Danone Murray Goulburn
OVERALL |
|
Owned |
CAN/FRA |
Rating |
 |
Dairy joint venture
Murray Goulburn Co-operative and Danone announced their Australian yoghurt joint-venture in March 2010. Manufacturing is at Kiewa (VIC).
Company Ownership
| Danone Murray Goulburn | CAN | website | ||||
Saputo Dairy Australia Pty Ltd 
owns 50% of Danone Murray Goulburn |
AUS | website | ||||
Dairy product manufacturing Saputo Dairy Australia was formed in 2018 when Canadian dairy giant Saputo bought Murray Goulburn Co-operative for $1.3 billion. Murray Goulburn Co-operative was previously owned by Australian dairy farmers and formed by farmers in the state of Victoria, Australia in 1950. Saputo also bought Warrnambool Cheese and Butter Factory Company in 2014 and has begun to integrate the two companies under Saputo Dairy Australia. | ||||||
| Saputo Inc
owns 100% of Saputo Dairy Australia Pty Ltd |
CAN | website | ||||
Dairy processor Largest dairy processor in Canada, and the twelfth largest in the world. Majority owned by the founding Saputo family. Founded in Canada in 1954, the company has expanded by mergers and acquisitions, particularly the USA, UK, Germany and Argentina. Acquired Australian dairy companies Warrnambool Cheese & Butter in 2014 and Murray Goulburn in 2018, and has begun to integrate the two companies under the name Saputo Dairy Australia. | ||||||
| Danone SA
owns 50% of Danone Murray Goulburn |
FRA | website | ||||
Food and beverages, especially dairy, water and baby formula One of the largest food producers in the world: fresh dairy products (#1 worldwide), waters (#2 on the packaged water market), baby nutrition (#2 worldwide) and medical nutrition. Bought baby nutrition company Royal Numico in 2007 for US$16.8bn. | ||||||
Company Assessment
| PRAISE | CRITICISM | INFORMATION | ||
| Danone Murray Goulburn | ||||
|
Danone Murray Goulburn is a joint venture between Saputo Dairy Australia and French food giant, Danone, both of which have criticisms in the Shop Ethical database.
Source: company website (2020) |
||||
| Saputo Dairy Australia Pty Ltd | ||||
|
This company received a packaging performance level of 4 (Leading) in its 2022 APCO Annual Report. Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) is a not-for-profit organisation leading the development of a circular economy for packaging in Australia. Each year, APCO Members are required to submit an APCO Annual Report and Action Plan, which includes an overall performance level from 1 (Getting Started) to 5 (Beyond Best Practice).
Source: APCO (2022) |
Greenpeace's Reenergise campaign ranks Australia's biggest electricity using companies on their commitments and actions regarding renewable energy use. This company has signed a power purchase agreement (PPA) to buy power from a wind or solar project; but they have not committed to powering their operations by 100% renewable electricity by 2030; and they have not invested in on-site solar.
Source: Greenpeace (2021)
This company has been criticised for offensive advertising. In 2013/14 the Advertising Standards Bureau upheld complaints about five ads by this company on the grounds that they breached advertising codes. The ads were subsequently discontinued or modified.
Source: Advertising Standards Bureau (2014)
In April 2016 Murray Goulburn reduced its farm-gate price for raw milk from an average of $5.60 to $4.75-$5. This was criticised as below the cost of production.
Source: news article (2016)
Former Murray Goulburn boss Gary Helou pocketed $10 million as farmers struggle to break even after reduced farm-gate prices for milk. Now Mr Helou, who owns a $3.2 million luxury NSW home, has been named in a shareholder class action lodged in the Supreme Court which claims Murray Goulburn knowingly made misleading statements about forecast profits and production.
Source: news article (2016)
This company and its eleven directors has been named in a shareholder class action lodged in the Supreme Court in May 2016 which claims Murray Goulburn knowingly made misleading statements about forecast profits and production as it embarked on its $500 million pre float raising.
Source: news article (2016)
In 2017 the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) fined Murray Goulburn $650,000 over an alleged breach of its disclosure obligations in the lead-up to a dramatic price cut paid to its farm suppliers in April 2016. Company ownership has since changed.
Source: news article (2017)
This company is a signatory to the Manufacturers and Importers Agreement 1992 (MAIF), a voluntary self-regulatory code of conduct between the manufacturers and importers of infant formula in Australia. The MAIF Agreement aims to contribute to the provision of safe and adequate nutrition for infants, by the protection and promotion of breastfeeding and by ensuring the proper use of breast milk substitutes, when they are necessary, on the basis of adequate information through appropriate marketing and distribution.
Source: Australian Govt Dept of Health (2019)
This company has corporate citizenship claims on its website, under the headings responsible sourcing, environment, community, food safety and business ethics.
Source: company website (2020) |
|||
| Saputo Inc | ||||
|
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change risk. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Climate Change Score of B.
Source: CDP (2021) |
This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for their use of palm oil, signifying they are using no or minimal certified palm products, and with no or minimal positive commitments.
Source: Ethical Consumer (2022)
The livestock sector is the single largest contributor to man-made methane emissions. Even though rapid reductions of methane emissions are needed to slow the rate of global warming, the largest meat and dairy corporations are oblivious to the problem. Changing Markets' 2021 report 'Blindspot' investigated the policies and actions of 20 meat and dairy giants to reduce their methane emissions. This company scored 8/100 for their methane policy and actions.
Source: Changing Markets (2021)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 27/100 in the Food Products category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 18 Nov 2022). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
Source: S&P Global (2022)
The 2021 Food and Agriculture Benchmark assessed 350 keystone companies across the entirety of the food system, from farm to fork. It covers three dimensions where transformation is needed: nutrition, environment and social inclusion. This company ranked #172/350, with a total score of 18.2/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2021) |
This company was fined C$187,500 after a worker was killed by a cheese cutting machine. The Ontario Court of Justice levied the fine on May 1, 2018 after the company pleaded guilty to failing to ensure a pinch point was guarded resulting in the worker's death in December 2016.
Source: Bloomberg (2018)
This company has products rated RED in Greenpeace Canada's "How to Avoid Genetically Engineered Foods" Shoppers Guide. Products on the RED list are likely to contain GE or GE-derived ingredients from the most widely grown GE crops, usually corn, soy, canola or cotton. Companies on this list have confirmed that their products may or are likely to be made with GE ingredients, or have not denied using GE foods when given the opportunity to do so.
Source: Greenpeace Canada (2013)
This company has corporate citizenship claims on its website, under the headings responsible sourcing, environment, community, food safety and business ethics.
Source: company website (2020)
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to manage and govern freshwater resources. Responding companies are scored on six key metrics: transparency; governance & strategy; measuring & monitoring; risk assessment; targets & goals; and value chain engagement. This company received a CDP Water Security Score of C.
Source: CDP (2021)
The 2021 Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) report ranks global food companies on how they are managing and reporting their farm animal welfare policies and practices. This company appeared in tier 4, "Making progress on implementation", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.
Source: BBFAW (2021)
A 2015 Mercy For Animals Canada investigation revealed animal abuse at Chilliwack Cattle Company - a major Saputo dairy supplier. Saputo responded by releasing a new animal welfare policy and saying it will refuse to buy milk from farmers that don't treat their animals humanely. The policy also commits to eliminating the practice of cutting or docking the cow's tail, administering pain control when dehorning cattle and reducing stress on cows through low-energy animal handling methods.
Source: news article (2015) |
||
| Danone SA | ||||
|
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts towards removing commodity-driven deforestation and forest degradation from its direct operations and supply chains. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Forests Score of A.
Source: CDP (2021)
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change risk. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Climate Change Score of A.
Source: CDP (2021)
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to manage and govern freshwater resources. Responding companies are scored on six key metrics: transparency; governance & strategy; measuring & monitoring; risk assessment; targets & goals; and value chain engagement. This company received a CDP Water Security Score of A.
Source: CDP (2021)
The Global Access to Nutrition Index assesses how the world's 25 largest global food and beverage manufacturers contribute to addressing malnutrition in all its forms: overweight and obesity, undernutrition, and micronutrient deficiency. All have been assessed on their commitments, practices, and disclosure with regards to governance and management; the production and distribution of healthy, affordable, accessible products; and how they influence consumer choices and behavior. Of the 25 companies ranked, this company came 4th.
Source: Access to Nutrition Foundation (2021)
The 2021 Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) report ranks global food companies on how they are managing and reporting their farm animal welfare policies and practices. This company appeared in tier 2, "Integral to business strategy", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.
Source: BBFAW (2021)
The 2021 Food and Agriculture Benchmark assessed 350 keystone companies across the entirety of the food system, from farm to fork. It covers three dimensions where transformation is needed: nutrition, environment and social inclusion. This company ranked #3/350, with a total score of 63.6/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2021)
The WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard 2021 assesses 227 companies on the actions companies have taken to ensure their own palm oil supply chain is sustainable and free of deforestation, natural ecosystem conversion, and human rights abuse. This company is rated 'well on the path' with a score of 19.17 out of a possible total of 24.
Source: WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard (2021)
InfluenceMap's 2021 A-List of Climate Policy Engagement identifies 15 corporate leaders advocating for ambitious climate policy across a range of sectors and regions. To qualify, a company must exhibit sufficient support for ambitious climate policy, strategic levels of engagement with climate policy, and leadership in its sector. Links to industry associations egregiously opposing climate policy can disqualify a company from the list. The report also offers 21 'Potential Leaders', including his company, which appear to be on the right track.
Source: Influence Map (2021)
Eight Danone entites, approximately 30% of their global business is now covered by B Corp certification. Certified B Corporations use the power of business to solve social and environmental problems. B Corps meet comprehensive and transparent social and environmental performance standards; meet higher legal accountability standards; and build business constituency for good business.
Source: news article (2018) |
In 2021 Break Free From Plastic engaged 11,184 volunteers in 45 countries to conduct 440 brand audits. These volunteers collected 330,493 pieces of plastic waste, 58% of which was marked with a clear consumer brand. This company ranked as one of the world's top 10 plastic polluters.
Source: #breakfreefromplastic (2021)
The Talking Trash 2020 report by Changing Markets investigates the corporate playbook of false solutions to the plastic crisis. It found that the industry is actively delaying and derailing ambitious action on plastic pollution in its fight to maintain business as usual for as long as possible. For example, this company is signed up to 5 nice-sounding voluntary initiatives to address plastic waste, while also participating in 10 industry associations which lobby against legislation that could restrict plastic, or make corporations responsible for managing the waste they create, financially or otherwise.
Source: Changing Markets (2020)
Danone has faced criticism that packaging water from the French Alps and transporting it around the world in plastic bottles causes unnecessary environmental damage.
Source: news article (2017)
This company received a score of 35.4/100 (retrieved 10-Oct-2020) in the Corporate Information Transparency Index (CITI), a system for evaluating supply chain practices in China, particularly in regards to environmental management and water pollution. Scores are calculated using government compliance data, online monitoring data, and third-party environmental audits, as well as trends in the environmental performance of factories in the company's supply chains.
Source: IPE (2020)
A 2022 BBC News, Mongabay and the Gecko Project released a joint investigation that looked into a scheme that was intended to help lift millions of Indonesians out of poverty and cut them in on the spoils of the global palm oil boom, but has instead been plagued by allegations of exploitation and illegality. They identified 13 companies, including this one, that have sourced palm oil from producers alleged to have withheld plasma (a portion of large-scale plantations to be shared with local communities), or the profits from plasma, from Indonesian communities over the past eight years. The losses suffered across Indonesia by communities owed plasma could stretch into the hundreds of millions of dollars each year. Protests by local tribes over plasma are violently suppressed by Indonesian authorities.
Source: Mongabay (2022) |
In 2015 Cruelty Free International exposed cruel animal tests carried out by Danone, Nestle and Yakult, presumably so that the companies could market health claims about their products. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: Cruelty Free International (2015)
In 2013 China fined six companies, including this one, a total of $110 million following an investigation into price fixing and anti-competitive practices by foreign baby formula makers.
Source: news article (2013)
In 2008, Danone set a goal of a 30 per cent global carbon footprint reduction by 2012 across the entire supply chain, including plants and factories, packaging and end-of-cycle disposal, transportation and storage. To meet this challenge, Danone and SAP teamed up and devised a system to analyze and measure carbon footprint across 35,000 products.
Source: SAP (2012)
As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: adopt a science-based emissions reduction target; responsible corporate engagement in climate policy; commit to 100% renewable power.
Source: We Mean Business (2021)
This company has products that are certified by the Carbon Trust, signifying that the carbon footprint of selected products has been measured, managed and reduced. A life cycle product carbon footprint is determined by calculating the total greenhouse gas emissions generated by a product, from extraction of raw-materials, to end-of-life.
Source: Carbon Trust (2021)
In 2022 after more than 170 nations backed a historic UN resolution to end plastic pollution, global businesses across the plastics value chain, financial institutions, and NGOs came together to announce a common vision for an effective and ambitious Global Treaty to End Plastic Pollution. The vision will form the basis for future policy engagements with governments through a newly launched Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty which will be convened by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and WWF. This company has endorsed the vision statement of the treaty.
Source: Global Plastics Treaty (2022)
This company appears on the 2021 Bloomberg Gender-Equality Index, signifying a commitment to supporting gender equality through policy development, representation, and transparency.
Source: Bloomberg (2021)
This company is a signatory to the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment, whose goal is to eliminate plastic pollution at its source.
Source: New Plastics Economy (2022)
This company is a global partner of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, whose stated mission is to accelerate the transition to a circular economy. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation works with business, government and academia to build a framework for an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design.
Source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019)
This company is one of a group of eight multinationals working together under the Brazilian Business and Ecosystem Services Partnership (PESE) which provides a platform for Brazilian companies to proactively develop strategies to manage business risks and opportunities arising from their companies' dependence and impact on ecosystems. By making the connection between healthy ecosystems and the bottom line, PESE not only fosters more sustainable business practices, but also opens the door to new, profitable business opportunities.
Source: PESE (2017)
This company is a member of the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform, the main food industry initiative supporting the development of sustainable agriculture worldwide. Created by Nestle, Unilever and Danone in 2002, the SAI Platform is a non-profit organization to facilitate sharing, at precompetitive level, of knowledge and initiatives to support the development and implementation of sustainable agriculture practices involving the different stakeholders of the food chain.
Source: SAI Platform (2019)
This company is a member of the Supplier Ethical Data Exchange (Sedex), a not-for-profit, membership organisation that leads work with buyers and suppliers to deliver improvements in responsible and ethical business practices in global supply chains. Tens of thousands of companies use Sedex to manage their performance around labour rights, health & safety, the environment and business ethics.
Source: Sedex (2018)
This company is a Gold Member of the Sustainable Brands Network, the leading peer to peer, learning and networking group designed to support brands in meeting their sustainability goals and ultimately become those leaders of the next sustainable economy.
Source: Sustainable Brands (2018)
The Sustainable Food Lab is a network of business, public sector, and civil society leaders from around the globe who are working together to accelerate sustainability in mainstream food and agriculture.
Source: Sustainable Food Lab (2016)
The United Nations Global Compact asks companies to embrace, support and enact, within their sphere of influence, a set of 10 values in the areas of human rights, labour standards, the environment, and anti-corruption. However it's non-binding nature has been widely criticised, and many signatory corporations continue to violate the Compact's values.
Source: UN Global Compact (2020)
Forest 500 identifies the 350 companies and 150 financial institutions with the greatest exposure to tropical deforestation risk, and annually assesses them on the strength and implementation of their deforestation and human rights commitments. This company received a score of 55%.
Source: Forest 500 (2021)
This company received a score of 8 out of a possible total of 24 in the WWF Soy Scorecard 2016, which rates companies on their use of responsible soy, grown without damaging the environment and harming people.
Source: WWF Soy Scorecard 2016 (2016)
As You Sow's 2021 Corporate Plastic Pollution Scorecard ranks companies on plastic packaging pollution. The study measures the progress of 50 large companies in the beverage, quick-service restaurant, consumer packaged goods, and retail sectors on six core pillars where swift action is needed to reduce plastic pollution: 1) Packaging Design, 2) Reusable Packaging, 3) Recycled Content, 4) Public Data Transparency, 5) Support for Recycling, and 6) Producer Responsibility. This company received a grade of C
Source: As You Sow (2021)
The livestock sector is the single largest contributor to man-made methane emissions. Even though rapid reductions of methane emissions are needed to slow the rate of global warming, the largest meat and dairy corporations are oblivious to the problem. Changing Markets' 2021 report 'Blindspot' investigated the policies and actions of 20 meat and dairy giants to reduce their methane emissions. This company scored 30.2/100 for their methane policy and actions.
Source: Changing Markets (2021)
The 2022 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark assessed 127 companies in the food and agriculture, ICT and automotive manufacturing sectors on their human rights performance. This company received a score of 27.7%. The overall average score was a disappointing 17.3% and the highest score was 50.3%.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2022)
Over the last 60 years farming has become dependent on the intensive use of chemicals. As You Sow's 2021 report, Pesticides in the Pantry, examines the growing risks posed by the use of synthetic pesticides in agricultural supply chains to food manufacturers, and scores companies on their efforts to reduce pesticide use in their supply chains. Scores ranged from 16 to 0, with an average score of 7.5. This company received a score of 11/27.
Source: As You Sow (2021)
In 2020/21 KnowTheChain benchmarked over 180 large global companies in the ICT, Food & Beverage, and Apparel & Footwear sectors on their efforts to address forced labour and human trafficking in their supply chains. This company received a score of 41/100.
Source: KnowTheChain (2021)
Friends of the Earth's 2014 report "Tiny Ingredients, Big Risks" names this company as one of over 200 transnational food companies engaged in nanotechnology research and development, and on their way to commercializing products. New studies are adding to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating nanomaterials may be toxic to humans and the environment.
Source: FOE (2014)
The Islamic Human Rights Commission supports the political boycott called against this company due to its involvement with Israel. [This assessment has not been used in calculation of ratings].
Source: The Islamic Human Rights Commission (2012)
OpenSecrets.org tracks the influence of money on U.S. politics, and how that money affects policy and citizens' lives. Follow link to see this company's record of political donations, lobbying, outside spending and more.
Source: Open Secrets (2020)
This company received a score of 53.4/100 in the Newsweek Green Ranking 2017, which ranks the world's largest publicly traded companies on eight indicators covering energy, greenhouse gases, water, waste, fines and penalties, linking executive pay to sustainability targets, board-level committee oversight of environmental issues and third-party audits. Ranking methodology by Corporate Knights and HIP Investor.
Source: Newsweek (2017)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 45/100 in the Food Products category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 23 Sep 2022). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
Source: S&P Global (2022) |
||
Company Details
| Type | Joint venture |
Contact Details
| Address | 369 Royal Parade, Parkville, VIC, 3052, CAN/FRA |
| Freecall | 1800 097 117 |
| Website | www.activia.com.au |