The number of active armed conflicts is growing around the globe. One key influencer, though importantly not determinant, in these events is environmental change—mostly caused by humans. The body of research on environment and conflict has grown rapidly in the last couple of decades, with some clarity and also some outstanding questions. Concurrently, there are also important questions on how to harness environmental challenges for cooperation and peacebuilding. Evidence suggests that it is possible for environmental challenges to be a source of peacebuilding. However, it is not always a clear or even possible path, and there can be potential adverse effects to such pursuits. Part of the challenge stems from the complex and increasing cumulative effects of environmental change and the cascading effects of these changes ranging from migration to unsustainable livelihoods to catastrophic and/or repetitive disaster events. Another key challenge is a lack of evidence with which to parse these complex interactions. This is especially true at the community level, as most of the research has focused on the international and national levels to date.
But what happens at the local level when attempting to harness environmental challenges as a centrifuge for peacebuilding and restoration? Can degraded peace and ecosystems be simultaneously restored? If so, what factors are most important for calibrating peace praxis and sustainable interventions—e.g., institutions, social norms, capacities and capabilities, etc.? These questions remain open in environmental peacebuilding yet are more pressing by the day in a world increasingly in conflict.
While the data to date is scant, some organizations are putting these questions to the test. Working with the Bethany Land Institute (BLI) in Luwero District, Uganda, we have begun to explore the potential for regenerative production to be a vehicle for sustainable peacebuilding and ecosystem revitalization. BLI is a two-year in-residence regenerative agriculture training program that helps young adults—what they call Caretakers—develop skills that produce a sustainable livelihood in the face of increasing challenges such as climate change while also giving them the skills to be agents of change in their communities.
Regenerative production broadly includes those processes of material production that do not harm the environment and promote nature flourishing. Regenerative agriculture is one type of regenerative production that includes a variety of practices from agroforestry that can reforest while producing food to no-till, cover crop farming, that restores soil profiles and microbiomes. While shown to be effective for its primary aim, the question is, can it also promote peacebuilding?
On its face regenerative agriculture could be a pathway for sustainable development that could contribute to peacebuilding by bringing local people from different backgrounds together. However, conceptually it is not without its challenges, as BLI has experienced first-hand. First, to do regenerative agriculture requires technical skill and deep knowledge of the local environment. Increasingly people are losing such knowledge due to previous displacement, the shedding of traditional practices, and other mechanisms of loss or erasure.
Practicing regenerative agriculture also means you are adding value to your land—e.g., building your soil nutrient load. But if the land is not actually your land, for example, if it is rented, value is added to someone else’s asset who might want to claim it. This happened to BLI, when their agroforestry process began yielding a new forest that the owners soon desired. This led to the annulment of the land deed and a legal battle which is still playing out.
These challenges can complicate the answer to whether regenerative agriculture can serve as a vehicle for peacebuilding. However, solutions to these challenges can contribute to the conditions necessary for peace. For example, the communication and technical assistance often needed for initiating a regenerative agriculture farm can foster trust and open lines of discussion between farmers and either government extension workers or locally operating NGOs. Caretakers have noted how intentionally sharing their skills with other farmers in their communities has fostered not only improved communication and cooperation, but also trust and a shared identity within the community. Caretakers also note how these relationships have allowed them and their community members to remain in place, allowing for farming even through ‘rough seasons’ with unusually high temperatures and drought events. Their collective action and shared identity based on collective perseverance, therefore, can be seen as an indicator of sustainable positive peace.
More evidence is needed to evaluate when, how, and under what circumstances regenerative agriculture, and regenerative production more broadly, can contribute to peacebuilding. Thankfully, as the need to simultaneously build peace and restore ecosystems is only growing, the potential promise of regeneration seems plausible. If in the end it proves broadly effective, it might be the most potent tool against the greatest challenges to humanity today.
Richard Marcantonio
Dr. Richard (Drew) Marcantonio is a researcher, teacher, and practitioner focused on regenerative and durable livelihoods, environmental management and policy, environmental and other violence, and peacebuilding. He is the author of Environmental Violence: In the Earth System and the Human Niche (2022; Cambridge University Press), co-author of the textbook Environmental Management: Concepts and Practical Skills (2022; Cambridge University Press), and lead co-editor (with John Paul Lederach and Agustin Fuentes) of Environmental Violence Explored (2024; Cambridge University Press). He has published numerous peer-reviewed, policy, and public facing articles in periodicals ranging fromPeacebuildingtoEnvironmental Science and Policyto the popular periodical theBulletin of Atomic Scientists. He has conducted research and practice on these critical issues on five continents working with communities, elected officials, regulators, corporations, and NGOs alike.
