How we work
A peer-reviewed, dual-lens approach to climate and social vulnerability assessment
We combine satellite-based environmental analysis with ground-level social network research to produce integrated vulnerability profiles. The methodology has been developed, tested, and published in peer-reviewed journals.
Two streams, one assessment
Two streams, one assessment
Environmental data and social network analysis are treated as co-equal analytical pillars. Both feed into a single integrated vulnerability assessment at the country level.
Stream 1
Environmental vulnerability analysis
We use satellite observations — optical imagery, temperature data, vegetation indices — combined with hydrological models, LiDAR, and climate projections to assess current and projected climate risk across coffee-producing zones.
The analysis covers both current conditions and ten-to-thirty-year projections, integrating temperature change, precipitation shifts, drought indices, flooding risk, and land-use dynamics. Output is country-level and, where data permits, stakeholder-territory level.
Download the methodology overviewStream 2
Social Network Performance Indicators
The SNPI framework measures how well stakeholder networks actually collaborate on environmental governance. It links five key social indicators — relationship building, power sharing, social learning, trust building, and the potential for collective action — to quantitative network metrics such as density, centrality, and reciprocity.
Applied to a coffee sector governance network, SNPI produces a numerical picture of where collaboration is strong, where it fractures, and where external support could unlock collective action. It turns the social dimension into something measurable — not anecdotal.
- Public institutions
- Coffee business actors
- Civil society & NGOs
- Education & scientific
- International organizations
Sample network: five stakeholder categories drawn from the 2024 El Salvador study (illustrative).
Integration
Bringing it together
The two streams are not merely juxtaposed — they are integrated. Environmental risk indicators are weighted by the social network's capacity to respond to them. A region facing high drought risk with a highly collaborative stakeholder network is in a fundamentally different position than one facing the same risk without that collaborative capacity. The integrated assessment captures both.
Our fieldwork methodology — stakeholder encounters, participatory data gathering, and co-designed research agendas — was developed and tested in El Salvador and published in 2024. It distinguishes between Scope 1 practice-oriented interventions (what stakeholders can do with existing capacity) and Scope 2 transformative interventions (what requires structural change). That distinction shapes the recommendations we produce for each country case study.