In this file:


·         Study: Big food brands may be falling short on lofty climate goals

·         The World’s Largest Protein Companies Are Failing To Address Their Environmental Impacts



Study: Big food brands may be falling short on lofty climate goals


Grete Suarez, Yahoo Finance

September 8, 2019


Big brands like McDonalds (MCD), Nestlé (NESN.SW), and Walmart (WMT) are championing climate action, but a network of investors argue the big brands’ suppliers aren’t aligned with their messaging.


A new report suggests that the bold public commitments these big brands have made diverge from the reality.


Within the vast global food supply chain, there’s a large gap between what big food brands commit to in terms of reducing the environmental impact, and what their suppliers have in place, according to the latest Protein Producer Index from the Farm Animal Investment Risk and Return (FAIRR).


The FAIRR index is created to bring transparency into the “hidden” supply chain by tracking 60 of the world’s largest exchange-listed protein suppliers.


It assigns a “risk rating” determined from nine critical risks that impact sustainable farming including greenhouse gas emissions, food safety, and working conditions for laborers.


“It is the companies hidden upstream in the meat and dairy supply chain who face the most significant climate and public health risks,” said Jeremy Coller, FAIRR founder said in a statement.


“Our research shows that the largest animal protein producers have failed to deliver any solutions,” he said — with some of the key offenders being suppliers to McDonalds, Tesco (TSCO.L), Nestlé, and Walmart.


The FAIRR network is made up of institutional investors holding $17.1 trillion in assets under management. The group believes “intensive animal production poses material risks to the global financial system and hinders sustainable development.”


For instance, McDonald’s has a target to reduce 31% of greenhouse gas emissions across its supply chain by 2030. Yet according to FAIRR, three-quarters of major meat, fish, and dairy producers suppliers do not measure emissions.


“When we took a deep-dive look into the actual producers, we didn’t see these public commitments and we didn’t see the public available data or information,” said Maria Lettini, Director of FAIRR on YFi PM.


“It’s up to us there and the investor market to connect the dots there to ask the producers and sellers to see if they’re actually aligned with the commitments we’ve seen,’ said Lettini.


For example, Walmart...


more, including links



The World’s Largest Protein Companies Are Failing To Address Their Environmental Impacts


Jenny Splitter, Contributor, Forbes

Sep 9, 2019


Many of world’s largest animal protein producers are failing to address their environmental, animal welfare and human health impacts, a new report suggests. Now in its second year, the Coller FAIRR Protein Producer Index analyzes companies like Hormel and the Brazilian meat firm JBS, finding that many of the 60 largest in the sector aren’t taking the necessary steps to reduce their environmental impacts. Despite urgent warnings from environmental groups that food producers must do more, many of the largest animal protein companies are failing to take necessary action.


Soaring Population, Shrinking Resources


According to the United Nations, the world population will reach 9.7 billion people by the year 2050. There’s no question that industrial food production has succeeded in feeding huge swaths of the global population for decades now, but that success has come with significant costs to the environment.


Many food companies say they’re working to reduce their environmental harms, but at least according to this report, the publicly available data suggests otherwise. This year, the FAIRR Index has analyzed the sustainability efforts of 60 of the largest animal protein companies across nine different categories, including greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, food waste, conditions for workers, antibiotic use and animal welfare, and in many cases found company efforts lacking.


To make matters worse, the increasing impacts of climate change are putting additional pressures on food production. “What we’re seeing is that companies in the sector are contributing to many of the risks we discuss in the report, but they’re also deeply the impacts of climate change,” says FAIRR’s Head of Research, Aarti Ramachandran.


The financial consequences can be severe. “We’re already seeing company revenues hit by extreme weather events,” Ramachandran says, pointing to the Australian Agricultural Company as an example. The beef producer lost over $100 million in damages due to flooding in Queensland. “They lost over half of their herd,” she says, but despite these significant losses, the company has still failed to disclose any sort of climate change mitigation strategy. 


All Talk, Little Action ...


One Quarter Of The Companies Refuses To Disclose Antibiotic Use ... 


There Is Some Good News ...


more, including links