Farmers have welcomed new guidance from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) on regenerative farming claims for brands and advertisers.
The Net Zero Transition Plan published earlier this month by WRAP and IGD highlights that agriculture is responsible for more than half of all UK food system emissions. While regenerative agriculture is much discussed, with growing enthusiasm for its farming principles, it risks leaving the farm gate wide open for far-ranging interpretations of what nature-friendly farming practices are really being applied.
The guidance, issued on 7 November, shows that the ASA has recognised the potential for brands to misuse the term when seeking to appeal to consumers who are looking for greater sustainability in their purchases.
Soil Association Director of Standards Innovation, Sarah Compson, said, “We welcome this clear and considered advice from the ASA which shows they are putting the interest of consumers first and are vigilant to the potential risk of greenwashing when it comes to regenerative farming claims.
“Regenerative agriculture or simply ‘regen’ are great buzzwords which have everyone talking and excited about the possibilities to deliver significant benefits for nature and the environment. And it is really heartening that so many farmers are embracing regenerative farming principles. However, consumer awareness and understanding of what regenerative farming is and what practices it involves is relatively low thus far – so it is critical that brands don’t overclaim, and clearly explain and substantiate any claims they do make.
“There is a big risk that businesses or brands could overstate the nature-friendly farming practices used to grow or produce their product or ingredients for commercial gain.
“Unlike organic farming, which is legally regulated and has a comprehensive set of robust standards against which farmers are annually audited to achieve organic certification – regenerative is an expression of intent without a clear definition or set of legally binding standards and practices.”
Compson said that she believes that organic is regenerative. She said “It’s the gold standard of regenerative farming, trusted and looked for by consumers who understand that it has the added reassurance of the highest animal welfare standards, avoids GMOs and the routine use of antibiotics, and is free from pesticides and fossil-fuel based fertilisers.”
Caroline Grindrod, a regenerative agriculture advisor from Roots to Regeneration, also welcomed the ASA action, but pushed back against the Soil Association’s assumptions about regenerative farming.
Grindrod said, “I have worked with many organic farmers who are transitioning to a regenerative farming system. Some were regenerating their soil, enhancing biodiversity, and improving land hydrology, and some were not.
“Regenerative agriculture has many lineages, each arising from a place with a unique cultural twist and ways of describing it. Farmers will adopt it to different levels, giving rise to the impression that regenerative agriculture is simply an expression of intent. This is not the case.
“For a farm to be able to claim it is ‘regenerative’ it must be able to measure its regenerative outcomes. But unlike organic standards, which assume positive environmental outcomes will be achieved by complying with a set of standards, regenerative agriculture encourages farmers to design farming systems using regenerative principles that are unique to their social, environmental and economic context and confirm regeneration is taking place by measuring improvements in ecosystem processes.”
The Soil Association was included as a stakeholder in the ASA consultation, together with a number of other leading food and farming bodies.