Academics predict a reduction of the earth’s arable topsoil sufficient to put at risk having the acreages of land needed to feed the world. The earth may not have enough usable soil by 2075, or so they estimate. Their conclusion is that some of our agriculture practices need to change to stop the erosion of our soil, and they point to regenerative agriculture.
In short, the argument is that regenerative agriculture is essential because current rates of soil destruction, decarbonization, erosion, desertification, and chemical pollution are not sustainable.
Transition from monoculture farming
The reality is that an uptake in this type of farming won’t happen unless it succeeds in making it commercially attractive for the farmers. At the end of each harvest or when the animals are processed, the farmer or rancher needs to see a financial benefit with a sustainable level of income. For most agriculture, adopting regenerative practices requires change, at a minimum a period of transition.
The risk and cost associated with this transition can not be underestimated. Most farmers and ranchers already know the value of their land and try to take good care of it. Unless there is a tangible benefit in the short run (say 2 to 4 years), most farms (and their financial backers) don’t want to be exposed to the risks of transition and potential loss of income.
The primary barriers to wider adoption in the US include high upfront costs, estimated at up to $200 per acre for transitioning to practices like no-till and cover cropping.
What are the regenerative practices?
Planting cover crops, reducing or eliminating (deep) soil tilling, crop rotation, integrating livestock and crops on one farm, smarter water use, reduce or eliminate chemical spraying, are all parts of regenerative farming. As are precision agriculture and the strategic use of biologicals, employed to optimize input application, reducing reliance on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. Incorporating trees into farmland and the use of biochar, charcoal from organic waste, help sequester carbon, improve soil structure, and reduce pollution.
The main strategy of regenerative farming is to use a holistic approach that goes beyond sustainability or limited use of chemicals. It means actively restoring and improving land health, leading to rebuilding soil organic matter. It also means restoring biodiversity, which results in carbon drawdown and improved water cycles.
By enhancing soil health, crop diversity, and water retention, regenerative practices increase resilience to climate extremes like droughts and floods, ensuring more stable food production. It improves nutrient density in food, reduces the need for synthetic inputs, and strengthens rural economies by supporting family farming and preserving indigenous knowledge.
It also reduces greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, which currently accounts for 44 to 57% of global emissions, and has the potential to sequester significant amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Data driven
While working on, or visiting, regenerative farms, one aspect surprised me. Modern farming is already driven by data to a certain degree, but these regenerative farmers seem to take it to the next level. More sensors, measurements and observations lead to more data that can be processed to assist in making small or large adjustments.
I saw a lot of experimentation, constant adjustments and tweaks, leading to an iterative cycle of farming. On one farm the boss spends most of her time in the office, except during peak activity like planting or harvest. Collecting, analyzing and drawing conclusions from the data, consulting with outsiders, is a major part of her job. Like most other farms, keeping a close eye on the finances is part of her remit too.
Organic farming
Regenerative and organic farming share common goals of promoting environmental health and sustainable food production, but they differ significantly in their core philosophies, standards and focus areas. Organic agriculture is defined by somewhat strict, legally mandated standards. It prohibits the use of synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and genetically modified organism. These standards are enforced through third-party certification.
An organic farmer I met says that “organic farming focusses on doing no environmental harm. It embodies many regenerative principles and can thus be used as a foundation for regenerative farming. On our farm we grow organic produce, but aim to adopt the wider regenerative principles.”
Regenerative agriculture is broader in its principles which go beyond primarily avoiding harm. It aims to actively restore and enhance ecosystems and create more bio-diversity.
Food industry in support
Despite challenges, there is growing momentum. Major food companies like General Mills, Unilever, PepsiCo, and Nestle have pledged support for regenerative agriculture, with General Mills aiming to advance practices on 1 million acres globally by 2030. A collaboration between General Mills and Walmart targets 600,000 acres by 2030.
Furthermore, McKinsey research suggests that achieving 80% adoption of no-till and cover cropping on U.S. corn and soy farms could generate an incremental economic value of up to $250 billion over a decade, driven by increased net income, land value appreciation, and ecosystem payments.
Is its adoption growing fast enough?
Based on recent growth, insiders project expansion to one billion regenerative farming acres worldwide by 2050. If met, it will have removed 23 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and generate substantial economic returns, making it a critical contribution for climate change mitigation, food security, and ecological restoration.
While growing, its adoption in the US does not appear to be fast. Of the 900 million arable acres in the US, currently about 1.5% is farmed regeneratively. Compare that to organic farming which hovers around 1% of farmed acreages in the US.
Around 20% of US farmers use cover cropping and approximately 50% practice low-till or no-till farming. Note that these practices are typically implemented on less than 30% of their total acreage. An increasing use of an ever wider pallet of chemicals is almost universal in today’s US agriculture.
The Department of Agriculture and the American Farm Bureau estimate that 140 million acres, or 15% of total US farmland, receive financial and technical assistance for conservation practices. However, this does not equate to a full adaptation of regenerative agriculture.
The primary barriers to wider adoption in the US include high upfront costs, estimated at up to $200 per acre for transitioning to practices like no-till and cover cropping.
One potential stimulant can come from agreeing on common metrics and reimbursement for environmental outcomes. The health of the soil, the environment and the sustainability of a farm is not usually something a farmer has been able to recoup income from.
Moving to a set of metrics adopted by the whole food industry, should make it easier for farmers to adjust their practices and for positive changes to be rewarded.
Today, all the risk and most of the cost sits with the farmers, with limited support from the taxpayers through the US farm bill. It seems impossible to achieve systems transformation at the scale needed without sharing the burden and benefits through the value chain.
As one farmer put it: Farmers are, and have always been, stewards of the soil. They must be incentivized and rewarded as such.