Helping a F&B brand nudge its customers towards low carbon intensive offerings-Rajesh
Business Context
Highlevel Diner, a sustainability oriented F&B brand wanted to help its customers reduce the carbon footprint of their food choices, while building its own brand reputation as a business which cares. For every food item on its menu- there were emissions attached at every stage- farming, processing, transporting, and cooking- all generating greenhouse gases (CH4, N2O etc).
It’s a complex process to measure, validate and communicate in a way that customers can understand, appreciate and take action based on the thought behind the process.
Results Achieved
Based on an understanding of customer psychology, looking at different data points and in-person interviews- Rajesh and his team decided to build/redesign the custom food menu. The new menu needed to communicated the proposition seamlessly-
Process
The carbon footprint values on the new menu represents the total estimated carbon footprint of each meal, while the carbon footprint symbols on the menu correspond to diet type and estimated annual carbon footprint of this diet type as shown in the table below.
Rajesh’s team performed academic research on life cycle analysis (LCA) of food emissions and compiled a unit inventory (kg CO2/kg of food item) for most foods. The LCA included emissions from production, transportation, and retail/cooking aspects of the supply chain. They then used restaurant food sourcing information (i.e. food type, quantity, location source etc.) to complete the emission calculation for each Highlevel Diner menu item.
Assumptions:
a) The production footprint data for most food items references US based production data. Limited production data is available for Canada, and US and Canada food production data are assumed to be similar. The production data has been verified and cited in many research papers used in support of this project.
b) The transport footprint data is based on average aggregate data collected from the food miles from multiple modes of transport (rail, sea and truck).
c) The retail and cooking component were assumed to be combined 0.1kg CO2e/kg food item as they constitute a small component of the overall footprint.
d) Due to complexity, estimated emissions from land use change (component of production footprint) was not evaluated as part of this project.
Sanity Checks:
a) Multiple academic papers were cross checked to ensure data reliability.
b) Latest academic papers were given preference to improve data quality.
c) The final calculations were compared with the footprint numbers of L’s Kitchen, Lindholmen, a Swedish restaurant which has already implemented carbon footprint reporting on its menu.
Key Conclusions:
