Transforming the global food system for a sustainable future

July 2025  |  TALKINGPOINT | SECTOR ANALYSIS

Financier Worldwide Magazine

July 2025 Issue

FW discusses sustainable transformation of the global food system with Enda Buckley at the Carbery Group, Steve Bochanski at PwC US, Sabine Durand-Hayes at PwC France and Harald Dutzler at PwC Strategy& Austria GmbH.

FW: Could you provide a brief overview of the current state of the global food system?

Buckley: I see firsthand how important nutrient-dense food is. For that reason, food security for me is a big part of the global food system story, and closely related to that is nutrition. Humans have faced hunger and food insecurity for millennia, but it remains a persistent issue. Just look at places like Africa, where unfortunately there is still lots of malnutrition, which brings us to the issue of affordability of healthy diets. In my view, we have to do more as a global community to ensure we produce food with the lowest environmental impact. We have to look at sustainable and regenerative farming practices for future generations’ sake.

Dutzler: We see overlapping industry transformations occurring in primarily six core domains of human activity: how we feed ourselves, how we move, how we care for ourselves, how we power, how we make and how we build. In food, as in each domain, traditional industries are reconfiguring themselves into dynamic ecosystems and historical norms are being challenged. That means where the value is being created in these industries is going to shift in ways we cannot predict – but we know it is going to happen. In 2025 alone, our research shows that up to $7.1 trillion in revenue will be redistributed across the global economy as companies reinvent their business models. Compared to other industries, the food system is probably the most fragmented, so will be the most complicated one to predict the winners and the losers.

Bochanski: The global food system is an intricate web – geographically vast but operationally narrow in critical areas. Many consumer product companies have a list of priority commodities that their brands and supply chains are built upon. Those commodities often grow in only a few places, or depend on one or two ports, to supply entire continents. The current state of the global food system is one that is likely to be regularly disrupted due to extreme weather events, that are becoming more frequent and severe due to climate change. These changes lead to a need for resiliency and strategic planning. For example, drought in western Africa has decreased cocoa yields, leading to increased costs. In addition, 14 percent of total food is wasted between harvest and the retail market, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization.

Durand-Hayes: The great paradox of the global food system is that the factors that have led to such a successful era in food production are also driving the environmental impact of the global agriculture system. So, global food security is facing increased threats. Climate change, global tensions, global population growth and supply chain disruptions mean our food systems are becoming more precarious. The question is, what role can businesses play in reimagining our food systems? And second, how can they help with the changes required to secure our food supply for generations to come?

FW: Could you delve into the nexus between climate change and food security? How does this factor into industry net-zero commitments?

Dutzler: At the most basic level, everything in our food system starts at the farm. And everything at the farm largely depends on nature. Not only is climate change putting tremendous stress on our planet, but people see it every day. In our 2024 ‘Voice of the Consumer’ study, more than 80 percent of respondents from all over the world said they personally see the effects of climate change in their day to day lives. According to climate specialists, drought and heat stress could severely challenge the production of maize, wheat and rice – commodities that provide 42 percent of the world’s calories. Subsequent climate modelling shows that without intervention, key growing regions for popular consumer crops, including bananas, coffee beans and hops, could face significant production losses due to factors such as rising temperatures and increased rainfall. While many companies have very clear net-zero commitments as part of their sustainability practices, it is not just about net zero. Other actions include ensuring deforestation-free supply chains and investing in new ingredients and technology.

Bochanski: Climate and food security are closely linked, with variability in climate posing significant challenges to global food systems. There is a potential for decreased agricultural production and crop yield through increased maximum temperatures, daily temperature variations and volatile precipitation patterns. Additionally, temperature and humidity changes can impact disease spread. The global patterns of ‘growing suitability’ or the ideal weather for certain crops and livestock is likely changing, which could disrupt global supply chains. It is important to understand that this affects all of us – all industries and individuals are participants in the global food system in one way or another. At the same time, it is imperative to remember that the agricultural system is one of the largest producers of greenhouse gases that will drive and exacerbate these changes. While the sector lags in progress, the gap is narrowing. From 2023 to 2024, the share of agriculture, food and beverage companies on track to meet their targets increased by 7 percentage points for scope 1 and 2 and 8 percentage points for scope 3 – outpacing the 2 and 3 percentage point increases of other sectors for scope 1 and 2, and scope 3, respectively.

Durand-Hayes: The food system is one of the biggest sources of global CO2 emissions. Many companies have very ambitious and well-defined sustainability goals, including food security. But when you think about net zero in Europe, for example, you think about the whole new range of coming regulations. So, companies need to consider the reputational and financial risk around regulatory compliance and potentially missing targets around emissions. A smart move many companies are making is developing a roadmap that tracks their inputs – what they are purchasing and from where – to give them better information about their emissions and design associated indicators on which to measure progress.

Buckley: Nutrient density is not talked about enough when it comes to carbon emissions and net zero. The carbon impact of food has more nuance than you might think. Some foods with low nutritional value might produce fewer carbon emissions compared to foods that are highly nutritious, creating a trade-off between nutrition and carbon footprint. If you take a glass of milk and a glass of a soft drink, if we look at it from a pure carbon perspective, the soft drink will have net less carbon emissions. But if we look at it through the lens of nutrient density, they are just not in the same ballpark. We need to start looking at food more in nutrient density terms because the prism of carbon analysis does not tell the whole story.

FW: What if companies decide to sit back and wait for others to move first? What are the consequences of continuing to adhere to the status quo?

Bochanski: Waiting for others to lead can mean missing out on resilience, innovation and competitive advantage. The reality is that climate-related risks, such as extreme weather or biodiversity loss, are not future hypotheticals; they are business factors showing up in today’s supply chains, customer expectations and operating costs. Understanding how these risks could affect the value chain is not just good practice – it is good business. Without that insight, organisations may face avoidable challenges, operational disruptions, missed revenue opportunities and brand erosion. The good news is that acting now does not mean overhauling everything overnight. It means starting with what is knowable: assessing risk exposure, aligning strategy with resilience and building smart, sustainable operations – from emissions reductions to regenerative practices. Companies that take a proactive stance are better positioned to protect value, respond with agility and capture the growth potential of the energy transition. The path forward is clear: less about reacting, more about readying.

Durand-Hayes: It is important to understand that there are so many different players in the global agribusiness ecosystem. First, you have 8 billion consumers. You have the farmers. Then the small companies that might take wheat and mill it into flour, or produce small batches of olive oil. There are the big traders that help move global commodities from the farmers and the growers to some of the processing facilities for first transformation. Do not forget the big consumer packaged goods (CPG) food companies – not to mention all types of retailers, from farmers’ markets to proximity stores to modern trade grocery stores like Walmart. No one can afford to sit back because the pressure is on the whole system and all players will need to change; the key is banding together and finding new ways to fund the changes we need.

Dutzler: For companies in the food system, climate change is a critical concern for the future of their businesses. Sitting back and waiting will help neither these companies, the overall food system, nor the planet. Disruptions to the food supply are increasingly likely, along with rising demand-side pressures, so the players in the system must factor those risks in. While agricultural industrialisation has done an incredible job of feeding the masses, the status quo has damaged the environment. In 2020, agriculture emitted about one-third of global emissions. If rises in food production accompany population growth, as expected, those emissions by 2050 with be 80 percent higher compared to emissions in 2010. So, this is not something to simply sit back and watch happen.

FW: What kinds of solutions are being advocated to sustainably feed the world’s growing population?

Dutzler: The most successful companies are factoring in the interconnected network of companies, governments, farms and consumers that collectively influence the fragmented food system. For example, a recent farm to factory study we conducted for a food retailer in the UK showed that solutions providing greater transparency in the supply chain could lead to a 2 to 5 percent uplift in sales if the retailer adopted dynamic pricing campaigns that discounted products close to their expiry date. Other solutions include margin improvements by reducing food waste and optimising transport and inventory costs. Then there are product alternatives. For instance, alternatives to palm oil – the world’s most widely used vegetable oil – are being developed from agri-food waste and precision fermentation.

Buckley: In Ireland, for example, there have been huge advances in breeding. The Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, in collaboration with Teagasc, has developed a breeding index which research suggests can indirectly contribute to reducing methane emissions. There are huge applications for technologies such as drones. Today, when a farmer goes out to spread fertiliser, for example, that is done by tractor, which is not really the most environmentally efficient method. I can see a drone in 10 years doing this work, and it will be far more precise. For watering and harvesting processes, as well, I think drones are going to become huge. Precision fermentation, blockchain – these technologies are all coming to fruition. And just think about solar power in Ireland or globally for that matter. We have not come close to optimising solar, and I think once we do, we are going to see a lot more energy efficiency in terms of smart grids and energy management systems.

FW: In terms of innovation and technology, which parts of the ‘value chain’ are most likely to undergo the greatest technological change?

Buckley: There are so many things happening at the farm level. In addition to drones, robotic milking also exists. Instead of manually milking the cow, the cow is enticed with a treat into a staging area where a robot milks the cow. The stress on the cow has been measured and it is generally less stressful on the cow compared to humans doing the job. So, there is a huge move toward technology, and another side benefit of that is to make farming a more attractive career. Farming is difficult; I grew up on a dairy farm and my father told me to do something else as farming was a difficult career. If technology can make dairy farming more enticing, that is a huge plus. There have also been huge advances in breeding and genetics.

Durand-Hayes: We have a lot of solutions already in place – they are just not evenly distributed throughout the system. Tractors are not very precise, but in India, where less than half of agriculture is mechanised, tractors are still something that could be part of the solution. When it comes to really new technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), some of the most exciting things are happening at the farm level, from vertical farming to precision agriculture. The big issue here is that a lot of these technologies are not scalable and affordable everywhere. Away from the farm, one tangible solution is the use of AI in really reducing food waste. If we can use technology to do things like help families plan their weekly meals smarter, resulting in less wasted food, or helping farmers and CPGs anticipate demand changes, and maintain the best transport conditions, that is very exciting.

Dutzler: At the farm, sensors, satellites, drones and AI are revolutionising productivity, enabling precision farming and reducing the use of fertilisers and pesticides. In the lab, there is the advancement of animal-free proteins and other ingredient replacements. In fact, many companies have basically morphed into research companies, employing hundreds or even thousands of scientists to produce new products, finding ingredient alternatives at the molecular level and using tools like AI to boost ingredient innovation for better taste and texture.

FW: Could you outline how consumer demands and food choices impact climate change and sustainability?

Durand-Hayes: Consumers are not just reacting to change – they are driving it. Their behaviour, preferences and spending power will shape where value will be created. Our latest annual survey of consumers, ‘The Voice of the Consumer’, reveals the emergence of an aspirational consumer that is focused on value-driven choices. Worldwide, consumers are inclined to purchase food that aligns with their attitudes toward health, convenience and sustainability. For example, concerns over ultra-processed foods and pesticide use are intensifying among approximately 60 percent of consumers surveyed.

Buckley: There is sort of a truism among people deeply involved in the food industry that maybe one out of 10 consumers are willing to pay more for more sustainably produced food. Now, that might vary depending on income, age and country, but farmers realise that sustainability must be achieved at a reasonable cost – because in the end, someone has to pay for it, as processes like complying with regulations and getting sustainability verifications come with a cost. Right now, the farmer pays for some of it, the processor pays, and the retailer some. On a positive note, advances like blockchain technology will help with that verification piece, so that will help reduce these costs and make these products more affordable for the consumer.

Bochanski: We are seeing shifts in what people expect from the brands they support. Our latest ‘Voice of the Consumer’ survey shows a rising appetite for products that reflect environmental and social responsibility – and some are willing to pay more for it. This shift is influencing how companies think about sourcing, supply chains and brand reputation. Sustainability is not just a ‘nice to have’, it is becoming a driver of consumer trust, brand loyalty and competitive edge. More companies are embedding these insights into their strategies – and demonstrating an ability to drive value as a result.

FW: What measures can be implemented to reduce food waste in the global food system?

Buckley: There are such huge opportunities because so much food is wasted. And of course, the more food is wasted, the more our environmental issues are exacerbated. First, there are the environmental effects of food production, and second, disposal impacts, because when extra food ends up in landfill, methane is produced. One major opportunity is improving storage and transportation. There is definitely scope to enhance cold storage facilities and prevent spoilage in the first instance, especially in regions with high temperatures. Optimising supply chains will cut down on transportation. Dynamic pricing – adjusting prices based on demand and shelf life – is also interesting. And, as always, education and awareness. There are some great new apps and tools that can help consumers plan meals, tracking things like expiration dates and finding recipes for leftovers. There is no magic bullet when it comes to packaging, but we can do more in terms of extending the shelf life of products and getting more eco-friendly packaging into the market. Finally, there is policy and regulation. Some countries already have food donation laws. We can implement policies that promote food donation and establish waste reduction goals. The UK has done this with some success.

Dutzler: Solutions span the gamut, from more efficient transportation to families using AI to better plan their weekly menus. Other factors like glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) drugs reducing appetites could also contribute. But the crisis is here: the World Food Programme estimates that global food waste and loss amounts to $1 trillion annually and contributes 10 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Our own analysis attributes this partly to underinvestment in supply chains, and partly to slow adoption of digital tech, including precision agriculture and supply chain tracking. If these issues were fixed, and taken together with changes in people’s diets and successful management of other food security factors, the world could feed an additional 2 billion people, roughly in line with the expected population growth by 2050.

FW: What are your predictions for how the food system will change in the coming months and years? How confident are you we will see a large-scale, fundamental shift in food production?

Buckley: In terms of consumers, I think we will see more local and seasonal foods, especially the way personalised nutrition is advancing. System-wide, the inherent challenges demand more collaboration; the links in the chain need to be talking to each other and working with each other. When done right, it is very powerful. The more time I spend in sustainability, the more I see the need for collaboration between all players throughout the food value chain – and that means government as well, by the way – and I think we are going to see that.

Dutzler: I am quite confident that we are going to see significant reconfiguration of the system in just a decade or two. Chief executives understand this is an existential issue for them, with an urgent need to evolve business models. Without overhauling product traceability – tracking origins, ensuring transparency and resilience, implementing robust data systems – companies risk obsolescence. Value pools will emerge, some existing ones will expand, and others will vanish. Players across all sectors, from start-ups to giants, public and private, will converge. And businesses will be challenged to rethink nature’s role in their sustainable growth.

Durand-Hayes: I am actually very optimistic because the need to succeed will drive innovation and there is much to gain for everyone in the system. Some of the most exciting changes I am anticipating include new kinds of partnership as the food industry increasingly intersects with healthcare, tech and financial services. We will also see innovative new delivery formats, including predictive, personalised nutrition and new premiumisation opportunities. GLP-1 patients, for example, may buy more premium products if they are spending less money overall on food. The timeframe and payoff will depend on the individual company.

FW: What do you believe are the barriers to implementing more sustainable practices in the global food system?

Dutzler: When one thinks ‘global food system’, it may not be immediate to think ‘banks’. But financing the coming transformation means employing different types of financial instruments – including insurance, loans and subsidies – to meet the challenges of fluctuating market dynamics. For instance, significant upfront investment in precision farming and soil health monitoring is necessary to scale regenerative agriculture. So, financing is a significant barrier, depending on a lot of various factors. At the same time, there is a significant need for technology tailored to small and marginal farms. Farmers in the poorest parts of Africa still lack access to basic 20th century agricultural technologies such as fertiliser, tractors and irrigation.

Durand-Hayes: The sheer number of players in the global food system all need to be pulling in the same direction. Of course, there are the farmers, the food companies and the retailers, but you also have banks, insurance companies, government, logistics companies, ports and other infrastructure assets, and healthcare companies. And, of course, there are consumers, whose needs and purchasing power are driving this entire system. The challenge is finding new ways of working together.

Bochanski: There are several barriers to implementing sustainable practices in the global food system. First, there can be a lack of awareness and understanding among stakeholders about the benefits and necessity of sustainable practices. Many companies face financial constraints and perceive the upfront costs of transitioning to sustainable operations as prohibitive. Supply chain complexities further impede progress, with challenges in sourcing sustainable materials and ensuring transparency. Additionally, regulatory frameworks can be inconsistent across regions and at times volatile and unpredictable, making it difficult for businesses to standardise sustainable practices globally or have confidence that their investments will drive persistent value over time. Consumer demand for low-cost products can conflict with the higher expenses that are sometimes associated with sustainable options. But there is a hopeful future – one where companies open the aperture to see the full range of benefits from implementing sustainable practices and how such practices lead to value creation. Companies that use the full suite of data, tools and processes available to them to design transparent, sustainable food supply chains that are resilient to a changing climate will be best positioned for sustained success.

Buckley: Cutting-edge innovation is not available to all farmers, which puts a lot of pressure on farmers in terms of labour. In Ireland, we are starting to see immigrant farmers come from places like the Philippines, much the way you might see Mexican labourers on farms in California, because a lot of people simply will do something else if they can. So, access to new technologies that can alleviate labour shortages on the farm will be very important. Then you see a lot of inconsistent policies that can hinder the adoption of systemic practices. Subsidies and incentives factor into that. For example, existing subsidies often favour conventional practices over sustainable ones, but that is changing. Then, of course, there is climate variability itself, the unpredictable weather patterns and the belief that certain sustainable farming practices are unaffordable.

Enda Buckley is director of sustainability at the Carbery Group. Over the past 10 years he has spearheaded a number of sustainability initiatives across the Carbery Group, such as Farm Zero C, Carbery Trees and Futureproof (farm sustainability bonus programme). Prior to Carbery, he founded and ran his own consultancy – Sustainable Solutions – and held senior sustainability roles at the Irish Environmental Network and National Newspapers of Ireland. He holds an MSc in the management of sustainable development. He can be contacted by email: ebuckley@carbery.com.

Steve Bochanski is a principal at PwC US in the modelling services practice. He leads PwC’s US climate risk team leveraging over 25 years of experience in risk and financial modelling. His team blends diverse skills in climate and environmental sciences, actuarial science, catastrophe modelling, geospatial analysis, and sustainability and climate risk consulting. They provide expert advice to clients across all industries and sectors based on leading-edge scientific approaches and technologies. He can be contacted by email: steve.bochanski@pwc.com.

Sabine Durand-Hayes is a partner at PwC France in the deals practice and has more than 25 years of experience advising M&A transactions for corporates and private equities. She is PwC’s consumer markets global leader, including in particular the end to end food ecosystem. She contributes to industry though leadership with a focus on the future of the industry and supports PwC teams, assembling capabilities to service large clients within the sector. She can be contacted by email: sabine.durand@pwc.com.

Harald Dutzler is a partner at PwC Strategy& Austria GmbH and the global consumer goods leader for PwC. Based in the Vienna office and with more than 25 years of strategy consulting experience, his primary focus lies in food & beverage value chains and on non-food supply chains. He holds a diploma in business administration. He can be contacted by email: harald.dutzler@pwc.com.

© Financier Worldwide

THE PANELLISTS

Enda Buckley

Carbery Group

Steve Bochanski

PwC US

Sabine Durand-Hayes

PwC France

Harald Dutzler

PwC Strategy& Austria GmbH