During phase 1, 75% of companies held dialogues with investors, 85% of companies replied to the investor letters, 65% of companies acknowledged and/or provided feedback on their assessment 

For individual Protein Diversification engagement company assessments, please visit our Company Universe. 

Protein diversification is being underutilised as a tool to decarbonise by companies.

The Science-based Targets initiative (SBTi) now requires companies to set a 1.5C-aligned Scope 3 emissions reduction target. 45% of the companies have these targets, with 35% of companies having targets covering their Forest, Land, and Agriculture (FLAG) emissions. To deliver on these targets, most companies are relying on reducing the emissions of animal protein production and neglecting the potential of ingredient substitution to lower-emitting plant-based proteins. Companies are setting their climate strategies without quantifying the carbon mitigation potential of protein diversification, leading to an underestimation of its benefits.  

Board expertise of companies in climate is stronger compared to nutrition.

Companies that have set protein diversification targets or have integrated protein diversification into their climate transition plans have all received board-level support for these initiatives. 70% of the companies in the engagement have an executive team with direct experience in climate. However, experience in nutrition is lacking, with only 25% of companies reporting having nutrition or health expertise within their boards. Nutrition expertise at the board level can support that climate plans also deliver positive nutrition outcomes.

Companies are under-reporting their climate and nutrition lobbying efforts.

80% of companies in this engagement disclose a list of direct lobbying, and 90% of companies disclose a list of indirect lobbying through trade associations and partner organisations. Only 35% of companies disclose lobbying towards both positive climate and nutrition outcomes. 

While 80% of companies report evidence of supporting decarbonisation in their animal supply chains, only 15% have formal commitments to a Just Transition in animal agriculture, and 95% overlook the supply chain implications of protein diversification. 

Most companies involved in the engagement lack just transition commitments, and their supplier engagement efforts do not include a consultation process for developing a just transition plan. Despite this, 80% of companies report some evidence of taking steps to support animal agricultural farmers in decarbonisation, relying primarily on on-farm climate solutions. However, 95% of companies overlook scientific recommendations to shift diets towards plant-based proteins and the implications for animal supply chains.

Despite market challenges, all companies continue to expand their plant-based ranges with growing innovation in product formulation under existing brands.

A decline in demand for plant-based meat and dairy alternatives has been caused by high inflation, products not meeting consumer demand for taste and texture, and concerns around the ultra-processed narrative. Despite these market challenges, 95% of companies in the engagement continue to allocate resources to expand their plant-based offerings. However, there has been a shift in plant-based product development strategies to focus on hybrid and blended products and the use of plant-based whole foods as ingredients. 

Attracting the mainstream consumer and the flexitarian is a priority for companies.

Despite limited public disclosure, it was found that most companies in this engagement have ongoing efforts to promote plant-based products, such as through loyalty card discounts, recipe inspirations or in-store product placements. Many of these initiatives are targeted at the mainstream consumer or flexitarian who were cited as a key market for 60% of companies. Companies argued that taste and texture are a priority selling point for these products, with nutrition and sustainability being secondary considerations.