In early January 2024, RAFI staff members Edna Rodriguez, Carolina Alzate Gouzy, Ray Jeffers, and Jaimie McGirt attended the Oxford Real Farming Conference (ORFC) in the U.K. This conference attracts farmers, activists, policymakers, and researchers from around the world who are interested in transforming our food system. As anticipated, RAFI staff members came back energized and eager to bring the knowledge attained to inform and strengthen RAFI’s work.

Living Roots: Why was it important for RAFI staff to attend this conference?

Edna Rodriguez: We’re not operating in a vacuum as we work toward mitigating the climate crisis. To help expand our global perspective, we decided to connect with our colleagues across the pond at the U.K.’s Oxford Real Farming Conference. In addition to learning more about the U.K.’s agricultural policy landscape and how it compares to ours, we were eager to hear more about international perspectives on agriculture and the climate crisis. Because of the still unclear definition of “regenerative agriculture,” we wanted to explore the approach of other countries, both in practice and in policy. And, finally, we were interested in learning more about how the U.K. supports marginalized farming communities. Overall, we wanted to connect to global movements, absorb new ideas, and draw inspiration from like-minded advocates.

LR: What were some of the important takeaways?

ER: The conference confirmed our belief that by working together we can address global issues such as the climate crisis, animal agriculture reform, and loosening the stranglehold of corporate interests on our agricultural system.

We went to listen and learn — that certainly happened. But what we couldn’t anticipate was the level of interest in our own work, particularly our efforts to support marginalized farmers and farmers of color.

Also, I was a bit taken aback by the realization that our visit coincided with a critically important time for U.K. agriculture, which had recently started implementing new agricultural policies introduced post-Brexit. The story of the implementation of these policies and the emerging challenges they present parallel the experience of the U.S. in many ways. I would not be surprised if, going forward, the U.K. policy landscape more closely resembles that of the U.S.

Carolina Alzate Gouzy: I experienced the conference as a special gathering of people who united to think, reflect, and discuss agroecology — the type of event where you gain hope when hearing about the diverse ways agroecology is shaping stories of regeneration. It’s also helpful to stay connected to other global movements that are helping farmers thrive on their farms.

Jaimie McGirt: I got affirmation that agroecological farming methods when applied to any scale can help reduce emissions that are fueling the climate crisis; both farmers and scientists made a case for this. Also, I heard consensus that both reforesting or rewilding open farmland and regenerating healthy soil for carbon storage on actively used agricultural land are critical measures to slow the trajectory of the climate change crisis.

Ray Jeffers: I could see how RAFI’s work is global, especially around the areas of supporting local and regional food systems, addressing land access deficits, and facing and fighting corporate consolidation and its toll on agriculture, communities, and food systems worldwide. To make the impact we all hope for, we will have to seek thought partners around the globe, particularly when it comes to the climate crisis.

CAG: A strong food system does not only depend on a conscious and responsible government to direct the policies that support a just food system, but it depends most of all on a social fabric that integrates all the stakeholders. Land access remains one of the biggest challenges globally for farmers because of historical, aristocratic, and inequitable dynamics that make it difficult if not impossible for small farmers to hold land. The conference draws different kinds of people: farmers, academics, organizations, etc. and what makes it a great conference — globally recognized — is that everyone has a voice.

LR: What were some things you learned that surprised you?

JM: Producers in the U.K. share parallel experiences with their ag department as farmers in the U.S. do with the USDA. Many small-scale farmers expressed that the national conservation program does not sufficiently serve their needs; the programs were designed to serve larger farms.

RJ: I found it surprising how many farmers did not own the land they farmed on, but operated more like farm managers for large landowners. The U.K. has adopted the model “get big or get out,” as did the U.S. in the 1970s.

ER: The decision of the U.K. (England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland) to leave the European Union (EU), known as Brexit, has necessitated the development of a new agriculture policy, independent of EU’s framework. Each U.K. country created and implemented its own agricultural policy — something that initially surprised me to learn. That seems like a daunting undertaking. However, I also believe that developing policies customized to the unique needs, markets, and challenges of each region presents distinct advantages. It will be insightful to observe the implementation of these policies and their effectiveness in achieving their intended outcomes.

LR: How will attending this conference help your work with RAFI?

JM: Learning about the structure of the U.K.’s conservation programs — as well as the opportunities and barriers posed to farmers trying to access them — will help us consider national policy recommendations for U.S. Farm Bill programs to better advance conservation on smaller acreage farms. I also hope to integrate a more agroecological focus into RAFI’s current conservation technical assistance offered to farmers.

CAG: Learning about the approaches other organizations take toward rural justice was inspiring in assessing our methods at RAFI. Recognizing the strength of the agroecological movement globally is crucial for comprehending its profound implications and exploring how we can integrate its principles into our climate action objectives.

ER: Post-Brexit, England’s Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (equivalent of USDA), introduced the Environmental Land Management Programme (ELM) as the cornerstone of its future farm policy. It focuses on payments for public goods, a departure from the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), in which payments to farmers were largely based on the area of land owned and came with few conditions. The new approach involves smaller payments and more conditions, many designed to incentivize conservation practices. At first glance, we noticed that ELM shares similarities with the NRCS. We plan to research and compare the two programs to uncover potential insights or innovative ideas.