How and Why the Fashion Industry Is Trending Toward Sustainable Clothing

/by

Author: Mantas Malukas | Published: October 26, 2017

Who makes the clothes we wear every day? Where are they being made? And what happens to all the clothes we discard? These are the questions both fashion brands and consumers are starting to ask more than ever. Fashion as we know it, whether we like to hear it or not, is an industry largely built on low-cost labor, horrible working conditions, animal cruelty, and environmental degradation.

In step sustainable fashion, the trending alternative to “fast fashion” that dominates the current clothing marketplace and, unfortunately, tends to emphasize quick manufacturing at low costs at the expense of labor and the environment. Also called eco fashion, sustainable fashion sets out to revolutionize the fashion industry by creating a system of clothing production that is totally renewable and minimizes or completely negates any ecological or social impact.

The substantial rise of sustainable fashion is in large part thanks to a greater societal move toward sustainability and socially-conscious consumerism being led primarily by younger shoppers. In fact, over 79 percent of young consumers say they are much more likely to engage with a brand that can help them make a difference, according to a recent report. On top of this, 44 percent of millennials said they would like to more eco-friendly fabrics used in clothes.

While sustainable fashion is without a doubt heading in the right direction and is very promising, it’s important not to jump too far ahead. Sustainable clothing is still only in its infancy in terms of trendiness. Consumers still overwhelmingly value price in comparison to sustainability.

And, realistically, sustainable fashion has no chance in the greater clothing marketplace if it can’t look as chic and stylish as normal high-street clothing.

But it definitely must be said that sustainable fashion has made huge strides since its early days when it was associated with a non-fashionable look that often tended to be Bohemian and dull, mostly due to hemp, cotton, and canvas being the most eco-friendly and readily available materials at the time.

But with the rise of technology, this has changed drastically. Now fashion brands are pushing bright, colorful, high-fashion worthy eco-friendly and ethical clothing that are so stylish that many consumers can’t even spot the differences.

So in addition to significantly changing consumer behaviors favoring eco and socially conscious buying, the key to sustainable fashion’s recent trendiness essentially comes down to technological innovations helping fashion designers easily create clothes that both look good and still feel comfortable.

And with 66 percent of consumers willing to spend more on a product if it comes from a sustainable brand and when the costs of creating sustainable clothing inevitably come down as tech progresses, we should only expect sustainable fashion to trend faster and higher in the years to come.

KEEP READING ON NICHE HUNT

A Native Parisian Spins a Thriving Ethical Clothing Brand From Sustainable Fibers

/by

Author: Susan Price | Published: November 13, 2017

The navy and white stripes may be iconic, but the T-shirts Amour Vert began selling several years ago were something new. The shirts were spun from a fabric so soft it they quickly caught the attention of celebrity stylemakers and major retailers.

That soft fabric also happened to be sustainable and durable, and the T-shirts were made in America in factories paying fair wages. “No one really cared at first that we were an ethical brand,” says co-founder Linda Balti. “They bought our T-shirts because they were so soft and comfortable, though once they knew how they were made they loved our story.”

Amour Vert—the name means green love in French—now has a line of dresses, tops, denim and more it sells online and in an expanding number of its own stores. All Amour Vert’s clothing is made using sustainable fabrics and non-toxic dyes, and the brand is committed to zero-waste manufacturing and fair wages. Amour Vert also partners with American Forests to plant a tree for each T-shirt it sells.

Balti grew up in Paris and trained as an engineer. She worked for a defense company for a time, but found the lab was not for her. Someone suggested she do VIP presentations for the company and at one of those meetings, she met Chirstoph Frehsee. Frehsee had founded MineWolf Systems, a company that cleared landmines, and after he sold it, he and Balti spent a year traveling around the world. While on that trip, Balti read a Newsweek article about ethical fashion that stunned her. “It was the first time I realized the impact fashion has on the environment,” says Balti. “It is the second most polluting industry in the world.”

KEEP READING ON FORBES

Global Sequestration Potential of Increased Organic Carbon in Cropland Soils

/by

Authors: Deborah A. Bossio, Rolf Sommer, Louis V. Verchot & Robert J. Zomer, Published: November 14, 2017 

Historical and ongoing increase of agricultural production worldwide has profoundly impacted global carbon, water and nutrient cycles1,2,3,4. Both land-use change to agriculture and agricultural production have and continue to contribute significantly to the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), accounting for as much as 24% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions5. Almost 50% of all potentially vegetated land surface globally has been converted to croplands, pastures and rangelands1,2,3,4. This land-use change and soil cultivation have contributed 136 ± 55 petagrams of carbon (Pg C) to the atmosphere from change in biomass carbon since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, with depletion of soil organic carbon (SOC) accounting for a further contribution of 78 ± 12 Pg C. This estimated 214 ± 67 Pg C from the land-use sector compares to the estimated 270 ± 30 Pg of C contributed by fossil fuel combustion6 as a historical carbon source. More recently soil organic matter also has gotten increasing attention as a potentially large and uncertain source of carbon to the atmosphere in the future in response to predicted global temperature rises7,8.

Soils, however, can act as both sources and sinks of carbon, depending upon management, biomass input levels, micro-climatic conditions, and bioclimatic change. Substantially more carbon is stored in the world’s soils than is present in the atmosphere. The global soil carbon (C) pool to one-meter depth, estimated at 2500 Pg C, of which about 1500 Pg C is soil organic carbon (SOC), is about 3.2 times the size of the atmospheric pool and 4 times that of the biotic pool6,9,10. An extensive body of research has shown that land management practices can increase soil carbon stocks on agricultural lands with practices including addition of organic manures, cover cropping, mulching, conservation tillage, fertility management, agroforestry, and rotational grazing11,12. There is general agreement that the technical potential for sequestration of carbon in soil is significant, and some consensus on the magnitude of that potential13. On this basis, the 4p1000 initiative on Soil for Food Security and Climate14, officially launched by the French Ministry of Agriculture at the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change: Conference of the Parties (UNFCCC COP 21) in Paris, aims to sequester approximately 3.5Gt C annually in soils. Croplands will be extremely important in this effort, as these lands are already being actively managed, and so amenable to implementation of improved practices12. Furthermore, because almost all cropped soils have lost a large percentage of their pre-cultivation SOC6,15, they potentially represent a large sink to re-absorb carbon through the introduction and adoption of improved or proper management aimed towards increased SOC. However, carbon is rarely stored in soils in its elemental form, but rather in the form of organic matter which contains significant amounts of other nutrients, above all nitrogen. Nutrients, biomass productivity, the type of vegetation and water availability, among other constraints therefore can be major limiting factors inhibiting increases in soil carbon sequestration16. Further imperative to sequester carbon in soils arises from the multiple co-benefits that are obtained from sequestration of carbon in soils that have been depleted of their organic matter17. Soil fertility, health, and functioning are immediate consequences of the amount of soil organic matter (and hence carbon) a soil contains; this is even more important for highly weathered soils, as is the case for the majority of soils in the humid lowland tropics. Increasing carbon in soils also means improving its physical properties and related ecosystems services, such as better water infiltration, water holding capacity, as well as potentially increasing agricultural productivity and ecological resilience11,12.

In this analysis, we illustrate where carbon might be sequestered, and how much, if, through improved practices and management, we could increase SOC on agricultural land by a generally accepted (as attainable) moderate to optimistic amount, based on the medium and high sequestration scenarios of Sommer and Bossio (2014). These scenarios from Sommer and Bossio (2014) resulted in an 0.27 and 0.54% increase in SOC in the top 30 cm of soils after 20 years, for the medium and high scenarios, respectively, that is, a 0.012 to 0.027% annual increase. The low scenario in Sommer and Bossio (2014) was not used because it refers to sequestration rates estimated primarily for unimproved pasture land. An implicit basic assumption is that in general, 50 to 70% of soil carbon stocks have been lost in cultivated soils6,15,17, such that the SOC status of almost all cultivated soils can be increased. It is expected that these cropped soils will be able to sequester carbon for at least 20 years before reaching saturation points and new SOC equilibriums13,18, while meta-analysis of field studies14 suggests that in some instances significant sequestration can continue for 30 or even up to 40 years before reaching new equilibriums. We used the recently released ISRIC SoilGrids250m19 global database of soil information, to identify and derive basic soil characteristics, i.e. SOC and soil bulk density, and the FAO GLC-Share Land Cover database20 to identify and calculate areal extent of the cropland landcover class. The analysis gives a spatially articulated estimate of the distribution and increase of SOC if equal sequestration is reached, within the medium and high scenarios, on all available cropland soils through improved practices. The results of this paper provide an estimate of what the potential amount of sequestered carbon would be in terms of tons of carbon per hectare, spatially articulated at 250 m resolution, and in terms of Pg C regionally and globally, allowing for a quantified discussion of the importance of this carbon pool within on-going global discussions regarding mitigation potential within the agricultural sector.

Results

Global Soil Organic Carbon Stocks on Croplands

Estimates of global soil carbon stocks, trends and sequestration potential11,16, particularly within the context of a warming climate7,8,21,22, are now central to important discussions ongoing within various international fora, notably the discussions on including agricultural land within mitigation strategies and protocols at the UNFCCC, and are the basis for the 4p1000 Initiative14. The spatial distribution of SOC on croplands (Fig. 1), and its contribution to total carbon stock, varies with latitude, and differs substantially from that of carbon stored in above and below ground biomass23,24. Most of the world’s SOC is stored at northern latitudes, particularly in the permafrost and moist boreal regions. In contrast, large areas of cropland in India, across the Sahel, northern China, and Australia are found on low carbon density soils. An overview of 27 studies25 reports that 1500 Pg C can be regarded as a rough estimate of the global SOC pool (to one meter depth; across all the world’s soils, more than 130 million km2), however with substantial variability among both spatially- and non-spatially-explicit estimates and a range of from 500 to 3000 Pg C.

About 372,000 km2 of cropland (Supplementary Figure S1), comprised of carbon dense soils (> 400 t C/ha and/or with a bulk density <1.0 g/cm3) and which are considered likely to lose SOC under any form of cropping management, and sandy soils unlikely to sequester carbon due to high sand content (> 85%), were excluded from the analysis as “unavailable” (Table 1). In particular, it is highlighted that high SOC soils, while accounting for only 2% of total cropland area, account for almost 6% (8.48 Pg C) of total global cropland SOC stocks, and require a set of management options aimed toward conservation and maintenance of carbon stocks25. These areas are primarily peatlands in South East Asia, Russia, some in North America, South America, Europe, Australia/Pacific, and Andosols in South America. Cultivation of peat soils has been shown to contribute significantly to global emissions from agriculture26. Tropical and temperate peatlands account for a disproportionate share of terrestrial carbon stocks considering their more limited area globally27, with peatland drainage, concentrated in Europe and Indonesia, reported to account for nearly a third of all cropland emissions28.

Table 1: Soil organic carbon (SOC) for all available cropland soils globally (i.e. those not excluded from the analysis as high SOC or sandy soils), showing both the global totals and the global averages per hectare, at current status (T0), and after 20 years for both the medium and high sequestration scenarios, and their annual increment.
Full size table

Globally, cropland stores more than 140 Pg C in the top 30 cm of soil, almost 10% of the total global SOC pool. About 94% of this carbon (131.81 Pg C) is stored on the 15.9 million km2 (98% of global cropland) identified as potentially available for enhanced carbon sequestration through improved soil management and farming practices11. Global distribution of SOC is strongly influenced by temperature and precipitation15,29. SOC is generally lower in the tropics where it is hotter and/or drier, and higher in the cooler, wetter, more northerly, and to a somewhat lesser extent, southerly, latitudes (Fig. 1). Lal (2002) cites several studies showing an exponential decrease in SOC with increase in temperature. This is reflected by low SOC values found across much of the equatorial belt (e.g. less than 100 t C/ha), with the highest carbon density soils (400 t C/ha or more) found in the northern croplands and farmed peat soils of the United States, Canada, Europe and Russia (see Supplementary Table S1).

The regions of North America, Eurasia (Russia) and Europe currently store the greatest amount of carbon on cropland, each with more than 21 Pg C, and all together accounting for over 50% of all SOC stocks on cropland globally (Table 1). By contrast, Central America, North Africa, and the Australian/Pacific region have very low amounts of stored SOC, together comprising 6.48 Pg C or just over 4.6% of the global total. Western Asia, South Asia, Southeast East Asia and East Asia each have moderate amount ranging from 4.38 Pg C to 9.14 Pg C, but together accounting for just less than 2% of global total. South America, even having a fairly large amount of farmland, has a moderate 9.42 Pg C. Almost 12 Pg C, more than 8.5% of the global total, is found in Africa, with the highest concentrations found in the Eastern and Central regions. Nationally, Russia with its vast northern tracts of carbon dense agricultural land has the largest total amount of SOC stored on cropland more than 21.9 Pg C (almost 17% of the global total), followed by the United States (18.9 Pg C), China (8.4 Pg C), India (6.4 Pg C), and Brazil (5.0 Pg C) (Supplementary Table S2).

KEEP READING ON NATURE 

New Study: Up to 7 Billion Tonnes of Carbon Dioxide Can Be Removed From the Atmosphere Each Year Through Better Soil Management on Farmland

/by

Author: Georgina Smith | Published: November 14, 2017 

By better managing farmland soil, the amount of carbon stored in the top 30 centimeters of the soil could increase an extra 0.9 to 1.85 gigatons each year, say authors of a new study published today in Scientific Reports.

This is equivalent to carbon globally emitted by the transport sector (1.87 gigatons of Carbon); and equivalent to 3 – 7 billion tonnes of CO2 which could be removed from the atmosphere. For comparison, the US emits 5 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent each year (Edgar database, 2015).

The maps in the new study show how much carbon could be stored per hectare each year, which will be vital for designing global mitigation strategies, for achieving targets set out in the Paris Climate Agreement.

Since the industrial revolution, 50-70 percent of carbon stored in the soil has been lost to the atmosphere, contributing to harmful greenhouse gas emissions in the form of carbon dioxide. Since farmland is already intensively managed, improving the way it is managed is a practical step to reduce carbon in the atmosphere, say authors.

Dr. Robert Zomer, from the Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences and lead-author of the study, said: “Our finding show that turning soils into carbon sinks can sequester significant amounts of carbon in cropland soils. Our research shows soils can be part of the solution to combat climate change – and by doing so we can improve soil health.

The findings illustrate that most of the world’s carbon is stored in cooler, wetter, parts of the world in the northern hemisphere; and less in the tropics where it is hotter or drier. North America, Russia and Europe currently store for over half of the world’s carbon in croplands.

The United States showed the highest total annual potential to store carbon in the soil, followed by India, China, Russian and Australia, if management is improved. The improved practices, among others, include, using compost or (green) manure, mulching, zero tillage, cover cropping, and other regenerative and natural climate solutions, such as agroforestry.

KEEP READING ON CIAT

COP23 Overview: Climate Conference Tip-Toes Around Regenerative Agriculture as Solution to Global Warming

/by

On November 6, the 23rd session of the Conference of the Parties (COP23) to the UN Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) kicked off in Bonn, Germany, the nation’s former capital. Germany is one of the world’s worst offenders when it comes to pollution. It’s also the largest polluter in all of Europe. But Germany is not alone in the polluting business—and countries are not the only big polluters.

The world’s top 20 meat and dairy companies emitted more greenhouse gases in 2016 than all of Germany, according to a report published by GRAIN, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) and Heinrich Böll Foundation.

Let us briefly go back to COP23, where Big Meat and Dairy are also participating. Several statements have been made so far at the meeting and there have been a few surprises. Unfortunately, it seems that COP23 will not be particularly innovative, especially when it comes to agricultural policies.

COP23 started under the following premises:

  1. There is no time to waste and the Paris Agreement must be implemented as soon as possible.
  2. The climate disasters we experienced in 2017 (devastating hurricanes and floods, long droughts and extreme temperatures) are not isolated, random events. Rather, they’re directly connected to climate change and unless we do something about it, they’ll become more and more frequent.
  3. With or without the U.S. being part of the negotiations, those countries that have signed up must commit to reaching the goal of making sure warming is limited to 2 degrees Celsius, and ideally, 1.5 degrees Celsius.
  4. Rich countries must compensate poor countries, which are the most vulnerable to climate change, even when they have been the least responsible for it. The financial commitment agreed upon in Paris is now being reviewed to see if it is sufficient and adequate. It’s also crucial to determine how the funding that would have come from the U.S. will be covered once it officially leaves the agreement in 2020.

COP23 Surprises

  1. Syria, the only country that had not signed the Paris Climate Agreement after Nicaragua joined in late October, has finally agreed to be part of it. As a result, the U.S. has become increasingly more isolated as it’s now the only nation on Earth that does not recognize the agreement.
  2. The general mood (COP’s halls are usually the best place to get an idea of what people are really thinking about—beyond protocol) is that the U.S. government’s decision to leave the agreement has only created a stronger sense of solidarity among nations, which can now implement and lead the charge to reverse climate change. Many nations are competing to be the recipient of international recognition, as well as the distribution of copious amounts of funding, which in turn will pave the way for the creation of a number of agencies, departments and many other intermediate bodies.

COP23 As Usual:

  1. The negotiation of agreements behind closed doors while civil society organizations and NGOs host side events. This is a way to prove that during COPs, there is civil society participation, but without ever really having to compromise.
  2. Giving more relevance to controversial solutions to which much capital has already been invested and promised, such as geoengineering and nuclear energy. It’s not a coincidence that despite saying the U.S. will not be part of the negotiations, the Trump administration sent a team to COP23 to advocate for more fossil fuel use.
  3. Pushing existing projects that have proven effective for fighting climate change, but don’t seem to have the same financial incentive.
  4. Unfortunately, from what we’ve seen so far, the negotiations seem to ignore regenerative agriculture as being the solution to climate change. While predictable, this is actually a greater setback than other COPs, which have at least mentioned agriculture, desertification and soil restoration as being key factors in reversing climate change.

Why agriculture?

As previously mentioned, last year the world’s top 20 meat and dairy companies emitted more greenhouse gases than all of Germany. Industrialized agriculture, which doesn’t account for the 500 plus million small farmers and 200 million herders that exist in the world, is a type of production that pollutes the atmosphere, our soils and waterways.

Industrialized agriculture has huge negative impacts on human health too. While producing and selling poison, Big Agriculture ruins not just local economies, but also the means of life and survival of thousands of farmers who rely on a healthy environment for their production.

At Regeneration International, we know that industrial agriculture is a critical part of the problem. But we also know that agriculture, done the right way or rather the regenerative way, is a fundamental part of the solution.

The conversations at COP23 would be entirely different if Big Meat and Dairy giants like Cargill, Tyson or JBS were held accountable for the health and environmental destruction they have caused—a significant portion of which has been funded by government subsidies.

COP23 negotiations could actually focus on real solutions if polluting corporations acknowledged their contribution to climate change, and transitioned away from chemical- and factory farm-based agriculture to a system focused on soil health, animal welfare, nutritious food and farmworker rights.

Instead, the negotiations have thus far focused on whether or not the Paris Agreement is achievable, a lack of funding and Trump’s latest insult. A genuine effort to hold polluting corporations accountable would shift the mood at COP23 from the same corporate rhetoric we so often hear to one centered on human health, environment and climate-related solutions.

Regeneration International Hosts “Speed Up the Cool Down” Event at COP23

/by
[pdf-embedder url=”https://regenerationinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/spped-up-the-cool-down-poster-1.pdf” title=”spped up the cool down poster”]

Regenerative Returns

/by

Author: Jon Connors | Published: February 3, 2017

Farming, to many, is an afterthought to their daily lives; many of us do not realize the degenerative ecological and economic effects that come from almost all food produced globally. Global degenerative agriculture is the leading cause of rainforest deforestation, land and water toxicity, is the largest consumer of water, and one of the largest causes of soil erosion globally. Regenerative agriculture is the complete opposite; it restores water in local hydrology, builds plant biomass and increases soil content (and soil carbon levels.) This type of agriculture currently has a fraction of the global food market, and due to serious crises facing all of human society, it is set to explode; offering huge investment potential for regular and institutional investors.

Regenerative agriculture can take carbon out of the atmosphere and replace it in the soil (see next subheading.) This means that soon consumers will be able to link their eating habits to food, and fashion habits to clothing, that is specifically designed to reverse climate change. The average consumer need not wait for their government to take action; their everyday purchasing habits can ‘fix’ the largest problem facing humanity today. This is an exciting investment opportunity unlike ever before in recorded history.

Regenerative Agriculture, unlike its degenerative counterpart, (according to preliminary research,) may offer exponential return in the form of food production. This arises from the symbiotic relationship of regenerative plant, microbe and water systems that are designed to improve over time. More research has to be done to fully prove this scientifically, but if true, as the human population continues to grow exponentially, regenerative agricultural yields can keep up with demand in ways that benefit the ecosystem, the local water cycle, and the soil. As Ryland Englehart, cofounder of the nonprofit Kiss the Ground, says, ‘it’s an idea whose time has come.’

The purpose of this paper is to recruit activist investors who see the long term restorative potential of regenerative agriculture, and who want to link a portion of their retirement savings to land regeneration projects. The key driver here is that average investors can link long term portfolio performance with the regenerative movement, and will therefore have an incentive to ‘convert’ their close friends and families toward eating more regenerative food, also to wearing more regenerative clothing, leading to an increase in value of land regeneration investments, and a decrease of carbon in our atmosphere- a truly virtuous cycle.

International Initiative- 4 per 1000

4p1000 is an international initiative that uses the metric of four parts per thousand as the driver for success to offset carbon current carbon emissions; they have identified the tipping point of carbon sequestration to halt the annual increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. The infographic below explains the process thoroughly. Regenerative Agriculture has the potential to rebuild land value while reversing climate change, and this international initiative will help accelerate the process.

According to the 4p1000 website, ‘The aim of the Initiative is to demonstrate that agriculture, and agricultural soils in particular, can play a crucial role where food security and climate change are concerned.

Based on robust scientific evidence, the Initiative therefore invites all partners to declare or to implement practical programmes for carbon sequestration in soil and the types of farming methods (regenerative agriculture) used to promote it.’ The Initiative is currently being signed by 25 nations, as well as 65 partner organizations. This international momentum will push for international policy changes; leading toward potential government subsidies for regenerative agricultural practices (which would increase investment return for regenerative agricultural projects.)

Regenerative Food and Textile Production

The team at Regenerative International is teaming up with other organizations to digitally map the landscape for regenerative farms and organizations worldwide. The goal for this project is to inform consumers where they can purchase food from farms on an easy to understand digital map. This technology will help drive demand for regenerative goods to food consumers, as well as be a ‘best practice’ guide for regenerative farmers in the future. Such easy to use consumer tools help create consumer action that could quickly take market share from degenerative foodstuffs toward regenerative foods.

Companies like Fibershed in Northern California are exploring how to unite locally produced fiber/ textiles, with local dyes and local labor, all with original source materials (wool, etc) raised on regenerative land.Imagine the social clout that comes when early adopter consumers will be able to tell the story of how their new leather jacket, or wool hat, were raised on a farm that sequesters carbon in the soil. As the realities of climate change continue to lead to global weirding, this social impact solution has potential to rapidly spread in the marketplace.

‘Kiss the Ground’ 2017 documentary

Josh and Rebecca Tickell (of ‘Fuel’ and ‘The Big Fix’) are currently creating a full-length documentary about regenerative agriculture called ‘Kiss The Ground.’ Their goal upon release is to encourage one million people to become regenerative farmers. This documentary will help to inform consumers of power of regenerative agriculture, leading to both an increase in supply- by driving farmers to the land, and an increase in demand- by informing consumers of the benefits of regeneration. The nonprofit behind the film, also called Kiss the Ground have an easy to understand animated film called ‘The Soil Story’ that breaks down the story of soil carbon sequestration. This digestible communication can drive rapid consumer demand for regenerative development.

KEEP READING ON PROPAGATE

Healthy Soils Help Cities Deal with Floods

/by

Author: Ann Adams | Published: October 19, 2017

A recent article on the Union for Concerned Scientists website, titled “How Healthier Soils Help Farms and Communities Downstream Deal with Floods and Droughts,” was particularly timely given the recent hurricane damage that much of the southeast faced in late August and early September. It is no news to farmers and ranchers how devastating these events can be.

In the United States, floods and droughts together have done damage worth an estimated $340.4 billion since 1980 and taxpayers have paid $38.5 billion in crop insurance payouts from 2011 to 2016 (not to mention all the flood damage numerous cities have had to face). Luckily, the knowledge that soil can be a huge sponge to soak up rainfall is becoming more widespread as people learn about soil health and the power of soil carbon.

The full report noted in the article shares some of the key points learned from the Union’s review of scientific data. They also note that the key practices that increase soil health and resilience are:

  • Ecological grazing (planned grazing)
  • No-till cropping
  • Cover crops
  • Integration of livestock and cropping
  • Perennial cropping

The Union performed a rigorous review of prior field studies (150 experiments on six continents) that used any of those practices and focused on soil properties that improved water infiltration rate and water availability in the soil. Here’s some of the key findings:

  • Water infiltration rates improved by 59% with perennial crops, 35% with cover crops, and 58% with improved grazing practices.
  • The largest and most consistent improvements came from practices that keep live roots in the soil year round, such as cover crops, perennial crops, and planned grazing.
  • Heavy rainfall events – more than one inch of rain per hour – can be significantly offset with some of these practices, particularly perennials. In more than half (53%) of the experiments that compared perennial crops to annual crops, water entering the soil not only increased, but did so at a rate higher than a one-inch per hour rain event.
KEEP READING ON HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL

Ethical Shopping: Are We Really On Board?

/by

Author: Guy Chiswick | Published: October 23, 2017

Questions around ethics in the fast fashion industry have been high on the agenda ever since the tragedy of the 2012 fire at the Tazreen Fashions factory in Dhaka. This horrific incident urgently brought to our attention the human cost of fast fashion, highlighting serious health and safety concerns and paving necessary steps for safer worker conditions.

 

Documentaries such as The True Cost and the BBC’s Blood, Sweat and T-shirts have also shown us the stark reality of where fast fashion comes from – and joined the dots between our insatiable appetite for new clothes and the production processes behind it.

 

According to the 2016 Ethical Consumer Markets Report, the value of all ethical spending in the UK grew to £38billion in 2015. This trend was also mirrored in the Organic Market 2017 report, which revealed sales of organic food and drink have grown by 7.1% year-on-year, whilst non-organic food continues to show decline.

 

So what are the reasons behind this shift, and which brands are already leading by example?

Why are we shopping more ethically?

One reason we’re thinking about shopping more ethically is because of increased awareness of the impact our shopping habits have on the environment. According to Greenmatch and multiple sources including Eileen Fisher, fast fashion is the second largest polluter in the world, after the oil industry. Unilever research revealed a third of consumers (33%) are now choosing to buy from brands they believe are doing social or environmental good, with 53% of shoppers in the UK and 78% in the US saying they feel better when they buy products that are sustainably produced.

However despite this feel-good factor and our moral compass imploring us otherwise, when it comes to consumers choosing between ethical brands and the mass market, the decision can often be made based on the cost factor. Ethical products are generally more expensive to produce because of their production processes, sourcing of ethically-produced raw materials, labour costs, and commitments to environmental conservation.

KEEP READING ON THE HUFFINGTON POST

An Epic Success Story

/by

Katie Forrest and Taylor Collins hit it big with their meaty protein bars. Now they’re determined to improve the lives of farm animals and the lands they graze

Author: Kimya Kavehkar | Published: October 10, 2017

One July morning, blessedly before the excruciating heat of summer descends, I’m hiking the Barton Creek Greenbelt with a couple of fit thirtysomethings and Lakota, their 8-year-old chocolate Labrador retriever. A thin haze drapes the sun, and the bone-dry creek bed we cross—in more verdant times a spot where people wade through rushing waters with beer cans in hand—is mostly dust.

Katie Forrest, a mountain biker and Ironman triathlete, and Taylor Collins, also a triathlete and a marathon runner, gracefully navigate slippery rocks and fallen branches along the trail with impressive speed. My short legs and not-at-all-athletic frame make it a struggle to keep up, as I try not to pant too heavily, even though I’m asking a lot of questions. The only other sounds are the jangling of Lakota’s collar, as she leads our pack confidently, and the crunching of the forest detritus beneath our feet.

The conversation turns to Forrest and Collins’ infant daughter, Scout.

“I think about the way she eats versus the way that I was raised to eat, and it’s so fundamentally different,” Forrest says, a baseball cap pulled low over her eyes. “Last night she had a grass-fed ribeye. She was just sucking the fatty part. I think her first solid food was pastured egg yolk, and the second was bone marrow. My first food was rice cereal and then mashed peas.”

Maybe Scout’s next solid meal will be the bison-bacon-cranberry bars her parents sell through their line of gourmet, grain-free, soy-free, dairy-free, gluten-free jerky products, Epic Provisions.

A few hours later I’m at Epic’s South Congress Avenue headquarters. Forrest and Collins had invited me to a lunchtime potluck during which they’re showing their staff a PowerPoint presentation about regenerative farming. The design of their offices can best be described as Anthropologie-meets-your-uncle’s-ranch-cabin. I head to the basement where about 20 employees are filling their plates in the kitchen and cracking open icy Topo Chicos before settling into their seats. I notice that one person is barefoot.

Forrest, 31, and Collins, 34, are at the front of the room fidgeting with the projector remote and a stack of notes in nearly the same outfits that they’d gone hiking in that morning; Collins has switched out his tennis shoes for flip-flops.

Epic looks, feels, and acts every bit an Austin born-and-bred company. The lack of pretention of its husband-and-wife founders is matched by their quiet determination to succeed and devotion to their mission to build much more than merely a thriving business.

Ever since Epic was purchased by packaged food titan General Mills in January 2016, Forrest and Collins have been able to step away from the day-to-day slog of running a profitable company and put themselves in the position of thought leaders hell-bent on altering the prevailing relationship between farm animals and grazing lands. Terms of the General Mills deal were not disclosed, but with Epic boasting annual revenue of about $20 million, one source told financial news site TheStreet that the purchase price was about $100 million.

That’s why they’ve gathered their staff here, to view slides depicting grasslands in various states of growth and to learn what words like “ruminants” mean. (The term refers to animals like goats and cows that must regurgitate their partially digested food to be chewed more than once.) “Once people start to learn about regenerative agriculture, it starts to change everything for them,” Collins says.

Long before they became evangelists for rotational grazing, they were students who first crossed paths in an Austin High School hallway in 2001. “It was the most intense emotional experience of my life, like earth-shaking,” Collins remembers of seeing Forrest for the first time. She felt much the same, but because they were a few years apart in age they had few opportunities to interact during that single year they overlapped at AHS.

They didn’t reconnect until three years later as students at Texas State University. They kept seeing each other when they walked through the same park every day to get to class. Then Forrest, a women’s studies major, called Collins, a physical therapy student, and asked if they could carpool. For their first date, they went to a modern dance performance as extra credit for one of her classes and grabbed a bite afterward at Magnolia Cafe. After dating for just three months, they moved in together, much to the chagrin of her parents.

Among the things that bonded them was their competitive spirits and shared pleasure in pushing their bodies to their physical limits. They didn’t fit the lazy college kid stereotype. For fun they’d take 10-hour bike rides together and participated in marathons and triathlons.

“Anything that gives us a little resistance that we can push into that helps us work towards accomplishing something is very, very rewarding in our lives,” Collins says.

KEEP READING ON AUSTIN MONTHLY