At the World Agri-Tech Innovation Summit 2025 in London, a panel on “A Commercial Roadmap for Adoption of Regenerative Agriculture” explored what drives farmers’ investment decisions, the role of data in tracking impacts, and the co-financing models that can accelerate adoption. More about the session and panelists on the event website and here are some insights.

Building resilience in supply chains has become central to the conversation on regenerative agriculture. Companies like McCain, working with 250 UK potato farmers, see soil health and sustainable practices not just as environmental necessities, but as strategies to secure long-term raw material supply. The challenge lies in creating solid business cases for farmers: while case studies often highlight environmental benefits, the financial impacts on yield, profitability, and input savings are harder to demonstrate in the short term. With regenerative transitions taking 10–15 years, incentives and support systems are critical to bridge the gap.

In the US, progress has been accelerated through incentive-based programs tied to big buyers like PepsiCo and Mars, where Scope 3 commitments create a direct business case for farmers. By contrast, the EU context is more fragmented, with multiple standards and regulations that complicate scaling. Still, the drivers remain consistent: climate resilience (de-risking is especially linked to flood management and insurance), food security, and a new approach to farming with soil health at the center.

Financing models and incentives are evolving. Dual schemes that reward both carbon capture and farmer support, or premiums for sustainable products, show promise. Participants stressed that benefits must flow to farmers if adoption is to scale. Connecting regenerative practices to tangible values, from biodiversity and soil health to water retention and farm profitability, is where the real business case lies. Farmers also need trusted, streamlined systems: too many apps and fragmented platforms dilute impact, while centralised data and digital tools like “digital twins” could enable better scenario planning and transparency.

A key risk is greenwashing. To avoid it, long-term partnerships, external verification, and system-wide thinking are necessary, siloing efforts around single metrics like carbon can backfire. Integrity is especially important for farmers, who are protective of their data and wary of being linked to questionable claims. That said, in the case of regenerative programs demonstrating profitability alongside sustainability, with no yield penalties and clear financial rewards, farmer adoption grows.

The roadmap forward rests on three essentials: inclusivity (everyone in the supply chain belongs in the conversation), transparency (clarity on impacts and how data is used), and advisory (supporting farmers with peer-to-peer support or training). Regenerative agriculture is a long-term business and environmental strategy. The willingness to change is already there, now the task is to connect the dots, align incentives, and ensure the benefits of healthier soils and stronger systems reach the farm level.