It’s been a testing few weeks for sustainability professionals. The failure of COP29 (climate), COP16 (biodiversity) and INC-5 (plastics) to make meaningful progress in taming the assault on the planet from ‘business as usual’ politics and commerce, was enough to leave the most hardened optimist weeping into their half-empty, reusable cup of Fairtrade coffee.
The Grocer captured the dispiriting zeitgeist with a cover feature titled ‘How sustainability efforts are going up in flames’, in which demoralised food and drink sustainability leaders queued up to bemoan their lack of agency to effect meaningful change in large organisations.
That’s not to suggest there aren’t businesses attempting the transformational task of aligning commercial models with climate science, rather than the other way around, but they remain the exception rather the rule. For evidence, we need look no further than WWF’s latest ‘What’s in store for the planet’ report, which charts progress among the UK’s leading grocery retailers towards the goal of halving the environmental impact of UK shopping baskets by 2030. Despite improvements in data collection, pilots in shifting agricultural practices, and supply chain innovation, WWF concluded that “insufficient progress” is being made towards both the headline goal and specific targets for climate and nature. “Across the board we see retailers consistently struggling to make progress on those outcomes for which systemic change is necessary,” WWF stated. “We see this particularly within the sourcing of verified DCF (deforestation and conversion-free) soy and cocoa, and shifting consumers towards a healthier, more sustainable diet, where collective action across government and industry is needed to move the needle.”
The first major milestone for the WWF Basket – for 100% DCF agricultural commodity supply chains by 2025 – is unlikely to be met if immediate action isn’t taken. WWF said it now plans to work with IGD and Wrap to accelerate action throughout the whole supply chain through the development of a food systems change leaders forum.
One of WWF’s targets is for a 40:30:30 percentage split in sales of proteins across livestock, seafood and plant-based proteins respectively by 2030. This is but a pipe dream at the moment. Although the number of retailers reporting on protein food diversification has increased from six to nine since 2023, livestock-based protein still accounts for 79% of sales across the retailers assessed.
Anyone looking to replace meat in the diet for their own health and that of the planet should look no further than beans, according to new research. Beans and peas rank best as meat and milk replacements from nutritional, health, environmental and cost perspectives, according to a new study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Led by Marco Springmann of the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food, the study assessed traditional plant-based products such as tofu and tempeh against processed alternatives such as veggie burgers and plant milks, innovative products such as lab-grown beef, as well as unprocessed foods such as soybeans and peas. It echoed a recent Food Foundation analysis in finding that unprocessed plant-based foods such as soybeans, peas and beans are best suited for replacing meat and dairy.
Strategies to reduce the impact from diets on greenhouse gas emissions encompass supply side as well as demand-based measures. In their recent decarbonisation plan for the food and drink sector, IGD and Wrap highlighted the potential use of feed additives to reduce methane emissions from grazing animals. The future for such innovation has been thrown into doubt, however, by the row over Arla’s trial of the Bovaer feed additive, which has become the subject of social media-stoked outrage and misinformation. The dairy giant has faced calls to boycott its products following the announcement of a trial to use Bovaer on 30 of its UK farms with critics claiming, without evidence, that the additive is a risk to human health. In fact, Bovear has been assessed as safe by the European Food Safety Authority, whose approvals process is regarded as one of the most stringent in the world, as well as by the UK’s Food Standards Agency.
While there is a legitimate argument to be made that methane-supressing feed additives deflect attention from the need to reduce meat consumption and adopt more regenerative livestock practices, the IGD analysis is clear that all the tools in the box will be required to decarbonise the UK food system – including feed innovation.
Arla has pledged to press on regardless. As for social-media driven conspiracy theories, the Digest patiently awaits the public backlash against microplastics and forever chemicals (PFAS) for which the evidence of genuine harm is getting stronger by the day. We shan’t hold our breath.
Other news stories this week, which can be accessed via the Footprint website, focus on the abandonment of the UK Government’s planned mandatory takeback scheme for single-use cups; a call from UKHospitality for flexibility to underpin new allergens guidance for out of home businesses; and analysis showing a modest fall in calorie levels in sweet products sold in Scottish cafés, coffee shops and bakeries.
Leave a Reply