Climate reporting has become a baseline expectation for food businesses. Customers ask for it. Tenders require it. Regulations increasingly assume it. Yet many teams still struggle to answer a simple question:
What should climate reporting actually help us do?
For food businesses, reporting only becomes valuable when it supports decisions, communication, and confidence across the organization. Anything less tends to create work without impact.
Reporting needs to reflect how food businesses operate
Food businesses don’t run on static structures; menus evolve, ingredients change, and suppliers shift. Decisions are made across procurement, operations, finance, sustainability, and commercial teams. Reporting that doesn’t reflect this reality quickly feels disconnected.
When climate reporting is built around annual snapshots or high-level totals, it becomes difficult to:
• Understand where emissions are coming from
• Explain changes over time
• Translate results into practical next steps
What food businesses need instead is reporting that can move with the business, not trail behind it.
Teams need reporting they can actually use
One of the most common challenges in food organizations is that climate data lives with a single team.
Sustainability managers often carry the responsibility for:
• Collecting data
• Interpreting results
• Answering follow-up questions
Meanwhile, procurement teams focus on suppliers, chefs focus on menus, and commercial teams focus on clients. When reporting outputs aren’t accessible or relevant to these roles, the data stays siloed.
Effective climate reporting supports collaboration by:
• Connecting emissions data to ingredients, dishes, and suppliers
• Making insights understandable beyond technical audiences
• Allowing teams to see how their decisions influence outcomes
Scope 3 makes food reporting fundamentally different
Food businesses are particularly affected by where emissions sit.
Under the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a large share of food-related emissions fall under Scope 3, especially in purchased goods and services. That includes agricultural production, processing, and upstream supply chains.
At a global level, food systems account for a significant share of greenhouse gas emissions, driven largely by these upstream activities—a pattern consistently highlighted in research on the topic.
This means food businesses need reporting that can handle:
• High variation between ingredients
• Differences between suppliers
• Changes in sourcing over time
Without that level of resolution, reporting provides totals but limited guidance.
Reporting should support external communication with confidence
Climate reporting increasingly shows up outside internal documents.
Food businesses use emissions data to:
• Respond to client and tender requirements
• Communicate sustainability efforts to guests
• Support brand and marketing claims
In these situations, confidence matters. Teams need to explain:
• What’s included in the numbers
• Why certain choices have higher or lower impact
• How progress is being tracked
Reporting that lacks transparency or consistency makes these conversations harder. Reporting that is clear and repeatable makes them easier.
Leadership needs reporting that enables prioritization
At a leadership level, climate reporting should help answer practical questions:
• Where should we focus first?
• Which changes would have the biggest impact?
• How do sustainability goals interact with cost, margins, and operations?
When reporting doesn’t support prioritization, it competes with other business priorities for attention. When it does, it becomes part of strategic planning rather than a parallel exercise.
What “good” climate reporting looks like for food businesses
Across food businesses at different stages of maturity, effective reporting tends to share a few characteristics:
• Food-specific detail rather than generic averages
• Consistency over time, even as menus and suppliers change
• Transparency around assumptions and boundaries
• Usability across teams, not just sustainability roles
• Clear links between data and decisions
These qualities don’t replace standards or frameworks, but make them workable in day-to-day operations.
Reporting as part of how the business runs
As expectations around sustainability continue to rise, climate reporting plays a larger role in how food businesses are evaluated.
Reporting that aligns with operational reality supports:
• Faster responses to stakeholder questions
• Better internal decision-making
• More credible external communication
Over time, it becomes a shared resource rather than a standalone task.
Building reporting that supports progress
Food businesses don’t need more reporting for its own sake.
They need reporting that reflects how food is sourced, prepared, and served—and that supports the decisions teams make every day. When reporting is built with that purpose in mind, it provides clarity instead of friction.
That’s when climate reporting starts to deliver value beyond compliance.
FAQ: What Food Businesses Need from Reporting
Q: What should climate reporting help food businesses do?
A: Effective reporting supports prioritization, communication, and decision-making across teams, rather than serving as a standalone compliance output.
Q: Who should use climate reporting inside a food business?
A: Procurement, operations, sustainability, and leadership teams all benefit when reporting is designed to be accessible and relevant to their roles.
Q: How do food businesses evaluate climate reporting tools?
A: Evaluation often focuses on usability, food-specific detail, consistency over time, and how well reporting connects to real business decisions.
UNLOCK YOUR POTENTIAL
Ready to turn sustainability into a
growth driver?
Book a demo with Klimato and see how our tools can help your catering business win.
