Devouring profit - International Coffee Organization

several years they may well begin to get an idea of how much damage at various
stages of the crop cycle relates to final harvest yields. This could be an area for future
participatory research, presumably a few farmers become experts at knowing when
and when not to apply control.
It should be stressed that CBB control is a function of productivity because if the latter
is high, potential losses are correspondingly higher. Conversely if productivity is very
low there could be less interest in carrying out sound control. We will see an example
of this now from Honduras.
5.2 Economics of
CBB in Honduras
Figure 10 depicts potential losses according to different levels of CBB in parchment
coffee. This simulation (for three different yields per hectare) is based on a price of
600 lempiras/Quintal (US$40/qq = US$0.40/lb parchment coffee), and a 1% price
penalty for 3% damage.
At a meeting at La Fe research station in Honduras, we estimated the cost of CBB
management at about 600 lempiras/ha/year (US$40). To make the management of
this pest worthwhile, the cost/benefit relationship should be higher than zero, but
from Figure 10, we can see that this would be achieved only if the practices carried
out reduce damage levels by 6 or more percentage points. And it would seem risky for
the small farmer to try to achieve the export (Coex) standard of 2%, since he could
invest a lot of resources to try to achieve the standard but still fail. Hence an “all-ornothing”
quality standard could discourage farmers trying to improve quality.
Loss (US$/ha)
100
66
33
0
1.5 3.0 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0
Figure 10. Potential losses due to different levels of CBB for different yields (Honduras) 16
16 Exchange rate: 1 US$ = 15 Lempiras
% of CBB in parchment coffee
25 qq/ha
20 qq/ha
15 qq/ha
55