Plant-Forward Menus Are Cutting Emissions, but Not Fast Enough

Food sector emissions account for one quarter to one-third of the total global inventory of greenhouse gases. Research shows one highly effective way of curbing those emissions is shifting to plant-forward diets, but making that shift comes with plenty of challenges. 

According to a new report from the World Resources Institute on their Coolfoods initiative, food providers pledging to serve more climate-friendly meals in cafeterias and dining halls have reported success in reducing their food-related emissions. There are challenges, however. Diners and consumers make food choices based on a number of competing factors, like the rising cost of living in the U.S. and health-related dietary trends.

The World Resources Institute launched the Coolfoods initiative in 2018 with a goal of partnering with food providers — restaurants, caterers, hospitals, universities, city governments and other organizations — to measure and reduce the climate impact of their menus. Now at 87 pledge members, the initiative published a progress report last month.

“I personally think this is one of the most ambitious programmes right now aiming to address the climate impacts of the world food system,” Joseph Poore, a senior research fellow at the University of Oxford, told Sentient over email. “It is clearly driving major behaviour change at scale, uses open reporting, and is backed [by] strong science,” wrote Poore, who was not involved with the report. 

Cities, compared to other cohort sectors, are dominating the challenge of lowering emissions associated with every plate of food served, especially in New York City. Serving free meals to more than one million students daily, the New York City Public Schools Office of Food and Nutrition Services has reduced per-plate emissions by nearly 40% since joining the pledge in 2019. Their success is shared among other cities in the cohort, with the sector averaging 37% per-plate reductions through 2025. New York and other pledge member cities have done this by drastically cutting ruminant meat options that are high in emissions and expanding plant-based offerings on their menus. 

To participate in the initiative, pledge members submit records of their food purchases to the Coolfood team to calculate the climate toll of their food offerings. The WRI researchers multiply the weight of a specific food item by its emission factors, which include emissions from the span of the supply chain, starting from farming of the product through the point of sale. They also include the carbon opportunity cost in their calculation, which takes into account how much carbon could have been saved if the land used to produce food had instead been kept in its uncultivated state, like native grasslands. 

Swapping an emissions-heavy food like beef for something like a bean burger would have a big impact, for example. For 1,000 calories of beef, the researchers calculated 24.12 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions from its supply chain and 161.81 kilograms of emissions from its opportunity cost. Legumes on the other hand have a much lower impact: 0.48 and 3.38 kilograms of emissions for their supply chain and carbon opportunity cost, respectively. 

The team also measures each member’s emissions output against a series of climate targets based on the 2015 Paris Agreement and the corporate Science Based Targets initiative.

The potential for climate action is enormous. “If there’s one thing that’s going to have the biggest impact, it’s shifting diets,” says Jenny Arthur, head of the Coolfood program at the World Resources Institute.

And the overall picture of the report is positive: Across sectors, providers are dishing out meals with lower emissions than they had before joining the initiative. But progress is slowing down. The Institute’s goal was a 25% drop in per-plate emissions for the cohort by 2025; instead, they saw a 12% decrease. Some of this stagnation, however, is due to newer members joining the program and having less time to implement lasting emissions-reducing solutions. 

Clara Cho, the Coolfood Data Lead at World Resources Institute, notes that city food programs can find the change to more sustainable options easier because of their simpler decision making structures compared to businesses and other organizations whose scope of work may serve a more disparate geography. In New York, the Mayor’s Office of Food Policy was able to quickly implement trials at schools such as the “Chefs in the Schools” program, in which they partnered with the public schools to have students taste-test and ultimately approve or reject climate-friendly options.

Universities and businesses come in second and third place, respectively, for per-plate emissions reductions. Like cities, they have invested in more plant-based options and cut down on their ruminant meat offerings. A star cohort member is Williams College, which has used theme nights on Mondays and Wednesdays to showcase plant-based flavor. Their plant-based “Build Your Own Grain Bowl” dinner rose to the #1 spot on its mobile ordering platform. 

Food providers in the healthcare, catering and restaurant industries are dishing out lower-emissions foods the slowest, the researchers found, with progress since 2023 stalling. Healthcare, the largest sector represented by cohort members, has had an influx of new pledgers, and may pick up the pace once they have had more time to participate. Veteran members who pledged prior to 2022 have seen a 19% decrease in per-plate emissions through 2025 while newer members’ emissions per plate have dropped only 12%. 

Restaurants and contract caterers provide the largest share — 85% — of meals from the cohort and they often execute the most complicated operations in terms of geography, sites and volume. The team expects their progress to take time. 

While emissions per dish are an important metric to measure climate impact, they don’t give the whole picture. Absolute emissions across the cohort have increased by 3% through 2025. According to the report, this is the first reporting period at which the members are heading in the wrong direction on the journey to their 2030 goal, which necessitated a 16.6% absolute emissions reduction by this point.

The researchers chalk this shortcoming up to growth in food purchased and meals served, especially since many food providers have now recovered from pandemic food service interruptions. Expanded operations mean more food served and thus more emissions overall, even if the options they serve have relatively lower carbon footprints. 

Ultimately, the most important actors in this partnership are not the providers themselves, but the people ordering their food, the researchers have observed. “It all goes back to consumer demand,” says Arthur. When customers order vegan and vegetarian options, “[providers] are more likely to invest in innovation, invest in these ingredients and offer more plant-rich dishes.” 

But consumer focus has been roiled by economic and geopolitical circumstances of the last few years. The researchers cited multiple, ongoing geopolitical conflicts in the Middle East and Europe as driving up the cost of energy, which in turn has made food production more expensive. The authors believe consumers are more concerned with affordability of food than sustainability, and their purchasing decisions show as much. 

Dietary preferences can also compete with sustainability in purchasing decisions. While Arthur maintains that more climate-friendly diets are often linked with health benefits, especially in terms of fiber content, consumers today are more concerned with boosting their protein intake than they once were. And the increased use of GLP-1s, hormones that reduce appetite, means consumers are eating less and wanting more protein per bite. 

Cho agrees that a shift toward emissions-reduced food relies on buy-in from consumers. “If you’re going out and choosing that plant-rich dish, companies notice that and will see that demand.”