Relational values in regenerative agriculture: a systematic review and checklist for transformative potential

Ethan Gordon, Matías Hargreaves-Méndez, Ada P. Smith, Hannah Gosnell, Jennifer Hodbod (), Austin Himes, Morgan Mathisonslee, Henry Pitts and Jonathan Vivas
Additional contact information
Ethan Gordon: College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University
Matías Hargreaves-Méndez: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Ada P. Smith: College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University
Hannah Gosnell: College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University
Jennifer Hodbod: University of Leeds, Woodhouse
Austin Himes: Washington State University
Morgan Mathisonslee: Michigan State University
Henry Pitts: College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University
Jonathan Vivas: Michigan State University

Agriculture and Human Values, 2025, vol. 42, issue 3, No 62, 2297-2316

Abstract: Abstract Modern agriculture has increased yields but degraded socio-ecological systems all over the world. Consequently, advocates of regenerative agriculture (RA) aim to regenerate land and transform food systems. We undertook a systematic literature review of 104 peer-reviewed articles to determine how relational values (RVs) might be contributing to RA. RVs are values that emerge from specific human-nature relationships or meaningful relationships between people that happen in nature. Cultivating these values could inspire mindset shifts that support agricultural transformations. This review was guided by our research questions: (1) to what extent have RVs been implicitly or explicitly examined across the RA literature? (2) What implications might RVs have for the transformative potential of RA? Building on prior research, we explored salient articulations of RVs – identity through relationships; good life; sense of place; care; and human connections through nature. The review highlighted the role of Indigenous knowledges in RA; sustaining conditions for RVs; and the valuing of life supporting processes in RA. Our results reflect a distinction between productivist framings of RA that primarily emphasise instrumental values and relational framings of RA that foreground RVs but embrace value pluralism. We propose this distinction is more significant to RA’s transformative potential than the process-outcomes distinction. We suggest that conceptualisations of RA are more likely to contribute to sustainability transformations if they mobilise the (often latently held) RVs evident in the RA literature. Based on these results we develop checking questions for RA advocates to reflexively assess whether key actors are engaged in relational RA.

Keywords: Systematic literature review; Sustainability transformations; Definitions; Value pluralism; Relationality; Indigenous knowledges (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-025-10736-x Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:agrhuv:v:42:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-025-10736-x

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10460

DOI: 10.1007/s10460-025-10736-x

Access Statistics for this article

Agriculture and Human Values is currently edited by Harvey S. James Jr.

More articles in Agriculture and Human Values from Springer, The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().