Regenerative agriculture has emerged as a transformative approach to farming, promising to restore ecosystems, enhance soil health, and improve food security while addressing climate change. This review explores the history, definition, practices, and scientific evidence behind regenerative agriculture, comparing it with organic farming and permaculture. It also examines its market potential and initiatives by international agencies like the FAO and IFAD.
1. The history of regenerative agriculture
Regenerative agriculture, while often framed as a modern solution to contemporary environmental challenges, is deeply rooted in ancient practices and traditional knowledge. Its principles are not new but rather a re-emergence of time-tested methods combined with advancements in ecological science.
1.1. Ancient roots
Indigenous and rural communities across the globe have practised sustainable land management for centuries. Techniques such as crop rotation, intercropping, and agroforestry were integral to maintaining soil fertility, biodiversity, and ecosystem health. For example:
• Indigenous peoples in the Americas used the Three Sisters system (maize, beans, and squash) to create a symbiotic relationship between crops, enhancing soil health and yield (Kimmerer, 2013).
• In Africa, traditional practices like fallowing and mulching were used to restore soil nutrients (Altieri, 2004).
• Asian rice paddies incorporated aquatic biodiversity to create resilient farming systems (Thrupp, 2000).
These practices were inherently regenerative, focusing on working with nature rather than against it.
1.2. Modern emergence
The term ‘regenerative agriculture’ began to gain prominence in the 1980s, largely through the work of Robert Rodale, son of J.I. Rodale, a pioneer of organic farming. Robert Rodale emphasised the importance of rebuilding soil organic matter and restoring degraded ecosystems as a way to address the growing environmental crises caused by industrial agriculture (Rodale, 1983). He framed regenerative agriculture as a holistic approach that goes beyond sustainability, aiming to actively improve ecosystems rather than merely maintaining them.
1.3. Key milestones
- 1970s-1980s: the organic farming movement, led by figures like J.I. Rodale, laid the groundwork for regenerative agriculture by highlighting the harms of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides (Rodale Institute, 2020).
• 1980s-1990s: Robert Rodale popularised the term “regenerative agriculture,” focusing on soil health as the foundation of resilient farming systems (Rodale, 1983).
• 2000s: the concept gained momentum as climate change and biodiversity loss became pressing global issues. Organisations like the Rodale Institute and Kiss the Ground began advocating for regenerative practices.
2. Defining ‘regenerative agriculture’
There is no universally accepted definition of regenerative agriculture, but it is broadly understood as a system of farming principles and practices that increase biodiversity, enrich soils, improve watersheds, and enhance ecosystem services. Key principles include:
• Soil health. Building organic matter and microbial diversity.
• Biodiversity. Promoting diverse crops, livestock, and wildlife.
• Water management. Enhancing water retention and reducing runoff.
• Carbon sequestration. Capturing atmospheric carbon in soils and plants.
• Resilience. Creating systems that adapt to climate variability.
While there is no ISO standard for regenerative agriculture, several private certification schemes exist, such as the Regenerative Organic Certification (ROC) by the Rodale Institute and Savory Institute’s Land to Market programme. These frameworks provide guidelines but lack the uniformity of organic farming standards.
3. Practices and implementation
Regenerative agriculture is implemented through a suite of practices, including:
1. Cover cropping. Planting cover crops to protect soil and fix nitrogen.
2. No-till farming. Minimising soil disturbance to preserve structure and microbial life.
3. Crop rotation and diversification. Reducing pest pressure and improving soil fertility.
4. Agroforestry. Integrating trees and shrubs into farming systems.
5. Composting and manure application. Enhancing soil organic matter.
6. Integrated livestock management. Using grazing animals to improve soil health.
Unlike organic farming, which prohibits synthetic inputs except for a limited set of ecological plant-protection products (Burtscher-Schaden et al., 2022), regenerative agriculture allows ‘limited use’ of agrochemicals—yet to be defined and standardised, with specific reference to the most dangerous toxic substances ban—focusing instead on reducing dependency through ecological practices. Permaculture, on the other hand, is a ‘design system’ that integrates regenerative principles but extends beyond agriculture to include sustainable living.
4. The European Alliance for Regenerative Agriculture (EARA)
The European Alliance for Regenerative Agriculture (EARA) has developed a set of defining principles to guide this movement, emphasising ecological, social, and economic regeneration. This chapter synthesises EARA’s principles, insights on pesticide use, and the broader implications for sustainable agriculture.
4.1. EARA’s principles of regenerative agriculture
EARA outlines four core principles that underpin regenerative farming:
• Regeneration as a life-enhancing process. Regenerative farming is a dynamic, evolving process rather than a static state. It builds on the principle of evolution, where life compounds into more symbiotic complexity under conducive conditions. This process continuously enhances the life-giving capacity of places and people.
• Outcome-oriented regeneration. The focus is on achieving positive outcomes in social, ecological, and economic health. Regenerative agriculture is non-dogmatic, allowing farmers to choose practices based on a deep analysis of their specific context. The development of symbiotic interdependence on a bioregional scale is essential, bridging holistic ecological improvements with highly productive agriculture.
• Context-specific regeneration. The regeneration process begins with a thorough understanding of a farm system’s unique context. It involves developing a comprehensive vision for the system’s health and functional properties, progressing towards key outcomes that guide decision-making. Flexibility and adaptability are crucial in tailoring approaches to unique environmental and socio-economic circumstances.
• Systemic regeneration. Regeneration is fostered through the entire system, not just on the farm. It involves synergies where increased soil biodiversity leads to better ecological functions, healthier plants, and greater productivity. This systemic approach ensures that agricultural productivity is not traded off for socio-ecological impact but rather enhances both.
4.2. Insights on pesticide use
EARA provides a nuanced perspective on the use of synthetic pesticides within regenerative farming:
• Context-specific reduction. While synthetic pesticides might be used initially or in certain contexts, the emphasis is on a drastic reduction from conventional use rates. This reduction is achieved through an ambitious and context-specific phased-out approach, tailored to the unique circumstances of each farm. The primary outcome is ecological health, particularly improved soil health, which can be measured by the development of total toxicity load per hectare/yield and soil biodiversity.
• Systemic health focus. The use of synthetic pesticides is acceptable within regenerative agriculture if it aligns with the broader goal of systemic health. A farm is considered regenerative if it consistently reduces synthetic pesticide use within its context, moving towards eventual phase-out. This aligns with the principle of regeneration being systemic, focusing on the overall health of the farm and agrifood ecosystem rather than strict adherence to externally prescribed practices.
• Temporary necessity. Synthetic pesticides should be viewed as a temporary necessity rather than a permanent solution. Farms that rely heavily on synthetic pesticides without a clear trajectory towards reduction and phase-out cannot be considered regenerative. Such reliance limits ecological regeneration and maintains economic dependence, leading to non-optimal outcomes for overall health.
• Ecological benefits. Regenerative agriculture enhances ecosystem functions and overall health by reestablishing natural food webs and improving soil biodiversity. This enables ecosystems to better manage pests, diseases, and weeds through natural predators and antagonists. Enhanced biological soil functions also increase the soil’s capacity to detoxify the environment, reducing the need for synthetic inputs.
5. Scientific studies
Evaluating scientific studies on the benefits of regenerative agriculture is challenging due to the lack of a standardised definition for the practices considered in each study. However, consistent application of regenerative agriculture principles, in most cases within the organic system, has been associated with several potential benefits, as follows.
5.1. Soil fertility and carbon sequestration
Regenerative agriculture has been widely recognised for its potential to significantly improve soil health, a critical component of sustainable farming systems. A seminal study by Lal (2020) highlights that regenerative practices, such as cover cropping, reduced tillage, and organic amendments, can increase soil organic carbon (SOC) by 0.5-1.5% annually. This increase not only enhances soil fertility but also improves water retention and nutrient cycling, making agricultural systems more resilient to climate variability and extreme weather events.
Similarly, Teague et al., (2016) demonstrated that managed grazing systems, a key component of regenerative agriculture, can significantly improve soil structure and carbon storage. Their research showed that rotational grazing practices increase root biomass and microbial activity, leading to higher levels of soil organic matter (SOM) and improved aggregate stability. These changes contribute to long-term carbon sequestration, reducing atmospheric CO₂ levels and mitigating climate change.
Further supporting these findings, Paustian et al. (2016) emphasised that regenerative practices, such as agroforestry and diversified crop rotations, can enhance soil carbon stocks while maintaining or even increasing agricultural productivity. Their meta-analysis of global studies found that regenerative systems can sequester 0.5-2 tonnes of carbon per hectare annually, depending on regional conditions and management practices (Paustian et al., 2016).
Moreover, Bossio et al., (2020) highlighted the role of regenerative agriculture in restoring degraded soils, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions. Their research found that practices like compost application and perennial cropping can rebuild soil organic matter, improve water infiltration, and increase biodiversity, leading to more productive and sustainable farming systems.
5.2. Biodiversity
Regenerative agriculture plays a crucial role in promoting biodiversity by creating habitats for pollinators, beneficial insects, and other wildlife. Kremen and Miles (2012) demonstrated that diversified farming systems, such as those incorporating crop rotations, intercropping, and agroforestry, support significantly higher species richness compared to monocultures. These systems provide a variety of ecological niches, enhancing the resilience of agricultural ecosystems to pests, diseases, and climate change (Kremen & Miles, 2012). Additionally, Altieri et al., (2015) found that regenerative practices in organic agriculture, such as the use of cover crops and reduced chemical inputs, increase the abundance of soil microorganisms and arthropods, which are essential for nutrient cycling and pest control.
5.3. Yields
While yields in regenerative systems may be lower initially, they often stabilise or increase over time as soil health improves and ecosystems become more resilient. A meta-analysis by Ponisio et al., (2015) found that diversified farming systems within organic agriculture, such as those incorporating crop rotations, intercropping, and agroforestry, achieve comparable yields to conventional monocultures while enhancing biodiversity and ecosystem services.
5.4. Nutritional quality of crops
One of the key nutritional benefits of organic agriculture is the increased concentration of bioactive compounds in crops. Mitchell et al., (2007) demonstrated that regenerative practices, such as the use of organic amendments and cover crops, significantly increase the levels of phenolic compounds, antioxidants, and vitamins in fruits and vegetables. For example, tomatoes grown in regenerative systems were found to have higher levels of vitamin C and lycopene, both of which are associated with health benefits such as reduced risk of chronic diseases.
Furthermore, Reganold and Wachter (2016) highlighted that organic and regenerative systems often produce crops with higher nutrient density, including increased levels of minerals such as zinc, iron, and magnesium. This is attributed to the improved soil health and microbial activity in regenerative systems, which enhance nutrient uptake by plants. Their review also noted that regenerative practices can lead to long-term yield stability, particularly in the face of climate variability, due to the enhanced resilience of agroecosystems.
5.5. Food security
In addition to nutritional benefits, regenerative agriculture can also improve food security by reducing dependency on external inputs such as synthetic fertilisers and pesticides. Schreefel et al., (2020) found that regenerative systems, particularly those integrating livestock and cropping, can achieve higher net profitability over time, despite potentially lower initial yields. This economic resilience, combined with improved nutritional outcomes, makes regenerative agriculture a compelling option for addressing both food security and nutritional security.
6. Comparison with organic agriculture
Regenerative agriculture shares many principles with organic farming, such as avoiding synthetic inputs and promoting biodiversity. However, it goes further by emphasising soil carbon sequestration and ecosystem restoration. A comparative study by Gattinger et al., (2012) found that organic systems improve soil health but may not achieve the same carbon sequestration levels as regenerative practices.
Upon closer examination, the principles of regenerative agriculture closely align with those of organic agriculture. The primary distinctions can be summarised as follows:
• Definition and standards. Organic agriculture is internationally defined, encompassing general principles and specific criteria for both farming and livestock practices. These criteria include a positive list of permissible plant protection products and their conditions of use, alongside a prohibition on products containing or derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and new genomic techniques (NGTs), except for veterinary medicines.
• Regulatory framework. The aforementioned agricultural and livestock practices are embedded in mandatory regulations across various countries (e.g., Regulation EU 2018/848), with several decades of application experience.
• Compliance and oversight. The binding nature of organic agriculture rules requires adherence to a specific regime of official controls, supplementary to those applicable to general agri-food production.
• Product certification. All products labelled as organic are subject to additional official controls, in addition to certifications by bodies authorised by competent institutions, required for all operators within the respective supply chains (excluding only distributors of pre-packaged products).
• Food additive restrictions. Organic foods are also subject to specific requirements, including a restrictive positive list of permitted food additives compared to those allowed in conventional foods.
In contrast, regenerative agriculture focuses on outcomes such as soil health, biodiversity enhancement, and ecosystem restoration, without a universally accepted definition or standardised certification process.
7. Recognitions by international agencies
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) have recognised the potential of regenerative agriculture as a transformative approach to addressing global food security, climate change, and rural poverty:
• The FAO’s Global Soil Partnership (GSP), established in 2012, plays a pivotal role in promoting sustainable soil management practices worldwide. The GSP focuses on enhancing soil health through initiatives such as capacity development, knowledge sharing, and the implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management (FAO, 2017). These guidelines emphasise the importance of practices like crop rotation, organic amendments, and reduced tillage, which align closely with the principles of regenerative agriculture.
• Similarly, IFAD has been instrumental in supporting regenerative agriculture projects, particularly in developing countries where smallholder farmers face significant challenges. For example, IFAD has funded agroforestry projects in sub-Saharan Africa, integrating trees with crops and livestock to restore degraded lands, improve biodiversity, and enhance livelihoods (IFAD, 2024). These projects not only contribute to carbon sequestration and climate resilience but also empower local communities by providing sustainable income sources and improving food security.
• Both FAO and IFAD highlight the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration and knowledge exchange in scaling up regenerative practices. FAO’s Scaling Up Agroecology Initiative and IFAD’s Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP+) are examples of how international agencies are fostering partnerships between governments, NGOs, and local communities to mainstream regenerative agriculture (FAO, 2020; IFAD, 2022). These initiatives underscore the critical role of regenerative agriculture in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and SDG 15 (Life on Land).
8. Market size and expected growth
The global market for regenerative agriculture is experiencing rapid growth, driven by increasing awareness of its environmental, social, and economic benefits. According to a comprehensive report by Grand View Research (2025), the global regenerative agriculture market was estimated at USD 10.30 billion in 2023 and is predicted to reach USD 31.88 billion by 2031, at a CAGR of 15.37% during the prediction period for 2024-2034.
‘Nowadays, several food companies are promoting their products as being produced using regenerative practices, which has become a potent marketing tool. Consumers are willing to pay a premium price for food products that resonate with their values. As a result, more and more food companies are adopting these sustainable practices, contributing to the greater awareness and adoption of these practices across the food industry’. (Grand View Research, 2022)
8.1. Key drivers of market growth
• Consumer demand for ‘sustainable’ products: there is a growing consumer preference for sustainably produced food, driven by heightened awareness of environmental issues such as soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change. Brands that adopt regenerative practices are increasingly seen as leaders in sustainability, gaining a competitive edge in the market (Grand View Research, 2022).
• Corporate commitments to carbon neutrality: many corporations are committing to carbon neutrality and net-zero emissions targets, recognising the role of regenerative agriculture in carbon sequestration. For example, companies like Cargill, Danone, General Mills, Nestlé, PepsiCo, Unilever, and Walmart have launched regenerative agriculture initiatives as part of their sustainability strategies, also to enhance brand reputation (Grand View Research, 2025).
• Government policies and incentives: governments worldwide are introducing policies and financial incentives to promote regenerative practices. For instance, the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Conservation Stewardship Program provide funding and technical support to farmers transitioning to regenerative methods. These policies are expected to accelerate market growth by reducing barriers to adoption.
• Technological advancements. Innovations in precision agriculture, soil health monitoring, and regenerative farming techniques are making it easier for farmers to adopt and scale regenerative practices. Technologies such as remote sensing, AI-driven analytics, and biodegradable inputs are enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of regenerative agriculture, further driving market expansion (World Economic Forum, 2024).
8.2. Regional insights
• North America: the region dominates the regenerative agriculture global market, accounting for its largest share. This is attributed to strong consumer demand for sustainable products, coupled with significant corporate and government support (Grand View Research, 2022).
• Europe: Europe was expected to experience substantial growth, driven by stringent environmental regulations outlined in the EU’s Farm to Fork Strategy (2020) , which aimed to make food systems more sustainable. However, the shift in focus in the new EU’s Vision for the Future of Agriculture and Food (2025) has cast doubt on the continuation of these expectations. In particular, as regards to pesticides safety and their reduction.
• Asia-Pacific: the region is also emerging as a high-growth market, with increasing adoption of regenerative practices in countries like India and Australia. Government initiatives and rising awareness of soil health are key factors contributing to this growth.
9. The greenwashing risk
The burgeoning market for regenerative agriculture has led to an increase in marketing claims regarding its environmental benefits. However, the lack of universally accepted definitions and standards poses a significant risk, as companies may make inconsistent and, in some cases, deceptive claims. This risk has been also highlighted in a recent report on sustainability labelling in the EU food sector, published from the Joint Research Center (JRC) of the European Commission (JRC, 2024).
This ambiguity not only undermines consumer trust but may also—inadvertently or not—contribute to ‘greenwashing’ practices, that ought to be banned by the Directive (EU) 2024/825. This risk is compounded by the marketing of products as ‘regenerative’ while failing to meet the promised ecological thresholds, often due to a lack of independent verification.
According to a report by the European Court of Auditors (2022), this lack of regulatory clarity exposes businesses and consumers to misleading claims that do not comply with the greenwashing bans provided by EU legislation. Only through transparency, scientific verification, and consistent standards can regenerative agriculture live up to its potential for sustainability.
10. Transparency needs
In an era of increasing consumer awareness about food safety and sustainability, claims regarding ‘zero pesticides residues’ must be verified with rigour and transparency. Regenerative agriculture is often marketed as an alternative to conventional farming practices, with claims of significantly reduced or zero pesticide use. However, without concrete verification systems, such claims are susceptible to exploitation.
Detailed analysis protocols must be developed and registered within a public blockchain system to provide credible verification for these claims. This would involve the collection of pesticide residue data through standardised testing methods at different stages of the food production process, with results made publicly available in real-time through a public blockchain. Such a system would prevent businesses from misleading consumers with unsubstantiated claims, which can otherwise be difficult to verify due to the absence of international standards or clear legislation defining what constitutes regenerative agriculture.
Blockchain technology offers an efficient solution for maintaining an immutable and transparent record of all pesticide residue testing and agricultural practices, ensuring traceability and accountability throughout the food supply chain. A system like this could eliminate the confusion surrounding terms like ‘regenerative agriculture’ or ‘regenerative farming’, which often lack a legal definition. By enabling direct public access to these verified data, such a blockchain solution could prevent false marketing claims and help protect both consumers and businesses from being misled.
Without such a system in place, businesses may continue to capitalise on vague, unverified claims, leading to consumer deception and undermining the credibility of regenerative agriculture. It is therefore essential that legislative bodies, in collaboration with blockchain developers, certification authorities, and the agricultural industry, establish a clear and transparent process for verifying claims related to pesticide residues and regenerative practices. Until then, consumers remain at risk of being misled by claims that do not reflect the true ecological benefits or practices employed in food production.
11. Provisional conclusions
The potential of regenerative agriculture to enhance soil health, biodiversity, and climate resilience, providing sustainable solutions to food security and environmental challenges, is overshadowed by the lack of standardised definitions and criteria. The organic supply chain remains the only reliable system to ensure these same objectives.
Shifting public funding from organic agriculture to ‘regenerative’ practices is not recommended, as it may not guarantee the achievement of comparable outcomes, particularly concerning the decontamination of soils and waters from pesticides and other contaminants (e.g., PFAS, microplastics) linked to their use.
However, businesses adopting regenerative practices should prioritise transparency by registering all relevant data on public blockchain platforms. This would ensure data accessibility and reliability, enhance public trust, and facilitate broader acceptance, ultimately supporting the widespread adoption of regenerative practices.
Dario Dongo
AI-generated cover by Fotor
References
1. Altieri, M.A. (1996). Agroecology: The science of sustainable agriculture. 2nd ed. 2018. Boulder: Westview Press. ISBN: 9780429495465. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429495465
2. FAO, 2017. The future of food and agriculture: Trends and challenges. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6583e.pdf
3. Kimmerer, R.W., 2013. Braiding sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge, and the teachings of plants. Minneapolis: Milkweed Editions. ISBN 978-1-57131-335-5 https://tinyurl.com/3wwrmx64
4. LaCanne, C.E. and Lundgren, J.G., 2018. Regenerative agriculture: Merging farming and natural resource conservation profitably. PeerJ, 6, p.e4428. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4428
5. Lal, R., 2020. Regenerative agriculture for food and climate. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 75(5), pp.123A-124A. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2020.0620A
6. Minasny, B., Malone, B.P., McBratney, A.B., Angers, D.A., Arrouays, D., Chambers, A., Chaplot, V., Chen, Z.S., Cheng, K., Das, B.S. and Field, D.J., 2017. Soil carbon 4 per mille. Geoderma, 292, pp.59-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.01.002
7. Montgomery, D.R., 2017. Growing a revolution: Bringing our soil back to life. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. ISBN: 9780393608335
8. Paustian, K., Lehmann, J., Ogle, S., Reay, D., Robertson, G.P. and Smith, P., 2016. Climate-Smart Soils. Nature, 532(7597), pp. 49-57. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17174
9. Rodale, R., 1983. Breaking new ground: The search for a sustainable agriculture. The Futurist, 17(1), pp.15-20. https://tinyurl.com/5n8n5yfv
10. Jeff Moyer, Andrew Smith, PhD, Yichao Rui, PhD, Jennifer Hayde, 2020. Regenerative agriculture and the soil carbon solution. Kutztown: Rodale Institute. https://tinyurl.com/34epuss2
11. Savory, A., Buttefield, J., 2013. Holistic management: A commonsense revolution to restore our environment. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISDN: 9781610917438
12. Thrupp, L.A., 2000. Linking agricultural biodiversity and food security: The valuable role of agrobiodiversity for sustainable agriculture. International Affairs, 76(2), pp.265-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.00133
13. Burtscher-Schaden, H.; Durstberger, T.; Zaller, J.G. Toxicological Comparison of Pesticide Active Substances Approved for Conventional vs. Organic Agriculture in Europe. Toxics 2022, 10, 753. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10120753
14. Lal, R., 2020. Regenerative Agriculture for Soil Health and Carbon Sequestration. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 75(5), pp. 123A-129A. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2020.0620A
15. Teague, W.R., Apfelbaum, S., Lal, R., Kreuter, U.P., Rowntree, J., Davies, C.A., Conser, R., Rasmussen, M., Hatfield, J., Wang, T., Wang, F. and Byck, P., 2016. The Role of Ruminants in Reducing Agriculture’s Carbon Footprint in North America. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 71(2), pp. 156-164. https://tinyurl.com/yx3edjyz
16. Bossio, D.A., Cook-Patton, S.C., Ellis, P.W., Fargione, J., Sanderman, J., Smith, P., Wood, S., Zomer, R.J., von Unger, M., Emmer, I.M. and Griscom, B.W., 2020. The Role of Soil Carbon in Natural Climate Solutions. Nature Sustainability, 3(5), pp. 391-398. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0491-z
17. Kremen, C., and Miles, A., 2012. Ecosystem Services in Biologically Diversified versus Conventional Farming Systems. Ecology and Society, 17(4), 40. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05035-170440
18. Altieri, M.A., Nicholls, C.I., Henao, A. and Lana, M.A., 2015. Agroecology and the Design of Climate Change-Resilient Farming Systems. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 35(3), pp. 869-890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-015-0285-2
19. Ponisio, L.C., M’Gonigle, L.K., Mace, K.C., et al., 2015. Diversification Practices Reduce Organic to Conventional Yield Gap. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 282(1799), 20141396. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1396
20. Mitchell, A.E., Hong, Y.J., Koh, E., et al., 2007. Ten-Year Comparison of the Influence of Organic and Conventional Crop Management Practices on the Content of Flavonoids in Tomatoes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 55(15), 6154-6159. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf070344+
21. Reganold, J.P. and Wachter, J.M., 2016. Organic Agriculture in the Twenty-First Century. Nature Plants, 2(2), p. 15221. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2015.221
22. Schreefel, L., Schulte, R.P.O., de Boer, I.J.M., et al., 2020. Regenerative Agriculture – the Soil is the Base. Global Food Security, 26, 100404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100404
23. What Is the Difference Between Organic and Regenerative Agriculture? Noble Research Institute. [Accessed 1 March 2025] https://tinyurl.com/4y3dm5cu
24. Grand View Research, 2025. Regenerative Agriculture Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report. https://tinyurl.com/n8cbv5zm
25. Peer, J., 2020. Agronomic efficiency in regenerative farming. Outlook on Agriculture, 50(1), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727021998063
26. Sher, A., Li, H., ullah, A. et al. Importance of regenerative agriculture: climate, soil health, biodiversity and its socioecological impact. Discov Sustain 5, 462 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00662-z
27. Giller KE, Hijbeek R, Andersson JA, Sumberg J. Regenerative Agriculture: An agronomic perspective. Outlook Agric. 2021 Mar;50(1):13-25. doi: 10.1177/0030727021998063
28. FAO, 2017. Voluntary Guidelines on Sustainable Soil Management (VGSSM). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://tinyurl.com/yu79ux3b
29. IFAD, 2024. Strengthening agroforestry in rural investment: lessons learned and best practices from IFAD operations. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Rome. ISBN 978-92-9266-393-3. https://tinyurl.com/4p7yr4pp
30. FAO, 2020. Scaling Up Agroecology Initiative. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://tinyurl.com/drxbnwfp
31. IFAD, 2022. Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP+). International Fund for Agricultural Development. https://www.ifad.org/en/asap
32. USDA, 2020. Conservation Stewardship Program. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/financial/csp/
33. World Economic Forum. Farms of the future: How can AI accelerate regenerative agriculture? September 10, 2024 https://tinyurl.com/m23hv2j4
34. FAO, 2022. Regenerative Agriculture in Asia-Pacific: Opportunities and Challenges. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
35. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Sanye Mengual, E., Boschiero, M., Leite, J., Casonato, C., Fiorese, G., Mancini, L., Sinkko, T., Wollgast, J., Listorti, G. and Sala, S. Sustainability labeling in the EU food sector: current status and coverage of sustainability aspects. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2024. https://tinyurl.com/n42fpr88
36. Pablo Tittonell, Veronica El Mujtar, Georges Felix, Yodit Kebede, Luciana Laborda, Raquel Luján Soto, and Joris de Vente. Regenerative agriculture—agroecology without politics? Front. Sustain. Food Syst. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.844261
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
