Jan. 27, 2014
The "microlots" topic hits several issues that are extremely relevant to resiliency in coffee. So it is significant that today, Counter Culture Coffee posted Phase II of their research to understand the impact of microlots.
Click here to read their helpful introduction to this phase of the project and click here to see the full report, also posted on Artisan Coffee Imports website. Artisan Coffee Imports assisted with the analysis of the data collected in this phase of their project -- a wonderful collaboration that provided learning for all sides.
Resiliency issues, and reasons why this type of research is important are:
"Direct Traders" claim they are benefiting producers, they even claim they are benefiting producers more than the Fair Trade system. Is there evidence to support it? Do all "direct traders" operate the same way?
Resiliency has to do with bio-diversity. Are there ways incentive systems, like those employed by Virmax and discussed in this report, can be used to encourage bio-diversity and thereby improve producers ability to absorb shocks?
Research issues also came to light with this report:
1. A pilot run of the questionnaire, or even several pilots run with producers could help fine tune the questions. Also, the pilot data (both quantitative and qualitative) could have been assembled so that it was clear which types of analysis the full data (once collected) would enable.
2. A control group or baseline data would help to verify that the impacts and benefits of the microlot program can be attributed to the microlot program.
3. Cupping data collected on all the coffee included in the study (microlot and the control group) would enable more conclusive insights one which growing practices may be having an impact.
Going Further and Farther With This Research:
There is much more that can be done with the data Counter Culture has collected. Even more could be done if Virmax continues to collaborate and find value in understanding which of their innovative processes are doing the most to improve producer livelihoods. The following are questions that could be pursued in phase III:
Does paying microlot premiums increase the volume (quantity) of 86+ coffee produced in a region? Another way to ask this question is, 'at what level of premium payment, does the premium actually change a producer's decisions on the quantity vs. quality trade-off?'
Does paying incrementally higher premiums for incrementally higher scoring coffees impact the average cup quality of all coffees receiving microlot premiums in a given region? In other words, does a roaster's investment in incentive programs actually "pay off" in terms of creating more higher quality coffees than would otherwise be the case?
Add controls for exogenous factors that occurred over the three years of this study -- price volatility, Federation policies to encourage planting Colombia varieties, etc.
We will look at more of these types of questions in the upcoming blogs.
Showing posts with label Virmax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Virmax. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Monday, January 13, 2014
6. The Value of Participatory, Qualitative Research for Coffee
Jan. 13, 2014
How would you define research? Something about uncovering truth? Finding new knowledge? My off-the-cuff definition is, "a systematic process for uncovering new knowledge." As I've re-entered the world of graduate school this past fall, I've been refreshed to see an appreciation of how valuable qualitative and participatory research can be. It seems I'm not the only economist trained during the 80s and 90s who decided that to really understand what happens in developing countries, we need more than predictive econometric models that come close to being randomly controlled trials.
Quantitative methods are important, but they can be more effective when combined with the insights one gets from open-ended questions and in-depth interviews. Ethnography and exploratory study has taken on new levels of competence and value in the world of market research and academic investigations. What is particularly relevant to coffee are the ways in which we are including interviews and discussions with producers themselves. We are placing more value on the opportunities to talk with the people who have generations of knowledge about growing coffee and about the places, the environments and the cultures which surround and support their coffee-growing places.
Example and case in point -- the microlots research on which Counter Culture Coffee and Virmax have collaborated was designed from the ground up to include, not just limited choice type questions, but open ended questions also. (Get a preview of the upcoming study here.) The study is being done with a participatory approach to the extent that the results of the work are being presented and shared with all 122 producers who were surveyed back in January 2013. That, in and of itself, is a "research step" that is too often forgotten. Do we share the results of our research with those who contributed to making the research possible? It may not always be desirable or feasible, but I would suggest that in most cases where it involves coffee producers, it could be extremely valuable.
It seems so easy and so logical, but I think this is a relatively new phenomena: this effort to more comprehensively integrate the things we, as actors at one end of the coffee supply chain, know, with the knowledge producers and other actors at origin have. Qualitative and participatory research can help us get closer to an understanding of where solutions may lie.
How would you define research? Something about uncovering truth? Finding new knowledge? My off-the-cuff definition is, "a systematic process for uncovering new knowledge." As I've re-entered the world of graduate school this past fall, I've been refreshed to see an appreciation of how valuable qualitative and participatory research can be. It seems I'm not the only economist trained during the 80s and 90s who decided that to really understand what happens in developing countries, we need more than predictive econometric models that come close to being randomly controlled trials.
Quantitative methods are important, but they can be more effective when combined with the insights one gets from open-ended questions and in-depth interviews. Ethnography and exploratory study has taken on new levels of competence and value in the world of market research and academic investigations. What is particularly relevant to coffee are the ways in which we are including interviews and discussions with producers themselves. We are placing more value on the opportunities to talk with the people who have generations of knowledge about growing coffee and about the places, the environments and the cultures which surround and support their coffee-growing places.
Example and case in point -- the microlots research on which Counter Culture Coffee and Virmax have collaborated was designed from the ground up to include, not just limited choice type questions, but open ended questions also. (Get a preview of the upcoming study here.) The study is being done with a participatory approach to the extent that the results of the work are being presented and shared with all 122 producers who were surveyed back in January 2013. That, in and of itself, is a "research step" that is too often forgotten. Do we share the results of our research with those who contributed to making the research possible? It may not always be desirable or feasible, but I would suggest that in most cases where it involves coffee producers, it could be extremely valuable.
It seems so easy and so logical, but I think this is a relatively new phenomena: this effort to more comprehensively integrate the things we, as actors at one end of the coffee supply chain, know, with the knowledge producers and other actors at origin have. Qualitative and participatory research can help us get closer to an understanding of where solutions may lie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)