Content area
Brazil, the world’s largest coffee producer and exporter, accounted for one-third of global coffee production in 2022, with a small portion being specialty coffee. This study aims to analyze the production areas, certifications adopted, cultivars used, processing methods, and the production chain of specialty coffee in Brazil, highlighting the challenges and opportunities. Data were collected from 175 farms associated with the Brazilian Specialty Coffee Association (BSCA), and analyzed. The state of Minas Gerais leads in specialty coffee production, supported by a well-structured supply chain. Most Brazilian specialty coffee producers have adopted the semidry processing method, either using this method alone or in combination with other methods. A high frequency of Arabica coffee cultivars with Coffea canephora introgression (e.g., derivatives of Híbrido de Timor and Icatu) was observed on farms, indicating that they have genetic potential for producing specialty coffees. The production of specialty coffees is still limited to a few producers due to the higher costs related to investments in equipment, certification, and traceability. Certifications play a crucial role in ensuring quality and sustainability, addressing environmental, social, and management aspects. These factors are essential for differentiating Brazilian specialty coffees in the global market, increasing their value and its selling price.
Introduction
Brazil is the world’s largest producer and exporter of coffee. In 2022, Brazil was responsible for one-third of global coffee production1 and exported more than 2.36 million Mg of coffee beans. The main export destinations were the United States, Germany, Italy, Belgium and Japan2. In Brazil, the two most widely planted coffee species are Coffea arabica and C. canephora, with the former being the most widely cultivated and known for its better beverage quality3.
Approximately 17% of the total volume of Brazilian coffee exported in 2022 were classified as differentiated coffees4—these coffees are defined as commodities with some type of differentiation, having superior beverage quality and a geographical identification seal or some type of certification, but they are not specialty coffees. There are coffees with certain distinguishing features that are still considered commodities, and then there are specialty coffees that meet a series of stringent requirements to earn this designation. Among the different coffees, a small number are C. arabica specialty coffees, which stand out for having superior sensory qualities, such as aromas and spicy, nutty, sweet, floral, and fruity flavors.
The term specialty coffee was first used in 1974 by Erna Knutsen to describe the high-quality green coffees that she sold in limited quantities to small roasters5. Unlike commodity coffees—which are traded on the stock exchange and generally characterized by lower quality—specialty coffees are known for their superior sensory attributes and traceability. These coffees were obtained from specific geographic microclimates and had unique flavor profiles. In 1982, with the objective of discussing issues and establishing quality standards for the specialty coffee trade, a group of professionals founded the Specialty Coffee Association (SCA)6.
The SCA has developed a methodology for evaluating specialty coffees and has members from all levels of the production chain, from coffee growers to roasters and baristas, making it the largest coffee association of this type in the world6. The Brazilian Association of Specialty Coffees (BSCA) is one of the representatives on the board of the SCA7.
SCA classification protocols define the best practices for evaluating green beans and beverages6. First, the defects of the green beans are classified before roasting. Only samples with no category 1 defects (e.g., fully black, fully sour, dried cherry, fungal damage, foreign matter contamination and severe insect damage) and fewer than five category 2 defects (e.g., partially black, partially sour, parchment, floater, unripe, withered, shell, broken or cut, husk and slight insect damage) were classified as specialty. In addition, the green beans are evaluated for color and strange odors. Samples of green grains with a blue‒green or bluish–green color or green stains were considered acceptable for specialty coffee at this level. Samples with odors (e.g., smoke, diesel and crop protection products) were not classified as specialty coffee. After these evaluations, the coffee was roasted and evaluated for the presence of roasted beans called Quaker, which are roasted coffees originating from immature or unripe fruits. Quaker beans were not allowed in the sample evaluated. The beverage quality of roasted coffee is evaluated based on fragrance, aroma, flavor, body, acidity, aftertaste, and balance—the latter reflecting how well the other attributes are harmonized. In addition to these attributes, the sweetness, uniformity and defects of the beverages were evaluated, and an overall score was assigned. On the tasting form, each attribute was assigned a grade from 6 to 10. The final score was obtained by adding the points assigned for each attribute and subtracting the number of cups with defects. For a coffee to be considered specialty, it must have a minimum score of 80 points on a scale of 0 to 100. This evaluation must be conducted by a Q-Grader, a professional certified by the Coffee Quality Institute8.
It is important to note that, while certified coffees—such as those bearing Rainforest Alliance, Fair Trade, or organic seals—are recognized for adhering to social, environmental, or production standards, they do not, by themselves, define a coffee as specialty. Specialty status is granted based on quality criteria, particularly sensory evaluation, rather than certification alone.
The quality of specialty C. arabica beans is influenced by the following factors: (i) variety-specific genetic factors; (ii) cultivation environment (e.g., elevation, latitude, air temperature, precipitation, relative air humidity, water availability and soil fertility); (iii) cultivation practices (e.g., fertilization, irrigation, pruning, intercropping); (iv) control of pests (e.g., coffee berry borers) and diseases (e.g., brown-eye spots) that directly affect grain quality; (v) microbiota present at the site; (vi) types of harvest (e.g., manual harvesting with total fruit detachment, selective manual harvesting, mechanical harvesting); (vii) postharvest treatments (e.g., processing methods, the use of microorganisms for induced fermentation, drying and beneficiation); and (viii) storage.
C. arabica yields higher market prices than C. canephora9 because it has better quality and aroma and differentiated flavors. The price paid for specialty coffee is greater than the price paid for commodity coffee. In the 2021/2022 crop year, commodity-grade C. arabica was traded on the New York Stock Exchange for US$ 2.77 kg−1, and commodity-grade C. canephora was traded on the London Stock Exchange for US$1.38 kg−1. Considering the average prices in the 2020/2021, 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 crop years, Brazil had one of the least expensive specialty coffees globally, with an average price of US$ 4.43 per kilo and a mean quality score of 83 points, which is lower than the world average of 84.510.
Some producers are realizing that specialty coffee can offer higher margins and, therefore, are seeking direct negotiations and international participation without dependence on traditional commercial intermediaries11,12. In addition, there is an expansion of coffee shops in metropolitan areas that seek unique microlot varieties and specialization in the coffee preparation process13.
Specialty coffee has developed into an important niche market and source of income for many coffee producers and entrepreneurs in Brazil. However, there are few studies on specialty coffees production and commercialization. Given this gap in knowledge and based on BSCA data on Brazilian production of specialty coffees, this study aimed to analyze (i) the areas in which specialty coffee production occurs, (ii) the certifications adopted, (iii) the cultivars used, (iv) the processing methods used, and (v) the specialty coffee production chain.
Material and methods
To analyze the production of coffee beans in Brazil, information on the average yield and the amount of C. arabica beans and C. canephora beans produced from 2021–2022 was considered. To minimize possible variations in coffee production, a 2-year average (including a year with low yield and a year with high yield) was calculated. The data were extracted from the Municipal Agricultural Production survey (PAM) provided by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics14.
The grain yield of C. arabica and C. canephora in Brazil from 2021–2022 was calculated based on data from the IBGE14. Production was classified into nine ranges: very high > = 100,000 Mg (megagram); high = 50,000–100,000 Mg; medium–high = 25,000–50,000 Mg; average = 10,000–25,000 Mg; medium–low = 5,000–10,000 Mg; low = 1,000–5,000 Mg; very low = 1–1,000 Mg; and absent = 0 Mg.
To analyze the production and trade of specialty coffees in Brazil, data collected in 2023 from all 175 farms associated with the BSCA were used7. Based on the BSCA data, the specialty coffee production area (in hectares), as well as the locality, certifications, cultivars, and processing methods adopted by 175 producers were considered.
The certifications adopted by the specialty coffee producers from farms associated with the BSCA were analyzed. These include certifications that attest to the agricultural and industrial production quality of specialty coffee and include environmental, socioenvironmental, social, management and quality certifications, as well as certifications that verify the organoleptic quality of the coffees. In addition, certifications related to geographical origin were considered. Among the certifications identified and used in the classification of farmers are Rainforest Alliance, Utz Certified, Certifica Minas, IBD (Biodynamic Institute), Starbucks CAFE Practices, and the BSCA’s own quality certification. The farms were grouped according to the different certifications adopted, allowing for a detailed analysis of certification practices in the context of specialty coffee production in Brazil.
The cultivars adopted by specialty coffee producers associated with the BSCA were also considered in the analysis, as they present differences in genetic factors and quality potential. The distribution and frequency of occurrence of the cultivars Mundo Novo, Catuaí (including Catuaí Amarelo IAC 62), Bourbon (Amarelo and Vermelho), Acaiá, Icatu (Amarelo IAC 2944 and Vermelho IAC 4045), Catucaí, Tupi IAC 1669-33, Catiguá MG1, Catiguá MG2, MGS Catiguá 3, IAC 125 RN, Acauã, MGS Paraiso 2, Obatã IAC 1669–20, Oeiras MG 6851, Sarchimor MG8840, IPR 98, Iapar 59, Paraíso MG H 419-1, and Araponga MG1 were considered.
The processing methods of specialty coffees adopted by producers from farms associated with the BSCA were also analyzed. The categorization of the properties was carried out according to the processing methods used and the frequency of use of each method. For this purpose, the number of times each coffee processing method was used on the properties associated with the BSCA was recorded. The dry, semidry, and wet processing methods were considered, as well as the different combinations of these methods. Additionally, an “other” category was used for methods that could not be classified as dry, semidry, or wet.
To assess the production chain of specialty coffee, data on the number and location of warehouses, associations and cooperatives, brokerage firms, exporters, associated producers and roasters were analyzed based on data obtained from the BSCA. In the analysis of the production chain, the different agents that function directly or indirectly within the coffee production system were considered; such as actors include researchers, technical assistants, rural extension workers, certifiers, suppliers of inputs for agricultural production, rural producers, cooperatives or brokers, individuals involved in the roasting and grinding industry, coffee exporters, and individuals who work in domestic and foreign markets.
QGIS 3.22 software was used to prepare coffee production maps in Brazil and identify the locations of producers, brokers, warehouses, associations and cooperatives, exporters and roasters of specialty coffees in association with the BSCA.
Results and discussion
Coffee production in Brazil
In Brazil, producers cultivate two main coffee species: C. arabica and C. canephora. In 2021–2022, the total production of C. arabica accounted for 66.1% of the total production (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora grain yields in Brazil for 2021–2022.
Source: IBGE (2023).
There was very high production (> 100,000 Mg) of C. arabica in the state of Minas Gerais, especially in the regions of Sul de Minas Gerais, Cerrado Mineiro and Matas de Minas or Zona da Mata (on the border with the state of Espírito Santo); these regions are in the southern, western and eastern areas of the state, respectively. In northeastern and northern Minas Gerais, the production levels were medium–high (25,000–50,000 Mg) and medium (10,000–25,000 Mg), respectively. In the southern part of the state of Espírito Santo, near the border with Minas Gerais, there was very high production of C. arabica. In northern and northeastern São Paulo, in the region called Mogiana, there was very high production, while in the southwestern region (on the border with Paraná), the production was medium–high. In southern Bahia, production was high (50,000–100,000 Mg), while in the eastern region, it was average. In northeastern Paraná, the region with the highest production (25,000–50,000 Mg) was the Norte Pioneiro or Norte Velho region, while in the North-Central region, production was average.
One of the main factors considered when choosing a species for cultivation is the average annual temperature of a region, which is affected mainly by elevation and latitude. The higher the elevation and latitude are, the lower the average annual temperature will be. For C. arabica, the sites suitable for cultivation are those with an average annual temperature of 19–22 °C, while the marginal sites are those with average annual temperatures of 18–19 and 22–23 °C, and unsuitable sites are those with average temperatures < 18 °C and > 23 °C15. Therefore, C. arabica can be cultivated from southern to northern and northeastern Brazil16, depending on the elevation and management practices adopted by coffee farmers.
An alternative practice that can reduce the risk of frost in places with higher latitudes, such as the state of Paraná, is the use of crop afforestation17. Afforestation can also reduce heat damage in regions at lower latitudes and low elevation18, such as the Northeast and North Regions of Brazil. According to official IBGE data (Fig. 1), coffee is not cultivated in the states of Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul, which are known to be colder and have a greater frequency of severe frosts. However, there are small coffee plantations in these two states in low-elevation areas, which are warmer and have infrequent frosts. Afforestation has been used in these two states to reduce or even prevent frost damage.
C. canephora, which comprises the robusta and conilon varieties, is primarily cultivated in the North, Northeast, and coastal regions of Brazil. Robusta is predominantly grown in the state of Rondônia, whereas conilon is more commonly cultivated in the northern region of Espírito Santo. Other significant producing areas include the states of Acre and southern Bahia. The main reasons for the cultivation of C. canephora in these locations are the greater resistance to heat and lower resistance to cold in this species compared with C. arabica. For C. canephora, marginal sites have average annual temperatures of 21–22 °C, and unsuitable sites have average temperatures < 21 °C15.
A second factor that affects the selection of Coffea species is water deficit. In general, C. canephora is more resistant to drought and tolerates greater water deficits. For C. arabica, suitable sites for cultivation are those with water deficits < 100 mm, while marginal sites are those with water deficits of 100–200 mm and unsuitable sites are those with water deficits > 200 mm. For C. canephora, suitable cultivation sites are those with water deficits < 200 mm, while marginal sites are those with water deficits of 200–400 mm and unsuitable sites are those with deficits > 400 mm. Irrigation is the main method used to mitigate losses caused by water deficits15. The losses caused by high temperatures and water deficits can also be mitigated with the use of afforestation and intercropping18 in addition to the application of kaolin-based products19,20.
Currently, 80% of C. arabica plantations in Brazil are cultivated by the Mundo Novo and Catuaí groups20. The suitable, marginal and unsuitable locations described above are for cultivation areas associated with these two groups; they are also the most widely studied areas in terms of climatic suitability in Brazil. However, over several decades, several Brazilian Arabica coffee breeding programs (IAC, IDR-Paraná, Procafé Foundation and EPAMIG/UFV) have developed cultivars with different levels of resistance to heat and drought, with the latter being more well studied. Resistance to drought has been reported in Arabica coffee cultivars with introgression of C. canephora15,21, 22, 23, 24, 25–26 (Acauã, Asabranca, Azulão, Beija-flor, Iapar 59, IPR 98, IPR 103, IBC Palma 1, IBC Palma 2, and Japy), C. liberica23,26,27 (IPR 100, IAC Catuaí SH3) and C. racemosa15 (cultivars called Siriema). Heat resistance has been reported in cultivars IPR 10322 and Sabiá Tardio15, both of which are Arabica coffees with introgression of C. canephora23. Therefore, in the locations with marginal or unsuitable conditions for Arabica coffee described above, cultivation of this species with cultivars more resistant to heat and drought is possible, but this approach needs to be confirmed with further studies.
Of the 1.872 million hectares designated for coffee harvesting in Brazil in 202214, only 38 thousand hectares were used for the production of certified specialty coffees7. The largest areas are located, in descending order, in the states of Minas Gerais, São Paulo, Goiás and Paraná, with approximately 82% of these areas destined for the production of specialty coffees in Minas Gerais (Fig. 2). One of the possible explanations for the larger area of specialty coffee cultivation in Minas Gerais is that this state is the largest Brazilian producer (Fig. 1). Another explanation is that in Minas Gerais, the production chain of specialty coffees is better structured, with a greater number of brokers, warehouses, associations, cooperatives, exporters and roasters.
Fig. 2 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Production area and number of specialty coffee producers in Brazil (hectares on properties associated with the Brazilian Association of Specialty Coffees—BSCA).
Source: BSCA (2023).
The state of São Paulo, the second largest producer of specialty coffees according to the BSCA, has approximately 4 thousand hectares of coffee cultivation; that is, approximately 10% of the total cultivation. São Paulo is also the second largest Brazilian producer of Arabica coffee (Fig. 1). Within São Paulo, there is a greater concentration of specialty coffee producers in the Mogiana region, probably because they are close to the border with southern Minas Gerais, where the production chain is more developed—with greater availability of cooperatives, infrastructure, technical assistance, and market access dedicated to specialty coffee.
Goiás produced 3.25 times more specialty coffees than Paraná, even though the amounts of Arabica coffee produced in the two states was similar (Fig. 1). This could be explained by the greater area per producer, greater use of technology (e.g., mechanization, irrigation) among producers and more favorable environment for the production of specialty coffees in Goiás than in Paraná. The average area per producer in the state of Goiás was 651 ha, while in Paraná, it was 200 ha.
The temperature, elevation and latitude of cultivation sites are essential factors for obtaining specialty coffees28. Temperature affects beverage quality, and this factor is directly related to elevation and latitude. Coffee plantations located in locations with milder temperatures have higher beverage quality than those in warmer locations because the fruits ripen more slowly. Each 100 m increase in elevation corresponds to a decrease in temperature of 0.6 °C29. In addition, coffees planted at higher elevations have more dense beans and produce more acidic beverages. Although latitude also affects air temperature, this factor is not always associated with improved beverage quality. Coffee production in Paraná is concentrated in northern Pioneiro (Fig. 1), which has an average elevation of approximately 700 m, while in the states of Minas Gerais and São Paulo, cultivation sites are located above 1000 m15. Despite the higher elevations in Minas Gerais and in the Mogiana region of São Paulo, the latitudes of these regions are lower than those in the northern Pioneiro do Paraná locations.
Certifications adopted in the production areas of BSCA members
The specialty coffee market is receiving increasing recognition, highlighting the importance of quality certificates both in production and in the final product. Certifications ensure that coffee production complies with social, environmental, and quality standards.
To acquire the BSCA quality seal, the following requirements must be met7: (i) the producer must be affiliated with the BSCA in the producer category; (ii) the associate must send a 2 kg sample of the lot to be evaluated; (iii) the BSCA will label this sample and send 200 g to three tasters randomly chosen from among its evaluators, as well as to the organization’s technical officer, while the remainder of the sample is kept in the BSCA’s laboratory; (iv) the evaluators will examine the sample’s type, color, appearance, size and degree of roasting; (v) the same evaluators will analyze the appearance, cleanliness of the beverage, sweetness, acidity, body, flavor, aftertaste and general balance of the roasted and ground beans; (vi) to be certified, the coffee must receive a score equal to or greater than 80, and no parameter may have a score of zero; and finally, (vii) the samples that meet the requirements will receive the BSCA coffee quality certificate. In addition, an audit is performed, without prior notice, by an employee of the BSCA or by a company appointed by the association to perform the service. If a product divergence is found, the penalties include the loss of the coffee quality certificate.
Certifications have several appeals that vary according to the context in which they were created and developed. Therefore, depending on the established appeal, properties may have one or more certifications. There are several certifications that pertain to both agricultural production and industrial production of specialty coffee and consider factors such as environmental suitability (e.g., the organic seal of the Biodynamic Institute for Rural Development (IBD certifications); socioenvironmental factors (e.g., the Rainforest Alliance, Utz Certified and Starbucks CAFE practices); social factors (e.g., Fair and Solidarity Trade); and management and quality (e.g., Certifica Minas and the Coffee Quality Program of the Brazilian Coffee Industry Association—ABIC). Furthermore, some certifications attest to the organoleptic quality of coffees (such as that of the BSCA). In addition to these certifications, there are also those related to origin, which consider the origin and geography of samples, such as the Cerrado Mineiro region, the Serra da Mantiqueira region of Minas Gerais, the West Baiano region, the North Pioneiro region of Paraná and the Alta Mogiana region in São Paulo. Thus, the flexibility and adaptability of certification programs are evidenced by their wide range of options, which allows them to meet the specific demands of consumers.
The properties associated with the BSCA have different certifications (Fig. 3). Some properties have more than one certification to appeal to a wider subset of the international market. Of the 175 specialty coffee-producing properties associated with the BSCA in 2023, 74 had the Rainforest Alliance certification, 74 had the Utz Certified seal, 34 had the Certifica Minas, 9 had IBD certifications, 1 had the Starbucks CAFE practices certification and 29 had no additional certification.
Fig. 3 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Certifications and number of certified farms associated with the Brazilian Association of Specialty Coffees (BSCA).
Source: BSCA (2023).
Certifications offer several benefits that go beyond the validation of sustainable practices30. In addition to reinforcing the environmental and social commitments of the producer, such certifications have the potential to facilitate trade by providing privileged access to specific markets that value quality and sustainability. The credibility conferred by certifications, such as those of the Rainforest Alliance or Fair Trade, not only validates the effort of the producer to adopt responsible practices but also adds value to the product31.
The growing demand for specialty coffees, often from certified origins, results in a more positive perception by consumers, which, in turn, can translate into higher prices and profits for the producer32. Thus, certifications not only promote social and environmental responsibility but also are strategic for boosting the profitability and competitiveness of specialty coffee producers.
Genetic aspects of quality and cultivars planted in specialty coffees areas
Although genetics is recognized as one of the factors responsible for influencing the production of specialty coffees, much of the information about the genetic potential of cultivars is contradictory. This can also be observed by the different classifications found in the literature. Based on information provided by the World Coffee Research—WCR33, the potential quality of Arabica coffee varieties can be classified into five categories: very low, low, good, very good and exceptional. According to the WCR, the cultivars Casiopea, Geisha, Mibirizi, Pacamara, SL28 and SL34 are classified as exceptional. However, none of these cultivars are registered for cultivation in Brazil, based on the National Registry of Cultivars—RNC34.
Among the Brazilian cultivars included in the RNC, only eight appear in the cultivar catalog of the WCR. Typica, Bourbon and Maragogipe are classified as having very good beverage quality; Caturra, Catuaí, Mundo Novo and Obatã Vermelho IAC 1669–20 have good beverage quality; and Iapar 59 is reported to have low beverage quality33. However, the basis used by the agency to define the drinking potential of these cultivars is unclear.
The main Brazilian cultivars are classified as regular or differentiated based on their genetic potential for specialty coffees as evaluated mainly by sensory analysis and beverage quality contests35. In addition, the conditions during handling and harvesting and in the postharvest period contribute to the formation of excellent beverages even with the use of cultivars classified as regular.
Among the 72 properties associated with the BSCA (Fig. 4), Mundo Novo and Catuaí were the most common and second most commonly planted cultivars, respectively. In general, these cultivars are reported to have a good9,33,36 or fair15,35 beverage quality. For the cultivars of the Bourbon group, those with yellow fruits are preferred for cultivation on properties associated with the BSCA and are the third most widely planted cultivars. The cultivation of Bourbon Vermelho was observed on nine other properties, for a total of 50 sites with cultivars belonging to the Bourbon group. The genotypes of this group are usually classified as having very good15,33, differentiated35 or even excellent36 beverage quality and are among the favorites on the international market due to their desirable attributes37.
Fig. 4 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Frequency of cultivars on farms certified associated with the Brazilian Association of Specialty Coffees (BSCA).
Source: BSCA (2023).
Among the 13 cultivars derived from Catuaí, only Catuaí Amarelo IAC 62 has been reported to be associated with the genetic potential for quality35. Due to the existence of several cultivars, the popularization of these genotypes has led to them being known as “Catuaí”, and in some cases, they are grouped according to the red or yellow colors of the fruit38. Thus, it is not possible to determine how many of these reports refer to Catuaí Amarelo IAC 62 or are related to the quality of other cultivars of Catuaí.
This situation also usually occurs for materials named Mundo Novo and Bourbon and is reflected in the data reported by the producers to the BSCA. As for Catuaí, the information provided by the BSCA does not specify which of the cultivars planted are included in the accounting for Mundo Novo and Bourbon. In the case of Bourbon, eight cultivars are registered in the RNC, seven of which have yellow fruits and one of which has red fruits34. However, the data reported by the BSCA account for only Bourbon Amarelo and Bourbon Vermelho.
Currently, 121 cultivars are described in the RNC, six of which are known as Mundo Novo. Three other cultivars, named Acaiá, are also essentially derived from Mundo Novo22,35. When considering the grouping of these cultivars with similar origins, the sum of Acaiá and Mundo Novo accounted for cultivation on 110 properties associated with the BSCA.
The total number of farms with cultivation of Arabica coffee cultivars with introgression from C. canephora was 87. Derivatives of Híbrido de Timor account for 51.72% of this total, characterized by the following cultivars: Tupi IAC 1669-33, Catiguá MG1, Catiguá MG2 MGS Catiguá 3, IAC 125 RN, Acauã, MGS Paraiso 2, Obatã IAC 1669-20, Oeiras MG 6851, Sarchimor MG8840, IPR 98, Iapar 59, Paraíso MG H 419-1 and Araponga MG1. The cultivars derived from Icatu (Icatu Amarelo IAC 2944 and Icatu Vermelho IAC 4045) and from the cross of Icatu x Catuaí (with the name Catucaí) account for another 48.28% of the total. The preference for these materials is probably due to their higher resistance to coffee leaf rust compared to that of pure Arabica cultivars20.
In general, it is believed that cultivars with a pure C. arabica origin may have better beverage quality9; such cultivars include wild Ethiopian coffee trees and the cultivars Bourbon, Typica, Geisha, Java, Mundo Novo, Sumatra, Caturra and Catuaí39. High-quality coffees tend to be produced by Typica and Bourbon derivatives, even if these genotypes are not classified by World Coffee Research as having the potential for exceptional beverage quality40.
Among the 23 cultivars classified as having differentiated beverage qualities, nine are pure C. arabica and are derived from the Typica and Bourbon groups35. Among these cultivars, six are derived from the Bourbon germplasm (Bourbon Amarelo IAC J10, Bourbon Vermelho IAC 662, Caturra Amarelo IAC 476, Caturra Vermelho IAC 477, Laurina IAC 870 and Ibairi IAC 4761); two are derived from Typica (Maragogipe Vermelho and Amarelo); and only one belongs to the Catuaí group (Catuaí Amarelo IAC 62). Among these cultivars, only Catuaí Amarelo IAC 62 is classified as having a high yield, while the others have very low, low and medium yields22.
Arabica coffee varieties with introgressed C. canephora genes tend to exhibit undesirable traits40. However, among the Brazilian cultivars listed as differentiated35, 14 have C. canephora introgression, 10 of which originate from the germplasm of Híbrido de Timor (Catiguá MG2 and MGS Paraiso 2, Arara, IAC 125 RN, Obatã IAC 1669-20, Iapar 59, IAC Obatã 4739, IPR 107, IPR Pérola, IPR 99) and three of which derived from Icatu (Catucaí 785-15, IPR 106, Icatu Precoce IAC 3282). In addition, IPR 108 has introgressions of both mentioned germplasms.
The genetic potential for beverage quality in Arabica coffee varieties with introgression of C. canephora can also be identified based on the list of the best coffees in quality competitions, such as the Cup of Excellence (COE) Brazil. The cultivars with introgression of C. canephora appear among the best Arabica coffees from 2019 to 2022: Arara, Catiguá MG1 Catiguá MG2 MGS Catiguá 3, Iapar 59, Obatã Vermelho 1669-20, MGS Paraiso 2, Acauãnovo, Icatu Amarelo IAC 2944, Catucaí-açu, Catucaiam 24137, Catucaí Amarelo 2SL, Catucaí 785-15 and Catucaí Vermelho.
The resulting 14 cultivars represented 26.66%, 43.33%, 29.03% and 33.33% of the best coffees in 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively. Overall, these cultivars had scores above 87.16 in the SCA classification. Values above 90.0 were achieved by Catucaí 785-15 (90.03) in 2020 and Catucaí Amarelo 2SL (90.53) in 202241. Thus, the use of cultivars with C. canephora introgressions also makes it possible to obtain coffees of exceptional quality and with scores higher than 90.
The best lots from the COE Brazil were predominated by cultivars from the Catuaí group, followed by Bourbon Amarelo and Geisha, and it is important to note that there was no mention of cultivars from the Mundo Novo group between 2019 and 20227. In addition, considering that the cultivars of the Mundo Novo, Catuaí and Bourbon groups are susceptible to pests and diseases15,35 the possibility of obtaining high-quality coffees from Arabica coffee with introgression of C. canephora, with respect to traits related to disease resistance, is a great advantage20,22,42. In addition to disease resistance, cultivars with introgression of C. canephora, such as Arara, Catucaí 785–15, MGS Paraiso 2, IAC 125 RN, IAC Obatã 4739, IPR 99, IPR 107 and IPR Pérola, exhibit high productivity and excellent beverage quality22,43, which can also increase the profitability of coffee growers. These factors may favor cultivation and the ability to obtain certifications, reduce production costs and, consequently, increase the profitability and sustainability of crops.
Processing methods of specialty coffees
The quality of coffee beans is directly influenced by the postharvest processing method since coffee beans are susceptible to spoilage44. The types of processing used were dry, semidry and wet. In dry processing, the harvested fruits are dried with the peel (exocarp) and pulp (mesocarp). The harvested fruits can go straight to drying or, before drying, they can be transferred a washer/separator to remove stones and separate the floating or dried fruits from the unripe and ripe fruits. The semidry processing method, also called natural pulped and pulped cherry or CD in Brazil, represents an intermediate system between dry and wet processing systems. After the same procedures performed in the dry method, the fruit is peeled by a machine, removing part of the pulp; the part of the pulp that remains adhered to the parchment (endocarp) is called the mucilage. The main objective of natural pulp processing is to mechanically separate ripe fruits from unripe fruits. During wet processing, after the fruits go through the same procedures used in the dry processing and semidry processing systems, the mucilage is removed from the fruits45.
Reports of Brazilian farmers regarding the names of postharvest stages tend to cause confusion, as observed in the data provided by the BSCA. A total of 23 names or terms were used in these data to describe the types of processing. Among the 175 properties analyzed, 39 used only one processing method (dry or semidry), 52 used at least 2 processing methods, and 52 used all 3 processing methods, demonstrating that for the same property, several processing methods are used. For the 32 rural properties, it was not possible to classify the processing methods as dry, semidry or wet (Fig. 5).
Fig. 5 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Number of times each coffee processing method was used on the properties associated with the Brazilian Association of Specialty Coffees (BSCA).
Source: BSCA (2023).
The information obtained by the BSCA was categorized, and the results showed that most Brazilian specialty coffee producers have adopted the semidry processing method, either using this method alone or in parallel with other methods. This selection is related to the type of harvesting most commonly adopted in Brazil, which tends to mix fruits at different stages of maturation45. Immature fruits tend to reduce beverage quality because they result in an astringent, bitter and/or vegetal flavor46; semidry processing was developed to solve this problem45. While husks can be removed from ripe fruits by mechanical removal, the same does not occur for immature fruits; as a result, it is possible to separate these two stages of maturity to obtain better quality coffees44. Based on this system, pulped natural coffees have become trusted by the consumer market as high-quality coffees that are free of the characteristics derived from immature beans and have a fuller-bodied beverage than coffees processed using other methods45.
Semidry processing has also been widely adopted. Preference for this method is common in Brazil, as well as in West African countries47, with approximately 60 to 80% of coffee farmers in Brazil opting for this type of processing44,48. As wet and semidry processing are more expensive than dry processing, Brazilian producers have given priority to the production of coffees using the dry method, while the preference for wet and semidry processing is limited to rural properties that employ a relatively high level of technology49.
However, despite being considered one of the easiest, simplest and least expensive means of postharvest processing, dry processing is also the most difficult to use in the production of specialty coffees. This is due to the higher moisture content of unpeeled fruits, which is equivalent to 82% to 90% of the pulp content50. Consequently, a longer drying period is needed for dry processing than for the other processes44. The occurrence of climatic variations can result in inconsistencies in drying, causing grains to become more vulnerable to the development of microorganisms that can affect beverage quality47,48.
To support the drying of the coffee, wet processing can be used to reduce the moisture and volume of the beans; the drying period and the risks of undesirable fermentation are also reduced as a result. However, only 19.82% of the properties associated with the BSCA use this processing method. Although the wet processing method was adopted less frequently than the dry and semidry methods, the wet method is the most commonly adopted method in other coffee-producing countries51. Regions in cooler and wetter locations should avoid dry processing to obtain higher quality coffees44. the wet processing method is usually used in coffee-growing regions of Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Mexico, El Salvador and Kenya52.
The fact that there are greater difficulties in producing specialty coffees by dry processing does not mean that it is impossible to produce specialty coffees by this method. In natural coffees obtained by the dry processing method, a longer drying period, during which the pulp and mucilage remain in contact, leads to the translocation of chemical constituents from the pulp to the bean, which has positive effects on beverage quality50. Most of the natural coffee produced in the world originates from the nonselective harvesting of fruits. During dry processing, immature, ripe, very ripe and dry fruits are processed together, and only dried fruits are separated using a washer/separator45. This mixture of fruits at different stages of maturation is one of the main reasons why the dry method results in a lower beverage quality than the semidry and wet methods. Therefore, selective harvesting of ripe fruits could be used to increase the beverage quality potential of dry-processed coffees.
On the other hand, it is not possible to guarantee improvements in coffee quality from the adoption of semidry and wet processing. In the semidry and wet processing methods, the skins of most ripe cherries are removed, which also eliminates most of the unripe fruits. In the wet method, the mucilage is also removed, reducing undesirable fermentations. These methods can have indirect effect on quality due to the removal of impurities, defective beans and immature fruits44, in addition to facilitating drying in environments with higher humidity47.
Thus, although processing is known to have a significant impact on the physical, chemical and sensory properties of the product53 in addition to coffee pricing51, the information found in the literature does not allow inference of the superiority of one processing method over another. Coffee quality is more strongly associated with the conditions throughout the postharvest stages in addition to the variables mentioned above, which influence the production of specialty coffees. The choice of processing method seems to be more strongly associated with the specific conditions in the cultivation environment, the level of technology available, the infrastructure, and the possibility of paying production costs.
Specialty coffee production chain
The coffee production chain can be divided into (i) suppliers of inputs for agricultural production; (ii) rural producers; (iii) cooperatives or brokers; (iv) the roasting and grinding industry; (v) coffee exporters; and (vi) domestic and foreign markets (Fig. 6). In addition, researchers, support staff (technical assistants and rural extension workers), and certifiers are involved at different stages of the production chain.
Fig. 6 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Specialty coffee production chain.
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
Research plays a key role in the production and marketing of green coffee (in natura), focusing on the new demands of roasters and local and international consumers. It has benefited several segments of the production chain, such as at the industry level, which has sought improvements in production processes (cost and time) and in the creation of new products54,55. Such research was conducted mainly by public institutes such as Instituto Agronômico (IAC); Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária de Minas Gerais (Epamig); the Procafé Foundation; the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA); Instituto Capixaba de Pesquisa; Assistência Técnica e Extensão Rural (Incaper); Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Pesagro-Rio); Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia (UESB); Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA),; Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV); Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa); and the Institute of Rural Development of Paraná (IAPAR-EMATER) (IDR-Paraná). Additional research on coffee has been conducted by other institutes and universities, such as Instituto Biológico, Instituto Federal do Sul de Minas, ESALQ, UNESP, Unicamp, ITAL and UEL. The scientists associated with these institutes conducted studies in the states of Minas Gerais, São Paulo, Espírito Santo, Paraná, Rio de Janeiro and Bahia. In Minas Gerais, research has been conducted mainly by Epamig, UFLA, UFV and Fundação Procafé. In São Paulo, research has been predominantly conducted by IAC with the support of other institutes, such as the Biological Institute, and universities, such as ESALQ and UNESP. The studies conducted in the states of Espírito Santo, Paraná, Rio de Janeiro and Bahia have been conducted mainly by Incaper, IDR-Paraná, Pesagro-Rio and UESB, respectively. Embrapa coordinates the Brazilian Coffee Research and Development Consortium, which is headquartered in the Federal District, and several of its researchers are headquartered in other institutes in other states. The main lines of research of these institutes are cultivars, management from planting to harvest, postharvest processing, the development of new products from residues, chemical components of raw and roasted beans, and roasting and preparation of beverages. Private companies also conduct research on coffee cultivation; these studies are mainly related to the testing and development of new machines and agricultural inputs. Associations and cooperatives also perform cultivar validation tests.
Inputs play a key role in the production chain of specialty coffee in Brazil. Proper use of inputs is essential for the production of high-quality coffee that meets the demands of the international market and can add value to the coffee production chain in the country. Cooperatives play a significant role in the acquisition of inputs56, as is the case for cooperative producers who can benefit from lower prices due to joint purchases.
For rural producers, the production stages require the producer’s technical and practical knowledge, and these producers must be attentive to all the details to ensure the quality of the specialty coffees. The coffee must be harvested by hand, taking care not to damage the beans, and separated into batches according to their quality57. During the drying stage, the producer needs to dry the beans properly, controlling the humidity and temperature, which is essential to ensure the preservation of the flavor and aroma of the coffee48. Technical assistance and rural extension are highly important, as they allow coffee farmers to adopt the technologies necessary to achieve high levels of productivity and beverage quality. Generally, larger and more capitalized producers are able to hire specialized consulting services from private companies to achieve high profitability. However, most Brazilian coffee farmers are smallholders who depend on other types of technical assistance. These smallholders can be served by public technical assistance programs, which have a limited capacity because they employ few technicians; thus, coffee farmers receive only partial assistance. Associations, cooperatives and even agricultural product stores have agronomists who provide technical assistance for small to large producers.
In addition to the production of green coffee, there are several possible trajectories that beans can follow. They can be exported directly by the producer or through cooperatives and brokers. If they are not exported, the beans can go through beneficiation processes and be used in the roasting and grinding industries, as well as in the coffee industry. This process also includes the commercialization of packaging and graphics and the printing of labels. The roasting and grinding industries, as well as the soluble coffee industry, represent sectors of great socioeconomic importance for the industrialization of coffee. These sectors are still undergoing consolidation in terms of industrial development. Despite recent advances, the industry is still characterized by technological and managerial insufficiencies.
The production, storage and export of specialty coffees are concentrated mainly in the state of Minas Gerais (Fig. 7). In addition to the aforementioned states, only Paraná, Mato Grosso do Sul, Goiás, Rio de Janeiro and Espírito Santo have certified producers.
Fig. 7 [Images not available. See PDF.]
Distribution of producers, warehouses, brokers, associations and cooperatives, roasters and exporters of specialty coffees in Brazil.
Source: BSCA (2023).
Most specialty coffee roasters are located in the state of Minas Gerais and Mogiana in São Paulo, as these are the regions where most producers are located; these producers manufacture their own roasted specialty coffee and sell it on the Brazilian market. In coffee-producing states with a lower concentration of coffee growers, roasters serve producers from other states and, mainly, the local consumer market. Such a system can be observed in the metropolitan regions of São Paulo and Campinas in the state of São Paulo; Londrina, Maringá and Curitiba in Paraná; Rio de Janeiro in the state of Rio de Janeiro; and Vitória in Espírito Santo. Roasters are also located in states where production does not occur, such as the states of Distrito Federal, Mato Grosso, Santa Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul, Pernambuco, Paraíba and Alagoas. In these nonproducing regions, roasters sell mainly in the local market, but they also sell to other states. Certified warehouses and brokers are located only in Minas Gerais, where a large proportion of the production is concentrated.
The production of specialty coffees is still limited to a few producers because the harvest and postharvest processes needed to achieve such coffees require relatively high investment, especially for postharvest structures such as washers, pulpers, separators, and dryers58. Another factor is the lack of buyers for specialty coffees, as there are few specialty coffee warehouses and exporters throughout Brazil.
Significant changes in the coffee market have been noted related to product differentiation and quality improvement, and consumers are willing to pay more for specialty coffees because they cannot be replaced by other types of coffee. These changes were driven by increased demand for quality coffees from specific origins, by the emergence of new marketing strategies for the coffee beverages, by greater sensitivity to environmental sustainability and by the challenges and vulnerabilities of coffee farmers59.
The coffee production and processing sector is interconnected with other economic sectors, as it relies on raw materials from other sectors (fertilizers, crop protection products, machinery and equipment) and provides inputs for various industries (roasting, sweets and candies, soluble coffee, medicinal products and foods and beverages in general). Thus, disruptions in this sector, such as supply, demand, stock retention policies and exchange rate variations, can have multiplier effects on the economy60.
In summary, Brazil is one of the largest coffee producers in the world, and the specialty coffee supply chain in the country presents notable strengths, such as a favorable climate for diverse cultivars, an expanding base of producers committed to quality, and a growing network of cooperatives and research institutions focused on innovation and technical development. However, important challenges and weaknesses remain, including limited access to postharvest infrastructure (e.g., washers, pulpers, dryers), unequal access to technical assistance, and a low number of certified warehouses and exporters—particularly outside the state of Minas Gerais. These structural limitations restrict broader participation in the specialty segment, especially among smallholders.
Despite these constraints, the sector also presents significant opportunities, such as increasing global demand for differentiated and traceable products, growth potential in domestic consumption of specialty coffee, and the emergence of new market strategies centered on sustainability, origin, and storytelling. Strengthening the logistics chain, expanding access to technical training and financing, and improving market linkages can help unlock the full potential of Brazilian specialty coffee in both domestic and international markets.
Conclusions
The largest production areas of specialty coffees from producers associated with the BSCA are concentrated in the state of Minas Gerais and in the northern region of the state of São Paulo. These regions benefit from more developed production chains, better infrastructure, and the presence of certified warehouses and brokers, which facilitate higher production volumes and market access.
Areas with roasting capabilities were identified in states without production areas, such as Mato Grosso, Santa Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul, Pernambuco, Paraíba and Alagoas. This can be explained by the flow of products destined for export. Only the state of Minas Gerais has warehouses and brokers certified by the BSCA, which contributed to the greater volume produced in this state.
Most of the properties associated with the BSCA had more than one certification. Of the 175 farms analyzed in the study, 146 had at least some type of certification independent of the BSCA, i.e., only 29 producers associated with the BSCA sell their products with only the BSCA certificate.In general, the producers associated with the BSCA adopted more than one coffee processing method.
The production of specialty coffees remains concentrated among a limited group of producers. This restriction is largely due to structural barriers, including high costs associated with postharvest infrastructure, certification processes, and traceability systems—challenges that particularly affect smallholders.
These findings suggest important implications for public policy and supply chain management. Expanding access to technical assistance, rural credit, and infrastructure investment is essential to enable broader inclusion in the specialty coffee segment. Incentives that support the formation of cooperatives, simplify certification procedures, and promote the domestic consumption of specialty coffee could also contribute to strengthening the sector.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico—CNPq, and Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—CAPES.
Author contributions
G.H.S., B.V., and T.S.T. conceived and conceptualized the study. G.H.S., B.V., V.M.J., C.T.M.P. and T.S.T. curated the data, designed the methodology, performed the formal analysis, and drafting of the manuscript. G.H.S. and TST approved the final version of the manuscript. All authors contributed to reviewing the manuscript.
Data availability
The datasets generated or analysed during the current study are available: in the Municipal Agricultural Production Survey (PAM) – Sistema IBGE de Recuperação Automática (SIDRA) repository, by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) [https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/pam/]; in the Brazilian Specialty Coffees Association (BSCA) [https://www.bsca.com.br/]; in the Ministério do Desenvolvimento, Indústria, Comércio e Serviços (MDIC) repository [http://comexstat.mdic.gov.br]; and in Registro Nacional de Cultivares (RNC) repository, by the Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária (MAPA) [https://sistemas.agricultura.gov.br/snpc/cultivarweb/].
Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
1. FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT. Available at https://www.fao.org/faostat. Accessed on 21 November 2023 (2023).
2. MDIC—Ministério do Desenvolvimento, Indústria, Comércio e Serviços. COMEX STAT. Disponível em: http://comexstat.mdic.gov.br. Accessed on 28 March 2023 (2023).
3. Teixeira, AL et al. Amazonian Robustas—new Coffea canephora coffee cultivars for the Western Brazilian Amazon. Crop Breed. Appl. Biotechnol.; 2020; 20, [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1984-70332020v20n3c53] e323420318.
4. CECAFÉ—Conselho dos Exportadores de Caf’e do Brasil. Relatório mensal—Dezembro 2022. Available at https://www.cecafe.com.br. Accessed on 28 January 2023 (2023).
5. Quintão, RT; Brito, EPZ; Belk, RW. The taste transformation ritual in the specialty coffee market. Revista de Administração de Empresas; 2017; 57,
6. SCA - Specialty Coffee Association. Available at https://sca.coffee/. Accessed on 27 January 2023 (2023).
7. BSCA - Brazil Specialty Coffee Association. Available at http://bsca.com.br. Accessed on 30 january 2023 (2023).
8. CQI - Coffee Quality Institute. Available at https://pt.coffeeinstitute.org/. Accessed on 25 January 2023 (2023).
9. Barbosa, ID et al. Sensory analysis of arabica coffee: Cultivars of rust resistance with potential for the specialty coffee market. Euphytica; 2020; 216, 165. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10681-020-02704-9]
10. SCTG—Specialty Coffee Transaction Guide. Researchers from transparent trade coffee. Available at www.transactionguide.coffee. Accessed on 08 April 2023 (2023).
11. Campos, ASN; Satolo, EG; Mac-Lean, PAB; BragaJúnior, SS. Economic sustainability analysis of the specialty coffee farmers in Garça/SP. Coffee Sci.; 2021; 16, e161993. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25186/.v16i.1993]
12. Cabrera, LC; Caldarelli, CE. Viabilidade econômica de certificações de café para produtores brasileiros. Revista de Política Agrícola; 2021; 30, 64.
13. Boaventura, PSM; Abdalla, CC; Araújo, CL; Arakelian, JS. Value co-creation in the specialty coffee value chain: the third-wave coffee movement. Rev. Adm. Empresas; 2018; 58, pp. 254-266. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020180306]
14. IBGE - Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. PAM - Municipal Agricultural Production survey. Available at http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br/. Accessed on 17 November 2023 (2023).
15. Matiello, J. B., Santinato, R., Almeida, S. R. & Garcia, A. W. R. Cultivares de café no Brasil: Manual de recomendações (Ministério da Agricultura e do Abastecimento, Fundação Procafé, 2020).
16. Volsi, B; Telles, TS; Caldarelli, CE; Câmara, MRG. The dynamics of coffee production in Brazil. PLoS ONE; 2019; 14, 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC1MXhs1yqtLvM [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219742] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31335891][PubMedCentral: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6650033]e0219742.
17. Godoy, AH et al. Coffee leaf miner incidence and its predation by wasp in coffee intercropped with rubber trees. Coffee Sci.; 2018; 13, pp. 389-400. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25186/cs.v13i3.1487]
18. Moreira, SLS et al. Intercropping of coffee with the palm tree, macauba, can mitigate climate change effects. Agric. For. Meteorol.; 2018; 256, pp. 379-390.2018AgFM.256.379M [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2018.03.026]
19. Silva, PSO et al. Effects of calcium particle films and natural shading on ecophysiological parameters of conilon coffee. Sci. Hortic.; 2019; 245, pp. 171-177.1:CAS:528:DC%2BC1cXhvFCgsrjL [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2018.10.010]
20. Sera, GH et al. Coffee leaf rust in Brazil: Historical events, current situation and control measures. Agronomy; 2022; 12,
21. Van der Vossen, H; Bertrand, B; Charrier, A. Next generation variety development for sustainable production of Arabica coffee (Coffea arabica L.): A review. Euphytica; 2015; 204, pp. 243-256.1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXivVSnsr8%3D [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10681-015-1398-z]
22. Sera, T; Sera, GH; Fazuoli, LC. IPR 103—Rustic dwarf Arabic coffee cultivar more adapted to hot regions and poor soils. Crop Breed. Appl. Biotechnol.; 2013; 13, pp. 95-98. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1984-70332013000100012]
23. Sera, T et al. IPR 100 - Rustic dwarf Arabica coffee cultivar with resistance to nematodes Meloidogyne paranaensis and M. incognita. Crop Breed. Appl. Biotechnol.; 2017; 17, pp. 175-179.1:CAS:528:DC%2BC1cXhsFCmtrbK [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1984-70332017v17n2c26]
24. Freire, LP; Marraccini, P; Rodrigues, GC; Andrade, AC. Análise da expressão do gene da manose 6 fosfatos redutase em cafeeiros submetidos ao déficit hídrico no campo. Coffee Sci.; 2013; 8, pp. 17-23.
25. Pereira, AA; Baião, AC. Sakiyama, NS; Martinez, HEP; Tomaz, MA; Borém, A. Cultivares. Café arábica: do plantio à colheita; 2015; Lavras, Editora UFV: pp. 24-45.
26. Carvalho, FG et al. Tolerância ao déficit hídrico em mudas de genótipos de café portadores de genes de diferentes espécies. Coffee Sci.; 2017; 12,
27. Fazuoli, LC et al. IAC Catuaí SH3—A dwarf Arabica coffee cultivar with leaf rust resistance and drought tolerance. Crop Breed. Appl. Biotechnol.; 2019; 19,
28. Silva, SA; Queiroz, DM; Ferreira, WPM; Corrêa, PC; Rufino, JLS. Mapping the potential beverage quality of coffee produced in the Zona da Mata, Minas Gerais, Brazil. J. Sci. Food Agric.; 2016; 96, pp. 3098-3108.1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXhvVajsrbP [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.7485] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26439192]
29. Wintgens, JN. Wintgens, JN. Factors influencing the quality of green coffee. Coffee: Growing, Processing, Sustainable Production—A Guidebook for Growers, Processors, Traders and Researchers; 2009; Weinheim, Wiley-VCH: pp. 789-809.
30. Vellema, W; Buritica Casanova, A; Gonzalez, C; D’Haese, M. The effect of specialty coffee certification on household livelihood strategies and specialisation. Food Policy; 2015; 57, pp. 13-25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.07.003]
31. Mitiku, F; De Mey, Y; Nyssen, J; Maertens, M. Do private sustainability standards contribute to income growth and poverty alleviation? A comparison of different coffee certification schemes in Ethiopia. Sustainability; 2017; 9, 246.2017Sust..9.246M [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su9020246]
32. Haggar, J; Sato, G; Casanoves, F; Virginio, EM. Environmental-economic benefits and trade-offs on sustainably certified coffee farms. Ecol. Ind.; 2017; 79, pp. 330-337. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.04.023]
33. WCR—World Coffee Research. Varieties catalog: Arabica coffee. Available at https://varieties.worldcoffeeresearch.org/es/arabica. Accessed on 18 June 2023.
34. RNC—Registro Nacional de Cultivares. Cultivar Web. Available at https://sistemas.agricultura.gov.br/snpc/cultivarweb. Accessed on 17 June 2023. (2023).
35. Carvalho, CHS et al. Catálogo de cultivares de café arábica; 2022; Brasília, Embrapa Café:
36. Fazuoli, LC et al. Cultivares de café arábica do IAC: Um patrimônio da cafeicultura brasileira. O Agronômico; 2007; 59, pp. 12-15.
37. Piccino, S; Boulanger, R; Descroix, F; Sing, ASC. Aromatic composition and potent odorants of the “specialty coffee” brew “Bourbon Pointu” correlated to its three trade classifications. Food Res. Int.; 2014; 61, pp. 264-271.1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXht1GmsbbO [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2013.07.034]
38. Carvalho, CHS et al. Carvalho, CHS et al. Cultivares de café de porte baixo. Cultivares de café: origem, características e recomendações; 2008; Brasília, Embrapa Café: pp. 157-226.
39. Montagnon, C; Marraccini, P; Bertrand, B. Oberthür, T; Läderach, P; Pohlan, HAJ; Cock, J. Breeding for coffee quality. Specialty Coffee: Managing Quality; 2012; Merced, International Plant Nutrition Institute: pp. 93-122.
40. Eskes, AB; Leroy, T. Wintgens, JN. Coffee selection and breeding. Coffee: Growing, Processing, Sustainable Production—A Guidebook for Growers, Processors, Traders and Researchers; 2009; Weinheim, Wiley-VCH: pp. 57-86. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9783527619627.ch3]
41. COE—Cup of Excellence. Brazil 2022. Available at https://allianceforcoffeeexcellence.org/brazil-2022. Accessed on 14 December 2023 (2023).
42. Silva, MC et al. Coffee resistance to the main diseases: Leaf rust and coffee berry disease. Braz. J. Plant. Physiol.; 2006; 18,
43. Salojärvi, J et al. The genome and population genomics of allopolyploid Coffea arabica reveal the diversification history of modern coffee cultivars. Nat. Genet.; 2024; 56, pp. 721-731.1:CAS:528:DC%2BB2cXotlKitr0%3D [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41588-024-01695-w] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38622339][PubMedCentral: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11018527]
44. Teixeira, MM; Lacerda Filho, AF; Oliveira, MVM; Silva, FAP; Moreira, RMG. Sakiyama, NS; Martinez, HEP; Tomaz, MA; Borém, A. Colheita e pós-colheita. Café arábica: Do plantio à colheita; 2015; Lavras, Editora UFV: pp. 216-249.
45. Brando, CHJ. Wintgens, JN. Harvest and green coffee processing. Coffee: Growing, Processing, Sustainable Production—A Guidebook for Growers, Processors, Traders and Researchers; 2009; Weinheim, Wiley-VCH: pp. 604-715. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9783527619627.ch24]
46. Van der Vossen, HAM. The cup quality of disease-resistant cultivars of Arabica coffee (Coffea arabica). Exp. Agric.; 2009; 45, pp. 323-332. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0014479709007595]
47. Banti, M; Abrahan, E. Coffee processing methods, coffee quality and related environmental issues. J. Food Nutr. Sci.; 2021; 9, pp. 144-152. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20210906.12]
48. Poltronieri, P; Rossi, F. Challenges in specialty coffee processing and quality assurance. Challenges; 2016; 7, 19. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/challe7020019]
49. Silva, JS; Moreli, AP; Soares, SF; Donzeles, SML; Vitor, DG. Produção de café cereja descascado—Equipamentos e custo de processamento; 2013; Brasília, Embrapa Café:
50. Cleves, RS. Wintgens, JN. Ecological processing of coffee and use of byproducts. Coffee: Growing, Processing, Sustainable Production—A Guidebook for Growers, Processors, Traders and Researchers; 2009; Weinheim, Wiley-VCH: pp. 716-730. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9783527619627.ch25]
51. Traoré, TM; Wilson, NLW; Fields, D, III. What explains specialty coffee quality scores and prices: a case study from the cup of excellence program. J. Agric. Appl. Econ.; 2018; 50,
52. Borém, FM. Borém, FM. Processamento do café. Pós colheita do café; 2015; Editora UFLA, Lavras: pp. 127-158.
53. Febrianto, NA; Zhu, F. Coffee bean processing: Emerging methods and their effects on chemical, biological and sensory properties. Food Chem.; 2023; 412, 1:CAS:528:DC%2BB3sXitFKlsrc%3D [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135489] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36716620]135489.
54. Guimarães, ER; Leme, PHMV; Rezende, DC; Pereira, SP; Santos, AC. The brand new Brazilian specialty coffee market. J. Food Prod. Mark.; 2019; 25,
55. Costa, BR. Almeida, FL; Spers, EE. Brazilian specialty coffee scenario. Coffee Consumption and Industry Strategies in Brazil; 2020; Sawston, Woodhead Publishing: pp. 51-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814721-4.00003-2]
56. Gonçalves, C; Zylbersztajn, D. Almeida, FL; Spers, EE. Business history and challenges for coffee cooperatives in Brazil: The case of Cooxupé Cooperative. Coffee Consumption and Industry Strategies in Brazil; 2020; Sawston, Woodhead Publishing: pp. 203-228. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814721-4.00015-9]
57. Hernandez-Aguilera, JN et al. Quality as a driver of sustainable agricultural value chains: The case of the relationship coffee model. Bus. Strategy Environ.; 2018; 27,
58. Magalhães Júnior, AI et al. A critical techno-economic analysis of coffee processing utilizing a modern fermentation system: Implications for specialty coffee production. Food Bioprod. Process.; 2021; 125, pp. 14-21.1:CAS:528:DC%2BB3cXitlWgtr3K [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2020.10.010]
59. Borrella, I; Mataix, C; Carrasco-Gallego, R. Smallholder farmers in the speciality coffee industry: Opportunities, constraints and the businesses that are making it possible. IDS Bull.; 2015; 46, pp. 29-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1759-5436.12142]
60. Santos, VE; Gomes, MFM; Braga, MJ; Silveira, SFR. Análise do setor de produção e processamento de café em Minas Gerais: uma abordagem matriz insumo-produto. Rev. Econ. Sociol. Rural; 2009; 47, pp. 363-388. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032009000200003]
© The Author(s) 2025. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the "License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.