November 23, 2024 | 07:15 GMT +7

  • Click to copy
Thursday- 07:27, 29/02/2024

Carbon offsetting is a last resort, not a silver bullet

(VAN) Brands have never been under more pressure to be sustainable. As they should be – we all need to do what we can to reverse the devastating effects of climate change.
The Amazon rainforest in Amapá state, Brazil. Photo: Alamy

The Amazon rainforest in Amapá state, Brazil. Photo: Alamy

This pressure has been especially driven by consumers. In a study by NIQ in early 2023, 61% of UK consumers said they felt sustainability was more important to them than it was two years ago. And with 46% expecting businesses to be the ones to bring about sustainable change, they’re looking for brands to lead the way.

This is directly impacting purchasing decisions, with 14% of people being ‘evangelist’ shoppers actively making ethical purchasing decisions and a further 69% being ‘persuadables’ open to change.

So you can understand why brands have felt a panicked desperation to be seen to be as sustainable as possible. To be doing the right thing – such as carbon offsetting.

That’s exactly what we did at Better Nature Tempeh. In 2020 we became the UK’s first carbon-negative meat-free brand. Something we were incredibly proud of and loudly celebrated. 

We had looked extensively into the programmes we were funding through this and were confident they were having a positive impact. We really felt like we were doing the right thing. 

It was only when our marketing manager looked into the whole process more deeply that we realised the issues with it. 

To be totally clear, offsetting is not in itself a bad thing to do. Anything we can do to remove carbon emissions from the air is positive. 

The issue with offsetting is that it normalises the act of paying over changing, which then results in brands prioritising quick and ineffective action over slow and effective change. It’s never been easier to create a net-zero strategy that involves almost no reduction and a lot of offsetting. 

It’s also not very transparent, as what you offset today may only be removed from the environment in five years’ time, particularly in the case of practices like tree planting. That will likely be too late to reverse the impact of climate change. This is confusing and unfair for customers, who genuinely want their sustainable choices to have a positive impact now. 

Digging deeper also revealed unaccredited offsetting programmes were sending credits towards projects that would be happening anyway, but using offsetting as another revenue stream. These may be in the minority, but the fact it’s happening at all is shocking.  

Once we realised this, we knew we had to change our stance. 

It was scary to do a u-turn on something we’d been so vocal about and felt so core to our brand at the time, but we went back to basics. What was our core mission? What were our areas of expertise? What was our role in the market? How could we have the greatest positive impact, while being realistic about what we could do as a small business? 

Instead of offsetting, we decided to donate 1% of all our sales to YUM, an NGO that tackles malnutrition in Indonesia, the home of tempeh. We got our products carbon-rated by MyEmissions (all low or very low) to keep ourselves accountable on our CO2 emissions. We engaged in carbon reduction exercises to reduce wherever we could, while being realistic about our current limitations. Finally, we became a B Corp, which encompasses a lot more than just CO2, and reflects the genuine impact we want to have in everything we do. 

As brands, we need to be honest with ourselves. Offsetting isn’t always wrong, but it should be a last resort and an add-on – not the core of a sustainability strategy.

H.D

(The Grocer)

Gaza food production ‘decimated’ with 70% of farmland hit

Gaza food production ‘decimated’ with 70% of farmland hit

(VAN) Israeli attacks have destroyed huge areas of land used for crops, with 90% of cattle killed, analysis shows.

Improving safety at sea at a time of climate change

Improving safety at sea at a time of climate change

(VAN) Interview with Manuel Barange, Director of FAO’s Fisheries and Aquaculture Division.

British farmers warn of bitter harvest

British farmers warn of bitter harvest

(VAN) Finances, politics and a cultural divide push the agriculture sector to the brink and stir up anger.

Small farms key to taking on hunger

Small farms key to taking on hunger

(VAN) Modest operations account for more than 90% of global food producers.

What the farmers' protest tells us about their argument with the government

What the farmers' protest tells us about their argument with the government

(VAN) The farmers' demonstration was best summed up in two images: real tractors being driven by farmers around Parliament Square, and beside them a collection of toy tractors being peddled around by their children.

FAO urges all its Members and partners to join the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty

FAO urges all its Members and partners to join the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty

(VAN) G20’s initiative is officially launched in Brazil. FAO will host the Global Alliance’s Support Mechanism.

COP29 showcases China’s progress in green transition

COP29 showcases China’s progress in green transition

(VAN) China has provided and mobilized more than 177 billion yuan of project funds since 2016 in support of other developing countries' climate response, the Xinhua News Agency reported.

Read more