A policy brief outlining recommendations for UK policymakers based on the results of FLAVOUR, an innovative project funded by the EU’s Interreg 2 Seas Mers Zeeën 2014-2020 programme that aims to tackle food waste while supporting inclusive jobs in the social economy.
Our research reveals that eating the wild-caught fish destined for salmon farms would allow nearly 4 million tonnes of fish to be left in the sea while providing an extra 6 million tonnes of seafood.
Anaerobic digestion (AD) – the process of producing “biogas” from organic matter like crops and wastes – has presented itself as the silver bullet to everything from producing green gas for heating and transport, to producing fertiliser for our crops. However, our research shows that, at best, AD is a sub-optimal sticking plaster solution, and at worst, it is sometimes actually perpetuating the problems it claims to solve.
The UK’s local councils are pouring £238 million in pension fund money into industrial livestock investments, fuelling a destructive industry which causes climate change, deforestation, human rights abuses and industrial-scale animal cruelty.
This report explores the role of Dutch supermarkets in addressing the country’s climate footprint by taking responsibility for the environmental impact of their high meat and dairy sales.
The report is in Dutch, a summary in English is available here.
We contributed to Changing Markets report on methane. Climate scientists have confirmed that a focus on methane emissions – in addition to measures designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions – will be crucial in determining whether global heating can be kept below 1.5°C. Although the livestock sector is by far the largest contributor of human-induced methane emissions, the report reveals that both the biggest meat and dairy-producing countries – with some of the highest methane emissions – and the largest meat and dairy corporations are oblivious to the problem.
Food retailers face a new climate and sustainability front: in order to meet net zero goals, the UK must reduce meat and dairy consumption by least 50% by 2030 and beyond. Yet, currently, the majority of retailers are failing to face up to both long- and short-term physical and transitional climate risks associated with their meat and dairy sales. As markets continue to price climate risk into the value of equity securities, setting and meeting ambitious and accountable science-based targets on product emissions will become a bellwether of a retailer’s long-term viability. Investors have the opportunity to review potential retail investments in Foodrise’s Meat and Climate Scorecard to assess their responsiveness to supply chain and regulatory risk.
Action to reduce methane emissions can avoid 0.3°C of warming by 2045, according to UNEP. While reduction in fossil fuel methane emissions is both vital and achievable, this briefing sets out the benefits to concurrently implementing global action plans to address the role of agriculture and food systems in generating methane emissions. This briefing sets out the case for the UK Presidency of COP26 to advocate for effective demand-side food system measures to achieve major methane reductions in the agriculture sector, bringing 1.5 degrees within reach.
We need to eat significantly less meat but is it necessary to cut out meat and animal products from our diets completely? Our paper describes the important role that livestock should play at recycling unavoidable food waste in the food system and defines what less and better meat really looks like. Our evidence based definition of ‘better meat’ is meat from animals that are reared only on food waste and by-products and do not graze or eat crops from land that could be used to grow human-edible crops. In fact, eating some meat, fed exclusively on leftovers, maximises the nutritional output of our land and uses less land than a vegan diet.All this can be done safely by treating the food waste in specialist treatment facilities.
Its important that money saved from feeding animals on leftovers does not lead to an increase in industrial livestock, or this will undo the climate benefits. The climate and land footprint of the UK’s pigs and chickens is predominantly abroad as the feed is imported. Our leftovers model creates a real opportunity to end the reliance on feed imports and their devastating effects on rainforests and the climate.
UK supermarkets control over 90% of the UK groceries market share and for many people, going to the supermarket is the only option for buying food. Supermarkets therefore have a responsibilty to ensure the food they sell isn’t hurting the planet, including meat and dairy. With this scorecard, Feedback set out to assess the top 10 UK supermarkets on their work to address the climate crisis by reducing the environmental impact of the meat and dairy they sell. See how well your supermarket scored.
Scientists urge governments to act aggressively over the next decade to keep global warming to 1.5°C and avert the worst consequences of climate change. Pivotal to that effort are policies to quickly end reliance on dirty energy; support a rapid transition to genuinely non-emitting and renewable energy; and protect forests and other intact ecosystems as critical carbon sinks. Industrial scale biomass-burning in the power sector threatens all three pillars of climate action and should not be subsidised.
Anaerobic Digestion (AD) of biomass feedstocks such as wastes and bioenergy crops is often a suboptimal use of land and resources, and must therefore be kept within its sustainable niche as a last-resort waste management option1. Any support for the growth of AD must be designed in a manner which does not undermine waste prevention efforts or divert land from environmentally preferable uses.
The UK prides itself on being a world leader on climate action, and in particular deforestation. New legislative proposals from the UK government plan to introduce a due diligence obligation on companies trading in forest risk commodities – but exempts the financial sector which finances this trade. This report analyses sample investments held by the Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund (PCPF) and reveals that Members of Parliament hold pensions investments in a fund holding US$67m in stock from companies among the top 35 largest global meat and dairy companies. The fund includes shares of JBS, one of the biggest meat producers in the world whose business practices have been repeatedly linked to deforestation in the Amazon rainforest and Cerrado region. These investments demonstrate why regulation is needed: MPs who strongly support an end to U.K. complicity in global deforestation will go on the record while, unknowingly, paying their own money into a fund that backs some of the worst offenders in forest destruction. Domestic legislation on deforestation which fails to address one of the most integral parts of the supply chain, finance, leaves gaping loopholes. Incorporating a due diligence obligation on finance sector organisations would close many of these gaps.
The Paris agreement targets are unlikely to be met by mitigation alone and based on current trajectories, 1.5°C warming is likely to be exceeded between 2030 and 2052. It is therefore clear that the UK will also need to use Greenhouse Gas Removal methods to reach net zero by 2050. However, it is imperative that Greenhouse Gas Removal is in addition to maximising the mitigation potential of all sectors.
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.
We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
