For decades, tree planting has been a common sustainability practice on coffee farms and beyond—but new research finds that our energy may be better directed elsewhere.
BY BHAVI PATEL
BARISTA MAGAZINE ONLINE
Featured photo by Nay Sa Muel
A groundbreaking global meta-analysis has challenged the coffee industry’s fundamental approach to carbon sequestration, revealing that decades of tree-planting initiatives may be missing the forest for the trees—literally.
A comprehensive study, published in the journal Nature Communications Earth & Environment, found that protecting existing shade-grown systems delivers exponentially greater climate benefits than planting new trees on intensively managed coffee farms. The research suggests that current carbon market incentives may be resulting in net environmental harm.
The Scale of the Problem
Researchers from the Smithsonian National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute and the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute conducted the first global assessment of carbon storage across coffee’s vegetation complexity gradient—from monoculture plantations to biodiverse agroforestry systems.
Currently, coffee farms hold an estimated 481.59 teragrams of carbon (TgC) globally and could sequester an additional 81.53-86.50 TgC under different agroforestry adoption scenarios. However, more than twice as much aboveground carbon—174.23-221.45 TgC—could be lost under intensification scenarios where existing shade trees are removed.
“Tree planting programs in coffee can sequester meaningful carbon volumes but may fail to achieve global carbon and biodiversity goals if they do not also protect existing agroforestry and diversify planting efforts,” the study concludes. In other words, planting new trees—if they aren’t the right trees—may be doing more harm than good to the environment.
The Carbon-Biodiversity Disconnect
While tree diversity supports overall biodiversity in agroforestry systems, the study found it does not independently increase carbon storage, indicating that carbon and biodiversity outcomes may be fundamentally decoupled. Tree density, rather than tree diversity, predicted carbon accumulation, suggesting that carbon-focused strategies may inadvertently undermine biodiversity conservation.
“To protect nature and fight climate change, coffee producers need to focus on planting a diversity of the right trees, not just planting a high density of fast-growing trees that capture carbon,” the study finds.
Historical Context and Market Failures
Until the 1970s, most coffee was produced in agroforestry systems, but by 2010, only 24% was managed under a diverse shade canopy. Complex agroforestry systems with remnant native forest trees—which demonstrate the highest carbon stocks—have been disappearing at an alarming pace.
The research reveals a critical gap in carbon market structures. While substantial funding flows toward tree-planting on degraded farms, virtually no financial incentives exist to protect standing shade trees outside specialized certifications.
“There is a lot of money behind planting trees on degraded coffee farms, yet there are basically no financial incentives to protect standing shade trees,” the study reports. Planting shade trees on monoculture coffee farms is a positive step, but the study finds that tree planting alone can’t make up for what is lost when mature shade trees are removed.
Global Implications
The study’s scenarios reveal that even the most ambitious tree-planting programs cannot offset carbon losses from continued intensification. This highlights the critical importance of implementing protection mechanisms alongside creation initiatives.
The current aboveground carbon stock in coffee systems represents roughly one-third of European temperate conifer forests, underscoring coffee agriculture’s significant role in global carbon management.
Moving forward, the coffee industry faces a fundamental choice: continue prioritizing easily quantifiable tree-planting programs or pivot toward more effective conservation strategies. The study suggests that sustainable carbon management requires a dual approach—protecting existing agroforestry systems while strategically expanding shade cover.
As carbon markets evolve, this research provides a roadmap for aligning coffee production with both climate goals and biodiversity conservation. The message is clear: Protecting what we have may be more valuable than planting what we hope to grow.
Bhavi Patel is a food writer focusing on coffee and tea, and a brand-building specialist with a background in dairy technology and an interest in culinary history and sensory perception of food.
Subscribe and More!
As always, you can read Barista Magazine in paper by subscribing or ordering an issue.
Read the August + September 2025 Issue for free with our digital edition.
For free access to more than five years’ worth of issues, visit our digital edition archives here.
