High Claims, Limited Scientific Rigor - Anonymous employee Agreena Employee Review

Critical discussion around core scientific assumptions—particularly carbon removal accounting—was limited. In my experience, raising methodological concerns was not actively encouraged. There was a noticeable imbalance between investment in commercial activities (marketing and sales) and investment in scientific and technical robustness. Much of the scientific work appeared to be carried out by relatively inexperienced staff, with limited senior scientific oversight, making it challenging to ensure methodological rigor at the level implied by the company’s public claims. There was limited integration of agronomy and soil science expertise into decision-making, despite these being central to the company’s work. Many roles and leadership positions appeared to be filled by individuals with finance or commercial backgrounds rather than direct farming or soil science experience. Strategic direction changed frequently, with shifting priorities and a lack of stable long-term goals, which made sustained, careful work difficult. My termination was handled in a way I experienced as unprofessional and lacking transparency.