Laudes Foundation and Dalberg Advisors, with other partners, launched their report, A Just Transition in Food: Impacts on Workers in the Food Supply Chain (December 2026). The report focuses specifically on what the food transition could like in the EU, UK and US, which house many of the world’s largest food producers and manufacturers.
Human Level’s Take:
- A food system change is urgent: the EU, UK and US food systems contribute 15% of global food emissions, yet agricultural emissions have barely moved since 2005, falling far short of the 43% reduction needed by 2030 under the Paris Agreement.
- Laudes Foundation and Dalberg Advisors identify three key levers to shift the needle. A net-zero food system requires more sustainable production, reducing food waste, and shifting consumer demand toward lower-emission, plant-based foods aligned with the EAT-Lancet Commission’s Planetary Health Diet.
- There will be varying impacts on food system workers. Over the next 5–15 years, the transition is projected to create 1–3 million jobs while displacing 1–2 million workers in the EU, UK and US. This is broadly net-neutral, but will vary significantly by region and sector. Fruit, vegetable, legume and alternative protein sectors could grow by 20–45%, while meat, dairy and grain sectors may contract by 10–20%, losing 1–2 million jobs.
- Beyond 15 years, the disruption could be larger. Displacement could reach 7–8 million jobs against 4–6 million new roles created. This level of workforce shift will require significant planning to ensure it is just, increasing training and reskilling opportunities and place-base support for those unable to transition.
- Beyond job numbers, the transition brings both benefits and risks for workers. Improvements could include better health and safety, year-round job stability and a sense of purpose. Risks could include job displacement and new physical hazards from different production methods and inevitable climate volatility.
- So what does it take to make the transition ‘just’? Companies will need to increase resilience of their business operations and supply chains try breaking down silos between strategies, investing in workforce transition planning, strengthening supply chain due diligence and transparency, and supporting worker inclusion and agency.
- Investors can play a role by using their leverage (shareholder resolutions, favourable investment terms) to advance good practices, advocating with governments to use market levers that promote fair food systems, and holding portfolio companies to account for both disclosure and action.
Some key takeaways:
- Why a food transition is needed: The EU, UK and US food systems account for 15% of global food emissions, with large producers carrying particularly heavy supply chain footprints. Despite the food system representing one-third of global GHG emissions, progress on reduction has been insufficient and agricultural emissions have remained broadly flat since 2005. This falls well short of the 43% reduction by 2030 required under the Paris Agreement. The report identifies three key levers for a net-zero food system: (1) more sustainable food production that reduces GHG, biodiversity loss and environmental degradation; (2) reducing food waste and loss at all stages of the food value chain; (3) and shifting demand to lower emission food, especially plant-based food, aligning with the EAT-Lancet Commission’s proposed Planetary Health Diet. Transitioning our food system to meet these objectives can offer significant benefits, including better economic resilience, workforce and livelihood protection, increased food security, improved public health, and regenerated biodiversity and natural resources. To do this will require a large outlay of efforts and investment from the private sector, which will transform our existing food systems and - importantly - have both positive and negative impacts on workers.
- What will be the impact on workers?: The research shows that adopting the Planetary Health Diet over the next 5-15 years is projected to create one to three million new jobs while displacing one to two million others in the EU, UK and US. While this is broadly a net-neutral outcome, there will be significant variation by region and sector. Under this scenario, growth will be concentrated in fruit and vegetable, legume and alternative protein value chains, which could expand by 20 to 45%. This could add up to 3 million new jobs. Conversely, meat, poultry, dairy and grain sectors are expected to contract by 10-20%, losing roughly one to two million jobs due to reduced demand for high-emission foods and lower feed production. The greatest disruption will fall on production and manufacturing workers whose roles are commodity-specific, while wholesale, retail and food service roles will be more insulated due to their flexibility across product types. Under a longer term scenario (over 15 years), adopting the Planetary health Diet could displace around seven to eight million jobs but create an estimated four to six million jobs, reflecting a change in workforce size seven times greater than in the medium term scenario. Most displaced jobs will be in production and manufacturing of meat, dairy and grains, and most opportunities will arise in production and manufacturing of legumes, vegetables and alternative proteins. Beyond employment numbers, what will be the impact on workers of the food transition? Positive impacts could include increased pride and sense of purpose, improvements to occupational health by limiting exposure to spoiled food, and reduced exposure to harmful chemicals and increased job-stability due to sustainable production methods like diversified cropping and soil regeneration. At the same time, the increased climate volatility, technological disruption and changing production models could increase risks to workers by increasing precarious incomes and posing new physical risks to workers. In order to adapt the food system workforce to changes, targeted reselling will be needed and some workers who are not able to find employment in the food sector will require more tailored, place-based support. In addition, improving working conditions, particularly in agriculture, will be critical to avoid emerging safety risks.
- The private sector’s role: The report outlines key recommendations for the private sector, among other actors, including for both companies and investors. Companies are expected to increase the resilience of their business operations and supply chains through fair and accountable transitions. For example, this can entail aligning climate, social and business strategies and investing in workforce transition planning; strengthening supply chain due diligence and transparency; supporting worker inclusion and agency, including by support the rights to unionise and collectively bargain; and improving labour protections across the supply chain, for example by prohibiting recruitment fees, paying fair wages and benefits, investing in climate mitigation and adaptation, and supporting industry-led grievance mechanisms. For their part, investors are expected to manage the long-term social and climate risks in their portfolios, ensuring portfolio value and meeting demands from regulators and other stakeholders. This can include promoting worker-centered transition pathways by using leverage, such as favourable funding terms and shareholder resolutions; advocating for governments to use market levers that promote fair food systems; and requiring corporate disclosures and action on labour, climate and just transition to increase accountability.
