Corporate Climate Commitment: A Critical Assessment of Major Food Giants
Source: dairynews.today
A 2025 report evaluates the climate responsibility practices of the world's top food companies, revealing significant gaps in their commitments to reducing emissions.
A recent report titled ‘Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025’ evaluated five leading food companies regarding their climate change mitigation efforts. Conducted by the NewClimate Institute and Carbon Market Watch, the analysis focused on greenhouse gas emissions and sustainable practices. Disconcertingly, none of these companies had committed to reducing livestock production or significantly shifting to plant-based protein sources, which are major contributors to their emissions.
They rely on commodity certificates for deforestation-free claims without substantive action towards reducing fertiliser emissions, which account for 25% of agricultural greenhouse gases. Among the scrutinized firms, JBS stood out negatively, missing a tangible emissions reduction target while expanding high-emission operations. Nestlé’s pledge was criticized as misleading, potentially translating to a lower-than-required reduction compared to 2019 levels.
PepsiCo was chided for insufficient methane emission and food waste targets, with its increasing reliance on virgin plastics adding to its emissions. Mars was praised for target transparency but plans for reducing animal-based protein reliance and fertiliser use were lacking. Danone, with a methane reduction goal, aimed to expand its plant-based offerings, yet the clarity on land-based removals for achieving net zero remained vague. The report concludes with a recommendation for separate emissions reduction targets from carbon removals to ensure accountability.
They rely on commodity certificates for deforestation-free claims without substantive action towards reducing fertiliser emissions, which account for 25% of agricultural greenhouse gases. Among the scrutinized firms, JBS stood out negatively, missing a tangible emissions reduction target while expanding high-emission operations. Nestlé’s pledge was criticized as misleading, potentially translating to a lower-than-required reduction compared to 2019 levels.
PepsiCo was chided for insufficient methane emission and food waste targets, with its increasing reliance on virgin plastics adding to its emissions. Mars was praised for target transparency but plans for reducing animal-based protein reliance and fertiliser use were lacking. Danone, with a methane reduction goal, aimed to expand its plant-based offerings, yet the clarity on land-based removals for achieving net zero remained vague. The report concludes with a recommendation for separate emissions reduction targets from carbon removals to ensure accountability.
