Regenerative Agriculture
This refers specifically to the animal-based and specifically grazing-based Regenerative Agriculture as advocated by Allan Savory of the Savory Institute and similar proponents/organizations like Tony Lovell, Bruce Ward, and other "Holistic Management" organizations.
The most important (and not-vegan) reference to summarize the science is the FCRN report "Grazed and Confused" found here: https://www.fcrn.org.uk/projects/grazed-and-confused
George Monbiot of the Guardian has also penned some of the earliest articles discrediting the bad science behind regenerative animal agriculture: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2014/aug/04/eat-more-meat-and-save-the-world-the-latest-implausible-farming-miracle (there are responses to this article, and responses to those responses to be found)
"Reformed food reformer" Adam Merberg provides insights here in a brief article:
http://www.inexactchange.org/blog/2013/03/11/cows-against-climate-change/
Regarding carbon sequestration: "Disturbance by ploughing and/or grazing significantly reduced SOC" (Soil Organic Carbon) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167880913000285
"Results show that areas used by domestic livestock have 20% less plant cover and 100% less soil organic carbon and nitrogen compared to relict sites browsed by native ungulates. In actively grazed sites, domestic livestock grazing also appears to lead to clustered, rather than random, spatial distribution of soil resources. Magnetic susceptibility, a proxy for soil stability in this region, suggests that grazing increases soil erosion leading to an increase in the area of nutrient-depleted bare ground. Overall, these results, combined with previous studies in the region, suggest that livestock grazing affects both plant cover and soil fertility with potential long-term implications for the sustainability of grazing operations in this semi-arid landscape."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140196307002662
Once equilibrium is reached, grazing is *worse* than feedlots. Beef is always worse than other food production processes.
"We used ISO-compliant life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the cumulative energy use, ecological footprint, greenhouse gas emissions and eutrophying emissions associated with models of three beef production strategies as currently practiced in the Upper Midwestern United States. Specifically we examined systems where calves were either: weaned directly to feedlots; weaned to out-of-state wheat pastures (backgrounded) then finished in feedlots; or finished wholly on managed pasture and hay. Impacts per live-weight kg of beef produced were highest for pasture-finished beef for all impact categories and lowest for feedlot-finished beef, assuming equilibrium conditions in soil organic carbon fluxes across systems. A sensitivity analysis indicated the possibility of substantial reductions in net greenhouse gas emissions for pasture systems under conditions of positive soil organic carbon sequestration potential. Forage utilization rates were also found to have a modest influence on impact levels in pasture-based beef production. Three measures of resource use efficiency were applied and indicated that beef production, whether feedlot or pasture-based, generates lower edible resource returns on material/energy investment relative to other food production strategies."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308521X10000399
"This commentary summarizes the evidence supporting holistic management (HM) and intensive rotational grazing (IRG) to demonstrate the extent to which Sherren and coauthors (2012) have overstated their policy endorsement of HM for rangeland application. Five major points are presented – distinction between HM and IRG, insufficient evaluation of the contradictory evidence, limitations of the experimental approach, additional costs associated with IRG, and heterogeneous capabilities and goals of graziers’ to manage intensive strategies – to justify why this policy endorsement is ill-advised. The vast majority of experimental evidence does not support claims of enhanced ecological benefits in IRG compared to other grazing strategies, including the capacity to increase storage of soil organic carbon."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308521X13001480
Other links: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijbd/2014/163431/
FCRN also has a response document, but the link is broken: https://www.fcrn.org.uk/projects/grazed-and-confused FCRN Response to the Sustainable Food Trust commentary on Grazed and Confused. (Note to editors, we should fetch this from archives or elsewhere, and possibly inform the webmaster of FCRN to fix the problem if it doesn't resolve)
