The agricultural sector stands at a crossroads, with intensive animal farming practices pushing the planet’s boundaries to the brink. The ecological fallout—soil depletion, water pollution, and accelerated climate change—threatens not only environmental stability but also the long-term viability of the industry itself. While technological innovations offer some solutions, a new analysis from the FAIRR initiative suggests that nature-based interventions hold the key to lasting, systemic change.
FAIRR, an investor network with $75 trillion in assets under management, has identified six nature-based solutions that are market-ready, offer net-positive returns within five years, and present fewer negative trade-offs than most tech-driven approaches. These solutions, according to Sajeev Mohankumar, senior technical specialist for climate and biodiversity at FAIRR, have significant benefits across climate and nature metrics.
The shortcomings of tech-based climate solutions are becoming increasingly apparent. Many of these interventions focus solely on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, overlooking broader environmental factors such as soil health, biodiversity, and water cycles. This narrow approach risks reinforcing industrial farming practices and delaying the necessary transformation towards sustainable agriculture. Moreover, some tech-based solutions come with unintended consequences, such as synthetic feed additives that contribute to antimicrobial resistance and negatively impact human and animal health.
Nature-based solutions, on the other hand, offer a more holistic approach. FAIRR’s assessment found that these interventions positively impact an average of around five planetary boundaries, compared to just three for tech-based interventions. They also have the potential to deliver 37% of the mitigation needed to meet 2030 climate targets, along with significant nature co-benefits.
One standout example is tree intercropping, which integrates trees with traditional agriculture. This practice can increase soil carbon, promote nutrient cycling, improve soil health, boost biodiversity, regulate water cycles, and reduce pest infestation on nearby crops. It’s a prime example of how nature-based solutions can deliver multiple benefits with fewer trade-offs.
From a market-readiness perspective, almost all nature-based interventions are deployable, unlike some tech-based approaches that require additional support from carbon and nature markets to generate returns. However, nature-based solutions are currently underfunded, receiving $30 million less public investment globally than tech-based interventions. This disparity highlights the need for greater investment, policy support, and incentives to scale these solutions.
It’s crucial to understand that nature-based solutions aren’t anti-tech. Instead, technology can enhance and scale regenerative practices. For instance, satellite and remote sensing technology can boost the benefits of nature-based interventions by setting up cost-effective monitoring, reporting, and verification systems.
Investors, governments, philanthropies, and agri-food companies across the livestock value chain have a significant role to play. By recognizing the lower risk and higher resilience of nature-based approaches, they can help overcome barriers to scaling these solutions, reducing environmental risks, and ensuring long-term value creation.
In the quest for sustainable agriculture, tech will undoubtedly play a role. However, prioritizing nature-based interventions is essential for achieving positive impacts across multiple planetary boundaries and protecting investor portfolios. After all, there is no silver bullet; we need all the solutions available. But by leading with nature and complementing it with tech, we can pave the way for a more resilient and sustainable agricultural future.
