The food sector accounts for one quarter to one third of global greenhouse gas emissions. Shifting to plant-based diets is considered one of the most effective ways to reduce them, but the transition faces obstacles: consumers make choices based on the cost of living, dietary trends and other competing factors.
The World Resources Institute launched the Coolfood initiative in 2018 to work with food providers — restaurants, catering companies, hospitals, universities, municipalities and other organizations — to measure and reduce the climate footprint of their menus. Today, the initiative has 87 members that have made the pledge, and last month it published a progress report. Joseph Poore, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford, described it as "one of the most ambitious programs targeting the climate impacts of the global food system," noting that it is based on sound science and open data reporting.
Cities stand out for their reductions in emissions per dish, with New York leading the way. The New York City Public Schools Office of Food and Nutrition Services, which serves free meals to more than one million students every day, has reduced emissions per dish by almost 40% since joining the initiative in 2019. The cities sector as a whole recorded reductions of 37% per dish by 2025, mainly by sharply reducing options containing meat from ruminant animals, which has high emissions, and expanding plant-based dishes.
To participate in the initiative, a member submits food purchasing records to the Coolfood team, which calculates the climate cost by multiplying the weight of each food by its emissions factors. These factors cover the entire supply chain, from production to the point of sale, and include the "carbon opportunity cost": the amount of carbon that would have been stored if the land had remained uncultivated, for example as natural grassland. Beef provides an illustrative example: for 1,000 calories of beef, researchers calculated 24.12 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent from the supply chain and 161.81 kilograms from the opportunity cost. Legumes have a much smaller impact: 0.48 and 3.38 kilograms respectively.
The report's overall picture is positive, but progress is slowing. The institute's target was a 25% reduction in emissions per dish across all members by 2025; instead, a 12% reduction was recorded. Some of the stagnation is attributed to newer members, which have had less time to implement lasting solutions. For example, members that made the pledge before 2022 achieved a 19% reduction per dish by 2025, while newer members achieved just 12%.
After cities, universities and businesses rank second and third for reductions per dish, having also invested in plant-based options and reduced meat from ruminant animals. One example is Williams College, which holds themed evenings every Monday and Wednesday to showcase plant-based flavors; its plant-based "Build Your Own Grain Bowl" dish reached the top spot on its ordering platform. By contrast, providers in healthcare, catering and restaurants are reducing emissions more slowly, with progress stalled since 2023. The healthcare sector, which has the most members, saw an influx of new members and is expected to accelerate once they gain more experience.
Despite the reduction per dish, the group's total emissions rose by 3% by 2025. According to the report, this is the first period in which members are moving in the wrong direction relative to the 2030 target, which called for a 16.6% reduction in absolute emissions by this point. Researchers attribute this development to increases in food purchases and meals served, as many providers have recovered from pandemic disruptions. Expanded operations mean more meals and therefore more total emissions, even if the options have a relatively smaller footprint.
The researchers stress that the most important players are not the providers but the people placing orders. "It all comes down to consumer demand," says Jenny Arthur, head of the Coolfood program. When customers choose vegan and vegetarian dishes, providers are more likely to invest in innovation and offer more plant-based dishes. However, consumer priorities have been disrupted by economic and geopolitical conditions in recent years: conflicts in the Middle East and Europe increased energy costs and, consequently, food production costs. The authors believe consumers are more concerned about affordability than sustainability.
Demand for protein and the use of GLP-1 drugs, which reduce appetite, are leading consumers to want more protein per bite, which may compete with climate-friendly choices. As Clara Cho, Coolfood's data lead, notes, the shift to foods with lower emissions depends on consumer acceptance: "If you choose plant-based dishes when you eat out, companies notice and see that demand." Despite the slowdown, Arthur points to the potential for change: "If there is one thing that will have the biggest impact, it is changing diets."
The report shows that plant-based menus can significantly reduce emissions, but the scale of change is still insufficient. Cities demonstrate that rapid implementation is possible when the decision-making structure is simple, while restaurants and catering companies, which provide 85% of the group's meals, need more time because of the complexity involved. The challenge for the coming years is to combine reductions per dish with cuts in total emissions as demand grows.
Comments