With sustainability and ESG initiatives shaping the narrative for many food and beverage companies in Asia, progress in this space is moving more quickly than ever before in the region.
That said, a new report released by Asia Research and Engagement (ARE) in February 2026 assessing sustainable sourcing in the food industry has found that this progress is moving forward in a skewed manner, with some areas gaining much more attention than others.
Based on data collected on 100 leading food businesses in the region including retailers, manufacturers, foodservice and hospitality groups, ARE found that the greatest improvements were seen for initiatives concerning Climate Change and Labour issues eg reporting according to established disclosure frameworks — but low when it came to anything requiring demonstrable results.
“Performance remains extremely weak where companies are expected to demonstrate progress in execution,” the authors stated in the Asia Protein Buyers 100 report.
“These include quantified deforestation-free sourcing, robust supply chain worker safety metrics, and measurable progress with suppliers on reducing antibiotic use and strengthening animal welfare via commitments and practical outcomes across protein supply.”
The food businesses were scored across 10 key themes such as Governance, Traceability, Labour, Animal Welfare, Climate Change, Deforestation, and Water usage. Based on their final scores out of 100%, the companies were categorised into six tiers.
Companies that achieved 75% or more would be placed in the top tier, and those scoring above 50% in the second tier — and it is crucial to note that no Asian company has hit either of these benchmarks as of yet.
“The average overall score rose from ~9% in 2024 to ~16% in 2026, and around 86% of comparable companies improved their scores. However, progress is uneven and concentrated among a subset of leaders, while a significant minority of companies still disclose little or nothing across several material topics,” the report stated.
No specific scores were released, but the majority of companies scored between 25% and 50%, placing them in the third tier — familiar names here include Mengniu, Yili, Kewpie, AEON, Meiji, Nissin, CJ Cheiljedang, Lotte, Century Pacific, CP Foods, Thai Beverage and Thai Union.
Big Tier 4 (10% to 25%) names include Isetan, AEON Malaysia, Nestle Malaysia, Sheng Siong, Nestle India, and Hindustan Unilever Ltd; whereas big Tier 5 (5% to 10%) names include Vinh Hoan, Britannia, and FamilyMart.
“Protein diversification [was one of the lowest-performing themes] with an average score of 7.4%, reflecting limited target-setting and lack of disclosure on shifting product mix,” the authors added.
“[Food safety in the form of] antimicrobial resistance (AMR) risk reduction showed an average score of 12.1%, [where] performance was held back by a near absence of disclosure that addresses clear antibiotic stewardship principles and supply chain policy.”
AMR is one of Asia’s biggest challenges due to a lack of governance and rising cost pressures being placed on protein producers in the region.
“Antimicrobial resistance is rising in prominence as a [food] safety risk, with growing recognition that misuse and overuse of antibiotics in livestock and aquaculture is linked to poor animal welfare and can accelerate resistance,” the authors stated.
“The use of antibiotics as growth promoters has been banned or heavily restricted in most Asian markets for years now [as well as their use] for disease treatment, though effective enforcement of these measures remains a work in progress.”
Shifting protein challenges
As for protein diversification, success in this area calls for companies to integrate varied protein sources into their sustainability and business strategies, including plant-based protein targets to stimulate sales — but it is no secret that plant-based protein has had a tough go of it in Asia thus far.
“Almost half of the companies assessed (48 of 100) provide plant protein products [but] very few companies have incorporated them into their business or sustainability strategy,” the authors added.
“Only two companies have actually published targets for sourcing alternative proteins and report on their sourcing volume, indicating that most companies are not yet treating protein diversification as a strategic pillar.”
One of plant-based protein’s major hurdles so far has been cost, with these items still generally priced higher than conventional meat products in most Asian markets.
The report highlighted that solving this challenge would break down a lot of barriers, with the success of IKEA Thailand as an example.
“IKEA Thailand had 50% of their main menu comprised of plant-based items as of May 2025 — these were priced 7.8% lower than meatballs, localised recipes, and palatable in taste, making up the key to success,” the authors said.
“IKEA’s case addresses affordability barriers in Asia while delivering measurable business and climate benefits, contributing to IKEA’s climate commitment of halving value chain emissions by 2030 (vs 2016 baseline) and achieving net-zero by 2050.”
What is changing, and is it happening fast enough?
In short, there is still a long way to go before Asia can comfortably sit within the range of any major sustainability evolutions, but there is a clear and present need for it to move quickly.
“Asia is the world’s fastest-growing protein market, which means what happens here will determine the future of global food systems,” said Kate Blaszak, ARE Director, Protein Transition.
“This [report] shows that disclosure and awareness are improving and aims to trigger a shift from Policy to Practice [and] the next phase must focus on full supply-chain coverage, measurable targets, and annual progress with board-level accountability.”
There does however remain the major challenge of incorporating smallholders into this change across the region, as these producers are exposed to the most risk when changes are made to incorporate sustainability targets.
“For Asia, incorporating a [fair and] just transition lens is especially important because a large share of production and livelihoods sits with smallholders who are exposed to climate shocks and market volatility,” they added.
“[This means that if not done correctly], they may otherwise bear a disproportionate share of transition costs in global supply chains.”
