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.

In September 2020, the UK government held a 6-week consultation about its proposals for due diligence legislation on forest risk commodities. This followed the publication in March 2020 of the Recommendations Report from the independent Taskforce for the UK’s Global Resource Initiative (GRI). Foodrise's response focused on expanding the scope of the proposed new due diligence law, and in underscoring the recommendations of the GRI.

Foodrise welcome that the government is committed to zero food waste to landfill by 2030 and mandatory separate food waste collection. The government is also “committed to increasing the energy from waste produced through AD”. The summary of evidence presented here shows that Anaerobic Digestion (AD) is often a suboptimal use of the land and resources embodied in food waste, except as a last-resort waste management option, and that food waste prevention and diversion to animal feed yield far greater environmental benefits.

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

Foodrise's report ‘Butchering the Planet’, showing for the first time the banks, pension funds and asset managers providing financial fodder to the world’s biggest factory farming corporations. Here we share the underlying dataset. Compiled through meticulous research by the Dutch not-for-profit Profundo from a range of financial databases, the data documents the money pouring into the world’s thirty-five biggest meat and dairy companies. We invite journalists, campaigners and activists to use this data to help uncover the pensions telling porkies about their sustainability policies, the investors who think factory farming will be a long-term cash-cow, and the piggy banks getting greedy for industrial meat.

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

Food waste should be addressed holistically, as early as from the farm and all the way to the fork. In this regard, we are disappointed by the lack of attention to food waste occurring at the primary production level and the early stages of the supply chain.

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.