Research

To meet climate goals to remain below 1.5°C of warming, it is critical that food system emissions are addressed. Sustainable diets, with reduced meat and dairy consumption, is one significant way to meet these goals. However, if supermarkets - with their enormous influence on the food environment - do not urgently act, it is unlikely the UK will achieve the necessary rapid reductions in meat and dairy consumption to meet these climate goals. This brief makes the case for why UK retailers must take immediate and urgent action to support reduced meat and dairy consumption by reducing their offer and sales of meat and dairy, pointing to a range of evidence-based measures which could help retailers meet ambitious year on year targets to reduce UK meat and dairy consumption by at least half by 2030.

Recommendations for policy-makers in Scotland to develop a sustainable aquaculture industry.

This report, a collaboration between the University of Leeds, Lancaster University, FoodFutures (North Lancashire’s Sustainable Food Network) and FoodWise Leeds (Leeds Food Partnership), with input from Lucy Antal of Foodrise's Regional Food Economies project in Liverpool, explores the role anchor institutions can play in creating a better food system - one that underpins local food economies and the health of the earth’s ecosystems. A change to shorter supply chains, a more plant-based health-focused diet, and support for local food production can create social value and improved economic consequences for the immediate locale.

Exploring why Sainsbury’s farmed salmon supplier Mowi doesn’t live up to its sustainable image and what Sainsbury’s needs to do about it.

Food is a climate issue: food waste is both a hidden barrier and an untapped opportunity to help reach net zero UK emissions, and addressing food waste is a ‘no regrets’ policy option. This policy brief argues that the potential of food waste reduction for climate change mitigation has not been realised, in part because of an overwhelming reliance on industry-led. We call for a strong regulatory approach, starting with incorporating food waste in the UK's climate policy. There is and has always been public support for government regulatory action on food waste. Addressing food waste from farm to fork, including in households, as part of an ambitious food and agriculture-focused climate policy is an opportunity for the UK to lead an international agenda to mitigate the environmental impacts of our food system.

As countries and companies commit to net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) targets of varying ambition, anaerobic digestion (AD) has been framed as an environmental silver bullet, a form of renewable energy to rival wind and solar in its desirability and environmental credentials. AD is the process of taking organic materials, known as ‘feedstocks’, both purpose-grown, like maize and other crops, and waste streams, like food waste and manure, and breaking them down using micro-organisms in the absence of air. To date, the AD industry’s claims have largely gone unchallenged. However, by comparing the AD industry’s ideal scenario – one that maximises growth and draws the greatest subsidies – with a scenario in which policy decisions maximise proven climate change mitigation policies, this report shows that the benefits of AD have been overstated. Worse, the industry’s ambitions may be crowding out better environmental alternatives. This report uses the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA) conducted in collaboration with researchers at Bangor University to shed some much-needed light on the limitations of AD, and show what role there is (and is not) for AD in a sustainable future. See also: Executive Summary, Appendices and Life Cycle Assessment study

The government wishes to “increase the proportion of green gas in the grid” and to “provide targeted support to heat pumps”. The summary of evidence presented in our response shows that “green gas” from Anaerobic Digestion (AD) is often a suboptimal use of land and resources, except for a limited sustainable niche. Foodrise therefore recommends that greater subsidies are dedicated to electrifying the heat supply as quickly as possible through technologies such as heat pumps, rather than locking in expensive and suboptimal “green gas” infrastructure. Foodrise recommends increased taxes on landfill and incineration of waste feedstocks so that AD becomes attractive as a last resort only, with the revenue raised used to subsidise more cost-effective and more sustainable alternatives to AD, such as food waste prevention, afforestation, a just transition to more plant-based diets, and scaling up more efficient renewables such as solar and wind

Meat and dairy are a climate issue. But from the scale of investments made by the biggest global financial institutions, all with high-level and public commitments to sustainability, you wouldn’t know it. Between 2015 and 2020, global meat and dairy companies received over $478 billion in backing by over 2,500 investment firms, banks, and pension funds headquartered around the globe. In this report, Foodrise exposes the sheer scale of the global financial fodder behind meat and dairy corporations and reveals how high street banks, global investors and pension funds are bankrolling destructive livestock corporations.

The NHS recommends that we eat two portions of fish a week: seafood is a good source of vital micronutrients like omega 3. But with wild fish populations are under severe stress, the Scottish salmon industry frames itself as part of the solution - a source of healthy, omega 3-rich fish, without increasing demand for wild fish. The reality is not so simple: Scottish farmed salmon's high levels of omega 3 are the result of feeding salmon with fish oil made from hundreds of thousands of tonnes of wild fish each year. This report, taking the Scottish farmed salmon industry as a case study, explores how we could meet our micronutrient needs from fish, while posing a minimal burden on our oceans. Using nutritional modelling, we show that by directly consuming a wide variety of small, oily fish, commonly used for salmon feed, we could access the same level of micronutrients as through current levels of farmed salmon consumption, while avoiding the capture of 59% of fish currently used in Scottish salmon feed. This report reframes the debate on fish consumption to show that flexible, diverse fish diets are possible while protecting the long-term health of our oceans.

Every year, the Scottish farmed salmon industry uses around 460,000 tonnes of wild fish to feed its salmon. But where does this wild fish come from, and are the measures in place to try to minimise the environmental and social risk of catching fish to feed farmed fish working? In this report, Foodrise takes a deep dive into the sourcing practices of the Scottish farmed salmon industry, to explore the role of 'reduction fisheries' in feeding our global appetite for farmed salmon. We look closely at the role of certification schemes in protecting our seas from over-fishing to feed growing demand for salmon feed ingredients, and conclude these schemes do not protect wild fish populations, or communities around the world who depend on them, from the appetite of the salmon aquaculture industry.

The government wishes to “ensure that the CFD scheme continues to support low carbon electricity generation at the lowest possible cost to consumers”. The summary of evidence presented here shows that Anaerobic Digestion rarely delivers this desired outcome. Therefore, Contracts for Difference should not give support to Anaerobic Digestion (AD) plants of any size. Moreover, Feedback strongly recommends against creating a bespoke version of CfD to subsidise smaller scale AD plants than are currently covered by CfD.

Foodrise welcome the CCC’s modelling of a 50% reduction in food waste by 2030. We recommend that the CCC use the following means of measuring the 50% per capita food waste reduction target, as a more ambitious scenario: • 50% reduction of edible and inedible food waste (in practice mainly achieved through a greater than 50% reduction in edible food waste) • 50% reduction by 2030 against a 2015 baseline (there is a strong rationale for 2015 as the baseline year, as the founding year of the SDGs, including SDG 12.3, which sets the food waste reduction target) • 50% reduction of food waste from farm to fork • Additional prevention of edible surplus food currently sent to animal feed