Growing Together: How Coffee, Forest Conservation and Livelihoods Reinforce Each Other in Ethiopia's Yayu Biosphere

In Ethiopia’s Yayu Coffee Forest, protecting the forest also means protecting the future of coffee and the people who depend on it. The forest is one of the birthplaces of wild Arabica coffee, a biodiversity hotspot, and part of a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. At the same time, it is a lived-in landscape: Yayu's transition zone is home to more than 150,000 people who depend on coffee and forest resources for their livelihoods.

This connection is what makes Yayu unique – and what makes conservation challenging. Coffee grows naturally in forests, semi-forest systems, and garden plots close to people’s homes. But many plots do not reach their full potential: Trees are old, productivity low, and agronomic knowledge and resources limited. As population density increases and families seek higher incomes, cultivation further expands into protected areas. The result is mounting pressure on the forest, leading to degradation, biodiversity loss, declining soil quality and reduced carbon storage capacity – threatening the ecosystem in which coffee grows.

But more productive, resilient, and valuable coffee landscapes can also become part of the solution. The project “Restoring Degraded Coffee Landscapes,” funded by the International Climate Initiative (IKI) and the German Federal Ministry for the Environment (BMUV), addressed this very issue. Implemented by Hanns R. Neumann Stiftung, the project ran in two phases from 2018 to 2025: the first from 2018 to 2021 and the second from 2022 to 2025. From the beginning, it was built on the idea that coffee, forest, and livelihoods reinforce each other – and need to be strengthened as one system. “In Ethiopia, without forest conservation, we cannot think about coffee and coffee management,” explains Sisay Abebe, Project Manager at HRNS in Ethiopia.

Through 80 farmer field schools and 80 demonstration plots, the project reached more than 2,000 households with the agronomic knowledge to grow and process coffee more sustainably, without clearing more land: from pruning and mulching to shade-tree planting and stumping old trees.

The project also restored the landscape directly: 300,000 seedlings were planted, 24 community nurseries were established, and energy-saving stoves distributed. A structured Gender Household Approach (GHA) complemented the training with shared household planning, decision-making, and visions. Eight farmer cooperatives and the regional coffee union were supported in governance, record keeping, marketing, and organizational development.

Evaluation and project monitoring data from the second project phase (2022–2025) show that this integrated approach translated into significant improvements:

Adoption of good agricultural practices (GAPs) increased from 36% to 72%, with 71.5% of farmers adopting at least two climate-smart practices by the 2025 endline. “The evidence shows that improved practices translated directly into higher earnings for households,” explains Rahel Kassa, Monitoring & Evaluation Coordinator at HRNS Ethiopia. GAP adopters achieved a 26% increase in average coffee income, and 78% of the target group reported higher incomes overall.

The project also strengthened institutions: Government and cooperative readiness for climate-smart agriculture rose from 48% to 78%, with more than 200 staff trained. Cooperatives increasingly used organizational scorecards to assess their governance and performance against clear indicators, with use rising from 29% to 68%. “This is a very big achievement – a foundation reform that underpins all other cooperative improvement,” says Rahel. At endline, 73% of cooperatives showed improved governance by 2025. Women’s empowerment also improved: The proportion of households reporting joint decision-making increased from 39% to 72%, and women’s leadership in cooperatives rose from 10% to 24%.

Looking across the full 2018–2025 project cycle, the two phases also generated evidence of climate and forest impact. “We found very significant differences contributing substantially to restoration, biomass production and carbon sequestration,” says Chalachew Gebeyehu, Co-Country Manager at HRNS Ethiopia. Project-supported plots recorded almost double the biomass of comparable non-project plots (0.080 vs. 0.039 tons per tree), and tree planting was estimated to have sequestered more than 15,000 tons of CO₂e (carbon dioxide equivalent). In total, almost 5,000 hectares came under improved conservation. Energy-saving cookstoves cut fuelwood use by an estimated 53.4%, reducing emissions by around 327 tons CO₂e per year and lowering pressure on about 4.6 hectares of forest annually.

Behind these numbers are design choices the evaluation points to as the real drivers of change:

1. Conservation and Livelihoods Were Treated as One System.

The project started from the understanding that farming families are more willing and able to protect forests when conservation is linked to clear livelihood benefits. “What we have seen is that balancing both is critical,” explains Sisay. “When farmers see clear economic benefits, they can conserve and help protect these areas.” To make this practical, the project helped families produce more and better coffee on existing plots. And the 14% premium achieved by one cooperative for deforestation-free coffee showed how forest-friendly production can become economically tangible.

2. Cooperatives Connected Coffee Farmers to Lasting Market Opportunities.

Higher incomes only translate into lasting change when local organizations can carry them forward. Strong farmer organizations were key to making the system of conservation and livelihoods work beyond individual farms. Cooperatives supported quality, traceability, certification, ownership, and – as Rahel emphasizes – marketing: “Farmers need reliable buyers who reward sustainability. That is why we have to connect cooperatives to premium markets and help them maintain certifications.”

3. Agricultural Knowledge Moved Through Trust.

Peer coaching drove adoption because, as Rahel puts it, “farmers trust farmers.” Farmers participating through a Lead Farmer – trained farmers who share practices with their peers – were 2.3 times more likely to adopt GAPs.

4. Gender Equality Was Designed In, Not Added On.

Technical training and GHA activities went hand in hand from the outset. For Rahel, this combination was key: “Change in women’s empowerment happened when we paired technical training with Gender Household Approach activities, engaging both men and women. Gender outcomes require intentional design – inclusive and participatory.”

5. Sustainability Was Built Through Local Ownership and Strong Systems From Day One.

“Sustainability shouldn’t be discussed in the final year,” emphasizes Sisay. “It should be built into the project design from day one.” In Yayu, this meant designing activities around farmer field schools, trained facilitators, cooperatives, nurseries, research partnerships, and digital monitoring systems – and embedding them into government and woreda structures early. This helped local institutions eventually take over key services. “We found that sustainability improves when local actors, or local stakeholders and institutions, take ownership,” stresses Sisay.

What these shifts look like for one household is visible in the story of Mulinesh Ejerso, who heads her own family and had long depended on an aging, low-yielding coffee farm. Through the Bikila Farmer Field School, she learned proper stumping and other good agricultural practices – and her income doubled. The GHA helped her manage her finances for the first time, and she opened her first bank account. “We used to work hard and earn small,” she says. “Now, I work smarter, and I know where I spend every penny.” She now plans to diversify further into agroforestry.

Mulinesh’s story shows what “growing together” means in practice: Climate-smart practices become more powerful when combined with inclusion, stronger institutions, and market opportunities.

The evaluation shows how these elements worked together at project level: Better agronomy helped increase incomes; stronger cooperatives and market incentives turned sustainable production into economic value; women’s empowerment made these changes more inclusive; and stronger local institutions embedded climate-smart practices for the long term. Together, these changes eased pressure on one of the world’s most important coffee landscapes – proof, as Sisay Abebe puts it, that “conservation and coffee production should be treated as one system.”

This is the central lesson from Ethiopia’s Yayu Biosphere: Coffee, forest, and livelihoods grow stronger when they grow together. Protecting one means strengthening the others.