Industry Leaders Respond to USDA’s Funding Announcement for Regenerative Agriculture
This article first appeared in the January 2026 issue of Presence Marketing’s newsletter.
By Steven Hoffman
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, alongside U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, M.D., on December 10 announced a $700 million Regenerative Pilot Program to help American farmers adopt practices that improve soil health, enhance water quality, and boost long-term productivity, all while building a healthier, more resilient food system, said USDA. According to the release, HHS also is investing in research on the connection between regenerative agriculture and public health, as well as developing messaging to explain this connection.
“Protecting and improving the health of our soil is critical not only for the future viability of farmland, but to the future success of American farmers. In order to continue to be the most productive and efficient growers in the world, we must protect our topsoil from unnecessary erosion and improve soil health and land stewardship. Today’s announcement encourages these priorities while supporting farmers who choose to transition to regenerative agriculture. The Regenerative Pilot Program also puts farmers first and reduces barriers to entry for conservation programs,” said Secretary Rollins.
Administered by USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the new Regenerative Pilot Program is designed to deliver a streamlined, outcome-based conservation model—empowering producers to plan and implement whole-farm regenerative practices through a single application. In FY2026, the Regenerative Pilot Program will focus on whole-farm planning that addresses every major resource concern—soil, water, and natural vitality—under a single conservation framework. USDA said it is dedicating $400 million through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and $300 million through the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) to fund this first year of regenerative agriculture projects. The program is said to be designed for both beginning and advanced producers, ensuring availability for all farmers ready to take the next step in regenerative agriculture.
To support the program, NRCS is establishing a Chief’s Regenerative Agriculture Advisory Council “to keep the Regenerative Pilot Program grounded in practical, producer-led solutions,” USDA said. The Council will meet quarterly, with rotating participants, to advise the Chief of NRCS, review implementation progress, and help guide data and reporting improvements. Its recommendations will shape future USDA conservation delivery and strengthen coordination between the public and private sectors.
USDA also said it is permitting public-private partnerships as part of the Regenerative Agriculture Initiative (RAI), claiming that such partnerships will allow USDA to match private funding, thus stretching taxpayer dollars further, and bringing new capacity to producers interested in adopting regenerative practices.
We asked leaders in regenerative agriculture to weigh in on USDA’s announcement. Here’s what they had to say:
Hannah Tremblay, Policy and Advocacy Manager, Farm Aid
As a strong supporter of regenerative agriculture, Farm Aid welcomes USDA’s funding announcement for regenerative agriculture, but the lack of details about the program's specifics means we're unable to give a full response or analysis. From the few details that have been provided to date, this looks like a streamlining of processes and possible restructuring of existing funding, but does not appear to represent new funding for these programs.
The chronic underfunding and oversubscription of the EQIP and CSP programs – two crucial conservation programs – are ongoing problems that this administration and Congress have not addressed. The recent budget bill passed by Congress makes it easier for large operations to disproportionately use EQIP and CSP dollars by removing payment limits and Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) requirements. Policies like these make these programs less accessible to small and diversified farming operations and do a disservice to family farmers who are trying to enact conservation practices.
This sudden embrace of regenerative agriculture flies in the face of the other policies we've seen from this administration, including canceling the Climate Smart Commodities Program, EPA's fast tracking of pesticides and cuts to USDA's NRCS staff, who are crucial to helping farmers implement soil health practices.
Matthew Dillon, Co-CEO, Organic Trade Association
There are still many details to come in the implementation of the NRCS regenerative program, but the Organic Trade Association (OTA) is always supportive of programs that help farmers transition to improved management of their natural resources. It would appear that it will give farmers an à la carte menu of practices that they can select and create a less burdensome bundled approach with NRCS. If we can make it easier for farmers to better care for natural resources, that’s a good outcome.
The optimal outcome would be for farmers to have integrated and holistic conservation plans, like those that organic farmers do in their annual Organic System Plan. And ideally, that would include pesticide mitigation plans for those farmers who are conventional. Hopefully for some of these farmers it will be an on-ramp to exploring opportunities in organic markets.
At the end of the day, policy incentives will only go so far in rewarding farmers for ecosystem services – markets and consumers are essential. Organic is the only third party, verified, backed-by-law marketplace that does that. We will work to make sure organic farmers have adequate access and get recognition in these programs.
Ken Cook, Executive Director, Environmental Working Group
Basically, I’m pretty skeptical of the Regenerative Pilot Program. If you look at all of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s big talk during the Trump campaign and then during the transition regarding subsidies, $700 million rebranded from existing programs (with multi-billion-dollar budget baselines that a lot of us built and defended) is hardly the bold action he promised. The emphasis on efficiency and red tape is interesting—whole farm plans that originated in the 1930s and 1940s in the old Soil Conservation Service (SCS) are all about paperwork and red tape, and going back, a lot of us in the conservation world (and reformist elements within NRCS) pushed the agency to focus on practices aimed at priority lands/problems. Reformers in NRCS in the 1980s and after always felt whole-farm plans were make-work that resulted in career advancements (and documents on farmers’ shelves) but not necessarily conservation on the ground.
There was no emphasis at the press conference announcing the program on reducing pesticides. Nor was there any emphasis on aiming some of the money at organic, the only system out there that does fulfill the MAHA rhetoric from farm to grocery shelf.
And of course, during the Biden administration there was so much emphasis in regenerative circles on climate progress via carbon farming, carbon sequestration, farmers selling carbon credits, and so on, but those words and objectives have been forbidden by USDA. (We always thought the carbon stuff was way oversold—and not needed to justify lots of benefits from mixed crop-livestock farms, longer more diverse rotations, cover crops and other sensible practices that…have also been around and under-deployed by farmers since the 1930s despite BILLIONS spent by taxpayers on free technical assistance and cost-sharing).
Then of course there are the ‘antithesis-of-MAHA’ cuts to vital programs earlier this year to get local food to schools and food banks, the reductions in NRCS staff to do those whole-farm plans, and the massive, multi-billion-dollar subsidies that have been paid in tariff reparations to big commodity operations—whose payment limits have been generously increased to make sure the biggest operations get the most money.
Christopher Gergen, CEO, Regenerative Organic Alliance
The Regenerative Organic Alliance (ROA) welcomes the USDA’s announcement of a new Regenerative Pilot Program as an important signal of federal commitment to advancing healthier soils, more resilient farms, and stronger rural economies. We applaud this growing recognition that agriculture must go beyond extraction toward restoration, a core belief that has guided our work since the creation of the Regenerative Organic Certified® (ROC™) standard.
As USDA begins shaping the program’s criteria and implementation, ROA encourages alignment with the rigorous, holistic principles that define regenerative organic agriculture: improving soil health, ensuring dignified and fair conditions for farm workers, and supporting the humane treatment of animals. These three pillars are foundational to the ROC framework and have proven essential to achieving long-term ecological, economic and community benefits.
We are encouraged that the USDA acknowledges the role of organic systems in regenerative agriculture. ROC builds on USDA Organic as a necessary baseline for eliminating toxic synthetic pesticides, fertilizers, and GMOs — inputs that undermine soil biology, water quality, pollinator health, and farmworker safety. ROC then goes further by requiring additional soil health practices, pasture-based animal welfare, and fair labor conditions.
As decades of peer-reviewed research and field evidence show, regenerative practices alone cannot fully deliver intended environmental outcomes if they allow routine use of synthetic chemicals. The scientific record also shows that organic systems, including those that strategically use tillage for weed control in lieu of herbicides — consistently build soil carbon, increase water retention, reduce erosion, and improve microbial diversity. We encourage USDA to ensure that any regenerative agriculture program reflects this evidence by prioritizing systems that avoid toxic inputs and protect both ecological and human health.
The rapid expansion of regenerative claims creates both opportunity and risk. Without clear definitions, rigorous standards, and third-party verification, the regenerative category is vulnerable to greenwashing and consumer confusion. Independent analysis has shown that some non-organic regenerative labels allow herbicides, GMOs, synthetic fertilizers, and minimal verification, which could undermine public trust and the credibility of the entire regenerative movement.
With the right structure, USDA’s initiative can accelerate the transition to a food and fiber system that heals the land, strengthens rural communities, and ensures a healthier future for all; a vision that drives our mission every day. ROA looks forward to engaging with USDA as this pilot advances and to contributing our expertise, data, and proven frameworks to help shape a regenerative future rooted in integrity, transparency, and meaningful impact.
Jeff Tkach, Executive Director, Rodale Institute
Rodale Institute welcomes the USDA’s announcement of the new Regenerative Pilot Program and views it as an important signal that soil health, farm resilience, and long-term productivity are increasingly central priorities within American agriculture. This moment reflects a growing federal recognition that healthy soil is foundational to a secure food system, climate resilience, and human health.
For more than 78 years, Rodale Institute has led the science and practice of regenerative organic agriculture, long before “regenerative” entered the policy lexicon. Through the longest-running side-by-side comparison of organic and conventional farming systems in North America, Rodale Institute has demonstrated that regenerative organic agricultural practices can improve soil health, enhance water quality, increase resilience to extreme weather, and support farm profitability.
With a national network of research hubs, education initiatives and farmer training programs, Rodale Institute has helped producers across regions and production systems transition to regenerative organic practices rooted in measurable outcomes and continuous improvement. This experience, coupled with our leadership as a founding member of the Regenerative Organic Alliance, positions Rodale Institute as a critical partner in ensuring that regenerative initiatives are clearly defined, science-based, and deliver real, lasting benefits for farmers, communities, and the environment.
As the USDA advances this pilot program, Rodale Institute stands ready to contribute its decades of research, farmer-centered expertise, and leadership to help guide its success. By keeping soil health at the center of agricultural policy and practice, we can continue building a food system that supports productive farms, nourishing food, and healthy people, now and for future generations.
Paige Mitchum, Executive Director, Regen Circle
This Regenerative Agriculture Pilot Program is not new. It is a carve-out from the existing Farm Bill’s conservation funds using the same forms, rankings and field offices. The key difference is that they were processing proposals differently. Under the Climate Smart Commodities Program the process went USDA ↔ big project ↔ farmer. This pilot now routes money through individual NCRS contracts so the process flows as NRCS ↔ farmer. This sounds cleaner unless the agency in the middle just lost 20% of its staff, as is the case with the NRCS.
By doing away with the big projects intermediaries you lose the support provided by states, tribes and NGOs whose role was to recruit farmers, do measurement verification and reporting, provide technical assistance and handle smaller payments. Without this the NRCS will need significantly more bandwidth to handle a direct to farmer approach. But they aren’t staffing up; the FY2026 plan indicated further personnel reductions, leaving me to draw only one conclusion: The regenerative pilot program will be woefully under resourced, forcing them to accept applications from large well-resourced operations leaving small and vitally important producers on their own.
In a nine‑day window in December, the administration: backed pesticide maker Bayer in court, poured billions into the most glyphosate‑dependent crop systems, and then unveiled a sub‑billion-dollar regenerative agriculture pilot program as its health‑and‑soil solution. Once again this administration has brilliantly cut social infrastructure and meaningful programs that were supporting small farmers in regenerative transition, shielded a flagship herbicide company from liability, bailed out large monocultures, and in exchange handed us a small carve-out of existing programs with zero new infrastructure or any credible way of executing said program. As such, this reads more as a marketing scheme than it does meaningful policy work, and I hope that the private sector can step up and support the small holder farmers at the heart of the regenerative movement.
They took away the mountain we were slowly, imperfectly but intentionally building, they took a shovel and put a small mound of dirt aside and said, take this and enjoy the view.
Read Page’s full article here.
André Leu, D.Sc., BA Com., Grad Dip Ed., International Director, Regeneration International
In theory, this is a great initiative. Improving soil health through regenerative practices has been long overdue. Most farmers, including many organic farmers, need to adopt these methods. In reality, it will depend on who is selected to sit on the Chief’s Regenerative Agriculture Advisory Council. If it is composed of regenerative and organic farmers, it will be credible. If they repeat the NOSB (National Organic Standards Board) model, it will be hijacked by academics, NGOs and agribusiness. It will be an exercise in greenwashing, promoting no-till Roundup-ready GMOs and other degenerative practices. I don't have confidence that, given the USDA's history with the organic sector, they will choose the credible option.
Alexis Baden-Mayer, Political Director, Organic Consumers Association
I've been looking into where the money's coming from for the Regenerative Agriculture Pilot Program and how much has been allocated versus taken away. This is money Congress appropriated for two regenerative agriculture programs (the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the Conservation Stewardship Program) with a total annual budget of $4.515 billion. So, if $700 million is going to regenerative, that means $3.815 billion (84%) of EQIP and CSP funds will be going to factory farms and pesticide-drenched genetically modified field crops. Admittedly, Trump's USDA isn't the first to misappropriate these funds this way, but it is the first to celebrate it.
Earlier this year, the USDA refused to disburse $6.062 billion appropriated by Congress for family famers adopting regenerative agriculture practices and serving local markets. Now we're now supposed to be happy because the USDA is earmarking $700 million for regenerative agriculture? I feel like they're trying to convince us two pennies is more than a dollar bill because two is more than one.
Max Goldberg, Founder, Editor and Publisher of Organic Insider
The USDA's announcement of about $700 million dedicated to regenerative agriculture puts the spotlight on the importance of soil health at a critical time and is extremely welcome. Yet, whether this program can actually deliver tangible results to America's farmland remains a serious uncertainty, and there are two questions that must be answered.
First, does the USDA have adequate on-the-ground technical staff to assist farmers in executing regenerative practices while also measuring soil health improvements? Second, will this program actually lead to a reduction in pesticide use? Only time will tell, but the level of skepticism is very high that the funds will be spent in an efficient manner and this will result in meaningful progress.
Dan Kane, Lead Scientist, MAD Agriculture
The Regenerative Agriculture Initiative (RAI), also called the Regenerative Pilot Program (RPP), is a program announced by Secretary Rollins on Dec. 10, 2025. The press release from USDA describes it as a $700 million pilot program for FY2026 focused on helping farmers transition to regenerative practices.
The RAI is not a new program but instead a repackaging of existing USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) conservation programs, including the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP). Nor does the RAI designate new funding towards either of these programs and the practices they target. It will likely function as a priority national funding pool producers can apply to with some minor modifications to requirements and the application process. Efforts by the prior administration to increase funding to key regenerative practices and the regenerative agriculture community more broadly through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) would have provided greater funding overall in FY2026 and beyond.
The IRA added approximately $19.5 billion into USDA conservation programs above and beyond 2018 Farm Bill funding levels over a period of four fiscal years (FY2023-FY2028). EQIP would’ve been expanded by $8.45 billion over that period, with about $3.45 billion of that coming in FY 2026 for a combined total of $5.5 billion in FY2026. CSP would’ve received $3.25 billion over that period with $1.5 billion coming in FY2026 for a combined total of $2.5 billion in FY2026.
Given all the shifts in funding, and the reallocation of IRA funds to CSP and EQIP baseline spending enacted through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB), RAI is effectively funded through the reallocation of IRA funds. But, considering the reduction in total funding, it’s still not net new spending compared to what would’ve happened had IRA stayed in place. Although the OBBB increased baseline EQIP and CSP funding over a longer time period, the Congressional Budget Office still estimates that the rescission and reallocation of IRA funds will result in a net decrease of approximately $2 billion in actual conservation spending through FY2034.
While some of the changes included in this program (bundling applications, whole farm planning, soil testing) are good ideas, they’re ideas that NRCS has already applied through other programs. Major reductions in NRCS staff and proposed changes to how the NRCS is structured are likely to limit total capacity and reduce agency efficiency and function. Last, the elimination of income eligibility caps and the potential integration of public/private partnerships into the program raise concerns that this program and USDA conservation programs writ large will end up primarily serving very large farmers and agribusiness interests.
Any USDA programming focused on regenerative agriculture is a welcome addition to the financial stack for producers. No doubt we at Mad Agriculture will keep this program in mind as a potential option for the producers with whom we work. But this is a small win in comparison to the huge loss that came through the rescission/reallocation of IRA funds.
Read MAD Agriculture’s full analysis of USDA’s Regenerative Agriculture Initiative here.
Charles "Chuck" Benbrook, Ph.D., Founder, Benbrook Consulting Services
Chuck Benbrook is the former Chief Science Officer of The Organic Center; former Research Professor, Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources, Washington State University; and former Director, National Academy of Sciences Board on Agriculture
As someone who has been deeply involved in soil conservation policy, I was excited to see this announcement from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). With $700 million committed in the next fiscal year, it's a pretty substantial investment in regenerative agriculture. The hope is that it will go on with continued, and hopefully increased, funding.
As I read the announcement for the Regenerative Pilot Program, it seems to be a clear recognition by the USDA that soil health and what is needed to enhance the biological integrity and health of the soil has to be a very high priority. In fact, on par with controlling physical erosion. And I think that's the right direction. That's how we're going to lower the cost of production. That's how we're going to clean up water and start dealing with all these rural areas with ridiculously high levels of nitrate in everybody's drinking water. It's how we're going to deal with resistant weeds. Dealing with soil biology at this point is the most important and lowest hanging fruit for healing what ails us.
I think there are two aspects to the significance of USDA's announcement. One, it recognizes farmers anywhere along the continuum, from conventional, chemical-dependent farmers to regenerative organic producers. Wherever you are along the continuum, if you want to move toward a more diversified, resilient, less chemical-dependent system, you have to make multiple changes simultaneously and timed correctly to succeed.
I also think the NRCS approach of entering into customized contracts with growers that start from where they're at and finance the next round of changes in their farming systems, which could include changes in rotations, tillage, cover crop management and water management, is a good one.
It's also a positive that it's a streamlined administrative process where the farmer basically comes in with a proposal and works with the local NRCS and farm services agency staff to come up with how much the cashier payment will be next year and presumably for subsequent years for the practices that are adopted. Of course, one of the big concerns that people have is how progress is going to be monitored and quantified in a convincing way. Also, like everyone, I'm curious to see the details of how NRCS is going to structure the contracts.
My wish with this program is that smaller producers will have as much access as larger operators, however the fact is, those big commodity farmers tend to get favored when it comes to grants. Yet, I didn't see anything in the announcement to suggest that the NRCS is going to take into account the size of the farm in allocating the available funds. But let's face it, the larger, more sophisticated, often multi-owner, farms are going to be in the door first with well thought out proposals.
Regarding the appointment of an Advisory Council to help oversee the Regenerative Pilot Program, I think (USDA) Secretary Rollins has had a constructive series of conversations with people that come out of the organic and regenerative community. I also think she'll insist that a few folks from that world are on this advisory committee. But, you know, if past is prologue, the soybean growers will have a rep, the cotton council will have a rep and the pesticide industry will have a couple of reps. And it might not be somebody that's working actively for a pesticide manufacturer today, but it could be someone who has deep roots in that community. They may be an academic now. They may work for a consulting firm, but you know, the politics inside these federal agencies is really brutal.
The NRCS regenerative program has great potential to be the fulcrum to start the transition towards more diversified, sustainable regenerative systems, but for it to work in a meaningful way at scale, it has to be combined with a similar negotiated change in how commodity program subsidies and crop insurance subsidies are currently supporting agriculture. And that's the core idea behind what we're working on now called the Farm Economic Viability and Renewal Act, or FEVER Act, to help spark discussion among agriculture community leaders and policymakers of the systemic reforms in policy needed to avoid ever-larger bailouts in the not-too-distant future.
The large sums of taxpayer money at play — over $40 billion in farm support in 2025, and likely even more in 2026 — heighten the urgency of reaching agreement on substantive policy changes. The pressing challenge is to not invest taxpayer dollars during 2026 and beyond in bigger and better band aids, but instead in support of the deeper, systemic changes in farming systems that most farmers, advocates for healthier rural communities, scientists, and policy wonks know are needed.
Companies interested in partnering with USDA NRCS in the Regenerative Pilot Program can email regenerative@usda.gov for more information. Farmers and ranchers interested in regenerative agriculture are encouraged to apply through their local NRCS Service Center by their state’s ranking dates for consideration in FY2026 funding. Applications for both EQIP and CSP can now be submitted under the new single regenerative application process.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural Marketing, a strategic communications and brand development agency serving the natural and organic products industry. Learn more at www.compassnatural.com.
Is 2024 the Year Regenerative Agriculture Takes Root?
This article first appeared in Presence Marketing’s January 2024 newsletter.
By Steven Hoffman
In 1942, J.I. Rodale first popularized the term organic in the U.S. with the launch of Organic Farming and Gardening Magazine. Some 45 years later, in the 1970s, J.I.’s son Robert Rodale introduced the phrase “regenerative organic.” Robert’s goal was to describe an approach to farming that combined organic practices with a more holistic approach to land management and a focus on rebuilding soil health. Yet it’s only been in the past few years that the term has gained more widespread traction.
With the release in 2023 of two full-length feature documentary films, Common Ground and Organic Rising, along with increased adoption among farmers and producers, awareness of regenerative agriculture is set to gain ground in the coming year among large-scale food manufacturers, policymakers, researchers, the general public and more. Today, advocates of regenerative agriculture say it is the best way to produce healthier food and promote local and rural economies. And, by sequestering carbon back into soils, it can also play a significant role in mitigating climate change.
“2024 indeed will be marked as the year of regenerative agriculture. Why? We are closing in on a tipping point of awareness and collective action is being realized on a huge scale. Not only is soil and regenerative agriculture finally making its way as a leading climate, water and health solution, but we are also showing up as one of the biggest economic solutions for rural economies and businesses across the world,” said Finian Makepeace, Co-founder and Chief Strategy Officer of the nonprofit organization Kiss the Ground and Producer of the films Kiss the Ground and its sequel Common Ground.
“With the recent film Common Ground, and many other feature films and shows in this space sharing the story along with the incredible build of awareness brought on by Save Soil and others, we are seeing a dramatic increase in people comprehending the soil solution. With brands and businesses, there are huge commitments around regenerative agriculture for 2030. I believe 2024 will be a year of turning on those actions and increasing the integrity of their proposed programs. Regarding regenerative agriculture, I feel that 2024 will be the year that the world’s regen leaders find common ground and agree upon a definition that will allow for many more to work and support this space functionally,” Makepeace added.
“I do think that 2024 could be the best year yet for regenerative agriculture. While there is still disagreement over the definition, there is significant consensus that it includes a keen focus on building soil health, enhancing biodiversity, humanely integrating livestock and including worker fairness. New certification and verification programs like Regenerative Organic Certified, Certified Regenified, and Soil & Climate Health provide a lot of support and tools for farmers who want to incorporate more regenerative practices,” said Elizabeth Candelario, Director of Strategic Partnerships for MAD Agriculture, an organization that works with farmers and industry to advance regenerative practices.
In addition, Candelario said, “While their motivations may vary — from mission alignment to strengthening supply chains to mandatory ESG reporting — food companies are (finally) paying attention to the agriculture that is producing their ingredients. And food was finally on the table at the recent COP28 climate summit. The conference opened with a declaration on sustainable agriculture, signed by more than 130 countries, and ended with a final agreement that acknowledges for the first time that sustainable agriculture needs to be included in climate change solutions.”
Regenerative Products Sales Take Off
Now, the marketplace is responding. According to the Regenerative Organic Alliance Impact Report 2022 – 2023, sales of Regenerative Organic Certified (ROC®) products grew an average of 22% from EOY 2022 to EOY 2023, with sales totaling nearly $40 million in 2023. Companies including Dr. Bronner’s, Patagonia, Lundberg Family Farms, Manitoba Harvest, Bonterra and others are leading the certification efforts and serving as role models for other brands.
According to the Impact Report and based on SPINS data, revenue from sales of ROC® products in natural and multi-outlet grocers increased by one-third compared to the same period in the previous year. In addition, the number of ROC® SKUs in the market increased nearly forty-fold in 2023, “indicative of continued growth potential,” the report said. “By offering Regenerative Organic Certified products, brands are responding to the consumer desire to have their purchase make a positive impact at every level: environmentally, ethically, and socially,” the report concluded.
Globally, the market size for regenerative agriculture reached US$975.2 million in 2022, and is projected to be worth US$4.3 billion by 2032, poised to grow at a CAGR of 15.97% from 2023 to 2032, according to a June 2023 report from Precedence Research. North America generated more than 37% of the revenue share in 2022, Precedence Research reported.
While regenerative agriculture practices aren’t yet familiar to most Americans (just one in five consumers surveyed by Food Insight in 2022 said they’d heard of regenerative agriculture), 73% of consumers agreed they would be more likely to trust retailers and brands that implement regenerative agriculture programs, and 72% agreed that they would be more like to purchase from them, Supermarket Perimeter reported in October 2023.
Major retailers are taking notice. In December 2023, Whole Foods Market announced that it had implemented new standards to protect pollinator health. As such, the retailer will now require all fresh produce and floral suppliers to implement supply chain practices that help protect honeybees and other native pollinators.
Speaking to executives at Progressive Grocer’s Grocery Impact conference in November 2023, Whole Foods CEO Jason Buechle said, “Whole Foods Market invites you to help us start a ripple effect of change that will fix our broken food system. The decisions we make as a business — even the smallest ones — in how food is raised and grown today can have a profound and lasting impact on nourishing people and the planet for future generations to come. One of the biggest challenges our food system is facing now and will continue [to face] in the future is the climate crisis. If we continue farming in the large-scale, mechanized way that much of the industry currently does, our topsoil is not going to have the nutrient density it needs to grow the foods we know and love today,” Buechle said.
To address this challenge, Buechle reported that the retailer is working with farmers, ranchers, suppliers, scientists and other experts, as well as leading organizations, to leverage regenerative agriculture to evolve the practices used to grow, raise and produce the products that it sells. A focus on regenerative agriculture and responsible sourcing is an essential part of the retailer’s value proposition, which remains strong despite the mainstreaming of natural foods and the effects of inflation on consumer spending, according to Buechle.
Regenerative Food and Agriculture in 2024
In October 2023, Forbes reported that water stewardship will one of the biggest food trends in 2024. “As the tides of environmental consciousness continue to shape consumer choices, it is no wonder that water stewardship is set to become one of the top food trends for 2024,” wrote Senior Contributor Daphne Ewing-Chow.
“The global agri-food industry— valued at $6 trillion— is one of the most highly exposed to water risks, with water stress impacting many of the world’s largest food-exporting countries. Paradoxically, despite mounting perils to both food and water security stemming from water depletion, pollution, and climate-induced droughts, the food and agri-business sector is a chief contributor to the problem, accounting for a substantial 70% of all freshwater withdrawals,” she continued.
According to Ewing-Chow, “Regenerative agriculture plays a pivotal role in enhancing soil health, facilitating nutrient retention, bolstering natural resilience to environmental challenges, and mitigating erosion. This contributes to the conservation of water resources and the enhancement of ecosystem water quality, reducing the volume of water required for farming activities and decreasing harmful water and nutrient runoff from agricultural lands.”
Forbes also reported that in September 2023, SAI Platform, a network comprising 170 major food companies dedicated to sustainability, unveiled a global framework outlining the transition to regenerative agriculture for food businesses. A number of mainstream food brands such as Unilever, Nestlé, McDonald’s, Danone, and General Mills have already committed their support for regenerative agriculture, Forbes reported.
Greater technical innovation and research into regenerative agriculture will continue over the coming year, the Global Ag Tech Initiative predicted in its December 2023 report, 5 AgTech Trends to Watch in 2024. “Essentially mimicking natural process and biodiversity on agricultural land, the ultimate aim of regenerative agriculture is to improve soil health in order to boost yield. To address the challenges of climate change and feed a global population of over 8 billion, regenerative agriculture is vital. Digital tools use accurate, up-to-date data to create tailored regenerative agriculture solutions. These consider soil conditions, weather conditions, microclimates, and current crop growth or land use, as well as individual budgets and local regulations. Platforms offering site specific data will likely reign supreme in 2024. A view of sustainability that extends beyond simple carbon metrics and one-size-fits-all solutions is necessary and will enable the establishment of realistic, actionable objectives for growers, promoting sustainability and formulating strategies tailored to local environments,” the report said.
Beyond Food – Regenerative Fashion Threads the Needle
On the textile and fiber front, companies including fashion leader Mango will begin incorporating regeneratively grown cotton into its 2024 fashion collections, the Fashion Network reported in December 2023. The company has partnered with Materra, a British-Indian company specializing in regenerative cotton cultivation, and said it will be able to ensure complete traceability across the value chain of its cotton, from seed to final garment.
“As a global fashion company, our intent is clear: to contribute to creating a fairer society and reduce the fashion industry’s impact on the environment. This is why we ally ourselves with key partners like Materra, which will help us accelerate our path to ensuring that 100% of the fibers we use are sustainable by 2030,” said Andrés Fernández, Mango’s director of sustainability and sourcing.
Other fashion brands driving regenerative agriculture initiatives include J.Crew, Prana, Terra Thread and other textile and fiber companies that are members of the Regenerative Organic Alliance. “Big fashion brands and independent labels are embracing regenerative agriculture as a win-win solution that could allow them to source climate-positive materials. The challenge is that the concept doesn’t have a singular definition, and without clear standards it risks becoming a tool for greenwashing,” Business of Fashion reported in August 2023.
California Could Define Regenerative
Speaking of a definition, beginning in January 2024, the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), in collaboration with the State Board of Food and Agriculture, will host a series of public listening sessions to receive comments to help define “regenerative agriculture.”
“As interest in ‘regenerative agriculture’ continues to grow, we are seeing the introduction and evolution of the term in California policies and programs,” CDFA said. “Incorporating a definition of regenerative agriculture for state policies and programs provides a science-based criterion for the designation or recognition of the term ‘regenerative’ in agriculture-related policies of the state. By defining ‘regenerative agriculture’ and its associated practices, we are working to formalize holistic methods of farming that are designed to protect, sustain and enhance natural resources on our farms and farming communities throughout California,” the agency said.
Max Goldberg, Editor and Publisher of Organic Insider, commented, “If California codifies or legally defines ‘regenerative agriculture’ … it will certainly raise the profile of this term among consumers and farmers may end up paying more attention to the way they manage their soil, which is a real positive. However, both the opportunity for greenwashing and the consequences for organic could be severe,” he cautioned.
“At its core, the regenerative agriculture controversy stems from the question of whether a farming practice can be truly ‘regenerative’ if super-toxic chemicals, such as glyphosate or dicamba, are applied to the crops. There is no question that the regenerative movement has brought incredible attention to soil health … and that it has led to very important steps forward in farming practices around the world. But with all of the positive developments, ‘regenerative’ is ripe for abuse and greenwashing, and the multinational chemical companies, who have no intention of minimizing the importance of GMO seeds and synthetic pesticides, are eagerly embracing the term,” Goldberg added.
Elizabeth Whitlow, Executive Director of the Regenerative Organic Alliance, which manages the Regenerative Organic Certified program, told Organic Insider that she believes that California needs to act with real caution. “There are many groups and farmers advocating for ‘regenerative agriculture’ that are doing some excellent and extremely vital work. My concern, however, is that if the state defines ‘regenerative agriculture’ and it excludes organic, it could have the unintended effect of actually doing a lot more harm than good. Bad actors greenwashing the term is a real threat, and all stakeholders in California’s organic industry need to be fully engaged and on board with how the state is going to define ‘regenerative agriculture.’ The stakes are very high, for both California and our entire country, and this process cannot be rushed,” she said.
Woody Harrelson’s Regenerative Reason for Hope
Three-time Oscar nominated actor and environmental activist Woody Harrelson, in a December 2023 Op-Ed in The Wrap, expressed that, after serving as a co-narrator on the film Common Ground, he is “no longer hopeless for the future.”
Harrelson writes:
We stand at a crossroads, facing two paths. One leads to climate chaos, food shortages, deserts expanding and a biodiversity crash. The other involves rethinking our relationship with nature by choosing regenerative agriculture. The regenerative path can give us abundant, nutritious food, thriving ecosystems and a future for generations to come.
I had a surreal moment when I met King Charles and he said he loved “Kiss the Ground” so much he personally sent it to 1,000 people. I hope the same is true of “Common Ground” – I hope thousands of people send the new documentary to thousands of their friends.
I’ve never been a big believer in the political process in this country, but I believe in people. Congress is currently debating something called the Farm Bill. There are a lot of good people in America, who deserve to eat clean food, and it would be refreshing to see Washington prioritize communities over commodities.
I’m no longer hopeless. I’m actually inspired. In fact, I’m committed to using my voice and activism to make the regenerative agriculture movement spread far and wide.
We don’t just need to support soil in the Farm Bill — we need to make the effort in every way we can, from turning our lawns into food gardens and our food waste into compost, to buying food from local regenerative farmers and ranchers. We all eat and we can all support the people who are doing the hard work to feed the world with healthy regenerative food. We can vote with our dollars.
One thing is for certain, it’s time for a change. Soil is our common ground.
Let’s make regenerative agriculture our priority.
Learn More
Growing Life: Regenerating Farming and Ranching, by André Leu, December 2021
Food Climate and Nature FAQs, The Nature Conservancy, Sept. 1, 2023
Regeneration International, a global nonprofit organization and educational resource
44th Annual EcoFarm Conference, Pacific Grove, California, Jan. 17-20, 2024
Regenerative Business Live, United Nations, New York, NY, May 7, 2024
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing public relations, brand marketing, social media, and strategic business development services to natural, organic, sustainable and hemp/CBD products businesses. Compass Natural serves in PR and programming for NoCo Hemp Expo and Southern Hemp Expo, and Hoffman serves as Editor of the weekly Let’s Talk Hemp Newsletter, published by We are for Better Alternatives. Contact steve@compassnaturalmarketing.com.