Aligning science and policy of regenerative agriculture

Abstract Scientific findings since the 1980s indicate conventional agriculture (CONVA) accounts for 8 to 12% of U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, or 23% of the country's total anthropogenic forcing of climate change. In contrast, according to the United Nations Environmental Programs (UNEP), regenerative agriculture (RA) practices, such as, no‐till (NT) has helped reduce emission of 241 Tg of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) since the 1970s. U.S. Farm Bills and other international policies have helped encourage adoption of RA practices, such as NT, but major challenges remain, if a potential climate change impact of CONVA is to be reduced. One approach would be to adopt more efficient and robust production systems such as RA. Regenerative agriculture is designed to minimize external inputs and off‐site impacts, and has globally been adopted on ∼180 M ha, with the most common U.S. practice being NT on 22.6% of the cropland. Currently, the economic benefits of RA are the most evident on smallholder farms, where higher yields and decreased labor for land preparation including weeding (9 and 19 d ha −1 , respectively) have been recorded. A greater RA return to labor compared with CONVA suggests it may be an efficient low‐input farming approach that requires less energy and reduces waste while sustaining productivity and perhaps increasing profitability within a semi‐closed system. No‐till is used here to illustrate the proposed system because it reduces CO 2 release into the atmosphere and increases surface‐layer SOC storage. Globally, there is significant room for RA improvement, confirming the need for additional research and technology transfer along with robust policy articulation.