Crunch Time: US Food Sector Needs to Implement Climate Action Plans to Feed Demand from Hungry Investors

Jul 7, 2022

Reading Time : 4 min

By: Stacey H. Mitchell, Kenneth J. Markowitz, Charles Edward Smith, Radiance Campbell (Summer Associate)

According to Ceres, the food sector3 is responsible for one-third of global GHG emissions. Consistent with its “whole of government” approach to responding to the threats posed by climate change, the Biden administration has thus targeted the high-emitting food sector for climate-related policy: among other things, it has provided funding through the U.S. Department of Agriculture to encourage voluntary adoption of “climate-smart” agricultural policies and practices in certain states. And, of course, the food sector would not be immune from the proposed Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) amendments mandating public companies annually disclose GHG emissions, including from upstream and downstream activities in their value chains.

Nevertheless, to date, according to Ceres, fewer than half of the 50 highest emitting food companies in North America have set short-term GHG emission reduction targets, and none have published a climate transition plan. As a result, Ceres published the Investor Guide as part of its broader “Ceres Ambition 2030” initiative to encourage decarbonization of six of the highest-emitting sectors in the U.S.4 The Investor Guide aims to provide “a common high-level agenda for companies to reduce emissions across the food supply chain.” It details sub-industry specific recommendations for the U.S. food sector, outlining proposed criteria for evaluating companies as they develop, disclose and implement climate transition plans.

According to the Investor Guide, climate transition plans should outline clear and concrete short and medium-term actions to achieve a company’s long term commitment and address climate change throughout the company, from growth strategy to operations. For investors, the Investor Guide identifies “red flags” in climate-related targets, plans and disclosures that could indicate that company is not responding adequately to mitigate emissions to reduce climate-related risk. For companies, these same “red flags” suggest opportunities to clarify and bolster climate-related disclosures to meet anticipated investor demands. We’ve summarized the major themes from the Investor Guide below:

Emissions Disclosure and Emissions Reduction Targets: A company’s emissions reduction targets should align with the science-based target of limiting global temperature rise to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius. Additionally, companies should disclose their scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions throughout their business. Because scope 3 emissions make up a majority of a food company’s full GHG emissions profile, it is not possible to know whether a company is accounting for or addressing its major emissions if its disclosures cover only scope 1 and 2 emissions, or if it does not disclose a breakdown of its emissions sources. Similarly, disclosure or target setting for only a limited part of a business (such as just one product line or brand) provides an incomplete understanding of a company’s emissions profile.

Growth and Innovation Strategy: Action on climate-related risks and transition plans should be “embedded as a guiding force of a company’s corporate strategy.” Climate action should be integrated into a company’s core decision-making by ensuring clear and formal board oversight on these issues across the company’s portfolio of brands, subsidiaries, franchisees and other business units, including its supply chain. Companies should plan to reduce emissions not only in the creation of new products, but also in existing brands and services. It should be clear from disclosures how research and development, product development and capital expenditures impact overall emissions reduction goals.

Corporate Procurement Strategies and Supply Chain Implementation: A company should trace, assess and disclose emissions in its supply chain and engage with suppliers to reduce these emissions, such as by requiring supplier target-setting or offering supplier incentives. These policies should address the major sources of emissions in a company’s supply chain, rather than engaging only certain direct suppliers or only certain products, brands, segments, subsidiaries or franchises. If a company pilots a climate-related project, it should demonstrate evidence of intent to scale-up the project.

Operations, Waste, and Transportation: Plans to mitigate emissions must extend to operations, transportation and food loss and waste. A company’s new acquisitions and investments—such as company-owned agricultural lands and operations, food processing and manufacturing plants, and company-owned transportation and distribution—should align with its emissions goals. Food waste should be reduced, according to quantitative methods that can be tracked and disclosed, rather than simply diverted. At the same time, a company should not plan on only reducing operational or transportation emissions, while failing to reduce scope 3 emissions that may make up the majority of its attributable emissions.

A company’s failure to take the above steps should raise “red flags” for investors because not making climate action a guiding force in company decision-making “expose[s] companies to financially material climate risk and can lead investors to over- or underestimate the risks in their portfolio holdings.”5 Ceres encourages investors to engage companies to disclose climate transition plans and thereafter to keep on track to achieve ambitious, science-based emissions reduction targets. Finally, companies in the food sector, whether or not they have publicly adopted GHG reduction targets and other climate-related goals, should be prepared to explain to stakeholders, including investors, why they have not done so.


1 Ceres is a nonprofit organization that works with investors, companies and capital market influencers to solve sustainability challenges by integrating environmental, social and governance practices into business strategies. Through Ceres’s Food Emissions 50, investors are pushing 50 of the highest-emitting public food companies in North America to encourage the food sector toward a net-zero future. In connection with these efforts, such investors are seeking tangible commitments from these companies to improve their disclosures relative to their GHG emissions, as well as more robust disclosures regarding climate transition plans and the extent to which such plans align with the Paris Agreement. See Food Emissions 50, CERES, https://www.ceres.org/climate/ambition2030/food#about-the-initiative.

2 Available at https://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/investor-guide-climate-transition-plans-us-food-sector.

3 The Investor Guide covers agricultural products, food distributors, packaged foods and meats, food retailers, hypermarkets and supercenters, restaurants.

4 The six highest-emitting sectors in the U.S. are banking, electric power, food, oil and gas, steel and transportation. See Ceres Ambition 2030, CERES, https://www.ceres.org/climate/ambition2030?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIjrP198jD-AIVgtzICh1lCQVEEAAYASAAEgIBsfD_BwE.

5 See The Investor Guide at 14.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Sustainability

August 21, 2025

On August 13, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied a motion for preliminary injunction filed by a coalition of business groups seeking to halt implementation of California’s corporate climate disclosure laws—SB 253 and SB 261. Senate Bill 253 (SB 253 )1 requires entities that do business in California and whose total annual revenue exceeds $1 billion to disclose Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions beginning in 2026 (covering 2025 data), and Scope 3 emissions beginning in 2027 (covering 2026 data). Senate Bill 261 (SB 261),2 passed as part of the same Climate Accountability legislative package, requires entities that do business in California and whose total annual revenue exceeds $500 million to publicly disclose the business’s climate-related financial risks and measures taken to reduce or adapt to that risk online every two years, beginning in 2026.3

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

July 31, 2025

Key Topics in Akin’s July 2025 Speaking Sustainability - Legal & Regulatory Update

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

June 30, 2025

The European Parliament and Council reached a provisional agreement (i.e., a post-consultation, non-binding political deal in relation to the final text of a legislative proposal) to streamline the European Union’s (EU) Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) on June 18, 2025. This is a key instrument to prevent carbon leakage and align trade policy with the EU’s climate goals. The changes are part of the EU’s broader sustainability legislative simplification package announced earlier this year. This proposal is intended to ease compliance burdens while maintaining the environmental integrity of the CBAM framework.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

June 27, 2025

Key Topics in Akin’s June 2025 Speaking Sustainability - Legal & Regulatory Update

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

February 19, 2025

Wind energy projects along the coasts are facing uncertainty due to President Trump’s Presidential Memorandum1 issued on January 20, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects.” This Memorandum introduces substantial policy changes that impact both onshore and offshore wind development.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

February 14, 2025

Key topics in Akin’s February 2025 Speaking Sustainability - Legal & Regulatory Update include:

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

January 24, 2025

Beginning on Monday, there have been a flurry of executive orders from the Trump administration reversing Biden-era energy policies, emphasizing oil and gas production, lifting the liquified natural gas (LNG) export permitting pause and withdrawing from all accords and commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) including the Paris climate agreement. The orders also target electric vehicles (EVs), wind energy, international climate aid and the use of the social cost of carbon in agency decision making. For close tracking of these orders and more to come, visit the Akin Trump Executive Order tracker. Concurrently, President Trump’s nominees for the Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Energy (DOE) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have each passed their initial rounds of committee confirmation votes, and now await votes before the Senate floor.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

January 10, 2025

In the final days of his term, President Joe Biden has taken significant steps to solidify his administration’s climate legacy. The administration finalized rules for various clean energy tax credits established under the Inflation Reduction Act. However, these rules, intended to stimulate clean energy advancements through 2032, face opposition from Congressional Republicans, who are considering scaling back or repealing the credits through budget reconciliation.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.