Arla Foods
Climate warning
Climate warning
Leo Alexander
121 w
Do the right thing – Not only because it looks good
The milk giant Arla has announced they will stop climate-compensating its products. In a campaign launched in 2019 Arla stated their organic milk had a “net zero climate footprint". After that statement Arla received massive critique for misleading marketing and got sued by the Swedish Consumer Agency (Consumer ombudsman, CO). Ida Nyström at CO told Swedish radio that consumers could have been mislead by Arlas statement, getting the impression that these products do not change the environment and climate in any sense. Neither during production nor the purchase or afterwards.
Arla now responds with a stop to climate-compensating for their products.
- Because we see that we need to be able to create profitability through the sustainability initiatives we do. If we can't talk [somewhere about this climate compensation. then we see that we cannot justify continuing it, says Victoria Olsson sustainability manager at Arla.
Arla should reconsider this decision and take responsibility for climate. Not because its good press, but because its the right thing to do.
Read more (Swe):
https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/arla-slutar-klimatkompensera-vi-kan-inte-motivera-den
Do you agree?
111 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
Watch our Latest Broadcasts!
We need to stop methane and #BuyMoreTime
Yes, we make a difference!
Businesses and leaders will listen and reply on We Don't Have Time
The Climate Action App
We plant a tree for every new user
•
120 w
This is good in terms of transparency for products, but actually BAD for addressing climate change. Investing in climate action outside the value chain (e.g. verified and addtional offset) is a major source for climate finance. Governments will not provide all the climate finance that is needed, and it is clear that the vast majority will need to come from the private sector. In addition, there is nothing that is preventing Arla Foods from making these investments at a corporate level, including accounting in the context of neutralizing emissions (impacts). This is allowed under the new ESRS reporting standards, GRI, and even under SBTi. They just can not account for offsetting in their GHG mitigation targets and progress made. Many other international companies do this!!!
•
120 w
@douglas_marett Absolutely! The way I see it, if businesses are really care, and genuinely want to participate, they could compensate for past GHG emissions (eg.since 2000), present and future offset can only be maximum 10% of all the carbon emissions.
•
•
121 w
What a bunch of hypocritical clowns 🤡
•
121 w
This is unbelievable and hard to understand from a PR-perspective too. I can’t imagine anyone learning about this and thinking “that’s good of Arla”
•
•
•
121 w
Dear Leo Alexander Thank you for getting your climate warning to level 2! We have reached out to Arla and asked for a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Muhammad We Don't Have Time
•
121 w
Kind of leaves you with a taste of sour milk, doesn't it? 🤷🏼♂️
•
121 w
That's a failure to communicate!
•
•
•
121 w
I was skeptical of their climate action when they only did it for organic milk. Now when they are not doing it anymore because they can't communicate, it only shows that they saw climate action as a marketing gimmick. Nothing stops Arla from continuing to communicate what they do to offset their emissions. They can't say that they are climate neutral! But they can communicate what they do. Instread they choose to stop doing climate action altogether. This is terrible leadership! I wonder if they will sell their organic milk cheaper now when they do not pay for the offset or if they just going to increase their profit instead!
•
•
121 w
I wish everyone could just do the right thing. Its a shame.