In the quest to tackle climate change, carbon has become the star of the show. In government targets, corporate climate pledges, and newspaper headlines “net zero” is now the dominant narrative – and carbon accounting tools are the means to measure progress. But when it comes to farming, especially regenerative mixed farming systems, this one-dimensional focus risks missing the bigger picture.
Agriculture is often labelled as the largest contributor to GhG emissions and soil degradation, however, it also has great potential to reverse this damage and sequester carbon, cool the planet and enhance and protect nature. Soils are the planet’s second largest carbon sink after oceans, holding more carbon than all the world’s vegetation combined. In the UK, our soils – including peatlands – store an estimated 94% of the country’s terrestrial biosphere carbon stocks1. Yet while the potential for carbon sequestration is real, it comes with critical limitations. According to the UK Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP), the most effective strategy is not necessarily to build new soil carbon, but to protect what already exists. Carbon that took thousands of years to accumulate in soils can be lost within decades through poor land management such as tillage, overgrazing, and drainage. In fact, between 1998 and 2007, UK soils lost an estimated 0.5% of their carbon stocks1. Building them back is a slow game – many proposed land use changes, such as converting pasture to woodland, can initially cause soil carbon loss before gains are realised years later.
Regenerative farming offers a pathway to managing land in a way that balances food production with landscape restoration, by integrating practices like diverse crop rotations, agroforestry, and hedgerow planting with livestock grazing. Evidence from UK farms highlight how such systems not only produce food but also act as significant carbon sinks. One carbon audit of a mixed farm carried out in 2021 showed that it sequestered 227% of its operational emissions, driven largely by the carbon held in its hedgerows and woodlands2. However, the many accounting tools used to reach this figure come with caveats. Different assumptions, exclusion of non-agricultural activities (like on-farm events), and debates over how to treat biogenic methane complicate the final numbers2. However, carbon accounting tools are constantly being improved to show a more accurate representation of reality.
The bigger issue is how the carbon metric has come to dominate agricultural sustainability narratives. Because carbon can be measured and traded, it has become a convenient currency for climate action. But this commodification risks encouraging oversimplified solutions, like mass tree-planting on farmland, while ignoring other vital aspects of land stewardship. There is already evidence of corporations purchasing farmland in Wales with the goal of tree planting for carbon offsetting, effectively using rural landscapes to justify continued fossil fuel emissions elsewhere2.
If farming is reduced to carbon accounting, we risk undervaluing the very qualities that make land resilient, and communities thrive. Good farming systems can provide far more than carbon sequestration: they support biodiversity, purify air and water, create meaningful rural jobs, and produce nutritious food. These public goods cannot be captured in a tonne of CO₂-equivalent. Moreover, as climate warms, the very stability of carbon stored in soils is threatened. A national-scale modelling study showed that even under optimistic climate scenarios, the UK’s potential to sequester additional terrestrial carbon through tree planting and grassland restoration is modest—around 120 MtC by 2100, roughly equivalent to a single year of the UK’s current emissions3. Under more pessimistic warming scenarios, those gains could be entirely reversed, with net soil carbon losses projected3.
The message is clear: carbon matters, but it is not the whole story. To build resilience in our food and farming systems, we need tools, policies, and markets that reflect the full complexity of nature—and the many benefits that regenerative agriculture can deliver. Yes, healthy soils play a key role in capturing carbon. But resilience also depends on protecting biodiverse grasslands, creating wildlife habitats, and supporting the people who steward the land. Thriving rural communities, local jobs, and traditional crafts are just as vital to a sustainable farming future.
As large-scale tree planting continues to be promoted as a strategy for achieving net zero, we must also ask: What kinds of trees? Where? And who will care for them? Species must suit the landscape, and long-term success depends on local communities with the knowledge and resources to manage them. This means smarter, place-based policy—guided by local expertise and clear land management plans that weigh the trade-offs between tree planting, food production, nature restoration, and rural livelihoods.
References
- ERAMMP Policy Briefing-01: The Opportunities and Limitations of Carbon Capture in Soil and Peatlands, UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, October 2023.
- Huw Evans, Carbon Negative Meat, blog post on farm carbon auditing and the limitations of carbon metrics in assessing regenerative systems. https://www.threepools.co.uk/single-post/carbon-negative-meat
- Yumashev, D. et al. (2022). Terrestrial carbon sequestration under future climate, nutrient and land use change and management scenarios: a national-scale UK case study. Environmental Research Letters, 17(11), 114054. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aca037
Author: Mari-Liis Nukis, Land Projects and Development
Published by