At the UN Climate Summit 2025, Mercy For Animals, a Founding Member of the World Federation for Animals, unveiled an ambitious new tool: a scorecard assessing how national climate plans, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), address food systems.
This matters for animal welfare because food systems are not only major drivers of greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and deforestation, but also of immense animal suffering.
To explore the significance of this new initiative, we spoke with Sebastian Osborn from Mercy For Animals about the launch of the Food Systems NDC Scorecard – a timely step toward more inclusive, effective, and animal-conscious climate policy.
Q1. Could you briefly explain what makes the Food Systems NDC Scorecard a groundbreaking or distinctive tool?
The Food Systems NDC Scorecard is groundbreaking in providing a critical evaluation, based on a transparent, structured framework, of how well countries incorporate food systems into their NDCs. Food systems account for about one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions and are deeply affected by climate change impacts. Yet many national climate plans address only limited parts of the food system, do not address important issues within the food system, or create risks—for example, to animal welfare or biodiversity. Our motivation was to create a practical instrument that guides countries to comprehensively include food system strategies—from production through waste—to accelerate climate action aligned with sustainable development, and that highlights best examples.
Q2. Why does this new policy tool matter for animal welfare and protection?
Good climate action on food systems can improve animal welfare in several ways, from reducing demand for animal production to considering animal health and welfare directly—for example, by considering the mitigation and adaptation benefits of improved animal health and welfare, the need to protect animals from the impacts of climate change, and the importance of ensuring that policies do not have unintended negative consequences for animals.
Q3. How do you envision governments using the Scorecard in practice?
Governments can use the scorecard as a guide and benchmark to evaluate and strengthen their NDCs, identifying gaps and best practices for food system integration. Broad collaboration among stakeholders—government agencies, civil society, scientific bodies—and transparent reporting mechanisms will promote real uptake. Incorporating the scorecard’s findings into national policy dialogues and supporting implementation funding will be key to moving beyond plans to concrete actions.
Q4. Do you plan to expand or update the Scorecard over time?
In the next month or two, we plan to complete assessments for Belize, the Marshall Islands, Singapore, and Somalia. We also plan to discuss the scorecard with stakeholders at COP30. Longer term, we will consider additional assessments or other activities, such as updates to the framework or outreach activities, depending on resources and capacity.
Q5. From the first set of country evaluations, are there particular examples that illustrate progress or gaps?
Our initial evaluations highlight that several countries, even those with high animal agriculture emissions, include concrete measures to reduce demand for animal-based products or improve livestock systems. Switzerland emerged as a leading example by integrating climate and diet policies, recognizing the importance of plant-based consumption. Brazil notably has opportunities to strengthen its NDC by removing policies promoting intensive livestock production, a change that would benefit both climate goals and animal welfare.
