Laurence Jassogne, email@example.com, Piet van Asten, Peter Laderach, Alessandro Craparo, Ibrahim Wanyama, Anaclet Nibasumba, and Charles Bielders
Coffee is a major cash crop in the East African highland farming systems. It represents a high proportion of export values at the national level (for example >20% for Uganda). It is also crucial for the sustainability of the livelihoods of smallholder farmers.
During a survey in Uganda, smallholder farmers explained that the income generated by coffee had sent their children to school and helped to build permanent houses. Prices of coffee have also been increasing in the past decennia, motivating them to continue growing the crop.
Although coffee is a promising cash crop, smallholder farmers that grow coffee are still vulnerable. Soil fertility is declining, pest and disease pressure is increasing, populations are rising, and land is continuously fragmented. Above all, climate change is starting to take its toll and puts further pressure on the coffee-based farming systemsâ€”directly, because temperature and rainfall have an impact on the physiology of Arabica coffee, and indirectly because the incidence and severity of certain pests and diseases such as the coffee berry borer and coffee leaf rust will increase.
Current and future suitability of coffee growing areas
In collaboration with Dr Peter Laderach (CIAT), the direct effect of climate change on the suitability of coffee-growing areas in Uganda was mapped (Fig. 1).
If the current coffee crop systems do not change (i.e., same coffee varieties and management practices), these areas will move up the slope and the suitable surface area will decrease. In this light, climate-smart coffee- based systems need to be developed to sustain the existing coffee- based systems.
Adaptation strategies in coffee systems
IITA-led field surveys in the region, combined with a literature review, revealed that there is a multitude of coffee systems that exist. This diversity reflects the variability among farmers in terms of their resource availability, objectives, political history, and opportunities (Fig. 2).
Highest yields can be obtained in systems without shade or with low shade levels (Fig. 2). However, these same systems represent higher production risks and a higher use of external inputs. In polyculture systems and forest systems, on the other hand, highest yield quality can be obtained with the minimum use of external inputs. Furthermore, they allow, among others, a better adaptation to climate change, higher carbon stocks, and more ecological services. Quantifying these trade-offs and raising awareness among farmers and other stakeholders along the coffee value chain will help informed and sustainable decisions to be made about the coffee systems.
The more coffee is shaded, the more it is protected from rising temperatures and extreme weather events. Shade in coffee systems can reduce the average temperature in the lower coffee canopy by a few degrees. Although shade is an interesting technology to make coffee systems â€œclimate smartâ€ and hence, adapted to climate change, it is not the primary reason why farmers add shade to their coffee. Shade plants often produce fruit and/or timber. This diversifies the income of the farmer.
The same happens when farmers intercrop coffee with banana. Adding banana to the system increases food security, diversifies income, and adds shading to coffee. A country-wide survey in Uganda showed that coffee/banana intercropping was a common cropping system except in North and North-West Uganda. The incidence of coffee leaf rust was 50% when coffee was intercropped with banana.
Most farmers have some shade trees in their coffee; many practice intercropping with common beans. The combination of short- and long-term benefits of such shade systems makes them ideal climate-smart candidates. Shade trees also sequester carbon, contributing to the mitigation of the effects of climate change. In the end, few farmers (<5%) have pure full-sun monocropped coffee.
Constraints in diversified systems
However, shade trees also compete with coffee for light, nutrients, and water. If this competition is not managed well, then the shaded coffee system risks collapse, especially in conditions of poor soil fertility. Due to increasing population pressure and land fragmentation, integrated soil fertility management (ISFM) will help to manage nutrient competition. In a shaded system, the turn-over of biomass contributes to nutrient recycling. Organic matter from shade trees or banana will act as in-situ mulch. However, soils in Uganda are poor and have some major nutrient deficiencies (Fig. 3).
Replenishing soil fertility by adding external inputs is necessary if farming systems need to be sustained. Adding small amounts of fertilizers adapted to site-specific deficiencies increases fertilizer use efficiency and forms part of the ISFM approach. Coffee can be a major driver for the adoption of fertilizers by smallholders since farmers are generally organized for access to output markets. The same organizational lines can then be used to provide access to input markets.
Understanding the farmersâ€™ objectives, perceptions, and constraints is critical in identifying the adoption pathways of production-increasing technologies. To continue this research, IITA will start a case study in Rakai (Uganda) at a site of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security (CCAFS). Here, climate-smart coffee scenarios will be developed in a participatory manner with smallholder farmers, based on data from previous projects, interviews with individual farmers and groups, and farm measurements. Greenhouse gas emissions will be quantified to measure the mitigation potential of the existing coffee systems. Furthermore, fertilizer trials throughout Uganda will be set up to test the site-specific recommendations. IITA also plans to further advance its collaborative research efforts on modeling trade-offs and synergies in coffee smallholder systems in East Africa.