Editor’s note: For a comprehensive look at all aspects related to regenerative agriculture for 2025, cooked food We interviewed Tina Owens, founder of Snowhaven Regeneration, strategist and futurist for the organic and regenerative agriculture movement in the United States.
Tina’s work in food systems spanned two decades at two of the world’s largest food companies (Kellogg Company, Danone North America) and focused on food system transformation and supply continuity within markets. As Head of Agriculture and Sustainability for a major food brand, she led change in how food is sourced, producers are compensated, consumers opt-in, and systems are regenerated and decarbonized. I’ve been doing it. Her current clients include Transformational Investment in Food Systems (TIFS), Creo Syndicate, and the Regenerative Food Systems Investment Forum. She is also a co-founder and advisor of the Nutrient Density Alliance and a board member of the Mad Agriculture and Non-GMO Project.
Cooked food: This year, you were involved in some important research, including the Nutrient Density Alliance (NDA) white paper on engaging consumers about the soil-nutrient connection. We also helped review the top 100 consumer goods companies and their regenerative agriculture efforts. The movement is beginning to gain momentum across the agriculture and food sectors, with major food companies such as Nestlé, PepsiCo, General Mills, and McCain adopting specific goals.
Food and Beverage Predictions for 2025
Looking back at 2024, could you point out the advances in regenerative agriculture made by manufacturers? What stands out to you?
Tina Owens: Thank you for drawing attention to the scale of the regenerative agriculture movement. What struck me this year was the potential stability of the future and the fact that the foundations have been laid for the maturation of the market within this decade. By the beginning of this year, all 68 of the top 100 food companies on the planet had specific commitments or mentions of regenerative agriculture. It represents more than 1 trillion companies that are realizing the potential of regenerative agriculture to transform and reduce risk scenarios within the broader food and agriculture supply chain.
Regenerative agriculture is not a fringe movement, but a mainstream movement that impacts the entire soil-based agricultural production system. This year, 2024, there will be real interest from institutional shareholders in how FMCG companies promise and communicate the benefits of their regenerative agriculture programs and the potential for current or future risk mitigation in their supply factories. It was also the year when the number of people started to increase.
PF: What about things we didn’t see in 2024? What conversations still need to be had?
Owens: While significant work has been done on acreage, crops, global geography, etc., major questions remain about whether farmers will be offered a premium for switching to regenerative agriculture in the short or long term. are. Meanwhile, CPGs must measure potential emissions reductions from remanufacturing operations on-site and captured within supply warehouses due to public commitments to Scope 3. Gaps remain in what is measured, how the data is aggregated, how it relates to emissions reductions, and where costs are absorbed by profit-driven industries.
Some breakthroughs with farmer support and investment capital are still needed to balance the needs of all stakeholders and system outcomes. We hope that this gap will not remain for long, as many influential stakeholders are currently considering how farmers can receive additional transition support.
PF: What about the contribution of raw material suppliers? Who are the industry leaders in this field?
Owens: Looking at where the missing middle pieces are in the system, it is clear that raw material processors deserve a great deal of credit for how they balance stakeholder demands. We also see that there is still a lot of work left to do in terms of processing infrastructure. . Processors hold many keys to how they enter into contracts with farmers, whether recycled materials are segregated for sale to consumers, and how rotational crops within regenerative systems are valued differently from standard products. .
That said, our ultra-efficient production systems, which have improved the cost of standardized commodities such as corn, soybeans, beets, and wheat for decades, are already operating at scale. , creating price expectations and barriers that consistently reward existing entrenched systems. Balancing the distinct needs of production and harvest with fair prices for farmers is where considerable work remains if we want to reward the performance of different systems.
PF: Who supports renewable agricultural sourcing within food companies?
Owens: This is the great thing about the regeneration movement. It is not about leaders in particular sectors or lines of business, but rather an economy that recognizes how our current actions are reducing resources and embraces collaborative and collective solutions. It’s about the system and the leadership of the entire agricultural system. That is unsustainable.
Regenerating recognizes the validity of a wide range of principles about everything from the continued protection of livelihoods in the fields, to the role of communities in land management, to the way consumers choose products that take these broader systems into account. That’s it. The reality is that those in leadership positions need a clear business mission to do so. With many different business functions and perspectives working on a common solution, a viable business case is more likely to provide executives with the tools they need to support their strategy. It’s not just a sourcing strategy or a sustainability strategy, it’s an enterprise-level and system-level strategy shared among multiple business leaders and the people who execute it every day.
PF: Were any of those photos missing company executive titles? Could that change in 2025?
Owens: Let’s highlight 68 of the top 100 food companies that share our regenerative focus and mission. Now, within these companies, there are often individual champions who must prove that a new operational system is worth pursuing, spotlighting how the existing system is broken. Masu. This can create a dual narrative within a company that is difficult for leaders to address. This is also why the authority to incorporate regenerative systems cannot rest solely on one department or one leader.
What is missing now is a shift in thinking about entrenched “business as usual” outcomes that insists that the current system continues to function at historic levels. But now that a convergence of sciences is showing us where the foundations needed to sustain living systems are being eroded, propped up, extracted, and degraded, the results of the past are shaping agriculture’s future potential. Never before has sex been so implied.
PF: Let’s move on to the discussion here. What do you think consumers know and understand about regenerative agriculture and its benefits?
Owens: Awareness of how agricultural production practices are linked to human health systems has grown over the years. Hartman Group research shows younger consumers are internalizing the message that what they buy and how it’s made has inherent costs that aren’t reflected in the price tag alone. It seems so.
PF: Has that understanding changed? Can you point out any positive developments?
Owens: Let’s start 2020 with survey data from Hartman Group. Among them, organic consumers shared that soil health and ecological principles are the main factors in their purchase intent. And natural shoppers are showing greater interest in outcomes such as regenerative agriculture and nutrient density, and awareness continues to grow (Non-GMO Project). Add to this the fact that 66% of consumers choose products based on their health needs (according to SPINS), and the potential to attract consumers is due to the standard ” It turns out that it’s much more than a “values-based” message.
In the Nutrient Density Alliance white paper, we argue that marketers don’t need to take entirely new approaches or interpret complex soil science when discussing regenerative agriculture with consumers. We sought to address the gap in understanding among marketers of the vast potential of regenerative agriculture. NDA believes regenerative agriculture enhances the ability of brands to connect on issues of health, quality and nutrition, tenets that are already core to how they engage with consumers.
PF: So far, what are the “best” examples of marketing regenerative agriculture to consumers?
Owens: We could list dozens of brands here, but instead we’ve compiled a list of renewable brands serving consumers online or in grocery stores, including Regenmade, Savory, We would like to introduce you to the Regenerative Organic Alliance and our major retailers. Create a natural and organic space. There are two brands that are owned by very large consumer goods manufacturers, have nationally distributed products, and are present in almost every retail store in the country. It’s TAZO Tea and Applegate hot dogs. Together with Edelman, TAZO created a campaign on TikTok that has been dubbed “the world’s first recycled advertising.” This campaign is worth checking out, as it includes all the principles marketers look for to prove that consumer campaigns have merit.
PF: What needs to happen in this space in 2025, and who should lead the effort?
Owens: Most of the major food companies that are getting into renewable energy treat this program like a back-office emissions reduction program. They avoid the consumer messages about quality and taste that draw people to their brands, leaving consumers with money. I hope that there will be deeper awareness in the industry in this regard.
There is also a lot of work to be done across collective movements to prove that regenerative agricultural production systems can economically benefit farms. Beyond standard row cropping systems, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence that needs to be more rigorously aggregated so that producers understand a clear path forward for considering their own land management.
PF: If a food and beverage company wants to make meaningful progress in this space in 2025, what would you recommend?
Owens: Embrace cross-functional efforts through collective systems. Beyond the singular cost-per-bushel perspective of food and agriculture, we also look at how soil erosion from bare soil, monocultures, reliance on tillage, and lack of continuous growing cover make things more risky and costly. There’s never been a better time to understand more about what’s creating this. Future food production system. Keeping the soil covered not only allows for better water infiltration, but also allows for additional crop rotation in line with consumer interest and demand. Don’t let what’s already scaled exclude what will create system resilience in the future.
PF: We have learned that regenerative agriculture improves soil health and ultimately contributes to produce with a higher nutritional profile. This suggests that corporate nutritionists should also be included in this discussion. do you agree?
Owens: yes. Also, if brands would like to learn more about the relationship between soil health and nutrient density, check out the Nutrient Density Alliance’s white paper, “Engaging Consumers on Regenerative Agriculture: How Brands Can Adjust Nutrient Density for Top-Line Growth.” You can read more about how it can be integrated.
