Food Report Final

8/3/2019 Food Report Final

1/22


2/22

2008 GRI

2

About GRIs Research andDevelopment Publication

Series

GRIs world class research and development

program supports a commitment to continuous

improvement by investigating challenging issues

around reporting and innovating new ways to

apply the GRI Reporting Framework in conjunction

with other standards.

Publications in the GRI Research and Development

Series are presented in three categories:

Research and implications on reporting

related to subject such as biodiversity

and gender

Tracking reporting practice and

implementation, and assessing uture

scenarios.

Guidance or using the GRI Reporting

Framework in combination with other

standards

This document Sustainability Reporting in the Food

Processing Sector, alls under the Reporting Practices

category.

Copyright

This document is copyright-protected by Stichting

Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction

and distribution o this document or inormation

and/or use in preparing a sustainability report

is permitted without prior permission rom GRI.

However neither this document nor any extract

rom it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or

transerred in any orm or by any means (electronic,

mechanical, photocopies, recorded, or otherwise)

or any other purpose without prior written

permission rom GRI.

Global Reporting Initiative, the Global Reporting

Initiative logo, Sustainability Reporting Guidelines,

and GRI are trademarks o the Global Reporting

Initiative.

2008 GRI

Topics

ReportingPractices

GRIResearch&Development

Tools


3/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

1

GRI Research and

Development SeriesReportingPractices

Acknowledgement

The Global Reporting Initiative

The Global Reporting InitiativeTM (GRI) is a

multi-stakeholder non-prot organization that

develops and publishes guidelines or reporting on

economic, environmental, and social perormance

(sustainability perormance). The GRIs Sustainability

Reporting Guidelines had been used by over

1000 organizations worldwide, with many more

organizations considering them inormally duringthe preparation o their public reports. The guidelines

are developed through a unique multi-stakeholder

consultative process involving representatives rom

reporting organizations and report inormation

users rom around the world. First published in 2000

and then revised in 2002, the guidelines have now

entered their third generation, reerred to as the GRI

G3 Guidelines which were released in October 2006.

Research conducted by:

Laura French, GRI

Lead editors:

Maaike Fleur, GRI

Sean Gilbert, GRI

Designer:

Tuuli Sauren, INSPIRIT International

Communications


4/22

2008 GRI

2

2007 GRI

2

2008 GRI

2


5/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

3

GRI Research and


Table o Contents

1. Introduction 4

2. Methodology 5

3. Overview o Food ProcessingSustainability Reporters 6

4. Trends in Food Processing

Sustainability Reporting 8

4.1 Frequency o reported GRI Indicators 8

4.2 Added reporting on sector themes 8

5. Conclusions 13

List o Figures

Figure I Food Processing Reporters by

Region 6

Figure II Food Processing Reporters by

Sub-sector 6

Figure III Number o Reporters by

Sub-sector, 1991-2006 7

Figure IV Frequency o Reporting 8

List o Tables

Table I Frequency o Reporting onThemes 9

AnnexesAnnex I 2006 Food Processing Reporters 14

Annex II Frequency o Reported

GRI Indicators 16

Annex III Supply Chain in the GRI 2002

and GRI G3 18


6/22

2008 GRI

4

The Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) vision isthat reporting on economic, environmental, and

social perormance by all organizations is as

routine and comparable as nancial reporting.

The GRI has pioneered the development o the

worlds most widely used sustainability reporting

ramework, the G3 Guidelines, and is committed to its

continuous improvement and application worldwide.

This ramework sets out the principles and indicators

that organizations can use to measure and report their

economic, environmental, and social perormance.

Some sectors ace unique needs that require

specialized guidance in addition to the universally

applicable core Guidelines. Sector Supplements

respond to these needs and are a key part o the

Reporting Framework, designed to complement the

Guidelines.

Ater numerous requests, GRI began exploring

the possibility o developing a Food Processing

Sector Supplement in the summer o 2007. For the

purpose o ocusing a sector supplement, a group

o companies with a comparable sustainability

impact is sought. For that reason, the ocus here ison companies without retail activities or processing

tobacco or alcohol. In initial conversations,

questions were raised regarding the current level

o reporting and the content o the published

sustainability reports in the Food Processing sector.

To answer these questions, GRI compiled an

overview o reporting in the ood sector in 2006

to serve as a resource or the development o

the Sector Supplement. The research assessed

trends in use o some GRI indicators and how Food

Processing companies report on sector-specic

themes.

The results o all analyses are presented in this

report, beginning with an overview o the 60 ood

processing reports which cover the year 2006. This

is ollowed by an examination o reporting trends

among a sample o 20 ood processing reporters.

The research uncovered a number o sector-specic

issues that regularly appear in reports, but are

not covered in the GRI Guidelines and should be

considered or inclusion through a supplement.

1. Introduction


7/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

5

GRI Research and


GRIs research on reporting in the ood processingsector ocused on the 60 ood processing

companies that had issued sustainability reports

covering the year 2006 (see Annex I or list).

To gain additional insight, 20 ood processing

sustainability reports were selected or a detailed

analysis ocused on two questions:

What is the requency o reporting on GRI1)

indicators in ood processing reports? (see 4.1)

What themes were included in ood processing2)reports, and how did these relate to the themes

covered in the G3 Guidelines? (see 4.2)

The detailed analysis o the 20 reports was limited

to those reports published in English. The sample

was chosen to reect a diverse geographic and sub-

sector representation.

The sample o reports included ones written

using the GRI Guidelines as well as reports written

without reerence to the GRI. Inormation on the20 selected companies, including the company

location, primary sub-sector and reporting

guidelines, is marked and bolded in Annex I.

To gauge reporting on GRI Indicators, thecontent index o the GRI reports was examined to

determine whether a company had reported on

a given indicator. However, the research did not

try to systematically survey the GRI Disclosures on

Management Approach amongst companies. For

reporting on indicators, no distinction was made

between ull and partial reporting as described

by individual companies, nor the manner o

reporting, and i companies reerred to a separate

document containing their response to a given

indicator, this was also counted as reporting.

Certain assumptions were made so that

inormation could be extracted rom the 20

reports in a consistent and standardized way.

In order to track companies reporting on sector

themes, only the actual report was read and the

research did not extend to reviewing the content

o other documents alluded to or linked to in

the report. The preliminary research results were

discussed by companies and stakeholders rom

the Food Processing sector, and the 20 samplecompanies were oered the opportunity to do

an accuracy check.

2. Methodology


8/22

2008 GRI

6

Following the global trend in environmental

awareness, paired with heightened consumer

consciousness, ood companies are increasingly

acing new expectations and seeking to

proactively communicate the economic, social andenvironmental perormance o their businesses.

The global ood industry, an enterprise in which

over 4 billion tons o products are moved rom eld

to table each year, can be broken into three main

sectors: agriculture, ood processing, and ood

retail & oodservice. Sitting in between agriculture

and ood retail and oodservice, ood processing

companies ace demands placed on them by

partners both upstream and downstream, and are

thereore central to the discussion o sustainable

ood production.

The ood processing sector can be urther

broken down by sub-sectors based on the main

products companies process: agricultural crops,

semi-processed products, meat, sh, dairy, and

beverages. Some companies provide multiple

products but have or the purpose o this research

been classied within the sub-sector representing

the largest portion o sales volume. Alcohol,

pharmaceutical and tobacco processing companies

may have overlapping activities with companies inthe ood processing sector, but were excluded here

as they ace dierent sustainability challenges.

Upon examination o sustainability reporting

practices in the ood processing sector, it was ound

that 60 companies produced reports covering the

year 2006. This includes both GRI and non-GRI

based reports. Some companies started reporting

as early as 1991, however, companies have, on

average, around 4 years o reporting experience.

Hal o the ood processing reporters operate in the

agricultural crops sub-sector and the large majority

o reporters were based in Europe. The ollowing

charts highlight this geographic and sub-sector

distribution.

3. Overview of Food

ProcessingSustainability Reporting

Figure II: 2006 Food Processing Reporters

by Sub-sector

Figure I: 2006 Food Processing Reporters

by Region


9/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

7

GRI Research and


1. IntroductionAs to the size and prole o reporters, slightly overhal had revenues o greater than 1 billion Euros.

There has been an

overall increase

in reporting since

the rst reports

were issued over

15 years ago by

companies in

the agricultural

processing and

the beverage

sub-sectors. Most

o the reports

were produced

in 2006. It took

almost 10 years

or the sh and

meat processing

sub-sectors to start producing reports, and even

now, there is not dramatic growth in the number

o companies reporting on sustainability in thesesub-sectors. In 2006, 24 ood processing companies

used the GRI Guidelines when reporting.

Figure III: Number o Reporters by Sub-Sector,

rom 1991-2006


10/22

2008 GRI

8

In addition to providing an overview o reporting in

the Food Processing sector or the year 2006,

this research also addressed trends in reporting at

20 companies (See Methodology, p. 5). In section

4.1, the requency o use o perormance indicatorsby GRI reporters has been examined, the indicators

least reported upon in the ood processing sector

are described. Section 4.2 considers specic

themes that appear most requently in reports.

These two components o this research on trends in

the Food Processing sustainability reporting oers

a starting point or development o the GRI Sector

Supplement or the Food Processing sector.

4.1 Frequency o reported GRI Indicators

The inormation on the requency o reportingvarious GRI indicators was compiled by reviewing

the content indexes o the reports (reer to Annex

II or a detailed examination). The review identied

three indicator aspects where ewer than 20% o

the companies claimed to have reported on the

indicators. These were:

Biodiversity

Indigenous Rights

Labor/Management Relations

4.2 Added Reporting on Sector Themes

Within the 20 ood processing reports considered,

several sector-specic themes appeared most oten,

with some themes being at least partially covered

by GRI G3 indicators. It was ound that the manner

o reporting on themes varied signicantly rom

company to company: some ood processors chose

to provide quantitative data, acilitating comparison

within the sector and across time (reerred to here

as, quantitative inormation), while others took a

more process-based approach, oering case studies

and detailed descriptions o policies and systems(reerred to as, qualitative inormation).

On the ollowing pages a brie description is

provided in order to demonstrate what the 20

ood processing reporters are doing in practice to

address each sector theme. Though this research

documents what companies are doing, it was

not possible to assess user satisaction with the

resulting reports.

High requency themes

Sourcing and supply chain issues19 o the 20 companies reported on supply chain

and sourcing issues in the sector.The GRI G3 asks

reporters to address supply chain activities based

on their denition o Report Boundaries.

In Part 1 o the Guidelines, Dening Report Content,

Quality and Boundary, within the Reporting Guidance

or Boundary Setting, the G3 states,

The approach to reporting on an entity will depend

on a combination o the reporting organizations

control or inuence over the entity, and whether

the disclosure relates to operational perormance,

management perormance, or narrative/descriptive

inormation.

Method

High requency reers to themes reported on by 14 ormore companies out o 20. Medium requency reersto themes that were addressed by 7 to 13 companiesand low requency themes were addressed by lessthan 7 companies. The table below identies the mostcommon themes in order o requency o reporting,as well as the corresponding GRI indicators, whereapplicable.

High

Frequency

Medium

Frequency

LowFrequency

4. Trends in Food

ProcessingSustainability Reporting

Figure IV: Legend, Frequency o Reporting


11/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

9

GRI Research and


It urther denes control and signicant

inuence:

Control: the power to govern the nancial and

operating policies o an enterprise so as to obtain

benets rom its activities.

Signicant inuence: the power to participate in the

nancial and operating policy decisions o the entity

but not the power to control those policies.

In addition, the Disclosure on Management

Approach prompts disclosures on supply chain

monitoring and two o the Perormance Indicators

in the G3 Guidelines reer specically to suppliers.

These are,

EC6 Policy, practices, and proportion

o spending on locally-based

suppliers at signicant locations o

operation.

HR2 Percentage o signicant suppliersand contractors that have

undergone screening on human

rights and actions taken.

Annex III provides detailed inormation on the

dierence between the GRI 2002 Guidelines and the

GRI G3 Guidelines on supply chain issues.

It was dicult to strictly separate supply chain

activities as a distinct theme in ood processing

reporting. It was ound that reporters addressed

the supplier perormance through reporting

on other themes, including, or instance, ood

saety, environmental aspects o agriculture andpackaging, among others.

In practice, most companies approached this theme

descriptively, outlining their approach to products

supply chains, including the basis or choosing

certain suppliers over others. It was also common

or reporters to describe their classication system

or suppliers which is generally based on risk

assessments. Ongoing engagement and requency

o supplier audits is also based on risk assessment.

Reports also included descriptions o suppliercodes o conduct or supplier surveys and several

companies used case studies to highlight supply

chain issues.

Table I: Sample Companies, Frequency o Reporting on Themes

Sector ThemeFrequency o

Reporting

Number o

ReportersRelevant G3 Indicators

Sourcing & Supply Chain Issues High 19/20 EC6, HR2

Food Saety High 18/20 PR1, PR2, PR4, PR5, PR9

Health & Nutrition High 16/20 PR1, PR3

Transportation High 16/20 EN29

Environmental Aspects o Agriculture High 15/20 EN1 - EN25, EN28, EN30

Packaging High 15/20 EN27

Animal Welare (only applicable or companies

processing animal products)High 9/12 N/A

Advertising & Marketing Medium 12/20 PR6, PR7

Malnutrition & Poverty Medium 10/20 N/A

Fair Pricing o Products Medium 8/20 N/A

GMO Medium 7/20 N/A

Chronic Disease Prevention Low 6/20 N/A

Smell & Noise Low 6/20 N/A

Residues Low 4/20 N/A


12/22

2008 GRI

10

Quantitative inormation reported on included: thenumber o suppliers a company works with in total

and their locations, the percentage o suppliers

that have signed a supplier code o conduct with

the company, and the percentage o raw materials

that are supplied by air trade certied or minority/

women owned businesses. In addition, a ew

companies reported quantitative environmental

data across a part o their supply chain such as

packaging or transportation activities, i these were

sourced.

Food saety

Food saety was reported on at 18 o the sampled

companies. This theme corresponds to G3

perormance indicators on product responsibility:

PR1 Lie cycle stages in which health and saety

impacts o products and services are

assessed or improvement, and percentage

o signicant products and services

categories subject to such procedures,

PR2 Total incidents o non-compliance with

regulations and voluntary codes concerning

health and saety impacts o products and

services during their lie cycle, by type o

outcomes,

PR4 Total number o incidents o non-

compliance with regulations and voluntary

codes concerning product and service

inormation and labeling, by type o

outcomes,

PR5 Practices related to customer satisaction,

including results o surveys measuringcustomer satisaction and

PR9 Monetary value o signicant nes or

non-compliance with laws and regulations

concerning the provision and use o

products and services.

The large majority o these companies (13 out o

18) chose to address the theme only in a qualitative

manner. In practice, many companies described

adherence to HACCP1 and outlined their internal

1 HACCP: Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point.

control processes, as well as their tracing andtracking systems or products raw materials.

They also requently reerred to customer care

telephone lines. Some companies described their

saety auditing procedures, both internally and or

suppliers. For the 5 o 18 companies that provided

quantitative inormation, a ew companies reported

the number o recalls, the number o customer

saety complaints, the percentage o products

made right the rst time, and the total cost o

quality ailure.

Health and nutrition

16 o the sampled companies reported on the

health and nutritional value o their oods or

human beings. This theme relates to the ollowing

G3 indicators:

PR1 Lie cycle stages in which health and saety

impacts o products and services are

assessed or improvement, and percentage

o signicant products and services

categories subject to such procedures) and

PR3 Type o product and service inormation

required by procedures, and percentage o

signicant products and services subject to

such inormation requirements.

Most (14) out o the 16 ood processors that

discussed health and nutrition did so in a qualitative

manner. Companies tended to report descriptively

on changes in product ormulations or packaging

sizes o their oods. They also requently described

their approach to nutrition labeling and how oods

correspond to International Dietary Guidelines.

Some companies also described their initiatives

to promote wellness including physical activity

programs. In terms o quantitative inormation, 2

companies disclosed data including the number

o products that they have deemed healthy and

nutritious choices and the percentage o reduction

o salt, at and sugar in a number o their products.

Transportation

The transportation o products to customers was

reported on by 15 o the sampled ood processors,and is reected in G3 indicator


13/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

11

GRI Research and


EN29 Signicant environmental impacts otransporting products and other goods

and materials used or the organizations

operations, and transporting members o

the workorce.

Some companies described the use intermodal

transportation or products, others made reerence

to transportation as part o the product lie cycle,

or reported on it as a component o their supply

chain. Some companies oered case studies on

product transportation. In terms o quantitativeinormation, several companies disclosed CO2

and

other GHG emissions in tons, in total or per product

unit, arising rom transportation activities.

Environmental

Aspects o Agriculture

Agricultural processes and their environmental

impacts were reported on by 15 o the companies

sampled. This broad theme is reected in a number

o G3 indicators, notably the Environmental

Perormance Indicators EN1 - EN25, EN28 and

EN30 (too extensive to describe here).

In practice, the extent o reporting seemed to

vary as some companies cited that agricultural

production alls outside the boundaries o reporting

when raw materials are sourced. In terms o

narrative reporting, 9 out o the 15 companies that

addressed this topic did so by using qualitative

inormation only. This includes case studies o

organic or sustainable agricultural initiatives, as

well as local and international agreements they are

party to and case studies o working in cooperationwith suppliers to provide technical advice and

how the companies promote best practice. In

terms o quantitative inormation, 6 out o these 15

companies disclosed data including the percentage

o their product line that is organic or sourced rom

suppliers practicing low impact arming; use o

ertilizers and pesticides; and nancial penalties

incurred or poor environmental compliance.

Packaging

The use and choice o material inputs or productpackaging was reported on by 16 o the sample

companies. This theme relates to the G3 indicator

EN27 Percentage o products sold and theirpackaging materials that are claimed by

category.

Companies tended to report descriptively on

recyclability o packaging materials and initiatives

to reduce the quantity o packaging used. Case

studies were also common in the company reports.

There was one report that was devoted solely to

the issue o packaging. Qualitative data disclosed

includes the quantity o various raw materials used

in packaging, as well as the quantity and type onal packaging used and the recyclable, reusable

or waste components o each package type. Other

reporters disclosed the reduction in percentage o

packaging materials that has been achieved over a

number o years.

Animal welare

Treatment o animals was reported on by 9 out o

the 12 companies that work with animals or use

animal ingredients. The theme o animal welare is

not explicitly covered in the G3 Guidelines. Most

companies that process meat or poultry described

adherence to relevant laws and standards, as well

as internal and external auditing procedures. Some

reporters listed the names o stakeholders they

work with or animal welare.

Medium requency themes

Advertising & Marketing

12 out o the 20 sampled companies reported their

approach to responsible marketing o products.

This theme is addressed in the ollowing G3indicators:

PR6 Programs or adherence to laws, standards,

and voluntary codes concerning marketing

communications, including advertising,

promotion, and sponsorship by type o

outcomes.

PR7 Total number o incidents o non-

compliance with regulations and

voluntary codes concerning marketing

communications, including advertising,promotion, and sponsorship by type o

outcomes.


14/22

2008 GRI

12

The companies that reported on this theme tendedto do so descriptively, including discussions

regarding legal requirements or product

claims, and company policy towards marketing

to vulnerable groups such as new mothers

and children. Additional descriptive reporting

addressed their policy towards purchasing

advertising space or instance, a policy o

not advertising in elementary schools. A ew

companies stated the minimum age o children

they advertise to.

Malnutrition & poverty

10 out o the companies sampled reported on

the theme o malnutrition, which is not explicitly

covered by any G3 indicators.

The reporting companies generally described their

intention to make products accessible to those

with low purchasing power parity, or stated that

they ormulate special products to meet the needs

o individuals with poor diets. A ew companies

disclosed the number o products in their line

that are ortied with vitamins and nutrients and

suitable or individuals with poor diets.

Fair & aordable price o products

Making products aordable to consumers with

lower incomes/purchasing power parity was

reported on by 8 o the companies investigated.

This theme is not covered specically by any G3

indicators.

The reporting generally consisted o a brie

description o the companys intention to oer

products at a air price. One company reported

specic initiatives undertaken, including oering

products in smaller, low-cost packages, and

presented quantiable data including a price

comparison o one o their products in several

dierent countries.

Genetically modifed organisms

6 out o the 20 companies we chose to investigate

reported on the use o genetically modied

organisms (GMOs) in their products, or outlinedtheir policy towards biotechnology. This theme

does not directly relate to any G3 indicators.

Reporters generally described their internalpolicy on GMOs, and also their policy towards

stakeholders or national legislation on GMOs.

One reporter stated that, when GMO is used, this

will be clearly stated on product labels. In terms

o quantiable data, only 1 o these 6 listed the

number or percent o products that are GMO-ree.

Low requency themes

Chronic disease prevention

Chronic diseases and the role o ood in mitigating/

managing them were reported on or reerred to

by 6 companies out o the total set o sampled

ood processors, and this theme is not covered

specically by any G3 indicators.

In practice, the reporting tended to consist o a

brie statement recognizing the role o the ood

processing industry in ghting chronic disease

and none o the companies used quantiable

inormation to address this theme.

Smell & noise complaintsStakeholder complaints regarding odor and noise

rom operations were reported at 6 o the sample

companies. This theme is not explicitly covered

by any G3 indicators. Most o these companies

described the processes or lodging and addressing

complaints and gave examples or case studies

o how they were handled. Only hal o these 6

companies disclosed quantitative inormation such

as the number o complaints received per year and

the number o acilities upgrades made in response

to complaints.

Residues

Only 4 o the companies considered reported on

residues. This theme is not covered specically

by any G3 indicators. The reporters generally

described their processes to screen or residues on

either raw materials or nal products, usually as it

related to ood saety. In addition, these companies

generally reerred to national standards and limits

or residues and one company oered a case study.

In terms o quantitative disclosures, only one o the

our companies who reported on residues oeredquantitative inormation on the allowable amount

o residues per product unit.


15/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

13

GRI Research and


As it is apparent that reporting in the sector isincreasing year-over-year, with the most recent

year having the greatest number o reporters, the

time seems right to increase the comparability

and transparency o such reports. The act that

the sample companies report on sector-specic

themes which are not (completely) covered by

the G3 Guidelines show that a Sector Supplement

or the Food Processing sector can help increase

the comparability o sustainability reports in thissector.

In 2010 GRI expects to publish the GRI Sector

Supplement or the Food Processing Sector. Please

inorm us i you would like to receive regular updates

on this work or i you would like to receive drats

or public comment. Please email: guidelines@

globalreporting.org.

5. Conclusions


16/22

2008 GRI

14

Annex I: 2006 Food Processing Reporters

Company Sub-sector 1 Country Reporting

Reporting Level o

Most Recent beore2006 or 2006 Report

Ajinomoto Co Inc Hal Products Japan GRI GRI 2002

Associated British Foods plc Agricultural Products UK non-GRI

Australian Agricultural Company Limited Meat Australia non-GRI

Baer AG Dairy Switzerland non-GRI

Ben & Jerry s Homemade Holdings Inc Dairy USA non-GRI

Bonduelle Groupe Agricultural Products France non-GRI

Bunge Brazil Agricultural Products Brazil GRI GRI 2002

Cadbury Schweppes plc Conectionary* UK GRI GRI 2002

Campina Melkunie UA DairyThe

NetherlandsGRI GRI 2002

Cargill Inc Agricultural Products USA non-GRI

Centrale del Latte di Firenze, Pistoia e

Livorno SpADairy Italy GRI

G3, Application

Level A

Chiquita Brands International Inc Agricultural Products USA non-GRI

Chr Hansen A/S Hal Products Denmark non-GRI

Coca-Cola Company, The Beverages USA GRIG3, Application

Level B

Coca-Cola Industrias Ltda Beverages Brazil non-GRI

CSM NV Hal ProductsThe

NetherlandsGRI GRI 2002

Danisco A/S Hal Products Denmark GRI

G3, Application

Level C+

Danone Group Dairy France GRI GRI 2002

Danone sp zoo Dairy Poland non-GRI

Dr August Oetker Nahrungsmittel KG Agricultural Products Germany non-GRI

Ebro Puleva SA Agricultural Products Spain non-GRI

Flowers Foods Inc Agricultural Products USA non-GRI

General Mills Inc Agricultural Products USA non-GRI

Gerolsteiner Brunnen GmbH Beverages Germany non-GRI

Golden Hope Plantations Bhd Agricultural Products Malaysia non-GRI

Granlatte Consorzio Cooperativo Dairy Italy non-GRI

Grupo Los Grobo SA Agricultural Products Argentina GRI GRI 2002

Grupo SOS Agricultural Products Spain GRIG3, Application

Level Undeclared

Gustav Paulig Ltd Beverages Finland GRI GRI 2002

Harineras Villamayor Agricultural Products Spain GRI GRI 2002

Heinz (HJ) Co Agricultural Products USA GRIG3, Application

Level B

HIPP Werk Georg Hipp GmbH & Co KG Dairy Germany non-GRI

Hubbard Foods Ltd Agricultural Products New Zealand non-GRI

Krntnermilch reg.Gen.m.b.H Dairy Austria non-GRI

Kikkoman Corporation Agricultural Products Japan GRI GRI 2002

Krat Foods Inc Dairy USA non-GRI

* Calculated as beverages in the total.


17/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

15

GRI Research and


Company Sub-sector 1 Country Reporting

Reporting Level o

Most Recent beore2006 or 2006 Report

Mrkisches Landbrot GmbH Agricultural Products Germany non-GRI

National Foods Limited Dairy Australia non-GRI

Nestl SA Agricultural P roducts Switzerland non-GRI

Nutreco Holding NV FishThe

NetherlandsGRI

G3, Application

Level C

Oceana Group Limited Fish South Arica GRI GRI 2002

Pepsico Inc Beverages USA GRIG3, Application

Level Undeclared

Podravka dd Agricultural Products Croatia GRIG3, Application

Level B

PRIMCO Agricultural Products France non-GRI

Raisio Oyj Agricultural Products Finland GRI GRI 2002

Royal Cosun Agricultural ProductsThe

Netherlandsnon-GRI

Royal Friesland Foods NV DairyThe

Netherlandsnon-GRI

Royal Numico NV DairyThe

NetherlandsGRI

G3, Application

Level B+

Sanord Limited Fish New Zealand non-GRI

Skretting AS Agricultural Products Norway non-GRI

Smithfeld Foods Inc Meat USA GRI GRI 2002

Suiker Unie Agricultural Products TheNetherlands

non-GRI

Tate & Lyle plc Agricultural Products UK non-GRI

The Greenery BV Agricultural ProductsThe

Netherlandsnon-GRI

Tyson Foods Inc Meat USA non-GRI

Unilever (Brazil) Agricultural Products Brazil non-GRI

Unilever plc / NV Agricultural Products UK GRI GRI 2002

Unilever UK Agricultural Products UK non-GRI

Vaasan & Vaasan Oy Agricultural Products Finland GRI GRI 2002

Valio Ltd Dairy Finland GRIG3, Application

Level Undeclared

Note: Even though their 2006 CSR report was not yet available, Green Mountain Coee Roasters, has been considered in the

examination o reporting on sector themes as they are actively involved in the development o the GRI Food Processing Sector

Supplement.


18/22

2008 GRI

16

Least Reported Indicators by 7 G3Food Processing Companies

NB: (A) additional G3 indicator

(C) core G3 indicator

0 Reporters out o 5 G3 reporters

(A) EC5 Market Presence, Economic Indicators:

Range o ratios o standard entry level

wage compared to local minimum wage at

signicant locations o operation.

(A) EN15 Biodiversity, Environmental Indicators:Number o IUCN Red List species and

national conservation list species with

habitats in areas afected by operations, by

level o extinction risk.

(A) HR9 Indigenous Rights, Human Rights: Total

number o incidents o violations involving

rights o indigenous people and actions

taken.

(A) PR7 Marketing Communications, Product

Responsibility: Total number o incidents

o non-compliance with regulations and



promotion and sponsorship.

1 Reporter out o 5 G3 reporters

(C) LA4 Labor/Management Relations, Labor

Practices and Decent Work: Percentage

o employees covered by collective

bargaining agreements.

(A) LA9 Occupational Health & Saety, Labor

Practices and Decent Work: Health &

saety topics covered in ormal agreementswith trade unions.

(A) LA11 Training and Education, Labor Practices

and Decent Work: Programs or skills

management and lielong learning that

support the continued employability o

employee and assist them in managing

career endings.

(A) LA12 Training and Education, Labor Practicesand Decent Work: Percentage o

employees receiving regular perormance

reviews and career development reviews.

(C) HR1 Investment and Procurement Practices,

Human Rights: Percentage and total

number o signicant investment

agreements that include human rights

clauses or that have undergone human

rights screening.

(C) HR4 Nondiscrimination, Human Rights:

Total number o incidents o discrimination

and actions taken.(C) HR5 Freedom o Association, Human Rights:

Operations identied in which the

right to exercise reedom o association

and collective bargaining may be at a

signicant risk, and actions taken to

support these rights.

(A) HR8 Security Practices, Human Rights:

Percentage o security personnel trained in

the organizations policies or procedures

concerning aspects o human rights that

are relevant to operations.

(A) PR4 Product and Service Labeling, ProductResponsibility, PR4: Total number

o incidents o non-compliance with

regulations and voluntary codes

concerning health and saety impacts o

products and services during their lie cycle,

by type o outcome.

(A) PR7 Marketing Communications, Product

Responsibility: Total number o incidents

o non-compliance with regulations and



promotion, and sponsorship by type ooutcomes.

(C) PR9 Compliance, Product Responsibility:

Monetary value o signicant nes or

non-compliance with laws and regulations

concerning the provision and use o

products and services.

Annex II


19/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

17

GRI Research and


Frequency o Reported Indicators, at14 GRI 2002 Reporting Food ProcessingCompanies, least reported indicators

3 Reporters (out o 14 GRI 2002 reporters)

(A) EN24 Biodiversity, Environmental:Amount o

impermeable surace as a percentage o

land purchased or leased.

(A) EN26 Biodiversity, Environmental: Changes to

natural habitats resulting rom activities

and operations and percentage o habitat

protected or restored.

(A) EN28 Biodiversity, Environmental: Number oIUCN Red List species with habitats in areas

afected by operations.

(A) EN32 Emissions Efuents and Waste,

Environmental: Water sources and related

ecosystems/habitats signicantly afected

by discharges o water and runof.

4 Reporters (out o 14 GRI 2002 reporters)(C) EC9 Public Sector, Economic: Subsidies

received broken down by country or region.

(C) EN2 Materials, Environmental: Percentage o

materials used that are wastes (processed

or unprocessed) rom sources external to

the reporting organization.

(C) EN4 Energy, Environmental: Indirect energy

use.

(A) EN25 Biodiversity, Environmental, EN25:

Impacts o activities and operations on

protected and sensitive areas.

(A) EN29 Biodiversity, Environmental: Business

units currently operating or planning

operations in or around protected or

sensitive areas.


20/22

2008 GRI

18

Annex III

Supply Chain in the GRI 2002 and GRI G3Guidelines

Reporting on the Supply Chain in GRI 2002GuidelinesThe GRI 2002 addresses upstream/downstream

activities in reporters Prole Disclosures and

Perormance Indicators, as recorded below:

Profle DisclosuresProle Disclosure 2.9 Organizational ProleList o

stakeholders, key attributes o each, and relationship

to the reporting organization.

In notes, it states,

Stakeholders typically include the ollowing groups

(examples o attributes are show in parentheses):

Suppliers (products/services provided, local/

national/international operations)

Prole Disclosure 2.13 Report Scope Boundaries

o report (countries/regions, products/services,

divisions/acilities/joint ventures/subsidiaries) and

any specic limitations on the scope.

Prole Disclosures 3.9-3.12Stakeholder Engagementmay be relevant, depending on inormation reported

on in 2.9

Prole Disclosure 3.16Policies and/or systems or

managing upstream and downstream impacts,

including:

Supply chain management as it pertains to

outsourcing and supplier environmental and

social perormance; and

Product and service initiatives.

Stewardship initiatives include eorts to improve

product design to minimize negative impactsassociated with manuacturing, use, and nal

disposal.

Perormance IndicatorsEconomic Perormance Indicator EC11 Supplier

breakdown by organization and country

(ADDITIONAL)

List all suppliers rom which purchases in the

reporting period represent 10% or more o total

purchases in that period. Also identiy all countries

where total purchasing represents 5% or more oGDP.

Environmental Perormance Indicator EN19Other

indirect (upstream/downstream) energy use and

implications, such as organizational travel, product

liecycle management, and use o energy intensive

materials. (ADDITIONAL)

Environmental Perormance Indicator EN30 Other

relevant indirect greenhouse gas emissions. (CO2,

CH4, N

2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF

6). Reers to emissions

that are a consequence o the activities o the

reporting entity, but occur rom sources owned or

controlled by another entity. Report in tonnes o

gas and tonnes o CO2 equivalent. See WRI-WBCSD

Greenhouse Gas Protocol. (ADDITIONAL)

Environmental Perormance Indicator EN33

Perormance o suppliers relative to environmental

components o programmes and procedures

described in response to Governance Structure and

Management Systems section (3.16). (ADDITIONAL)

Social Perormance Indicator, Human Rights HR2:

Evidence o consideration o human rights impactsas part o investment and procurement decisions,

including selection o suppliers/contractors. (CORE)

Social Perormance Indicator, Human Rights HR3:

Description o policies and procedures to evaluate

and address human rights perormance within the

supply chain and contractors, including monitoring

systems and results o monitoring.

Human rights perormance reers to the aspects o

human rights identied as reporting aspects in the

GRI perormance indicators. (CORE)

Reporting on supply chain issues in G3GuidelinesAs opposed to GRI 2002 Guidelines which provide

or supply chain activities through specic Prole

Disclosures and Perormance Indicators, the G3

Guidelines oers room or reporters to address

upstream/downstream activities in their treatment

o each aspect o reporting, subject to their selection

o Report Boundaries and their Disclosure on

Management Approach.


21/22

Sustainability

Reportingi

nt

he

FoodPr

ocessingS

ector

19

GRI Research and


Signicant inuence: the power to participatein the nancial and operating policy decisions

o the entity but not the power to control those

policies.

Nonetheless, two o the Perormance Indicators

in the G3 Guidelines reer specically to suppliers.

These are,

EC6 Policy, practices, and proportion o spending

on locally-based suppliers at signicant

locations o operation.

HR2 Percentage o signicant suppliers and

contractors that have undergone screening

on human rights and actions taken.

In Part 1 o the G3 Guidelines, Dening ReportContent, Quality and Boundary, within the Reporting

Guidance or Boundary Setting, it states,

The approach to reporting on an entity will

depend on a combination o the reporting

organizations control or inuence over the entity,

and whether the disclosure relates to operational

perormance, management perormance, or

narrative/descriptive inormation.

It urther denes control and signicant inuence:

Control: the power to govern the nancial andoperating policies o an enterprise so as to obtain

benets rom its activities.


22/22

Global Reporting Initiative

PO Box 10039

1001 EA Amsterdam

The Netherlands

Tel: +31 (0) 20 531 00 00Fax: +31 (0) 20 531 00 31

www.globalreporting.org

Topics

ReportingPractices

GRIResearch&Development

Series

Tools

Food Report Final

Documents

Transcript of Food Report Final