The company has asserted since 2021 that it aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and has promoted its “climate-smart” beef initiative for nearly two years. The lawsuit, filed by the Environmental Working Group, contends that these claims are deceptive, as Tyson Foods lacks concrete plans to fulfill these objectives.
“Greenwashing claims primarily target consumers who are genuinely trying to make responsible choices with their purchases and seek to support more environmentally friendly food options,” stated Carrie Apfel, an attorney with Earthjustice, which is representing the plaintiff.
“When consumers are presented with numerous false or misleading claims, they are unable to make informed decisions about their spending,” she added.
A representative from Tyson Foods declined to comment on the ongoing litigation but emphasized the company’s longstanding commitment to sustainable practices and responsible environmental stewardship. Beef accounts for 36% of the company’s sales and contributes to 65% of its total emissions.
This lawsuit marks the second instance this year in which a major U.S. meat company has been sued for greenwashing. In February, New York Attorney General Letitia James took legal action against JBS, a Brazilian meat giant, on similar allegations, claiming that the company’s commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2040 lacked a viable plan. This followed Earthjustice's successful challenge of JBS’s environmental claims before an advertising industry self-regulation body last year.
There has been a notable increase in greenwashing lawsuits globally, according to Michael Gerrard, the founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School. He pointed out that Europe and Australia are at the forefront of these legal actions, with their advertising integrity boards reporting numerous violations. In the United States, similar cases are emerging, albeit in smaller numbers.
A recent complaint against Tyson Foods was lodged in Washington, D.C., where consumer protection legislation permits interest groups to take legal action against companies for misleading advertising on behalf of consumers. Coca-Cola is also facing a lawsuit under this law, accused of exaggerating its recycling objectives.
In contrast to many competitors in the meat industry, Tyson Foods has established emissions reduction targets that have received validation from the Science-Based Targets initiative, a nonprofit organization that evaluates corporate climate commitments.
However, the SBTi has only assessed Tyson Foods' emissions reduction plans for 2030 and has not approved any net-zero targets proposed by the company.
“Tyson has not presented a comprehensive plan or taken significant actions necessary to achieve the substantial reductions required to reach net-zero or any meaningful decrease in its emissions,” stated Apfel.
The plaintiffs are seeking a court order that would compel Tyson Foods to either retract its climate-related claims or provide a concrete plan to substantiate its assertions.