A new report by Oxfam International shows the massive impact that the Big 10 food companies are having on people, land and water around the world -- and much of it isn't good. Activist shareholders and others need to keep the pressure on food companies to make big changes, and one change in particular.

In Oxfam's report, Behind The Brands, the poverty-fighting organization says: "For more than 100 years, the world's most powerful food and beverage companies have relied on cheap land and labor to produce inexpensive products and huge profits. But these profits have often come at the cost of the environment and local communities around the world, and have contributed to a food system in crisis."

Small-scale farmers and their workers are likely to be poor and hungry while they are feeding billions worldwide, says the report. Many small-scale farmers are women, and they often are exploited.

Relatively rich consumers in the United States and elsewhere have paid a price for this system as well: The food and beverage industry has been producing the cheapest products possible, often with the lowest nutritional value, and is now being scrutinized for contributing to the explosion in obesity and diabetes linked to the consumption of junk food and sugar-laden drinks, notes Oxfam.

The Big 10, by the way, are Associated British Foods (ABF), Coca-Cola, Danone, General Mills, Kellogg, Mars, Mondelez International (previously Kraft Foods), Nestlé, PepsiCo and Unilever.

The Oxfam report outlines five overriding problems, or "policy gaps":
• Companies are overly secretive about their agricultural supply chains, making claims of "sustainability" and "social responsibility" difficult to verify;
• None of the Big 10 have adequate policies to protect local communities from land and water grabs along their supply chains;
• Companies are not taking sufficient steps to curb massive agricultural greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate changes now affecting farmers;
• Most companies do not provide small-scale farmers with equal access to their supply chains and no company has made a commitment to ensure that small-scale producers are paid a fair price;
• Only a minority of the Big 10 are doing anything at all to address the exploitation of women small-scale farmers and workers in their supply chains.


The one change in particular that shareholders and others should increasingly demand is for the Big 10 to be transparent about their supply chains. If these companies made the names public of their suppliers, claims about "sustainability" and "social responsibility" would be easier to verify. More important, identifying suppliers would make it far harder for them to lie about how they produce food, enslave workers and inflict other abuses.

Companies in other industries have been more willing to provide supply chain transparency, while the food industry has remained secretive. Food and beverage companies say they need to keep the names of suppliers secret to maintain a competitive advantage, according to Oxfam. "Few voluntarily disclose any information about who produces their raw materials, where, and how much," the report says.

Because the food industry releases so little information about its suppliers, Oxfam is rating companies on their policies aimed at building a better food system. Oxfam notes companies have initiated projects to address supply chain challenges. To read this fascinating report, click here.