The world’s largest food companies are overstating their climate progress by “relying on carbon removals and weak certifications” while failing to cut emissions at source, claims a new report accusing firms of “corporate greenwashing.”
According to the Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025, relying on land-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) to meet sustainability targets via carbon insetting or offsetting initiatives such as soil carbon sequestration or reforestation distracts from the need to reduce emissions at source.
According to the report, penned by nonprofits NewClimate Institute and Carbon Market Watch, “This focus on CDR distracts distracts from their lack of commitments to deep, structural emission reductions, especially regarding methane.
“While the draft GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Guidance recommends setting separate targets for emissions reductions and removals, the current SBTi FLAG guidance appears to allow companies to count removals toward their reduction targets. Danone, Nestlé and PepsiCo seem to be taking this approach.”
It adds: “Companies are exploiting loopholes in voluntary standards like SBTi FLAG and the GHG Protocol, which allow them to blend removals with reductions in a single figure, masking a lack of real mitigation.”
While all companies apart from meat giant JBS have committed to source deforestation-free commodities by 2025, meanwhile, these commitments “include caveats such as limited coverage of commodities or only covering direct suppliers,” claims the report.
“Targets on sourcing deforestation-free cocoa appear to be the weakest: Nestlé is not on track to reach its 2025 commitment, PepsiCo does not provide information on its progress, and Mars does not present a target year for sourcing 100% deforestation-free cocoa.”
It also takes issue with the use of “commodity certificates without physical traceability” such as the RSPO’s “book and claim” initiative, which allows companies to buy credits that support the production of certified sustainable palm oil but do not guarantee that the palm oil they use in their products can be traced to a sustainable source. Supporters of the scheme, however, say that what matters is whether it is increasing the acreage of sustainable palm oil, not exactly where that oil ends up.
‘A misleading impression of progress’
Overall, the report “raises serious concerns about corporate greenwashing and the integrity of food sector climate commitments,” say the authors.
“None of the companies assessed has committed to reducing livestock production or meaningfully shifting to plant-based protein, despite livestock being the sector’s largest emissions source. Fertilizer emissions, responsible for roughly 25% of agricultural greenhouse gases, are largely ignored.”
The report recommends that emissions reduction targets are set separately from carbon removals; that targets should be broken down by gas (methane, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide); that companies avoid using untraceable certificates to claim emissions reductions; and that standard-setters “urgently close loopholes in climate reporting frameworks, requiring separate accounting for reductions and removals.”
According to the report:
- “Nestlé could rely on land-based removals for up to 80% of its 2030 target. The removals are poorly defined, lack transparency, and create a misleading impression of progress.
- “JBS has no valid emissions reduction target, continues expanding its high-emissions operations, and omits deforestation emissions from its disclosures. Its interim targets for 2030 would lead to a 1% emission reduction compared to its reported 2019 emissions, if interpreted generously.
- “PepsiCo lacks targets for methane or food waste reduction. Virgin plastic use is rising, even though packaging accounts for 25% of its total emissions.
- “Mars has no plan to shift away from animal-based protein and is preparing to include removals in future climate targets, despite lacking a credible transition strategy.
- “Danone is the only company with a methane reduction target (30% from fresh milk by 2030) and plans to grow its plant-based portfolio. However, it also intends to rely on removals without setting clear limits.”
Nestlé: ‘Our progress is clear’
Nestlé rejected the greenwashing allegations, telling AgFunderNews that it “disagrees with the conclusions of the report, which do not reflect Nestlé’s progress and commitment to achieve its net zero commitments.”
Asked to address claims about an over-reliance on land-based removals rather than reductions in emissions at source, the company claimed that 91% of the decline in its GHG emissions in 2024 was due to reductions, with the remaining 9% from “high quality carbon removals within our value chain.”
It added: “Since carbon reductions alone are insufficient to enable the agri-food sector to meet Net Zero, capturing carbon from the atmosphere offers an opportunity for the sector and removing carbon for example, through agroforestry programs, also has wider benefits – e.g., for biodiversity and helps restore degraded land.”
Meanwhile, Nestlé has reduced methane emissions by 20.56% versus 2018, it claimed. “We are reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, including methane, as part of our Net Zero roadmap which has SBTi-validated targets. Rather than setting targets for individual gases, we are focused on reducing our absolute GHG emissions by 50% by 2030. This includes reducing methane from dairy and livestock.
“Our progress is clear: we have reduced GHG emissions by 20.38% versus 2018, one year ahead of our target, and we have sourced 21.3% of our key ingredients from farmers adopting regenerative agriculture practices, one year ahead of our target as well.”
Finally, “93.5% of our primary supply chain was assessed as deforestation-free for coffee, cocoa, meat, palm oil, pulp and paper, soy and sugar,” added the food giant.
“We believe that a mix of different measures will help us to reduce emissions. For example, we work closely with farmers and run more than 100 climate projects worldwide to reduce and remove GHG emissions and support regenerative agriculture on dairy farms. Also, we are exploring feed solutions to reduce methane produced during digestion. “
Danone: ‘Steady progress’
Asked about the report’s claims that Danone is overly reliant on carbon removals rather than reducing its own emissions, Danone told us: “Although we see value in helping farming partners transition to regenerative agriculture practices, these targets do not include soil carbon removals.”
The company added: “In 2024, we made steady progress on the eight strategic programs of our climate transition plan, which are currently on track to achieve their near-term objectives. We will continue to operate in a transparent way as we move ahead with our plans to cut emissions and achieve a traceable, verified deforestation- and conversion-free value chain on our key direct commodities by 2025.
“Danone is fully committed to reducing GHG emissions across its full value chain, with ambitious 2030 reduction targets and 2050 Net Zero targets aligned with 1.5°C pathway on scopes 1, 2 and 3, that have been validated by the Science Based Target initiative (SBTi).”
JBS, Mars, and PepsiCo did not respond to requests for comment.
The post New report accuses Big Food of ‘corporate greenwashing.’ Danone and Nestlé hit back appeared first on AgFunderNews.
