Embracing nature-inclusive practices over agribusiness-as-usual

Embracing nature-inclusive practices over agribusiness-as-usual

4 March 2025 by Isik Ozturk, Senior Scientist in Climate and Agriculture

The global agricultural landscape is at a crossroads. For decades, industrial farming strategies led by agribusiness have focused on maximizing yields through intensified practices that rely heavily on synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and genetically modified seeds. While these methods were advocated as solutions to reduce global hunger and enable economic growth, they are now increasingly blamed for their far-reaching environmental, social, and economic consequences. These include widespread soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and deepening social inequities (IAASTD, 2013; IPBES, 2019).

This approach, represented by the Green Revolution, significantly reduced hunger in regions such as India and Mexico by increasing crop yields. However, these achievements came at a steep cost. Intensive farming depleted soil fertility, polluted water resources, and disrupted ecosystems, all while marginalizing smallholder farmers (FAO and ITPS; Pingali, 2012; Pretty et al., 2018; Shiva, 2016; Tilman et al., 2002). As global challenges like climate change, resource depletion, and population growth intensify, skepticism about the sustainability of this model continues to grow.

The success of the Green Revolution demonstrated agriculture’s potential to address hunger, but it also highlights the need for a new approach — one that prioritizes environmental sustainability alongside food security. The challenges posed by climate change further underscore the urgency of this transition. Industrial agriculture, with its reliance on monocultures and synthetic inputs, is ill-equipped to cope with the increasing frequency of extreme weather events, shifting growing seasons, and resource scarcity. In addition, global hunger is on the rise, and addressing it effectively requires a paradigm shift toward sustainable agricultural systems.

Nature-Inclusive Agriculture (NIA) represents a compelling alternative. Unlike conventional monoculture farming, NIA integrates diverse crops and farming systems, which improves resilience to pests, diseases, and climate shocks. For example, agroforestry systems in Zambia combine crops like maize and legumes with nitrogen-fixing trees, enhancing soil fertility and productivity while reducing vulnerability to drought (Ajayi et al., 2011). Similarly, in Latin America, agroecological practices have boosted yields of maize and beans by 50–100%, while farmers report improved biodiversity and soil health (Altieri et al., 2017; Altieri & Nicholls, 2012). In Asia, the system of rice intensification has increased rice yields by 20–50% while reducing water use and reliance on chemical inputs (Thakur et al., 2023). In Brazil, regenerative farming practices have restored degraded pastures, increasing productivity by up to 30% without further deforestation (Latawiec et al., 2014). Meanwhile, the Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration programme in Africa has transformed over 5 million hectares of degraded land in Niger, raising millet and sorghum yields by 30–50% and benefiting millions of smallholders (Reij et al., 2009). In short, NIA can be both productive and economically viable, providing a pathway without the pitfalls of industrial agriculture.

The global adoption of NIA demands comprehensive support on multiple levels. Policy reforms, educational initiatives, and targeted investments are essential to facilitate this transition. Governments must redirect subsidies from synthetic inputs to programmes that foster sustainable farming practices, ensuring that resources are channeled toward practices that benefit both farmers and the environment. Education and capacity-building are equally critical, empowering farmers with the knowledge and skills to implement NIA techniques successfully. Simultaneously, increased investment in research is needed to innovate and refine these practices, tailoring them to local ecological and climatic conditions. As part of this effort, the Shamba Centre, together with the Juno Evidence Alliance and researchers from MIT’s FACT Alliance and the University of Aberdeen, is using advanced evidence syntheses to identify the most promising agricultural interventions to enhance climate resilience and food security through the Hesat2030 project.

By systematically evaluating the effectiveness of nature-inclusive practices in the contexts of climate change, biodiversity conservation, and food security, these endeavors further validate NIA’s potential and inform where resources, including official development assistance (ODA), and investments can be most efficiently deployed. This strategic alignment not only supports sustainable agricultural transformation but also enhances global efforts to combat hunger, protect ecosystems, and build resilience against future challenges.

The successes of the Green Revolution should inspire—not limit—our aspirations for the future of agriculture. While it solved many of the food security challenges of its time, it also revealed the critical need for more sustainable, inclusive solutions. The time has come for a fundamental shift toward agroecological, self-reliant farming systems that embrace diversity and ecological balance. Such a shift is not merely an option but a necessity if we seek to ensure sustainable food production, enhance resilience against climate shocks, and protect the environment for future generations.

The future of agriculture lies in embracing innovative, nature-inclusive methods that promise a sustainable, equitable, and resilient system.

Sources

Ajayi, O. C., Place, F., Akinnifesi, F. K., & Sileshi, G. W. (2011). Agricultural success from Africa: The case of fertilizer tree systems in southern Africa (Malawi, Tanzania, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe). International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 9(1), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2010.0554

Altieri, M. A., & Nicholls, C. I. (2012). Agroecology Scaling Up for Food Sovereignty and Resiliency. In E. Lichtfouse (Ed.), Sustainable Agriculture Reviews: Volume 11 (pp. 1–29). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5449-2_1

Altieri, M. A., Nicholls, C. I., & Montalba, R. (2017). Technological Approaches to Sustainable Agriculture at a Crossroads: An Agroecological Perspective. Sustainability, 9(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9030349

FAO and ITPS. (2015). Status of the World’s Soil Resources (SWSR) – Main Report. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils, Rome, Italy. Accessed from: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5199e.pdf

IAASTD. (2013, January 15). Development Projects: International Assessment of Agricultural Science & Technology for Development (IAASTD) - P090963 [Text/HTML]. World Bank. https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/project-detail/P090963

IPBES. (2019, May 17). Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat. Accessed from: https://www.ipbes.net/node/35274

Latawiec, A. E., Strassburg, B. B. N., Valentim, J. F., Ramos, F., & Alves-Pinto, H. N. (2014). Intensification of cattle ranching production systems: Socioeconomic and environmental synergies and risks in Brazil. Animal, 8(8), 1255–1263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731114001566

IPBES. (2019, May 17). Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat. Accessed from: https://www.ipbes.net/node/35274

Montanarella, L., Badraoui, M., Chude, V., Costa, I. dos S. B., Mamo, T., Yemefack, M., Aulang, M. S., Yagi, K., Hong, S. Y., Vijarnsorn, P., Zhang, G. L., Arrouays, D., Black, H., Krasilnikov, P., Sobocca, J., Alegre, J., Henriquez, C. R., Mendonca-Santos, M. de L., Taboada, M., … Montarella, L. (2015). Status of the world’s soil resources: Main report.Accessed from: http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/handle/doc/1034770

Pingali, P. L. (2012). Green revolution: Impacts, limits, and the path ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(31), 12302–12308. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912953109

Pretty, J., Benton, T. G., Bharucha, Z. P., Dicks, L. V., Flora, C. B., Godfray, H. C. J., Goulson, D., Hartley, S., Lampkin, N., Morris, C., Pierzynski, G., Prasad, P. V. V., Reganold, J., Rockström, J., Smith, P., Thorne, P., & Wratten, S. (2018). Global assessment of agricultural system redesign for sustainable intensification. Nature Sustainability, 1(8), 441–446. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0114-0

Reij, C., Tappan, G. G., & Smale, M. (2009). Agroenvironmental transformation in the Sahel: Another kind of ‘green revolution’ (No. 00914). International Food Policy Research Institute. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70042448

Shiva, V. (2016). Who really feeds the world? The failures of agribusiness and the promise of agroecology. North Atlantic Books.

Thakur, A. K., Mandal, K. G., Verma, O. P., & Mohanty, R. K. (2023). Do System of Rice Intensification Practices Produce Rice Plants Phenotypically and Physiologically Superior to Conventional Practice? Agronomy, 13(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13041098

Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418(6898), 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01014