Measuring the Environmental Impact of Development Programs: An Earth Day Q&A
In 2024, TechnoServe programs mitigated 126,000 tons of CO₂e and supported regenerative practices across 189,000 hectares of land—numbers set to grow in the years ahead. To unpack how and why TechnoServe measures these impacts, we spoke with Inés Suaya, senior specialist for climate impact.
The 2026 Earth Day manifesto states that “progress in protecting our land, air, and water is real, resilient, and ongoing.” To understand that progress, we must be able to measure and track it–and that’s no straightforward task. In this interview, read about the ways in which TechnoServe staff and clients around the world measure the environmental impact of the organization’s initiatives.
Why Measuring Environmental Impact Matters for Sustainable Development
Why is it important to measure the environmental impacts of programs like TechnoServe’s?
Measurement really serves a dual purpose: it allows us to continuously build our internal knowledge while ensuring strict accountability and the ability to course-correct when necessary.
There is a fundamental truth in the saying, “We cannot manage what we cannot measure.” At its core, informed decision-making only occurs when we have data and evidence at our fingertips. When we speak about the impact of TechnoServe’s work, that impact must be anchored in accurate and transparent data. This is where the vital need for measurement arises.
How Development Initiatives Can Measure Environmental Impact
Q: What are the key environmental metrics that TechnoServe tracks across its programs?
All of TechnoServe’s regenerative projects track two key metrics: total area under improved management and mitigated greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond these core measurements, projects are also encouraged to adopt additional environmental indicators based on their specific goals. For example, one project in Mozambique is measuring agroecology resilience. A partnership with a multinational business to pilot and scale regenerative agriculture practices in its value chains is tracking nitrogen use, water efficiency, and soil health. Capturing more comprehensive data allows these projects to demonstrate more robust impact, inform decision-making, and articulate their success more effectively.
Are these metrics measured directly, or does TechnoServe use estimates?
While I’m using measurement and estimation interchangeably here, they are not actually the same. At TechnoServe, we do some of both.
Impact measurement involves collecting primary, empirical data straight from the field to capture exactly what is occurring within a specific ecosystem. In an agricultural context, this might include installing flow meters to monitor precise water usage or conducting multi-year lab analyses of soil samples to track specific changes in microbial biodiversity and soil organic carbon. While this approach offers the highest level of accuracy, it can be both labor-intensive and costly.
When constraints on time, budget, or data availability prevent direct measurement, impact estimation serves as a critical alternative. This method utilizes secondary data—such as regional or global statistics—to derive high-level impact results from a limited number of project-specific data points. Although estimation is less precise than direct measurement, it allows for more efficient, lower-effort conclusions.
How Smallholder Farmers Can Improve the Environment
In a typical agriculture project, what kind of environmental impact can a smallholder have on her farm?
In an agricultural project, a smallholder’s environmental impact is profound because a farm is a porous, living system. Because the farm is built directly on the natural world and is entirely dependent on its resources, every farm-management decision is a direct intervention in the local ecosystem. This includes soil health, biodiversity–from microbes and root species to animals and insects–water resources, the resilience of the environment to climatic and pest shocks, and ultimately, productivity.
This direct attachment to the earth means that agriculture holds a unique potential for positive environmental outcomes. Ultimately, this creates a virtuous cycle where environmental restoration leads to higher yields and better human nutrition, proving that in a well-managed agricultural project, the improvement of human life and the healing of the planet are two sides of the same coin.
What are some examples of farming practices that both increase incomes and benefit the environment?
Regeneration is defined by results rather than specific actions, so there is no universal set of activities we can label as environmentally beneficial. A practice that generates positive climate and nature outcomes in one setting might not achieve the same effect elsewhere.
While it’s therefore difficult to identify one standard set of recommendations, our projects are living evidence of a clear connection between specific practices and positive results within their local contexts.
In Chile, helping tomato growers replace synthetic nitrogen with bio-inputs, applying winter cover crops, satellite-based soil moisture tracking, improvements in rhizosphere development and mycorrhizal colonization in the roots and soil, and integrated pest management led to an average 6% increase in yield, 14% increase in water use efficiency, and 23% decrease in emissions per ton of produce within the first year.
In Peru, TechnoServe supported smallholder coffee farmers to adopt practices like wastewater management, organic fertilization, soil coverage, and tree planting. Even amid climate shocks brought by La Niña and El Niño, farmers improved their yields and resilience while reducing the carbon emissions of every ton of coffee cherry by 21%.
Challenges and Opportunities in Measuring Environmental Impact
What are the biggest challenges with measuring environmental impact in smallholder agriculture?
Coming from the world of financial accounting—a discipline defined by long-established and clear standards—it is striking to see how much of a work in progress environmental impact measurement remains. Unlike a financial balance sheet, environmental measurement in agriculture isn’t straightforward because it relies on the unpredictable interaction of living ecosystems. A practice that succeeds in one soil type or climate may yield entirely different results just a few miles away, making replicability a constant challenge.
Effective measurement also requires the active participation of the farmer or business owner to monitor their own activity data. This is where the challenge becomes human: smallholder farmers often lack the formal systems to track fertilizer use or energy consumption, and those in remote areas may have no access to the digital tools needed for reporting.
Even entrepreneurs who are diligent about their financial records rarely document their “environmental debits” like precise water or electricity usage. TechnoServe’s role in training these participants on data recording is a fundamental bridge toward transparency and accuracy.
Another key challenge is the frequent disconnect between ambitious impact goals and the actual time required to realize them. This is especially evident in the agricultural sector, where implementing better practices doesn’t always produce immediate, observable outcomes. For example, significant increases in crop yields or verifiable improvements in soil organic carbon typically require several years to manifest.
However, tracking this impact is invaluable. Despite the hurdles, we have spent the last three years proving that measurement and climate-impact estimation are possible with the right capacity-building. Every year, more TechnoServe programs are tracking their environmental impact, and we are excited about how this data helps our clients.
Change Starts Small.
We believe in providing hardworking people with the tools to build their own way out of poverty. See the data-backed methodology behind our global efforts to create systemic, sustainable change.
