Foodrise’s response to the Financial Conduct Authority’s consultation.
Foodrise, alongside nearly 50 partner organisations, call on the European Commission, European Council, European Parliament and EU member states to support legally binding targets to reduce food waste from farm to fork by 2030, and for food waste measurement and targets to include edible food left unharvested or used on farm at primary production.
We urge the European Commission to set a legally binding target of a 50%, farm-to-fork reduction in food waste by 2030 and recommend that policymakers, organisations, and individuals join us in calling for these targets to be adopted.
We along with other organisations urge IFC shareholders not to grant the proposed loan of up to US$200 million to Louis Dreyfus Company Brazil (LDC) for the purchase of soy and corn produced in the heavily threatened Cerrado biome of Brazil, the world’s most biodiverse savanna that has already lost roughly half of its native vegetation to agribusiness.
Surplus food redistribution (SFR) is hailed as a ‘win-win’ strategy to address both household food insecurity and food waste. However, SFR is condemned as being a ‘band-aid’ solution that addresses neither the fundamental socio-economic causes of poverty, nor the systematic roots of food waste. This research aims to set an agenda for the future of SFR in the UK for the next five to 10 years, including policy interventions required to achieve this future.
The future of SFR lies in a truly sustainable food system that meets the needs of the people and delivers socio-economic benefits whilst respecting planetary boundaries. In this future, SFR is no longer required as a solution for food waste or household food insecurity. Finally, the study identifies five pathways leading to this future: i) rejecting the SFR ‘win-win’ narrative ii) tackling systematic food overproduction iii) eradicating poverty iv) delivering food security within planetary boundaries, and v) balancing uneven power distribution amongst food system actors. The proposed interventions are relevant to food and waste policies, and offer insights to transition pathways for sustainable food and other socio-technical systems.
October 2022 Update: Joint Statement by IATP, Feedback and DeSmog on JBS’ response to our research published in April 2022 on its GHG emissions
JBS, which is the largest meat processor in the world, increased its annual greenhouse gas emissions by a whopping 51% between 2016 and 2021, from 280 million metric tonnes to 421.6 million metric tonnes (mmts), based on the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP)’s latest calculations.[1]
This is more than fossil fuel giant Total’s 2020 emissions.[2] It is more than Italy’s annual climate footprint and 95% of France’s (at 443 mmt). As JBS prepares for its annual general meeting (AGM) on 22 April in São Paulo, this briefing outlines how the company’s “green” claims fail to live up to reality and the meat giant continues to mislead in its communications with investors and the public.
“Both the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine have shed light on the weaknesses of the
European food system.”
Read our joint letter on EU food supply and solidarity response to the war in Ukraine.
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.
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.
