This morning, The Grocer newsletter included two news stories about the grocery industry and the environment.
The first reported on the British Retail Consortium as it sounded the alarm over biodiversity loss threatening UK supply chains, while the second saw Science for Sustainable Agriculture telling everyone to calm down. Defra’s most recent biodiversity report has it wrong, it says, claiming that the number of birds and insects on Britain’s farmland has remained stable over the past 30 years.
Two headlines, two vastly opposing views – and a perfect snapshot of why the topic of sustainability in grocery is so controversial.
We all know why biodiversity matters. The grocery sector is deeply intertwined with nature: crops, livestock, packaging, transport – every link in the chain depends on natural resources. When biodiversity declines, so does resilience. Supply chains become more vulnerable, yields drop, and costs rise. Sustainability isn’t just a moral imperative, it’s a commercial one.
It’s the perfect way to mark the start of the first ever Green Week at The Grocer.
We’ve been exploring sustainability topics within the food and drink industry for years. And for the last two decades we’ve published an annual Green Issue, shining a spotlight on how retailers, brands, and suppliers are tackling key environmental challenges.
But we’ve switched this year’s coverage up a gear, with daily news, opinion and features running throughout the week, culminating in the publication of a jam-packed magazine on Saturday.
We’ll be exploring the role of insect protein, reporting from the IGD Future of UK Food event on Wednesday, examining progress in measuring Scope 3 emissions, and investigating the truth behind ‘flushable’ wet wipes. We’re also gearing up to report on the Eat-Lancet study (to be published on Friday), continued weather challenges in farming and the opportunity for plant-based as meat prices soar.
The increased coverage reflects a recognition that sustainability matters. In fact, we’re writing about sustainability more than ever. So why is the topic so divisive?
Climate contradictions
The first issue is climate denial. It’s getting louder, feeding into a wider politicisation of sustainability. Only last week Donald Trump called climate change the “greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world”. And that’s filtering through into corporate decision making.
Some see sustainability as a matter of life and death; others believe it’s essential to future-proofing the economy; but increasingly there are also concerns around regulatory overreach or greenwashing.
But ensuring we have a planet to sustain us should be a shared mission, and drawing party lines over the future of the planet makes it increasingly challenging to get anything productive done.
This morning’s contradictory news stories shows that even experts who are broadly pushing in the same direction can disagree. Where one group sees crisis, another sees stability.
What’s going on? Someone has to be right, surely? Well - it’s complicated. And you can prove anything with statistics. With at least 84% of them entirely made up (or so the old joke goes), how can people know who to trust? Such contradictions muddy the waters for retailers and brands trying to make informed decisions, especially when sustainable practices often require a hefty upfront investment.
The BRC’s flagship report, Planning for Nature, called on retailers to “urgently address” the risk of accelerating loss of nature and biodiversity, revealing that more than three-quarters of retailers have not set any targets on protecting nature. It marks the beginning of the industry’s journey to halt and reverse nature loss by 2030, with a target of full recovery by 2050.
As to Science for Sustainable Agriculture, it suggests there is growing evidence that numbers of farmland birds are not in decline. On the contrary, it says, overall populations for insects and birds have remained broadly stable over the past three decades, despite government-accredited data from Defra to the contrary.
It is arguing that a longer list of species should be included in the official metrics, adding that putting “high-yield agriculture on our most fertile land and leaving more land for intact nature and biodiversity conservation [is] the most efficient, cost-effective and sustainable way to meet our food needs, achieve conservation goals and mitigate climate change”.
Muddy waters
The RSPB has dismissed the report as “nonsense”, pointing out that the SSA is “not denying that the specialist farmland bird species are declining, just that all the common birds found on farmland and everywhere else should be included to mask the plight of the specialist species.
”They’re basically saying we may have lost skylarks, turtle doves, yellowhammers and lapwings but all the woodpigeons make up for it.”
Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, was equally dismissive of the SSA’s claims. “The evidence is clear that farmland bird populations have declined more than 60% since 1970 and declines are stronger for farmland specialist birds than for generalist species.
“Nature-friendly farming is essential for wildlife and the future of agriculture. Many farmers have begun to plan for environmentally positive food production, but delays in support are putting that future at risk.
“Now is not the time to muddy the debate; the science is clear that farming reform is needed. Anyone interested in the future of farming should be campaigning for a faster and more ambitious transition to nature-friendly agriculture.”
Whatever your take on the stories above, the confusion illustrates that whether arguing over insect numbers, scope 3 emissions or if climate change really exists at all, we must have robust data, clearly defined goalposts and an honest dialogue.
The grocery sector doesn’t have the luxury of ignoring sustainability. Whether biodiversity is genuinely in freefall or simply shifting, the risks to farming and grocery supply chains are real.
To move forward, we need a shared understanding of what sustainability truly means – not just for the planet, but for the people and businesses who depend on it.
No comments yet