Loading policy action…
Why this action matters
Backed by researchTracking procurement emissions is justified because government procurement can significantly influence dietary environmental footprints, as evidenced by the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and resource use through informed dietary choices. Evidence shows that shifting towards plant-based diets and reducing meat consumption can lower emissions by up to 70%, highlighting the role of procurement policies in driving systemic change within the food system.
Concept connections
Drafted by softwareBnature Speople Ethe economy · ▶what this action affects ◀what it needs first · Tap a concept to see other actions linked to it
What this action would change
Backed by researchThe action itself
Creating a publicly accessible dashboard that tracks the carbon footprint of council food procurement, updated regularly against reduction targets, enables transparent monitoring and accountability for food-related emissions within local government operations.
What it would change in the UK
In the UK, this action addresses a significant blind spot in public sector carbon reporting by bringing food-system emissions into focus, potentially reducing emissions from food procurement by up to 15% through targeted interventions, as evidenced by studies showing that reducing food waste and shifting to plant-based diets can significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions.
What it would change worldwide
Globally, the UK's adoption of this approach provides a replicable model for municipal-level food emissions accounting, which can be adapted by cities worldwide to align with climate goals, support biodiversity through reduced land use for livestock, and contribute to the global effort to limit warming to 1.5°C as outlined in the IPCC reports.
Where national politics stands
Nothing recorded yetThe research behind it
Published research about food and farming as a whole, not this action in particular
We are holding this summary back until we have checked it
This summary was written before we started checking summaries against the papers they cite, so it has not been checked.
Research and reports on this action
Research that argues the other way
We are holding this summary back until we have checked it
This summary was written before we started checking summaries against the papers they cite, so it has not been checked.