McKinsey & Company
Up to about 17 percent of retailers’ Scope 3 emission reductions could be
enabled by applying cost saving or neutral levers.
¹Based on baseline emissions, reduction potentials, and costs of levers only for packaged products as received by retail store; does not include losses, consumer,or end-of-life emissions and levers.
²Cost neutral is defined as break-even ($0/Mt CO₂ abated).
³Calculated based on levers that sit within retailers’ tiers 1 and 2 supply network and levers that are “in the money” as well as cost neutral (ie, break-even).
⁴Reduction potential for the theme. Switching from animal protein to plant alternatives is calculated using beef category as proxy, assuming 4% adoption rate of alternative meat by 2030 and assuming an emission reduction potential of ~80–85% in beef.
Cost saving or neutral²
Cost prohibitive
Reduction potential,¹ %
Highlighted levers in Chapter 4
0.2
<0.1
<0.1
0.1
0.6
0.3
<0.1
1.4
2.7
5.0
0.1
4.5
<0.1
<0.1
7.7
9.1
0.1
2.7
0.1
<0.1
1.3
7.4
4.4
3.8
4.6
0.8
1.4
<0.1
55–65%
Total reduction
potential
Switching from
animal proteins to
plant alternatives
(feed or product)⁴
Reducing emissions
in transportation
Reducing waste and
increasing process
efficiency
Increasing circularity
and recycling
Adopting regenerative
practices in plant basedagricultural
inputs
Reducing farming
emissions from
livestock management
Transitioning to
clean and renewable
energy
Reduction theme
Reduction potential
16.7
16.2
8.9
7.5
6.0
1.7
1.3
A
B
Lead and scale,
$0/metric ton
(Mt) in tiers 1
and 2,³ %
Convene value chain, $0/Mt
in tiers 3+, %
1–2%
11–15%
C
Collaborate and catalyze, $0–$50/Mt
in tiers 1–3, %
Advocate and support, >$0/Mt
in tiers 4+ and >$50/Mt across
all tiers, %
D
19–23%
20–24%
Cost saving or neutral²
Cost prohibitive
Cost saving or neutral²
Cost prohibitive