Tyson Foods has agreed to stop using the term 'climate smart' for its beef products following a lawsuit by environmental group EWG. The settlement requires independent verification for any future net-zero emissions claims. Advocates hail the move as a win against greenwashing in industrial agriculture.
In a settlement reached after a 2024 lawsuit, Tyson Foods, which produces 20 percent of U.S. beef, chicken, and pork, has committed to dropping claims of a plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 unless verified by an independent expert. The company also agreed not to market or sell beef products as 'climate smart' or 'climate friendly' in the United States for the next five years.
The Environmental Working Group (EWG), represented by nonprofit Earthjustice, filed the complaint in D.C. Superior Court, alleging Tyson's claims were false and misleading. EWG argued that Tyson had never defined 'climate-smart beef' despite using it in marketing materials. Under the agreement, Tyson and EWG will select a third-party expert to verify future claims.
'We landed in a place that feels satisfying in terms of what we were able to get from the settlement,' said Carrie Apfel, deputy managing attorney of Earthjustice’s Sustainable Food and Farming program and lead attorney on the case. She added, 'We think that this provides the consumer protections we were seeking from the lawsuit.' Apfel further noted that 'climate smart' is an oxymoron for industrial beef production, as beef remains the highest-emitting major food type even with reductions.
Leila Yow, climate program associate at the Institute for Agricultural and Trade Policy, called the settlement 'a critical win for the fight against climate greenwashing by industrial agriculture.'
A Tyson spokesperson stated the company 'has a long-held core value to serve as stewards of the land, animals, and resources entrusted to our care' and seeks to reduce emissions across the supply chain. The settlement avoids litigation costs without admitting wrongdoing.
This follows a similar case against JBS Foods, where New York Attorney General Letitia James secured a $1.1 million settlement in 2024, requiring JBS to frame its 2040 net-zero goal as aspirational rather than a firm plan. Experts like Yow highlight challenges in holding meat companies accountable due to voluntary and inconsistent emissions reporting, with Tyson and JBS ranking lowest in sustainability commitments among major firms.