Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Weed control practices on Costa Rican coffee farms: is herbicide use necessary for small-scale producers?

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents research conducted during two coffee farming seasons in Costa Rica. The study examined coffee farmers’ weed management practices and is presented in the form of a case study of small-scale farmers’ use of labor and herbicides in weed management practices. Over 200 structured interviews were conducted with coffee farmers concerning their use of hired labor and family labor, weed management activities, support services, and expectations about the future of their coffee production. ANOVA and regression analyses describe the relationships between farm size, labor, and herbicide use, and three farm types (i.e., conventional, semi-conventional, and organic). Based on findings regarding the amount of labor used to manually control weeds on different types of farms (large farms, small conventional, semi-conventional, and organic farms) I am able to challenge small conventional farmers’ perceived need for herbicide use. Semi-structured interviews of coffee farmers and extension workers further revealed a dominant role played by agro-chemical companies in assisting farmers with production problems, and documented a high transaction cost for information provided from elsewhere. Chemical companies hire extension workers to visit farmers at their farms, free of charge, to offer recommendations on how to treat different pest problems, while government and cooperative extension agents charge for the service. There is a need to increase the amount of resources available to the National Coffee Institute to fund one-on-one farmer support services in order to balance the influence of agro-chemical company representatives and allow farmers to make better decisions regarding weed management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

Icafe:

National Coffee Institute (Costa Rica)

USAID:

United States Agency for International Development

References

  • Abeysekera, W.A.T. 1988. Pesticide use in the food production sector in Sri Lanka. In Use of pesticides and health hazards in the plantation sector, ed. G. Botterweck, 12–37. Colombo: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akobundu, I.O. 1997. Basic elements for improved weed management in the developing world. In Proceedings of the expert consultation on weed ecology and management conference, 22–24 September 1997, 86–92. Rome, Italy.

  • Altieri, M. 1995. Agroecology: The science of sustainable agriculture, 2nd ed. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altieri, M.A., and M. Liebman eds. 1988. Weed management in agroecosystems: Ecological approaches. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, W.P. 1996. Weed science. New York, NY: West Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auld, B. A., and K. M. Menz. 1997. Basic criteria for improved weed management in developing countries. In Proceedings of the expert consultation on weed ecology and management conference, 22–24 September 1997, 93–99. Rome, Italy.

  • Bentley, J.W., and G. Thiele. 1999. Bibliography: Farmer knowledge and management of crop disease. Agriculture and Human Values 16(1): 75–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, H. S., and N. David. 2001. Impediments to sustainable agriculture in China. In Promoting global innovation of agricultural science and technology and sustainable agriculture development. 7–9 November 2001. Beijing, China: International Conference on Agricultural Science and Technology.

  • Blair, A., and S.H. Zahm. 1993. Patterns of pesticide use among farmers—implications for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology 4(1): 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce, J., A. Fernandez, E. Furst, and O. Segura. 1994. Café y desarollo sostenible: del cultivo agroquimico a la produccion organica en Costa Rica. Heredia: Editorial Fundacion UNA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. 2004. Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conroy, M.E., D.L. Murray, and P.M. Rosset. 1996. A cautionary tale: Failed U.S. development policy in Central America. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, G. 1997. The doubly green revolution. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, A. P., M. Ahmad, and T. Ali. 2001. Dilemmas of agricultural extension in Pakistan: Food for thought. In Agricultural research and extension network, No. 116. London, UK: Overseas Development Institute.

  • De Graaff, J. 1986. The economics of coffee. Wageningen: Pudoc Wageningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duell, E.J., R.C. Millikan, D.A. Savitz, M.J. Schell, B. Newman, J. Chiu-Kit, and D.P. Sandler. 2001. Reproducibility of reported farming activities and pesticide use among breast cancer cases and controls: A comparison of two modes of data collection. Annals of Epidemiology 11: 178–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, X. 2001. Agricultural science and technology and vertical integration in agriculture in China. In Promoting global innovation of agricultural science and technology and sustainable agriculture development, 7–9 November 2001. Beijing, China: International Conference on Agricultural Science and Technology.

  • Fleischer, G. 1999. The role of economic analysis of pesticide use and policy—experiences from country case studies. In Pesticides policies in Zimbabwe, ed. G. D. Mudimu, H. Waibel, and G. Fleischer. Pesticide Policy Project Publication Series, No. 1. Hannover, Germany: Institute of Horticultural Economics.

  • Flynn, L.T. 1992. Pesticides: Helpful or harmful? In Rational readings on environmental concerns, ed. J.H. Lehr. New York, NY: International Thomson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerowitt, B. 1997. Practical use of economic thresholds for weeds. In Proceedings of the expert consultation on weed ecology and management conference, 22–24 September 1997, 59–66. Rome, Italy.

  • Hassanein, N. 1999. Changing the way America farms: Knowledge and community in the sustainable agriculture movement. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez Navarro, L. 1995. Café con aroma de burocracia. La Jornada (Mexico City), 14 March, p. 11.

  • Hoppin, J.A., F. Yucel, M. Dosemeci, and D.P. Sandler. 2002. Accuracy of self-reported pesticide use duration information from licensed pesticide applicators in the Agricultural Health Study. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 12: 313–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Icafe. 1998. Manual de recomendaciones para el cultivo del café. San Jose: Instituto del café de Costa Rica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Icafe. 2009. Productores. http://www.icafe.go.cr/nuestro_cafe/estructura%20del%20sector/productores.html. Accessed 27 July 2009.

  • IFAD. 2003. The adoption of organic agriculture among small farmers in Latin America and the Caribbean. Report No. 1337. Rome: International Fund for Agricultural Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labrada, R. 1997. Problems related to the development of weed management in the developing world. In Proceedings of the expert consultation on weed ecology and management conference, 22–24 September 1997, 8–13. Rome, Italy.

  • Labrada, R., and C. Parker. 1994. Weed control in the context of integrated pest management. In Weed management for developing countries, eds. R. Labrada, J. Caseley, and C. Parker. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 120. Rome: FAO.

  • Lotz, L.A., M.J. Kropff, and R.M.W. Groeneveld. 1990. Modeling weed competition and yield losses to study the effect of omission of herbicides in winter wheat. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 39: 711–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matson, P.A., W.J. Parton, A.G. Power, and M.J. Swift. 1997. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 277: 504–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matteson, P.C. 2000. Insect pest management in tropical Asian irrigated rice. Annual Review of Entomology 45: 549–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matteson, P.C., K.D. Gallagher, and P.E. Kenmore. 1993. Extension of integrated pest management for plant hoppers in Asian irrigated rice. In Ecology, management of plant hoppers, ed. R.F. Denno and T.J. Perfect. London: Chapman and Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monaco, T.J., S.C. Weller, and F.M. Ashton. 2002. Weed science: Principles and practices, 4th ed. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mora, C., and M. Soto. 1996. Estudio comparativo de dos sistemas de producción de café: convencional y orgánico. PhD dissertation. San Jose, Costa Rica: Universidad Latinoamericana de Ciencia y Tecnología, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales.

  • Mortimer, M. 1997. The need for studies on weed ecology to improve weed management. In Proceedings of the expert consultation on weed ecology and management conference, 22–24 September 1997, 15–22. Rome, Italy.

  • Moses, M., E.S. Johnson, W.K. Anger, V.W. Burse, S.W. Horstman, et al. 1993. Environmental equity and pesticide exposure. Toxicology and Industrial Health 9(5): 913–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. 1989. Alternative agriculture. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, K.D., and V.R. Eidman. 1992. A farmer’s choice of weed control method and the impacts of policy and risk. Review of Agricultural Economics 14: 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palis, F.G. 1998. Changing farmers’ perceptions and practices: The case of insect pest control in Central Luzon, Philippines. Crop Protection 17(7): 599–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel, D., H. Acquay, M. Biltonen, P. Rice, M. Silva, et al. 1992. Environmental and economic costs of pesticide use. BioScience 42: 750–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pontius, J., R. Dilts, and A. Bartlett. 2002. From farmer field schools to community IPM, ten years of IPM training in Asia. Jakarta: FAO Community IPM Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J. 2005. The pesticide detox: Towards a more sustainable agriculture. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radosevich, S., J. Holt, and C. Ghersa. 1997. Weed ecology: Implications for management. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, R.A. 1999. A place unbecoming: the coffee farm of northern Latin America. Geographical Review 89(4): 554–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, R.A., and J.R. Ward. 1996. Coffee, conservation and commerce in the western hemisphere. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center and Natural Resources Defense Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosset, P. 1999. The multiple benefits and functions of small farm agriculture. Policy Brief No. 4. Oakland: Food First.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, L. A. 1994. The role of the private sector, in agricultural extension: economic analysis and case studies. Agricultural research and extension network, No. 48. London, UK: Overseas Development Institute.

  • Segura, B., and J. Reynolds. 1993. Environmental impact of coffee production and processing in El Salvador and Costa Rica. In Paper prepared for UN conference on trade and environment, Geneva.

  • Sick, D. 1999. Farmers of the golden bean: Costa Rican households and the global coffee economy. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Syngenta. 2005. Gramaxone herbicide. http://www.syngenta.ca/en/prod/gramoxone/ index.asp?nav=OVERVIEW. Accessed 9 April 2008.

  • Taiz, L., and E. Zeiger. 2002. Plant physiology, 3rd ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., J. Fargione, B. Wolff, C. D’Antonio, A. Dobson, et al. 2001. Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science 292: 281–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA. 1997. R.E.D. facts: Paraquat dichloride. EPA-738-F-96–018. Washington DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waggoner, P.E. 1997. How much land can ten billion people spare for nature? In Technological trajectories, the human environment, ed. J. Ausubel and H.D. Langford. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, N. 1995. Technological change and the regulation of pollution from agricultural pesticides. Geoforum 26(1): 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I want to sincerely thank R. Naylor and T. Hahn for their advice, support and editorial comments; to the extension workers at Icafe, CoopeSanVito and CoopeAtenas for their time and assistance; to the students and staff at SFS for getting me started down this path; to anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments; and to Stanford University for the funding to conduct this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, 106 91, Stockholm, Sweden

    Angelina Sanderson Bellamy

Authors
  1. Angelina Sanderson Bellamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angelina Sanderson Bellamy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bellamy, A.S. Weed control practices on Costa Rican coffee farms: is herbicide use necessary for small-scale producers?. Agric Hum Values 28, 167–177 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-010-9261-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-010-9261-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation