Nestle Purina PetCare Australia

This company sponsors of the Animal Welfare League Australia, providing food and pet care support for dogs and cats in their care.
Source: AWLA (2016)

Nescafe received the 'Going Backwards for negative trends' award in Environment Victoria's DUMP report 2007. Nescafe Short Black coffee jar. The smoky colour of the glass jar will be rejected for recycling, the lid contains two different plastics and a foam insert, none of which can be recycled, and the tamper-proof seals are made of metallised plastic which can't be recycled
Source: Environment Victoria's DUMP Report 2007 (2007)

This company has been criticised for offensive advertising. In 2010 the Advertising Standards Bureau upheld complaints about two ads by this company on the grounds that they breached advertising codes. The ads were subsequently discontinued or modified.
Source: Advertising Standards Bureau (2011)

Named and shamed in the 2016 CHOICE Shonky Awards for giving Milo a 4.5 star health rating. The 4.5 star rating applies when Milo is drunk with skim milk. When drunk with full cream milk it has a 2.5 star rating, and Milo (which is 46% sugar) on it's own would get a 1.5 star rating.
Source: Choice (2016)

Nestle's pet food division, Purina, has come under fire for using kangaroo meat ' a 'product' of the largest land based wildlife slaughter on the planet. Each year around 4 million kangaroos are killed in Australia''s outback by the commercial industry. A large portion of the kangaroos end up in pet food products. This large scale killing puts pressure on the population and with shooting taking place at night in remote locations it is impossible to effectively monitor this industry or the welfare of the kangaroos involved.
Source: Animals Australia (2011)

Independent testing commissioned by Friends of the Earth found potentially harmful nanoparticles of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and silica (SiO2) in a range of food products including products by this company. The silica and titanium dioxide in all 14 food products tested contained a high proportion of nanoparticles that have not been tested, labelled or approved for consumption in Australia. Furthermore, peer reviewed studies have raised health serious health concerns regarding the use of these nanoparticles in food.
Source: FOE (2015)

Some of this company's products are certified organic by NASAA.
Source: NASAA (2018)

This company is a signatory to the Responsible Children's Marketing Initiative (RCMI), which is managed by the Australian Food & Grocery Council and covers products found in retail outlets. Companies that have signed up to the initiative commit to: only advertising healthier choices to children and encouraging a healthy lifestyle through good diet and physical activity; not paying for or seeking product placement television programs, editorial content or interactive games aimed at children, unless the product is a healthier choice; not advertising and marketing to children in Australian schools unless they are asked to by those schools.
Source: AFGC (2019)

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 is a member of the Australian chapter 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 Australia (2019)

The WWF Soy Scorecard 2016 rates companies on their use of responsible soy, grown without damaging the environment and harming people. This company failed to respond to requests for information.
Source: WWF Soy Scorecard 2016 (2016)

In early 1997, Syed Aamar Raza a Medical Delegate for Nestle in Pakistan, responsible for promoting breastmilk substitutes and infant cereals, resigned from his job. Six months later he issued his former employers a Legal Notice (dated 12/11/1997), attaching nearly 80 pages of evidence of the company's unethical marketing practices. These alleged practises included bribing doctors to recommend Nestle products, being paid commission on his sales, something banned under the code and handing out samples at baby shows.
Source: Baby Milk Action (1997)

Nestle refuse to agree to Baby Milk Action's four point plan. The four point plan was put to Nestle in 2001 as a way to call off the international boycott on Nestle products. Nestle rejected the plan immediately and since 2005 have refuse to debate the issue. See the plan and Nestle's response.
Source: Baby Milk Action (2012)

Specifics on why target Nestle is the continued target of the boycott; and a look at what Nestle does and does not do in the light of what it says it does.
Source: Baby Milk Action (2013)

The Guardian ran a report (2007)'Milking it' by Joanna Moorhead who travelled to Bangladesh to investigate whether Nestle and other baby milk firms were still using aggressive marketing tactics in Bangladesh and found them to be still pushing their product on mothers.
Source: Guardian Weekly (2007)

The South African civil rights initiative, AfriForum, launched an international campaign calling on people to boycott all Nestle products, unless Nestle decided by 7 October 2009 to stop buying milk from Grace Mugabe, wife of the Zimbabwean dictator, Robert Mugabe. From 4 October 2009, Nestle stopped buying any milk from Grace Mugabe.
Source: The Telegraph (2009)

The film Formula For Disaster (2007) highlighted many of the problems. Including how baby food companies undermine breastfeeding, the conditions under which mothers are using formula, company promotions and health workers explaining the pressure they are under to recommend company products.
Source: U-tube (2007)

This International Labor Rights Forum report highlights corporations known for violating workers' freedom of association and right to organise. This company was selected on the basis of their ties to violence against trade unions and suppression of the universal right to organise. [listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: ILRF (2009)

This 2014 report by Friends of the Earth documents a tenfold increase in unregulated, unlabeled "nanofood" products on the American market since 2008. The report named this company among those with products containing unlabeled nano-ingredients. These nanomaterials differ significantly from larger particles of the same chemical composition, and new studies are adding to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating they may be more toxic to humans and the environment.
Source: FOE (2014)

This company has signed a letter of intent (https://bit.ly/2rdBlwn) to participate in the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, which claims will lift 50 million people in Africa out of poverty by 2022. But according to a 2015 report by ActionAid, the scheme will benefit multinational companies at the expense of small-scale farmers and is likely to increase poverty and inequality in Africa. Launched in 2012, the New Alliance provides aid money from rich countries like the US and the UK, and helps big business invest in the African agricultural sector. But in return, African countries are required to change their land, seed and trade rules in favour of big business. The New Alliance will: Make it easier for big corporations to grab land in Africa: Prevent farmers from breeding, saving and exchanging seeds: Heavily promote chemical fertilisers and pesticides, which increase farmers’ risk of debt as well as damaging the environment and farmers' health: Replace family farms with low paid, insecure jobs; and Prevent countries from restricting crop exports, even at times of domestic shortage.
Source: Action Aid (2015)

In Feb 2013 eleven chocolate companies including Nestle and Kraft were fined over 60m euros ($82m) for colluding to raise chocolate prices in Germany, while price fixing investigations continue in the US and Canada.
Source: news article (2013)

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; put a price on carbon; commit to 100% renewable power; responsible corporate engagement in climate policy; report climate change information in mainstream reports as a fiduciary duty; remove commodity-driven deforestation from all supply chains by 2020; develop low carbon action plan.
Source: We Mean Business (2017)

In 2010 Nestle responded to Greenpeace evidence of the Sinar Mas group's destructive practices by cancelling their contracts with the Indonesian palm oil and paper giant. Greenpeace has documented Sinar Mas repeatedly breaking industry guidelines, Indonesian law and its own public statements, razing rainforests to the ground in its race to produce palm oil.
Source: Greenpeace (2010)

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)

When joining the Fair Labor Association (FLA) this company committed to promoting and complying with international labor standards throughout their supply chain. The FLA does not accredit the company itself; rather, they accredit the company's labor compliance program. Being granted accreditation implies that their workplace standards program is substantially in compliance with the FLA Code.
Source: Fair Labor Association (2016)

In 2014 Nestle announced a comprehensive and ambitious animal welfare program, which will cleanse its supply chain of the following practices: confinement of sows in gestation crates, calves in veal crates and egg-laying chickens in cages; the forced rapid growth of chickens used for meat products; and the harsh cutting of the horns, tails and genitals of farm animals without painkillers.
Source: Humane Society of the US (2014)

This company is listed on the RSPCA Australia website as 'cage-free and proud', signifying a commitment to source 100% cage-free eggs by 2025. Essentially cage-free means barn laid, which is better than cage eggs, but still much worse than free-range or organic eggs when it comes to animal welfare.
Source: RSPCA Australia (2020)

In March 2013 Nestle published "a set of forward-looking commitments to society and on environment sustainability it aims to meet by 2020 or earlier." The company has identified 30 goals in the areas of nutrition, water, rural development, sustainability and compliance in its new report, 'Nestle in Society: Creating Shared Value and meeting our commitments 2012'.
Source: company website (2013)

Deloitte developed a Zero Impact Growth Monitor that was used in 2012 to assess and rank 65 different companies' attempts to become more sustainable. Six companies reached the 'Ecosystem' level: Puma, Nike, Nestle, Natura, Unilever and Ricoh. These pioneering companies have not only set measurable and ambitious mid- to long-term targets (beyond 2020), but have also embedded their sub-policies in a holistic strategic vision of their attempt to minimize their negative environmental and societal impacts.
Source: Deloitte (2012)

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 (2019)

This company is a signatory to the US Plastics Pact, a collaborative effort organized by The Recycling Partnership and the World Wildlife Fund, launched as part of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation's global Plastics Pact network to unify diverse public-private stakeholders across the plastics value chain to rethink the way we design, use, and reuse plastics, to create a path forward to realize a circular economy for plastic in the United States. In line with the Ellen McArthur Foundation's vision of a circular economy for plastics, which unites more than 850+ organizations, the US Plastics Pact brings together companies, government entities, NGOs, researchers, and other stakeholders to work collectively toward scalable solutions tailored to the unique needs and challenges within the U.S. landscape, through vital knowledge sharing and coordinated action.
Source: US Plastics Pact (2020)

This company is a member of Bonsucro - Better Sugar Cane Initiative, a global non-profit, multi-stakeholder organisation fostering the sustainability of the sugarcane sector through its leading metric-based certification scheme and its support for continuous improvement for members.
Source: Bonsucro (2019)

This company is a member of How2Recycle. The How2Recycle Label is a voluntary, standardized labeling system that clearly communicates recycling instructions to the public. It involves a coalition of forward thinking brands who want their packaging to be recycled and are empowering consumers through smart packaging labels. Companies must be a member of the program to use the How2Recycle Label.
Source: How2Recycle (2020)

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 Bronze 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)

This company is a member of the Cocoa & Forests Initiative, demonstrating a commitment to no further conversion of any forest land for cocoa production in Ghana and Cote d'Ivoire. On March 2019, thirty-three company signatories, accounting for about 85% of global cocoa usage, released detailed individual action plans. The action plans focus on forest protection and restoration, sustainable cocoa production and farmers' livelihoods, and community engagement and social inclusion.
Source: World Cocoa Foundation (2020)

This company is a member of the World Cocoa Foundation (WCF), an international membership organization representing more than 100 member companies across the cocoa value chain. WCF is committed to creating a sustainable cocoa economy through economic & social development and environmental stewardship in cocoa-growing communities.
Source: World Cocoa Foundation (2019)

Greenpeace launched a campaign in March 2010 asserting that Nestle, maker of Kit Kat, uses palm oil from companies that are trashing Indonesian rainforests, threatening the livelihoods of local people and pushing orang-utans towards extinction. Two months later Nestle announced a commitment to stop using products that come from rainforest destruction.
Source: Greenpeace (2010)

As You Sow's 2020 report, Waste and Opportunity, 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) Packaging Data Transparency, 5) Support for Recycling, and 6) Producer Responsibility. This company received a grade of C+
Source: As You Sow (2020)

The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010 (SB 657) requires companies operating in California to disclose their efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from their direct supply chains. KnowTheChain.org has examined this company's disclosure statement and concluded that it addresses the majority of SB 657 requirements. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.
Source: company website (2013)

According to the Nestle website, Nestle agrees with the World Health Organisation (WHO) and other leading medical and health associations that breast-milk is the best and most natural food for babies. Nestle also supports the WHO/UNICEF's Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding and Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative. [Note, despite these statements, Nestle refuse to agree to Baby Milk Action's four point plan. The four point plan was put to Nestle in 2001 as a way to call off the international boycott on Nestle products.]
Source: Nestle website (2013)

Over the last 60 years farming has become dependent on the intensive use of chemicals. As You Sow's 2019 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 18 to 0, with an average score of 6.1. This company received a score of 7/30.
Source: As You Sow (2019)

In 2021 Green America, Mighty Earth and Be Slavery Free released their Easter Chocolate Shopping Guide, which breaks down company commitments and policies in regards to deforestation, farmer poverty and child labour. It does not assess effectiveness or implementation. This company is rated as "Starting to have good policies to implement".
Source: Be Slavery Free (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)

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 (2014)

This company received a score of 57.1/100 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)

The Corporate Research Project's Corporate Rap Sheets are dossiers summarising the most significant crimes, violations and other questionable activities of the world's largest and most controversial companies. Follow link to see this company's Corporate Rap Sheet. "One of the world's most controversial corporations. For more than two decades the Nestle name was widely associated with a controversy, including a longstanding boycott, over its marketing of infant formula in poor countries. More recently, the company has been one of the primary targets of the global movement against the bottled water industry. The company's hard-line labor relations practices in poor countries have made it a villain in the eyes of the international union movement."
Source: Corporate Research Project (2018)

This company is listed on the Facing Finance website as a company that manufactures weapons or profits from violations of human rights, pollution, corruption, or international law. Follow link for further details.
Source: Facing Finance (2014)