This document summarizes Andrew Sargent's presentation on developing a consolidated approach to development in the coffee sector. It discusses the large, intractable problems facing coffee farmers, economies, and the environment. It proposes that development approaches should aim to address multiple root causes of these problems simultaneously at a large scale. The goal is to eventually influence public policy through evidence-based programs that improve livelihoods for nearly all coffee farmers and are disseminated within the industry and development sector. Key questions are raised about whether current approaches sufficiently address the entire coffee sector's needs and problems or just some producers, and whether they engage in true development or just short-term solutions.

1. Towards a consolidated approach to
development in the coffee sector
Andrew Sargent
Hanns R. Neumann Stiftung, North America (HRNS)
SCAA Symposium 2011
Houston, Texas

2. The context
Large, daunting, intractable problems
• For coffee farmers & communities
• For developing country economies
• For natural environment
• For the coffee sector in the medium and long run
2

3. How to solve a big development problem
This is the starting This should be the
point (eventual) objective
Development Scaled Incorporation
of effective Pilot project up into public
approach project policy
This will be the
focus today
3

4. Are we aiming at the right target?
Well-run, well- Farmers
managed benefitting
organizations substantially
Organizations with Farmers
some deficiencies benefitting only
slightly
Weak, corrupt, ineff
ective Farmers not
organizations benefitting
Unorganized, indep Farmers with no
endent farmers support
structures
4

5. Are we aiming at the right target?
What‘s the right
Well-run, well- Farmers
Where are we / have
target?
managed benefitting
we been aiming?
organizations substantially
• For the specialty
industry
Organizations with Farmers
Where should we aim
• some deficiencies
For the coffee benefitting only
in the future?
sector as a whole slightly
• For donors &
Weak, corrupt, ineff
NGOs
ective Farmers not
• For producing benefitting
organizations
country
governments
Unorganized, indep Farmers with no
endent farmers support
structures
5

6. Problem diagnosis
Effects
Effects Effects
Effects
Problem
Causes
Intermediate causes
Root causes
6

7. Problem diagnosis
LOW INCOME FROM
Effects PRIMARY LIVELIHOOD
STRATEGY (COFFEE)
Low volume Low % of High costs of
of coffee export price production
Macro
Small Low Limited Reliance on Low Not Poor market Inefficiency economic
farms yields credit access intermediaries quality processing access
factors
Poor Poor post Inadequate No
Inadequate
harvest harvest drying quality
quality control
practices practices infrastructure incentive
Inadequate QC Lack of trained
infrastructure personnel
7

8. Problem diagnosis
LOW INCOME FROM
Effects PRIMARY LIVELIHOOD
STRATEGY (COFFEE)
Low volume Low % of High costs of
of coffee export price production
Macro
Small Low Limited Reliance on Low Not Poor market Inefficiency economic
farms yields credit access intermediaries quality processing access
factors
Poor Poor post Inadequate No
Inadequate
harvest harvest drying quality
quality control
practices practices infrastructure incentive
Inadequate QC Lack of trained
infrastructure personnel
8

9. Problem diagnosis
LOW INCOME FROM
Effects PRIMARY LIVELIHOOD
STRATEGY (COFFEE)
Low volume Low % of High costs of
of coffee export price production
Macro
Small Low Limited Reliance on Low Not Poor market Inefficiency economic
farms yields credit access intermediaries quality processing access
factors
Independent farmers / Lack of knowledge & capacity Lacking / inaccessible
ineffective organizations at farm & organization levels technical assistance
9

10. What target, which problems?
What problem are we trying to solve, and what are our objectives?
Problem “That coop‘s quality isn‘t specialty grade“
Objective “I want that coop to ship me specialty grade quality“
versus
Problem “Coffee farmers are living in poverty and unable to satisfy basic human needs“
“Coffee farmers need to benefit more from coffee production and marketing to
Objective alleviate human suffering and ensure they don‘t exacerbate supply shortages by
switching to other crops or migrating to cities“
10

11. What target, which problems?
versus
LOW INCOME FROM LOW INCOME FROM
Effects PRIMARY LIVELIHOOD Effects PRIMARY LIVELIHOOD
STRATEGY (COFFEE) STRATEGY (COFFEE)
Low volume Low % of High costs of Low volume Low % of High costs of
of coffee export price production of coffee export price production
Macro Macro
Small Low Limited Reliance on Low Not Poor market Inefficiency Small Low Limited Reliance on Low Not Poor market
economic Inefficiency economic
farms yields credit access intermediaries quality processing access farms yields credit access intermediaries quality processing access
factors factors
Poor Poor post Inadequate No Poor Poor post Inadequate No
Inadequate Inadequate
harvest harvest drying quality harvest harvest drying quality
quality control quality control
practices practices infrastructure incentive practices practices infrastructure incentive
Inadequate QC Lack of trained Inadequate QC Lack of trained
infrastructure personnel infrastructure personnel
11

12. HRNS’ view
 We need to address the big problems
 We need to address multiple problems simultaneously
 Our solutions need to be relevant for (nearly) all farmers in the coffee sector
 We need to actively work to improve our approaches, learn from experience, and
disseminate lessons within the coffee industry, the development sector, in donor circles
 We need to first develop a sound approach, with the eventual aim of informing and
influencing public policy at the sector/country level
Development Scaled Incorporation
of effective Pilot project up into public
approach project policy
12

13. Towards a consolidated approach to development in
the coffee sector
• Are our programs relevant for the entire coffee sector, or only for a small number of
producers or contexts?
• Are we addressing all relevant problems, or only some? Are we addressing their root
causes or just their symptoms?
• Are we doing what communities need, or just what we‘re good at?
• Are we engaging in charity or development?
• Are we actively working to improve approaches, or just doing what we did last time?
• Are we having genuine impact, or just creating nice marketing materials?
• Are we basing actions and programs on evidence or on opinion?
• Are we sharing lessons and disseminating best practices, or jockeying for market
position?
13

14. Thank you
Andrew Sargent
Hanns R. Neumann Stiftung, North America
New York, New York
andrew.sargent@hrnstiftung.org