Landscape analysis of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing metrics for consumer nutrition and health in the food and beverage sector.

IF 3.3 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-24 DOI:10.1136/bmjnph-2022-000600
Meghan O'Hearn, Julia Reedy, Ella Robinson, Christina Economos, John B Wong, Gary Sacks, Dariush Mozaffarian
{"title":"Landscape analysis of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing metrics for consumer nutrition and health in the food and beverage sector.","authors":"Meghan O'Hearn, Julia Reedy, Ella Robinson, Christina Economos, John B Wong, Gary Sacks, Dariush Mozaffarian","doi":"10.1136/bmjnph-2022-000600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The private sector plays a critical role in influencing food choices and health outcomes of consumers. Among private sector actors, investors are a powerful yet underutilised stakeholder for driving scalable public health impact. There are systems to facilitate investors' involvement, notably environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, which is well placed to include an assessment of business risks to social well-being. However, nutrition efforts within the ESG agenda (ESG-Nutrition) are nascent. We aimed to critically assess the strength of existing ESG-Nutrition metrics to advance the science of measuring business impacts on consumer nutrition and health.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ESG-Nutrition metrics were extracted from eight ESG frameworks and categorised across four domains: product portfolio healthfulness; product distribution and equity; product marketing and labelling; and nutrition-related governance. The strength of each metric was evaluated and scored 1-3 (best), independently by two researchers, based on six attributes: materiality, objectivity, alignment, activity, resolution and verifiability. The total score (range 6-18) and intercorrelation for each attribute was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 529 metrics, most related to product marketing and labelling (n=230, 43.5%), followed by product healthfulness (n=126, 23.8%), nutrition-related governance (n=108, 20.4%) and product distribution and equity (n=65, 12.3%). Across all metrics, average total score was 10.94 (1.58), with average attribute scoring highest for verifiability (mean: 2.36 (SD: 0.57)), objectivity (2.11 (0.61)) and materiality (2.01 (0.68)) and lowest for activity (1.83 (0.74)), alignment (1.37 (0.67)) and resolution (1.26 (0.65)). Most intercorrelations were null, suggesting attributes were measuring distinct characteristics of each metric. Significant heterogeneity across domains and frameworks was also observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This research identifies a range of nutrition-related metrics used in ESG frameworks with respect to food companies, but with substantial heterogeneity in relevant nutrition domains covered and strength of each metric. Efforts are required to improve the quality of metrics across frameworks, establish standardised reporting and align these with investor priorities.</p>","PeriodicalId":36307,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10800242/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjnph-2022-000600","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The private sector plays a critical role in influencing food choices and health outcomes of consumers. Among private sector actors, investors are a powerful yet underutilised stakeholder for driving scalable public health impact. There are systems to facilitate investors' involvement, notably environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, which is well placed to include an assessment of business risks to social well-being. However, nutrition efforts within the ESG agenda (ESG-Nutrition) are nascent. We aimed to critically assess the strength of existing ESG-Nutrition metrics to advance the science of measuring business impacts on consumer nutrition and health.

Methods: ESG-Nutrition metrics were extracted from eight ESG frameworks and categorised across four domains: product portfolio healthfulness; product distribution and equity; product marketing and labelling; and nutrition-related governance. The strength of each metric was evaluated and scored 1-3 (best), independently by two researchers, based on six attributes: materiality, objectivity, alignment, activity, resolution and verifiability. The total score (range 6-18) and intercorrelation for each attribute was calculated.

Results: Across 529 metrics, most related to product marketing and labelling (n=230, 43.5%), followed by product healthfulness (n=126, 23.8%), nutrition-related governance (n=108, 20.4%) and product distribution and equity (n=65, 12.3%). Across all metrics, average total score was 10.94 (1.58), with average attribute scoring highest for verifiability (mean: 2.36 (SD: 0.57)), objectivity (2.11 (0.61)) and materiality (2.01 (0.68)) and lowest for activity (1.83 (0.74)), alignment (1.37 (0.67)) and resolution (1.26 (0.65)). Most intercorrelations were null, suggesting attributes were measuring distinct characteristics of each metric. Significant heterogeneity across domains and frameworks was also observed.

Conclusions: This research identifies a range of nutrition-related metrics used in ESG frameworks with respect to food companies, but with substantial heterogeneity in relevant nutrition domains covered and strength of each metric. Efforts are required to improve the quality of metrics across frameworks, establish standardised reporting and align these with investor priorities.

食品和饮料行业消费者营养和健康的环境、社会和治理(ESG)投资指标的景观分析
私营部门在影响消费者的食品选择和健康结果方面发挥着关键作用。在私营部门行为者中,投资者是推动大规模公共卫生影响的强大但未得到充分利用的利益攸关方。有一些系统可以促进投资者的参与,特别是环境、社会和治理(ESG)投资,其中包括对企业对社会福祉的风险评估。然而,ESG议程(ESG-营养)中的营养工作才刚刚起步。我们旨在批判性地评估现有esg -营养指标的强度,以推进衡量企业对消费者营养和健康影响的科学。方法从八个ESG框架中提取ESG-营养指标,并在四个领域进行分类:产品组合健康;产品分销及权益;产品营销和标签;以及与营养相关的治理。每个指标的强度由两名研究人员独立评估,得分为1-3(最佳),基于六个属性:重要性、客观性、一致性、活动性、分辨率和可验证性。计算每个属性的总得分(范围6-18)和相互关系。在529个指标中,大多数与产品营销和标签相关(n=230, 43.5%),其次是产品健康(n=126, 23.8%),营养相关治理(n=108, 20.4%)和产品分销和公平(n=65, 12.3%)。在所有指标中,平均总分为10.94(1.58),可验证性(平均值:2.36 (SD: 0.57))、客观性(2.11(0.61))和重要性(2.01(0.68))的平均属性得分最高,活动性(1.83(0.74))、一致性(1.37(0.67))和分辨率(1.26(0.65))的平均属性得分最低。大多数相互关系是空的,表明属性是衡量每个指标的不同特征。跨领域和框架的显著异质性也被观察到。本研究确定了食品公司ESG框架中使用的一系列与营养相关的指标,但在相关营养领域和每个指标的强度方面存在很大的异质性。需要努力提高各框架指标的质量,建立标准化报告,并使其与投资者的优先事项保持一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health Nursing-Nutrition and Dietetics
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信