PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 26, 2026British Food Journal1 citationsOpen Access

Heterogeneity in quantity, scope and target connection in food sector firms’ reporting of sustainability indicators – examples from Sweden

View Full Paper
HRHelena RoblingKIKiana IslamianEOEnoch Owusu-Sekyere

Key Points

  • The research aims to investigate the quantity, scope, and target connection of sustainability indicators in food sector firms and how these are influenced by firm characteristics.
  • Constructed a panel data set from 92 firms in Sweden's food and beverage sector from 2017 to 2021.
  • Categorized sustainability indicators into topics and dimensions.
  • Employed random-effects Tobit estimation and censored quantile regression for analysis.
  • Approximately 90% of firms report on emissions, but dimensions like maintaining natural capital are underreported.
  • Net turnover and multinational affiliation correlate positively with sustainability reporting.
  • The share of target-connected sustainability indicators increased from 30% to 50% during the studied period.

Abstract

Purpose Monitoring sustainability in the food system is vital, yet the firms operating between production and consumption in the value chain are often overlooked; they constitute a “missing middle”. We investigate sustainability indicator quantity, scope and target connection among food sector firms and assess how these are influenced by firm characteristics, including size, sector and multinational affiliation. Design/methodology/approach We construct and use a panel data set of quantity, scope and target connection of reported sustainability indicators from 92 firms active in the Swedish food and beverage industry, wholesale and retail sector, from 2017 to 2021. We categorize sustainability indicators into topics and dimensions and employ random-effects Tobit estimation and censored quantile regression to explore heterogeneity among firms. Findings The findings reveal firm heterogeneity in sustainability indicator reporting. While almost 90% report emissions, “maintaining natural capital” and “economic enablers” are underreported sustainability dimensions. Net turnover and multinational affiliation are positively related to sustainability indicator reporting, while belonging to the wholesale sector is negatively related to reporting sustainability indicators for high and low quantiles. The share of target-connected sustainability indicators increases from 30% to 50% over the period. Research limitations/implications Using sustainability reports as a source of data for sustainability efforts implies some limitations since all monitored indicators may not be disclosed in sustainability reports nor does monitoring indicators mean that sustainability objectives are met. We consider the act of monitoring, targeting and reporting on indicators as a key step for achieving such objectives, and the quantity, scope and alignment of indicators with specific targets are highlighted to ensure that the report is informative and effective and the data are trustworthy. Practical implications Our study can be useful for firms themselves, wishing to benchmark against similar firms and plan future monitoring and reporting efforts. For researchers and policymakers, our study can work as a transparent source of information on the contents sustainability reporting, a solid base for future research and policy impact evaluations. Social implications Food system sustainability is a topic of broad social relevance, affecting all levels of society from producers to consumers. This research provide insights into the sustainability efforts of an under-researched segment of the food system, and on how monitoring tools such as indicators can and should be used to speed up the progress toward sustainability. Further, we provide a basis for effective impact evaluation of legislation, which is important to tailor effective policy for a future sustainable food system. Originality/value This is one of the first studies to collect a unique and detailed catalogue covering actual sustainability indicators used by the “missing middle” firms and illustrate their capacity to capture relevant dimensions, topics and targets. We highlight the heterogeneity in sustainability indicator reporting among firms and thereby provide a pre-Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive benchmark which is useful for efficient policy evaluation on the path towards sustainable food systems.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Robling et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69c4cec3fdc3bde44891ab79https://doi.org/10.1108/bfj-08-2025-1011
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A Qualitative Analysis of Social Indicators in Highly Polluting Sectors: The Challenge for Multifaceted Standards in Emerging Economies2025
  2. 2An indicator framework to guide food system sustainability transition – The case of Sweden2024 · 4 citations
  3. 3Sustainable Finance and Measuring International Business Performance: Example of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Reporting in the Food Sector2025
  4. 4Drivers of a more sustainable future food system – Lessons from Sweden2024
  5. 5Innovation-Led Sustainability in the Agri-food Sector: Evidence from the Global Food and Beverage Industry Journal: Business Strategy and the Environment2026 · 2 citations