Regenerative Agriculture: Why the Transition Takes More Than Good Intentions
Regenerative agriculture is gaining momentum, but moving from conventional farming practices to regenerative systems is not as simple as deciding to change.
For farmers, the transition can mean new investments, different management practices and a significant shift in the way they have worked for decades. And because a farm is ultimately a business, there is a very real question behind every proposed change:
Will this work financially?
That question came up repeatedly in our conversation with João Martins, co-founder of Terra Madre, on the Ideas to Impact podcast.
João has spent much of his career working across technology, climate and impact, including work with farmers and carbon programmes. At Terra Madre, the focus is on helping farmers transition towards regenerative agriculture while measuring the environmental outcomes of that transition.
What stood out from our conversation was that regenerative agriculture isn't something you simply implement. It's a journey.
The financial risk of changing how you farm. For farmers, the biggest barrier to regenerative agriculture isn't necessarily a lack of interest. It's uncertainty.
What will the transition cost? When will the investment pay back? What happens if productivity drops? What happens if the new approach doesn't work as expected?
These aren't abstract questions. For farmers, their fields are their livelihood. Transitioning can also require upfront investment. Depending on the farm, this could mean new equipment, cover crops or other changes to how the land is managed.
Terra Madre is working to address some of this risk through bridge financing and investment support, helping farmers manage the financial side of the transition. But financial support alone isn't enough. Farmers also need confidence that they are making the right decisions.
Measuring more than carbon
One of the interesting aspects of Terra Madre's approach is its focus on measuring the wider outcomes of regenerative agriculture. Alongside carbon MRV — measurement, reporting and verification — the company uses what it calls an agroecological assessment.
This looks at areas including:
Soil health
Water cycles
Biodiversity
Social impact
Agricultural management
The purpose isn't simply to create another sustainability report. The data can actually feed back into farm management. If measurements show that soil health is improving, biodiversity is changing or a particular approach isn't delivering the expected result, farmers can use that information to make better decisions about what happens next.
That creates an important connection between measurement and action. The goal isn't just to prove that change is happening. It's to understand what is working and help farmers improve over time.
Why incremental change matters
One of João's most interesting points was around where the biggest impact can actually come from. It's tempting to focus on farmers who are already highly advanced in regenerative agriculture. They provide great examples of what is possible. But if the goal is large-scale impact, there is potentially much more to gain by working with conventional farmers who are just beginning their transition.
A farmer doesn't need to completely transform their operation overnight for the change to matter. If a farm has historically relied heavily on tilling, fertilisers and other conventional practices, even incremental changes can represent meaningful additional impact.
The important thing is creating an opportunity to influence the decision-making process.
As farmers become more familiar with different practices and start seeing the benefits, the transition can develop over time. It becomes less about meeting a fixed set of requirements and more about understanding why those changes matter.
Regenerative agriculture requires a change in mindset
This is one of the reasons the transition can take time. Agricultural practices are often deeply embedded. Farmers may be following systems they learned from their parents and grandparents, based on what has worked for their farms over many years. Changing those systems requires more than information. It requires trust, support and evidence.
That's why support around planning, training and access to agronomists and other consultants can be just as important as the financial component. Farmers need to understand not only what they should change, but how to make that change work within their own operation. And ultimately, the transition needs to make sense for the farmer.
From carbon credits to ecosystem outcomes
The conversation also moved beyond individual farms and into the future of carbon markets in Europe. João sees potential in stronger European frameworks for carbon farming, including the development of the EU Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming Certification Framework.
Greater structure could help build confidence in European carbon markets and encourage more demand for projects within Europe. But there is also an opportunity to think beyond carbon alone. A regenerative agriculture project can affect soil health, biodiversity, water management and the resilience of an agricultural ecosystem.
So rather than treating carbon credits as isolated commodities, the future could involve a much broader understanding of environmental outcomes.
Today, we might talk about carbon credits with biodiversity or water co-benefits.
In the future, we could potentially be talking about biodiversity or water credits with carbon benefits. That would represent a significant shift in how environmental impact is valued.
What does scaling regenerative agriculture actually look like?
For Terra Madre, the ambition is ultimately about increasing the number of hectares involved while ensuring that the environmental outcomes improve alongside that growth.
More hectares alone aren't enough. If regenerative agriculture is going to scale, the metrics need to show that the transition is actually producing better outcomes.
That means combining:
Finance — so farmers can manage the risk of transition.
Data — so progress can be measured and decisions can be informed.
Expertise — so farmers have access to the right advice and support.
Time — because meaningful changes in agricultural systems don't happen overnight.
And perhaps most importantly, a realistic understanding of where farmers are starting from.
The transition doesn't need to be perfect from day one. It needs to be possible.
Regenerative agriculture is a process, not a destination
The biggest takeaway from our conversation with João was that meaningful agricultural transition requires patience. Farmers need to be able to experiment, learn and adapt without taking on unsustainable levels of risk. And the people working to support that transition need to recognise that progress can look different from farm to farm.
Regenerative agriculture isn't about reaching a perfect end state overnight.
It's about creating the conditions for farmers to make better decisions, measure the results and keep moving forward.
Because when it comes to climate impact, the biggest opportunity may not be finding the farmers who are already doing everything right. It may be helping millions more take the next step.
Listen to the full conversation
João Martins joined Magda on the Ideas to Impact podcast to discuss regenerative agriculture, climate finance, carbon markets and the realities of creating measurable impact.
Building a team for the climate transition?
The transition to a more sustainable economy needs more than new technologies and better systems. It needs the people who can build, scale and deliver them.
If you're growing a team in climate tech, clean energy, carbon markets, sustainability or another area of the climate economy, Jobs for Planet can help you find the right people.
Comments