A new critical review in CABI Agriculture and Bioscience examines the rise and scientific foundations of regenerative agriculture (RA), proposing a working definition focused on ecological cycles and farm system outcomes.
Dr. Nicholas Bardsley, from the Department of Agri-Food Economics and Marketing at the University of Reading, argues that as agriculture faces growing challenges from soil degradation, climate disruption, and ecological decline, a deeper reassessment of how food is produced — and what it means to farm regeneratively — is needed.
Drawing on peer-reviewed studies, grey literature, practitioner insights, and the latest soil ecology research, the review explores how RA could transform farming systems from extractive to restorative. It offers a critical yet constructive assessment of RA practices, definitions, and evidence, framing it as a farmer-led, soil-focused movement grounded in ecological restoration principles.
Redefining Regenerative Agriculture
While RA is gaining international attention, its definition remains debated. The review suggests framing it as farming that works with and enhances natural nutrient, carbon, and water cycles for agricultural benefit. Rather than prescribing specific methods, the focus is on measurable outcomes — improved soil function, biological activity, and resilience—allowing flexibility across different farming systems.
Scientific Foundations: Soil as a Living System
The review synthesizes recent soil science findings that challenge traditional assumptions about soil formation and fertility. Contrary to the belief that soil degradation is largely irreversible, evidence shows that biological processes, particularly plant-microbe interactions, can rebuild soil organic matter and structure faster than previously thought.
RA practices such as cover cropping, minimal or no-till cultivation, livestock integration, and use of biological inputs engage these processes, helping restore the “soil food web” and reactivate nutrient and water cycles. According to the review, regenerative farmers aim not just to conserve soil but to rebuild what has been lost, according to a press release.
Ecological and Societal Co-Benefits
RA also offers multiple co-benefits: enhanced carbon sequestration and potential climate mitigation, reduced reliance on synthetic inputs, biodiversity restoration, improved resilience to drought, disease, and economic stress, and possible public health benefits through higher crop quality and richer soil microbiomes.
The review highlights growing scientific interest in links between soil health, crop nutrient density, and human health, emphasizing RA’s potential contributions to broader societal goals.
Challenges to Adoption And Policy Gaps
Despite its potential, RA faces barriers to wider adoption. These include limited long-term public research funding, narrow definitions of evidence-based practice, and policy frameworks—such as the UK’s Environmental Land Management scheme—that do not fully support systemic change.
Certification and market-driven approaches also risk “greenwashing,” potentially diluting the ecological integrity of RA. The review calls for place-based support, experimentation, and prioritizing farmer knowledge alongside ecological monitoring.
A New Paradigm
The paper concludes that RA represents more than a set of technical practices; it is a paradigm shift grounded in systems thinking and ecological reciprocity. By placing living processes at the center of soil regeneration, RA challenges conventional assumptions in both science and policy.
The review urges funders, researchers, and institutions to invest in systems-level studies that reflect the complexity of farming ecosystems and to recognize regenerative farmers as key agents of ecological knowledge and innovation.
