Different Stakeholders’ Conceptualizations and Perspectives of Regenerative Agriculture Reveals More Consensus Than Discord

Kelly R. Wilson (), Robert L. Myers, Mary K. Hendrickson and Emily A. Heaton
Additional contact information
Kelly R. Wilson: Center for Regenerative Agriculture, College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
Robert L. Myers: Center for Regenerative Agriculture, College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
Mary K. Hendrickson: Division of Applied Social Sciences (DASS), College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
Emily A. Heaton: Department of Crop Sciences, College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61801, USA

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 22, 1-14

Abstract: A range of content analyses have recently sought to define the term “regenerative agriculture”, which has gained a surge of attention in the last few years. However, these studies have not incorporated the voices of those using the term to define their work: the farmers, private companies, researchers, and NGOs giving energy to the movement. In this study, we conducted qualitative interviews with 19 stakeholders from across the United States. Key points of consensus were that regenerative agriculture moves beyond sustainability, is outcomes-based, and, as such, is context-specific: focusing on outcomes provides opportunities to be adaptive to a specific context and that, depending on one’s context, different practices may be used to achieve target outcomes. We identified three categories of outcomes: climate adaptation and mitigation, socio-economic benefits, and integrated systems. We also found several opportunities within the energy of the movement. First, regenerative agriculture remains a “big tent” that is still accessible to a broad range of farmers. Participants also underscore the need to move toward systems-based research as opposed to reductionist research. Finally, we present participants’ mixed perspectives on the role of government, the private sector, and third parties in moving regenerative agriculture forward.

Keywords: regenerative agriculture; food system transformation; soil health; qualitative research; resilient food systems (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15261/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15261/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15261-:d:975635

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().