________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Where I see the biggest untapped opportunity is in ingredient sourcing. Most companies are still working from rough, industry-average estimates here, and quality supplier-specific data will unlock better decisioning, across climate and other risk and cost vectors. Changes in farming practice remain one of the most significant and underleveraged opportunities here too. Regenerative agriculture and interventions like feed additives to address enteric methane can materially reduce upstream emissions, but they require buyer co-funding and longterm relationships with growers, not just data requests. Packaging is consistently underestimated, where more sustainable procurement decisions around global material use can scale extensively. Logistics is worth highlighting too, where fuel type and routing decisions are made daily but rarely connected back to emissions targets – a new class of point-to-point logistics modeling tools and emissions factors have greatly improved calculation accuracy here.
The common thread is that progress depends on engaging each part of the chain in the right way: what works for a farm won’ t work for a logistics provider.
Many businesses struggle with visibility beyond Tier 1 suppliers. How can companies realistically gain accurate emissions data deeper into their supply chains? Treat it as a ladder, not a leap. Trying to perfect product-level footprints before you have basic, directional visibility into where Tier 1 hotspots are, is where most companies get stuck, and progress stalls while the problem keeps growing.
Start with a Scope 3 heatmap: combine spend data with sector-level emissions factors to find where the majority of emissions sit by category and geography. Most companies find their footprint is far more concentrated amongst select suppliers than they expected.
From there, agree on methodology before collecting data, then run structured, targeted campaigns in your highest-impact categories, reaching out to the most relevant suppliers with tools they can leverage with ease.
In food and beverage specifically, growers, processors, packaging suppliers, and logistics providers each need a different engagement approach. What works for a manufacturer won’ t work for a farm. Programs that recognize that reality and segment supplier cohorting drive far better participation, and far better data in turn.
What are the most common mistakes organizations make when they first attempt to measure supply chain emissions? Three pitfalls come up consistently.
First, chasing the last decimal point, spending months perfecting methodology while suppliers disengage and nothing changes on the ground. It’ s better to be directionally correct and action-oriented than stuck in analysis paralysis.
Second, keeping it siloed from procurement. If Scope 3 only comes up in sustainability meetings, it will always come second to price and service. When procurement teams embed carbon into sourcing criteria, suppliers understand it matters not just to the sustainability team, but to their commercial relationships at large.
Third, supplier fatigue. Most suppliers, especially SMEs, are already inundated with fragmented requests from multiple customers. The ask needs to come with the right tools, training, and a clear reason why it matters to them, otherwise you get poor data and disengaged suppliers.
Collaboration is often cited as essential, but difficult in practice. What does effective collaboration across the food value chain actually look like? In practice, it means aligning on standards
14