260
When it comes to company indicators, several companies report CSA-relevant
indicators within annual reports, corporate social responsibility reports and sustainability reports, or under the Global Reporting Initiative of the Carbon Disclosure
Project. Companies track progress differently, in terms of which indicators are used,
how the indicators are measured (e.g. absolute versus relative progress), and how far
back the reporting goes. There are major gaps in data availability, both across companies and for individual companies over time. At least five companies (approximately 40%) provided data for both 2010 and 2015 on five indicators: total waste to
landfill (pillar 1), total water use (pillar 2); absolute Scope 1 emissions or Direct
GHG i.e. from sources that are owned or controlled by the company, plus Scope 2
emissions or Energy Indirect GHG i.e. emissions from the consumption of purchased electricity, steam, or other sources of energy (e.g. chilled water) generated
upstream from the company, and emissions intensity (pillar 3).
Current indicators at global and company levels are inadequate to provide a full
picture of progress on climate-smart agriculture in line with the WBCSD definition
and vision. At the company level, in particular, supplementing current data collection and reporting with additional indicators that resonate with both the SDGs and
the Paris Agreement is recommended. Specific indicators are recommended in
Vermeulen and Frid-Nielsen (2017).
22.4 Snapshot of Progress Towards the WBCSD Statement
of Ambition
For pillar one on productivity, trends in global yield and production quantities from
2010 to 2014 indicate that we are on track to produce enough food to meet the
WBCSD target of 50% more food by 2030, but without the guarantee that this food
will meet food security needs or sustainability criteria such as zero land expansion.
From 2010 to 2014, global average production quantity and yield of important food
groups (cereals, vegetables, roots and tubers, fruit, meat, and milk) increased 10.8%
and 2.7% respectively. To reach the 2030 target, food production must increase by
approximately 1.9% per year. However, this trajectory is not certain; it is subject to
multiple risks including climate, geo-politics and markets. We do not have evidence
that this food will be nutritious or accessible to poorer consumers. Moreover, there
is no data available on the wider WBCSD definition of pillar one, specifically
whether this increased production is on existing land (thereby improving resourceuse intensity), protects ecosystem services and biodiversity, brings degraded land
back into productive use, or reduces food loss from field to shelf.
For pillar two on resilience, we know very little indeed. Neither companies nor
global data sets are keeping track of the resilience and welfare of agricultural communities and landscapes under climate change. Global data sets on rural poverty can
provide a metric towards the overall intended outcome of pillar two; but are not
especially useful for the WBCSD CSA initiative, because they do not link to climate
S. Vermeulen
When it comes to company indicators, several companies report CSA-relevant
indicators within annual reports, corporate social responsibility reports and sustainability reports, or under the Global Reporting Initiative of the Carbon Disclosure
Project. Companies track progress differently, in terms of which indicators are used,
how the indicators are measured (e.g. absolute versus relative progress), and how far
back the reporting goes. There are major gaps in data availability, both across companies and for individual companies over time. At least five companies (approximately 40%) provided data for both 2010 and 2015 on five indicators: total waste to
landfill (pillar 1), total water use (pillar 2); absolute Scope 1 emissions or Direct
GHG i.e. from sources that are owned or controlled by the company, plus Scope 2
emissions or Energy Indirect GHG i.e. emissions from the consumption of purchased electricity, steam, or other sources of energy (e.g. chilled water) generated
upstream from the company, and emissions intensity (pillar 3).
Current indicators at global and company levels are inadequate to provide a full
picture of progress on climate-smart agriculture in line with the WBCSD definition
and vision. At the company level, in particular, supplementing current data collection and reporting with additional indicators that resonate with both the SDGs and
the Paris Agreement is recommended. Specific indicators are recommended in
Vermeulen and Frid-Nielsen (2017).
22.4 Snapshot of Progress Towards the WBCSD Statement
of Ambition
For pillar one on productivity, trends in global yield and production quantities from
2010 to 2014 indicate that we are on track to produce enough food to meet the
WBCSD target of 50% more food by 2030, but without the guarantee that this food
will meet food security needs or sustainability criteria such as zero land expansion.
From 2010 to 2014, global average production quantity and yield of important food
groups (cereals, vegetables, roots and tubers, fruit, meat, and milk) increased 10.8%
and 2.7% respectively. To reach the 2030 target, food production must increase by
approximately 1.9% per year. However, this trajectory is not certain; it is subject to
multiple risks including climate, geo-politics and markets. We do not have evidence
that this food will be nutritious or accessible to poorer consumers. Moreover, there
is no data available on the wider WBCSD definition of pillar one, specifically
whether this increased production is on existing land (thereby improving resourceuse intensity), protects ecosystem services and biodiversity, brings degraded land
back into productive use, or reduces food loss from field to shelf.
For pillar two on resilience, we know very little indeed. Neither companies nor
global data sets are keeping track of the resilience and welfare of agricultural communities and landscapes under climate change. Global data sets on rural poverty can
provide a metric towards the overall intended outcome of pillar two; but are not
especially useful for the WBCSD CSA initiative, because they do not link to climate
S. Vermeulen