Improving Environmental Outcomes Along Food Supply Chains - A Review of Initiatives and Their Effectiveness - OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Paper - 186

Aug 27, 2026

Upload by Maeve

This paper reviews initiatives that use a “supply chain lens” to improve environmental outcomes across food systems. It examines approaches such as due diligence requirements, supply-chain impact disclosure, and benchmarking of firms’ supply-chain performance. The review also covers corporate pledges, emerging labels that communicate life-cycle environmental impacts, and government financial incentives linked to those impacts. Growth and diversity of initiatives are highlighted, with clearer societal expectations and reporting standards that reduce greenwashing, though evidence on effectiveness remains limited and gaps persist.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages51

Reading Time2 h 9 min

AccessFree to download

Executive Summary

Introduction

Due diligence for responsible business conduct

Effectiveness

Disclosure

Voluntary disclosure through CDP

Mandatory disclosure

Effectiveness

Benchmarking

World Benchmarking Alliance – Food and Agriculture

The Coller FAIRR Protein Producer Index

Effectiveness

Corporate pledges

Science-Based Targets

Collective aspirations to reduce deforestation

Company commitments to zero deforestation

Effectiveness

Voluntary sustainability standards and labels

Effectiveness

Communicating environmental impacts of products

Environmental product declarations

Product Environmental Footprint

Foundation Earth

Eco-score

Towards mandatory environmental impact labelling in France

Effectiveness

Financial incentives by governments

Taxes or subsidies based on life-cycle impacts

Public procurement

Effectiveness

Conclusion

References

IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES ALONG FOOD SUPPLY CHAINS A REVIEW OF INITIATIVES AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS OECD FOOD, AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES PAPER September 2022 n°186 Improving Environmental Outcomes Along Food Supply Chains: A Review of Initiatives and Their Effectiveness Koen Deconinck and May Hobeika This paper reviews initiatives which take a “supply chain lens” to improving environmental outcomes of food systems. Some focus on due diligence, or ask firms to disclose impacts of their supply chain. Others benchmark firms according to supply chain performance. Firms also increasingly make corporate pledges covering their supply chain. In addition to traditional voluntary sustainability standards and labels, new labels are emerging which communicate actual environmental impacts along the life cycle. Governments can also provide financial incentives linked to such impacts. This review demonstrates the strong growth and diversity of initiatives, bolstered by more clearly defined societal expectations and reporting standards, and leading to a greater availability of data and evidence and more universal reporting, reducing the scope for greenwashing. Despite their great promise, there remain coverage gaps. Evidence on effectiveness also remains relatively scarce, although there is a clear increase in the number of empirical studies. This is one of four papers developing work on addressing evidence gaps on food systems in OECD countries (OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 183 to 186) . Key words: Sustainability , Due diligence, Disclosure , Supply chain initiatives, Life cycle assessment JEL codes: Q51, Q56, Q17, Q27 , Q37, M14 This document replaces a previous version. The colour schemes of Figures 4, 5, 10, and 15 have been modified for greater clarity. Acknowledgements The author acknowledge valuable discussions with Peter Arbuckle (USDA), Ken Ash, Lauren Baker (Global Alliance for the Future of Food), Nick Betts (SAI Platform), Koen Boone (The Sustainability Consortium), Sarah Bridle (University of York), Jan Börner (University of Bonn), Martin Bruckner (Vienna University of Economics and Business), Viktoria de Bourbon de Parme (World Benchmarking Alliance), Florence Buchholzer (European Commission), Sebastiano Caleffi (City University of London), Monica Crippa (European Commission – Joint Research Centre), Simon Croft (University of York), Camillo De Camillis (FAO), Magali Deryckere (Bain & Company), Michiel de Vries (EEAC), Jelle Dhaen (Bain & Company), Patty Fong (Global Alliance for the Future of Food), Gretel Gambarelli (UNEP), Javier Godar (Stockholm Environmental Institute), Monica Hadarits (Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef), Corinna Hawkes (City University of London), Marta Hugas (EFSA), Salman Hussain (UNEP), Adriana Ignaciuk (FAO), Joanna Ilicic (FAO), Sofia Ioannidou (EFSA), Clea Kaske-Kuck (World Business Council for Sustainable Development), Susanne Kat (World Business Council for Sustainable Development), Matthieu Lamolle (ITC), David Leclere (IIASA), Adrian Leip (European Commission), Anne Locke (ODI), Steven Lord (Oxford University), Will Martin (IFPRI), Christophe Matthys (University of Leuven), Sarah McLaren (Massey University), Alisher Mirzabaev (University of Bonn), Thomas Nemecek (Agroscope), Kelly Parsons (University of Hertfordshire), Helena Pinto (UNEP), Joseph Poore (Oxford University), Eline Reintjes (FAIRR), Greg Sixt (FACT Alliance), Alexander Stein (European Commission), Thomas Tomich (UC Davis), Lucinda Toyama (independent consultant), Francesco Tubiello (FAO), Hannah van Zanten (Wageningen University), Jan Verheeke (Minaraad), Joachim von Braun (University of Bonn), Liesbet Vranken (University of Leuven), Stephanie Walton (City University of London), Matthew Watkins (World Business Council for Sustainable Development), Chris West (University of York), Joseph Wozniak (ITC), Helena Wright (FAIRR), Jenn Yates (Global Alliance for the Future of Food), a

FAQs

What types of initiatives does the paper review to improve environmental outcomes in food supply chains?

It reviews due diligence approaches, supply-chain impact disclosure (voluntary and mandatory), benchmarking, corporate pledges, sustainability standards and labels, product impact communication tools, and government financial incentives.

How does the paper assess the effectiveness of supply-chain initiatives?

It outlines specific sections on effectiveness within each initiative type, noting that effectiveness evidence remains relatively scarce even as the number of empirical studies is increasing.

Why does the paper argue that greenwashing risk can be reduced?

It points to more clearly defined societal expectations and reporting standards, along with greater availability of data and evidence, which supports more universal reporting.

Aug 27, 2026

Upload by Maeve