Capturing the value from agroecology – Farm Contractor & Large Scale Farmer

In his opening presentation, Ed Brown, head of agroecology at Hutchinsons and chair of the Agroecology Conference, explained that agriculture was at something of a tipping point when it came to agroecological methods, many of which can be interchanged with regenerative agriculture.

He said there were going to be many more conventional farmers taking up these methods, either to reduce the cost of inputs, to capitalise on options within the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI), or due to pressure from government retailers, and the public.

“As more people adopt this way of working, there is the risk of the overall message being watered down and greater focus on the farms that fail while using these methods, even if the ideas have been only half implemented,” he added. “This places more emphasis on us to be able to back up claims about the benefits of agroecology.”

In line with this, Ed announced that Hutchinsons would publish an Agroecology Charter later this year – the first of its kind, according to the company, and something that would be exclusive to its members. “This will provide a clear definition of agroecology, as well as outlining key management processes and the risks associated with them.”

This grasp of figures will become increasingly important as growers balance their margins with outside pressures. “There is an almost unavoidable dip in yields from regenerative farming, which must be justifiable. With the current margins it does not take a lot for incomes to be unsustainable.”

Will added that premiums would need to be made available for growers showing a commitment to regenerative principles, however he also said that there were already opportunities for growers.

“If you look within SFI, it is possible to achieve a combined £102 per hectare for using no till methods and variable rate applications. As we see more consumer awareness about the provenance of their food, there will be further opportunities for growers to take greater control of the market and add value to their produce.”

Andrew Neal, from the department of net zero and resilient agriculture at Rothamsted Research, gave a very interesting talk on organic matter and carbon stocks. He posed the question: why are we so preoccupied with organic matter?

While there has been lots of discussion around the benefits of increasing matter in the soil, especially as part of a regenerative system, Andrew explained that there is a lot about soils that we don’t really know. He advised that growers should not boost organic matter for the sole reason of increasing yields.

Data from long-term experiments in Europe highlighted that straw and green residue, straw and slurries did little to increase yield, and farmyard manures only increased yield by around 2.5%. There were variances depending on the crop itself, with potatoes seeing a +5% yield boost, but most saw very little change.

Interestingly, autumn sown cereals could actually see a decrease in yield due to organic matter, while spring cereals did see a small increase.

“So, there is not a lot of evidence to suggest that increasing organic matter can lead to an uplift in yield,” he said. “Therefore, this should not be at the forefront of our minds when moving towards agroecology.”

He moved on to potential gains from the carbon sequestration market, highlighting a November 2020 report from the Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy (ATP) that said offsetting schemes can be damaging, with some endangering food security and limiting autonomy.

The same report said that the impact of methods to sequester carbon – and market this as carbon credits – have dubious benefits for the climate and can be difficult to quantify, with extreme weather events such as drought causing organic matter levels in the soil to drop.

“A key problem is that these schemes place the responsibility at the feet of the farmers, when the majority of agricultural emissions take place outside of the farm and are driven by large corporations in the production of fertilisers and pesticides,” Andrew explained.

“When you look at evidence showing that total soil sequestration potential is only equivalent to between two and seven years of fossil-derived emissions, we have to accept that we are not adding organic matter to our soils, nor should we, for the carbon market opportunities.”

So, if increased organic matter has little impact on yield, and if the carbon market is not a secure or sustainable aim for growers to strive for, then why is it important to increase organic matter levels? Andrew explained that the benefits of organic matter are seen at a micron level within the soil.

Higher levels of organic matter increased microbial activity and formed more porous soil structure, creating pathways for root structures, and allowing greater water absorption, though, strangely, this was only in clay soils.

“Texture determines the response to organic inputs,” he said. “Studies show that just 1% increased organic matter can improve the water holding capacity of salty clay loams by 354,000 litres per hectare. Sandy soils are what we call a non-adaptive system and higher levels of organic matter had little impact on the porosity of the soil.”

It should be pointed that growers expressed surprise over the claim that sandy soils did not react to organic matter. Andrew stated that we know less about our soil than we do about the surface of the moon and that he was keen to explore the impact on sandy soils.

More porous soils can also improve nutrient use efficiency and increase oxygen levels throughout the soil profile, minimising the risk of anaerobic patches. “These all serve to build resilience in the soil,” he concluded. “You may not notice the difference in a normal year, but during extreme weather events your soils will be able to maintain yields.”

After a short break, the audience were presented with three farm examples of agroecology. Claire Hill is a Shropshire farmer and co-founder of the Roots to Regeneration training programme, designed to provide growers with online and in-person modules to help them plan and implement their transition from conventional agriculture to regenerative.

Claire rears cattle, pigs and chickens on permanent pasture. She said that her biggest revelation was multi-species grazing. Establishing a diverse ley encourages each animal to take what it needs, and each paddock has a long resting period, grown to around 5,000kg og herbage per hectare, before grazing.

“I believe that this increased diversity is making our meat more nutrient dense, tackling the ‘hidden hunger’ brought about by a lack of micronutrients,” she explained. Claire went on to say that we needed a change in culture, as each passing generation suffered from shifting baseline syndrome, wherein we accept gradual changes in our environment – leading to increased tolerance of environmental degradation.

She added that growers would need to take ownership of their efforts to protect the environment and produce nutrient-dense food. “Major corporations are in the ‘Pilot Era’ of regenerative agriculture, with lots of talk about initiatives, and yet I also see a lot of greenwashing and greenrinsing – where environmental targets will be changed before they are achieved.”

Like Ed Brown earlier in the day, Claire talked about a tipping point. “It only takes 17.5% of people for something to become mainstream. We’re at the point of innovators and early adopters, taking regenerative produce to market and speaking directly with customers. From there, word spreads and we can actively encourage the public to engage more with the provenance of their food.”

Following Claire, fellow Shropshire farmer John Bubb and McCain Foods president of agriculture, James Young gave a presentation. McCain Foods has committed to sourcing 100% of its potatoes globally from regenerative farming practices by 2030.

Potatoes are not a crop talked about frequently when it comes to reducing tillage, but John – who grows 196 hectares of potatoes for McCain – explained how he has bought the crop into a regenerative system.

Since 2019, the business had integrated cover and catch crops into the rotation, using a mix of linseed, buckwheat, phacefia, vetch, clover, and oats, which is grazed off or sprayed off if necessary. The business has also minimised its chemical usage, avoiding soil sterilant since 2020 and cutting its nematicide use to just 8%, as well as adapting its nutrient plan to include more organic manures and trace minerals.

“Comparisons between our conventional crops and the crops established with regenerative practices had the same marketable yield, but with a £345 per hectare saving,” he said. “We’re now involved with trials to limit our herbicide use with re-ridging and are planting companion beans and peas crops alongside the potatoes.”