Agricultural Horizons: Research, Technology and Sustainable Development Vol. 3

Regenerative agriculture has become a prominent framework for responding simultaneously to soil degradation, climate change and pressure on crop production, yet the evidence supporting a universal "triple win" of greater soil carbon storage, lower greenhouse-gas emissions and higher yields remains uneven. This critical narrative review evaluates regenerative agriculture as a family of context-dependent management strategies rather than a single intervention. Literature published from January 2010 to 4 July 2026 was examined, with older foundational evidence included where needed. The synthesis focuses on reduced or no tillage, cover crops, diversified rotations and leys, residue retention, agroforestry, organic amendments and biochar, while distinguishing soil carbon accumulation from net climate mitigation. Across these practices, increases in soil organic carbon are most credible when management increases net carbon inputs, protects carbon from rapid loss and is maintained for sufficient duration. Benefits are frequently concentrated in surface soil, depend on baseline soil carbon, climate, texture and residue management, and are constrained by saturation, reversibility and measurement choices. Nitrous oxide and methane responses can materially offset apparent carbon gains, especially where nitrogen-rich residues, manure, wet soils or paddy conditions increase anaerobic microbial activity. Yield effects are similarly conditional: average responses are often neutral to positive, but water competition, transition costs, crop choice and nutrient synchrony can generate losses. Recent meta-analyses indicate that simultaneous gains in yield and soil carbon occur in only a subset of observations, reinforcing that the practice that maximises one outcome may not maximise another. The most defensible interpretation is therefore performance-based: regenerative systems should be evaluated by whole-profile soil carbon stocks, direct non-carbon-dioxide gases, input-related emissions, yield level and stability, and permanence over relevant timescales. Climate policy and farm decision-making should favour measured, locally adapted outcome bundles rather than assuming that a regenerative label guarantees mitigation or productivity benefits.