Stockholm (NordSIP) – The role of the food and agriculture sector in the climate crisis took centre stage once again this week as United States (US) meat producers hailed the outcome of COP28 during an online meeting convened by industry journal Feedstuffs. In comments reflecting the fossil fuel industry’s satisfaction with the Dubai conference’s final statement agreed in December, major US livestock companies expressed their relief that the anticipated targets for reducing the consumption of animal protein had not been implemented. Instead, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) had called for improvements in production efficiency while presenting the agricultural sector as a key player in helping to address the climate crisis.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) stated in 2023 that emissions from the food and agriculture idustry alone would cause the 1.5-degree warming limit to be breached even if global fossil fuel use was entirely eliminated. Just the emissions from livestock farming account for over 14% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and include a high proportion of particularly potent methane. Academics and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) had been calling on governments to draw up a mandate for a radical redesign of global food systems, with the sector responsible for a third of GHG emissions, roughly 70% of total freshwater use, and 80% of worldwide biodiversity loss. However, following the attendance of an unprecedented number of food and agriculture lobbyists at COP28, the final statement failed to set binding targets for reducing ruminant livestock volumes. Rather than proposing to reduce the industrial production and widespread consumption of meat, the FAO has recommended various efficiency measures to cut methane emissions, none of which have been proven effective at scale.
New York State lawsuit
Meanwhile, in a sign that short-term victories such as the relatively favourable COP28 and FAO recommendations may not be sufficient for the livestock industry to maintain business-as-usual over the long-term, the world’s largest meat producer is being sued by the New York attorney general Letitia James. JBS Foods’ American subsidiary (JBS) is accused of misleading the public about its environmental impact. In a case that relates more to consumer rights rather than purely environmental concerns, JBS has allegedly persited in making misleading claims regarding its pledges to curb deforestation and reduce its GHG emissions. James points to the JBS group’s 2040 net-zero pledge, which she says is spurious given the fact that the company cannot thus far accurately measure its own emissions and maintains plans to increase meat production over the period.
Commenting on the lawsuit, attorney General James said: “As families continue to face the daily impacts of the climate crisis, they are willing to spend more of their hard-earned money on products from brands that are better for the environment. When companies falsely advertise their commitment to sustainability, they are misleading consumers and endangering our planet. JBS USA’s greenwashing exploits the pocketbooks of everyday Americans and the promise of a healthy planet for future generations. My office will always ensure that companies do not abuse the environment and the trust of hardworking consumers for profit.”
The growing number of greenwashing lawsuits against large companies such as Volkswagen, KLM, Danone, and Shell may support a steady shift towards greater corporate transparency and accountability on sustainability matters. While many of these cases have been instigated by NGOs, the JBS suit is the first one to be made against a major meat producer and notable for the added weight of being led by a local government plaintiff. With JBS having reportedly ignored previous warnings from industry associations over its marketing claims, it is expected to face an uphill battle in successfully defending itself against the New York State lawsuit.
