While more than half of major food producers have pledged to reduce their use of agrochemicals, no major food producer has yet set a pesticide reduction target, investor-backed pressure group FAIRR warns.
Major agri-food companies are failing to back up their regenerative agriculture commitments with credible targets and transparent reporting, according to new research from the FAIRR investor network. The report, Regenerative Agriculture: Moving from Ambition to Credibility, assesses 78 publicly listed firms with combined revenues of US$3.3trn, revealing a widening gap between corporate ambition and reality.
NZI Transition and Climate Investment Conference | 22 October | London | Register here
The study finds that quantified regenerative agriculture targets have declined among assessed companies, dropping from 35% in 2023 to just 28% in 2026. Several major players, including Compass and JBS, no longer disclose previously reported targets or have significantly revised their commitments. Six companies, such as Sodexo and Yum! Brands, have removed references to regenerative agriculture from their public disclosures entirely.
Arthur van Mansvelt, senior engagement Specialist at Achmea Investment Management, one of 400 investor members backing FAIRR said: “Many agrifood businesses present regenerative agriculture as a silver bullet to meet climate and nature goals. But, as investors, we are still struggling to assess the credibility of initiatives. We need to have clarity on how companies use regenerative agriculture to contribute to achieving global nature goals. And farmers need fair compensation for the extra efforts and risks, particularly in the context of geopolitical instability and price volatility. The quality of the approach, implementation and disclosure will ultimately be the driver of long‑term profitability.”
FAIRR suggests this retreat may reflect growing legal and reputational risks as scrutiny of sustainability claims intensifies globally. "Companies that set targets they cannot demonstrate or substantiate face increasing exposure," the report notes. However, it warns that where previously disclosed targets are no longer referenced, it raises important questions for investors around whether targets have been retired, revised, or remain in place without updated public reporting.
Despite 54% of companies claiming to measure regenerative outcomes, only 4% have set outcome-based targets. Even for greenhouse gas emissions—the most easily measured metric—only 24% of firms report progress, leaving investors unable to properly assess the credibility of these programmes.
The report also highlights contradictions between stated goals and practices. While 52% of companies identify reducing agrochemical inputs as a goal, none have set specific pesticide reduction targets. Many widely deployed practices, such as cover crops (used by 68% of companies) and reduced tillage (58%), often remain heavily reliant on herbicides if not implemented alongside other methods.
FAIRR warns that this lack of transparency and contradictory practices creates significant risks for investors attempting to evaluate long-term supply chain resilience amid increasing climate volatility.
Longview Networks: Institutional Investment Conferences and Summits
