According to the New York newspaper, some analysts say that it is not possible to know if these foods are more sustainable than meat because companies are not always transparent when reporting their emissions. According to The New York Times, in recent years, consumers and investors alike have gobbled up Beyond Meat’s burgers, sausages and chicken, thanks, at least in part, to the company’s message that its plant-based products are good for the environment”.
But Sustainalytics, a firm that rates the sustainability of companies based on their environmental, social and corporate governance impact, doesn’t believe it. “We do not believe we have enough information to say that Beyond Meat is fundamentally different from JBS,” they say in a report in the North American newspaper. According to critics, the problem is that neither “Beyond Meat nor Impossible Foods – its rival in the US – disclose the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated by their operations, supply chains or consumer waste. Nor do they reveal the effects that they have their operations in the forests or how much water they use. ”
“The dominant narrative of the plant products industry and the venture capitalists that support it is that these companies are more beneficial for the environment, for health, for this and for that,” explained Ricardo San Martin, director of research for the program. of alternative meats at the University of California, Berkeley campus. But it is actually a black box. There are many elements of the content of these products that are not disclosed. All companies have a supply chain, and there is a carbon footprint behind that chain ”.
