Major meat and dairy firms have issued numerous commitments to cut emissions and enhance sustainability, yet a recent study indicates that most lack substantiation.
Environmental assertions from the dairy sector are facing examination.
Leading global meat and dairy producers are issuing extensive assurances to address climate change, but a fresh assessment argues that nearly all constitute greenwashing.
Livestock farming significantly contributes to global warming, accounting for at least 16.5% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. Facing criticism, the sector has introduced various sustainability initiatives.
Researchers led by Jennifer Jacquet from the University of Miami examined the latest sustainability documents and public websites of 33 top meat and dairy companies from 2021 to 2024. ‘Our goal was to distinguish genuine actions from mere publicity,’ Jacquet explains.
The group pinpointed 1233 environmental statements. ‘Nearly all—98%—qualified as greenwashing,’ Jacquet states, describing them as misleading or vague pledges about future climate goals without detailed strategies. Over two-thirds offered no proof, and just three were supported by academic research.
At present, 17 of the 33 firms have established net-zero objectives. However, similar to the oil and gas industry, these often seem remote and depend on carbon credits instead of direct emission cuts.
Specific steps highlighted by companies were far less substantial than their broad promises. For instance, a regenerative farming trial covered only 24 farms, equating to 0.0019% of one company’s worldwide activities. Others emphasized minor packaging changes, such as narrowing sausage packaging tape by 3 millimeters.
‘The study effectively demonstrates that many industry assertions are little more than superficial adjustments,’ notes Marco Springmann from the University of Oxford.
Pete Smith from the University of Aberdeen, who helped create the greenwashing evaluation method applied here, says the results are unsurprising.
Experts indicate that greenwashing persists in the field. ‘With the influence of big corporations and limits on change under existing market conditions, there’s motivation to exaggerate progress, seem more forward-thinking than reality, and advocate for maintaining the current system,’ says Tim Benton from the University of Leeds. ‘As seen with tobacco and fossil fuels, some players use deception and false information to safeguard their operations.’
