A research team at Oxford University, led by Dr Michael Clark, has analysed 57,000 food and drink products sold in the UK and Ireland by eight retailers, including supermarket giants Sainsbury’s and Tesco. The team studied ingredients data, and whilst the precise figures on how much of each ingredient was contained within each product were only available for around a tenth of items, the team were able to estimate the rest.
To do so, “Clark and his colleagues trained an algorithm on the known products and used it to predict the composition of the unknown ones, helped by the fact that UK regulations mean ingredients must be listed in descending order of quantity. Finally, the team linked all the ingredients to an existing database of environmental impacts, including emissions, land use and water stress.”[i]
The algorithm used showed the higher the score, the higher the environmental impact. As expected, foods containing more meat and dairy score much higher than those with more plant-based ingredients. By contrast, many meat alternatives, such as plant-based sausages or burgers, had between a fifth and less than a tenth of the environmental impact of meat-based equivalents. Importantly, there was also considerable variation within product categories. When looking at sausages, the product with the highest score was about 33% higher than that with the lowest score, or ‘least impactful’. Further, small recipe changes seemingly could make big differences- the impact of biscuits rose depending upon the levels of chocolate they contained.
It could be said that many of the findings come as no surprise, but there are additional opportunities, as Dr Clark argues:
“The major advance is not that beef has high impacts, fish has high impacts, cheese has high impacts. It’s the fact that you can start getting these impact estimates for products that people are purchasing, which then has a lot of knock-on implications.”[ii]
Figure 1: Environmental Impact of Foods Compared- Scores Based on Impacts of Cultivation, Processing and Transportation of Ingredients
Source: BBC referencing Oxford University data
One of the potential use cases, aside from the valuable information the research gives food producers themselves, is the opportunity to provide the scoring data on produce for consumers to see the environmental impact each product has.
The concept has been around for some time, and previous studies have highlighted the benefit such labels may bring. Research to assess whether consumers’ food consumption is more eco-friendly when information about a product’s environmental impact is provided was published in the Ecological Economics journal back in 2014. The survey undertaken at the time suggested “the use of an easy-to-interpret but comprehensive environmental information label increases the overall eco-friendliness of our subjects’ food consumption by about 5.3% relative to the default label used in current markets.”[iii]
It is thought that data on the ecological impact of food products could be presented in a similar manner to the nutritional ‘traffic light’ data currently seen on UK products. Given as a proportion of an adult’s daily intake, values are highlighted red (for a high % of daily intake), orange or green, depending on how highly they score.
Source: naturalproductsonline
Prof Peter Scarborough, one of the researchers in the study, told BBC News he hopes that the research leads to an eco-labelling system for customers, but that he also believes an even bigger impact would come from the food industry using the data to cut its environmental footprint:
"It fills a huge gap. Manufacturers, caterers, and retailers have targets for reaching net zero [emissions] and they don't have the tools they need to get there. Now they have this data, and some of them are talking to us about things they can do to help people move towards more sustainable food purchasing. The data could help manufacturers adjust their formulations."[iv]
With Oxford University’s research being described as “the first time a transparent and reproducible method has been developed to assess the environmental impacts of multi-ingredient products”, the findings stating that products made from meat, fish and cheese have caused concern with those in the farming industry. Jon Foot, head of environment at AHDB (Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board), told the Grocer that whilst the study had made “extensive progress in assessing the wider environmental impact of different foods”, he noted limitations to the research, such as the “lack of consideration for carbon sequestration, which disproportionately impacts beef and lamb”. A further lack of clear information around the sourcing of some products also meant the accuracy of the data “could vary greatly across suppliers and products”[v]. He added: “What’s more, the greenhouse gas emissions are not lifecycle assessed (farm to shelf), with consideration only being taken for the primary ingredients within the products, and not processing, packing or transport of the overall product”. Concerns were also raised by Phil Bicknell, head of business development at the Centre for Innovation Excellence in Livestock, he argued that the study had the potential to “do a disservice to some positive steps being taken in the UK by the food industry and by farmers”.
One area that the research does not incorporate is country of origin, something that the NFU (National Farmers Union) argue is crucial information, and this sentiment is shared by The British Meat Processors Association. A spokeswoman told The Grocer, “There are large factors that simply haven’t been included in the calculations; for example, the origin and method of production of ingredients is not accounted for; Brazilian beef has a very different eco-profile to British beef.”[vi]
The NFU response to the study saw Deputy President Tom Bradshaw state the following:
“While this tool was intended to give valuable insight for food manufacturers, caterers, and retailers to work towards their net zero goals, by its own admission information on the country of origin is missing from the ingredients list. For me this is a fundamental gap. Instead, what is needed are information and tools that support good decision-making by farmers and growers, food manufacturers and the like to work towards their net zero goals. This means it is crucial to get the detail right. Researchers must stop using global averages and use data from the country of origin for food and the ingredients within multi-food products. Only then will we all be able to make the progress needed and continue to play our part in tackling climate change.”[vii]
[i] These are the UK supermarket items with the worst environmental impact | New Scientist
[ii] These are the UK supermarket items with the worst environmental impact | New Scientist
[iii] Food labeling and eco-friendly consumption: Experimental evidence from a Belgian supermarket - ScienceDirect
[iv] Supermarket food could soon carry eco-labels, says study - BBC News
[v] Meat industry bodies raise concerns about new eco-labelling methodology from Oxford University | News | The Grocer
[vi] Ibid
[vii] NFU responds to Oxford University eco-labelling tool – NFUonline
Lauren has extensive experience as an analyst and market researcher in the digital technology and travel sectors. She has a background in researching and forecasting emerging technologies, with a particular passion for the Videogames and eSports industries. She joined the Critical Information Group as Head of Reports and Market Research at GRC World Forums, and leads the content and data research team at the Zero Carbon Academy. “What drew me to the academy is the opportunity to add content and commentary around sustainability across a wealth of industries and sectors.”
