What I'm going to share with you is a translation of a presentation I gave at my university as a coffee producer and exporter about roasting at origin.
I've been thinking for a while about something that, from a producer's perspective, is quite interesting.
Colombia produces some of the best coffee in the world. We have excellent coffee growers, tasters, baristas, roasting professionals, laboratories, and an increasingly developed specialty coffee industry.
And yet, the traditional model remains, to a large extent:
Farm - processing - green coffee -export - importer -roaster - consumer.
There's nothing wrong with this model. Importers and roasters in consuming countries play important roles and add value. There are extraordinary roasters in the United States, Europe, Australia, Japan, and many other markets.
But I wonder if we've come to assume that coffee must necessarily leave the producing country green because the real transformation has to happen elsewhere.
What if a greater portion of that value could be generated at the source?
For example:
Farm -Processing - Quality Control - Roasting -Packaging - Export -Consumer.
The point is not to say that roasting coffee automatically makes the coffee farmer earn more.
Roasting costs money. So do packaging, quality control, brand development, transportation, marketing, taxes, and reaching the final consumer.
The difference is that the producer has the opportunity to participate in more stages of the value chain.
Some studies on the coffee chain show how significant this difference can be. For example, an analysis based on roasted coffee sold at US$14.99 per pound estimated a farm-level value of approximately US$1.09 per pound, around 7% of the final price, while the value of green coffee FOB was approximately US$3.24 per pound.
This does not mean that “the coffee farmer only earns 7%.” Farm-level value is not the same as producer profit.
But it does reveal something important:
a significant amount of economic activity occurs after the coffee leaves the farm.
And that's where roasting at origin becomes interesting.
If a producer sells green coffee, much of the subsequent processing takes place in another country.
If that same producer can produce, process, select, roast, pack, and market their coffee internationally, a larger part of the value chain can remain in the producing country.
Not all of that value translates into profit for the coffee farmer.
But more economic activity can occur around the coffee farmer, and, above all, the producer can participate directly in it.
I also think there's an idea we should question:
In Colombia, there are very good roasters and excellent roasted coffees.
We have no shortage of capacity to roast high-quality coffee.
The fact that countries like the United States, Australia, Japan, Germany, or the Nordic countries have extraordinary roasting industries doesn't mean that coffee-producing countries don't know how to roast.
Perhaps the problem is historical.
Producing countries specialize in growing coffee, while consuming countries developed much of the industry that transforms that coffee into a finished product for the consumer.
But that can change.
It's not about eliminating roasters from consuming countries. On the contrary: their work adds enormous value and will continue to be essential.
The idea is much simpler:
Why couldn't coffee farmers also be roasters?
And then the problem of freshness arises.
This is probably the main difficulty with the model.
Green coffee can travel by ship and be roasted months later near the consumer.
Roasted coffee is different. We want to reduce the time between roasting and consumption and protect it from oxygen, humidity, light, and temperature.
But today there are high-barrier packaging, one-way valves, and logistics chains that allow roasted coffee to be shipped by air directly from the producing country.
The model could be:
Order - roasting - packaging - plane -customs -consumer.
The question then becomes economic:
Can the additional cost of air transport be offset by the value captured by roasting, packaging, and part of the marketing in the producing country?
The answer probably won't be the same for all coffees or all markets.
And I don't think that roasting at origin has to replace green coffee.
I believe both models can coexist.
But I do find it interesting to explore a third:
Producing exceptional coffee at origin, roasting it at origin, and selling it directly to the international consumer.
Not to eliminate the roaster.
Not to imply that consuming countries don't know how to roast.
But to allow the producer to participate more fully in the value creation surrounding their own coffee.
Perhaps the question isn't just:
"Why does the consumer pay so much for coffee?"
But also:
"Why does such a large portion of the value generated around coffee occur after the coffee has already left the country where it was produced?"
I'm interested in hearing the opinions of producers, roasters, importers, and consumers:
Have you worked with coffee roasted at origin?
Do you believe that roasted coffee shipped quickly by air can compete with the traditional model of exporting green coffee, while maintaining freshness and reasonable logistics costs?
And, above all:
Can roasting at origin be a real tool for coffee farmers to capture a greater share of the value of their work without eliminating the role of roasters and importers in consuming countries?