Food companies are making high promises to reduce their emissions by the end of the 2020s, and regenerative agriculture is being touted as the solution to improving their carbon footprint. But many experts say the lack of a definition of regenerative agriculture could do more harm than good.
Broadly speaking, “regenerative agriculture” is any form of agriculture that actively works to sequester atmospheric carbon in the soil. There are various farming methods, including cover crops and intercropping, both of which are methods of implementing new crops into farm ecosystems. Regenerative farms typically do not disturb the soil as much as conventional farms and avoid large amounts of fertilizer.
A recent report from the Food and Land Use Coalition, an agricultural group, found that unrealistic claims may be misrepresenting what some companies are capable of with sustainable farming practices.
Theodora Ewer, one of the report’s authors, said:
Some large companies are embracing regenerative agriculture, such as PepsiCo, which works with farmers across global supply chains, including corn, wheat and soybean farmers in the Midwest to implement practices.
The CPG giant has pledged to spread these sustainable practices across its major ingredient footprint of 7 million acres. PepsiCo estimates that regenerative agriculture will save at least 3 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the decade.
General Mills is embarking on farmer-focused pilot projects in the United States and Canada. The company sees farmland as a living ecosystem to maximize biodiversity.
Meanwile Flour giant King Arthur is working with competitors as part of a network of North Dakota wheat growers to align common sustainability goals.
Drought-forced pasture soil is hoisted aloft for participants attending the Soil Health Academy, which teaches regenerative farming techniques, May 31, 2022, in Cimarron, New Mexico.
Mario Tama via Getty Images
Critics question farming methods
But skeptics point to the lack of clearly defined principles as a risk of greenwashing.
Some critics have pointed to the advertised effects of certain agricultural practices as misleading.
In 2018, Andrew McGuire, an agronomist at the Center for Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources at Washington State University, said: Companies claimed to be using the label of ‘regenerative agriculture’ Implementing a mixed cover crop means that soil diversity can be increased without the need for synthetic fertilizers.
“When cover crop mixtures are so beneficial, their benefits are certainly difficult to detect,” says McGuire. I haven’t found any evidence of that.”
In an interview with Food Dive earlier this year, Jim Walsh, policy director for sustainability organization Food & Water Watch, said no-till farming is more harmful than tillage because it requires pesticides and fertilizers. said.
Courtesy of PepsiCo
with results
Results-based measures can help mitigate the greenwashing effect that some believe has come to be represented by regenerative agriculture.
FOLU reported that the most accurate data on the operations of food companies should be published to maximize transparency.
“Policy makers should repurpose agricultural subsidies to support agriculture that achieves positive outcomes,” said Ewer. “Subsidies should be aligned with an outcome-based framework, ensuring that stakeholders are rewarded for achieving positive outcomes rather than quantity or practices.”
The Agriculture Group pointed to a stakeholder initiative, Regen10. The organization says it is pressuring food companies to take action. According to Ewer, FOLU is working with farmers and indigenous groups on frameworks for optimal implementation of regenerative agriculture across the region.
“This framework will enable food system actors to properly measure agricultural outcomes to inform practices, guide incentives, validate data flows, and drive innovation and adaptation. says Ewer.
Ranchers and other attendees at the Soil Health Academy teaching regenerative farming techniques on June 1, 2022 in Cimarron, New Mexico, used adaptive grazing at the CS Ranch to learn about the newly opened They gather to watch the cows graze in the meadows. .
Mario Tama via Getty Images
Proponents accept its purported advantages
Some experts are more optimistic about regenerative agriculture, believing the benefits outweigh some of the disruptions.
A University of Washington study published in 2022 found that farms that increased soil biodiversity and added cover crops over five years produced more nutritious food.
Dr. Jeffrey Brand, founder of the immune health company Big Bold Health, says crops grown through regenerative agriculture have significant nutritional benefits. Acting as a biome, soil health methods said it has immune-boosting properties.
“When a plant’s seed is planted in soil to stimulate growth and develop immunologically active substances, and the plant is eaten by humans, it has a great potential impact on positively supporting the immune system.
The Ellen MacArthur Foundation, a sustainability organization, wrote in a blog post that healthier food-producing soils with more microbial biodiversity are one of the main ways to prevent further climate disasters. increase. The foundation writes that unless producers implement practices such as cover crops by 2050, the food system will use up two-thirds of the world’s remaining carbon budget.
“Regenerative food production makes harvests more reliable and resilient in the long run by enhancing the health of the soils, ecosystems and species we depend on,” the group posted. “This can make individual farms more resilient to the impacts of climate change, such as floods, droughts, and changes in temperature and precipitation.”