The Regen Ag Dilemma: “We Can’t Explain Our Product Simply”
Natural soil amendments and plant nutrients are more complicated than synthetics, at least at first glance. That is the nature of the beast. But here’s the thing: farmers can understand complex things if you use their language. Let’s look at how to effectively convey the complexity of a regenerative agriculture soil amendment to a farmer.
But this is the most important point that every ag supplier needs to embed in their organization:
No product is inherently regenerative. Regeneration is created by context, management, and system design. The first explanation any supplier has to give a farmer is the impact of the product or service on the ag ROI.
The Explosion of Regen Ag Products
What’s very interesting to me is that prior to 2022, we didn’t have Regenerative Ag products. We did have cover crop seed, biologicals, biochar, grazing tools, soil tests, and amendments. We had regenerative practices without the labeling. What happened around 2022 that changed how Ag suppliers marketed their products?
Around 2022, several things happened.
- CPG companies began making regenerative commitments
- Investors started using the term
- Certifications emerged
- USDA began referencing regenerative practices
Big Food, Big Ag, and the government started to take an interest in “regenerative” practices. Consumer expectations for sustainability and transparency fueled the adoption of regen ag practices (or perhaps language?) by many large CPG companies.
General Mills, Nestle, PepsiCo, Unilever, and many others got on the “Regen” bandwagon. The USDA and other government agencies also hopped onboard. The battle cry of “regen ag will save us from climate disaster” has since quietly been set aside. Consumers are suffering from climate fatigue. Farmers are sceptical of a product that claims to be a miracle worker. That’s the message we send when we say a product is “regenerative.”
When you market your product as “regenerative,” you also run the risk of appearing to be greenwashing, as far as the farmers and ranchers you’re talking to are concerned. Your claim that the market for regenerative products has skyrocketed is only partially true. People say they want to buy regenerative, but when questioned, most don’t have a clear understanding of what it is. Farmers and ranchers are aware of this, so they don’t see an actual market, just a lot of talk.
Dish the Regen Language, Talk About ROI
Capitalism isn’t going away any time soon. Farmers are businesspeople. They are supporting families and need to make a living. So, the question isn’t “How do I explain the complexity of our Product?”, but “How does our product help the farmer increase their profit?”
There are tons of studies out there that show Regen Ag is more profitable than Conventional Ag. And it does depend on the context; the crop, the soil, the weather patterns, and the farmer’s willingness to give something new a chance.
Ag producers need to know the particulars about regenerative agriculture ROI. In this age of immediate fact checking and digital farm tools, they need to know the claims you make for your product check all the farm cost boxes. How does your product affect:
- Yield stability
- Input reduction
- Labor changes
- Risk reduction
- Market premiums (if any)
Leading with data that lays out exactly how your products or services have impacted similar ag operations in the past gets the farmer or rancher’s attention. If it worked for other folks, it might work for me. Skepticism is the sign of a healthy, thoughtful producer.
What Studies Show About Regenerative Farming Profitability
Data from real‑world field trials is the strongest proof any supplier can offer. If your company doesn’t have enough of its own data, you need to partner with farmers and ranchers in the regions you serve and run serious, multi‑year trials.
Governmental, academic, and nonprofit research is abundant, but most of it is lab‑based and built around 3–5 year timelines — far longer than most producers can tolerate. Academic comparisons often show yield declines in the first three years, even when profitability holds steady, and that distinction between productivity and profitability is notoriously difficult to communicate.
The result is a marketplace where farmers feel they’re being asked to shoulder all the risk while suppliers make the claims.
That sense of risk is reinforced by the broader agricultural system. Much of the academic literature concludes that transitioning to regenerative practices carries early‑stage uncertainty and may reduce profitability in the first one to two years.
Those academic findings are widely circulated, especially by synthetic‑input suppliers who benefit from maintaining the status quo. Meanwhile, U.S. crop insurance and federal support programs still define “good agriculture” through a conventional lens. Practices like diverse rotations or adaptive grazing often fall outside those definitions, which means producers who try them are penalized by the very system meant to protect them.
It’s important to remember that USDA’s foundational standards for soil and farm management were created in 1937, when synthetic fertilizers and pesticides were just emerging, and last updated in 2017 — nearly a decade ago.
While NRCS technical guides, range manuals, and conservation practice standards are updated annually and remain valuable, they do not determine what happens at the legislative or insurance level. This disconnect leaves farmers caught between outdated definitions of “good agriculture,” emerging regenerative science, and supplier claims that rarely account for context.
Until suppliers ground their messaging in real data, real timelines, and real management requirements, producers will continue to feel they’re carrying all the risk.
Data from Folks in the Field May Not Match Academic Research
When you talk to crop consultants or companies that sell biologicals, composted organic matter, biochar soil amendments, no-till equipment, or other regenerative agriculture products, you hear a different story. Their clients and customers haven’t generally seen decreases in yield. Lower profitability has more to do with having to buy different equipment than with productivity. Switching from a tillage to a no-till operation requires an investment in equipment that cuts into any regenerative farm margins in the first few years.
A prominent soil amendment company spokesperson has stated that any “decrease in yield has to do with poor land management, not the regenerative practices.” This may be an overstatement because it isn’t contextualized. Every farm or ranch is unique, and its problems are unique. Your agricultural product or service is not a silver bullet, even if you’re passionate about it. There are situations where it just won’t work.
Folks in the field can gather data on a wide range of variables. If possible, you should have data for your product or service that summarises:
- Profit margins on regenerative vs conventional
- Adaptive grazing data (if incorporating livestock)
- Input cost reductions
- Different equipment costs
- Yield stability (over as many years as possible and includes regenerative vs conventional yields)
- Resilience to droughts & floods
- Herd performance in regenerative grazing systems
- Nutrient density changes
Gather the data, make it easily scannable, create graphs and tables, and show how ROI has been impacted on very similar ag operations. You won’t convince a corn/soy farmer of the advantages of changing with ROI data from a dairy.
After the data about profitability, you can address some of the other nuances of your “complex” regenerative product. Let’s start with clear explanations.
What Regen Ag Suppliers Must Explain Clearly
Phase 2 of convincing a farmer or rancher to try your product on a sample plot, an acre or two, is a clear explanation, so expectations are realistic and achievable. This is actually the 4Rs of ag: right place, right time, right product, right amount. You can get too much or the wrong kind of natural product just as easily as too much synthetic nitrogen. This is my list of what you really need to be able to tell that farmer or rancher.
- What the product actually does (in 1 sentence)
- What problem it solves
- What conditions must be present for it to work
- What conditions make it ineffective
- What is the expected ROI range
- What the product does not do (almost more important for scepticism than what it does)
This checklist should be part of the being of anyone selling your product or services. Just as no synthetic products fit all situations, natural ones don’t either. Develop a “context checklist” for your area and predominant crops to better answer the 6 questions above.
When you can answer these questions with ease, the chance of your prospective ag producing partner using your product goes up significantly. The path to mainstream adoption of regenerative ag practices is becoming more like a road; how are you positioning your products or services?
Is a Product Regen, or is Regen a Process?
You have probably spent a lot of money trying to position yourself as “the” regenerative product supplier. My question: How is that working for you? If it’s really part of a regenerative framework, that means that in itself it isn’t regenerative. Your product is a biological, a biochar, a fulvic/humic acid, cover crop seeds, IPM, portable fencing…
It’s “regenerative” only when it’s used in context. And although there is no clear cut definition of regenerative agriculture this is a good one to used when talking to farmers
“Regenerative agriculture is a system of farming and ranching that improves soil health, increases biodiversity, enhances ecosystem function, and strengthens the resilience of the land over time.”
At the outset, this definition will not matter to the farmer or rancher you’re discussing soil amendments with. But you need to remind yourself why you’re a regenerative agriculture supplier in the first place. We’ve spent so much time in the regen ag industry positioning ourselves that we’ve lost track of the reason we’re so passionate about restoring the earth in the first place.
With profitability data and the vision of a future with continually improving soil health, the ag producer sees why your product is valuable for the resilience of their farm or ranch.
Communicate the Value of Your Product or Service Without Overclaiming
Overclaiming by suppliers is one of the major reasons producers are skeptical. It’s a slippery slope to make regenerative claims about a product without contextualising it. For example, your product may increase humic acids in some soils. But without soil tests and trial-and-error, you can only make an educated guess about what happens in the field you’re standing in. And claims about soil properties aren’t what get an ag producer’s ear. We’re back to the ROI.
Farmers and ranchers care deeply about their land, no matter what management practices they are using. They also care about the profitability of that land. Sometimes these come together nicely. Sometimes it’s a bit of a mismatch. Make no mistake about it, farmers and ranchers are outcome-driven. Ideology, such as regenerative ag will save us from global warming, will make a farmer turn on his boot and walk away. When you’re talking to a farmer or rancher about your products or services,stay groundedin the way they think and the way they make decisions.
- Use outcomes, not ideology
- Use data, not buzzwords
- Use farmer or rancher language, not marketing language
- Be transparent about limitations
Your product may not be easily compared to conventional inputs, but the outcomes can be compared. And that’s the most important part to the ag producer. After you’ve made a convert with the economic facts, and they’ve tried your product, and they’ve had success, then you can start talking about all the co-benefits.
A producer has to see real results before they change their mind about how they manage land. Regeneration isn’t something you buy; it’s something you build. Products can support regeneration, but only when they’re used in the right context, with the right management, for the right reasons. Your job as a supplier is to bridge the gap between what you know about your product and how a farmer actually evaluates risk, cost, and outcomes.
When you speak in their terms, address their concerns, and respect the realities of their operation, you’re not just selling a product, you’re helping them make a better decision for their land and their business
Are you leading with data? Are you asking enough questions? Closing a sale starts with knowing exactly what problem needs to be solved.
Appendix of Regenerative Statistics & Reports
Economics of Soil Health Systems in Midwest Corn and Soy
Farming Systems Trial – Rodale Institute
No-Till Farming Improves Soil Stability : USDA ARS
Strategic Plan – Texas A&M AgriLife Research
This is not an exhaustive list. It will get you started. There is a lot of data available to make your case to a conventional ag producer on the financial, emotional, and environmental benefits of regenerative agriculture.