Blockchain and Coffee Supply Chain: Implications for Traceability, Efficiency, and Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

The high organizational complexity of the Global Coffee Supply Chain (GCSC) poses significant challenges in terms of governance and sustainability, such as asymmetric access to information, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, and overproduction, as well as high price volatility and social issues such as workers’ rights and the unequal distribution of value along the supply chain. In this context, therefore, the coffee sector could benefit from the adoption of advanced traceability systems such as blockchain, whose implications in the GCSC remain poorly systematized in the literature. Therefore, this research presented a systematic literature review on the application of BC in the GCSC to analyze its efficiency, traceability, and sustainability implications, as well as identifying the main factors that hinder its full implementation. The review included 42 peer-reviewed studies indexed in Scopus, and the results showed that, in terms of efficiency, BC adoption can help improve coordination and reduce information asymmetries along the supply chain, but only in specific contexts, as they depend largely on organizational and infrastructural conditions, rather than on the technical characteristics of the technology. With regard to sustainability, the results sometimes appear contradictory, reflecting profound differences in context. The review highlighted that the main obstacles to the effective adoption of BC in the GCSC stem from a combination of constraints, including centralized governance structures, power asymmetries in data management, infrastructure deficiencies in production contexts, and digital exclusion dynamics. Overall, the study highlighted that BC in the coffee sector cannot be considered a stand-alone solution but should be interpreted as a socio-technical infrastructure whose effectiveness depends on many interconnected factors.

1. Introduction

Coffee is a beverage (obtained from the seeds of plants belonging to the genus Coffea L.) [1] that, in addition to its nutritional and functional properties [2,3,4], plays a central role in cultural and social contexts [5,6,7], making it the second most traded commodity in the world after oil [4]. In 2023/2024, global coffee production was estimated at 168 million 60 kg bags, especially from Brazil (38%), Vietnam (17%), and Colombia (7%) [8,9], while on the consumption side, in 2025, the largest markets were the US (1.7 million tons), Germany (587,000 tons), and the Philippines (552,000 tons) [10]. This structural asymmetry between production and consumption highlights the role of coffee as a key global agricultural resource, central to rural livelihoods and international trade. Overall, the coffee industry is worth around $270 billion [11], employing millions of workers and involving a vast global supply chain [12], whose length and complexity, however, pose significant challenges, both in terms of governance and sustainability.

From a governance perspective, limited coordination between actors, insufficient traceability mechanisms, and asymmetric access to information increase the risk of quality loss, value erosion, and an unequal distribution of economic returns along the chain [13].

From a sustainability perspective, the GCSC is under increasing pressure due to a combination of structural challenges and converging risks. On an environmental level, the sector is affected by phenomena such as deforestation [14], soil erosion [15], water stress, biodiversity loss, and increasing climate instability [16], which threaten both productivity and ecological resilience. At the same time, significant economic vulnerabilities remain, linked in particular to overproduction and high price volatility [17,18], as well as growing competition from alternative beverages [12]. These fragilities are further exacerbated by fluctuations in international markets.

Finally, significant social issues continue to arise, associated with labor rights and the unequal distribution of value along the supply chain, which remain major barriers to achieving truly inclusive sustainability [16]. From this point of view, the coffee sector could benefit from the adoption of advanced traceability systems, as they have the potential to reduce information asymmetries and strengthen trust between all the supply chain actors involved [19]. At the same time, they could improve the credibility of certification systems, support better monitoring of environmental impacts, and contribute to a more transparent distribution of value along the supply chain. One of the most promising technological solutions for addressing the critical issues in the GCSC is the Blockchain (BC) [20]. Designed by Satoshi Nakamoto (a pseudonym whose real identity remains unknown) [21], it first appeared in 2008 [22] and is defined as a Digital Ledger Technology (DLT) [23] in which information is collected in chronologically linked blocks, the integrity of which is guaranteed by cryptographic systems [24,25]. In this system, each block is collectively validated and verified by the network nodes, and a new block can be added to the ledger only once consensus has been reached [26,27].

Although its role remains highly controversial due to its high implementation and transaction costs, as well as its high energy consumption [28], its decentralized architecture and immutable ledgers are often considered particularly well-suited to building trust and enabling end-to-end visibility in complex agri-food systems, potentially offering opportunities to improve governance [29]. However, despite these premises, there is limited systematic knowledge regarding the actual role of blockchain in addressing governance challenges in the GCSC. To address this gap, this study conducted a systematic literature review of blockchain applications in the coffee sector. The aim is to analyze existing contributions, synthesize findings from different sources, identify key opportunities and limitations, and assess the extent to which blockchain-based systems may support more sustainable, transparent, and equitable management of the coffee sector. From a broader perspective, this study could also contribute to the literature on sustainability by providing an assessment of how digital traceability technologies could support more transparent, accountable, and resilient agri-food systems, with a particular focus on one of the most socially and economically relevant commodities globally. By synthesizing fragmented findings and critically assessing both opportunities and limitations, the analysis could deepen understanding of sustainability governance in global soft commodity chains. At the same time, the analysis highlights the technical, organizational, and institutional prerequisites necessary for the effective implementation of such technologies, thus fueling the debate on socio-technical transitions in agriculture. In this sense, this research could also contribute to the broader discussion on how digital innovations can enable more equitable, sustainable, and socially inclusive supply chain models. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first systematic review specifically focused on blockchain applications in the coffee sector. Therefore, this study aims to provide concrete insights for researchers and professionals with a solid conceptual basis for future theoretical and practical developments in this emerging field of research. From a conceptual perspective, this study does not aim to address blockchain solely as a technical solution, but as part of a broader transition towards sustainability in the coffee sector. Technological innovations, in fact, only acquire meaning and effectiveness when they are integrated into existing governance structures and organizational practices. GCSC can therefore be interpreted as a complex socio-technical system in which blockchain interacts with power relations, regulatory frameworks, market dynamics, and sustainability governance mechanisms. In this context, blockchain is relevant not only for its technical ability to ensure data immutability and traceability, but also for its potential to reduce information asymmetries. Specifying this allows for a more critical assessment of this technology, emphasizing that its contribution to sustainability and equity depends on the creation of favorable institutional conditions, coordination between multiple actors, and inclusive governance arrangements, rather than technological capabilities alone.

Therefore, based on the theoretical background presented, the Review Questions (RQs) are as follows:

• RQ1: How does the existing literature conceptualize the contribution of blockchain to sustainability, traceability, and efficiency in coffee supply chains?
• RQ2: What technical, organizational, and institutional factors, as well as what structural limitations of the coffee supply chain, could hinder the effective use of blockchain for more sustainable and equitable management of this resource?

The remainder of the article is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the research methodology, including the search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and screening process. Section 3 presents and discusses the main findings of the review, while Section 4 outlines the key implications and conclusions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

This research conducted a literature review to synthesize existing knowledge on how blockchain could improve transparency, efficiency, and sustainability in the coffee sector and thus provide new scientific insights. A systematic review of the literature collects and synthesizes empirical evidence, critically evaluates it, and extracts data, ensuring a rigorous and evidence-based response to the predefined review question [30]. The bibliographic search was conducted using the Scopus database, and the following search query was used: TITLE-ABS-KEY “Coffee” AND “Blockchain”. The selection focused on publications from 2016 (date of first publication) to November 2025 and resulted in a total of 104 articles, i.e., the total available in the database. In this regard, it is essential to highlight two methodological clarifications:

• The search was deliberately limited to the two terms “Coffee” and “Blockchain” to ensure a clear alignment between the retrieved documents and the scope of the review, and thus to specifically identify contributions that explicitly deal with blockchain-based applications in the coffee sector. Broader terms such as “Distributed Ledger Technology”, “DLT”, “Digital Traceability Systems” or “Distributed Ledgers” were not included, as they are frequently used in a wide range of technological and industrial contexts and could have generated a very large number of non-specific results, potentially compromising the focus and manageability of the review process. However, it is recognized that this choice may have excluded relevant studies referring to blockchain using adjacent terminology or broader conceptual frameworks, but given the explicit objective of mapping specific blockchain applications in coffee supply chains, the query adopted was deemed appropriate to ensure thematic accuracy and conceptual consistency.
• Scopus was selected as the sole database because it is one of the largest peer-reviewed multidisciplinary academic archives and is widely recognized for its extensive coverage of scientific journals and conference proceedings in the fields of management, engineering, information systems, and sustainability, areas that are highly relevant to the topic of this review. Its broad geographical, thematic, and methodological coverage makes it particularly suitable for analyzing an emerging and cross-cutting field of research such as blockchain applications in coffee supply chains. In addition, Scopus adopts rigorous indexing standards and provides consolidated citation data, helping to ensure the scientific reliability of the contributions included. However, it is recognized that the exclusive use of Scopus could represent a potential limitation, as it may exclude studies indexed in complementary databases. Nevertheless, the breadth and multidisciplinary nature of Scopus were considered sufficient to ensure an adequate representation of the existing academic debate. Future research could benefit from extending the search to additional databases, such as Web of Science, to further strengthen the robustness of the analysis.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The review was conducted following a structured protocol for identifying, selecting, and assessing the suitability of articles, adopting the approach set out in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [31], as described in the Supplementary Materials. Of the 104 articles initially identified, only those in the final stage of publication were considered, thus excluding one article in press. Then, two Spanish contributions were excluded, as it was decided to include only articles published in English. This linguistic restriction was introduced to ensure consistency of the analysis, comparability of methodological approaches, and, above all, clarity in the interpretation of results. Consequently, the screening process started with 101 publications, from which articles, conference papers, conference reviews, book chapters, and books were retained.

2.3. Screening Process

After identifying the initial set of studies, detailed screening was conducted to determine the availability of the full text by opening and individually checking each contribution included in the preliminary phase. At this stage, 50 contributions were identified, for which full-text access was not possible, divided as follows: 9 books and book chapters, 37 conference papers and conference reviews (including 23 anonymous contributions), 3 non-open-access journal articles, and 1 contribution for which no PDF was available. More specifically, for these studies, the complete text was not accessible through institutional subscriptions. It is essential to acknowledge that excluding non-open-access studies or papers for which the full text is not available may introduce a potential selection bias. This decision was dictated by the methodological requirement to conduct a full-text screening. Articles available only as abstracts, anonymous conference reviews, or inaccessible full-text documents could not be systematically evaluated in terms of methodological soundness or relevance to the review questions. Consequently, their inclusion would have compromised the transparency and reliability of the analytical process. However, it is recognized that this restriction may have led to the omission of potentially relevant contributions, particularly in rapidly evolving technological fields where conference proceedings often precede journal publications. This could be considered a limitation of this research, which future studies may address by expanding institutional access or including additional repositories.

Following the preliminary screening based on the analysis of the title and abstract, four additional articles were excluded, as they contained the terms “blockchain” and “coffee” in their respective abstracts but were not relevant to the scope of this review. These studies were found to refer to contexts unrelated to the coffee sector, such as an application of the Internet of Things in the automotive sector [32], in which the reference to blockchain and coffee was merely illustrative in the abstract and could not be attributed to any actual use of the technology in the coffee supply chain. Studies that mention blockchain without providing an in-depth analysis of its impact or applications within the specific context of the coffee supply chain were therefore excluded, as they were not considered relevant to the analysis. To ensure the relevance of the studies, the following selection criteria were applied:

• Scope: The study had to explicitly address the application of blockchain technologies within the coffee sector.
• Focus: The contribution was required to provide insights into potential improvements in terms of transparency, sustainability, or governance within the coffee supply chain.
• Methodology: The study had to present empirical evidence, conceptual frameworks, or documented case studies relevant to coffee management and traceability.

3. Results and Discussion

At the end of the screening phase (Figure 1), 42 peer-reviewed studies, comprising journal articles (n = 32) and conference papers (n = 10), listed in Table S1, were deemed eligible and included in the systematic review for full-text analysis. No formal quality assessment tool was applied to the selected studies, in line with the exploratory nature of this review. Furthermore, the literature on blockchain applications in coffee supply chains is still relatively recent and heterogeneous, both in terms of methodological approaches and the type of publications, which makes the application of traditional quality assessment frameworks difficult and potentially inappropriate.

3.1. Bibliographic Analysis: Temporal, Geographical, and Typological Distribution of Articles

Although Blockchain was conceptualized in 2008, its large-scale diffusion only began in 2016, mainly in the financial services sector. As shown in Figure 2, the adoption of blockchain in the coffee supply chain also started in 2016 and has steadily increased over time. Academic interest in Blockchain within the coffee supply chain has grown significantly in recent years, resulting in a rapid growth in the literature on this technology, with 2021–2023 being considered an important phase of conceptual exploration of the potential of blockchain in the coffee industry. The peak in 2022–2023 could be because during these two years, there were many projects funded by public and private entities, often in collaboration with NGOs or tech start-ups, aimed at digitizing the coffee supply chain in producing countries [33]. The initial pool of 105 records already indicates a strong recent growth in scientific interest, as 86 of these contributions (81%) were published in the last three and a half years. From a geographical point of view, the scientific literature is predominantly concentrated in emerging and coffee-producing countries, while also including contributions from advanced economies.

As shown in Figure 3A, which compares the geographical distribution of scientific publications with global coffee production, the most prolific countries in terms of research output are Indonesia (15 articles), India (9), the United Kingdom (8), Italy (8), Vietnam (6), Germany (6), Colombia (6), Spain (5), Denmark (5), the United States (4), and Malaysia (4). This geographical distribution reflects the strategic importance of the coffee supply chain in different national contexts. Indonesia, the world’s fourth-largest coffee producer [8,9], ranks first in terms of research output, while Vietnam and Colombia, the second and third largest global producers, respectively, also show a substantial presence in the literature. This indicates a strong commitment on the part of these countries to exploring technological solutions, such as blockchain, to improve the traceability, transparency, and sustainability of their value chains and to enhance production and competitiveness in international markets. The presence of countries such as the UK, Italy, Germany, and Denmark, which are not direct producers but rather hubs of consumption, processing, or technological innovation, indicates that interest in the application of blockchain in the coffee supply chain is also driven by research, innovation, and responsible consumption. In these contexts, in fact, the adoption of digital solutions is often motivated by sustainability objectives, ESG reporting, and demand for transparency from end consumers [34]. Conversely, no contributions were identified from Brazil, although it is the world’s leading coffee producer (Figure 3B) [8,9]. This gap appears particularly significant when considering Brazil’s central role in the GCSC and its historical leadership in the international market. The absence of studies attributable to Brazilian institutions could be attributed to several possible reasons, including less academic attention, at least in English-language indexed circles, to the technological and traceable dimension of the supply chain, or the prevalence of approaches more oriented towards productivity and agronomic efficiency than those focused on transparency, sustainability, or process digitalization. This gap suggests the opportunity for further future investigations, aimed at better understanding the dynamics of digital innovation underway in the Brazilian context, as well as promoting greater integration of Brazil into international research and experimentation circuits on the application of blockchain in the coffee supply chain.

With regard to the source types, as shown in Figure 4 (which refers to the preliminary dataset of publications retrieved in the initial research phase, before the selection and eligibility process), the distribution is heterogeneous, reflecting the multidisciplinary nature and the still evolving character of the literature on the subject.

Specifically, the preliminary Scopus dataset highlighted the presence of 36 articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals (34% of the total), followed by 34 contributions presented in international conference proceedings (32%), 23 conference review papers (22%), 9 book chapters (9%), 2 books (2%), and 1 review (1%). This distribution may indicate that research on the application of blockchain in the coffee supply chain is being developed across various scientific dissemination channels, with a high incidence of conference publications. This can be interpreted as an indication that the topic is still in an exploratory phase, in which results are frequently shared at conferences before being consolidated in a journal. As mentioned in Section 2.3, it should also be noted that a significant proportion of the sources (N = 50) were not available in open access, including three journal articles, as well as a substantial portion of studies among conference proceedings, conference reviews, books, and book chapters whose full texts were not accessible through institutional subscriptions.

Such constraints can disproportionately affect researchers and practitioners in low- and middle-income countries, which are also the main regions of global coffee production, potentially limiting the dissemination and assimilation of knowledge about blockchain-based innovations in this sector.

3.2. VOSviewer Co-Occurrence Analysis

To explore recurring themes in the selected literature, a bibliometric analysis of keywords was conducted using VOSviewer 1.6.20, a free software developed in 2009 by van Eck and Waltman (2010) [35] that processes bibliometric maps [25].

Specifically, an analysis of keywords, titles, and abstracts (TITLE_ABS_KEY) was conducted, from which a co-occurrence map was generated, representing the most relevant terms that emerged within the corpus. The resulting network includes all articles selected from the Scopus database, covering the entire period under study (2016–2025). The analysis was performed on the basis of co-occurrences between keywords, using the “All Keywords” option and setting a minimum threshold of two occurrences, in order to include less frequent but potentially relevant concepts. The resulting map identified several thematic clusters, represented by colored nodes indicating groups of frequently associated keywords. The size of the nodes reflects the frequency of occurrence of each term, while the connections between nodes indicate the strength of co-occurrence across keywords in the analyzed documents. The term “blockchain” clearly emerges as a central node, confirming its role as the key concept of the entire text corpus. Among the main thematic clusters identified and shown in Figure 5, the following can be distinguished.

• A green cluster, centered on blockchain, supply chain, traceability systems, case studies, and information systems, which reflects the application of blockchain-based information systems for supply chain traceability. In this context, the co-occurrence of case studies indicates the predominance of applied and exploratory research approaches, rather than a classification of document types.
• A blue cluster, which includes keywords such as smart contracts, data integrity, authentication, and machine learning, indicating the technological dimensions and automated systems associated with blockchain implementation.
• A red cluster, focused on coffee, provenance, value chain, and distributed ledger technologies, which suggests the application of blockchain in specific agri-food areas, particularly in the coffee supply chain. The recurrence of “provenance” and “value chain” suggests a focus on origin certification and the fair distribution of value among the various players.
• A yellow cluster, composed of keywords such as sustainability, climate change, carbon footprint, and circular economy, highlighting the growing attention to environmental aspects and sustainability associated with the adoption of digital technologies.
• Finally, a purple cluster that includes terms such as food safety, agri-food, traceability, and certification is representative of the implications in the food sector in terms of safety, quality, and regulatory compliance.

Overall, the analysis reveals a complex but coherent network in which blockchain acts as an enabling technology, integrating technological, environmental, and socio-economic dimensions. In addition, the presence of terms such as fair trade, transparency, coffee supply chain, and the Internet of Things could suggest a growing interest in fairer, traceable, and digitized supply chain models.

3.3. Main Critical Issues in the Coffee Supply Chain

Before delving into the analysis of the existing literature, it is considered appropriate to outline, without claiming to be complete or exhaustive and beyond the objectives of this work, some of the structural criticalities that characterize the GCSC and that could represent the reference context for Blockchain adoption. Firstly, Rehman et al. (2025) [34] highlighted a lack of structured data along the supply chain, which is a highly fragmented, multi-level system, whose degree of globalization promotes commercial integration but generates significant information deficits and a high degree of opacity in data flows between actors. Small producers are often excluded from critical information regarding the destination of products and batches, as well as the selling price [23,36].

Added to this is the prevalence of centralized management systems, which expose the supply chain to vulnerabilities at single points of failure [36].

Similar limitations have also been highlighted by Ramachandra et al. (2023) [37], who emphasize the compromise of batch quality, logistical inefficiencies, and opacity in commercial intermediation relationships. These structural issues represent some of the main obstacles to transparency and sustainability in the supply chain, as well as one of the main areas for technological innovation. In addition, insufficient product traceability has also been reported, which compromises the ability to identify responsibilities along the chain and the causes of any decline in quality [38]. Moreover, inefficiencies in the quality control of green coffee beans, given that repeated inspection with traditional technologies such as color sorters leads to increased costs, inspection times, and the risk of product damage, sometimes guarantee unreliable results [38]. Furthermore, especially in Vietnam, where about 95% of coffee production is in the hands of small producers [39], evidence shows a multiplicity of structural criticalities that hinder the competitiveness and sustainability of the supply chain. These include limited agricultural productivity, high volatility in international markets, barriers to access to advanced technologies, and, more recently, a widespread trend towards the grubbing-up of coffee shrubs [39], which is indicative of a sectoral crisis. These are part of a pedoclimatic context already strongly compromised by the impacts of climate change, progressive soil degradation, and marked fragmentation of production units [40]. These critical issues are compounded by further vulnerabilities arising from the predominance of the Robusta variety, which is less prized than Arabica; the lack of selectivity in harvesting techniques, which negatively affects product quality; and the limited diffusion of technological innovations in the post-harvest stages [40]. However, a critical organizational condition has also recently emerged, namely that most agricultural cooperatives have neither clear operational objectives nor a solid economic structure, suffer from governance that lacks adequate managerial skills, and adopt subjective criteria for evaluating the performance of their members [39]. This picture has been further confirmed by Singh et al. (2022) [41], who show how cooperatives suffer from capacity constraints due to training deficiencies, seasonality of work, and a chronic lack of resources. More generally, however, only 7% of producers are affiliated with cooperatives capable of providing concrete support in the post-harvest phases [39], further accentuating inequalities in access to product enhancement tools. In Indonesia, on the other hand, the coffee supply chain is marked by critical issues such as poor transparency, low perceived quality, traceability problems, and widespread mistrust among actors in the chain [42]. Finally, problems related to traceability, food safety, and transparency that continue to limit the competitiveness of small producers have been identified by Pradana et al. (2024) [43], while Alamsyah et al. (2023) [12] reported poor information sharing among actors, which leads consumers to trust only retailers. In summary, the critical issues presented in this paragraph, taken together, paint a systemic picture of vulnerability that hinders efficiency, transparency, sustainability, and even equity in the distribution of value in the coffee supply chain, highlighting the need for structural interventions and advanced technological solutions.

3.4. Efficiency Implications of Blockchain Adoption in the Coffee Supply Chain

In GCSC, blockchain is frequently presented in the literature as a potentially relevant response to the growing demand for transparency, traceability, and accountability, with expected repercussions also in terms of operational efficiency and the reduction of information asymmetries among actors in the supply chain [44,45,46]. These expectations of efficiency derive largely from conceptual and theoretical contributions that emphasize the potential of technology to streamline information flows and reduce coordination costs. However, the reported efficiency implications are not clear-cut, and the available evidence shows heterogeneous and sometimes contradictory results, strongly dependent on the implementation context. Before proceeding with the analysis, however, it should be noted that, in this research, the concept of efficiency is mainly expressed in qualitative and organizational terms, rather than through quantitative relationships between technological investments and measurable economic results. In fact, most studies do not provide standardized indicators of cost–benefit, return on investment, or productivity, but focus on improvements in processes. Consequently, the efficiency implications discussed in this subsection should not be interpreted as evidence of quantified economic performance, but as indications of the mechanisms through which blockchain can, in specific contexts, affect the organization and functioning of the coffee supply chain. More specifically, several studies, based mainly on limited empirical evidence, show that blockchain systems enable the timely tracking of critical information, such as origin, certifications, environmental conditions, and economic transactions, with the potential to reduce coordination costs, improve information quality, and strengthen trust between producers and consumers [33,47,48]. However, other contributions, show that these efficiency benefits only emerge when specific enabling conditions are in place, including the availability of adequate digital infrastructure, the organizational capacity of producers, and a high level of coordination among supply chain actors. The integration of blockchain with IoT devices and mobile applications is often described as a key factor in automating data collection and synchronizing information in real time. In this sense, the systems developed by Seidenfat et al. (2024) [49] and Rehman et al. (2025) [34], both implemented as pilot or proof-of-concept initiatives, show improvements in terms of timeliness of information and process control, thanks to the adoption of Hyperledger Fabric and secure APIs in the artisanal coffee supply chain. However, in line with their proof-of-concept nature, these contributions have been conducted in controlled environments or with strong external technical support and are therefore heavily dependent on stable connectivity and predefined governance structures, conditions that are not uniformly present in coffee production contexts, often in developing countries, limiting the transferability of these efficiency gains.

This review also suggests that blockchain, especially when supported by smart contracts, can provide a technological infrastructure for streamlining traceability processes and reducing intermediation, potentially contributing to more distributed and efficient governance. Case studies in Colombia [33,50] and Indonesia [42] report improvements in the documentation of production phases, in the visibility of operations, and in the participation of local stakeholders. However, these findings derive from project-based empirical cases, and the positive outcomes appear to be closely linked to specific initiatives, often characterized by institutional support, suggesting that the efficiency benefits are not intrinsic to the technology but depend on organizational and institutional conditions. Contrasting evidence also emerges in relation to the role of smart contracts. On the one hand, numerous contributions at a conceptual and design level associate them with reduced transaction times, payment automation, and lower coordination costs [30,51,52]. On the other hand, some applications show that smart contracts require standardized processes, reliable information inputs, and clearly defined roles, elements that are often absent in production systems based on small producers. In these contexts, automation can therefore result in operational rigidity rather than a real increase in efficiency. More advanced applications that combine blockchain, machine learning, and automatic monitoring systems are then presented as solutions to inefficiencies related to quality control and logistics [38,48,50,53]. These contributions mainly demonstrate the technical feasibility of the proposed solutions but provide limited empirical evidence of their operational effectiveness on a large scale. Although these approaches show the potential for highly efficient systems, they require high levels of digital infrastructure and specialist skills, raising questions about their scalability and inclusiveness in less developed production contexts. Finally, user adoption also emerges as a critical factor for the overall efficiency of the system. For instance, Tharatipyakul et al. (2022) [54] provide empirical evidence showing how interface design significantly influences the usability of tracking systems, indicating that technologically advanced solutions may not translate into real efficiency gains if they are not consistent with the capabilities and practices of end users. This empirical evidence reinforces the idea that efficiency is not an intrinsic property of technology, but rather the result of a socio-technical alignment between tools, actors, and the operating context. Overall, the literature suggests that the efficiency implications of blockchain in the coffee supply chain are highly contextual and sometimes contradictory. Rather than a universally efficient solution, blockchain emerges as an enabling infrastructure whose effects on costs, time, and coordination depend significantly on technological, organizational, and governance factors. In light of this evidence, the results relating to efficiency implications help to answer RQ1 by showing that the adoption of blockchain systems can improve GCSC management in terms of coordination, traceability, and the reduction of information asymmetries, but only in specific socio-technical contexts, and that these benefits depend largely on organizational, infrastructural, and governance conditions rather than on the technology itself.

3.5. The Role of Blockchain in Supporting Sustainability in the Coffee Supply Chain

Contrary to what is often suggested at a conceptual level, the results reported by empirical studies do not converge toward a single effect and show contrasting outcomes, strongly dependent on the context of application, exactly as in the case of efficiency. On the one hand, some contributions report positive effects in terms of economic and social sustainability, as summarized in Figure 6. For example, Samoggia et al. (2025) [48] within their theoretical framework, highlighted how greater transparency can help counteract the concentration of value in the downstream stages of the supply chain, while Nuraisyah et al. (2025) [55], in the context of West Java, observe a strengthening of supply chain resilience and an improvement in pricing mechanisms. Similarly, Trollman et al. (2022) [56] and Nguyen et al. (2023) [40] theoretically associate the adoption of BC, especially when integrated with IoT and AI, with environmental benefits such as better resource management, waste reduction, and support for circular economy practices. On the other hand, however, these results emerge mainly in contexts characterized by favorable institutional and technological conditions, such as the presence of public support, coordinated projects, and adequate digital infrastructure. In Vietnamese cases [40,56], for example, environmental and social benefits are closely linked to structured programs and strong integration between public and private actors. In the absence of such conditions, the literature indicates that blockchain tends to produce more limited or symbolic effects, without substantially affecting structural inequalities in the supply chain. A particularly relevant contradiction concerns the redistributive dimension. Trollman et al. (2022) [56] suggest empirically that blockchain-enabled disintermediation can foster a fairer distribution of value and more remunerative prices for producers. However, other contributions, including Ordoñez et al. (2025) [50], show through empirical evidence that simply accessing digital traceability does not necessarily alter existing power relations, especially when control of platforms, data, and standards remains concentrated in the downstream stages of the supply chain. In such cases, blockchain risks reinforcing already unbalanced governance structures rather than correcting them. Similar ambiguities arise in terms of social sustainability. Blockchain traceability is often associated with the possibility of combating unethical practices, such as child labor, and strengthening compliance with social and environmental standards [40,57].

However, these results appear to depend above all on the existence of verification mechanisms, credible certification systems, and institutional enforcement capabilities, without which the technology tends to function more as a reputational tool than as a lever for structural change.

On the financial front, too, the literature presents divergent results. Some studies show how decentralized systems can facilitate access to credit and improve the financial inclusion of producers [40,56]. Other studies implicitly suggest that these benefits remain selective, favoring the most organized and digitally equipped players and risking the exclusion of small producers who are less integrated into technological circuits.

Finally, the role of consumer demand introduces an additional dimension of contextual dependence. Nudin et al. (2024) [57] note, based on empirical evidence, that growing interest in ethical practices may encourage the adoption of traceability systems. However, the literature points to a persistent tension between substantive sustainability and communicated sustainability, highlighting the risk that blockchain will be used primarily as a marketing tool, without significantly affecting the social and environmental conditions upstream of the supply chain [34]. Overall, in response to RQ1, the evidence suggests that blockchain’s contribution to sustainability in the coffee supply chain is neither automatic nor uniform. The results often appear contradictory because they reflect profound differences in institutional, socio-economic, and governance contexts. Rather than an inherently sustainable technology, blockchain emerges as a socio-technical infrastructure whose impact on sustainability depends on the ability of local contexts to integrate digital innovation, shared rules, and a rebalancing of power relations along the supply chain. Taken together, the evidence that has emerged therefore indicates that the outcomes of blockchain in terms of sustainability do not depend on the technology itself, but on how it fits into specific socio-technical and governance settings. The contradictions observed between studies reflect differences in institutional contexts, power relations along the supply chain, and coordination models between actors, suggesting that technical and structural factors decisively condition the effectiveness of blockchain as a tool for transitioning to more sustainable and equitable forms of coffee supply chain management, thus providing a direct reference for RQ2.

3.6. Potential Advantages and Opportunities of Blockchain in the Coffee Supply Chain

Several authors agree that BC can offer new opportunities to address some of the structural challenges that characterize GCSC, particularly in developing countries (

Table 1. The main advantages of Blockchain in the coffee supply chain found in the literature.

Focus	Specific Effect	Refs.	Links to RQ1
			Effects on Efficiency	Effects on Sustainability
Improved traceability	May enable end-to-end product traceability along the supply chain with immutable and verifiable data	[36,39,40,58]	Could reduce errors, information waste, and data access times	Potential to promote ethical practices, waste reduction, and improved control over environmental impacts
Fraud prevention	Could reduce fraudulent practices through immutable transaction recording	[34]	May lower costs related to audits and losses from fraud	Could enhance transparency and fairness, strengthen social sustainability, and increase the value of certified products
Strengthening consumer confidence	May provide access to reliable information on origin, quality, and sustainability	[38,42,61]	Faster and more reliable access to product information	Could promote responsible agricultural practices through recognition of ethical, environmental, and inclusion standards
Financial inclusion	Could provide direct access to decentralized financial services for coffee producers in contexts with limited banking infrastructure	[59,60]	Immediate and traceable payments, reduced bureaucratic delays, and lower operating costs	Digital financial inclusion may support access to credit and sustainability incentives, enabling fairer value distribution and reducing inequalities
Integrations with other 4.0 technologies	May increase functionality and interoperability through IoT, SSI, Verifiable Credentials, and smart contracts	[37,38,39,58,59,60,62,63]	Could enable process automation, reduce intermediaries, and improve information flows across the chain	VC and digital identity could allow automatic certification of social and environmental practices, fostering fairer value distribution and more conscious consumption
Smart Contact integration	May allow real-time adaptation of contractual conditions to market fluctuations	[12,53,64]	Could reduce transaction latency, execution times, and operational errors	Dynamic contracts may enhance resilience, transparency, and sustainability in supply chain governance
Sharding mechanisms	Could divide blockchain into autonomous sub-networks, reducing computational load	[65]	Potential to reduce latency and increase processing speed, making systems scalable and adaptable	Optimization of resources may support long-term sustainability, inclusivity of local producers, and distributed digitalization in producing countries

). Unlike the implications of efficiency and sustainability discussed in the previous sections, the literature in this area is dominated by conceptual and prospective contributions and focuses primarily on the potential opportunities enabled by technology, rather than on systematically validated outcomes. The most frequently cited advantage concerns improved traceability and transparency. Blockchain-based systems are described as enabling end-to-end monitoring of coffee batches, ensuring data immutability, and reducing fraud, logistical inefficiencies, and losses related to quality degradation [34,36,39,40]. However, while these benefits are widely recognized at a conceptual level, empirical evidence shows that the actual value of traceability depends on who controls data collection, raising important questions regarding information governance. A further opportunity concerns the use of complementary technologies, such as AI-based classification systems and IoT-enabled mobile applications, which could enable small producers to digitize production activities even in rural contexts [42,58]. However, the literature highlights a tension between the goal of empowering small producers and the risk that such tools may reinforce new forms of technological dependence. Similarly, financial inclusion is often presented as one of the main opportunities offered by blockchain. Direct payments, microcredit, and access to sustainability-related incentives through cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, and smart contracts are described as tools capable of overcoming the barriers of traditional banking systems [59,60]. However, opportunities for financial inclusion are strongly influenced by the regulatory framework and the ability of local actors to interact with digital financial instruments, suggesting that these benefits may remain selective rather than universally accessible. The potential of BC is often considered to increase when integrated with Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI), Verifiable Credentials (VC), IoT, and decentralized infrastructures such as Ethereum or ICP [38,60]. These solutions are presented as opportunities to develop secure digital identities, verifiable certifications, and distributed applications without dependence on centralized servers. However, such architectures raise issues related to standardization, interoperability, and protocol control, elements that directly influence decision-making within the supply chain. From the perspective of downstream players, importers and roasters can benefit from greater data transparency, reduced operating costs, and transaction automation through smart contracts [42,58]. This asymmetry of potential benefits suggests that the opportunities offered by blockchain are not distributed neutrally but tend to favor actors with greater technological and organizational capabilities.

Consumers, for their part, can access detailed information via QR codes, strengthening trust and perceived value, although the literature points to the risk that such information may serve a reputational function in the absence of independent verification [36,65]. Further opportunities arise from the integration of blockchain with smart contracts and Cyber–Physical Systems (CPSs), particularly in industrial contexts such as coffee roasting. In these cases, the literature suggests possible applications for emissions tracking and the automation of Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) processes [49]. However, these developments remain largely confined to specific experimental or industrial initiatives, such as the Lavazza–xFarm project [62], which raises questions about their replicability throughout the entire global coffee supply chain. At a more general level, blockchain is associated with innovative Supply Chain Finance (SCF) mechanisms, which could facilitate risk assessment, transparent credit management, and the inclusion of small producers in formal financial circuits [59]. Here too, opportunities depend critically on the integration of technology, institutional rules, and governance models, without which the risk of exclusion or concentration of benefits remains high. Overall, the literature suggests that blockchain offers a complex set of opportunities for the coffee supply chain, but these advantages are not automatic effects of the technology. Rather, they emerge as possibilities conditioned by governance structures, data control, institutional capacities, and power distribution along the supply chain, indicating that the opportunities of BC are inseparable from the socio-technical choices that guide its implementation.

3.7. Critical Issues, Limitations, and Obstacles of Blockchain in the Coffee Supply Chain

Despite the significant potential of BC, its application in the GCSC continues to face several obstacles (

Table 2. Main limitations and obstacles of Blockchain in the coffee supply chain.

Category	Subcategory	Link to RQ2: Critical Factors and Limitations	Refs.
Systemic limits	Applications limited to prototypes	Most blockchain applications in the coffee supply chain are still at the pilot or theoretical stage, and this may restrict large-scale deployment	[38,43,57,64,65]
Distortion in adoption	Instrumental use	Blockchain could be implemented primarily as a marketing tool, focusing on corporate branding rather than genuinely promoting transparency, fairness, or sustainable services	[34,48]
Operating limits	High initial costs	The initial investment for infrastructure may be prohibitive, especially for smallholders	[34,37,40,58]
	High transaction costs	Transaction fees, particularly in public blockchains, may hinder adoption in low-margin agri-food contexts	[36]
	Limited access to technology	Poor connectivity in rural areas may limit operational adoption and reduce inclusivity in sustainable digital services	[34,40]
	Energy consumption	Energy demand may be very high, potentially undermining environmental sustainability	[58,59]
	Exposure to cyber attacks	Risks related to 51% attacks, bugs in smart contracts, unauthorized access, which can compromise the integrity and security of transactions	[59]
	Privacy Concerns	Risk of overexposure of sensitive or strategic data, which could compromise corporate confidentiality and generate reluctance to share information within the blockchain	[36,58]
Technical limitations	Scalability Issues	Growth in nodes and storage requirements may slow down network performance, increase validation times, and raise infrastructure costs, limiting service efficiency	[36,58]
	Lack of infrastructure	In many rural areas, access to stable connectivity and electricity is limited, constraining blockchain adoption	[64]
	Centralized governance	The persistence of centralized management structures may compromise distributed decision-making, undermining trust, and inclusivity	[37]
	Lack of standards and regulations	The absence of shared technical standards and regulatory clarity may reduce interoperability across platforms and delay uniform adoption	[58]
Cultural boundaries	Resistance and literacy	Limited digital literacy and cultural resistance to technological change may reduce farmers’ willingness to engage with blockchain	[61]
	Contract rigidity	Traditional smart contracts may lack the flexibility to adapt to regulatory or market changes, limiting their usefulness in dynamic service contexts	[63]
Practical limitations	Data manipulation	Since data are entered manually, accuracy cannot always be guaranteed at the point of entry	[62]

), and its effectiveness appears to be highly context-dependent. In particular, the literature highlights a marked discrepancy between the theoretical promises of the technology and the results observable in real contexts, as most initiatives remain at the proof-of-concept stage [38,64,65], or are confined to predominantly conceptual proposals [45,58], with limited validation in real conditions. This gap reflects not only technical limitations but also institutional, organizational, and governance constraints that hinder scalability. A first element of contradiction concerns the transformative role of BC. On the one hand, the technology is often presented as a lever for restructuring agri-food supply chains more equitably and transparently. On the other hand, several studies warn against the instrumental use of BC. Rehman et al. (2025) [34] highlighted the risk that blockchain is primarily adopted as a marketing tool to reinforce corporate sustainability narratives, without affecting underlying mechanisms of value distribution. Likewise, Samoggia et al. (2025) [48] observe that large companies tend to disclose more limited information through blockchain systems, while small- and medium-sized enterprises show a greater propensity for transparency, often for reputational reasons. This asymmetry suggests that blockchain-enabled transparency is selective rather than neutral, potentially serving the interests of dominant actors. The lack of data on the distribution of economic value along the supply chain reinforces this interpretation, leaving the shares actually captured by small producers and wage workers opaque. This aspect could be particularly relevant for RQ2, as it indicates that pre-existing power relations represent a key barrier to the sustainable and equitable use of blockchain. In the absence of governance mechanisms that impose symmetrical obligations of transparency and value sharing, blockchain tends to adapt to dominant structures rather than transform them. From an operational perspective, the literature also points to numerous obstacles related to costs and access to technologies.

High implementation and transaction costs [34,36,37,40,58], together with the limited availability of digital infrastructure in rural areas [34,40], often make the adoption of blockchain unsustainable for small producers. Alternative solutions, such as uploading data to centralized collection points, have been identified, although critical issues remain regarding the role of producers, who risk being confined to the role of mere passive data suppliers. Further contradictions emerge in terms of safety and technological sustainability. While blockchain is often associated with high levels of security and reliability, the literature highlights critical issues related to energy consumption [58,59], vulnerability to cyberattacks (51%) [59], as well as privacy issues and overexposure of company information [58]. As also noted by Boonkrong et al. (2024) [36], the trade-off between transparency and data protection remains unresolved, suggesting that increased visibility may generate new risks rather than mitigate existing ones. From a technical and institutional point of view, the large-scale adoption of blockchain in the GCSC is hampered by scalability issues [38,59], inadequate infrastructure in rural areas [64], and the persistence of distorted models of centralized access management. The lack of shared standards [58], regulatory uncertainties, poor integration with certification bodies, and the persistent digital divide between actors represent further barriers [64]. These factors highlight how the limitations of blockchain do not stem from the technology itself, but from the institutional context in which it is implemented. Cultural and social factors also have a significant impact on the adoption of BC: limited digital literacy [61], resistance to technological change, and the absence of clear regulatory frameworks that legally recognize blockchain in the agri-food sector. Evidence from Thailand [66] shows, for example, that older users are less likely to adopt the technology, indicating that digital innovation can exacerbate pre-existing inequalities if it is not accompanied by inclusion and training policies. Another structural limitation concerns data quality. Although blockchain guarantees the immutability of information once it has been recorded, it does not ensure the accuracy of data during entry [54,62]. Integration with IoT sensors, RFID, and automated collection systems is frequently proposed as a solution, but this in turn introduces new technological dependencies and additional costs. Finally, the literature explicitly highlights the power implications associated with the adoption of blockchain. Many initiatives are implemented through top-down approaches, in which producers participate mainly as data providers [41]. This dynamic has been interpreted as a form of data colonialism [67], in which the value generated by data extracted from less powerful actors is captured disproportionately in the downstream stages of the supply chain. In the absence of fair data sharing agreements, blockchain therefore risks reinforcing, rather than reducing, existing hierarchies. This perspective allows blockchain to be interpreted as an infrastructure for data extraction and exploitation, whose impact depends on who controls access to and use of the information generated. In this sense, information and power asymmetries constitute a structural limitation to the equitable adoption of blockchain, which is more significant than the technical performance of the system alone. So, it is clear that the design of BC applications in the GCSC should go beyond the technical dimension, aiming to reduce the information burden on small producers and provide forms of compensation for the information they provide. Only with adequate governance structures in place can blockchain avoid reproducing extractive dynamics and contribute to more equitable and sustainable transformations of the supply chain. Taken together, the critical issues, contradictions, and limitations analyzed in this subsection directly address RQ2, as they show that the obstacles to the effective adoption of blockchain in the GCSC are not solely attributable to technological factors, but derive from a combination of technical, organizational, institutional, and structural constraints. In particular, the empirical and conceptual evidence examined highlights how factors hindering the sustainable and equitable use of blockchain include: (i) centralized governance structures, (ii) power asymmetries in data management, (iii) infrastructure deficiencies in production contexts, (iv) regulatory uncertainties, (v) limited organizational capacity of small producers, and (vi) dynamics of digital exclusion. The discussion on data colonialism and information asymmetries also highlights that these limitations are not neutral but directly affect power relations along the supply chain, clarifying why blockchain, if implemented without inclusive governance models, risks reproducing or reinforcing existing inequalities rather than contributing to a more sustainable and equitable management of coffee resources. Consequently, RQ2 finds its answer in the identification of these contextual and structural factors as key determinants that condition the effectiveness of blockchain, confirming the need to interpret this technology as part of a socio-technical and governance system, rather than as a purely technical solution.

4. Main Findings and Theoretical Implications

From a theoretical perspective, this review goes beyond a purely descriptive synthesis of existing studies and offers an explicit conceptual contribution to the literature on blockchain adoption in coffee supply chains, reframing the field as a matter of governance and power rather than purely technological. This perspective integrates fragmented empirical evidence into a coherent analytical framework focused on information asymmetries, data control, and institutional context, and clarifies how differences in governance arrangements influence the variability observed in blockchain outcomes in coffee supply chains. In particular, the results allow us to articulate five main contributions that can be summarized as follows:

• Research on the application of blockchain in the coffee sector is still in an exploratory phase. Approximately 81% of the contributions indexed in Scopus have been published in the last three and a half years, with a strong prevalence of papers presented in conference proceedings. This temporal and typological distribution reflects the experimental nature of the applications currently being developed, which are largely limited to prototypes, with large-scale validation still limited. This result allows for a more accurate assessment of the maturity level of the existing literature, highlighting a field of research characterized by high expectations but still only partial empirical consolidation.
• There is a significant geographical and institutional imbalance in the indexed studies. The available literature focuses mainly on emerging producing countries, while Brazil, despite its central role in global coffee production and trade, is relatively underrepresented. This evidence could indicate a knowledge gap and suggests the need for further empirical analysis in production contexts characterized by more structured governance arrangements and greater market power. From a theoretical point of view, this result reinforces the need to interpret the adoption of blockchain in relation to specific political and institutional contexts, avoiding generalized approaches to coffee supply chains.
• From a conceptual standpoint, the adoption of blockchain in the GCSC can be traced back to a question of governance rather than a mere technological choice. The literature analyzed frames blockchain as a potential tool for reducing information asymmetries, particularly when integrated with IoT devices and mobile technologies, and shows how its transformative potential can be expanded when incorporated into broader digital ecosystems (e.g., SSI, VC) and decentralized infrastructures. However, comparative analysis shows that these effects are not automatic, but depend on specific rules for access, validation, and use of data. Consequently, the impact of blockchain does not lie exclusively in its technical characteristics, but in the configuration of the governance structures that regulate its operation along the coffee supply chain.
• A second theoretical contribution of this review concerns the relationship between blockchain, power relations, and value appropriation in the GCSC. Several studies highlight the risk that data generated by small producers and local actors will be captured and exploited downstream by more powerful entities, without a corresponding increase in the share of value appropriated upstream. This data colonialism suggests that blockchain-based traceability systems may reproduce, or even reinforce, pre-existing asymmetries if they are implemented through top-down governance models and extractive data management agreements. It follows that the effects of blockchain on sustainability also depend heavily on validation mechanisms and the distribution of information control rights.
• At the relational level, the review further conceptualizes blockchain-enabled transparency as a potential mechanism of supply chain reconfiguration. The greater transparency enabled by blockchain could potentially affect the restructuring of relationships between actors in the supply chain, making visible not only product characteristics but also the behavior and performance of operators. In theory, this could strengthen the bargaining position of small producers, encourage forms of horizontal coordination, and facilitate more direct relationships with downstream actors. However, the literature analyzed consistently shows that these effects are not automatic and are strongly influenced by the rules of participation and data governance models adopted.

In light of these considerations, the results of this review could therefore be useful as follows:

• To scholars and researchers, as the review could provide a critical systematization of fragmented and emerging literature as well as a useful theoretical basis for future research on sustainability, socio-technical transitions, and informational power in agri-food supply chains.
• To professionals in the supply chain and technical operators, because the study clearly highlights that the potential benefits of blockchain in terms of efficiency, traceability, and sustainability are not automatic but depend on enabling conditions and inclusive governance models, without which the adoption of the technology risks generating additional costs or new forms of information dependency.
• To policymakers and public institutions, because this review provides relevant insights into the design of innovation and sustainability policies in agricultural supply chains. In particular, there is a clear need to accompany the adoption of blockchain with investments in rural digital infrastructure, technological literacy programs, clear regulatory frameworks, and mechanisms for protecting data rights. The benefits of public policy only materialize when the technology is integrated into broader strategies for territorial development and social justice.

In summary, therefore, in response to RQ1, the results indicate that blockchain can contribute to improving efficiency by reducing information uncertainty, simplifying coordination processes, and limiting fraud and manual verification activities. From a sustainability perspective, it can support more responsible agricultural practices, potentially fairer value distribution, digital financial inclusion, and better compliance with international social and environmental standards. Taken together, these findings suggest that blockchain operates primarily as an enabling infrastructure for innovation in sustainability-oriented services in coffee supply chains, rather than as a self-sufficient solution.

In response to RQ2, the review confirms that large-scale implementation remains strongly influenced by contextual factors that go beyond technological performance. The effectiveness of blockchain is dependent on its integration into inclusive governance frameworks, coherent public policies, adequate digital infrastructure, and shared standards capable of aligning technological innovation with social and environmental objectives. From a theoretical point of view, these results reinforce the interpretation of blockchain as a socio-technical system, whose impacts on sustainability depend on the institutional structures and power relations that regulate the management of coffee as a global resource.

5. Conclusions

Although blockchain offers promising opportunities, it cannot be considered a standalone solution for achieving sustainability in the coffee supply chain. Its effectiveness remains contingent on enabling factors, including inclusive governance frameworks, coherent public policies, sustained investment in digital infrastructure, and widespread technological literacy. More specifically, this review shows that blockchain should be interpreted not only as a technical tool but as a governance mechanism capable of redefining how information and responsibilities are coordinated along the supply chain.

The evidence analyzed suggests that blockchain tends to function more effectively in contexts where institutional systems already support value redistribution and social justice, acting primarily as a catalyst for transformation processes already underway. From the perspective of sustainability governance, this implies that BC could amplify pre-existing institutional dynamics rather than independently generate equitable outcomes. Conversely, in the absence of such conditions, blockchain risks remaining confined to isolated pilot projects or being adopted primarily as a symbolic or marketing tool rather than as a driver of substantial change. This instrumental adoption could pose a critical risk, as transparency-oriented technologies could be used to legitimize existing power structures without addressing structural inequalities in decision-making processes and value distribution. Fragmented and uncoordinated adoption could reproduce existing asymmetries, imposing additional informational and operational burdens on smallholder farmers rather than empowering them. The results of this review, therefore, contribute to the theory of sustainability governance, highlighting how the impacts of BC could depend on who controls access, validation, and use of data, as well as on the institutional rules within which these processes are embedded. The actual impact of blockchain in the agri-food sector, therefore, depends on the ability of stakeholders to co-create shared rules, standards, and values that regulate data use, transparency, and value distribution along the supply chain.

To mitigate these risks, investments in accessible and easy-to-use tools, training programs, and technical support are essential, particularly in vulnerable production contexts.

From a public policy perspective, the adoption of BC should be accompanied by regulatory frameworks that protect data rights, promote inclusive participation, and prevent extractive models of information governance. In this context, therefore, the following areas of research could form the basis for future studies.

• Further explore the integration of blockchain with complementary technologies such as IoT and artificial intelligence, improvements in user experience, and systematic evaluations of large-scale performance. From this perspective, large-scale empirical studies are needed to systematically evaluate operational performance, implementation costs, energy sustainability, and system robustness in heterogeneous production contexts.
• Explicitly address issues of power, equity, and institutional design, analyzing how different governance models could influence the social and environmental outcomes of digital traceability systems in different coffee production contexts.
• Analyze the extent to which blockchain-based traceability systems influence consumer confidence, perceptions of sustainability, and willingness to pay for digitally certified coffee.
• Assess how training, technological literacy, access to infrastructure, and institutional support can affect farmers’ ability to actively participate in blockchain systems, preventing these technologies from translating into new forms of dependence or exclusion.

Ultimately, the primary driver of change does not lie in the technology itself, but in the political will and collective capacity to steer digital innovation towards goals of equity, sustainability, and inclusion. Only under these conditions can blockchain evolve from a purely technical tool to a facilitator of sustainable services, contributing in a credible and lasting way to the development of more transparent, resilient, and equitable coffee supply chains.