RESUMO
As both coffee quality and sustainability become increasingly important, there is growing interest in understanding how ecological quality affects coffee quality. Here we analyze, for the first time, the state of evidence that ecological quality, in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem functions, impacts the quality of Coffea arabica and C. canephora, based on 78 studies. The following ecosystem functions were included: pollination; weed, disease, and pest control; water and soil fertility regulation. Biodiversity was described by the presence, percentage, and diversity of shade trees. Coffee quality was described by the green bean physical characteristics, biochemical compounds, and organoleptic characteristics. The presence and diversity of shade trees positively impacted bean size and weight and reduced the percentage of rejected beans, but these observations were not consistent over different altitudes. In fact, little is known about the diversity of shade trees and their influence on biochemical compounds. All biochemical compounds varied with the presence of shade, percentage of shade, and elevation. Coffee beans from more diverse tree shade plantations obtained higher scores for final total organoleptic quality than simplified tree shade and unshaded plantations. Decreasing ecological quality diminished ecosystem functions such as pollination, which in turn negatively affected bean quality. Shade affected pests and diseases in different ways, but weeds were reduced. High soil quality positively affected coffee quality. Shade improved the water use efficiency, such that coffee plants were not water stressed and coffee quality was improved. While knowledge on the influence of shade trees on overall coffee quality remains scarce, there is evidence that agroecosystem simplification is negatively correlated with coffee quality. Given global concerns about biodiversity and habitat loss, we recommend that the overall definition of coffee quality include measures of ecological quality, although these aspects are not always detectable in certain coffee quality characteristics or the final cup.
RESUMO
Food systems must become more sustainable and equitable, a transformation which requires the transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge. We present a framework of food sustainability that was co-created by academic and non-academic actors and comprises five dimensions: food security, right to food, environmental performance, poverty and inequality, and social-ecological resilience. For each dimension, an interdisciplinary research team-together with actors from different food systems-defined key indicators and empirically applied them to six case studies in Kenya and Bolivia. Food sustainability scores were analysed for the food systems as a whole, for the five dimensions, and for food system activities. We then identified the indicators with the greatest influence on sustainability scores. While all food systems displayed strengths and weaknesses, local and agroecological food systems scored comparatively highly across all dimensions. Agro-industrial food systems scored lowest in environmental performance and food security, while their resilience scores were medium to high. The lowest-scoring dimensions were right to food, poverty and inequality, with particularly low scores obtained for the indicators women's access to land and credit, agrobiodiversity, local food traditions, social protection, and remedies for violations of the right to food. This qualifies them as key levers for policy interventions towards food sustainability.
Assuntos
Agricultura , Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/métodos , Abastecimento de Alimentos/métodos , Alimentos , Bolívia , Humanos , Quênia , Política PúblicaRESUMO
Agroforestry often relies on local knowledge, which is gaining recognition in development projects. However, how local knowledge can articulate with external and scientific knowledge is little known. Our study explored the use and integration of local and external knowledge in agroforestry projects in Bolivia. In 42 field visits and 62 interviews with agroforestry farmers, civil society representatives, and policymakers, we found a diverse knowledge base. We examined how local and external knowledge contribute to livelihood assets and tree and crop diversity. Projects based predominantly on external knowledge tended to promote a single combination of tree and crop species and targeted mainly financial capital, whereas projects with a local or mixed knowledge base tended to focus on food security and increased natural capital (e.g., soil restoration) and used a higher diversity of trees and crops than those with an external knowledge base. The integration of different forms of knowledge can enable farmers to better cope with new challenges emerging as a result of climate change, fluctuating market prices for cash crops, and surrounding destructive land use strategies such as uncontrolled fires and aerial fumigation with herbicides. However, many projects still tended to prioritize external knowledge and undervalue local knowledge-a tendency that has long been institutionalized in the formal educational system and in extension services. More dialogue is needed between different forms of knowledge, which can be promoted by strengthening local organizations and their networks, reforming agricultural educational institutions, and working in close interaction with policymakers.