《英國標準協會（BSI）：2025再生農業標準化建設研究報告（英文版）（24頁）.pdf》由會員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關《英國標準協會（BSI）：2025再生農業標準化建設研究報告（英文版）（24頁）.pdf（24頁珍藏版）》請在三個皮匠報告上搜索。

1、2025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative AgricultureBSI Standards Research ReportMarch 2025ii2025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research ReportAuthorsLeyla nal(Research&Insight Manager,BSI)Shona Porter(Research&Data Analyst,BSI)ContributorsGill Jackson(Senior Resear

2、ch&Insight Manager,BSI)Emily Field(Food Sector Lead,BSI)Finian Makepeace(Co-Founder,Kiss the Ground)Catherine McCosker(Head of Agriculture and Landscapes,3Keel)AcknowledgementsThe authors are grateful to all the participants for their contributions and insights.DisclaimerThis report has been prepare

3、d for general information purposes relating to its subject matter only.It does not constitute a definitive or exhaustive advice;it outlines possible courses of action and next steps and is intended to inform further stakeholder discussion and decisions on its subject.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Sta

4、ndards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.iiiContents1 Executive summary 1 1.1 Purpose of the project.1 1.2 Stakeholder engagement.1 1.3 Recommendations.22 Introduction 3 2.1 Research background.3 2.2 The role of standards in achieving industry leadership for regenerative agriculture.43 Res

5、earch overview 5 3.1 Research objectives.5 3.2 Research scope.5 3.3 Research methodology .64Keyfindings 10 4.1 Alignment and harmonization.10 4.2 Principles versus outcomes.10 4.3 Flexible approach.12 4.4 Measuring,reporting and verification(MRV).12 4.5 Understanding drivers.14 4.6 Farmer engagement

6、.15 4.7 Formal standards.155 Potential areas for new standardization176 Recommendations 187 Stay in touch 19ListoffiguresFigure 1:Supply chain actors included in the project scope.5Figure 2:Standards landscape research methodology.6Figure 3:Jurisdictions.6Figure 4:Standards landscape research parame

7、ters.7Figure 5:Proportion of partially relevant standards by area of focus and type of farmland.16List of tablesTable 1:Relevancy definitions.8Table 2:Regenerative agriculture principles.11iv2025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research ReportForewordBy Finian Makepeac

8、e,Co-Founder of Kiss the GroundAgriculture has been the most destructive human activity on Earth.Yet,regenerative agriculture is gaining momentum as a powerful solution to crises in wellness,water scarcity,climate change,and biodiversity loss.It restores ecosystemsrebuilding soil,revitalizing water

9、cycles,and enhancing biodiversity.For farmers and ranchers,it reduces input costs,increases land resilience,diversifies enterprises,and boosts profits.Consumers gain access to healthier food,while companies recognize its role in stabilizing supply chains amid climate-related disruptions.Policymakers

10、,too,see its potential as the consequences of conventional agriculture become undeniable.With a global movement emerging,the question is:How do we create reliable standards that ensure regenerative agricultures full potential while staying practical and adaptable?To maintain integrity,we must clarif

11、y next steps,develop pragmatic solutions,and ensure this movement leads to lasting change.This is why organizations like BSI are essential.With experience in international standards,BSI has taken an important step in assessing whether a framework could scale regenerative agricultures impact while pr

12、eserving its core principles.In 2013,I co-founded Kiss the Ground to awaken people to the possibilities of regeneration.Through films like Kiss the Ground and Common Ground,along with storytelling,education,and partnerships,weve inspired millions to join this movement.I was pleased to engage with BS

13、I early in their process and encourage you to read the Regenerative Agriculture Discovery Research Report.While no framework can encompass every perspective,this report is a crucial step in understanding what key stakeholders envision for the future.Regardless of where you stand on standardization,w

14、e are at a critical juncture.Thoughtful discussions like this will shape how regenerative agriculture evolves.As this process unfolds,collective participation will be essential to ensuring any future standards align with the movements true intent.To regeneration and beyond,Finian MakepeaceFinian Mak

15、epeace,Co-Founder of Kiss the Ground,is a leading voice in regenerative agriculture,known for his storytelling,advocacy,and policy work.As a presenter,media creator,and producer of Kiss the Ground and Common Ground,he has helped educate and inspire millions through films,training programs,and initia

16、tives that connect people to the power of regeneration.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.11ExecutivesummaryRegenerative agriculture is increasingly seen as a solution to a variety of challenges in farming,environmental conservation and global sustaina

17、bility.It can facilitate carbon sequestration,increase biodiversity,improve soil health and reduce the risk of flooding,among other benefits.Regenerative agriculture also improves the resilience and security of our future food supply.However,the absence of a universally agreed definition for regener

18、ative agriculture and the lack of a baseline standard raises concerns that the sector might struggle to adopt best practice,which would potentially undermine genuine efforts of regenerative agriculture.Moreover,the lack of consensus on what constitutes regenerative agriculture and its supporting pri

19、nciples risks creating confusion among consumers,and inconsistent claims regarding products and practices might result in accusations of greenwashing.1.1PurposeoftheprojectBritish Standards Institution(BSI),as the UKs National Standards Body(NSB),has undertaken this discovery research project to und

20、erstand the key challenges faced by agri-food industry actors as they seek to integrate regenerative agriculture within their supply chains,and to identify if standardization can accelerate the adoption of regenerative agriculture.The project objectives include:exploring the need to define regenerat

21、ive agriculture and its principles in order to foster trustworthy and verifiable practice understanding the current challenges for global stakeholders currently engaging with regenerative agriculture within their supply chains understanding if standardization can support widescale adoption of regene

22、rative agriculture and overcome current challenges exploring the ways in which the scaling of trustworthy and verifiable regenerative agriculture practices can be facilitated building trust and assurance for all market stakeholders to support adoption of regenerative agriculture and guard against gr

23、eenwashing.1.2StakeholderengagementWe engaged extensively with industry experts,trade associations,regulators,non-governmental organizations(NGOs)and farmers from both the UK and internationally to guide this research on how to support trustworthy and verifiable regenerative agriculture practice and

24、 to identify areas where guidance/standardization is needed.The findings and recommendations represent input from these stakeholders and their collective voice,ensuring that the recommendations reflect industry needs regarding the complex challenges associated with regenerative agriculture.22025 BSI

25、.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report1.3RecommendationsThe following activities should be prioritized to facilitate the widespread adoption of trustworthy and verifiable regenerative agriculture practice.Form a Strategic Advisory Group(SAG)It is recommended that

26、 a Strategic Advisory Group(SAG)is established under the auspices of BSI,to provide advice on the most effective strategies and solutions to accelerate the adoption of regenerative agriculture across the industry.Develop best practice guidance Our research highlighted that there is a need for an ove

27、rarching guidance document to be developed that can act as a single reference point for understanding best practice when integrating regenerative agriculture within supply chains.This document would cover global best practice,including formal and informal standards,as well as existing frameworks and

28、 schemes(see next recommendation).Actors within the supply chain would benefit from guidance on how to implement these practices.Moreover,the document would help the various supply chain actors to assess their progress and desired outcomes against best practice.Conduct a review of informal standards

29、 There is a need for a landscape mapping exercise to be carried out,which would extend the presented research on formal standards(see Section 2.3.1)to include all relevant informal standards,frameworks and schemes(.e.g.SAI Platform1,Regen102,Regenified3).This would help inform the development of a u

30、niversal framework,convening all best practice into one reference document.Provide monitoring,reporting and verification(MRV)support The development of a measurement architecture is needed to help organizations measure,monitor,report and verify the outcomes of regenerative agriculture within their s

31、upply chains.A harmonized MRV framework would allow for consistency across the sector and further support the widescale adoption of best practice.1 https:/saiplatform.org/.2 https:/regen10.org/.3 https:/ Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.32Introduction2.1Researchb

32、ackgroundRegenerative agriculture agriculture that improves(regenerates)the environment while also producing food or fibre has been a topic of increasing interest for the past several years.Viewed variably as a method to improve resilience of food production against the changing climate,or just anot

33、her name for sustainable agriculture,among other opinions,regenerative agriculture involves many different stakeholders from farmers,to supply chain organizations,to investors and the finance sector,to the policy world all of whom have their own insights into what it is,why its needed,and how it sho

34、uld be implemented.While there is increasing convergence on the overarching principles that make up regenerative agriculture,there is no universally or legally agreed definition.Methods of food production vary considerably by region,and even within a region,as a result of the natural environments in

35、trinsic heterogeneity,as well as varying social,economic and geopolitical contexts,which makes it challenging to identify a single definitive approach.This lack of mutual understanding/agreement on what regenerative agriculture looks like in practice presents challenges to robustly demonstrating its

36、 implementation.This can be a barrier for organizations looking to integrate regenerative agriculture across their supply chains(and in some instances make claims to this end),for farmers wishing to demonstrate best practice production or achieve product premiums related to regenerative agriculture,

37、and for funders seeking to invest in regenerative agriculture at scale.The lack of standardization can increase the risk of greenwashing and create confusion regarding best practice.The potential solutions to these challenges are equally varied,which means that coming to conclusions on the best way

38、forward is difficult.One consequence of this is that an increasing number of organizations have developed their own definitions and implementation frameworks for regenerative agriculture.While this can be useful in allowing supply chain organizations to cater to the specific needs of their suppliers

39、 and growing contexts,it has no impact on addressing other challenges,such as growing customer understanding of and confidence in the term(and therefore increasing demand),or supporting verification pathways that are easily accessible for investors and governments looking to support the scaling of r

40、egenerative agriculture.It can also present issues for farmers,such as having to demonstrate progress against multiple different regenerative agriculture guidelines in order to show outcomes of regenerative agriculture,access funding or meet market requirements.It is against this backdrop that we ha

41、ve undertaken this discovery project to understand what our role as a neutral,trusted standards body could be in addressing these challenges and facilitating a way forward.42025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2.2 Theroleofstandardsinachievingindustrylea

42、dershipfor regenerative agriculture Standards can provide a consistent,trustworthy,and verifiable approach to regenerative agriculture,as well as offer guidance and recommendations to help organizations distil best practice.Standards also offer an opportunity for various actors within the supply cha

43、in to be aligned on expected outcomes and benefits.Rather than farmers and farming organizations having to reinvent the wheel when it comes to supply protocols,standards can improve efficiencies,eliminate confusion and help mitigate future risks.For organizations,investors and other supply chain act

44、ors,understanding the practices and expected outcomes of regenerative agriculture allows for alignment and a harmonized approach to scaling regenerative agriculture that builds trust and consumer confidence.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.53Research

45、overview3.1ResearchobjectivesThe aim of this research was to explore if,and how,standardization could support widescale,trustworthy and verifiable regenerative agriculture practice.The research objectives included:exploring the need to define regenerative agriculture and its principles in order to f

46、oster trustworthy and verifiable practice developing a deep understanding of the current challenges when integrating regenerative agriculture within supply chains for global stakeholders,as well as the risks,barriers and needs understanding if standardization can help overcome current challenges whe

47、n integrating regenerative agriculture,to enable adoption and identify actionable solutions exploring the ways in which the scaling of trustworthy and verifiable regenerative agriculture practice can be facilitated.3.2ResearchscopeThis research,informed by the principles and benefits of regenerative

48、 agriculture which encompass every stage of the supply chain,from farmers to retailers and investors is a high-level,initial exploration into the sectors needs.The research involved varying types of stakeholder engagement activities for collating the required insights,as well as a supplementary stan

49、dards landscape review.Specifically,components of the stakeholder engagement included a discovery workshop,one-to-one stakeholder interviews and an industry roundtable.All the stakeholder engagement activities were conducted on an anonymous basis and stakeholders expressed their personal views.Moreo

50、ver,upon request from the majority of stakeholders,their associated organizations are not disclosed in this report.For analytical purposes,this document refers to farming/agriculture sector actors as farmers,and to other stakeholders in the supply chain(e.g.retailers,manufacturers,financial institut

51、ions and certifying bodies)as supply chain actors,as presented in Figure 1.Figure 1:Supply chain actors included in the project scopeThe scope of the standards landscape research,which supplements the qualitative findings from stakeholder engagement,is discussed in Section 2.3.1.62025 BSI.All rights

52、 reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report3.3Researchmethodology3.3.1StandardslandscapeThe standards landscape research methodology consisted of four key stages,as detailed in Figure 2.Figure 2:Standards landscape research methodology StandardslandscapescopedefinitionThe issuin

53、g bodies,jurisdictions and geographies of the standards development organizations(SDOs)and NSBs within the scope of the standards landscape were identified,as presented in Figure 3 and Figure 4.IssuingbodiesandjurisdictionsbygeographyUK(BSI)standards are of clear interest,as are European standards d

54、eveloped by SDOs such as the European Committee for Standardization(CEN)and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization(CENELEC),and international standards developed by SDOs such as the International Organization for Standardization(ISO)and the International Electrotechnical Commiss

55、ion(IEC).Figure 3:Jurisdictions Formal standardsThe scope of the standards to be included in the standards landscape review were defined as formal standards only,i.e.standards published by NSBs and SDOs.The standards from these organizations that met the geographical criteria were included in the re

56、sults.Throughout the project,there was awareness of the proliferation of private standards and frameworks.However,at this early stage of the project,given the complexity of the landscape and limitations in terms of time,budget and access only formal standards were considered in the standards landsca

57、pe research.Following the desk research,a search matrix was developed in consultation with the sector lead and with input from a technical consultant.This matrix,shown in Figure 4,aided the identification and systematic classification of relevant standards.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Rese

58、arch Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.7Figure 4:Standards landscape research parameters82025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report Search matrix The keywords in relation to the types of land and regenerative agriculture benefits identified for the matrix we

59、re validated via workshops and interviews with industry stakeholders.Keyword searches were carried out and the results went through a relevancy review process(see Table 1 for details)to inform the analysis.Following the identification of the standards,they were assessed by a technical consultant to

60、determine their relevancy to the overall project objectives.The relevancy assessment was based on the categories defined in Table 1.Table1:Relevancy definitionsCategoryDefinitionHighly relevant to regenerative agricultureStandards directly related to sustainable farming practices,including regenerat

61、ive agriculture,or those specifically addressing the practice of regenerative agriculture.Partially relevant to regenerative agricultureStandards that to some extent relate to elements of sustainable farming or regenerative agriculture,such as soil health,biodiversity,net gain and carbon sequestrati

62、on.Low relevance to regenerative agriculture Standards that might relate to agriculture or food products but are not specific to the principles of regenerative agriculture.Note:Standards categorized as Low relevance were not considered for the analysis of the standards landscape.3.3.2Discoveryworksh

63、opWe held a discovery workshop with over 45 international participants representing various sectors,such as farming/agriculture,NGO/advocacy,consultancy,academia/research,government,certification,supply chain and investors/finance.The objectives of the workshop were to:explore participants experienc

64、es of implementing regenerative agriculture,as well as their understanding of the associated risks and challenges understand support requirements for trustworthy,verifiable and scalable practice.3.3.3StakeholderinterviewsA total of 12 in-depth stakeholder interviews were conducted with representativ

65、es from farming/agriculture,finance,academia/research,manufacturing,retail,certification and philanthropy sectors.The objectives of the interviews were to:explore the differences in terminology and industry needs around clarification of terminology identify the greatest barriers preventing widescale

66、 adoption of regenerative agriculture investigate the best approach,and the most critical considerations that support harmonization needs.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.93.3.4IndustryroundtableIn response to the findings of the standards landscape,

67、discovery workshop and stakeholder interviews,we conducted a roundtable with 12 representatives of various supply chain actors within the industry,from manufacture,retail,financial institutions and certification bodies.During the previous activities,the latter were identified as the key beneficiarie

68、s of a potential harmonization/standardization solution.The main objective of the roundtable was to validate the research findings and assess organizational priorities where harmonization/standardization is needed.Further objectives supporting the validation of the research findings were to gather p

69、articipants feedback on the harmonization of regenerative agriculture practices,to understand business drivers in the supply chain for regenerative agriculture;and to understand support needs for MRV.102025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report4KeyfindingsThi

70、s section presents the key overall findings from the research,including the standards landscape review.4.1AlignmentandharmonizationParticipants agreed that there is a need for harmonization and alignment of existing guidance and frameworks to better support widescale adoption of best practice.Harmon

71、izing existing standards and schemes would help prevent a disconnect between the standards that farms are using for the different products or commodities they are trading,and the varying requirements from the supply chain actors they are trading with.In addition,participants suggested that there is

72、a need to establish an overarching framework and convergence of all existing best practice into one key reference point.Participants stated that there needs to be clarity around the principles of regenerative agriculture,as well as around terminologies and categorizations.This would allow for consis

73、tency to ensure that all actors in the value chain operate in cohesion.4.2PrinciplesversusoutcomesParticipants views about the best approach for a creating a unified understanding of regenerative agriculture can be loosely grouped under principles-led versus outcomes-based preferences.The balance of

74、 a principles-led versus outcomes-based approach is an important consideration for standards development.Any potential principles-led standard should be broad enough to prevent it from being niche and out of reach;while an outcomes-based approach might be preferable in the long term,due to short-ter

75、m challenges such as the availability of data,continuous monitoring or varying weather conditions impacting the success of outcomes.As the principles of regenerative agriculture are well established and considered universal in terms of theoretically being applicable to farming practices anywhere,aro

76、und half of the participants indicated that they would prefer a principles-led approach.They noted that regenerative agriculture requires a wholesale application of five principles,with contextual adaptation.It is worth highlighting that while the principles are widely known and understood,there is

77、divergence around whether there are five or six principles.Moreover,participants highlighted that the mere application of some of the principles does not mean that farming has been done regeneratively and might be open to accusations of greenwashing.Participants noted the need for clarity around the

78、 principles,as well as terminologies and categorizations.The principles of regenerative agriculture are well disseminated and,despite variances,they serve as a common frame of reference.UK-based organizations,such as Groundswell4,The Royal Agricultural Society of England5 and Roots of Nature6,along

79、with various international organizations,refer to these principles.4 Groundswell.5 principles of regenerative agriculture.https:/ The Royal Agricultural Society of England.The principles of regenerative agriculture.https:/www.rase.org.uk/news/the-principles-of-regenerative-agriculture/.6 Roots of Na

80、ture.The principles of regenerative agriculture.https:/rootsofnature.co.uk/the-principles-of-regenerative-agriculture/.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.11Participants mentioned six principles(or five principles plus context),as listed in Table 2.Tabl

81、e2:Regenerative agriculture principlesMinimize soil disturbanceReducing or eliminating tillage and other similar practices disrupts the soil structure.By minimizing soil disturbance,the natural soil ecosystem,including microorganisms and soil organic matter,can thrive,leading to healthier,more resil

82、ient soil.Keep the soil covered Maintaining a cover on the soil,whether through cover crops,crop residues or mulches,protects the soil from erosion,conserves moisture,and helps regulate soil temperature.Soil cover also reduces the impact of heavy rain and wind,preventing erosion and nutrient loss.Ma

83、ximize crop diversityGrowing a variety of plants in the same area,either through crop rotation,intercropping or polycultures,enhances biodiversity.Diverse plant species contribute to healthier soil by supporting a wider range of beneficial insects and microorganisms and reducing the risk of pests an

84、d diseases.Maintain living roots year round Keeping living plants in the ground as much as possible ensures that roots are continually feeding soil microorganisms.This practice improves soil structure,enhances nutrient cycling and increases carbon sequestration,all of which are key to maintaining so

85、il health.Integrate livestockIncorporating animals into the farming system through managed grazing practices helps mimic natural ecosystems,where herbivores play a vital role in nutrient cycling.Livestock can help manage plant growth,spread seeds and contribute organic matter to the soil,all of whic

86、h promote soil health.Contextual adaptation Regenerative practices should be tailored to the specific context of the land,including its climate,geography and the needs of the local community.What works well in one region might not be effective in another,so farmers should adapt their practices to th

87、e unique conditions of their environment.Despite the general consensus around the principles and the necessity of a whole-farm approach,considerations around the main focus and boundaries of regenerative agriculture varied.The majority of the participants underlined the importance of the integration

88、 of livestock,referring to the use of different grazing systems,e.g.holistic planned grazing or rational grazing,and the transformational processes of transitioning to smaller and more native species of livestock.However,due to the specificity of the UK environment,in-depth conversations led to the

89、realization that the context which immediately comes to mind in terms of regenerative farming in the UK is arable farming.Moreover,the conversations highlighted that there is varying emphasis on the integration of livestock,with the tendency to see this principle as less of a priority,or a next step

90、 after the application of the two soil-based principles.There was also significant variance around the understanding of the principle of contextual adaptation.While some participants referred to context,mainly on the basis of variance in geography and climate,other participants highlighted the impor

91、tance of the social/cultural context as closely linked to agricultural practices.122025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research ReportPhilanthropy organizationUntil recently,people have been focusing mainly on climate and carbon,and more recently on nature.Its only no

92、w that people are beginning to realize that perhaps the biggest impact of all of agriculture is social,because it impacts public health,from both the mental and the physical health point of view.Around half the participants stated that they preferred an outcome-led understanding of regenerative farm

93、ing,which is closely linked to scientific evidence in relation to the application of the principles.Participants referred to the necessity of the observation of desired outputs(benefits)of regenerative farming as their preferred approach,i.e.increased soil health and fertility,carbon sequestration,i

94、ncreased biodiversity,better water management,environmental stewardship,farm resilience and economic benefits.They indicated that as long as there is evidence for the existence of these outputs in the form of scientifically measured outcomes,the agricultural practice should be accepted as regenerati

95、ve,regardless of the number of principles applied.4.3FlexibleapproachThe research findings indicated that a one-size-fits-all approach is not practicable due to the diversity of agricultural systems.A hybrid model that combines principles and outcomes,while allowing for local adaptation,was recommen

96、ded by the participants regardless of their preferred approach.They stated that there needs to be a downstream approach(an approach that emphasizes how organizations report on regenerative agriculture rather than what practices farmers should be following)in the harmonization process.Workshop,interv

97、iew and roundtable discussions highlighted that the principles of regenerative agriculture need to be clear,flexible and inclusive to be applicable to a variety of production systems,and cater for widespread adoption based on variability of context(soil type,climate,biodiversity,scale of the farm,la

98、bour availability and so on),which should also be balanced with an outcome-based approach.Moreover,participants mentioned the necessity of a whole-farm approach for the implementation of regenerative agriculture practices,which also presents challenges in terms of the classification and governance o

99、f different farm components.4.4Measuring,reportingandverification(MRV)The considerations of research participants around an outcome-based approach were closely linked to the question of measurement.Standardized measurement,reporting and verification(MRV)frameworks are vital to build trust and enable

100、 organizations to make credible claims about regenerative agriculture practices.Participants highlighted a need for baseline measures and suitable metrics to support reporting and verification of best practice.It was noted that the harmonization and alignment of existing schemes and frameworks would

101、 help support a set of measurable indicators.Participants concurred that establishing a consistent set of metrics covering numerous touchpoints is essential.As data collection and data management are existing challenges,Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserv

102、ed.13harmonization support is required to support MRV,which in turn would reduce costs,increase efficiency and prevent farmer fatigue.Participants mentioned that even though they would like to see scientifically measured outcomes,the processes of collection and management for consistent MRV are not

103、yet well understood.It was recognized that there needs to be an established and accepted methodology to present the process of continuous improvement of the ecosystem.This would require the continuous monitoring of outcomes and the establishment of thresholds along the continuum.There is a need for

104、a measurement architecture to create a baseline at the farm level with the participation of the various organizations carrying out MRV,following different methods,to different depths and at different frequencies,producing different results.Furthermore,participants stated that information around what

105、 is being measured,reported on and verified should be communicated to farmers.From the farmers perspective,harmonization and simplification of data collection would help prevent audit anxiety and audit overload.While there was consensus that standardizing MRV practices is critical for transparency a

106、nd comparability,it was also mentioned that the framework must be flexible enough to allow regenerative agriculture to act as a tool to improve farm resilience.One participant highlighted the increasing demand for verified greenhouse gas emission(GHG)methodologies and called for similar rigour in re

107、generative agriculture metrics.While work on carbon measurement can provide learnings for regenerative agriculture,defining baselines is still at an early stage.Standards,such as BS EN ISO 14064 on GHG reporting,were given as examples to emulate.Financial institution As a bank,we would like to under

108、stand how regenerative farming practices are assessed.We would like to ensure that we offer products that help build up farmer resilience towards withstanding risks of meeting future supply chain requirements,e.g.carbon.But we also would like to ensure that our products are used in the right way.The

109、 research participants stated that metrics and methods need to be defined to create a standardized,yet flexible,MRV framework for outcomes.These should include core metrics such as soil health indicators(e.g.soil organic carbon percentage,soil biodiversity/microbial activity,biodiversity,vegetative

110、cover and diversity,presence of key indicator species),carbon outcomes(e.g.emission reductions,CO2-equivalent per hectare),water retention indicators(e.g.field saturation levels post-rainfall)and supplementing metrics(e.g.farmer satisfaction and return on investment from adopting regenerative practi

111、ces).The priority areas and potential gaps in measurement requirements should be identified.Moreover,measurements should be carried out using methods that incorporate advancing technologies,such as remote sensing for biodiversity,142025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards

112、Research Reporton-farm testing for soil health(e.g.soil organic matter tests)and automated data collection(e.g.satellite imagery,soil monitors).The participants suggested a tiered system for measurement,with levels such as entry,intermediate and advanced or similar allowing farmers to progress at th

113、eir pace,and for granting recognition of such progress.As a future consideration,participants mentioned that regenerative agriculture metrics need to be aligned with corporate Environmental,Social and Governance(ESG)reporting to ensure compatibility with net-zero and sustainability targets.Moreover,

114、metrics should also be adapted to ESG frameworks,such as GHG Protocol Scope 37 and Science Based Targets Network(SBTN)8 for nature.4.5UnderstandingdriversClimate mitigation remains the primary driver for many organizations seeking to engage with regenerative agriculture,rather than the focus on food

115、 resilience.Many organizations,including retailers,see regenerative agriculture as a pathway to achieving net-zero targets and sustainability goals for climate change.Leveraging regenerative agricultures alignment with these broader goals is key to unlocking funding and mitigating greenwashing risks

116、.4.6FarmerengagementFarmer engagement remains critical to ensure the effective and widescale adoption of regenerative agriculture.A recurring theme in the research findings was the need to support farmers through education,financial incentives and simplified reporting mechanisms.Farmers apprehension

117、 about the costs and risks of adopting regenerative agriculture was noted as a significant barrier.Public funding for public goods(e.g.the UK governments Sustainable Farming Incentive scheme9)is a motivator for farmers.RetailerThe mindset around how farms are viewed needs to change.Farms used to be

118、judged based on how neat and tidy they were.But when running a farm for nature,hedges will look scruffy and the farm might not be neatly tilled.Building farmer confidence to accept these things is quite important.7 https:/ghgprotocol.org/corporate-value-chain-scope-3-standard.8 https:/sciencebasedta

119、rgets.org/about-us/sbtn.9 Sustainable Farming Incentive:guidance for applicants and agreement holders-GOV.UK.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.15Participants highlighted the need for guidance and training to address the gaps in farmers knowledge regar

120、ding the implementation of regenerative agriculture in their context and the understanding of its impact on yield and profitability.Sufficient guided choices should be provided for farmers,and knowledge sharing between the farming/agriculture community and other actors in the value chain should be f

121、acilitated.Training and information exchange might accelerate culture change towards the understanding and adoption of regenerative agriculture practices.4.7FormalstandardsThe standards landscape review(see Section 2.3.1)identified 1,033 standards in total.The majority of the standards were deemed e

122、ither irrelevant or of low relevance to regenerative agriculture.Standards classified as having low relevance were those that pertain to agriculture or food products in general,but do not specifically address the principles of regenerative agriculture in any way.These standards were excluded from th

123、e analysis and were not investigated further.Following the analysis of the standards landscape,it became evident that there are no highly relevant standards specific to regenerative agriculture or sustainable farming practices.A total of 225 standards were considered partially relevant(see Figure 5)

124、,indicating that certain elements within the standards content relate to aspects of regenerative agriculture,such as soil health,biodiversity net gain and carbon sequestration,which are elements integral to sustainable farming and regenerative agriculture but not specifically relating to the practic

125、e of regenerative agriculture.Examples include standards on carbon footprinting,measuring soil quality and conducting life cycle assessments(LCAs).Standards on nature markets,biodiversity net gain and voluntary carbon management are likely to have significant overlaps with areas of regenerative agri

126、culture and might require alignment to ensure the practicality of implementation.4.7.1ArableandpasturelandThe findings from the workshop and stakeholder interviews indicated that the primary emphasis of regenerative agriculture to date has been on arable land.As a result,the standards landscape revi

127、ew included standards that refer to specific types of land,as well as general soil and farming.The review suggests that there are very few standards addressing pasture land and arable land in relation to the benefits of regenerative agriculture.4.7.2Cross-sectorstandardsRegenerative agriculture inte

128、rsects with several other critical topics,such as sustainability,climate change and environmental impact.It is important to note that the standards landscape review examined these topics and identified several cross-sector standards in a broader context.For example,environmental management standards

129、 refer to impact on the environment more broadly,including elements such as technology and LCAs.These standards were categorized as low relevance,since they do not align closely with regenerative agriculture practices and were deemed unlikely to have much practical overlap with the adoption and impl

130、ementation of regenerative agriculture.162025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research ReportAllSoil health improvementBiodiversity/habitat enhancementClimate resilienceImproved nutrient cyclingRegenerative agricultureSocial and community benefitsSocial andcommunityben

131、efitsFarming terminologymentSoilImprovedintegrated pestNo specific landtypeSoil healthimprovementNo verticalPasture landArable landFarming terminologyImproved watermanagementSoilNo specific land typeImprovednutrient cycling RegenerativeagricultureSoilNo specific land typeArable landSoilClimate resil

132、ienceArable landBiodiversity/ha.Arable landSoilFarming terminologyFarming terminologyNo specific land type Improved water management Improved integrated pest management No verticalSoilFigure 5:Proportion of partially relevant standards by area of focus and type of farmlandTo interact with Figure 5,c

133、lick on the following link:https:/public.flourish.studio/visualisation/19627857/Click on the area of focus,e.g.Soil health improvement,to discover standards relating to that benefit.Hover the cursor over any standard,e.g.ISO 11265;the details of the standard,such as the document identifier and title

134、,will be displayed.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.175PotentialareasfornewstandardizationThe overall research findings of the project identified several potential areas for new standardization.Best practice guidance Due to the growing number of sche

135、mes,frameworks and principles on regenerative agriculture and the diverging practices and requirements,the findings indicate that a general guidance document would be welcomed and well received by industry stakeholders.This guidance document would harmonize all existing best practices and collate th

136、em in one overarching resource.The absence of a universal regenerative agriculture framework is causing confusion and inefficiencies across the supply chain.Developing international guidance,with clear definitions and baseline metrics,is essential to drive consistent adoption and build credibility o

137、f regenerative agriculture claims.Monitoring,ReportingandVerification Metrics and methodologies need to be defined to create a standardized,yet flexible,MRV system for understanding outcomes.The majority of the participants recognized the importance of MRV best practice and highlighted that standard

138、izing this process with a clear baseline,touchpoints and thresholds is essential for transparency and comparability.Data collection and management To aid MRV processes regarding regenerative agriculture outcomes,participants examined the considerations around the challenges related to data collectio

139、n and management.Farm data are often collected sporadically,using different methods,and the collection of data itself is currently time consuming and inefficient.Moreover,the sensitivity around data collection stemming from a lack of trust and confusion over data ownership needs to be addressed in a

140、ny potential standardization.There is a need for data collection,storage and management to be harmonized.This would provide trust and assurance to all actors in terms of the quality of the data being collected,how data is stored and maintained,and how data can be used to support MRV best practice.18

141、2025 BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research Report6RecommendationsRegenerative agriculture offers a promising solution to many of the environmental challenges facing the world today.However,throughout the research it was clear that the lack of clarity and consistency

142、 regarding the implementation of regenerative agriculture is causing confusion and possibly hindering wider adoption.Based on the research findings set out in Section 3 and 4,we have articulated four key recommendations to help the ongoing development of this work,to continue engaging with stakehold

143、ers,and help address the key challenges preventing widescale adoption of regenerative agriculture practice.Form a Strategic Advisory Group(SAG)A Strategic Advisory Group(SAG),under the auspices of BSI,should be established to provide advice on the most appropriate solutions to support and facilitate

144、 best practice when integrating regenerative agriculture into supply chains.The SAGs activities would include articulating industry requirements,policy ambitions,and providing guidance to ensure BSI standards and solutions support regenerative agriculture and wider work on nature recovery.Develop be

145、st practice guidance There is a need for a guidance document to act as a reference point for understanding best practice when integrating regenerative agriculture within supply chains.This document would act as a common reference point by collating global best practice in one place.The document woul

146、d also help various actors to assess their progress and desired outcomes against best practice.In addition,dissemination of best practice via training and knowledge sharing was highlighted as a key requirement to help build trust for the regenerative agriculture movement.Conduct a review of informal

147、 standards There is a need to carry out a landscape mapping exercise.The exercise would include a full review of existing standards,guidance,frameworks and certification schemes for a deeper understanding of both the formal and informal standards landscape.This would enable a comprehensive understan

148、ding of the information and guidance that already exists to facilitate the development of a universal framework that helps organizations integrate regenerative farming into their supply chains.Future work should also analyse any gaps in existing standards and schemes to add further value to any guid

149、ance that is developed.ProvideMRVsupport A measurement architecture is needed to support organizations when measuring,reporting and verifying the outcomes of regenerative agriculture practices.Harmonization of MRV metrics and methods would allow for transparency and consistency across the sector,hel

150、p deliver access to funds and markets,and help mitigate reputational and greenwashing risks.These recommendations should be considered as the first steps towards tackling the complex challenges currently impacting the implementation of regenerative agriculture within supply chains.Regenerative Agric

151、ulture:BSI Standards Research Report2025 BSI.All rights reserved.197StayintouchIf youd like to stay updated with our work on regenerative agriculture,or youd like to provide feedback on the work currently underway,you can do so at https:/ BSI.All rights reserved.Regenerative Agriculture:BSI Standards Research ReportBSI Group389 Chiswick High RoadLondon,W4 4AL United Kingdom+44 345 080 2025 BSI.All rights reserved.