Farmer's Weekly (South Africa)
‘Regenerative farming will grow once society as a whole buys into the concept’
Retailers, consumers, the supply chain and financial institutions should all play a more active role in promoting regenerative agriculture, according to panellists at a recent event in Stellenbosch.
Regenerative agriculture is a “spectrum of practices”, such as minimum to no tillage, increased use of biodiversity, the creation of living root systems, and increased soil protection. Moreover, the way in which it is implemented differs from farm to farm, based on the production system and climate.
This was according to Nic van Schalkwyk, executive director of Restore Africa Funds, who delivered the keynote address at the International Fresh Produce Association’s Fresh Solutions day held recently in Stellenbosch.
Van Schalkwyk said there was “big money”, such as fertiliser and pharmaceutical companies, behind conventional farming, so regenerative farming needed strong voices to promote the counter-argument.
In addition, financial institutions had to change their lending policies to accommodate the change.
“Most farmers don’t have the financial means to fund this out of their pockets, as the change usually coincides with a drop in production before stabilising higher than before the switch was made, three to four years later.”
Concurring with this, Jean-Pierre de Villiers, who had been following regenerative farming practices on his farm Goedemoed near Robertson in the Western Cape for the past six years, said he had not marketed or differentiated his produce from conventionally grown crops. He had imagined that the market would come to him once production was established, but this had not happened.
His view was that food produced using regenerative farming practices needed to become the new standard, whereas conventionally produced food needed to be labelled as ‘sprayed with harmful chemicals’ and ‘bad for your health’, similar to cigarette package labelling.
Michelle Lesur, CEO of Andermatt Madumbi, identified consumers as one of the obstacles to the growth of regenerative agriculture.
“They want healthier food produced in an environmentally responsible manner, but the food still has to look perfect, which is difficult to achieve when using softer pest and disease management practices.”
Retailers, she said, needed to educate consumers about the advantages of regenerative agriculture and address misconceptions that undermined the growth of this trend.
“The responsibility to educate consumers shouldn’t rest solely on farmers,” she added.
Some audience members said that food produced using regenerative agricultural practices needed to fetch premiums, but Van Schalkwyk countered that “the world cannot be fed on premiums”.
He added that the higher yields, reduced input costs, healthier production system and more efficient use of a production unit (through, for example, the use of animals) should be reward enough for using regenerative farming.
Turning to technical issues, De Villiers cautioned potential regenerative farmers that the time it took for soil to recover from conventional practices depended on its quality before the switch was made.
“If you’ve mined all the carbon out of the soil and used harsh chemical products, the wait can be much longer than four years. Dead soil ends up being nothing more than a growth medium and requires more and more inputs to produce decent yield.”
He, added, however, that the switch had brought many advantages for his farm.
“I haven’t used anything to control nematodes or red spider mite for the past two years. Where we once sprayed thrips three times during the flowering season, we only do one application these days and that with a biological product. My nitrogen bill has also been reduced by a third.”