Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is voluntary certification of tropical agricultural commodities achieving sustainability goals for small-scale producers? A review of the evidence

Open access
DeFries, Ruth S, Fanzo, Jessica, Mondal, Pinki, Remans, Roseline, Wood, Stephen A·2017·Environmental Research Letters

Abstract

Over the last several decades, voluntary certification programs have become a key approach to promote sustainable supply chains for agricultural commodities. These programs provide premiums and other benefits to producers for adhering to environmental and labor practices established by the certifying entities. Following the principles of Cochrane Reviews used in health sciences, we assess evidence to evaluate whether voluntary certification of tropical agricultural commodities (bananas, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, and tea) has achieved environmental benefits and improved economic and social outcomes for small-scale producers at the level of the farm household. We reviewed over 2600 papers in the peer-review literature and identified 24 cases of unique combinations of study area, certification program, and commodity in 16 papers that rigorously analyzed differences between treatment (certified households) and control groups (uncertified households) for a wide range of response variables. Based on analysis of 347 response variables reported in these papers, we conclude that certification is associated on average with positive outcomes for 34% of response variables, no significant difference for 58% of variables, and negative outcomes for 8% of variables. No significant differences were observed for different categories of responses (environmental, economic and social) or for different commodities (banana, coffee and tea), except negative outcomes were significantly less for environmental than other outcome categories ( p = 0.01). Most cases (20 out of 24) investigated coffee certification and response variables were inconsistent across cases, indicating the paucity of studies to conduct a conclusive meta-analysis. The somewhat positive results indicate that voluntary certification programs can sometimes play a role in meeting sustainable development goals and do not support the view that such programs are merely greenwashing. However, results also indicate that certification is not a panacea to improve social outcomes or overall incomes of smallholder farmers. Rigorous analysis, standardized criteria, and independent evaluation are needed to assess effectiveness of certification programs in the future.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1748-9326/aa625e

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
DeFries, R. S., Fanzo, J., Mondal, P., Remans, R., & Wood, S. A.
Venue
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2017-03-01
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
033001
ISSN
1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2590153719
Cited by
265
References
37
FWCI
39.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is voluntary certification of tropical agricultural commodities achieving sustainability goals for small-scale producers? A review of the evidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1748-9326/aa625e
The paper
DeFries, R. S., Fanzo, J., Mondal, P., Remans, R., & Wood, S. A. (2017). Is voluntary certification of tropical agricultural commodities achieving sustainability goals for small-scale producers? A review of the evidence. Environmental Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa625e

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.