/

www.agri-pulse.com/articles/14799-corporate-giants-climate-pledges-take-root-pressing-farmers-to-go-green

Lance Lilibridge shows the cover crops on his Iowa farm.

Corporate giants’ climate pledges takeroot, pressing farmers to go greenPhilip Brasher (/authors/1-philip-brasher) and Hannah Pagel (/authors/207-hannah-pagel)November 9, 2020

This story is the first part of a five-part Agri-Pulseseries that looks in-depth at how reductions in greenhouse gas emissions could have far-reachingeffects on American farmers and ranchers.

The alfalfa, oats, radish and clover sprouting in Lance Lillibridge’s Iowa corn field this fall willimprove his soil, prevent pollutants from running off his fields into local streams — and, accordingto scientists, help reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are changing the climate.

/

Ryan Sirolli, Cargill

These cover crops, which can also reduce air emissions from nitrogen fertilizer, a major agriculturalcontributor to greenhouse gas emissions, also are earning him $35 to $50 an acre in extra cash.That’s a meaningful source of income during a period when farmers can barely cover their cost ofproducing corn and soybeans.

Lillibridge is taking part in a project, co-sponsored by agribusiness giant Cargill Inc., that is testingwhether corporate titans of the grocery, food, beverage, restaurant and apparel industries canpersuade farmers to meaningfully reduce the environmental footprint of the crops they grow andanimals and they produce.

Officials with many corporations, including such names as Walmart, McDonald’s, General Mills,Levi Strauss and Co. and Danone, have in some cases made sweeping sustainability pledges toconsumers and investors to slash the carbon emissions in their supply chains and meet corporatesustainability targets.

“Consumers are really clearly awakening and demanding a lot more with regard to the climate,”said Ryan Sirolli, global row crop sustainability director for Minnesota-based Cargill, one of theworld’s largest grain and meat processors and ingredient suppliers. “You might debate climatechange and everything else, but I’d say on the consumer side it’s kind of a foregone conclusion.”

What does that mean for farmers? “You’re either addressing it, and you're here, or you're not …You may struggle to have a license to operate in the future.” said Sirolli.

Leading the way, according to industry officials, is Walmart Inc., the world’s largest grocery retailer.As part of the Arkansas-based firm’s sustainability journey, it has promised to slash thegreenhouse gas emissions in its vast supply chain by a billion tons by 2030, the equivalent oftaking 211 million cars off the road. Walmart expects agriculture to account for 200 million to 300million tons of that.

But many other corporations, especially consumer-facing multinational firms and European-basedcompanies, have made commitments to at least meet a target set by the Paris climate agreement,which is aimed at keeping global temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius by 2050,

/

according to an analysis byAgri-Pulse.These companies’ commitments include emissions in their supply chains, such as the agcommodities and food that they procure.

President Donald Trump withdrew the United States out of the Paris agreement, but thesecompanies are effectively ignoring his decision.

Food firms, retailers getting more ambitiousA few companies, including Danone, General Mills Inc., Nestle, Olam International (a major globalsupplier of food ingredients and commodities), food service giant Sodexo and PepsiCo Inc., havegone a step further and signed a United Nations-sponsored pledge to set more ambitiousemissions targets aimed at keeping the global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

At least two dozen major food, beverage and apparel companies have joined the Science BasedTargets initiative, or SBTi, a project that requires member companies to set scientifically valid goalsfor reducing their carbon emissions, with an option of following either the 2-degree or 1.5-degreegoal.

Some companies have even pledged to become carbon neutral, including Walmart, whichannounced in September that it planned to reach that goal by 2040, 10 years ahead of the targetset by the Paris agreement.

Smithfield Foods Inc., a vertically-integrated pork producer and processor, announced inSeptember it would make all of its company-owned operations carbon neutral by 2030, one of themost aggressive targets of any company.

Rival Tyson Foods Inc., one of the largest beef, pork and poultry processors, committed to theSBTi project and has pledged to cut emissions from its production of beef, pork and poultry by 30%in the next 10 years. Tyson and McDonald’s Corp. are key members of the U.S. Roundtable forSustainable Beef, which is sponsoring research on whether “adaptive multi-paddock” grazing canincrease rancher productivity and sequester more carbon in the soil at the same time.

Dole Foods Co., which produces and processes fruits and vegetables, has pledged to make itsfarms carbon neutral by 2030.

Danone, Sodexo and Starbucks Corp. have gone beyond many other companies, pledging toslash its emissions in half by 2030. Unilever, whose brands include Ben & Jerry’s and Hellmann’s,said in June that it intended to reach net zero emissions by 2039 for all products, "from thesourcing of the materials we use, up to the point of sale of our products.

Danone is further pledging to make its Horizon organic milk “carbon positive” by 2025, meaning itssupply chain will sequester more carbon than it emits. Dairy producers and others in animalagriculture should take note that plant-based alternatives are figuring in both Starbucks’ andSodexo’s plans: Starbucks plans to meet its climate goal in part by switching many dairy productsto plant-based alternatives; Sodexo says it is “raising public awareness of the environmentalbenefits of plant-based meals” and promoting them on menus.

/

Debbie Reed, Ecosystems Services Market Consortium

Based on interviews with industry officials, many companies aren’t clear yet how they will meettheir goals, nor is there agreement yet on how to measure the impact of many practices.

Those are among the reasons for a myriad of research programs and pilot projects that Walmart,Cargill and other corporations are sponsoring across the country. But many industry officials sayit’s clear U.S. farmers will likely have to play a role in reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions aspart of a broader effort to help food companies hit their sustainability targets.

“What we are hearing on all sides of this is that companies are really doubling down on theircommitments, and then you see companies also saying, ‘Not only are we going to reduce ourgreenhouse gas footprint by this much by this day, but we commit to being carbon neutral,’” saidDebbie Reed, executive director of the Ecosystem Services Market Consortium, an industry-backed coalition setting up a market in credits for reducing carbon emissions and improving waterquality.

The COVID-19 pandemic doesn’t appear to have discouraged companies from moving forwardeither, she said. “There is no letup in the corporate goal setting or the desire to actually work tomeet them,” she said. For some companies, the pandemic has increased their food sales, makingtheir climate goals even more challenging to meet.

Some companies, including ESMC members Danone and General Mills plan to meet theircommitments in part by purchasing offsets. Several tech companies, including Indigo Ag and Nori,also are setting up ag carbon markets.

Such markets are one of the primary ways farmers like Lillibridge could ultimately get paid forclimate-friendly practices once pilot projects like Cargill’s run their course. Joe Biden has proposeda second method: Making payments through a farm bill program, the Conservation StewardshipProgram, using a mixture of federal funding and funding from corporations that want to offsetemissions.

/

Companies aren’t yet requiring that farmers’ crops meet certain environmental standards, althoughfarm groups worry that could be coming. A senior executive with Nestle suggested at the 2019Sustainable Agriculture Summit in Indianapolis that her company would eventually writesustainability standards into its procurement specifications, something Nestle already does forpathogens and protein content.

Food giants bringing lobbying muscle to ag policyFood companies and restaurant chains also are considering labeling products and menu items,although there is concern about being able to back up claims. In October, first Panera Bread andthen Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. announced labeling plans.

Panera, the restaurant chain owned by the German conglomerate JAB, now labels menu items,including most of its soups, that are produced with less than a certain amount of carbon emissionsas “Cool Food Meals (https://www.wri.org/our-work/top-outcome/food-providers-serve-nearly-billion-meals-year-commit-cool-food-pledge),” a claim developed by the World Resources Institute.

Chipotle has a separate labeling program called “Real Foodprint (https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/14723-chipotle-to-include-sustainability-measurements-on-digital-orders),”which is based on measuring the “sustainability impact” of its ingredients on greenhouse gasemissions, water usage, soil health, organic farming acreage and usage of animal antibiotics.

Meanwhile, companies also are starting to play another role that farmers aren’t accustomed to:Lobbying Congress on farm bill programs and other policy issues. Danone, Nestle, Mars andUnilever formed the Sustainable Food Policy Alliance (https://foodpolicyalliance.org/) in mid-2018.The group hired the lobbying firm Glover Park Group at a cost of $100,000 in 2019 and $130,000so far this year.

“The idea of sustainability and leaving the world a better place than we found it is woven intoeverything that SFPA does, but particularly our work on the climate and environment,” AntonVincent, president of Mars Wrigley North America, said on a recent webinar sponsored byReuters.

"We know we are one piece of a larger puzzle, but the food and agriculture industries have animportant role to play in mitigating climate change.”

One priority for the group, he said, is passage of the Growing Climate Solutions Act(https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/13829-bipartisan-bill-aims-to-jump-start-ag-carbon-markets), abill introduced in the Senate and House this year to accelerate the development of agriculturalcarbon markets. The bill would put the Agriculture Department in charge of creating a certificationprogram for third-party verifiers and technical assistance provers. The third-party verifiers aresupposed to ensure the validity of carbon credits.

Another group that is likely to be influencing the shape of farm bill programs and other policydecisions is the Midwest Row Crop Collaborative. (https://midwestrowcrop.org) Walmart played aleading role in forming the MRCC, which also includes seed and chemical giant Bayer as well as

/

Brett Kaysen, National Pork Board

Cargill, Kellogg, PepsiCo, Unilever and three environmental groups, the Environmental DefenseFund, The Nature Conservancy and the World Wildlife Fund.

The MRCC is currently in the process of developing policy groups that members can agree on anduse to guide their own lobbying efforts.

Industry’s ‘Gigaton’ gorilla doubles downIndustry officials tellAgri-Pulsethat a single company, Walmart, is driving much of the effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,pushing food and beverage companies as well as key clothing manufacturers to reduce U.S.agriculture’s environmental footprint across the supply chain.

Walmart launched its Project Gigaton in 2017, a pledge to cut the greenhouse gas emissions in itssupply chain by a billion tons. “Through Project Gigaton, suppliers can take their sustainabilityefforts to the next level through goal-setting,” the firm notes. Walmart expects agriculture toaccount for 200 million to 300 million tons of that.

Walmart doubled down on the Project Gigaton pledge by promising to go carbon neutral by 2040,10 years ahead of the targets set by the Paris agreement.

“They took Gigaton and put it on steroids from my perspective,” said Brett Kaysen, vice presidentof sustainability for the National Pork Board.

He noted CEO Doug McMillon said the company was going to meet the carbon-neutral pledgethrough emissions reductions made by its suppliers. “So it's going to be a top-down push,” Kaysensaid.

/

Mikel Hancock, Walmart

So far, Walmart has made little progress in getting its agriculture suppliers to reduce emissions.According to the company’s 2020 progress report, agriculture accounted for just 1.6 million tons ofthe 136 million tons of emissions reductions made by Walmart suppliers in 2019. (The largestemissions reduction among Walmart suppliers, about 66 million tons, was the result of reducedenergy usage.)

But Tina Owens, senior director of food and agriculture impact for Danone North America, saidWalmart’s commitments are trickling down to its suppliers. Like many of its other suppliers,Walmart is Danone’s biggest customer. “It’s not just the writing on the wall for our farmers. Thewriting is on the wall for everybody,” Owens said.

And it’s not just food companies that worry about Walmart’s demands. Clothing and textilecompanies, such as Levi’s, do as well, which means Walmart’s goals are affecting cotton growers.

“When you have one of the largest retailers in the world, especially based out of the U.S., makingthese corporate goals like this, it’s not only for their corporation, but their suppliers as well,” saidKen Burton, executive director of the U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol, a U.S. industry

Walmart has taken several steps to encourage farmers to adopt new practices through projectssuch as the Midwest Row Crop Collaborative, which was formed with the lofty target of getting halfof the row crop acres in the Mississippi River Basin implementing soil health practices by 2025.

Meanwhile, the Walmart Foundation is funding research and training programs that amount towhat one scientist calls Walmart’s own “extension program” aimed at providing farmers andagribusiness companies in the United States as well as emerging markets with the know-how to

/

reduce their environmental footprint.

Walmart also is a leading supporter of The Sustainabilty Consortium(https://www.sustainabilityconsortium.org/), founded by the University of Arkansas (located inFayetteville, just down the road from Walmart’s Bentonville, Ark., headquarters) and Arizona StateUniversity.

The Walton Family Foundation, which is controlled by the heirs of Walmart founder Sam Walton, isassisting Cargill in funding the project that is paying Lillibridge for his soil-conserving practices.

Walmart officials say they’re doing what their customers want and that the agricultural practicesneeded to address climate change will also lead to critical environmental benefits, includingimproving water quality and wildlife diversity.

Walmart’s ability to meet its 2030 and 2040 goals rests on its ability to get its suppliers andultimately farmers and ranchers to reduce emissions with no promise of compensation.

So far, 2,300 of the suppliers have made commitments toward addressing emissions in theirsupplies.

Walmart monitors its suppliers on an annual basis.

“We definitely find that when you have a specific goal, you begin to measure, and it's time-bound.(That is a) very effective strategy to be able to use to work on those things together,” said MikelHancock, Walmart’s senior director for strategic initiatives, sustainability.

Walmart has no intention at this point of requiring that its suppliers meet standards for greenhousegas emissions.

“Walmart can't solve it alone, and even our suppliers individually can't solve it alone, butcollectively what we would like to do is, problem solve, brainstorm on how we actually … addressthe current issues and fight climate change together,” said Hancock.

“I don’t necessarily know that, you know, a mandate is going to drive the additional progress thatwe’re looking for.”

Among suppliers that Walmart has highlighted in its reports are PepsiCo and Kellogg’s. PepsiCohas committed to cutting the greenhouse gas emissions in its supply chain 20% by 2030. As of2019, those emissions had been cut by 5%, up from 3%. Kellogg’s has committed to be supporting500,000 farmers by 2025 on “climate smart” agricultural practices.

Hancock touts projects Walmart has been involved with to reduce the environmental footprint fromcorn and other row crops, knowing that doing so is vital to reducing the climate impact of animalagriculture as well. Roughly two-thirds of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with non-ruminant animals, hogs, chickens and turkeys, are associated with the feed that they eat.

“What we have as far as animal feed and how it goes through the agriculture side of the businessstarts with the ground,” he said.

Few sectors of agriculture may be able to escape

/

Dawn Pluribus Strip-Till System in the field planning corn in South Central Minnesota. Photo:Rodney Arthur

Belching cows get a lot of media attention when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions fromagriculture, which accounts for about 9% of total U.S. emissions. But the biggest source ofemissions from U.S. agriculture is actually the production of row crops, in part because of the useof nitrogen fertilizer, which turns into nitrous oxide gas.

One pound of nitrous oxide has nearly 300 times the impact on warming the atmosphere as apound of carbon dioxide.

Emissions from row crops are so significant, in fact, that they account for about 70% of theemissions from pork and poultry production, largely because of the corn fed to the hogs, chickensand turkeys.

And that’s where farmers like Lillibridge come in.

Improving soil health though cover crops, reduced tillage and other “regenerative” practices is seenas the key to both reducing greenhouse gas emissions, by sequestering carbon in the soil, whilealso protecting water quality by curbing soil runoff. In areas prone to drought, the increased plantmaterial in the soil can also help retain water, protecting crop yields and reducing the need forirrigation.

The soil is "a living and breathing digestive system and it is important that we keep it healthy justlike our own bodies,” said Lillibridge, who farms 1,450 acres in eastern Iowa northwest of CedarRapids.

In addition to planting the cover crops, which were aerially seeded into his fields in September sothey would be growing when he harvested his cash crops, Lillibridge also uses a practice known asstrip-tilling that leaves as much of the soil unplowed each spring. He cuts a five-inch-wide strip inwhich to plant corn and soybean seeds. Strip tilling has an advantage over no-till farming byallowing the soil to dry out better in the spring.

The animal agriculture industry that supplies Walmart and other retailers is counting on suchimprovements in the way that corn and soybeans are grown.

“When we look at any indicator, whether the indicator is greenhouse gas emissions, energy use,water use, land use, take your pick, they always come back to corn and soybeans when talkingabout animal ag,” said Marty Matlock, executive director of the University of Arkansas Resiliency

/

Center and a professor of ecological engineering.

Smithfield’s plan for making its farms carbon neutral illustrates the complexity of meeting corporateclimate goals: Soil health practices and more efficient use of fertilizer will reduce feed emissions.

Simultaneously, Smithfield plans to capture the methane from its farms’ hog manure and turn it intorenewable natural gas. Finally, Smithfield will also use more wind and solar power generation topower its operations.

The Environmental Defense Fund has been working with Smithfield on projects to improve thesustainability of corn and soybeans, one in North Carolina, and another in the Midwest, the latter ofwhich involves sourcing of small grains to help farmers break up their corn-soybean rotation andreduce fertilizer usage.

One of the goals of the North Carolina project is to ensure Smithfield farms have access to localgrain sources, reducing the distance the feed has to be transported, which in turn limits its carbonfootprint.

“That has a really big impact when a company like Smithfield … steps up and says this is reallyimportant to our supply chain and we want to work with you, EDF, and you, the farmers, to figureout to do this in way that’s scientifically robust and also good for the farmers,” said Shelby Shelton,a EDF project manager for working lands.

Sustainability fixes vary by sector, companyOther companies and sectors are taking or may take different approaches to reducing theirenvironmental footprint.

A few companies, including Campbell Soup Co., are tying pledges to individual commodities thatthey buy.

Campbell has pledged to source five key ingredients — jalapeños, potatoes, soy, tomatoes andwheat — from farmers participating in sustainable agriculture programs by 2025. So far, 90% of itstomatoes meet that commitment, but the same can be said for only 8% of its wheat and none of itsjalapeños, potatoes and soy.

Campbell sources tomatoes from a limited number of producers, 50 growers in northern Californiawithin 40 miles of the processing plant. The company has worked with the growers to select seedswith genetics that have high solid contents while resisting drought, said Andrea Chu, Campbell’smanager for responsible sourcing and risk management.

Del Monte has a goal of increasing the use of cover crops by its farmers by 5% a year, with aspecial emphasis in its Midwest growing areas of Wisconsin and Illinois. In 2019, cover crops onDel Monte vegetable fields increased nearly 12% in Wisconsin, the company says.

Interested in more coverage and insights? Receive a free month of Agri-Pulse(https://www.agri-pulse.com/subscriptions/trial/31).

/

Jay Watson, General Mills

To meet its pledge, General Mills is emphasizing regenerative agriculture practices, pledging tosupport their use on a million acres of U.S. farmland by 2030, while also tailoring sustainabilityprojects to its key ingredients.

The company has three pilot projects underway, one on oats in North Dakota and the neighboringCanadian provinces, a wheat pilot in Kansas and a dairy project in Michigan.

General Mills isn’t directly compensating farmers for regenerative practices but sees itsparticipation in ecosystems credit markets as a way to ensure that farmers who reducegreenhouse gas emissions while conserving water and protecting water quality potentially makemore money than other farmers.

Offset markets will ensure that “we're not treating all farmers as equal,” said Jay Watson, who is incharge of sourcing sustainability and regenerative agriculture at General Mills.

“The ones that are really working to rehabilitate their land and regenerate their ecosystems andproviding cleaner water, protecting water quality, improving air quality … improving soil health, theyreally should be compensated differently,” he said.

For U.S. cotton growers, the pressure on sustainability and carbon emissions originated withclothing brands based in Europe. Dozens of brands and retailers, including H&M, Ikea, Target, Gapand Walmart, have pledged to source 100% sustainable cotton by 2025. And a new survey carriedout for the industry by the Economist Intelligence Unit indicates that industry CEOs are broadlyintent on sustainability issues.

Some 60% of 150 fashion, retail and textile leaders surveyed said implementing sustainabilitymeasures was a top strategic objective for their company, second only to improving customers’experience. More than half the CEOs said they were collecting on data on suppliers’ greenhousegas emissions and 59% on water and energy usage.

/

Agri-Pulse Sustainability Series: Introduction to soil health and cover crops (https://www.agri-pulse.com/media/videos/play/711)

In the first video of our sustainability series farmers and experts discuss soil health, its impact onclimate change and the role of cover crops in modern farming systems.

To provide evidence to those and other CEOs that U.S. cotton is being produced sustainably, theNational Cotton Council launched the Cotton Trust Protocol (https://trustuscotton.org/), which set aseries of goals for the industry to reach by 2025, including a 30% reduction in greenhouse gasemissions and an 18% increase in irrigation efficiency. (By comparison, Levi Strauss and Co. haspledged to reduce its carbon emissions by 40% by 2025.)

The program, whose board members (https://trustuscotton.org/board-of-directors/) includerepresentatives of Levi’s, the World Wildlife Fund and The Nature Conservancy, finished a pilotproject this year with 300 growers with the goal of having half of all U.S. growers participating by2025.

"These brands and retailers are needing transparency,” said the protocol’s Burton. They’re needingsomething that allows them to hit their marks.”

Eventually, if the program works as designed, clothing companies and retailers will have access tocredits generated by the protocol and the right to use the protocol label on their products. Thecredits would provide funding to compensate growers for the time they spend on record keeping aswell as a grant program to help growers pay for implementing practices.

Interested in more coverage and insights? Receive a free month of Agri-Pulse(https://www.agri-pulse.com/subscriptions/trial/31).

The fruit, vegetable and nut industry, meanwhile, has organized an initiative called the StewardshipIndex for Specialty Crops to measure the sector’s environmental footprint. Metrics are currentlybeing developed on food loss and waste as well as on greenhouse gas emissions, which is beingmeasured by fuel use, electricity use, fertilizer production, nitrous oxide emissions and soil carbon.

Members of the program’s coordinating council include officials with Campbell Soup, Del MonteFoods, Panera, the Produce Marketing Association, Smuckers and the Western GrowersAssociation.

Many companies in the fruit and vegetable sector have focused their commitments on waterefficiency.

/

For example, in addition to its 2030 for zero carbon emissions from its farms, Dole Foods also ispledging to limit its water usage. Dole has specific 2025 goals to use 25% less water in fruitprocessing and to have 75% of its fresh vegetable converted to drip irrigation.

In the long run, the U.S. industry may move toward more decentralized, localized production, muchof it in greenhouses, said University of Arkansas’ Matlock, who advises the Stewardship Index forSpecialty Crops. That will reduce the sector’s environmental footprint by reducing food waste andtransportation and shift some production from water short regions such as California’s CentralValley.

Localized production will have markets with restaurants as well as retailers such as Walmart,which has committed to buying 10% of its produce from within the state where stores are located,he said.

One young company, BrightFarms, is growing lettuce, spinach, arugula and basil hydroponically inregional greenhouses and distributing them through 2,000 supermarkets, including Walmart andKroger stores, in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic and Midwest.

The company, which claims its products require 80% less water, 90% less land and 95% less fuelfor shipping than conventional field-grown leafy greens, recently announced that it secured $100million in financing to expand and expects to be in 15,000 stores by 2025.

Reducing food loss and waste is a key way to lower the greenhouse gas emissions of specialtycrops, because half of all vegetables produced in the U.S. are typically discarded, Matlock said.

Farmers to companies: Show us the moneyThe big question for farmers and ranchers — and for many of the companies trying to show thatthey are reducing their environmental footprint — is whether and how producers will becompensated.

That depends on a number of factors, including the development of private credit markets, whichexperts say will require a reliable system of measuring and verifying emissions reductions. Farmbill programs generally only provide only short-term financial assistance, though they could beexpanded.

The benefits to farmers may not necessarily be direct compensation, or through the selling ofag carbon credits. For example, a carbon footprint calculator being developed by the National PorkBoard would allow producers to make adjustments to their feed or other operations to make theirhogs more appealing to a processor.

Feeding pigs corn that was produced with cover crops, or using sorghum rather than corn, couldboth lower the farm’s carbon footprint, potentially giving the producer an edge over competitors.

Lillibridge, the Iowa grower, says it’s currently hard to measure the economic benefits of covercrops, making it difficult to know whether they are worth the investment. He said that planting covercrops adds $40 to $50 an acre to his costs.

/

Numerous research projects areunderway in the Midwest, South andelsewhere to determine the costs andbenefits of those and other practicesdepending on the farmer’s location, thetiming of the cover crop seeding, andother factors.

“We can see a cover crop is keeping thesoil green and its developing root systems(to aid in water runoff) and capturingnutrients. We all realize that that is a goodthing but we don't know how to measure itand it costs money,” said Lillibridge.

“So how do you measure a rate of return on that cost of investment? It's difficult and that is what isturning people away, especially in an ag environment that is not overly profitable right now."

The Soil and Water Outcomes Fund, which also involves the Iowa Soybean Association, that he’sparticipating in started with 10,000 acres and next year will expand to 100,000 acres.

“We'd much rather solve this through one of the voluntary innovative ways that agriculture can leadand show the path forward right that's good for everybody,” said Cargill’s Sirolli.

“Let's do it voluntarily before we get, you know, forced or regulated to do something.”

How food and ag giants set climate targets — and what they'vepromisedCorporate greenhouse gas emissions fall into one of three categories, or “scopes,” depending onthe source. Scope 3 emissions are the ones that affect farmers and ranchers.

Scope 1: Emissions are those generated by a company's in-house operations, including fleet vehicles,boilers etc.

Scope 2: Emissions are those caused by the electricity the company purchases.

Scope 3:Emissions are a company’s indirect emissions. They include company business travel as well asemissions from shipping products and the emissions that result from producing the rawcommodities, ingredients and finished products that the company purchases.

Some companies haven’t committed to reducing Scope 3 emissions or don’t track them. One ofthose is the food service giant Sysco Corp., which says collecting Scope 3 data “is not animmediate business priority.” Costco Wholesale Corp. also tracks only its Scope 1 and 2emissions.

/

Land O’Lakes doesn’t have a Scope 3 goal but has committed to make a reduction of 10 millionmetric tons that it will contribute toward Walmart’s Project Gigaton goal of cutting supply chainemissions by a billion tons.

Some big corporations, such as Kraft Heinz and restaurant giant Yum! Brands, which operates theKFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell chains, have committed to develop goals.

Through a nonprofit group, CDP (https://www.cdp.net/en), formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project,many companies file detailed reports on their emissions and measures they are taking to reducetheir risk from climate change.

In its 2020 CDP report (https://www.cdp.net/en/formatted_responses/responses?campaign_id=70692136&discloser_id=856462&locale=en&organization_name=Conagra+Brands+Inc&organization_number=3732&program=Investor&project_year=2020&redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fcdp.credit360.com%2Fsurveys%2F6sc15v4h%2F95969&survey_id=68887525), food giantConAgra Brands Inc. estimates its emissions from agriculture and forestry (which includes thepaper used for packaging at 2,989,975 metric tons). ConAgra hasn't set a target for reducing thoseemissions, but the company describes in its CDP report some measures it is taking to address theimpact of climate change.

The report says, for example, "Changing consumer preferences and customer requirements haveimpacted some of Conagra’s product lines and strategy in the short to medium term. For example,we have expanded certain product lines (such as Healthy Choice and Reddi-wip) to include moreplant-based options and have analyzed sales trends for climate-beneficial food products."

What they’ve promised

Here is a look at what many major corporations have promised in greenhouse gas emissions thatwould affect agricultural commodities. The information is based on information made available bythe companies on their websites, through the Science Based Targets initiative or provided inanswer to questions fromAgri-Pulse.

/

/

ADM

/

(processing) — Reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 25% by 2035 from its 2019 baseline. Aformer goal, set in 2010, was to reduce emissions 15% by 2020 from what they were in 2010. Thetarget was achieved in 2019.

*Ahold Delhaize(grocery) — Reduce Scope 3 emissions 15% by 2030.

*Anheuser-Busch InBev(beverage)—Reduce GHG emissions across the alcoholic beverage company’s value chain by 25% by 2025.The company says it has achieved a 6.9% reduction since 2017.

Bunge Ltd.(processing)—Reduce emissions 10% by 2026 and reduce water use by 25% in high water stress regions.

Campbell Soup Co.(food manufacturing)—The company previously set goals to reduce emissions and water use for tomatoes 20% by 2020from 2012. The company says that goal was achieved with a 26% reduction in emissions and 25%cut in water use. The company had a goal to reduce nitrogen use on tomatoes 10% by 2020. Theactual reduction was 8%.

*Cargill Inc.(processing)—Reduce GHG emissions 30% by 2030 from what they were in 2017.

*The Coca-Cola Co.(beverage)— The company set a goal in 2013 to reduce the carbon footprint of the “drink in your hand” by25% by 2020.

* ^Danone SA(food manufacturing)—Reduce emissions (https://www.danone.com/impact/planet/towards-carbon-neutrality.html%252523:~:text=Danone%25252520is%25252520meeting%25252520this%25252520challenge,net%25252520carbon%25252520emissions%25252520by%252525202050.&text=As

/

%25252520part%25252520of%25252520our%25252520journey,3%25252520emission%25252520intensity%25252520by%2525252050%25252525.) 50% by 2030, become carbon neutral by2050.

Del Monte Foods Inc.(processing) — Increase cover cropping on supplier farms 5% per year. Del Monte is specificallyencouraging the implementation of winter cover crops in Midwest growing areas and recorded a6% increase from 2018 to 2019 in cover crops on all vegetable crops in all states combined.

* ^Diageo PLC(beverage)—Committed to being carbon neutral by 2050.

Dole Food Co. Inc. (producer/processing)—Achieve net zero carbon emissions at the farm-level from Dole-managed operations by 2030

* ^General Mills Inc.(food manufacturing)—Reduce emissions 30% by 2030.

*TheHershey Co.(food manufacturing) — Committed in 2019(https://www.thehersheycompany.com/en_us/blog/using-science-to-do-our-part-in-green-house-gas-reduction.html) under Science Based Targets Initiative to develop emissions reduction goalsby 2021.

* ^H&M Group(retail)—Signed UN Business Ambition for 1.5°C pledge (https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/events/climate-action-summit-2019/business-ambition/business-leaders-taking-action), toreduce emissions in line with keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

JBS USA(meatpacking)—

/

Reduce emissions 20% by 2020. JBS reported (https://sustainability.jbssa.com/) earlier this yearthat its emissions had been reduced by 17%.

*Kellogg Co.(food manufacturing) — Reduce emissions 50% by 2050. The company set sustainability targetsfor 2020 to “responsibly source” 10 priority global ingredients: Corn, Sugar Cane, Wheat, Cocoa,Rice, Palm Oil, Potatoes, Fruits, Sugar Beets and Vanilla.

*The Kraft Heinz Co.(food manufacturing)— Committed to set emission reduction goals under SBTI.

* ^Levi Strauss & Co.(apparel)—Reduce emissions 40% across global supply chain by 2025.

*Mars Inc.(food manufacturing)—Reduce emissions 27% across value chain by 2025 and 67% by 2050 from 2015 base. Reduceunsustainable water use 50% by 2025 from 2019 base year.

*McDonald’s Corp.(restaurant)—Reduce emissions 31% by 2030 from 2015 base.

*Molson Coors Brewing Co.(beverage)—Reduce emissions across value chain 20% by 2025.

*Mondelez International Inc.(food manufacturing) — Reduce emissions (https://ir.mondelezinternational.com/news-releases/news-release-details/mondelez-international-sets-science-based-targets-reduce) 10% by2025 from 2018 base year.

^Nestle SA

/

(food manufacturing) — Committed(https://www.nestle.com/media/pressreleases/allpressreleases/nestle-climate-change-commitment-zero-net-emissions-2050) to becomingcarbon neutral by 2050, now establishing interim targets. “Strive for zero environmental impact inoperations by 2030.”

* ^Olam International(processing)— Signed UN Business Ambition for 1.5°C pledge (https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/events/climate-action-summit-2019/business-ambition/business-leaders-taking-action), toreduce emissions in line with keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

* **PepsiCo Inc.(food manufacturing)— Reduce absolute greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across value chain by at least 20 percentby 2030 from a 2015 baseline.

Smithfield Foods(meatpacking) — Committed to becoming carbon neutral in company-owned operations by 2030.

* ^Sodexo(food service) — Reduce emissions (https://www.sodexo.com/media/carbon-emissions-target-by-2025.html%2523:~:text=Sodexo,%252520world%252520leader%252520in%252520Quality,aim%252520of%252520the%252520Paris%252520Agreement,) 34% by 2025 from 2017 baseline.

*StarbucksCorp.(restaurant)— Reduce emissions 50% by 2030.

*Suntory Beverage & Food Ltd.(food and beverage) — Reduce emissions 20% across value chain by 2030.

*Target(grocery) — Reduce emissions (including scope 1, 2 and 3) 30% by 2030 from 2017 base.

*Tate & Lyle PLC(processing)— Reduce scope 3 emissions (https://www.tateandlyle.com/news/tate-lyle-greenhouse-gas-reduction-goals-approved-science-based-targets%23:~:text=Tate%2520&%2520Lyle%2520PLC%2520commits%2520to,over%2520the%25

/

20same%2520target%2520period.) 15% by 2030.

*Tyson FoodsInc. (meatpacking) — Reduce Scope 3 emissions from production of poultry, pork and beef(covering 80% of their scope 3 inventory) 30% by 2030 from a 2016 base.

* ^Unilever(food manufacturing/personal products) — Committed (https://www.unilever.com/climate-and-nature.html) in June to net zero emissions by 2039 from all products.

*VF Corp.(apparel) — Reduce Scope 3 emissions 30% by 2030 from a 2017 base, focusing on farm-to-retailmaterials, sourcing operations and logistics.

*Walmart Inc.(grocery)—Committed in 2017 to Project Gigaton to reduce Scope 3 emissions one billion tons by 2030.

Yum! Brands Inc.(restaurant) — Committed in 2019 under SBTI to develop targets for reducing GHG emissions.

*Committed to set emission reduction goals under the Science Based Targets Initiative(https://sciencebasedtargets.org/companies-taking-action/), which helps companies set targets inline with the 2015 Paris climate agreement intended to keep global warming below 2 degreesCelsius.

^Signed UN Business Ambition for 1.5°C pledge (https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/events/climate-action-summit-2019/business-ambition/business-leaders-taking-action), toreduce emissions in line with keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Next: Measuring outcomes, potential payoff is the key to ‘sustainable’ farming.