Farmer Tom Martin on regenerative agriculture’s five principles

While the term “regenerative agriculture” may seem self-explanatory, many have trouble defining what it actually means.

However, it doesn’t have to be this way, The Country’s UK correspondent, Tom Martin said.

Martin, aka Farmer Tom, is a proponent of regenerative agriculture.

He told The Country’s Jamie Mackay there were actually five principles to the practice, although he forgot one of them on the show today.

“Reducing tillage, increasing biodiversity, protecting your soil, incorporating livestock… and um…”

(For the record it’s keep living roots in the soil as much as possible).

Martin reckoned there was also a sixth principle – context – which meant applying the five listed above to a specific situation.

“So, whilst there are five key principles, it’s all about applying those into the area that you’re in – and that can vary across a field – but it can certainly vary around the world.”

While the whole concept seemed “broad,” Martin said he’d found the guidelines helpful on-farm as he “tumbled” into regenerative agriculture.

“I’ve taken each of the five principles and adopted them each on their own merit.”

This included reducing tillage to improve soil infiltration and protect soil biology while reducing the loss of organic matter and carbon, he said.

“We’ve taken that one principle on its own merit and of course, then we can move into any of the other … four principles.”

Regenerative agriculture has created a lot of interest around the world, with corporations and governments looking to mitigate the effects of climate change.

Listen below:

It had also become popular with consumers.

Mackay asked if Martin was concerned that some companies would use regenerative agriculture to “greenwash” their image to entice consumers to buy their products.

“It probably would be slightly better if it wasn’t so cool,” Martin said.

The broad definition of each of the five principles also left regenerative agriculture open to misinterpretation by corporations, he said.

“The thing about these principles is that no one owns them, so no one specifically defines them.”

One example was “the first and most prominent pillar,” reduced tillage, he said.

“That’s not [saying] eliminate tillage – it’s reduce tillage. So, what does that mean?

“Does that mean tilling every five years? Does it mean tilling every two years? Where do we draw the line there?”

Martin thought some companies would come up with incorrect interpretations.

“They’re going to struggle to specify those principles because … they’re just principles – they’re not rigid criteria.”

However, he believed regenerative farming was a combination of information and gut feeling and remained positive about the future.

“I don’t want to be wishy-washy but I think there’s the evidence that we see and we record – the data.

“But there’s also what we observe and what we feel around us and we get both of those on our farm.”

Despite the confusion around the practice, Martin was adamant it could unite people.

“Regenerative farming is something which, in my mind, should, and does, draw people together rather than push them apart.

“And that’s what I’m a big fan of – unity – drawing together, working together.”