Regenerative agriculture: Corporate co-optation obscures grassroots ecological restoration amid global agribusiness expansion

Regenerative agriculture is rooted in Indigenous land stewardship practices, such as controlled burns, polyculture cropping, and rotational grazing, which have sustained ecosystems for millennia. These systems are not merely 'sustainable' but actively restore biodiversity, soil health, and water cycles. Western frameworks often extract these practices while divorcing them from their cultural and spiritual contexts, reducing them to technical solutions. The erasure of Indigenous knowledge in favor of corporate-friendly 'regenerative' labels perpetuates a colonial knowledge hierarchy that prioritizes profit over ecological reciprocity.

The modern 'regenerative agriculture' movement emerged in the 1980s from Indigenous and peasant resistance to industrial agriculture, but its roots trace back to pre-colonial land management systems. Colonial land dispossession disrupted these systems, replacing them with monoculture plantations and extractive farming. The Green Revolution of the mid-20th century further entrenched chemical-dependent agriculture, leading to soil degradation and biodiversity loss. Today’s 'regenerative' rebranding mirrors past attempts to co-opt Indigenous knowledge (e.g., the 'Green Revolution' itself, which claimed to 'modernize' traditional farming while erasing it).

Cross-culturally, regenerative practices are often tied to cosmologies that view humans as part of, not above, nature. In South Asia, the *vasudhaiva kutumbakam* (world is one family) ethos underpins agroecological systems like *Navdanya*’s seed saving networks. In Oceania, Indigenous fire management (*cultural burning*) maintains biodiversity and reduces wildfire risk, a practice now being 'discovered' by Western scientists. These systems contrast with the Western paradigm of land as property, where regeneration is framed as a marketable commodity rather than a cultural responsibility. The global uptake of 'regenerative' agriculture risks homogenizing these diverse traditions into a single, corporate-friendly narrative.

Scientific research confirms that regenerative practices—such as cover cropping, reduced tillage, and agroforestry—enhance soil carbon sequestration, water retention, and biodiversity compared to industrial monoculture. Studies show that these systems can reverse soil degradation and mitigate climate change, with some models projecting sequestration of 2-5 gigatons of CO2 annually. However, corporate 'regenerative' certifications often lack rigorous standards, allowing practices like synthetic fertilizer use or confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) to be labeled 'regenerative.' This dilution undermines the scientific integrity of the term and obscures the need for systemic change in agricultural science funding, which remains dominated by agribusiness interests.

Artistic and spiritual traditions across cultures have long celebrated the reciprocity between humans and the land, framing agriculture as a sacred act. Indigenous ceremonies, such as the Hopi *rain dances* or the Hindu *Pongal* festival, honor the cyclical relationship between cultivation and cosmic balance. Modern regenerative agriculture often lacks this spiritual dimension, reducing land stewardship to a set of techniques rather than a lived relationship. The absence of this dimension in mainstream discourse reflects a broader secularization of environmentalism, where ecological restoration is divorced from the moral and spiritual frameworks that once sustained it.

Future scenarios for regenerative agriculture must account for the interplay between local ecological knowledge and global policy frameworks. Models suggest that scaling regenerative practices could sequester 10-20% of global agricultural emissions by 2050, but this requires dismantling structural barriers like land inequality, corporate subsidies, and intellectual property regimes on seeds. Climate projections indicate that regenerative systems are more resilient to extreme weather, but their adoption is hindered by short-term economic incentives favoring monoculture. Without systemic shifts—such as land reform, agroecological education, and policy incentives—regenerative agriculture will remain a niche practice rather than a global solution.

Marginalised voices—particularly Indigenous farmers, Black land stewards, and peasant women—have been the primary innovators and defenders of regenerative practices, yet their knowledge is systematically excluded from mainstream narratives. In the U.S., Black farmers have faced decades of discrimination in land access and USDA support, while Indigenous communities have been displaced from their ancestral lands, disrupting traditional regenerative systems. Global South smallholders, who produce 70% of the world’s food, are often portrayed as 'backward' rather than as stewards of sophisticated agroecological knowledge. Their exclusion from policy discussions and certification schemes reinforces colonial power structures and undermines the potential of regenerative agriculture to address food sovereignty and climate justice.