A recent study published in the journal Nature Food found that major UK food and beverage manufacturers can achieve large nutritional and environmental improvements by changing a small proportion of their product portfolios. The research analyzed the environmental and nutrition scores of thousands of products from 44 manufacturers, which account for 51.5% of the UK food and beverage retail market.
The study used the Euromonitor and foodDB datasets to assess the environmental impact and nutritional quality of the manufacturers’ products. The foodDB dataset provided quantitative information on the quality and impact of over 57,000 food products in 2019, which were then linked to the Euromonitor dataset to estimate the average nutritional quality and environmental impact scores for each brand and manufacturer.
Nutrition and Environment Scores
The researchers estimated the nutrition and environment scores for each product and weighted the resulting category- and manufacturer-level metrics by Euromonitor sales value. The nutrition score was based on a nutrient profiling model that includes seven characteristics of a food item, while the environmental impact score was based on four indicators: eutrophication, water use, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Read Also: Cobra venom yields new antimicrobial peptide candidate
The study found that manufacturer scores varied widely for products in the same category. For nutrition, the widest difference between the best and worst manufacturers was three-letter bands in one category, while for environment, the widest difference was four-letter bands in two categories. The researchers also found that some products, such as chocolate, fudge, and toffee, were consistently the least nutritious among confectionery products, while chocolates with high cocoa content had the highest environmental impact per 100g.
The researchers simulated the replacement of the worst products in 1% increments to estimate the potential for improvement. They found that manufacturers with the greatest potential for improvement were often those with the highest sales, while those with narrow product lines had less scope to improve their environment and nutrition scores. Across manufacturers, 27 had the potential to reduce environmental impact by more than 5%, and five by more than 20%.
Improvement Potential
The study found that for some manufacturers, improving a small proportion of their product lines could yield significant benefits. For instance, improving ≤ 10% of the product lines would yield more than half of the potential environmental benefits for 12 manufacturers and at least half of the potential nutritional improvements for 17 manufacturers, if all worse-than-median products were improved. However, some manufacturers would need to change more than 25% of their product lines to achieve ≥ 50% of the potential gains.
Read Also: Diet Strategies Help IBS Sufferers Gain Weight
The researchers noted that the environmental estimates were calculated per 100g and excluded processing, transportation, and storage, while the analysis assumed that products within each manufacturer-category grouping were sold in equal quantities. As such, more systemic changes are needed to develop a food system that supports a healthy planet and population. The study’s findings suggest that 12 manufacturers could achieve more than half of the potential environmental benefits by improving ≤ 10% of their product lines.
Citation and Image Attribution
The paper, authored by Hammond et al., appeared in Nature Food (2026), volume 7, issue 9, pages 857-868. Its DOI is 10.1038/s43016-026-01420-2, and it can be accessed online.
Systemic Changes Needed
The environmental estimates calculated per 100g excluded processing, transportation, and storage. The analysis assumed that products within each manufacturer-category grouping were sold in equal quantities. These limitations indicate that more changes are needed to achieve significant improvements in environmental sustainability and nutritional value.
