Thaifoods Group PCL

The company aims to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2065 through three phases; however, this target lacks validation by the SBTi. It does not have, nor is it developing, a specific methane emission reduction target for animal farming.

The company aims for net-zero GHG emissions by 2065 through a phased plan that includes solar cell installation, biogas development, LED bulbs, inverter air conditioners, travel management, and transitioning to electric vehicles. It is also pursuing low-carbon product development, emission-reducing technologies, and partnerships with environmentally conscious entities. However, the company has not disclosed targets for decreasing its Scope 3 emissions, despite using contract farming methods for poultry and swine and procuring feed components like corn, soybean meal, and rice bran solvent. All these should be included in its Scope 3 emissions target, but no such information has been provided.

The company does not discuss whether it is working with suppliers to reduce emissions from agriculture.

The company does not engage in innovative projects to reduce or mitigate emissions from feed farming.

The company does not engage in innovative projects to reduce or mitigate emissions from animal farming.

For FY2023, the company reports Scope 1 emissions at 36,651 tCO2e, Scope 2 emissions at 71,102 tCO2e, and Scope 3 emissions at 1,584,169 tCO2e.

The company does not disclose any information on GHG emissions from animal farming. The company does not disclose any information on GHG emissions from feed production. The company does not disclose any information on GHG emissions from land use change.

The company does not disclose information to the CDP Climate Change. However, its GHG inventory data is audited by a third party, LRQA (Thailand) Limited.

The company does not disclose any information on its emission performance. The company does not disclose a quantitative decrease in emissions arising from feed, enteric fermentation, or manure management.

The company does not disclose information on a climate-related scenario analysis.

The company acknowledges potential climate change risks, such as fluctuations in feed ingredient prices, and indicates it could use substitutes like rice bran oil or palm oil for soybean meal if prices rise. The company does not address the risks of animal heat stress, increased veterinary and medical costs, or rising energy expenses. It also does not discuss the potential impact of a carbon tax on electricity or animal protein, nor does it disclose any financially material events due to climate risk during the reporting period.

The company has established clear targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and devised an aligned investment plan. However, it does not report any costs related to climate risk.

The company sources soy for animal feed but does not disclose the percentage of feed ingredients this represents. 100% of soy is not sourced from deforestation-free areas or suppliers. The company has not undertaken a deforestation-related risk assessment to identify high-risk sourcing locations.

The company does not disclose having a deforestation/conversion-free target for soy.

The company does not report progress against its commitment. Nor did it respond to the CDP Forest Questionnaire in 2022.

The company sources soy from the United States, Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay for feed production. It states its commitment to ensuring operations do not negatively affect the environment and ecosystems, pledging to preserve biodiversity. While referencing the traceability of raw animal feed materials, the company does not clarify if biodiversity impacts are considered in supplier selection or how it addresses deforestation risks with soy suppliers. The company has categorised its traceability into two types, supported by an annual testing plan. Forward traceability tracks raw material from its origin through production stages to the customer. Backward traceability traces finished products back through each production step to the original raw material data.

The company does not disclose how compliance is monitored or what actions are taken if non-compliance occurs. Furthermore, the company does not disclose the level of traceability in its soy supply chain.

The company does not discuss innovations or practices to move towards sustainable feed sources.

The company acknowledges the importance of water in its production processes, including chicken and pig parts processing plants, and has established guidelines for effective water management. These guidelines involve collecting water usage data for analysis and updating management practices to align with the annual action plan. However, the company has not disclosed if it conducts risk assessments for its processing facilities or if it operates exclusively in low water stress regions. The company monitors water risks faced by its raw material suppliers, such as drought conditions affecting animal feed production and water management at suppliers' farms. Yet, it has not disclosed any risk assessments for processing facilities in high or medium water stress areas. The company reports a water consumption of 6 million m3 and has implemented strategies to manage potential water shortages. These include initiatives to reduce water use during production by surveying for leaks, inspecting pipelines, providing equipment maintenance, conducting employee training, emphasising recycling and reuse, and promoting water-saving measures among employees.

The company does not disclose a time-bound water reduction target to reduce total water withdrawals at facilities in the reporting year.

The company reports using 6,095,971 m3 of tap water and 503,486 m3 of recycled or reused water. Its water consumption increased from 3.4 million m3 in 2022 to 6.0 million m3 in 2023. However, it does not disclose withdrawals or consumption by water stress level, water-related CAPEX or OPEX, or whether water data is audited by a third party. Additionally, the company has not disclosed information to CDP.

The company does not address water usage in its feed supply chain. It does not discuss comprehensive guidance, support, or incentives offered to suppliers/growers on water usage and has not established a partnership with a third party to input into sourcing/farming strategy.

The company does not disclose feed water intensity or the proportion of feed sourced from water-stressed areas. Furthermore, the company does not provide evidence that it is investing in sustainable feed production from a water-use perspective.

The company does not disclose the proportion of animal protein commodities produced or sourced in water-stressed areas. While it acknowledges the importance of water management in its animal farms, it is unclear if its responsible sourcing policy explicitly addresses water use in animal farming. The company is involved in managing a chicken slaughtering factory alongside the community and government agencies to mitigate potential conflicts during water shortages. However, it provides no detailed guidance, support, or incentives to suppliers or growers regarding water use in animal farming.

The company does not disclose having established partnerships with third parties to input into sourcing/farming strategy, including water use.

The company reports zero incidents of non-compliance with water quality standards in FY2023. It has not identified processing facilities in high and medium water stress areas from a quality perspective. Although the company aims to ensure all water quality meets legal standards, it has not established targets for improving quality based on World Bank-recommended pollutant metrics. While the company intends to increase water reuse and recycling, it does not disclose a specific target for reducing wastewater volumes.

The company does not disclose the quality or volume of wastewater discharge. No evidence was found that wastewater-related data has been audited, and the company did not respond to the CDP Water Questionnaire in 2022.

The company does not disclose having improved the wastewater quality at the aggregate level compared to the previous reporting period or reduced the volume of wastewater discharged.

The company discloses policy and practice guidelines for its suppliers, emphasising the minimisation of environmental impact and the conservation of natural resources, including groundwater quality and soil fertility. However, it does not disclose whether it requires feed suppliers to have a nutrient management plan or if it implements such a plan for its own feed production. While the company states it promotes resource conservation, it does not specify the guidance, support, or incentives provided. Additionally, it has not established partnerships with third parties to influence its sourcing or farming strategy regarding nutrient pollution or fertiliser use.

The company does not invest in sustainable feed production to improve nutrient management or disclose information about pesticide use in its feed supply chain.

The company has implemented a biogas generator system that uses pig manure to produce renewable energy in the form of biogas for electricity generation. To obtain a professional licence for farm operation, the company must analyse water quality at the farm. However, it does not provide further information on the assessment or whether it includes pollution risk.

The company does not make site-specific nutrient management plans part of its supplier’s contractual agreement or its own farms management. Nor does it provide technical or financial support to suppliers or its own farms to develop nutrient management plans and improve manure storage.

The company does not integrate nutrient management into incentive schemes for farmers. It also does not address innovation in manure management. The company plans and manages water resources to mitigate costs and prevent conflicts during shortages. It collaborates with community groups and government agencies, such as the Huai Somong River Group in Prachinburi Province, to manage local water sources. Additionally, it monitors and complies with changing regulations to maintain its reputation and avoid disputes.

The company has a comprehensive antibiotics policy that prohibits the use of antibiotics for growth promotion or as feed additives, restricting their application strictly to therapeutic purposes under veterinary supervision. Despite this, the policy does not differentiate between protein types such as poultry and pork or specify the categories of antibiotics covered, including whether they are medically important. To reduce the need for antibiotics, the company has adopted measures such as biosecurity protocols, vaccination programs to boost immunity, and other welfare initiatives aimed at lowering stress and illness in livestock.

The company does not disclose the quantity of antibiotics used.

The company discusses efforts to promote animal health and reduce stress and illness. However, it does not explicitly support the Five Freedoms or provide a comprehensive statement on animal welfare from a well-being perspective. The company is committed to educating farmers with assistance from veterinarians and animal husbandry specialists, offering training programs to ensure adherence to standards. It is unclear if this commitment applies universally across all operations. The company does not disclose actions taken when a breach of its animal welfare policy is identified and does not show leadership in advancing animal welfare through involvement in research and development programmes.

The company does not state a commitment to engaging and training employees on animal welfare issues.

The company holds several certifications, including the Genesis GAP Certificate and Good Agricultural Practices (VietGAP), for its chicken and swine farms. It also has the Beta-Agonist Free Certificate from relevant Livestock Provincial Offices for pig farms. The Department of Livestock Development has certified its chicken and hatchery operations with Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) certificates. The company does not specify whether the certificates awarded in Thailand apply to all operations or only certain farms. Certifications in Vietnam appear to be jurisdiction-specific, applying to particular operations. Although the broiler chicken operations have the Genesis GAP Certificate, there is no confirmation it covers most operations, suggesting its application might be limited.

The company does not disclose information on animal welfare certifications or assurance programs for its beef operations.

The company does not disclose information on key animal welfare risks in beef.

The company provides a general statement on respecting human rights but does not indicate adherence to internationally recognised human rights conventions.

The company has implemented a Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD) process to identify and assess potential human rights risks, including developing mitigation strategies and monitoring compliance. However, it does not provide detailed information on the scope of this assessment. The company supervises, monitors, and inspects human rights practices and violations, but it does not disclose the scope of its monitoring or how it determines subsequent actions in cases of violations. While the company organises training to mitigate human rights risks in its supply chain, it does not disclose risk mitigation or remediation strategies within its own operations.

The company does not disclose whether it has identified any human rights risks in its operations through human rights due diligence.

The company prohibits discrimination, harassment, child labour, and forced labour, but it does not commit to paying employees a living wage or sick pay. Additionally, it does not disclose whether it conducts audits to ensure compliance with these policies within its direct operations. The company expects its suppliers to prohibit child labour, forced labour, discrimination, and abuse, and to prevent harassment throughout the value chain. Suppliers are also expected to adhere to labour laws regarding wages. However, compliance with labour laws alone might not ensure fair wages for workers.

The company conducts human rights assessments, though the robustness and details of these evaluations are unclear. A whistleblowing system is in place for its direct operations, but it is unspecified whether complaints can be submitted anonymously. The mechanism assures the preservation of complainants’ identities and protection from harassment. This system is also accessible to suppliers, stakeholders, and third parties for reporting potential issues. The company reports zero human rights complaints in 2023, but it does not disclose if other types of grievances were reported.

The company prioritises employee health and safety through regular risk assessments and a dedicated safety committee responsible for evaluating risks and implementing occupational safety training. However, it does not disclose holding a health and safety certification and has not assessed antimicrobial resistance risk for its workforce.

The company reports an increase in lost-time injury cases from 12 in FY2022 to 80 in FY2023, raising the injury rate from 0.0008 to 0.005 per person. It notes there were no work-related fatalities in either year, with the fatality rate remaining zero from 2019 to 2023. Additionally, the company discloses a voluntary turnover rate of 34% but does not break down this rate by seniority.

The company does not disclose a statement on the right to freedom of association or the unionisation rate, nor does it describe measures taken to support these rights. Additionally, it has not clarified whether its supplier code of conduct includes a policy requirement on freedom of association and collective bargaining.

The company does not disclose the distribution of its workforce according to contract type, nor does it state the number of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements or provide a statement supporting its employees' right to bargain collectively.

The company is certified by BRC and GAP, both recognised by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI). However, it does not disclose the number of certified facilities. While the company expects suppliers to meet its quality policy on food safety and credibility, it is unclear if it mandates or expects them to have GFSI certification. Additionally, the company does not disclose the proportion of its suppliers with GFSI certification.

The company's slaughterhouses in Thailand are subject to continuous on-site inspections by government officials. While inspectors from the Department of Livestock Development visit farms annually, officials and Halal representatives are present daily at the slaughterhouses to ensure compliance with sanitary and food safety standards. However, the company does not disclose similar information for other locations where it operates. Additionally, the company does not disclose corrective action rates for non-conformances at its facilities or the development and implementation of consumer-facing technology for food safety.

The company commits to food safety and quality assurance, detailing a system for supervising production processes and ensuring product quality. This includes customer complaint handling, annual traceability testing, and compliance with international standards. However, it does not fully disclose the details of its product recall system, such as roles, responsibilities, disposal procedures, and communication plans. While the company reports no significant product complaints in customer satisfaction surveys, it is unclear if there have been any product recalls.

The company does not disclose information on the number or locations of market bans, nor does it provide details on product recalls for the reporting year. Furthermore, media screenings revealed no instances of product recalls or market bans.

The company discloses that its Sustainable Development Committee, comprising four Board Members, reviews corporate governance policies, strategies, and goals concerning environmental, social, and governance practices, as well as sustainable development guidelines. The company has engaged with stakeholders to identify and prioritise material topics affecting its business, including turnover, climate management, business innovation, animal welfare, fair labour practices, and human rights. In 2023, this review was undertaken by the Corporate Governance and Sustainability Development Committee of the Board. However, the company does not disclose board-level expertise in sustainability or food safety, nor does it report having a board member with expertise in product development and innovation.

The company does not disclose executive monetary remuneration linked to climate or sustainability performance. Nor has it disclosed engaging with civil or trade associations on ESG issues, providing a comprehensive list of trade association memberships, or aligning any policy engagement activities with the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

The company's sustainable innovation strategy involves investing in renewable technologies and green businesses through Thaifoods Renewable Company Limited, as well as forming joint ventures in the clean energy sector. However, it does not disclose whether it benchmarks its sustainability and innovation efforts against peers.

The company does not explicitly acknowledge that protein diversification is a material business issue. Furthermore, it has not yet set a time-bound target to diversify protein sources, nor does it report revenue or sales linked to alternative protein sources.

The company promotes research into alternative protein sources, such as plant-based proteins and "clean meat", signing a memorandum of understanding with Thailand’s Institute of Scientific and Technological Research in 2020. However, there have been no further updates, and it is unclear whether the company plans to launch alternative protein products. Additionally, the company has not disclosed any investments for future growth in the current reporting period.