Farm Decisions and Activities during Harvest: A Regenerative Farming Point of View
Oct 28
11 min read
0
58
0
TL;DR/ Executive Summary:
Who is this article for:
Ag Industry Segments:
Readers with limited agricultural experience, working in Ag Tech, Sustainability, Nature-Based Solutions, Regenerative Farming, Food System Transformation/ Investing, and related fields.
Roles you might work in:
Sustainability Lead, Product or project management, business development, customer success, sales, marketing, engineering, data science, or design
Summary:
Harvest logistics can differ significantly between regenerative and conventional farmers due to several factors:
Better field accessibility during adverse weather.
Improved end-of-season crop standability.
Availability of grain/crop premiums and proximity to buyers (though this is uncommon).
However, marketing decisions are generally similar for both regenerative and conventional farmers because:
There is no official standard defining what constitutes a "regenerative" crop.
Quality measurements are still evolving.
Consumers have become overwhelmed by label claims over the past decade and are wary of greenwashing.
There is a lack of innovation in handheld devices for measuring crop nutritional quality.
Farmers are typically price takers rather than price makers, as marketing, branding, and organizing growers with similar practices require skills, time, and resources that many farmers do not possess.
Changing this narrative will require scalable regeneration that is both systematic and holistic. To create effective farm programs, start by defining company sustainability goals and then reverse-engineer these goals to the farm level.
How to best leverage this resource:
In the first two posts of this series we explored Harvest Logistics and Grain Marketing followed by Soil Management from a conventional farmers perspective. If you haven’t already read those, consider reading them first before continuing with this post. Additionally, if you’re interested in a deep dive on farm decision-making from a regenerative farming perspective, ranching point of view, or focusing on specific regions or countries, contact Living Roots Ag today!
This article is part of a five-part series designed to provide a deeper understanding of the decisions farmers make during the harvest and post-harvest months. It’s geared toward readers with limited agricultural experience, working in Ag Tech, Sustainability, Nature-Based Solutions, Regenerative Farming, Food System Transformation/ Investment and related roles, such as product or project management, business development, customer success, sales, marketing, engineering, data science, or design. A glossary of terms can be found at the end of this post.
Here’s the list of released and upcoming articles in the series: Farm Decisions and Activities during Harvest.
📬A Regenerative Farmers POV on Harvest Logistics and Grain Marketing
🔜Soil Management Decisions from a Regenerative Farming POV
🔜Positioning Your Ag Solution During Harvest
Introduction:
Regenerative farming, like conventional farming, has its own benefits and challenges. During the harvest window, both will encounter similar decisions but mindset and decision-making frameworks they use are vastly different. While the final action might be the same (e.g., whether to till or not), the underlying mental framework (more on this in a future post) ultimately shapes both the short and long-term outcomes for the farmer, the soil, the crops, the consumer packaged goods (CPG) brand, and the end consumer.
So what decisions and activities does a regenerative farmer do that are different from that of a conventional farmer? Keep reading to learn more!
Like conventional farmers, regenerative farmers face the same three primary decision-making areas: harvest logistics, marketing and storage decisions, and soil management, as covered in the first post of the Harvest Series. While the first two areas are largely similar, with some differences noted below, the approach to soil management diverges significantly. This will be explored in detail in the next post.
Regenerative Farming Harvest Logistics:
How does this differ for the regenerative Farmer?
For regenerative farmers, harvest logistics tend to differ more significantly from conventional practices than grain marketing does. While there are many reasons for this (which we'll explore in a future post), today's discussion will focus on the high-level differences. In a previous post, we outlined the seven most important factors influencing harvest. Below, Table 1 includes additional notes, highlighted in red, that illustrate how these factors differ for regenerative farmers compared to conventional ones.
Table 1: A high level overview of factors impacting harvest logistics.
Why does this differ for a regenerative farmer?
Regenerative farming practices, when properly managed, significantly enhance soil quality and function. For example, cover cropping has been shown to improve soil structure and water infiltration (Source 1 & Tables 3 and 4 in this whitepaper). This means that during heavy rains, more water is absorbed into the soil, reducing surface runoff, erosion, and downstream water quality issues. At harvest time, a regenerative farmer may be able to access fields sooner after a rain because the soil drains better, avoiding issues like equipment getting stuck or soil compaction. In contrast, a conventional farmer may face delays of 1-2 days or more while waiting for the soil to dry sufficiently, increasing the risk of crops falling over. Alternatively, harvesting on wet soils may cause severe compaction, leading to years of reduced yields or even equipment damage.
Regenerative Farming Marketing: Grain and Truck Crops:
How is it different for a regenerative farmer?
Currently, most regenerative farmers do not receive premiums for producing higher-quality crops, especially in the case of row crops. Based on the author's investigation, formal data and surveys documenting this trend are virtually non-existent. Exceptions like wheat and protein content or oil seeds and oil content, do exist. Though these are not specifically tied to regenerative practices.
At this time, the closest financial incentives for regenerative practices are carbon offset and inset programs. These programs typically pay growers for sequestering carbon (organic or inorganic), reducing emissions through less intensive practices, improving efficiency, using renewable energy sources, and other sustainable actions. The voluntary carbon market for agriculture is being developed by project owners, partnerships, organizations, policy groups, and NGOs such as Indigo Ag, Truterra, Agoro, CIBO Soil and Water Outcomes Fund, Bayer, and more.
Beyond voluntary offset/inset markets, farmers can also earn premiums through tax credit programs offered by renewable fuel processors (e.g., 40B, 45Z, and 45Q), water quality initiatives in specific watersheds, and biodiversity credits, which are largely still in development. These avenues represent key opportunities for farmers to be financially rewarded for their regenerative efforts but may not be widely available.
Why don't most regenerative farmers receive crop premiums?
There are many reasons but below are a few:
Lack of Official Standards: Regenerative farming does not have widely recognized standards or guidelines. While this allows farmers the freedom to innovate, it also creates challenges in establishing consistent value metrics. Although some voluntary certification bodies offer program-specific standards to provide clarity, these certifications are not yet widely adopted across the industry. Below are a few examples of such certification programs (Living Roots Ag has no affiliations with these organizations). For a more extensive list, refer to the linked blog post by Regenerative Farmers of America.
Outcomes Based:
Integrity Grown by Advancing Eco Ag
Framework/ Practice Based:
Evolving Quality Measurements: Currently, most crops—whether grain, fruit/ orchard, and vegetable crops—are assessed based on a limited set of criteria, such as physical appearance (size, color, shape, freshness and absence of flaws), foreign material, disease/toxicity levels, and relatively few nutritional parameters. (While USDA standards, linked in the previous sentence, offer detailed guidelines, they are primarily useful for those developing solutions in this specific area.) Although the food-as-medicine movement has gained traction, consumer awareness remains limited, and most people still view products like oranges or peppers as uniform commodities rather than valuing regenerative practices employed to grow them. An article by AgFunder News, based on Purdue Consumer Food Insights report, found that 71% of consumers are unfamiliar with the term "regenerative agriculture," and only 6% believe that consumers should bear the costs associated with these practices. This underscores the need for greater education and awareness about the benefits of regenerative farming.
Organizations and companies such as The Bionutrient Food Association, The Nutrient Density Alliance, FreshRx, Eat Real and many more are working diligently to change this narrative.
Label Overload and Greenwashing: The proliferation of eco-friendly labels in the past decade has made it difficult for consumers to distinguish between genuinely sustainable practices and mere marketing tactics. While some labels are valuable and verified, others can be misleading. This abundance of choices can be overwhelming, particularly for young parents shopping with children or busy shoppers who may associate green labels with sustainability without fully understanding the product's true environmental impact. The study by Nugraha, et. al, 2024 provides insights into this issue.
Quick Read: Check out the abstract (1 minute)
Moderate Review: Look at Table 3 and Figure 10 (5 minutes)
In-Depth Review: Read Section 3.5 (10 minutes)
Need for Handheld Measurement Tools: As the regenerative farming market evolves, there is a growing need for handheld tools that can assess the quality of regeneratively grown food, grain, and fiber for both farmers and consumers. While some tools have been developed, there is still room for advancement. The following tools are currently available or in development (Living Roots Ag has no affiliations with these companies):
Refractometers: Commonly used in various food industries, refractometers can help farmers assess crop health while it is growing. As an agronomist, this is one of my preferred and favorite in-field diagnostic tools.
Grain Sense provides a handheld device for measuring crop quality in the field.
Inarix is an emerging application that leverages the camera on a farmers phone for in-field measurements.
So, how does this tie back to grower decision-making? Often, growers are price takers rather than price makers. Marketing, as many of you know, requires significant time and effort. Developing and communicating a unique selling proposition (USP) is already challenging, and building a brand around it adds even more complexity. Many growers lack the time and resources to focus on marketing because their expertise lies elsewhere, and they may not see the value in creating a recognized brand. Additionally, the volume of their output may not justify the expenses associated with branding and marketing.
Another challenge is that organizing growers into cooperatives to sell their crops based on quality and farming practices is often not logistically feasible. There aren't enough centralized groups of farmers using multiple regenerative practices to support standalone infrastructure for segregating, storing, and handling this output.
That said, there are exceptions for certain commodities. Take, for example, the journey of Kamut brand wheat. For nearly four decades, they have worked to build brand awareness around the quality, nutritional value, and baking characteristics of their products. By uniting under a trademarked brand, Kamut growers have managed to shift the narrative in their favor.
Other farmers have also found success through direct-to-consumer marketing, especially with animal products, fruits, orchard crops, and vegetables. Examples include Polyface Farms, White Oak Pastures, 99 Counties, and many more. Direct connections with buyers enable these farmers to share their stories and help people feel more connected to their food.
How can we change this narrative?
As climate variability becomes increasingly erratic, adopting resilient farming systems like regenerative management is and will continue to be essential. Many companies involved in food production, such as Nestle, General Mills, Danone, MARs, Griffith Foods etc. have made significant progress in reducing their emissions footprint. These companies are collaborating with trusted advisors, farm groups, policy organizations, and others to incentivize the adoption of regenerative practices and work toward transforming the food production system. Despite these efforts, there are still substantial gaps to address.
One of the most critical gaps is understanding farm decision-making. Truly grasping the root barriers that prevent farmers from adopting regenerative practices involves delving into layers of agricultural policy, outdated agronomic models that overlook biological diversity, deeply held beliefs, and persistent false narratives. Each of these factors shapes the current landscape of farming practices (More on this in future posts).
Financial incentives play a crucial role in driving change, but if they only motivate short-term shifts, how can we expect to achieve lasting regeneration? The goal is to regenerate not just the soil, but entire farming systems—encompassing farms, animals/ livestock, communities, consumers, investors, businesses, supply chain relationships, and ultimately, the environment. By understanding a farmer's motivations and the challenges they face, we can develop solutions that truly foster long-term regeneration.
Wow… I stepped up on a soapbox for a moment. I’ll come down now! In summary, scalable regeneration needs to be both systematic and holistic. This involves providing education rooted in ecosystem dynamics, helping land managers understand underlying processes, demonstrating how different tools affect those processes, and uniting all participants in the supply chain under a common goal while considering each other's aspirations. This approach enables the development of strategies that deliver holistic solutions, benefiting both global ecosystems and supply chains.
What Opportunities Exist?
How do we turn this vision into reality? What steps can we take today to improve crop marketing for regenerative farmers? Here are some starting points to consider:
Leverage ESG funds to create programs that address key farm challenges.
Invest in or provide scholarships to training programs that equip/ support educators and trusted advisors with systems thinking and behavior change skills to support farmers effectively.
Examples include Integrity Soils CREATE, Holistic International, plus many more.
Collaborate with systems agronomists and trusted advisors to develop and implement scalable production plans that genuinely benefit soil health. Supply chains with vertically integrated farms are low hanging fruit.
Support the development of tools and services that help farmers transition away from traditional approaches.
Plus More.
Initiate commercial pilots or studies to assess the impact of regenerative farming practices on nutritional density, providing data to support premium pricing and long term health benefits.
Partner with outcome-based regenerative farming labels to promote transparency and value-added claims in the marketplace.
Increase consumer awareness about the benefits of regenerative farming to build demand for regeneratively grown products.
Concluding Thoughts:
Scalable regeneration is essential for a sustainable future, but getting started doesn't have to be overwhelming. While there are many opinions out there (mine included! 🙃), you can simplify the process by taking these or similar steps: Begin by clearly defining your sustainability and product goals. Then, reverse engineer these goals back to the farm level to ensure they are feasible, scalable, and effective at solving real challenges while encouraging long-term adoption. When approached this way, the climate, your farmers, and the entire supply chain will benefit.
Are you working on a sustainability team and wondering how you will go from a materiality assessment to strategy development, then execution, iteration, and reporting? Or maybe you are trying to identify what adoption barriers farmers in your supply shed face? Could it also be that you simply would like to connect with regenerative farmers and learn? If so, Living Roots is here to help. Don’t wait, contact us today!
Glossary:
Biodiversity Credits: A financial tool used to encourage the adoption of land management/ farming/ ranching practices that promote biodiversity.
Carbon Insets: A strategy focused on reducing a company's own supply chain emissions, also known as Scope 3 emissions, by implementing sustainable practices within the company's value chain rather than offsetting emissions elsewhere.
Carbon Offsets: A strategy used to compensate for a company’s greenhouse gas emissions by investing in projects that reduce or remove an equivalent amount of emissions elsewhere, such as reforestation, renewable energy, or carbon capture initiatives.
Soil Compaction: The pressing of soil particles leading to the reduction of pore/ air space which limits air and water flow into the soil.
Conventional Farming: A common farming approach that typically relies on standardized practices, such as synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and monocultures, often prioritizing short-term yields over the integration of biological processes.
Crop Standability: The ability of a crop to remain upright and intact after reaching maturity. Improved standability reduces the likelihood of the crop falling over, snapping, or breaking before harvest, ensuring better yield and quality.
Field Accessibility: The ability to access a field after adverse conditions.
Grain Marketing: The process of developing and implementing a strategy to sell grain at the most favorable price, considering factors such as market trends, timing, and storage costs.
Oil Seeds: Crops such as canola, peanuts, sunflowers, safflower, etc. used for the production of oils for food and non-food applications
Refractometers: A device used to measure the brix level (dissolved solids) in a liquid. In agronomy, it serves as an indirect indicator of plant health, with higher Brix levels often correlating to healthier crops.
Soil Structure: The way soil naturally forms into clumps or clusters. Different shapes can tell us about the health of the soil. For example, crumbly, granular soil on the surface usually means there’s good activity from plant roots and helpful microorganisms.
Soil Infiltration: This is how quickly water can soak into the ground. When soil doesn’t absorb water well due to poor structure, it can lead to a lot of runoff and erosion during heavy rains.
Truck Crops: These are crops like vegetables and fruits that are grown specifically to be sold to restaurants, grocery stores, or at local markets.
Related Posts
