Regenerative farming: Food 3.0 #7 #cong20


Our industrial/financial based society does not provide us with food that is healthy, fresh, grown in healthy soil by a fairly rewarded producer. It’s methods damage the soil and the climate.
Regenerative farming can change this and also strengthen our communities and societies.
I am searching for a person who would develop a regenerative horticultural enterprise on my farm.

Total Words


Reading Time in Minutes


Key Takeaways:

  1. Have a diverse diet.
  2. Support research on regenerative farming.
  3. Develop local resilience by supporting local enterprises.
  4. Your society provides your food. If it’s not good enough, change it.

About Conor O'Brien

I come from a tradition of cooperative and local involvement and have always been involved in community and farming organisations. I am a member of the Board oversight on Mitchelstown Credit Union. Chairperson of Knockmealdown Active that develops outdoor activities there. Also involved with a local group using walks on the Knockmealdowns and the Galtees to build the community. I help to organise a storytelling workshop on Cape Clear island in October every year. Learning more about the soil every day. Reading. Local history.

Contacting Conor O'Brien:

 You can contact Conor by email  or follow him on Twitter.

By Conor O’Brien.

Communities, and societies, developed so that people could manage their food, shelter, and health by coordinating how they used their resources. Various power structures evolved to do this. Some structures were benign, others oppressive; but all depended for their survival on satisfying their peoples material needs.
In simple terms Society 1.0 was pre-industrial, based on what a specific place and people could produce; Society 2.0 is the present industrial cum financial society based on maximising the growth of capital, with no ties to place or people. In Society 3.0 people will use the ICT developed in Society 2.0 to build their own virtual communities with no need for a common sense of place

During Society 2.0, our present industrial/financial age, the connection between people’s between their material needs and the means of providing them was gradually broken. One contributed to society by engaging in the market; by selling one’s labour for a specialised task, while buying one’s food and material goods from others who also did specialised tasks. Growing the return on capital became more important than any other need of society. This alienation from the sources of our well-being is not a minor matter of harmless ignorance.

Our health is directly related to the nature of our diet. Diversity and freshness in our diet is essential to the proper functioning of our bodies. Our present system of food production and distribution drastically reduces the opportunity for food diversity and freshness. We need a system that produces healthy food near us, grown on healthy soil, with a decent income for the producer. Regenerative farming is the new Food 3.0 that can do this

The core principle of regenerative farming is that the fungi in the soil can mobilise any elements that are in the soil which are needed by the plant. These are exchanged through the root system for the sugar produced through photosynthesis in the leaves. It depends on diversity of plants and the biome; protecting the soil with plants; integrate livestock and reduce ploughing.
In the conventional system of using artificial fertilisers the plant does not need to exchange any sugars with the fungi and the die off. Without the fungi the rest of the biome that are essential to the natural cycle will lack essential nutrients.
Applying herbicides and fungicides to correct the resulting crop ailments further destroys the fungi and the soil biome. Without these the soils water absorption potential is reduced. This is a soil catastrophe because the weaker molecular and physical ties within the soil leads to erosion and carbon loss from the soil. About 40% of the worlds agricultural land is seriously degraded.

The photosynthetic sugars are the currency of all living things. Our industrial Society 2.0 depends on the photosynthetic hydrocarbons trapped in the fossil fuels from millions of years ago. Burning these fossil fuels is driving a climate catastrophe. We are burning the currency that enables us to access the resources to maintain our society.
On the other hand, regenerative farming stabilises the carbon cycle, and sequesters carbon in the soil. The improvement in the soil’s water holding capacity reduces the effect of both droughts and floods.
There is another, social, effect. Regenerative farming is human capital intensive rather than financial capital intensive This makes it much more difficult to scale up and enables more people to make a living directly from farming. Being local and people intensive it provides both energy and resilience to communities, and consequently to the broader society.

At Christmas 2018 my brothers and I found that we had independently begun looking at regenerative agriculture and realising how little we know about plants and the soil. It has been one of the most productive learning periods of our careers.
I am now actively looking for someone who would be interested in developing a one to three acre regenerative horticultural operation on my farm at a reasonable rent.
So if you know someone who might be interested in starting a horticultural regenerative farming enterprise, let them contact me at:

Communities of Oak or of Pyramids #29 #cong19


Environmental degradation is life-threatening for todays young people but it will not be stopped by the world-view that produced it. This is my account of how my world-view and that of my community of farming is changing. And a hope that in taking action we will find a path.

4 Key Takeaways:

  1. Our environment is being degraded; sometimes from our own actions in our own communities, more often by people with far more power than we have.
  2. The world-view of the communities we live in shapes our attitude to this.
  3. We need to help our communities to change their world-view in order to reverse the degradation.
  4. If we work together we might be able to change our path before it is too late.

About Conor O'Brien:

I come from a tradition of cooperative and local involvement and have always been involved in community and farming organisations. I am a director of Mitchelstown Credit Union. Also involved with a local group using walks on the Knockmealdowns and the Galtees to build the community. I help to organise a storytelling workshop on Cape Clear island in October every year.

Contacting Conor O'Brien:

You can follow Conor on Twitter or contact him by email.

By Conor O’Brien

It is no longer possible to claim ignorance of the reasons for environmental degradation; inaction is a deliberate decision. We need world-views that reflect reality.

This is my account of how my world-view and that of my community of farming is changing. It is also giving me hope that communities in our broader society can change how we view our environment.

I retired from farming 12 years ago, and am still part of the farming community; it is a good identity. I was a medium scale ‘progressive’ dairy farmer committed to using the Teagasc approach, and sometimes was among those who were ahead of it.

The world-view of progressive farming is one of maximising the growth of plants by applying the optimum amount of fertiliser and treatments. The soil was simply a medium to support the plants. Some soils had a greater range of minerals naturally available than others; any deficits could be made good by appropriate inputs. Insects and micro-organisms were treated as an incidental environmental feature.

I was sufficiently environmentally aware to avoid damaging hedgerows, or wild-life habitats at the field edge; leaving habitats like trees and small ponds as they were. Overall, I considered that I had respected my corner of the world; while I had been careless at times, I had done some good as well.

I have two brothers also farming; Ned in dairy, Pat in tillage. About nine months ago, we were each surprised when we realised that we had independently begun questioning our world-view of progressive farming as we knew it.

The trigger for me was a friend who wanted space to grow vegetables without chemical inputs. In Ned’s case it was a curiosity about maximising output on an outlying farm using a low input approach. For Pat it was a question about reducing inputs by avoiding ploughing. Initially none of these initiatives challenged our world-view but as we went deeper into them we began to come across work that did challenge it, and appeared to have solid scientific credentials.

The new information showed that with our focus on ‘the green plant’ we were dealing with only a third of the total earth ecosystem. We were ignoring the other two-thirds of fungi and other organisms which comprise the earth and soil in which the plants exist.

The Oak and the Pyramid

The world-view of intensive farming is a microcosm, a fractal, of the larger world-view. In this view we are external manipulators of the earth as a global test-tube which will not damage us if it fails. The criteria of success is power and control of the surplus produced by maximising the growth of components in the system. Considerations for the needs of the broader ecosystem become irrelevant to the pursuit of success. Any surplus flows up; power is exercised downwards. The structure is shaped like a pyramid in which the components are shaped to support the structure of control.

In an oak forest an individual plant grows as a result of the whole ecosystem growing, and no one tree can dominate the system. Oak trees have a greater diversity of organisms living on them than any other plant in our ecosystem because they need the contribution of each organism. The trees exchange the sugars they produce through photosynthesis for the minerals that the various organisms absorb from the ground.

All models are wrong, but some are useful. An ecosystem is not a full model of society but it could help us to see around the huge world-view of society as a pyramid of power. By seeing ourselves as part of an ecosystem, just as much as an oak tree or the organisms around it, we recognise that we and our communities are not bystanders but intimately involved with it.

Trust is essential in communities. There are no free lunches in nature, nor is there limitless growth and power. It depends on exchange, and just as finance is the currency of exchange in a pyramid, or carbon in an ecosystem, trust is the currency for communities. Trust is a personal commitment that grows through our interactions with others. It grows faster through real interactions than through the virtual ones of social media, but social media can be powerful in supporting real interactions.

It is right to be realistic about the environmental damage; but we should also be alert to the possibilities for change. The oak tree world-view is not strange to us. Just as the organisms of our soil have withstood our farming practices, so also do we have a pattern of strong communities and voluntary organisations; they are a real existing part of our world-view. Congregation itself is an immediate example. We do not have to learn how to build structures where trust can grow; they are waiting to be recognised in our own lives.

Changing our world-view of farming was not easy; it brings uncertainty and doubt about one’s future path as well as regret at what one now views as mistakes. It is a journey that one starts without realising the implications. It can not be done alone, nor with people in whom one lacks trust. We were helped by finding that there were other farmers on the same path. We were surprised by how much support there is outside of the pyramid. The change came from access to information through the internet, and the discussions, walks, and growth of trust that came through the groups.

Being part of a supportive community is like a walk in an old forest; no one ever regrets it.
The oak tree or the pyramid. There is the world-view to choose.

A major part of the change in thinking derived from the work of two Australian scientists, Drs Walther Jehne and Christine Jones.

Christine Jones.

Walther Jehne.

“ approximately 60% of the ‘greenhouse effect’ is due to water vapour, 20% due to carbon dioxide and 20% due to other gases including methane and nitrous oxide. Emissions from the burning of fossil fuels represent only 3 to 5% of the atmospheric carbon flux. Improvements to photosynthetic capacity, groundcover management and soil microbial status hold the key to both adaptation and mitigation of climate change and global warming.” Dr Christine Jones.