Are certification systems beneficial for farmers? An 'on-the-ground' comparison of co-existing sustainability standards in the Colombian coffee sector

Abstract

Crop certification has been expanding rapidly as a market orientated solution to promote and reward sustainable production methods. Many certification and verification labels have emerged, and often co-exist in a locality. This paper aims to contribute to the knowledge on certification processes in a context of multiple labels, in order to assess the impact on farmers. It was found that in the perception of the coffee growers all labels have similar benefits and drawback, and all programmes contribute to the farmer’s livelihood. Although the income gain is an important driver for certification, also non-financial benefits are highly appreciated by farmers. Yet, between the labels there are some differences in accessibility for coffee growers. The co-existence of multiple labels can potentially certify a larger range of farmers with more distinct characteristics, as the labels have some differentiation in (rigidity of) requirements. However, the labels also show considerable similarities and compatibility, resulting in certification policies that favour farmers with similar characteristics. A stronger social-economic position is conducive to certification for all labels, although the verification programmes are more accessible to smallholders. The farmer cooperative selects farmers for certification and assists them in adapting the production process in accordance with the certification requirements. In order to reduce the costs for all parties involved, certification focuses on coffee growers with better capacity to make the adaptations needed and to benefit from the premium. Although the group certification and FNC assistance in the certification process may lower the barrier to certification, it remains less accessible to smallholders. This research shows that certifications are rather compatible, have overlapping requirements and attract farmers with similar characteristics. This results oftentimes in multi-certification of farmers. This may be the most efficient manner of certifying coffee, and enhancing profits for all actors in the value chain. For the certified farmers, multi-certification can gain access to premiums from various sources and hedge against fluctuations in demand and premium of a particular label. However, multi-certification limits the participation of additional farmers. Consequently, it acts as an exclusion mechanism that concentrates the benefits of certification to a smaller number of farmers. So, from a development point of view, this is a less effective outcome. Certification would be more effective when certification targets farmers with more distinctive characteristics, that include the more marginalised farmers.