Consumer Staples
Nordic 260 response rate: Consumer Staples Overall: 45% (9 of 20)
Key Industries within the sector: Food Products (3 of 13); Food & Staples Retailing (3 of 3); Beverages (1 of 2)
Responders: Axfood
Carlsberg Breweries Cermaq
Hakon Invest Kesko
Marine Harvest Group Oriflame Salmar
Swedish Match
Largest non-respondents include: Danisco,16
Lerøy Seafood Group, Austevoll Seafood
Opportunities reported • Competitive advantage for firms ready to comply with tougher product regulations and energy efficiency standards.
• Increased demand for products meeting consumer demands for sustainability, including fish (low emissions compared with agricultural protein).
• Improved conditions for fish farming and new plant varieties owing to higher temperatures.
Risks reported • Compliance costs from product, packaging and labelling regulations, including carbon footprinting.
• Reputational risks for firms that fail to adapt to consumer awareness of climate change. Vulnerability to criticism by journalists and NGOs.
• Indirect risk of higher transport and distribution costs due to emissions taxes and regulation. Supermarkets may face taxes on HFC gases for refrigeration.
Fig 23: Emissions disclosure (million metric tons CO2e)
(100% disclosed) Scope 3
(100% disclosed) Scope 2
(100% disclosed) Scope 1
0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5
Key actions • Increased use of renewable energy; measures to improve the efficiency of refrigeration, lighting, ventilation, etc. in stores, warehouses and factories.
• Reduced emissions from transport through maximised loads, lower speed limits, driver training and preference for rail.
• Measures to reduce waste in processing plants and stores, including donations of soon-to- expire products to charity.
Performance indicators
Average disclosure score Verification rate Scope 1 Verification rate Scope 2
Share with emissions reduction targets Change in emissions during 2010
Nordic 260 64
47% 38% 67%
+0.9%
Consumer Staples
69
67% 67% 78%
+3.2%
16. Danisco cited the ongoing acquisition (by DuPont) during the responding period 2011 as the reason for not responding.
42 ‘The carbon footprint of
fish (2.9 kg CO2/kg) is half that of pork (5.9 kg
CO2/kg), and one tenth of that of beef (30 kg CO2/ kg), measured as kg
CO2e per kg edible part at slaughter. Substituting
other meats with fish will therefore contribute to a lower carbon footprint per person.’
Marine Harvest Group
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62