 Last month I started my next chapter in helping change in ag, and I briefly talked about my thoughts on the future of ag and regenerative agriculture practices. I am adding a few more thoughts in this note, along with a very cool little youtube vid I found when doing some cursory research last weekend. And with more recent mainstream press coverage for sure discovery work is in progress! In this note, I am trying to get my head around understanding a little bit more, at a very high level, the differences and challenges to the conversion. It’s amazing to see that regenerative farmers in the EU, North America, Brazil, Australia, and India (mainly) are working actively to change the way we farm in this decade and as a result increase biodiversity, enrich soils, improve watersheds, and enhancing the health of livestock and wildlife. And by thinking more holistically, they in turn increase the resilience of their farms to weather events and help boost the sustainability of their communities as well. And with government policies and the food industry looking for solutions that will improve and secure food supplies in the post-covid era, orgs in the US, Brazil, India and the EU are planning to have millions of acres converted to regenerative farming methods (for example, Patagonia, Danone, General Mills and Mc Cain) and invested multi-million-dollar budgets. Recap: 5 principles of regenerative agriculture: Regenerative Ag has five main principles,
These are put into practice under a general, guiding principle of integrating all the farm’s operations as far as possible. In today’s conventional farming approach, crops and livestock production are typically kept separate. Regenerative agriculture combines them in circular ecosystems; essentially, the animals feed the plants, and the plants feed the animals. The regulated grazing of sheep or cows, for example, encourages plant growth, and distributes natural nutrients back over the land in the form of dung. Poultry also fertilizes land, as well as eating unwelcome bugs and weeds. The focus of regenerative farming is most commonly to be the quality and performance of the soil, and regenerative farmers use growing practices that improve the health of their land (by the way there is now evidence that this approach can enrich soil and improve watersheds, which reduces topsoil runoff) , with the more common regenerative farming methods including:
For the last century industrial farming has prioritized increasing production. Regenerative Agriculture addresses cost and regards profit for farmers as more important than production: if we can produce the same output with half the input, the farmer makes more money. Some see this as farming the way it used to be, before the shit to heavy mechanization and intense chemical us in the 1950s and 60s, which encouraged monocultures and ever-larger farms The advantages of regenerative farming in infiltration and biodiversity Improving the soil not only increases fertility in a sustainable way, but also tends to improve water infiltration. Better infiltration means less runoff, and also less erosion and pollution from soil being carried away in the runoff water. In some areas, water springs that dried up several years ago have begun to flow again due to new regenerative farming approaches. In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted supply chains and demand, and increased the amount of food waste in farms and fields while threatening food security for many. As agriculture gradually regains its footing, participants and stakeholders are casting an eye ahead, to safeguarding food supplies against the potentially greater and more disruptive effects and once again, innovation and advanced technologies are making a powerful contribution to secure and sustainable food production. And as a new agricultural ecosystem rapidly emerges, I am convinced that regenerative ag is very well positioned to replace 20th century conventional farming. Let me know what you think here.
My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. New Chapter! Head of Product at Vayda Vayda is advancing regenerative outcomes in agriculture. By combining regenerative principles and a high-tech approach, we are focused on facilitating the reversal of climate change, while rebuilding natural ecosystems and feeding people with healthier food. thinker, doer, designer, coder, leader
1 Comment
 What is regenerative agriculture? As climate change becomes a more mainstream issue, consumers, farmers, brands and retailers are beginning to take a closer look at how to review land and animal management practices: if current topsoil degradation rates continue unchecked, all topsoil could be depleted in 60 years. And since it takes 1,000 years to generate one inch (3 centimeters) of topsoil naturally, now is a good time to take action. Sustaining topsoil isn’t enough. We need also to adopt practices that can regenerate soils with improving soil health as the central foundation. While the term “regenerative agriculture” can have many meanings, in general it describes farming and grazing practices such as restoring degraded soil, improving biodiversity, and increasing carbon capture with the intention of creating long-term environmental benefits, positively impacting climate change while drastically improving farm profitability. Balancing profitability and sustainability: regenerative agricultural practices can protect the environment, improve soil fertility, and optimize long-term profitably to create greater food security. Increasingly, precision farmers use geo-enabled smart devices and cloud computing to understand how no-till, cover crops, rotational grazing, and other sustainable practices contribute to better soil health, biodiversity, and CO2 sequestration. Regenerative Agriculture Practices Regenerative agriculture practices improve the overall health of soil and the environment. One of the key principles of regenerative agriculture is to keep the soil covered at all times. This is achieved through cover crops, which protect the soil from wind and water erosion, lower the temperature of the soil, and feed the microorganisms within it. A “no till” guideline helps to protect the soil’s natural microbiome, so by limiting the disturbance of the soil, it maintains its structure and prevents erosion. Lastly, regenerative agriculture promotes crop diversity. Biological ecosystems are maintained and strengthened by cultivating a diverse number of crops, which work to enrich and restore the health of the soil as well as create a habitat for beneficial insects. In summary: financial impact of employing regenerative agriculture practices comes not only from the improvement and productivity of the soil profile but also from the effects and implications of the regenerative agricultural practices. Four basic principles govern regenerative agriculture:
With the successful implementation of each practice, soil microbial, fungi, and bacterial populations strengthen the symbiotic relationship with one another, nutrients and minerals, water, and, most importantly, the roots of a developing crop. These relationships form the nexus of soil health, untapped yield potential, nutrient cycling, porosity, water infiltration, and organic matter development. Improved soil health reduces the need for excessive fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticide inputs by creating an optimal environment of nutrient cycling and plant vigor; this allows plants to compete better and face growing-season challenges. By progressing through these practices, allowing each principle to build on the next, a sustainable production model is created. How Consumers Can Help The easiest way consumers can contribute is to align themselves with brands that utilize products grown via regenerative agriculture. By way of vegetable and grains, consumers can do research to see if the farms where these products were grown utilized regenerative agriculture concepts like cover crops, crop rotation, and no-till. By way of meat, dairy, and eggs, consumers can look into if the farmers utilized practices like holistic management and rotational grazing And now, the proof is in the pudding – here’s a great TedX talk from Gabe Brown, a regenerative farmer in North Dakota and a pioneer of soil health. Let me know what you think here. My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. New Chapter! Head of Product at Vayda Vayda is advancing regenerative outcomes in agriculture. By combining regenerative principles and a high-tech approach, we are focused on facilitating the reversal of climate change, while rebuilding natural ecosystems and feeding people with healthier food. thinker, doer, designer, coder, leader  Performance informs business decisions, KPIs drive actions: I was discussing with another startup founder this week (hint hint) on the importance of being data-driven in all decisions (I did write about this on medium a few years back). Key performance indicators (KPIs) are milestones on the road to success and monitoring them will help product-driven entrepreneurs identify progress towards their goals (of world domination) – and as such, KPIs should be chosen and monitored based on a startup’s specific and unique business goals. But with that in mind, I was thinking I would write a quick reminder note on the most common funnel-driven KPIs in e-commerce. Discovery metrics: Help Measure the activities that create awareness and discovery
Acquisition metrics There are many, many metrics in this phase of the funnel, so we’ll only focus on a few.
Conversion metrics Measure the performance in converting from a store visitor to a paying customer, adding products to their shopping cart and actually checking out.
Retention metrics. Acquiring a new customer is anywhere from 5 to 25 times more expensive than retaining an existing one. Retention-focused metrics drastically benefit from good customer service, loyalty programs, repeat purchase campaigns, and a true investment in customer satisfaction.
5. Advocacy metrics Advocates are a company’s goldmine, they’re the ones who deserve the white glove treatment. These metrics will help a company measure the efforts taken to show them the Company cares.
Let me know what you think here. My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. Head of Product thinker, doer, designer, coder, leader  A few weeks back I was talking to a startup founder and we were discussing product-market fit … This is actually a really good question in the context of Agriculture: a very slow, cyclical, highly commoditized and culturally entrenched industry – almost backwards by high-tech industry standards. And as such, I’ve been ideating on trying to find a good definition of a starting point for product-market fit in Ag and how, as an early stage startup and as a product manager, we should tackle the answer. More generally, product managers will always find it hard to figure out what features and product initiatives to prioritize amongst so many competing priorities and stakeholder demands (I have talked about this here!) Made popular by Marc Andreesen in the 2000s, product market fit at the time was the “only thing that matters” or the exact moment when a startup successfully finds itself in “a good market with a product that can satisfy that market”. In the B2C world, this is iPod and the fitness crowd in 2003 or Netflix and DVDs in the early 2000s. But how does this pan out in the B2B world of AgTech? Since there is a lot of product/market fit literature all over the internet, here’s a sampler of what I gathered with a quick google search and that I find the most relevant:
A. Product/market fit is when you build something that people want I will have a more detailed note about this particular definition very soon – it’s a great update from the initial Marc Andreesen definition by Paul Graham (Y-Combinator). Essentially, it stems from the accurate observation that most founders build things nobody wants. And the reason is that they think about startup ideas, not products but sound plausible enough to fool them into working on them. Graham goes on that when launching a startup business, there should already be some people who urgently need the product, and not just the idea of a potential benefit of using it. So the only question that matters is “who wants this right now?” – And as such as an entrepreneur as well as product manager, instead of (most often than not without evil) forcing your views on users, always ask yourself who wants what you’re building so much that they’ll use it even if it’s a crappy buggy first iteration MVP? B. Product/Market fit is when you have the right solution to a problem that’s worth solving The lean startup literature refines the two previous suggestions further by breaking up this startup lifecycle into three stages:
C. Product/market fit is when users love your product so much they tell other people to use it This is my favorite because this is Porter early definition of Product/Market fit in the 1990s, way before “software was eating the world”: “When people understand and use your product enough to recognize it’s value that’s a huge win. But when they begin to share their positive experience with others, when you can replicate the experience with every new user who your existing users tell, then you have product-market fit on your hands. And when this occurs something magical happens. All of a sudden your customers become your salespeople.” Simply put, product market fit is having enough users that love your product so much they spontaneously tell other people to use it … in other words, as a product manager you build a strong viral base of advocates for your product. As an example, chances are that the first time you used Slack somebody in your friends circle invited you to use it – you didn’t click on an ad online, right? By doing so you will also avoid the trappings of targeting a growth goal first and probably fool yourself until someone (like me) digs into your user retention numbers! (See my note on growth product management pitfalls here.)  In conclusion, for product managers as well as startup entrepreneurs, and also in the context of Ag Tech startup this does apply super well, which is the reason why I thought about writing this in the first place, it’s important to separate product/market fit from problem/solution fit and more specifically, in order to estimate your true potential customer base, you will need to make sure you measure the true desire for your product, not just for a solution. If not you’ll most likely end up with a product/market fit false positive. Further, always thrive to find a high or extreme degree of product/market fit or set yourself up for a giant, and often times, super costly, world of painful disappointment. Let me know what you think here. My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love: fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. Head of Product thinker, doer, designer, coder, leader |
Product Builder in Colorado. travel 🚀 work 🌵 weights 🍔 music 💪🏻 rocky mountains, tech and dogs 🐾
Categories
All
Archives
May 2025
|