Forest management is difficult in regions with high environmental heterogeneity and high species diversity of forests. The other concern is that such a strategy will not bring immediate economic benefits to the communities that need it.

Stronger arguments favor traditional coffee growing as an economic and environmental alternative for both the communities' well being and biodiversity conservation.

3. COFFEE GROWING AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC ALTERNATIVE for sustainable development

3.1 Shade coffee as a strategy for conservation

In the past decades, agricultural extension services recommended the culture of coffee without shade trees in order to gain the highest possible yields. Studies supported the idea that intensive management of unshaded monocultures could give 2 to 3 fold yield increase over traditional shaded systems. However this trend has changed and new studies have proven that, over the long term, profitability of the unshaded over the shaded crop is extremely unlikely (Beer, 1987).

Some of the main questions that I will seek to answer in this paper are, what are the advantages of traditional coffee growing systems in terms of biodiversity conservation? Will traditional grown coffee provide locals living in the Reserve with basic food, fiber and shelter to support themselves and their families in a long term while preserving the natural resources in Manantlan? To what extent can this alternative contribute to reducing transformation of forests into agricultural lands or illegal logging?

3.1.1 Coffee and agroforestry systems in Manantlan

In Manantlan, coffee plantations are traditionally grown in patches of trees and vegetation. An area of 425 ha. is dedicated to coffee by nearly 350 producers. The average of coffee grown per farmer is 1.25 ha. representing approximately 20% of their land. The vegetation that provides shade to these coffee plantations is very rich. These coffee plants are seldom fertilized mainly because farmers cannot afford this practice. In her book "La Comunidad y sus Recursos" Rosa Rojas described some of the problems with coffee plantations in Manantlan. First, farmers are not used to pruning their coffee plants. The unpruned and heavily shaded coffee plants greatly restrict yields and reduce productivity. Second, low care of plants and excessive shade harm the plant and reduce the quality of grains. Other major enemies of coffee plants are the fungus Mycena citricolor, and rodents like rats and squirrels. The average production of coffee is 552 kg. of green coffee per ha with 300kg as a minimum and 3,000 as a maximum. Most of the coffee is commercialized green. To reach this stage, farmers have to remove the pulp of the cherries by passing them through a depulper. Then they dry it in the sun in order to let the outer pulp surrounding the bean to shrivel, after which time it is stripped down to its "parchment". In this stage the beans are called parchment or "pergamino". One of their goals is to improve their infrastructure to produce as much pergamino as possible and receive better returns for their beans (Rojas, 1996).

3.1.2 The role of shade coffee in protecting biodiversity.

Also, the canopy trees protect the land from the impact of rain and wind and they also supply canopy leaf litter. Finally, shade trees provide a high diversity of food items for herbivores, frugivores, and nectarivores. A study conducted in Mexico demonstrated that a single coffee and cacao plantation was reported to contain 78 families of saproxilic invertebrates, with 93% belonging to the orders of Coleoptera, Diptera, saproxilic (Estrada, 1993).

Traditional coffee plantations can provide habitat to a wide range of bird species. They have the ability to shelter forest migrants, especially those species most likely to be affected by conversion of forests to farmland. Several studies have shown that shade coffee plantations support high densities of species that depend on closed canopy forest.

Perfecto, (1996) demonstrated that individuals of several migratory species were tested in shade coffee plantations and apparently they survived the winter at a rate comparable to those in natural forest habitats. Brash, (1987) suggested that the relatively low rate of avian extinction experienced on Puerto Rico during recent periods of deforestation may be due in part to the presence of shade coffee plantations. Greenberg, (1996) showed that in Chiapas, the avifaunal similarity between pine-oak woodland and rustic coffee was high. Shahabuddin (1997) described how species richness was not affected by conversion of Indian forest habitat into coffee plantations, in fact the author held that some species were more abundant in plantation habitat. The plantation habitat appeared to be a valuable secondary habitat for the foraging of a large subset of forest-dwelling species and may be an effective buffer between fragmented forest habitat patches. Also, the author observed that shade trees in coffee plantations provided an abundant source of food for the fruit and seed-eating bird species, including the Indian lorikeet, bluewinged parakeet and blossom headed parakeet.

Shade coffee plantations also support a high diversity of other vertebrate groups of mammals and reptiles. Estrada (1993) found a high diversity and abundance of bats in shade plantations with diverse canopies. As with birds, many of these species were frugivorous and nectarivorous, feeding on the flowering and fruiting trees. A strong relationship between shaded plantations and high diversity of small terrestrial and scansorial mamals was found in Veracruz, Mexico. In this region, species dependent on canopy trees made up more than half of the fauna of the plantations and more than 40% of the species were omnivores that commonly fed on fruit. In addition to many omnivorous species, some more specialized mammals, such as small cats and otters can also be found in shade plantations in Veracruz. Other species like howler monkeys and snakes have also been observed in these mixed-shade plantations.

3.1.3 Coffee and chemical inputs

Nevertheless, some researchers argue that coffee is resistant to insect pests due to their structure and the high diversity found in traditional plantations that keep an ecological balance. Coffee is a chemically well-defended plant besides having tough leaves (Perfecto,1996). They strongly affirm that there may be no native species in Latin America that has evolved mechanisms to overcome coffee's defenses. The other argument that supports the idea that coffee does not require too many chemicals is the fact that the structurally complex and floristically diverse traditional coffee plantations support a high density and diversity of predators and parasitoids. These organisms are ultimately responsible for reducing the number of insect pests. Perfecto demonstrated that ants and spiders were all more diverse in shaded plantations. She pointed out that spiders have considerable insecticidal effects. For example web-building spiders eat insects that can damage the plant.

3.2 Coffee growing as a strategy for development

During my visit to Manantlan this past summer, I learned that farmers were forming a cooperative to sell their coffee. The benefits from this organizational structure is that the business is owned and governed democratically and directly by the farmers. Decisions are not made based on who has the most wealth, but how the collective resources can best be managed to improve the welfare of the whole community as well as that of each family. With the coffee revenues, the cooperative can invest in community services, such as healthcare, education, public transportation and water supply.

3.2.1 The economic importance of shade coffee to locals

Traditionally, farmers at Manantlan have grown maize and beans as in most of rural Mexico. The majority of the farmers intercrop beans with maize and during rainy seasons they grow rice and green tomatillo. But the fact is that the value of these crops is not enough to cover the costs of production. During my trip, I talked to a family that had been cleaning beans for several days and asked them about how much they would get from their crop. I was surprised to find out that would not sell their grains because it would cost them more to transport the beans to the nearest city, than what they would get from the sales revenues.

3.2.1.1 Economic risk reduction with shade coffee

One of the advantage that Sierra de Manantlan has is this regard is that the land is dominated by small holdings on private and ejido land and most of the holdings are less than 5 ha. In this sense, if farmers can produce different crops and not depend 100% on coffee they will have a lower risk if a natural event damages the coffee plantation. On the other hand, farmers will not depend on generating income only once a year at harvest time. In other words, overstory species can provide fruits, fuel wood, and construction materials for household production. Species that have potential to be grown in the coffee overstory include avocado, chirimoyo, mango, nance, tempuche, guava and mamey. These products could provide households with a continuous supply of nutritious products for consumption or for local markets.

3.2.1.2 Market accessibility

The organic coffee market is growing very rapidly especially in Europe. This label assures customers that farmers used organic farming techniques to produce the coffee they are purchasing. The environmental advantage is that coffee farmers pay attention to the soil rather than on synthetic pesticides. Farmers use local animal and plant resources to manage the overall health of the soil and maximize its resources. Organic certifiers ensure that organic standards are being upheld. Finally, farmers can be supported by providing technical, educational and finance assistance.

The fair trade coffee market is also expanding rapidly. The idea behind this label is to educate consumers about where their coffee comes from and how it is produced. Trade organizations promote a fairer trade by linking farmers with consumers avoiding the chain of intermediaries and assuring to their customers that whatever extra they pay for the coffee will go directly to the farmers.

The bird friendly coffee market is also growing but at a lower rate. This label indicates that the crop was grown organically under the canopy of trees that shelter a wide variety of migratory birds. This marketing gives coffee drinkers a choice to help birds and their habitats. An independent, accredited inspector does these certifications.

3.3 Trade-offs and limitations to this alternative

First, in the attempt to integrate use and conservation efforts we will always encounter trade offs and I think that one of the main problems has to do with the difficulty to define "development". If we define it as the potentiality to satisfy individual basic needs, then how can we define "basic needs"? My concern is that if these farmers obtain revenues from coffee and do not recognize the value for conservation, then this alternative will not meet its objective. The reason is because farmers will purchase products like fertilizers and invest in projects such as cattle grazing, that will damage the Reserve. Another important consideration to make is to what extent the government should allow local farmers to manipulate the ecological system to benefit themselves rather than enhance Manantlan's biodiversity. These lands are communal owned ultimately, local farmers have the right to use their land to satisfy their needs. However, if the government restricts its use the Mexican Constitution clearly states the obligation to compensate these farmers and try to relocate them in other suitable areas. Society and the Authority will have to find a balance between how much biological conservation they are willing to give up in return for development or vice-versa.

Second, Manantlan farmers need to learn about the interrelationships and biological processes of coffee plants with other species. Bad management practices could affect the Reserve and lead to another threat to biodiversity not considered a major concern so far, which is the introduction of exotic species. On the other hand, the collective knowledge of the region's coffee growers, and the social and political interactions among the producers will have to shape a particular area's general management style. Many growers manage their holdings in a way taught by their fathers, uncles or grand-fathers. I would like to emphasize that the need for more schooling and training is essential in this region. The Instituto de Manantlan has an enormous responsibility in this regard.

Third, several studies argued the advantages of shade on coffee production. Beer, (1987) suggested that heavy shading can reduce the quality of crops. Also, shade tree root creates competition for moisture during the dry season and oxygen during the wet season. A reduced air movement and increased humidity environment may favor fungal diseases and insect attacks. Also, shade trees reduce the quality of transmitted radiation since there is a preferential absorption of photosynthetically useful radiation. Ultimately, harvesting of fruit and wood from the shade tree constitutes an additional drain of nutrients from the site.

Fourth, despite success stories about how cooperatives have benefited their communities, the effectiveness of this structure has also been heavily criticized. I see two main limitations. One is a lack of organizational infrastructure to provide continuity and legality when interacting with the outside world. Also, this system does not provide incentives to benefit those who work harder. In many cases leaders end up being corrupt and end up profiting from the money of the organization. Finally cooperatives do not operate under the formal legal system, this creates many problems especially when trying to solve controversies within the cooperative and out in the trading world.

4. CONCLUSIONS

Shade coffee growing has many advantages both for the local inhabitants of Manantlan as well as for the Biosphere Reserve. However there are some limitations that should be taken into account. The first is that no alternative is the panacea, there will always be trade-offs, society and authority should find a balance between how much biological conservation they are willing to give up in return for development or viceversa. Second, farmers need to learn about the biological processes of growing coffee with other species or else the alternative could result more damaging than beneficial. Third, shade coffee growing also has limitations related to coffee production. Finally, despite some successful stories, the organizational model or cooperatives also present limitations.

Decisions about how to grow coffee must obviously be made by those producing coffee. There is an urgent need to create the conditions in which social, political and economic structures allow such decisions, and provide growers with a wide range of knowledge upon which to base these decisions.

5.POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Environmental policy and conservation strategies should take advantage of large communal managed lands and provide alternative scenarios for conservation other than limits on their natural resources. The promotion of traditional coffee growing in Manantlan offers advantages to integrate both use and conservation.

• The government should find ways to compensate those farmers that have been restricted in the use of their lands. They should also work very close with the local communities especially when designing rules that will affect the ejidos and private lands.

• Resources should be allocated in effective education and training programs for the local inhabitants. It will help them understand the biological processes that occur in the Reserve as well as the importance to preserve this natural habitat. These programs should focus on managing skills that allow them to differentiate the good from the bad techniques. Education will create awareness and help guide their decisions to improve their livelihoods

• The government should promote alternatives to the use of pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers. More energy-efficient technologies to process the coffee should be sought. Promote innovative soil management techniques like vermiculture to improve the productivity of soils and manage pulp waste and avoid water pollution.

• The government should not limit to promote traditional coffee growing, but also help these communities to allocate their coffee production in the exporting fair trade markets and avoid the intermediaries so that they can increase their income.

REFERENCES

Benitez J, Perfecto I.1989. Efecto de diferentes tipos de manejo de cafe sobre las comunidades de hormigas. Agroecologia Neotropical. 1-1: 11-15

Contreras, E. Organic Coffee Growing in Mexico, November, 1995 (internet)

Estrada A, Coates-Estrada R, Merrit D Jr, 1993. Bat species richness and abundance in tropical rain forest fragments in agricultural habitats at Los Tuxtals, Mexico. Ecography 16: 309-318

Graf S, Santana E, Jardel E, Benz B. La Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Manantlan: un balance de ocho anos de gestion. Revista Universidad de Guadalajara. 55-60

Greenberg R, Bichier P, Cruz A., Reitsma R.1997 Bird population in shade and sun coffee plantations in central Guatemala. Conservation Biology. 11-2: 448-459

Greenberg R, Bichier P, Sterling J. 1996 In press. Bird populations and planted shade coffee plantations of eastern Chiapas. Biotropica

Jardel E, Santana E, Graf S. 1996. The Sierra de Manantlan Biosphere Reserve: conservation and regional sustainable development. Parks. 6-1: 14-22

Jardel P., E. J. (Coord.) 1992. Estrategia para la conservacion de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Manantlan. Editorial Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Jal. Mexico.

Kitts, J. (1995) Ecotourism and Coffee in the Shade.

Lockeretz, William. 1996. Enviornmental Enhancement through Agriculture. Proceedings of a conference held in Boston, Massachusetts, November 15-17, 1995, organized by the Tufts University School of Nutrition Science and Policy, the American Farmland Trust, and the Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture.

Mader R. (1994) Mexico's rivers threatened by coffee. (internet)

Nestel D, Altieri MA. 1992. The weed community of Mexican coffee agroecosystems: effect of management upon plant biomass and species composition. Acta Oecologia 13: 715-726

Nestel D. Dickschen F. 1990. The foraging kinetics of ground ant communities in different Mexican coffee aroecosystems. Oecologia 84: 58-63

Perfecto I, R. Rice R. Greenberg, and M. Van der Voort. 1996. Shade coffee: a disappearing refuge for biodiversity. Bioscience 46:596-608

Pimentel D, Stachow U, Takacs DA, Brubaker HW, Dumas AR, Meaney JJ, O'Neils JAS, Onsi DE, Corzilius DB. 1992. Conserving biological diversity in agricultural/forestry systems. BioScience 42: 354-362

Purata S, Meave J.1993. Agroecosystems as an alternative for biodiversity conservation of forest remnants in fragmented landscapes. Page 9 in Forest remnants in the tropical landscapes: benefits and policy implications. Symposium abstracts. Washington (DC): Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center.

Rice R, Ward J, 1996. Coffee, conservation and commerce in the Western Hemisphere. Washington (DC):Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center.

Rojas R. (Coord.)1996. La comunidad y sus recursos Ayotitlan Desarrollo Sustentable? Universidad de Guadalajara e Instituto Nacional Indigenista. Guadalajara, Jal. Mexico. Shahabuddin G. (1997) Preliminary Observations on the Role of Coffee Plantations as Avifaunal Refuges in the Palni Hills of the Western Ghats. Journal, Bombary Nat. Hist. Society, Vol. 94

Simon J. Endangered Mexico. An Environment on the Edge. Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, 1997

Somarriba E. 1990. Sustainable timber production from uneven-aged shade stands for Cordia alliodora in small coffee farms. Agroforestry Systems. 10: 253-263

____.1992. timber harvest, damage to crop plants and yeld reduction in two Costa Rican coffee plantations with Cordia alliadora shade trees. Agroforestry Systems 18: 69-82

Weaver P, Birdsey A. 1986. Tree succession and management opportunities in coffee shade stands. Turrialba 36-1: 47-58

Wille C. 1994. The birds and the beans. Audubon, November-December 1994 p.58-64

Santiago Lobeira can be reached via email: sl18@acpub.duke.edu

PLANETA.COM GUIDES

Home | About | Advertise! | Books | Central America | Ecotourism | Headlines
Learn Spanish | Mexico | Media | Site Map | South America | World Travel | Updates