The New York Times ran a piece earlier this summer about pledges made by companies such as PepsiCo, Cargill, Walmart, and General Mills to support sustainable agriculture, including pledges to have 70 million acres managed using regenerative practices by 2030. The article outlines the challenges in achieving these goals including inflation, the pandemic, supply chain issues, how the war in Ukraine has affected food prices, and most notably resistance or skepticism from farmers. For one thing, the average age of farmers in the U.S. is getting higher and farmers who have been using certain agricultural practices for years may be hesitant to take up new strategies. Additionally, there is a partisan nature to the way climate change is viewed and discussed in the U.S. and not all farmers will view soil carbon sequestration and regenerative practices in the same way, as some may see it as aligning more with a political party that is not their own. Lastly, there is the question of cost. Companies have offered various incentives–a per acre payment for the first year for conversion to regenerative techniques, contracts for carbon dioxide sequestered, and cost-sharing agreements to cover changes in yield–even still, farmers are concerned about taking up new practices and some believe that the incentives as they currently stand aren’t enough cover the initial costs (Creswell, 2022). All of these issues raised beg the question: What aids or prevents farmers from transitioning to regenerative agriculture techniques?
During my research on regenerative agriculture, I have read a handful of papers that delve into the topic of the pathways and barriers that exist for farmers in their transition to regenerative practices. While the focus of my paper has been on the carbon sequestration potential for regenerative agriculture, this social science piece cannot be ignored, as regenerative agriculture will not have a significant contribution toward the 1.5 degree target if a critical mass of farmers will not transition away from more conventional methods. From the literature here is a list of key pathways/opportunities that tend to assist or encourage farmers in their transition to regenerative practices, and a list of key barriers that hinder this transition process.
Pathways and Opportunities
- government programs
- niche markets/certification schemes
- access to extension and training
- the role of a land “steward”
- visible results in terms of soil moisture, texture, and increased biodiversity
- moments of change
A study based on the experience of livestock farmers in Australia found that governement programs, universities, and NGOs that support training on regenerative agriculture are key to creating a pathway that assists farmers in transitioning to more regenerative methods (Gosnell et al., 2019). Growing consumer demand and niche markets also support farmers in this transition, while also allowing farmers to sell regeneratively grown crops at a premium–bringing in a higher revenue while farmers are also saving on fertilizer costs (Gosnell et al., 2019; LaCanne & Lundgren 2018). While political forces may shape how farmers view climate change, there seems to be a common thread amongst most farmers in the importance of land stewardship and a desire to pass the land onto to the next generation (Gosnell et al., 2019; Kempf, 2020). These shared values can serve as an important entry point to more ecological and regenerative practices. Perhaps not all farmers will be compelled to transition to regenerative agriculture to mitigate emissions or a feeling of urgency about climate change, but practices that provide visible results such as improved soil health and texture and increased biodiversity can be powerful in terms of persuading farmers across the political spectrum about the effectiveness of regenerative agriculture as a form of land stewardship. Lastly, some farmer interviews suggest that a moment of change or crisis has been an important catalyst for changing farming techniques (Gosnell et al., 2019)–this could be extreme weather events, economic changes, or personal changes. While the passing of progressive agriculture or environmental policy is not always the top priority in moments of crisis, capitalizing on those moments of fluctuation may be key, as it is a time.
Barriers
- industry/peer pressure
- change from yield to profit-centered mindset
- initial investment cost of infrastructure and other materials
- learning curve of new methods and ecosystem processes
Of course, there are many barriers as well that keep farmers working within their current systems and technologies and make it harder to transition to regenerative agriculture practices as well. One of these barriers is the social pressure that farmers face from colleagues, extension officers, salespeople, and others in the agricultural industry to maintain their current practices (Gosnell et al., 2019). Finding community with other farmers utilizing the same techniques through universities or farmer collectives is crucial so that farmers have peers and colleagues they can turn to for shared ideas and support as they change methods. Livestock farmers with experience in transitioning to regenerative agriculture also noted that the change in techniques required an entire mindset-shift from a yield-centered approach to a profit-centered approach–especially given the lower costs associated with low-input agriculture. This fundamental shift in business model can be a sticking point for risk averse farmer who may be concerned about yield changing with different management strategies and the initial costs required to take up regenerative practices. Payments for ecosystem services, premiums for regeneratively grown food, and other financial incentives could be important in helping to assure farmers that they can cover initial costs and maintain profitability with regenerative methods. Farmers also described a learning curve that comes with regenerative agriculture and a need to develop more of an understanding of the landscape the ecosystem functioning. For exmple, farmers pointed out certain visual indicators in terms of the soil quality, presence of native species of flora and fauna, and level of defoliation and regrowth that helps them know when to rotate their cattle (Gosnell et al., 2019). This learning curve and adjustment can be a barrier for farmers. Access to training programs and seminars are important resources that can help support farmers transition to new agricultural techniques.
While advocates for regenerative agriculture believe that the adoption of regenerative practices can help reverse climate change, scaling up these practices remains a challenge. More research should focus on farmers who have been through this transition to shed light on the challenges and successes they faced. Future research that engages with farmers who participate in incentive programs from private companies, government agricultural conservation programs, carbon markets, PES schemes, training programs and more will help shed light on how to most effectively get farmers on board with regenerative practices.
References
Creswell, J. (2022, July 9). Companies’ Climate Promises Face a Wild Card: Farmers. The New York Times.
Gosnell, H., Gill, N., & Voyer, M. (2019). Transformational adaptation on the farm: Processes of change and persistence in transitions to ‘climate-smart’ regenerative agriculture. Global Environmental Change, 59, 101965. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101965
Kempf, J. (2020, May 11, 2020). The Role of Carbon in the Soil with Rattan Lal In Regenerative Agriculture Podcast. A. E. Agriculture.
LaCanne, C. E., & Lundgren, J. G. (2018). Regenerative agriculture: merging farming and natural resource conservation profitably. PeerJ, 6, e4428.