top of page

Loading Post

Olivia B

Apr 9, 2025

3

min read

Regenerative Agriculture: Healing Soils to Heal the World

Regenerative agriculture offers a new way to restore soil health worldwide.

Regenerative Agriculture: Healing Soils to Heal the World

“Regenerative agriculture” is a concept we often hear, but what does it mean and what does it do? To understand its aims, we must first understand soil and its place in the environment. “Soil” and “dirt” are terms often used interchangeably, but they differ in critical ways: put simply, soil is alive while dirt is dead, and we are turning the former into the latter at a high rate. This is concerning and potentially catastrophic for our environment and economy, so the difference is worth exploring in more detail.  


Soil vs. Dirt

Soil is a structured, complex, thriving biosphere that supports and promotes all manner of life. Its fertility comes from organic matter that hosts a variety of microorganisms, which in turn create stability in this tiny ecosystem by absorbing carbon, recycling nutrients, and supplying vital resources like water and gas. A healthy soil might take thousands of years to form. It’s also the planet’s second-largest carbon sink, topped only by the oceans. 


Dirt, meanwhile, is composed of clay, sand, and silt. The minerals it contains are only accessible to plants once they’ve been processed by microorganisms. Soil might contain dirt, but dirt is not enough to support life on its own. Soil becomes dirt through degradation, which removes its fertile properties and releases its trapped carbon into the atmosphere. In short, soil is a precious and increasingly limited resource. 


Soil Degradation: A Global Problem

Alarming metrics are everywhere: Earth's soil is vanishing. According to the FAO, fully a third globally has already degraded. UNESCO projects that 90% of the planet's terrestrial surface could be degraded by 2050. From 2015 to 2019, 100 million hectares were lost annually, totaling an area twice the size of Greenland over those four years. Impoverished areas disproportionately carry this burden: today, Africa bears 40% of our degraded soil, and the rest mostly occupies communities already afflicted by food insecurity.  


Poor land management and harmful farming practices over the last century are largely responsible for this damage. For instance, monocropping, growing a single crop year after year, degrades soil by continuously diminishing the same nutrients, killing the microorganisms that could replenish them. Synthetic fertilizers and pesticides like fumigants can also be lethal to soil dwellers (and detrimental to human health, as well). Heavy farm machinery and excessive tillage cause soil compaction and erosion, which hinders water absorption and filtration and makes the land more susceptible to flooding and desertification. Unsurprisingly, this leads to dire consequences not just for the environment but for human livelihoods, and the economy: one study estimated that damage from soil erosion alone globally costs $400 billion per year.  


The American Dust Bowl of the 1930s is one potent example of soil degradation’s very real perils. Drought, heat, and corrosive farming methods resulted in severe soil erosion on a massive scale, leading to dust blizzards in the Great Plains that devastated entire states and impoverished millions of people during the Great Depression. The lands affected have still not fully recovered nearly a century later. To avoid repeating history, something must be done to reverse degradation, and here regenerative agriculture enters the picture. 


Restoring Soils with Regenerative Agriculture

Where past sustainable farming has focused on simply avoiding degradation, regenerative agriculture aims to not only prevent further damage, but also actively improve the quality of the earth. It strives to offer a holistic approach, starting with the soil but also accounting for the plants, animals, and workers, essentially building agroecosystems that form a mutually beneficial relationship with nature rather than a purely extractive one.  


In the micro, regenerative agriculture revitalizes soil by reintroducing organic matter, prioritizing the biodiversity of its inhabitants, encouraging water absorption, and restoring ground nutrients. In the macro, regenerative practices lead to carbon recapture, healthier and more robust crops, less food insecurity, and more economically bountiful yields.  


So, what methods does regenerative agriculture use? There are many. Cover cropping maintains soil quality by ensuring the earth is never bare, which decreases erosion during the non-growing season. Intercropping (the practice of growing multiple crops in the same place simultaneously), rotational grazing by livestock, and crop rotation add nutrients to the soil, disrupt pests that thrive on monocrops, and increase yield as well as populations of beneficial bacteria. This allows farmers to use fewer pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, which further keeps soil microbiomes diverse and thriving. Agroforestry protects crops from wind and water damage. Limiting excessive tilling and heavy farm equipment keeps soil absorbent and aerated, potentially garnering greater yields that would eclipse efficiency gains created by those tools. 


Many of these methods have long been used by small farms and Indigenous peoples. Native American tribes, for instance, practiced intercropping with the “Three Sisters”: beans, squash, and corn. Now that regenerative agriculture is gaining wider traction, however, we could revolutionize food systems on a global scale — healing soil, boosting economies, and making the future more fertile for all.


Want to learn more? On May 7, the Global Impact Collective will host our next Community Networking Event at Tactile Studios and bring together a panel of regenerative agriculture experts. Join us for a deep discussion of motivations and challenges to adopting regenerative practices, the use of technology, how impact is being measured, the role of policy/standards, and the importance of partnerships and collaboration between businesses and farmers. We hope to see you there!

Agriculture

Recent Posts

Women's History Month 2025: Five Women Who Shaped Our Food Systems
Food Waste Prevention in the Pacific Northwest: Three Expert Perspectives
Embracing the Second Era of Sustainable Sourcing

Harnessing Human-Centered AI for Societal Good: Insights from Seattle's Design and Impact Community

  • Writer: James Bernard
    James Bernard
  • Oct 18, 2024
  • 6 min read

Updated: Oct 22, 2024

A Malawian farmer uses the UlangiziAI app to better understand how to determine crop health. The app uses a WhatsApp front end to communicate with farmers in a format that is familiar to them.



In the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence, it's crucial to pause and consider how we can harness this powerful technology for the betterment of society.

  

Recently, the Global Impact Collective brought together members of Seattle's design and impact community to explore this topic. Our event, "Harnessing Human-Centered AI for Societal Good," featured an engaging panel discussion with experts from diverse backgrounds, offering valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities presented by AI. 



Our Distinguished Panel 


We were fortunate to host three remarkable experts: 

 

1. Ruth Kikin-Gil, Responsible AI Strategist at Microsoft 

2. Jennifer Dumas, Chief Counsel at Allen Institute for AI 

3. Greg Nelson, Chief Technology Officer of Opportunity International 

 

Their varied experiences and perspectives led to a rich, thought-provoking discussion that touched on several key themes. 



Key Discussion Themes 


Defining AI: Beyond the Buzzword 

One of the first challenges we face when discussing AI is defining what we mean by the term. As our panelists pointed out, AI isn't a monolithic entity but rather an umbrella term covering thousands of different technologies.  


This complexity underscores the nuances that should be considered when discussing AI's capabilities and implications. For instance, AI can be categorized into narrow AI, which is designed to perform a specific task (like voice recognition or image classification), and general AI, which aims to understand and reason across a wide range of contexts, though we are still far from achieving this level of sophistication. Moreover, the rapid progress in AI research and development has led to a proliferation of techniques, including machine learning, natural language processing, and neural networks, each with its own set of ethical considerations and operational challenges. 


  • The AI Landscape: According to a 2021 Stanford University report, AI publications have grown by 270% in the last five years, indicating the rapid expansion and diversification of the field and the proliferation of new technologies, as outlined above. 


  • Extractive vs. Generative AI  


    • Extractive AI focuses on analyzing and deriving insights from existing data, greatly reducing the risks. Examples include sentiment analysis tools and recommendation systems. Greg Nelson cited an example where Opportunity International is working on an AI-driven agronomy tool, called UlangiziAI, for smallholder farmers in Malawi. Rather than pull from broadly available online information, the model was built using specific data from the Ministry of Agriculture in Malawi, making the information more relevant for farmers in that country. “This way, we know that farmers are getting the best and most relevant data for their own circumstances,” he said. If you’d like more information on this tool, you can read recent articles on Devex and Bloomberg. 


    • Generative AI, on the other hand, creates new content based on learned patterns. It can be used as a creative prompt but shouldn’t be used as a definitive source of the truth. Generative AI includes technologies like GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) models, which can generate human-like text, and GANs (Generative Adversarial Networks) used in creating realistic images. These tools, while impressive, may not have the depth for specific AI applications in impact and sustainability. 

 

  • Risk Assessment: The level of risk associated with AI applications varies greatly. For instance, an AI system used for movie recommendations carries far less risk than one used in healthcare diagnostics or criminal justice decision-making. 


  • AI as a Tool: Our panelists emphasized that generative AI should be viewed as a creative prompt rather than a source of factual information. A 2022 study by MIT researchers found that even state-of-the-art language models can generate factually incorrect information in up to 30% of cases, highlighting the importance of human oversight and verification. 



Navigating the Policy Gap 

A significant concern in the AI landscape is the lag between technological development and policy creation.  


  • Policy Development Timeline: Historical precedents suggest that comprehensive policy often lags technological innovation by several years. For example, it took nearly a decade after the widespread adoption of social media for the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to come into effect in 2018. 


  • Legal Liability Challenges: The lack of a comprehensive legal liability rubric for AI poses significant challenges. In the U.S., existing laws like the Communications Decency Act (Section 230) provide some protections for online platforms, but they weren't designed with AI in mind.  


  • Cultural Adaptation: As Jennifer Dumas pointed out, "We released a mature technology without the culture having caught up to that." This echoes concerns raised by scholars like Shoshana Zuboff in her book "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism," which argues that our social and economic systems are struggling to adapt to the rapid pace of technological change. 


  • Ethical Frameworks: The discussion brought to mind Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, highlighting the need for ethical frameworks in AI development. While these laws were fictional, they've inspired real-world efforts like the IEEE's Ethically Aligned Design guidelines and the EU's Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. 



Ensuring Informed Consent in Diverse Contexts 

The concept of informed consent becomes increasingly complex in the context of AI, especially when considering global applications, and users from diverse backgrounds, some of whom may not even be familiar with major technological platforms like Google.  

 

For instance, in many developing countries, the lack of digital literacy can lead to users unknowingly consenting to data practices that exploit their information. Additionally, the concept of informed consent is not uniform across cultures, which complicates the ethical deployment of AI systems globally. Engaging local communities in the design and implementation of AI systems is crucial to ensuring that their voices and needs are prioritized. 

 

  • Digital Divide: According to the International Telecommunication Union, as of 2023, approximately 2.7 billion people worldwide still lack internet access. This digital divide raises questions about how to ensure informed consent in regions with limited exposure to technology. One way to overcome this, according to our panelists, is to use existing technologies, such as WhatsApp, as the front end for AI-generated tools on the backend. 


  • AI in Emerging Markets: There's a risk of perpetuating digital colonialism through AI implementation in emerging markets if practitioners don’t involve local communities in decision making.  


    Getting information on crop health using the UlangiziAI app in Malawi.

A 2021 report by Mozilla highlighted how AI systems trained primarily on data from Western countries often perform poorly when applied in different cultural contexts. Greg Nelson reinforced this notion by talking about the importance of using locally available datasets and local language to train models.  


  • Stakeholder Identification: Our panelists emphasized the importance of considering all stakeholders affected by an AI system, beyond just the immediate users. This aligns with the concept of "stakeholder theory" in business ethics, which argues that companies should create value for all stakeholders, not just shareholders. 


Building Trust in AI 

Trust is fundamental to the widespread adoption and ethical use of AI yet remains a significant barrier for broader adoption.  


  • Current Trust Levels: A 2022 global survey by Edelman found that only 37% of respondents trust AI companies to "do what is right." This underscores the point made by Ruth Kikin-Gil that "the technology hasn't earned the trust yet." 


  • Misinformation Risks: The potential for AI to generate and spread misinformation is a significant concern. A 2020 study published in Nature Machine Intelligence found that AI-generated text was rated as more credible than human-written text in certain contexts, highlighting the need for robust detection and verification systems. 


  • AI in Critical Decisions: As our panelists noted, when people's lives depend on AI, such as in healthcare or criminal justice, the margin for error must be extremely low. A 2016 ProPublica investigation into COMPAS, an AI system used in criminal risk assessment, found significant racial biases in its predictions, underscoring the importance of rigorous testing and oversight. 


  • Inclusive AI Development: Building trust with underrepresented groups who have historically been marginalized by technology is crucial. Initiatives like the AI for Good Foundation are working to ensure AI benefits all of humanity, not just a select few. 


AI in the Broader Context of Technology 

Finally, our discussion touched on how AI fits into the broader landscape of technological advancement: 

 

  • Over-reliance on Technology: The tendency to over-rely on new technologies, as exemplified by early GPS adoption, is a well-documented phenomenon in technology adoption studies. A 2022 study in the Journal of Experimental Psychology found that people tend to defer to AI recommendations even when they conflict with their own judgement. This means that developers, policymakers, and users must fully understand the limitations of AI and remain critical thinkers when using it. 


  • Amara's Law: Named after Roy Amara, this principle suggests we tend to overestimate technology's short-term effects while underestimating its long-term impact. This is evident in the history of AI itself - the field has experienced several "AI winters" where hype outpaced actual capabilities, followed by periods of significant but less publicized progress. 



Join the Conversation 


This event was part of an ongoing series aimed at professionals working at the intersection of human-centered design and social impact. Our next event, focusing on food waste, is scheduled for January 2025. 

 

To stay informed about future events, follow the Global Impact Collective on LinkedIn. If you're interested in learning more about our work or discussing potential collaborations, visit our website or reach out to us at info@globalimpactcollective.net. 

 

As AI continues to shape our world, it's crucial that we engage in these discussions and work together to ensure that this powerful technology is harnessed for the greater good. We invite you to be part of this important conversation. 



bottom of page