In a revealing new study published in PLOS Climate on April 22, 2026, researchers Maya Bach and Jennifer Jacquet, along with their colleagues from the University of Miami, have exposed widespread greenwashing practices within the global meat and dairy industries. Their comprehensive analysis highlights how these industries use environmental claims that are often vague, unverifiable, and misleading, creating a deceptive illusion of climate responsibility while doing little to address their substantial environmental impact.
The study is grounded in the reality that animal agriculture is a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions, responsible for approximately 57% of all emissions related to food production and at least 16.5% of total emissions worldwide. These staggering figures underscore the critical importance of genuine sustainability measures in this sector. Yet, through rigorous examination of sustainability reports and public statements made by the 33 largest meat and dairy companies from 2021 to 2024, the researchers uncovered a troubling pattern: most environmental claims are hollow or lacking scientifically verifiable evidence.
Analyzing a total of 1,233 environmental claims, the research team found that a majority—68%—were specifically climate-related, either directly referencing greenhouse gas emissions or the broader impacts of climate change. This focus illustrates how companies increasingly frame their sustainability efforts in terms of climate change to appeal to rising public concern. However, nearly 40% of these claims projected unverifiable future accomplishments, such as pledges to achieve carbon neutrality or restore vast quantities of water by 2030, without concrete plans or data to support their feasibility.
The scarcity of rigorous evidence was striking. Only 29% of the studied claims were accompanied by any form of company-provided supporting information, and even more concerning, scientific literature was cited in support of just three claims—two of which dealt with climate issues. This suggests that the majority of environmental promises are not substantiated by empirical data or peer-reviewed research, raising serious questions about their authenticity and potential to mislead stakeholders, consumers, and policymakers alike.
Furthermore, the study shows a marked increase in net-zero commitments within the meat and dairy sector, rising from four companies in 2020 to 17 in 2024. However, scrutiny reveals that these pledges predominantly rely on carbon offset strategies rather than direct decarbonization and emissions reduction measures. Such reliance could enable companies to mask ongoing environmental harm under the guise of neutrality, undermining the urgency of actual emissions cuts necessary for climate stabilization.
By evaluating these environmental claims through a greenwashing framework—an analytical approach that assesses the genuineness of sustainability assertions—the research found that an overwhelming 98% of the claims could be categorized as greenwashing. Typical examples include vague commitments like producing “net climate-neutral dairy by no later than 2050,” which lack detailed action plans, metrics, or transparent accountability mechanisms. This form of corporate communication raises concerns about misleading marketing practices designed more to protect brand image than to contribute meaningfully to climate solutions.
The researchers emphasize that while greenwashing is not exclusive to the animal agricultural industry, the sector’s outsized contribution to global emissions amplifies the urgency of addressing such deceptive practices. The welfare of the planet depends heavily on reducing emissions in this sector, and false or exaggerated claims risk diluting public pressure and undermining policy frameworks aimed at genuine climate progress.
Lead author Maya Bach warns that the prevalence of misleading claims perpetuates complacency among consumers and policymakers. “We are concerned that these claims can mislead the public, influence consumers, and reduce pressure on policymakers to take climate action,” she states. This deceptive climate narrative could stall much-needed transitions to sustainable food systems and delay adoption of more effective environmental policies.
Jennifer Jacquet, the study’s corresponding author and a professor at the University of Miami, highlights the paradox of increased corporate rhetoric on climate change against the backdrop of insubstantial action. “Meat and dairy companies are talking a lot about climate change, which makes sense because animal-based foods lead to more emissions and other environmental impacts than other kinds of foods,” she remarks. “But when so much of what these companies say seem to be empty promises not backed up with evidence or investments, it starts to look more like a public relations exercise rather than caring for the planet.”
This work challenges the meat and dairy industry to move beyond performative sustainability claims and embrace transparent, evidence-based strategies that genuinely reduce environmental impact. It also calls for heightened scrutiny by regulators and watchdog organizations to prevent the spread of unfounded environmental marketing that could misdirect consumer choices and political will.
The implications of the study are far-reaching, touching on issues of climate change mitigation, food system sustainability, and corporate accountability. As the world races to meet global emission targets under the Paris Agreement, the role of high-impact sectors like animal agriculture in either advancing or hindering progress cannot be overstated. The authors’ findings reinforce the need for robust transparency standards and verifiable commitments to ensure that environmental claims translate into real-world benefits rather than greenwashed illusions.
Moreover, this research contributes crucial insights into the intersection of environmental science and corporate communication strategies. It underscores the necessity for interdisciplinary approaches that combine observational data analysis, social science perspectives, and climate science to decode how industries frame their climate narratives and the potential consequences.
The study also highlights the critical role that open-access scientific publishing plays in disseminating knowledge that can inform public debates, drive policy reform, and empower consumers. By making the full article freely available in PLOS Climate, the authors aim to foster an informed public dialogue about corporate environmental responsibility in one of the most impactful sectors on the planet.
As this evidence accumulates, it becomes increasingly clear that the road to sustainable food systems involves more than ambitious slogans and future promises. It requires rigorous monitoring, accountability frameworks, and a shift toward genuine emissions reductions and environmentally sound practices. Only then can the environmental costs of meat and dairy production be meaningfully addressed in the urgent global push toward climate stability.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Environmental claims, climate promises, and ‘greenwashing’ by meat and dairy companies
News Publication Date: 22-Apr-2026
Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000773
References: Bach M, Loy L, Mach KJ, Shukla McDermid S, Jacquet J (2026) Environmental claims, climate promises, and ‘greenwashing’ by meat and dairy companies. PLOS Clim 5(4): e0000773.
Keywords: Animal agriculture, greenhouse gas emissions, greenwashing, sustainability claims, climate promises, net-zero commitments, carbon neutrality, environmental impact, meat industry, dairy industry, climate change, corporate accountability
