Sourcing and roasting coffee of the highest quality is the core of our business, and we believe that promoting quality—in partnership with both our grower and customer partners—is the foundation for real economic sustainability from farm to cup. We make every effort not only to find great quality coffee for the benefit of coffee drinkers, but also for the benefit of coffee growers. We always communicate our cupping scores and quality assessments to our grower partners, that they might exercise greater control over their premium product. By providing information about and incentives for improving cup quality, Counter Culture can help growers sustain and improve quality in all areas: of life, of the environment, and in the cup.
Microlots are small lots of special coffees that Counter Culture selects to provide the best taste experiences to the consumer and to recognize coffee growers that produce extraordinary quality. A microlot may come from one grower within a community or co-operative of small growers; or a microlot may represent a small lot separated from a larger farm's lot. We identify microlots by cupping many small lots of coffee, which have been hand-separated and catalogued by our grower partners, and selecting the very best, often tiny lots based on cup quality. Each microlot is processed, roasted, and sold separately from the larger, still very high quality lot of coffee that we purchase from the same farmer or group. Our microlots are often among our most expensive coffees because we pay higher prices to the growers for these special lots to demonstrate that quality is important to us and our customers, and that we will keep working to find a market for the best coffees we taste.
It is important to note that some of our grower partners do not have the resources to manage the often-complex processes that result in microlots. Providing these growers with hands-on assistance and incentives to encourage quality development is just as important to us as working with farmers with well-established microlot-level quality. Therefore, we contribute to a number of training and capacity-building programs with farmers and communities that lack the lot separation necessary for microlots. Please visit our Origins page, which has up-to-date information about the progress of our current microlot and quality development projects around the world.
Click here to browse our selection of microlots coffees.
SCAA 2012: Do Microlots Matter to Producers?
4-21-12
The information presented in "Do Microlots Matter to Producers" derives from a study conducted by Counter Culture Coffee and published in March 2012 titled, "The Social Impacts of Microlots: A Coffee Cooperative Case Study in Ihuamaca, Peru." The study aimed to measure the social impacts of microlot selection on members of the CENFROCAFE cooperative in five Peruvian communities where Counter Culture Coffee has purchased coffee over the last five years.
The hypothesis prior to the study was that microlot coffee production may have both positive and negative impacts on communities, with positive impacts including recognition for effort and a return on investment in quality and negative impacts including feelings of envy and competition among fellow community members. The study design aimed to clarify the elements of microlot coffee production that contribute to its success and the areas that need improvement. Data was collected through 13 semi-structured, open-ended, qualitative interviews with microlot-producing and non-microlot-producing members of the cooperative, two interviews with CENFROCAFE staff members who work in these communities, and one facilitated community meeting.
We examined common themes and differences among members, as well as among members and Cenfrocafe representatives. Both microlot-producing members and non-microlot-producing members expressed support for the program and its continuation. Price incentives and pride emerged as the primary motivators for exerting extra effort, and members unanimously feel supportive of the microlot achievement of other community members. At the same time, all members expressed a desire to see the program evolve to address some commonly-cited areas for improvement, including the cupping and scoring system used by CENFROCAFE and Counter Culture Coffee and the on-farm infrastructure required for production of high-quality coffee. CENFROCAFE's staff demonstrated even more positive feelings overall, with a desire to create more, similar opportunities for growers in other communities of members as a top priority.
Limitations of the study include: small sample size, lack of diversity among sample, consideration for cultural congruency of the research design, and the survey instrument. Recommendations for enhancements of the partnership between CENFROCAFE and members as well as for CENFROCAFE and Counter Culture Coffee are addressed. Suggestions for future research are explored with an emphasis on a more participatory approach and an additional focus on economic impact of microlots.
Saludos,
Kim Elena
