Report of the EAT side event

1. Roundtable Summary Report:
Benchmarking Industries
for Food System Transformation
EAT Forum, 13 June 2018, Stockholm

2. 2
About the roundtable
Throughout the World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA) consultation
phase, many stakeholders have emphasised the urgency of ad-
dressing challenges in our current food system. For example,
during the Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur consultations participants
emphasised that the agribusiness sector plays a crucial role in
driving action on the SDGs in the region, or as one participant put
it: “if companies are not behaving responsibly, there is very limi-
ted opportunity for governments to improve on SDG 2”.
As part of the WBA consultation phase we are exploring the develop
ment of potential food-related benchmarks. These benchmarks
would focus on the role and performance of key industries and
companies in the transition to a food system that operates within
the planetary boundaries, provides nutritional needs and is inclusive.
The forthcoming report of the EAT-Lancet Commission could serve
as an important basis for these benchmarks. We envision that
these benchmarks will include “keystone actors” in the food and
agricultural value chain, from seeds to food retail.

3. 3
About the roundtable
This meeting, organised at the margins of the EAT Stockholm
Food Forum 2018, is part of an ongoing consultation process
that serves to determine the initial scope and focus in terms of
industries and themes of the benchmarks. During the meeting
we explored how the three dimensions (nutrition, environment
and social) should guide the development of future benchmarks
and what key topics should be included or prioritised. In addition,
the role of different industries in food system transformation was
discussed and how benchmarks can contribute to accelerating
change. This summary document outlines the main themes and
insights that emerged from the meeting. Social
Nutrition Environment Climate change
Biodiversity
Water and soil
GHG emissions
Eutrophication
Pollinators
Affordability and
Accessibility
Diets
Malnutrition
Obesity
Non-communicable diseases
Antimicrobial resistance
Gender equality
Living wage
Land rights
Labour rights
Child labour
Figure: the three key dimensions and a non-exhaustive list of examples for each

4. 4
Dimensions of food
system transformation
Participants were consulted on whether the identified dimen-
sions (nutrition, environment, social) could represent the right
scope for future food-related benchmarks. They agreed that
these are important dimensions but that their relevance also
“depends on the SDGs you want to focus on”. Some focus in terms
of SDGs and industries was advised in order to maximise impact, but
also to prevent duplicating existing efforts and putting additional
burdens on companies. One of the participants emphasised that,
from a company perspective, “there is no fear of being bench-
marked – rather it is about that extra effort, the extra burden”.
Furthermore, participants agreed it was important to work with
and align any new benchmark with existing benchmarks and other
efforts in this space in order to prevent duplication and ensure
consistent assessments. Making really clear what the purpose is
and a proper scanning of the landscape was advised by one of
the participants. “Not only ranking but also providing a roadmap
for change” was considered as an impactful way to create value
for companies being ranked.
One of the participants noted that any future benchmarks in this
space should also be mindful of the nutritional side of food, not
just the health side. Industries that could be relevant in this regard
include for example pharmaceutical and chemical industries that
produce nutritional ingredients such as minerals and vitamins.
Participants also highlighted that the relevance of each of the
identified dimensions can vary per region and that different stake-
holders attach different weight and importance to each of the
dimensions. But although being cognisant of varying priorities
across stakeholder groups is key, a clear focus is deemed imperative
to create impact and actionable outcomes. It was also stressed
that any future benchmark focused on food should include a clear
focus on the beginning of the value chain, or as one participant
put it: “The food supply chain has to be sustainable, not just for
the Europeans buying the food but also for those producing it.”

5. 5
The role of industries along
the food value chain in food
system transformation
Participants questioned the extent to which companies across
sectors can be meaningfully compared in one benchmark, using
one unified methodology, as companies in the beginning and at
the end of the chain are quite difficult to compare. The targets
that will be published in the forthcoming report of the EAT-Lancet
Commission on Food, Planet, Health could potentially provide a
basis for cross-sector comparisons. As one of the participants
noted: “If there are specific targets, it will be easier to compare
companies across sectors”. But operationalising these targets
could also mean different things for different sectors according
to participants – making the case stronger for benchmarks that
better reflect the distinct role that each industry along the food
value chain can play in food system transformation.
One of the participants advised to break down the food value chain
into three categories of industries, reflecting their influence and
focus. The first category of industries could be those that have the
ability to influence consumer behaviour due to their position at
the end of the food value chain and because they are consumer
facing. The second category of industries could include those
at the start of the food value chain and that have an important
influence on agricultural practices in food production. And thirdly,
those industries that can influence the entire food value chain
due to upstream and downstream linkages and influence. These
different categories of industries could all be considered to have

6. 6
The role of industries along
the food value chain in food
system transformation
different roles in the transition of our food system.
Participants emphasised that even though it would be a logical
first step to initially focus on large, global companies, there could
be a lot of value in making benchmarks relevant for regional,
smaller companies as well. Or as one of the participants stressed:
“If there is no usage for regional companies then we are missing
part of the point”. This could be done for example through the
development of self-assessment tools that allow smaller players
to assess their own performance, noted one participant. Another
participant stressed that when the scope of a benchmark is set,
it could be important to consider including criteria that go beyond
financial figures (e.g. revenues). For example, the WBA could
give more weight to production in the tropics, according to one
participant, so that companies with significant production in these
regions are part of the benchmark.
Participants also discussed the growing importance of food
services and the out-of-home segment. One of the participants
noted that in the future “there will be more processed food used
despite the promotion of fresh food, at home but also out-of-
home”. In addition, companies that produce vitamin- and mineral
supplements could also be considered as part of the food value
chain, as well as the alternative treatment industry (e.g. herbal
medicines). Another participant suggested to potentially also
focus on industries that are outside the food value chain but that
have a significant influence over it. An important example in this
regard mentioned included major agriculture lenders (banks).
These players should also be considered as important audiences
as the methodology and the benchmarking results can become
part of their due diligence processes, determining whether or not
to finance particular companies. Other industries mentioned in
this regard included ICT and data providers as data is becoming
increasingly important for food production.
In addition, participants emphasised that even though industries/
companies might be included in a potential benchmark, there
are still questions regarding the scope of these benchmarks on
company segment level. E.g. should a food and beverage com-
panies’ water business be included or not? Even though it is not
directly linked to the food and agriculture value chain, it has an
impact on agrobiodiversity and social issues, according to one
of the participants.

7. 7
How benchmarks can contribute
to accelerating change
Participants also discussed the role of other actors in enabling
and accelerating the transition to a more sustainable, healthier
and inclusive food system. The role of governments was raised
by different participants and it was discussed how for example
(fiscal) policies and taxation of companies that market unhealthy
foods could contribute to change, both on the producer and
consumer side. In addition, governments have an important role
in creating an enabling environment that allows companies to
do business in a more sustainable way. “We can only do so much
if the enabling environment is not up to standard”, noted one of
the participants.
Industry associations were also mentioned as important actors
for system change and participants recommended involving them
actively in the benchmark development process. One participant,
however, noted that there are significant differences among existing
industry and business associations and how they view sustainability
benchmarks. While some are supportive of benchmarks in order
to help accelerate change and to facilitate discussions around
important sustainability topics, others are more conservative
and protective of their respective industry or sector. Participants
agreed that getting associations involved in the benchmark deve-
lopment process could help spur more responsible and sustainable
behaviour among their members.

8. 8
How benchmarks can contribute
to accelerating change
It was also discussed how current benchmarks are used by stake-
holders. For example, one of the participants noted that companies
use their position in a benchmark in their conversations with banks,
especially regional companies. For investors, benchmarks can help
to show in a simple way what companies are doing.
Participants did not see any major concerns with companies fea-
turing in multiple benchmarks as this would allow stakeholders to
“get a clear picture of how a company performs across the board”.
The pros and cons of including publicly and non-publicly available
information in benchmarks were also discussed. Including publicly
available data creates a level playing field as it is based on infor-
mation that is available to all and drives greater transparency. The
inclusion of non-public information allows for the more detailed
assessment of specific issues, according to some participants,
but also raised the question of “how are you going to get the
information from companies?”
Participants agreed that benchmarks would have to start off with
a lot of complexity and data but that success would depend on the
extent to which benchmarks create transparency and simplicity.
Making them easy to understand and use for all stakeholders should
be an important priority in that regard.

9. 9
Next steps
This meeting was the first in series of dialogues and multi-stake-
holder consultations that will help to determine the initial scope
in terms of industries and themes of benchmarks that focus on
the role and performance of key industries and companies in
the transition to a food system that operates within planetary
boundaries, provides nutritional needs and is inclusive. Next to
dialogues and consultations, extensive research will be done on
the role of different industries in food system transformation
and the SDGs, providing important inputs for the scoping of the
benchmarks. In addition, an Expert Review Committee will be
established that consists of experts who provide external advice
on the structure, scope, methodology and analysis for the bench-
mark. Following a public consultation period on the methodology,
we aim to present the first scope and methodology of the EAT
Stockholm Food Forum 2019.