In our last blog, we discussed the issues with our current agricultural practices and looked at a potential alternative - regenerative agriculture. Due to its nascency in western agricultural thought, there are some issues with how the current movement is moving forward. Today we’re going to look at some of those issues, and think about how regenerative agriculture can reach its full potential and what that means.

Issues with Regenerative Agriculture in its Current Conception

Carbon Sequestration Rates

One of the issues with regenerative agriculture that is often talked about is the uncertainty around whether regenerative agriculture can be a powerful climate change solution, vis-a-vis soil carbon sequestration, or not. Bold claims are coming out of the regenerative agriculture movement that touts its potential for carbon sequestration as almost the solution to not only stop contributing to global warming but also to pull carbon from the atmosphere.

Unfortunately, there are many issues with these claims. It’s not that soil, when tended properly, doesn’t sequester carbon, it’s more a matter of how much and for how long the rate of sequestration stays the same. Some scientists claim that soil can’t store nearly enough carbon over a long enough period to be an effective climate solution. The science around these questions is still developing, but what it seems to be saying so far is that after a while soil tends to get saturated with carbon and no longer takes it in at the same levels as it used to. There also seems to be a much larger sequestration potential with severely degraded soils. This means that different soil has different carbon storage potential and can be very variable over a small tract of land. So we don’t really know that soil can capture as much carbon as some claim it can, and we also encounter trouble in our attempts to measure the soil carbon.

Because soil’s ability to capture and store carbon is variable, we need to approach the carbon sequestration potential with widespread soil testing. Particularly because there has been such a push on regenerative agriculture’s value as a carbon sequestration solution, the government and different funding sources are talking about using regenerative agricultural practices as a carbon offset to offer financial incentives for farmers to make the switch. Unfortunately, widespread soil testing is expensive and often cumbersome for farmers to take on to prove the value of their soil. To combat this issue, companies and researchers are instead trying to model the soil carbon potential of different land using old datasets. This can greatly exaggerate the amount of carbon that’s being stored in the soil. While we definitely want to have our whole agricultural system switch to practices that are better for the environment and for our communities, we want to be careful to ensure that the carbon storage that we’re paying for actually works the way we think it is.

Attribution and Equity

While the argument about whether regenerative agriculture’s carbon sequestration potential can be a powerful climate solution or not is critical to our understanding and to getting regenerative agriculture right, some say that focusing on the limits of regenerative agriculture’s environmental potentials obscures other important issues that are at hand - namely equity, justice, and acknowledgment. The current regenerative agricultural movement has been led by prominent think tanks, corporations, and foundations and often do not seek out or actively ignore diverse perspectives. Regenerative agriculture’s current conception is problematic because it assumes that it’s a new, splashy, scientific technique for restoring our soils and protecting the planet, when in fact these agricultural techniques have been practiced by black and indigenous peoples for generations.

When settlers seized the “corn belt” from indigenous people in the 19th century, they encountered a thriving and vibrant ecosystem largely constructed through the complex interactions of indigenous people, animals, plant life, and climate. These interactions left behind incredibly fertile topsoil, which the settlers then started tilling for farmland. Over time certain government programs, like the crop insurance subsidies, led to this land being predominantly used for the production of monocultures, like corn and soy. This transformation decreased productivity of the land, increased soil degradation and loss, and increased the need to use chemical fertilizers and pesticides.

When thinking about regenerative agriculture, we need to consider these issues of land loss and culture loss as they have clearly contributed to the environmental destruction that we see today. And when we take this example into context, it’s easier to see how indigenous voices are absolutely vital to discussions about transforming our agricultural system. “A vision of “regenerative” that ignores access and equity would likely be not only incoherent but ineffective, undermining its conservation goals from the outset” (Joe Fassler, The Counter 2021). When we don’t include black and indigenous voices in this transformation we are actively losing out on the generational knowledge that their experiences bring to the table. This could lead to crucial inadequacies of a predominantly white regenerative agricultural practice that won’t be as whole or as beneficial as we want it to be.

Equity and attribution are inextricably linked. When we attribute these agricultural practices to their true owners and give them a seat at the table, we inevitably have to shift our focus to an equitable agricultural transformation. Without these perspectives, we miss the important historical contexts of our agricultural system, in addition to losing out on that generational knowledge. For regenerative agriculture to exist in a form that truly benefits the planet and the people on it, it needs to deal with the systemic injustices of the past and take on a truly transformative approach - we can’t just keep growing large monocultures of corn and soil, even if we make them regenerative.

Regenerative Agriculture: A Powerful Solution

Even if the science behind regenerative agriculture’s carbon sequestration potential is iffy, it doesn’t mean that regenerative agriculture isn’t beneficial to us. While carbon storage rates are up for debate, the research behind regenerative agriculture’s other environmental benefits is crystal clear.

When no-till practices are put into place, they slow erosion and increase water absorption. Cover crops reduce the need for fertilizer, improve soil moisture and fertility, limit water pollution, and improve biodiversity. Crop rotation and crop diversity have many of the same benefits as cover crops and can even be a powerful pest deterrent, limiting the need for pesticides and herbicides. And livestock integration can help control weeds and clear cover crops, reducing the workload for farmers, all the while fertilizing and improving the soil. Not only that, but farm animals are much happier in a regenerative system where they are allowed to roam freely and feast on the foods that they were meant to eat and not on industrial feed that makes them sick.

Additionally, when equity and justice are added to the equation, the transformation to regenerative agriculture has the potential to be a powerful solution to addressing systemic racism, farmworker rights, and adding good jobs to the economy. A truly regenerative approach to agriculture would create jobs due to the increased labor that comes from crop diversity, crop and livestock rotation, cover crops, and the release from the need for monocultures. These practices would also reduce the need for toxic pesticides and fertilizers, which would make agricultural work a lot safer for farmers and farmworkers. Giving black and indigenous voices more power inherently addresses some of the systemic issues associated with a lack of representation and would lead to an increase of black and indigenous farmers and landowners. A regenerative approach would likely require the dismantling of some of the largest farmlands due to the increased demand of working the land, freeing up space for historically underrepresented communities to step in.

When done right, regenerative agriculture has the potential to be a truly transformative and powerful environmental, animal rights, and human rights solution. It’s an approach that will benefit all people and ecosystems due to its soil regeneration and water quality potential, which ultimately means healthier food and water for all of us.

How you can incorporate Regenerative Practices at Home!

Keep Knoxville Beautiful had the wonderful opportunity to host two informative webinars this year that directly deal with circular economy and regenerative principles. These webinars are instructional guides for how to incorporate sustainable gardening practices at home and for learning how to compost. If you’re interested in incorporating these practices into your life, I highly recommend watching these webinars! Additionally, the farmers’ market is an awesome resource for shopping for foods that were created sustainably and sometimes even regeneratively. Reach out to Nourish Knoxville for information on local farmers using these techniques.

Home Composting with Green Heron

Sustainable Gardening Practices with Beardsley Community Farm

Also, if you’re interested in deep diving into this issue, I highly recommend this article by Joe Fassler on The Counter and check out Soul Fire Farm for an equitable example of regenerative practices.

Regenerative Agriculture's Potential