What to Look for in a Scope 3 Food Data Solution

Mikael Halldén

Senior Sales Executive, Klimato

TLDR; If you’re a food business evaluating Scope 3 data solutions, you should prioritize the following:

• Ingredient-level accuracy over spend-based averages (vital for Category 1)
• GHG Protocol-aligned data
• Ability to audit emission factors that can hold up under an external CSRD review
• Methodology aligned with LSRS & SBTi FLAG or data reported according to said requirements

Now, back to the article.

Most food businesses don't have a Scope 3 measurement problem—they have a Scope 3 solution problem. Once you accept the need for Scope 3 reporting, you can find the right platform as your next step. It must handle the real challenges of food supply chains. Especially if you're evaluating options built specifically for automating Scope 3 emissions reporting rather than general carbon accounting.

Here's what to check before you commit to one:

Start With Category 1, Not the Feature List

For most food and beverage companies, purchased goods and services (Scope 3 Category 1) is not just one line item. In fact, it can cover up to 95% of Scope 3 emissions.

So, any solution review should start there. If a platform is weak on Category 1, it is weak where your emissions truly are.

Ask About the Data Hierarchy, Not Just "Do You Have Supplier Data"

The GHG Protocol's guidance on Category 1 sets out four methods, from most to least specific:

• Supplier-specific data
• A hybrid of supplier and secondary data
• Industry averages
• Spend-based estimates

Vendors will tell you they support "supplier data."

• Ask which tier that actually means, and how the platform decides when to use it.

“More specific data isn’t automatically more accurate data.”

The Protocol also offers a useful caution about precision claims: more specific data isn't automatically more accurate data. What matters is whether the platform targets your highest-emitting purchases first. What doesn't matter is if every ingredient uses the "fanciest" method.

Check Whether It's Actually Built for Food

A platform designed for generic procurement categories will map "dairy" to one average factor and call it a day. Food emissions vary by ingredient, origin, farming method, and processing—often significantly.

• Ask to see how the platform handles a real product line, not a demo with placeholder data.

The scale of a good food-specific database is a useful sanity check. Klimato, for example, covers 4,000+ ingredients in 100+ countries and includes differences by origin and production method.

This results in 20,000+ ingredient variations. If a vendor's database is a fraction of that size, or treats "beef" as a single global factor, that's worth asking about directly.

Moreover, better Category 1 data depends on getting real numbers from suppliers.

• Check that the platform can include the data your suppliers already have.

Ask About FLAG and Land-Sector Readiness (LSRS)

Companies that have set (or plan to set) SBTi FLAG food targets cannot treat land emissions as optional. The SBTi FLAG guidance was tightened in a version 1.2 update. It now includes stricter deforestation cutoff dates and new documentation requirements. All companies submitting FLAG emissions targets must comply.

The GHG Protocol's Land Sector and Removals Standard (LSRS) also takes effect January 1, 2027. If a solution can’t report land related emissions according to the LSRS categories, ask how and when it plans to support LSRS.

“Every material emissions figure needs a traceable path back to its source.”

Confirm that It Can Survive an Audit

CSRD reporting needs external assurance for the sustainability data you publish—not just an internal number you trust. This means that every material emissions figure needs a traceable path back to its source.

• Ask how the platform documents its calculation methods and data sources. Do not only ask if it produces a finished-looking report.

Methodology backing matters here, too. The Klimato Database has been reviewed by experts and auditors from WRI’s Coolfood Initiative and Bureau Veritas, and the Swedish Environmental Research Institute (IVL).

That is the level of documentation an auditor or a skeptical procurement lead will expect, whichever solution you choose.

Questions Worth Asking in a Demo

• Show me Category 1 data for one of my actual product lines, not a sample dataset.
• What tier of the GHG Protocol's data hierarchy does this number use, and why?
• What does a supplier see when you ask them for primary data, and how long does that usually take?
• Can this handle reporting requirements for FLAG or LSRS reporting?
• If an auditor asked to trace this number back to its source, what would you show them?

A solution that survives these questions will handle almost everything else on a typical RFP.

→ In case you were wondering, Klimato covers all these bases.

FAQ 

Q: What's the difference between a general carbon footprint accounting platform and a food-specific Scope 3 solution?

A: A general platform typically applies spend-based or industry-average factors across broad procurement categories. A food-specific solution works at the ingredient level. It accounts for variation by origin, farming method, and processing. This matters because Category 1 holds most food business emissions.

Q: Do we need supplier-specific data before we can start reporting Scope 3?

A: No. The GHG Protocol accepts industry averages as a starting point, especially in year one.

What matters over time is a written plan. The plan should replace the highest-impact averages with supplier-specific or hybrid data. It does not require perfect data from day one.

Q: How long does it typically take to get Scope 3 data audit-ready?

A: This depends on how much of your data is at the ingredient level versus the spend level. It also depends on the availability of your data. Once the data is available, a platform built for food procurement can shorten this a lot. It starts with ingredient-level factors, not from scratch.

Q: Can the same solution support both CSRD reporting and SBTi FLAG target-setting?

A: Yes, FLAG emissions are in Category 1. A solution with that data built in can support CSRD disclosure. It can also support to set FLAG targets, using the same dataset.