This report from the University of Oxford’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment explores the rapid growth of corporate involvement in the alternative proteins sector, and argues that corporate-led innovation can be a major contributor to emissions reductions.

This study explores why people choose to either see or avoid carbon emissions information when choosing a protein source, and the influence that seeing this information has on product choices. The study is based on an online survey where people were asked to make a hypothetical choice between a range of protein sources. 

This paper by Table member Alison Caffyn studies how the proliferation of intensive poultry operations in Herefordshire and Shropshire in the UK has led to conflicts between the agri-industrial sector and local objectors. The paper draws on planning application data and interviews. Caffyn argues that local authorities and environmental agencies need to improve the regulatory regime around new intensive livestock developments.

This paper, co-authored by Table member Hayo van der Werf, examines the spectrum of agroecological activity on organic vegetable farms in France. It reports that farming practices are linked to farm structure. For example, smaller farms are more likely to use agroecological practices. The paper sets out a framework that distinguishes agroecological organic farming from “conventionalised” organic farming, the latter of which involves more reliance on external inputs and supply chains that are more linked to global market prices.

Table members Martin Persson and Simon Bager have co-authored this paper, which offers 86 policy options through which the European Union could address deforestation associated with imported commodities such as palm oil, soybeans and beef. The paper finds trade-offs between the political feasibility of each option and the potential impact: the policy options that are most politically feasible tend to have a weaker theory of change.

This paper uses interviews with senior representatives of the UK food retail sector to explore how retailers view sustainable diets and the extent to which “less and better” meat and dairy plays a part in these understandings. It finds that retailers have diverse understandings of sustainable diets, and that these seldom include “less and better” meat and dairy. While retailers are implementing strategies to improve the sustainability of their meat and dairy supply chains, none of the retailers studied are actively trying to reduce the amount of meat they sell. 

This paper examines the climate commitments of the world’s 35 largest meat and dairy companies - summarised in this table - which together produce around 15% of all greenhouse gas emissions from animal agriculture. It also compares the companies’ projected future emissions to the Paris climate commitments of the country in which each company is headquartered (while noting that the Paris Agreement does not view climate responsibility in these terms), and traces the political influence of the 10 largest US meat and dairy companies.

The Guardian newspaper has analysed 44 studies on the mislabelling of seafood. 36% of thousands of samples across more than 30 countries were found to be mislabelled. Although some errors may be accidental, the writers suggest that since most of the substitutions were cheaper fish labelled as more expensive fish, fraud is likely to blame in many cases. 

Academics and students from Cornell University have released a website, Our Changing Menu, that tells the story of climate change using food. Aimed at a general audience and accompanying the book of the same name, it explains climate change, describes how the production of foods such as avocados, olive oil and beef might change, and offers solutions. A searchable food ingredient database, which will continue to be updated, shows how selected ingredients are expected to be affected by climate change.