Beyond Meat—Beyond Meat environmental sustainability claims questioned by scientists due to lack of independent data
Scientists and researchers challenged Beyond Meat's environmental claims, noting the company's life-cycle assessments lacked independent verification and failed to account for emissions from sourcing soy and other commodities. S&P Global's Trucost gave Beyond Meat a 0% environmental disclosure ratio in 2018, compared to 98-99% for traditional meat companies like Tyson. Oxford researcher Hannah Ritchie found claims difficult to substantiate, and experts noted supply chain traceability gaps for key ingredients including soy and coconut oil.
Scoring Impact
| Topic | Direction | Relevance | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate Transparency | -against | primary | -1.00 |
| Environmental Sustainability | -against | secondary | -0.50 |
| Overall incident score = | -0.214 | ||
Score = avg(topic contributions) × significance (medium ×1) × confidence (0.57)× agency (negligent ×0.5)
Evidence (1 signal)
Agriculture Dive investigation found experts unable to replicate Beyond Meat sustainability claims
Agriculture Dive reported that scientists and climate researchers struggled to replicate the findings of Beyond Meat's life-cycle assessments, raising concerns about accuracy. S&P Global's Trucost gave Beyond Meat a 0% environmental disclosure ratio, while traditional meat companies scored 98-99%. Experts said the company needed to better assess and independently verify its carbon footprint claims.