Table of Contents
Introduction
Sharing the Load: Why “Landscape” Approaches Are the Future of Sustainable Agriculture
Decarbonizing agriculture faces a paradox: each company is trying to reduce its Scope 3 emissions on its own, yet it is precisely this isolated approach that is hindering progress.
An industry trapped in a “convenience-driven mindset”
When companies try to tackle their Scope 3 emissions on their own, progress is, by its very nature, very slow.
Today, the agricultural sector remains trapped in a “commodity-based approach” rather than a “stakeholder-based approach”: companies are often far removed from the farm and generally purchase only a single crop within a multi-year crop rotation.
This fragmentation results in poor data traceability and a profound disconnect between on-the-ground activities and companies’ carbon accounting. Added to this is the difficulty of navigating a multitude of conflicting calculation methodologies—including approximately 25 ISO standards for product footprints alone—which is a source of immense confusion.
To accelerate decarbonization, key industry players emphasize the need to shift toward collaborative“landscape”approaches that pool resources and co-finance initiatives across the entire farm.
The Landscape Enterprise Network (LENs)
The Landscape Enterprise Network (LENs) is a prime example of this collaborative model. LENs brings together a critical mass of regional stakeholders - local governments, agri-food companies, and water companies - to pool their funding in pursuit of shared environmental outcomes, such as soil regeneration and carbon sequestration.
Since different stakeholders benefit from the same regenerative practices in different ways - an agri-food company gains supply chain resilience, while a water utility sees its water treatment costs decrease - pooling resources significantly lowers the financial barrier to entry. Each funder then receives customized reports tailored to its specific needs, such as for its Scope 3 alignment.
This model helps move the sector beyond short-lived pilot projects and toward sustainable impact: it has enabled the disbursement of nearly 30 million euros in fair and meaningful payments to farmers since 2021.
Major processors are also recognizing the need for shared programs to achieve their climate and methane goals by 2030. Danone is strongly committed to pre-competitive alignment: multiple players within the same supply chain agree in advance on common methodologies, program designs, and key performance indicators (KPIs) in order to unlock essential co-financing opportunities.
The EIT Food Lower Silesia Initiative
The EIT Food Initiative Lower Silesia 360° provides a concrete example of this co-financing at the farm-wide level. Launched in October 2025 for a three-year period (2025–2028) and coordinated by EIT Food, this flagship project brings together nearly 200 Polish farmers across more than 20,000 hectares in Lower Silesia, focusing on four major crops: rapeseed, wheat, malting barley, and sugar beets.
Several leaders in the agri-food industry— Bunge, PepsiCo, Viking Malt, and Malteurop —pool their financing there as buyers (off-takers) — while a consortium of experts comprising MyEasyFarm, Seqana, and Biosphères provides the initiative’s “digital backbone”: MyEasyFarm deploying its MRV platform to collect reliable data on soil health, biodiversity, and greenhouse gas emissions; Seqana provides scientific quantification of soil carbon; and Biosphères contributes its on-the-ground expertise in regenerative agriculture.
Designed as a model that can be replicated across Europe, the project combines technical training and financial incentives to make the transition sustainable and economically viable for farmers.
And watch the recording of the conference highlighting the project.
Would you like to find out more and talk to our experts?
Moving from Offsetting to True Decarbonization of Scope 3
Experts point out that if sequestered carbon is sold as a traditional offset credit, the underlying agricultural product can no longer be considered “low-carbon”—which directly conflicts with efforts to decarbonize corporate supply chains.
While voluntary carbon markets do indeed exist, MRV (measurement, reporting, and verification) for Scope 3 reporting remains the top priority for 85% of farmers. However, the lack of clear guidelines on what constitutes Scope 3 emissions in relation to tradable credits—within frameworks such as the EU’s Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF)—is causing companies to remain stuck in “pilot mode” to avoid the risk of double counting.
The Crucial Role of the EU and Interoperability
To overcome these obstacles, standards organizations, digital tool providers, and corporate buyers must share the financial risk and the costs of data collection. Industry experts warn against data duplication, citing cases where field samplers visit the same farm multiple times during a single season to collect identical data for different companies.
To address this, the European Union must act as a “system builder, ” linking the various reporting protocols (such as the GHG Protocol, the CSRD, and the CRCF) to ensure consistency and interoperability. Many experts recommend using the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) as an operational framework and opening up existing national datasets to drastically reduce MRV costs.
By establishing a digital infrastructure based on the “ask once, reuse data” principle and by providing financial support to operators who coordinate these complex“landscape”projects, the EU can reduce the administrative burden on farmers and encourage downstream agri-food companies to take action.
Conclusion
Decarbonizing agriculture will not happen on a farm-by-farm or company-by-company basis.
As long as each stakeholder acts alone, progress will remain slow, data will remain fragmented, and projects will remain stuck in perpetual “pilot mode.”“Landscape”approaches turn this logic on its head: by pooling funding, methodologies, and data collection across a region rather than focusing on a single crop, they lower the barrier to entry, ensure fair payments for farmers, and make the transition a long-term commitment rather than a mere experiment.
To scale up, two conditions remain: clarifying the distinction between Scope 3 reporting and tradable credits to alleviate concerns about double counting, and making the European Union a true “system builder” capable of enforcing the principle of “ask once, reuse the data.”
The challenge is no longer to prove that regenerative agriculture works, but to collectively organize its funding and evaluation.
In short: sharing the effort is the key to maximizing our impact.
