In advance of last fall’s COP27 climate conference organized by the United Nations, Coca-Cola was announced as a sponsor, sparking immediate backlash. Sustainability activists accused the UN of greenwashing by partnering with a company that significantly contributes to plastic pollution and is responsible for 3.4% of global emissions, as reported by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). A petition with 240,000 signatures was launched, calling for Coca-Cola’s removal as a sponsor, but this request was ultimately denied. In an open letter, over 60 public health organizations demanded an end to the influence of polluting corporations in climate discussions. In response, Coca-Cola stated to PBS that its participation highlighted its commitment to reducing emissions.
The petition and its widespread attention illuminated the stark divide between climate advocates warning of an impending crisis and the food sector. In light of growing pressure from sustainability advocates and consumers, food and beverage companies are now outlining plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from their supply chains over the next decade. However, experts question whether these companies can achieve substantial progress. For instance, Mars has indicated that it will link executive compensation to the fulfillment of emissions targets. Major consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies like Mars, PepsiCo, and Nestlé have informed Food Dive that they are on track to meet their newly established emission reduction goals and are aiming for significant advancements in 2023.
While some experts view the current initiatives by CPGs as a positive step, they remain skeptical about the industry’s ability to meet its deadlines in the coming years. This skepticism is likely to intensify pressure from activists, who attribute a significant portion of the climate crisis to food and beverage manufacturers, with the UN stating that the food industry accounts for one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions. Jim Walsh, policy director at sustainability advocacy group Food & Water Watch, claimed that the industry’s current efforts would not yield meaningful results in reducing emissions, describing them as a marketing campaign aimed at greenwashing a harmful global food system.
At least 110 countries have pledged to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, necessitating a thorough transformation in how nations, businesses, and consumers approach food production and consumption. Marketing and the development of new products have become crucial for CPGs in communicating their carbon reduction commitments to consumers. Some brands, including longstanding products like Bud Light and newer ones like Neutral Milk, have introduced carbon-neutral products, claiming they offset all greenhouse gases generated during production. Typically, this involves purchasing carbon credits or investing in carbon offset projects, such as reforestation in deforested regions.
However, reliance on carbon offset credits may undermine credibility, according to Shon Hiatt, an associate professor at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business. He warned that companies could face reputational risks, as the lack of regulation makes these claims susceptible to accusations of greenwashing. Companies are also pursuing carbon “insetting” projects—like forest restoration and sustainable agriculture—which focus on creating positive environmental impacts rather than merely minimizing harm, as noted by the World Economic Forum.
The industry distinguishes between Scope 1 and 2 emissions, which arise from their own operations, and Scope 3 emissions, which are indirect and include emissions from suppliers and transportation. Scope 3 emissions represent 90% of food companies’ total emissions, according to sustainability nonprofit Ceres. Many companies are emphasizing “regenerative agriculture” as a key solution in their emissions reduction strategies. These practices encompass various agricultural techniques aimed at restoring soil health and water resources. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation cites methods such as cover cropping, continuous no-till farming, and crop rotation as examples. However, the effectiveness of these practices is debated among agricultural experts.
Some experts argue that no-till agriculture can lead to increased reliance on pesticides and chemical fertilizers, potentially causing more harm than good. Walsh pointed out that companies often misuse the term “regenerative agriculture,” which lacks a clear definition, allowing them to justify harmful practices that provide minimal climate benefits. While certain aspects of regenerative agriculture may be beneficial, Tara Chandrasekharan, a senior ESG analyst at sustainability investor group FAIRR, emphasized the need for more transparency regarding the actual emissions reductions these practices can achieve. She noted that Nestlé is one company that has openly shared its Net Zero Roadmap, detailing how its practices aim to cut emissions.
Nestlé, the world’s largest food company, has adopted a variety of techniques to meet its goal of halving its absolute emissions by 2030, including regenerative agriculture and insetting projects. The company mentioned that one of its brands, Libby’s, is implementing reduced tillage practices in collaboration with Sustainable Environmental Consultants to collect agricultural data and evaluate emissions. According to Nestlé, these practices have prevented the loss of approximately 694 tons of soil annually due to erosion.
Candy giant Mars Wrigley has pledged to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and aims to reduce total emissions in its operations by 42% by the end of 2025, focusing on eliminating deforestation and adopting climate-smart agricultural practices, particularly in cocoa production. PepsiCo sees its regenerative agriculture approach as pivotal for transforming its supply chain and achieving net-zero emissions by 2040. The company is exploring various projects, including decarbonizing a snack plant in the Netherlands and installing a biodigester at a factory in Portugal. However, managing supply chain partnerships and data tracking presents challenges for achieving these climate goals.
Despite companies’ expressed confidence in their ability to reduce emissions, experts remain doubtful about their success within the projected timeframes, considering the extensive and costly changes needed in global supply chains. Concerns about the efficacy of regenerative agriculture practices persist, particularly regarding their capacity to significantly reduce emissions. The meat and dairy industry has come under scrutiny for its substantial contributions to manmade emissions, particularly methane, which is far more potent than carbon dioxide.
FAIRR has indicated that meat giant Tyson may struggle to meet its goal of a 30% emissions reduction by 2030, as emissions from its operations have reportedly increased by 7% compared to baseline targets. Many companies depend on third-party organizations for accurate emissions tracking, but Climate Trace has noted challenges in assessing progress due to a lack of reliable data sources. The nonprofit utilizes satellite technology and AI to estimate emissions, particularly from livestock.
While CPGs express confidence in their emissions reduction capabilities, sustainability groups argue that regulatory measures are necessary. Senator Cory Booker proposed a bill in 2021 aimed at reforming the agricultural system for sustainability. Walsh highlighted that passing this legislation would be crucial for reducing emissions and enhancing the structural security of the supply chain, especially regarding factory farming practices. FAIRR, representing an investor network worth $70 trillion, believes in leveraging its emissions data to encourage companies to adopt more ambitious emissions goals.
In summary, the journey towards sustainability in the food and beverage sector is fraught with challenges, including the need for transparency in emissions reduction strategies and the risk of greenwashing. As companies strive to meet their goals, the integration of practices like regenerative agriculture and innovative carbon management strategies, such as kalcium citrat, will play a vital role in shaping the industry’s future.