.png){kind=logo}
Reading one of the items in a recent issue of the Upstream Ag Insights newsletter produced by Shane Thomas, I was intrigued by what he had to say about regenerative agriculture. As a result, I felt his viewpoints were worth sharing with you.
I especially liked his concept that regenerative agriculture is more of a mentality than a process. Thomas says he is asked all the time about regenerative agriculture Is it good. Is it bad? Is it valid?
For Shane Thomas, the Answer is that It Depends
When the principles of regenerative ag are broken down to their core components, he sees it as a bundling of practices with the aim of “regenerating” the soil (an outcome), including increasing organic matter (soil carbon) encouraging biological activity and mitigating soil erosion.
He recognizes that no-till, cover crops and intercropping are “beneficial” or “good” by themselves. But he points out that not all regen ag practices make sense in every setting, geography or time horizon. This means use of these practices could sometimes be “bad” in terms of hindering farmer productivity and profitability, particularly in the short-term.
In a paper he wrote on Regenerative Agriculture Doesn’t Have to Be Contentious, he points out that most “conventional farmers” use some “regenerative” practices. He finds it unfortunate that there is no agreement (definition) of when a field or farm becomes “regenerative.”
“Just like any ‘bundle’ there are things people will like/value, and things they will not,” he says. “In some geographies, cover crops make little sense for a farmer. In others, cover crops present an opportunity to reduce erosion and manage compaction.”
Like Getting a Free Gym Membership
In a post from Janette Bernard in her Prime Future newsletter, Thomas found an interesting comment from an individual that shares a great perspective on regenerative agriculture: That individual compares the incentives for regen ag to receiving a free gym membership in the mail.
“It may encourage you to show up, but the results are wholly dependent on your level and duration of commitment. If you put the effort in, you’ll keep doing it because you see results over time. I think these regenerative ag methods can absolutely stand on their own feet without subsidies, even if the production is being sold as a commodity. But it is a long game.”
Only 10% of Farmers Will Make Regen Ag Work
Thomas says it is a pipe dream to think the average farmer will implement every principle within regenerative agriculture effectively in a short period of time.
“It’s intimidating and will keep many from even starting,” he says.” In the next decade, and probably beyond, there is not going to be a significant percentage (less than 10%) of farms who implement every principle effectively.”
Part of the concerns is that there isn’t a deep enough understanding today among farmers, retailers and advisors to implement the regen ag concept.
“Critically, there isn’t the discipline to do so” adds Thomas.” This isn’t a knock-on farmers, it’s a people thing. Change is hard, systems evolution is even harder and doing hard things doesn’t just take incentives, it takes discipline.”
He believes monetary incentives for regenerative practices will be fleeting, although he would like to be wrong. He adds that the main reason to implement any of these practices leads to better profitability, which today is still primarily through increased yield.
Consumer Attitudes on Regen Ag
Thomas cites a Purdue University’s Consumer Food Insights Report that states that regenerative ag seems less popular when it comes at the expense of consumers. The report indicates that 71% of consumers have little to no familiarity with the term “regenerative agriculture.” At the same time, consumers who understand the concept may not be willing to help pay for it via higher food prices, regardless of the environmental benefits.
Regardless of everyone’s views, Thomas finds the organic crop production concept is simple to understand for the consumer (“no chemicals.”) And he suspects this is why some folks haver began using the term “climate smart agriculture” vs. “regenerative” — a term that consumers can easily understand.
Shane Thomas is an agronomist and author of the Upstream Ag Insights weekly newsletter. Read his weekly newsletter at upstreamaginsights.substack.com. For more on his thinking, go to the No-Till Farmer website and write in “Who’s Afraid of Regenerative Agriculture?”
