By Mayara Subtil*
Building more resilient food systems and expanding financing for agriculture amid a global climate crisis have been key topics on the Action Agenda and within the Agriculture Working Group at the Bonn Conference in Germany. Negotiators have been emphasizing the need to transform climate commitments into concrete measures capable of integrating adaptation, mitigation, and food security, as well as expanding investments in agricultural practices aligned with environmental conservation.
It is in this context that IPAM (Amazon Environmental Research Institute) is bringing to Bonn the proposal for Regenerative Tropical Agriculture, an initiative that seeks to consolidate a concept adapted to the ecological, social, and productive realities of the tropics. The idea is to move beyond the view that conservation and production are separate agendas and to recognize the standing forest as part of the agricultural production infrastructure due to the ecosystem services it provides, such as temperature regulation and moisture transport.
“We want to have a fully tropical and well-defined concept of regenerative agriculture to scale up practices that take conservation into account, because it is no longer just a matter of reconciling conservation and production. We need to recognize standing forests as agricultural production infrastructure as a strategy for adapting to the new climate reality,” emphasized Ludmila Rattis, a researcher at IPAM and Woodwell Climate, as well as a professor at FDC (Fundação Dom Cabral), who is following the climate negotiations in Bonn.
The proposal is based on the premise that regenerative agriculture models developed in temperate climate regions do not fully account for the specificities of the tropics. Soils, climate, ecosystem dynamics, the diversity of production systems, and the strong presence of family farming require a unique approach capable of integrating food security, biodiversity conservation, and adaptation to the extreme effects of climate change.
Regenerative tropical agriculture consists of a set of practices aimed at restoring soil health, conserving biodiversity, and strengthening the resilience of production systems in the face of climate change. The proposal seeks to integrate production and conservation, valuing natural processes and ecosystem services essential to the sustainability of agricultural activity.
Among these services is precisely the role of forests in stabilizing the local climate. Recent research by IPAM indicates that areas of conserved forest, particularly FPNDs (Public Forests Not Designated for Specific Uses ), play a strategic role in maintaining “flying rivers”—a phenomenon responsible for transporting moisture that supplies agricultural systems in different parts of South America.
For researchers, native vegetation functions as a natural infrastructure capable of reducing temperatures, transporting moisture, and creating more favorable conditions for agricultural production, especially in a scenario of worsening extreme events due to climate change.
The concept under development also seeks to address the lack of a consolidated definition for regenerative agriculture in the tropics. Today, the term is used to describe quite distinct practices, hindering the formulation of public policies, the development of financial instruments, and the creation of incentive mechanisms for producers interested in transitioning to more sustainable systems.
Premises
Structured around four premises, the proposal advocated by IPAM is being developed by a group of partners that includes FDC, the Woodwell Climate Research Institute, Instituto Folio, the Josué de Castro Chair, and GAAS (Group for the Support of Sustainable Agriculture). The first premise is the need to consider regeneration at the landscape scale, recognizing that processes such as water regulation, ecological connectivity, and climate stability depend on cooperation among different rural properties. The second premise argues that the transition must be accessible to all types of producers, from family farmers to large enterprises, respecting the different realities of production.
The third premise relates to the so-called “levers” of regenerative tropical agriculture—practices capable of generating simultaneous benefits for multiple components of the system, such as water, biodiversity, carbon, climate, soil, and socioeconomic aspects. The logic is to simplify implementation and reduce monitoring costs by focusing efforts on actions that produce positive impacts across different dimensions of sustainability.
The fourth premise proposes that the implementation of these practices be accompanied by simple, scientifically robust, and low-cost indicators, allowing the transition to be monitored and scaled up on a large scale. The proposal considers that the shift to regenerative systems represents not only a technical transformation but also an economic and cultural one for rural producers.
Another distinctive feature of the concept is the recognition of the role of traditional and local knowledge in building more resilient production systems. For the research team, the experience accumulated by farmers, indigenous peoples, and traditional communities is essential for understanding which practices work in different ecological contexts and how they can contribute to restoring environmental functions and strengthening food production.
The work will also serve as a basis for the development of a Regenerative Tropical Agriculture Index, a tool that could inform public policies, payment mechanisms for environmental services, green rural credit lines, carbon markets, and monitoring, reporting, and verification systems associated with global goals to combat climate change.
Negotiations so far
Climate negotiations in Bonn are also continuing to advance on other issues considered strategic for implementing the commitments made in the Paris Agreement and preparing for COP31. Technical discussions have centered on issues such as adaptation, climate finance, just transition, and mechanisms to accelerate the implementation of decisions already approved at previous climate meetings.
One of the day’s main highlights was the progress made in discussions on the MitigationWork Programme (MWP). The negotiations highlighted the search for mechanisms capable of transforming commitments into concrete actions, with proposals to strengthen the NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions), expand the exchange of experiences among experts, and create technical tools that facilitate developing countries’ access to climate finance.
On the adaptation agenda, negotiators continued the debate on Adaptation Communications and support for LDCs (Least Developed Countries). Among the proposals discussed is the creation of an alliance aimed at implementing NAPs (National Adaptation Plans), with a focus on structuring investment portfolios, supporting project implementation, and expanding access to existing financing mechanisms.
Another key topic was the operationalization of the Work Program on Just Transition. Discussions addressed the creation of an international mechanism to support cooperation, technology transfer, capacity building, and financing aimed at low-carbon economic transformation, while preserving principles such as equity and common but differentiated responsibilities. There was also strong advocacy for workers, social rights, and directly affected populations to play a central role in this process.
The debates also reinforced the implementation of climate commitments through coordination among governments, the private sector, financial institutions, and civil society. One of the dialogue forums highlighted that most of the new NDCs submitted over the past two years already incorporate the findings of the firstGlobal Stocktake under the Paris Agreement, indicating a growing effort to link national targets to multilateral decisions. Among the main challenges identified are structural barriers to financing, high capital costs, and the need to accelerate the energy transition in a socially just manner.
*IPAM Communications Analyst. mayara.barbosa@ipam.org.br