Ben Palen, principal at consultancy Ag Management Partners, is a fifth-generation farmer with diverse experiences in many facets of agriculture in North America, Africa, and the Middle East.
The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily represent those of AgFunderNews.
Having read a recent article on AgFunderNews about regenerative-organic certification, I thought it would be informative to share our own farm’s journey down this path, and how measuring progress at the farm level offers the greatest benefits to growers and food corporates alike.
We farm several thousand acres in Kansas and Colorado, in addition to advising investors about value-added strategies in the ag world. For about 40 years, we have been heavily involved with no-till farming practices. We have also undertaken several organic projects.
There is currently lots of fanfare about “sustainability,” “regenerative practices,” “low-carbon” products, and the like. But it would be fair to say that some greenwashing has taken place, and some end users’ actions don’t match their words. Over the past few years, we have reached out directly to a number of companies—large and small—and it has been a somewhat frustrating exercise at times.
Meanwhile, the cuts in “climate smart programs” by the Trump administration have been a setback to a number of efforts that were underway.
There are nonetheless some credible efforts underway in the regenerative-organic space, notably as described in the AgFunderNews article with respect to the Rodale Institute. Two organizations we work with are California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF) and a company called Regenified.
The steps taken by these organizations to certify practices are meaningful for all participants from the field to the consumers’s tables. They take a holistic approach to this topic, and from our perspective, that makes a lot of sense.
Our approach
Although we did not label our earlier practices as “regenerative,” in reality they were the first steps in a process that has evolved with the passage of years. Those steps were probably more like giant leaps because of the shift from a wheat/fallow rotation—using lots of tillage—to one that featured multiple crops with no-till or limited-till practices.
Along the way, we built our own low-carbon model for wheat that’s demonstrated a substantial reduction in carbon emissions. We have also tracked improvements in soil organic matter and sequestered carbon levels via a lot of boots-on-the-ground work on our farms.
Our experience suggests it is fine that there are currently no hard-and-fast standards for regen or regen-organic certification. Nor should end users be overly concerned about this, given the wide variations in practices among crops and regions here in the U.S.
For example, our main production area features 16- to 17-inch annual precipitation; the primary areas of the Corn Belt are nearly double that amount. Cover crops are typically part of many regen programs, and they play a role in organic production too. They will not work well in our area because the moisture required to grow them often has a significant negative impact on profit from the resulting cash crop.
Instead, our approach to regenerative is based on agronomic practices that increase organic matter and soil’s water-holding capacity over a fairly long period of time. We also use crop rotations that are suited to our climate. While we do use fertilizers on our non-organic land, we are very cautious about the amounts, the timing of application, and the placement of them. Our goal is not necessarily the highest crop yield per acre, but rather the optimum result that balances financial considerations with good environmental results.
In our case, the multipart certification process this year with Regenified yielded a small premium on our organic wheat crop from its primary buyer. We believe that that premium will increase as the results of our practices become more apparent.
Outside of the organic context, we are raising wheat with a carbon footprint that is about a third of the typical wheat crop in our area. There are also encouraging signs of some premium in the market for that wheat. We have also seen some increased interest in the low-carbon approach from investors hoping to enhance their ESG profiles.
How standards must evolve
None of this is a get-rich-quick scheme. It requires a vision that transcends the current crop and political climate.
Of late it’s become clear that standards for benchmarking regen ag practices are evolving to acknowledge the factors that impact how crops are raised in various parts of the U.S.
There is some standard of materiality that, in our view, must be met in order to validate these claims. That might be, say, 20% less fertilizer use (in the non-organic context) than the norm, soil organic matter that increases by, say, 5% every couple of years in the organic scenario, 10% increases in sequestered carbon in the soils on a farm—and so forth.
From my standpoint as a farmer, it is time for the companies that buy our grains to put their money where their mouth is. There is an opportunity for those same companies to get buy-in from consumers based on measurable progress at the farm level along with such companies being true to their word about ESG goals. The opportunity for growers and consumer goods companies in the regen space goes beyond the creation of carbon credits.
All of this means close collaboration with farmers along with setting realistic goals for regen practices that will build credibility with end users while also giving farmers some incentives to adjust their practices.
