Company Resource Portal

Press Release

https://www.ceres.org/news-center/press-releases/new-report-ranks-largest-global-food-companies-water-risk-management

Social Media

Below is a fully customizable sample tweet that your company can push out on its social media channels:

We’re making progress on #water. See @CeresNews Feeding Ourselves Thirsty report to learn more. #ThirstyFood. http://feedingourselvesthirsty.ceres.org

Click here to download a zip file that contains several photos that you are free to use as well.

In addition, Ceres has also developed individual scorecards that showcase your company’s progress.

To share your individual Feeding Ourselves Thirsty scorecard on your social media channels:

1. Visit the Company Scorecards webpage
2. Select your company
3. Click on the Twitter icon in the upper righthand corner, which will generate your company’s unique tweet and graphic

Frequently Asked Questions

The following FAQ provides messaging and answers to questions pertaining to the main takeaways of this analysis, what steps companies are taking to address water risks and more.

1. What is Feeding Ourselves Thirsty?

Feeding Ourselves Thirsty ranks over 40 of the largest food companies on how they are managing water risk in their operations and supply chains. It provides data on four industries most at risk: packaged foods, beverages, agricultural products and meat. Most of the companies are US-based and publicly traded. It relies on publicly available data, such as 10-K filings and sustainability reports.

This is an update to Ceres’ 2015 Feeding Ourselves Thirsty benchmarking analysis.

2. How were the 40 companies chosen?

The majority of companies chosen are the largest publicly-held, U.S. based food companies in the four industries: beverage, packaged food, meat and agricultural products. A few privately held or non-U.S. based companies were also included because of their large market share in the food industry.

3. How were companies evaluated?

Using publicly available data, such as from 10-K filings, sustainability reports and the CDP Water Survey, companies were assessed across four categories of water management – Governance and Management, Direct Operations, Manufacturing Supply Chain and Agricultural Supply Chain – and each scored on a 0- to 100-point scale on their responses in anticipating and mitigating these risks.

The methodology for this analysis uses publicly available information and is grounded in the Ceres Aqua Gauge, which was developed to aid investors in evaluating the water management activities of corporations in a range of sectors against detailed definitions of leading practice. For the purpose of this analysis, these definitions were modified to enhance their relevance to the unique water use characteristics of the food sector.

For more information see the methodology.

4. What are the key takeaways?

Food production is in the bull’s eye of climate change, with more intense droughts and floods creating major risks to the sector’s bottom line. While our analysis shows a small number of food companies are making strong progress at addressing water risks, the majority remain unprepared for the profound impact of climate change on the water resources that sustain their operations and agricultural supply chains.

The analysis found that the water risk management scores of all food companies improved by an average of 10 percent since 2015, with the packaged food and meat industries making the biggest gains (16 and 20 percent improvement, respectively). However, the average score for the 42 companies benchmarked was still only 31 points out of 100.

5. Why is water a concern for food companies?

Growing and processing the food we eat is a thirsty and polluting business.

The global food and agriculture sector uses 70 percent of the world’s freshwater to grow crops, raise livestock and produce packaged food and beverages—and it faces extraordinary risks from climate change.

Besides climate change, other factors contributing to water scarcity include population growth, which is increasing demand for freshwater, including for water-intensive foods, such as pork and beef.

Agriculture is also the single biggest unchecked source of water pollution in the U.S. and many parts of the world because of poor management of chemical fertilizer and manure. Agricultural runoff causes widespread damage through algal blooms and poor manure management that is exacerbated by extreme storms.

6. How does climate change impact water resources for food companies?

Climate change is increasing the risk of both heavy and unpredictable rains, and extreme droughts. Hotter global temperatures are creating more erratic weather patterns, which impact water evaporation, stream flows and precipitation, with wetter areas generally becoming wetter and drier areas even drier.

Farmers are contending with more erratic periods of drought and deluges along with more weeds, diseases and pests - all of which reduce yield and drive food prices up.

Hotter temperatures are also impacting snowmelt around the world, which is a major contributor to water supply for growing regions such as California, India and Peru.

Not only is climate change compromising the availability of freshwater, but on very hot days, crops suffer stress as evaporation reduces the amount of water they can soak up through the soil.

Increased weather variability, coupled with growing competition for water in most major agricultural production regions, increases the risk of commodity price volatility. We’re already seeing evidence of this at the supermarket in the U.S., and in countries around the world where spikes in food prices have contributed to major civil unrest.

7. Who is Feeding Ourselves Thirsty intended for?

The report is primarily intended for investors, who increasingly view water management as a material financial risk. The World Economic Forum has consistently ranked water as a top global risk for the past four years. Similarly, an analysis by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) has determined that the financial risks associated with water withdrawals and wastewater are highly material to the four industries analyzed in Feeding Ourselves Thirsty. This benchmarking analysis is intended to assist investors in evaluating whether food company executives and their boards are approaching water challenges with open eyes, and a plan to address them.

8. Why did Nestlé rank number one in the analysis?

Ceres’ analysis evaluated the parent company, Nestlé S.A., which produces products ranging from chocolate and cereal to dairy and bottled water. Despite the company’s challenges around its bottled water brands—which represent eight percent of Nestlé’s revenues overall—it did score particularly well in some key areas.

First, Nestlé set an ambitious 2020 target to reduce direct water withdrawals per ton of product in every product category to achieve an overall reduction of 35 percent per ton of product since 2010. As of 2016, it has reduced water use 25 percent per ton.

Operations: Through 516 water-saving initiatives across its factories, Nestlé saves 3.7 million cubic meters of water annually (1500 Olympic-size pools), at a cost of $33 million.

Among those initiatives, Nestlé has implemented water-saving projects at 21 out of 24 priority manufacturing sites, reducing water withdrawals by 87.5 percent at these facilities.

Its Nescafé Dolce Gusto facility in Montes Claros, Brazil, received a landmark Triple Zero award in 2016: zero water withdrawn, zero waste to disposal and zero net GHG emissions.

Supply Chain: This is a key category, since supply chains for food are often extremely complex and opaque and can expose companies to considerable risk. Nestlé has provided $24 million in financial support to farmers worldwide, including $20 million in direct financial assistance for sustainable farm management (including water), and trained more than 360,000 farmers.

For example, Nestlé Colombia implemented drip irrigation at four farms that supply it with milk. The farms used an average 55 percent less water for crop cultivation, while milk production year on year increased by 42 percent for 2014–2015. The project will now be rolled out to 30 dairy farms over the next two years. Similarly, it trained 47,188 coffee farmers on improved water management techniques in Vietnam.

Governance: Nestlé also scored well in the governance category, which reflects board and executive oversight around water risk and management as well as policies linking senior executive compensation to sustainability generally and water goals in particular. Nestlé now has a board sustainability committee that exerts oversight around sustainability goals. The board also links company performance around water conservation to executive compensation. Water is one of three priority areas, with management responsibility embedded across its business units.

Wastewater: Nestlé treats the water it discharges by setting strict targets around discharge quality and operating its own treatment plants where municipal infrastructure is inadequate.

If you have additional questions about the analysis or your company’s performance, please contact Eliza Roberts at: [email protected].