Regenerative Agriculture vs Rewilding: Two Solutions for Ecosystem Regeneration
Regenerative agriculture and rewilding are two land-use approaches that are often misunderstood. One produces food, the other doesn’t. But both aim to restore function to ecosystems degraded by decades of extractive farming.
As the UK faces collapsing biodiversity and rising ecological costs from food production, understanding how these systems work—and why they matter—is essential.
What Is Regenerative Agriculture?
Regenerative agriculture is a method of food production that improves land health. It goes beyond “sustainability”—it actively restores soil, increases biodiversity, and enhances ecosystem services.
At the heart of regenerative agriculture is the production of nutrient-dense, grass-fed meat. These animals are not raised in feedlots. They are managed through holistic planned grazing, moving frequently across the land, mimicking natural herbivore behaviour. This creates a powerful cycle:
-
Grasses are grazed, then recover.
-
Manure feeds soil microbes.
-
Root systems deepen, increasing carbon sequestration.
-
Biodiversity above and below ground increases.
Regenerative farming does not just reduce harm. It creates positive ecological outcomes, all while producing high-quality meat that supports both human and planetary health.
What Is Rewilding?
Rewilding refers to the process of restoring land to its uncultivated state, often by removing human interference and allowing natural systems to re-establish.
This can include:
-
Removing farming or infrastructure
-
Reintroducing species like beavers, wild grazers, or predators
-
Letting plant succession take place without interruption
Unlike regenerative farming, rewilding does not produce food. The aim is ecological recovery, not agricultural output.
Key Differences Between Regenerative Farming and Rewilding
| Feature | Regenerative Agriculture | Rewilding |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Goal | Ecosystem regeneration with food production | Ecosystem restoration |
| Food Output | Yes – especially grass-fed meat | No |
| Human Management | High – grazing plans, monitoring, adaptive strategies | Variable – from passive to minimal intervention |
| Use of Livestock | Central to process | Sometimes used to replicate ecological function |
| Economic Model | Market-based ethical food systems | Often non-commercial, reliant on public or charitable support |
Shared Goals: Restoring Ecological Function
Though different in application, both approaches share key goals:
-
Increase biodiversity
-
Improve soil structure and health
-
Enhance carbon sequestration
-
Restore natural water cycles
-
Reduce dependence on synthetic inputs
Where regenerative farming uses managed grazing to replicate ecological disturbance, rewilding seeks to restore disturbance through wild processes. Both see animals as agents of change—vital to land regeneration.
The Role of Grass-Fed Meat in Regenerative Systems
The production of healthy, grass-fed meat is not a side effect of regenerative agriculture—it’s core to its success.
-
Livestock graze on species-rich pastures rather than monocultures.
-
Their movement and waste build topsoil, not deplete it.
-
Unlike grain-fed animals, they do not compete with humans for food.
-
Meat from these systems is richer in nutrients, healthy fats, and beneficial compounds.
When managed properly, these animals are part of the carbon solution—not the problem. The idea that meat is inherently unsustainable fails to account for how it is produced. Regenerative systems use animals to restore degraded ecosystemswhile producing ethically responsible food.
Why We Need Both
Not all land is suitable for food production. Some landscapes are better served by rewilding. Others can be regenerated through farming.
This is not a binary choice. A national or global land-use strategy must integrate both approaches:
-
Rewilding for ecological corridors, wilderness, and high conservation value land.
-
Regenerative farming for producing food on land that can support low-impact, biodiversity-rich agriculture.
Final Thought: Food and Nature Are Not Opposites
The industrial food system has created a false divide: food production vs nature. But regenerative farming and rewilding both reject this premise.
We must move from extractive models to systems that give back. Whether that means reintroducing beavers or mob-grazing cattle on pasture, the outcome is the same: land that improves over time, ecosystems that recover, and a future where food and biodiversity can coexist.
The question is not whether we choose regenerative farming or rewilding. It’s how we use both—wisely, strategically, and urgently.
