Coffee and Forest Conservation Meet in the Same Model in Indonesia

Production goals for coffee and forest conservation often conflict on the same land.

The Batutegi region in Sumatra, Indonesia, is trying to manage this tension with a different model.

The social forestry system implemented in the region leaves ownership of forest land with the state while granting local communities controlled usage rights. Farmers can continue to grow coffee and other products; in return, they are expected to protect forest cover, refrain from opening new forests, and comply with sustainable land management rules.

What stands out about the model from the perspective of the coffee sector is not just "coffee under shade."

Here, at the same time:

land use rights,
farmer income,
forest conservation,
product diversification
and organization

are all addressed.

Coffee in Batutegi has long been part of forest pressure

Despite having protected forest status for years, Batutegi experienced significant land openings for coffee farming until the early 2000s.

According to a field report by Daily Coffee News/Mongabay, the government began granting community forestry permits for long-used lands in the region between 2007 and 2010. The aim was not to completely eliminate existing farming but to formalize usage rights and prevent new illegal openings.

The initial implementation periods were not flawless.

In some cases, the requirement that only actively land-owning farmers could participate in the program created disincentives for reopening previously abandoned areas that had begun to regenerate.

This detail is important.

Because even well-intentioned regulations in sustainability programs can create new environmental pressures if designed with incorrect incentives.

What does social forestry provide to farmers?

One of the most concrete benefits of the system is the reduction of legal uncertainty.

Previously, farmers working on forest land faced the risk of having their crops uprooted or their settlements removed.

Communities that obtain legal usage rights under social forestry can access:

state support,
education,
private sector partnerships,
institutional consultancy

more easily.

The World Bank also defines Indonesia's social forestry program as a national policy aimed at improving the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities while ensuring sustainable forest management. The Bank states that in the support programs it conducts in four provinces between 2021 and 2025, community organization, income diversification, and forest management are addressed together.

Coffee is no longer the only product

The new approach in Batutegi centers on moving away from monoculture.

In the field report, the farmer Sri Atmiatun's land grows:

candlenut,
nutmeg,
avocado,
areca palm

alongside coffee.

In some producer groups, goat farming has also been added to the system.

This diversification serves two different purposes.

The first is environmental:

more tree layers,
ground cover,
a more complex ecosystem structure.

The second is economic:

so that when coffee prices drop, farmers do not remain dependent on a single income.

The real business logic of agroforestry emerges here.

It is not just about telling farmers to "protect the forest"; it is necessary to establish an economic structure that allows them to sustain their livelihoods while protecting the forest.

Diversifying income can reduce forest pressure

Coffee prices are not under the farmer's control.

If a producer is solely dependent on coffee, they may resort to opening more land when income drops.

In agroforestry, however:

banana,
areca,
avocado,
nutmeg,
livestock

can provide different income streams throughout the year.

This can mitigate economic shocks.

The 2025 Tana Toraja study included in FAO AGRIS also evaluates coffee-based agroforestry systems not just as an environmental protection method but as an economic model that can support local household income.

However, this does not mean that every agroforestry system automatically generates high income.

Product selection, yield, labor, and market access determine the outcome.

Market access remains one of the weakest links

Although farmers in Batutegi receive support on the production side, the issues on the sales side are not completely resolved.

According to Daily Coffee News/Mongabay, many farmers still sell their products to intermediaries and have limited say over prices.

Producer workgroups and cooperative-like structures are being established to increase bargaining power, but the results are not the same across all groups. When some structures weaken, producers revert to the old intermediary system.

This is a critical point in the coffee supply chain.

If sustainable production practices do not provide producers with stronger market access, they may lose their economic motivation in the long run.

Sustainable coffee is not just an agricultural technique

In the coffee sector, sustainability is often discussed in terms of:

shade trees,
fertilizer use,
carbon,
biodiversity

Batutegi's example shows another dimension.

The farmer's:

legal security over the land,
who they sell their product to,
institutional organization,
income diversity

is also part of sustainability.

Because it is hard to expect decades of environmental investment from a producer with uncertain land rights and low income security.

Therefore, coffee buyers should monitor not only farm-level technical controls in sustainability programs but also livelihood resilience.

Forest conservation results are positive but fragile

Programs in Batutegi aim to reduce new forest openings and increase productivity on existing lands.

A 2021 field study reported that members of community forestry indicated that open land boundaries and collective rules helped reduce fire and slash-and-burn practices. Daily Coffee News/Mongabay reports this result in the context of Batutegi.

However, it cannot be said that the forest has fully recovered.

According to the report, a significant portion of Batutegi still consists of fragmented forests and small farmer lands.

Therefore, the success of the program should not be measured by saying "the forest is saved" but by indicators such as:

reduction in new openings,
protection of tree cover,
increased agroforestry density,
stabilization of income

should be used.

Current academic research also highlights institutional differences

A study published in 2026 in Trees, Forests and People compared social forestry communities in Indonesia between Java and Sumatra.

The research indicates that communities in Java performed better than those in Sumatra in overall sustainability scores; particularly, differences were found in institutions, governance, and socioeconomic outcomes.

This result is significant for Batutegi.

In social forestry, the state's permission is the first step.

However, the determinants of long-term success are:

strong producer organizations,
good governance,
increased product value,
market access

In other words, a permit alone does not create an economic model.

The role of women is also changing

Another notable change in the Batutegi model is the organization of female producers.

The report mentions that women's farmer groups have become more visible in financial management, product sales, and decision-making processes.

This is not just a social impact title in the coffee supply chain.

Women's:

control over income,
business decision-making,
producer organization

can also affect the diversification of household economies.

However, there is currently no strong quantitative income data published specifically for Batutegi to support this impact.

Therefore, conclusions like "women's income increased by this much" should not be drawn.

What should coffee buyers monitor?

If a roaster or importer is purchasing coffee sourced from social forestry, they should not only look at the certification or project story.

More useful indicators include:

Land use rights: How strong is the producer's legal status?

Tree diversity: Is coffee really in an agroforestry system?

New forest openings: Is production concentrated on existing land?

Producer income: What is the share of coffee in household income?

Market share: How much of the product can be sold without intermediaries?

Cooperative performance: Is the producer organization really working?

Price premium: Does sustainable production bring economic returns to the producer?

Without measuring these, terms like "forest-friendly coffee" can easily turn into overly simplistic marketing messages.

Why is it important for the Turkish coffee sector?

Turkey is not a coffee-producing country; it is largely dependent on imports.

Therefore, environmental and social production risks come to coffee businesses in Turkey through the supply chain.

For roasters and large coffee chains, the issue is not just:

which country the coffee comes from,
what score it receives,
what process is used

In the long run:

land rights,
deforestation risk,
small producer income resilience

can also become part of sourcing decisions.

Especially for Turkish coffee companies selling products to the European market, supply chain transparency is becoming increasingly important.

Stafflink’s Opinion

In our view, the most important lesson from the Batutegi example for the coffee sector is that it is not as simple as "if we grow coffee under trees, the problem will be solved."

Sustainable sourcing is only lasting when it is also economically sustainable for the farmer.

While imposing the obligation to protect the forest on the producer:

if land security,
technical support,
income diversity
and market access

are not provided, the environmental goal remains fragile in the long run.

Therefore, coffee companies need to question not only how many shade trees are on the farm but also whether the producer has an economic reason to sustain that system.