Cited by 605Plant and soil sciencesSoil Management and Crop YieldAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development

Regenerative Agriculture: An agronomic perspective

Open access
Giller, Ken E, Hijbeek, Renske, Andersson, Jens A, Sumberg, James·2021·Outlook on Agriculture

Abstract

Agriculture is in crisis. Soil health is collapsing. Biodiversity faces the sixth mass extinction. Crop yields are plateauing. Against this crisis narrative swells a clarion call for Regenerative Agriculture. But what is Regenerative Agriculture, and why is it gaining such prominence? Which problems does it solve, and how? Here we address these questions from an agronomic perspective. The term Regenerative Agriculture has actually been in use for some time, but there has been a resurgence of interest over the past 5 years. It is supported from what are often considered opposite poles of the debate on agriculture and food. Regenerative Agriculture has been promoted strongly by civil society and NGOs as well as by many of the major multi-national food companies. Many practices promoted as regenerative, including crop residue retention, cover cropping and reduced tillage are central to the canon of ‘good agricultural practices’, while others are contested and at best niche (e.g. permaculture, holistic grazing). Worryingly, these practices are generally promoted with little regard to context. Practices most often encouraged (such as no tillage, no pesticides or no external nutrient inputs) are unlikely to lead to the benefits claimed in all places. We argue that the resurgence of interest in Regenerative Agriculture represents a re-framing of what have been considered to be two contrasting approaches to agricultural futures, namely agroecology and sustainable intensification, under the same banner. This is more likely to confuse than to clarify the public debate. More importantly, it draws attention away from more fundamental challenges. We conclude by providing guidance for research agronomists who want to engage with Regenerative Agriculture.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0030727021998063

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Transformation of agri-food systems is urgently needed to face current global crises.

    “Transformation of agri-food systems is urgently needed to face current global crises (Mier y Terán Giménez Cacho et al. 2018, Egmose et al. 2021, Giller et al. 2021).”

    From A heuristic framework to portray agroecological transition initiatives in reflexive arrangements, illustrated with a conservation agriculture network in Denmark (2025) · cites this paper as Giller et al. 2021

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says agriculture worldwide faces serious challenges, and the Introduction says some food-system problems require higher-level political and economic change. But the paper does not assert an urgent need for agri-food-system transformation to address global crises; it cautions that the challenges vary by context and that neither the soil nor biodiversity crisis is universal. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Boedeker W Watts M Clausing P, et al. (2020) The global distribution of acute unintentional pesticide poisoning: estimations based on a systematic review. BMC Public Health 20: 1875. 33287770 PMC7720593
  2. de Vries FT Thebault E Liiri M, et al. (2013) Soil food web properties explain ecosystem services across European land use systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110: 14296– 14301. PMC3761618 23940339
  3. Duncan J Carolan M Wiskerke JS (2021) Routledge Handbook of Sustainable and Regenerative Food Systems. London: Routledge.
  4. Evans DL Quinton JN Davies JAC, et al. (2020) Soil lifespans and how they can be extended by land use and management change. Environmental Research Letters 15: 0940b0942.
  5. Francis CA Harwood RR Parr JF (1986) The potential for regenerative agriculture in the developing world. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1: 65– 74.
  6. Gao B Huang T Ju X, et al. (2018) Chinese cropping systems are a net source of greenhouse gases despite soil carbon sequestration. Global Change Biology 24: 5590– 5606. 30118572
  7. Garnett T Godde C Muller A, et al. (2017) Grazed and Confused? Ruminating on Cattle, Grazing Systems, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, the Soil Carbon Sequestration Question – and What it all Means for Greenhouse gas Emissions. Oxford: Food Climate Research Network, University of Oxford, p. 127.
  8. Giller KE Andersson JA Corbeels M, et al. (2015) Beyond conservation agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science 6. Article 870.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00870 PMC4623198 26579139 · DOI
  9. Giller KE Andersson JA Sumberg J, et al. (2017) A golden age for agronomy? In: Sumberg J (ed) Agronomy for Development. London: Earthscan, pp. 150– 160.
  10. Glover JD Reganold JP Bell LW, et al. (2010) Increased food and ecosystem security via perennial grains. Science 328: 1638– 1639. 20576874
  11. Hall DM Martins DJ (2020) Human dimensions of insect pollinator conservation. Current Opinion in Insect Science 38: 107– 114. 32375115
  12. Hallmann CA Foppen RPB van Turnhout CAM, et al. (2014) Declines in insectivorous birds are associated with high neonicotinoid concentrations. Nature 511: 341– 343. 25030173
  13. Harwood RR (1983) International overview of regenerative agriculture. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Resource-efficient Farming Methods for Tanzania, Morogoro, Tanzania, 16–20 May 1983, Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry, and Veterinary Science, University of Dares Salaam,. Morogoro, TZ: Rodale Press.
  14. Hawken P (2017) Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming, New York, NY: Penguin.
  15. Hijbeek R Ittersum MK ten Berge H, et al. (2018) Evidence Review Indicates a Re-Think on the Impact of Organic Inputs and Soil Organic Matter on Crop Yield. Cambridge, MA: International Fertiliser Society.
  16. Jepson PC Guzy M Blaustein K, et al. (2014) Measuring pesticide ecological and health risks in West African agriculture to establish an enabling environment for sustainable intensification. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 369: 20130491– 20130491. PMC3928896 24535399
  17. Johnston AE Poulton PR Coleman K (2009) Chapter 1 soil organic matter: its importance in sustainable agriculture and carbon dioxide fluxes. In: Sparks DL (ed) Advances in Agronomy. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, pp. 1– 57.
  18. Kuyper TW Giller KE (2011) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning below-ground. In: Lenne JM Wood D (eds) Agrobiodiversity Management for Food Security. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 134– 149.
  19. Ladha JK Tirol-Padre A Reddy CK, et al. (2016) Global nitrogen budgets in cereals: a 50-year assessment for maize, rice and wheat production systems. Scientific Reports 6: 1– 9. 26778035 PMC4726071
  20. Pearson CJ (2007) Regenerative, semiclosed systems: a priority for twenty-first-century agriculture. BioScience 57: 409– 418.
  21. Poulton P Johnston J Macdonald A, et al. (2018) Major limitations to achieving “4 per 1000” increases in soil organic carbon stock in temperate regions: evidence from long-term experiments at Rothamsted Research, United Kingdom. Global Change Biology 24: 2563– 2584. 29356243 PMC6001646
  22. Powlson DS (2020) Soil health - useful terminology for communication or meaningless concept? Or both? Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering 7(3):246–250. DOI: 10.15302/J-FASE-2020326. · DOI
  23. Powlson DS Whitmore AP Goulding KWT (2011) Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change: a critical re-examination to identify the true and the false. European Journal of Soil Science 62: 42– 55.
  24. Rhodes CJ (2012) Feeding and healing the world: through regenerative agriculture and permaculture. Science Progress 95: 345– 446. 23469709 PMC10365435
  25. Sanderman J Hengl T Fiske GJ (2018) Correction for Sanderman et al., Soil carbon debt of 12,000 years of human land use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115: E1700. PMC5816226 29432153
  26. ten Berge H Schröder J Olesen JE, et al. (2019) Soil quality: a confusing beacon for sustainability. In: International Fertiliser Society Conference Cambridge, 12–13 December 2019. International Fertiliser Society Proceedings. Colchester, UK: International Fertiliser Society.
  27. Tsiafouli MA Thébault E Sgardelis SP, et al. (2014) Intensive agriculture reduces soil biodiversity across Europe. Global Change Biology 21: 973– 985. 25242445
  28. van Groenigen JW van Kessel C Hungate BA, et al. (2017) Sequestering soil organic carbon: a nitrogen dilemma. Environmental Science and Technology 51: 4738– 4739. 28426199
  29. van Klink R Bowler DE Gongalsky KB, et al. (2020) Meta-analysis reveals declines in terrestrial but increases in freshwater insect abundances. Science 368: 417– 420. 32327596
  30. Zhou M Zhu B Wang S, et al. (2017) Stimulation of N2O emission by manure application to agricultural soils may largely offset carbon benefits: a global meta-analysis. Global Change Biology 23: 4068– 4083. 28142211

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Giller, K. E., Hijbeek, R., Andersson, J. A., & Sumberg, J.
Affiliations
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Giller, Ken E
Venue
Outlook on Agriculture
Published
2021-03
Volume
50
Issue
1
Pages
13-25
ISSN
  • 0030-7270 (ISSN-L)
  • 2043-6866
OpenAlex
W3135705482
Cited by
605
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 133 · 2025: 145 · 2024: 115 · 2023: 111 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 25 · 2019: 1
FWCI
112.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Outlook on Agriculture (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • OpenDocs (Institute of Development Studies) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
NWO-WOTRO Strategic Partnership NL-CGIAR
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant and soil sciences
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Keywords
regenerative agriculture, soil health, agroecology, sustainable intensification, no-tillage, cover crops, crop residue retention, permaculture, agricultural futures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review