It is not Migros and Coop who are to blame, but consumers

Migros and Coop do not leave the Swiss people cold. The two retailers are too big and too powerful, and they are too closely interwoven with the country’s history.

The special role is currently evident in the major restructuring of Migros, which is causing a lot of emotion among the population. But it is also reflected in smaller issues. Whether the prices for organic food are allegedly too high or whether farmers are allegedly earning too little, the finger is quickly pointed at the large retailers and they are accused of exploiting their market power.

Large climate footprint

A similar pattern is now emerging when it comes to climate protection. This week, the environmental protection organization Greenpeace calculated in a study that Migros and Coop have a major impact on greenhouse gas emissions in Switzerland, but are also doing too little to achieve climate protection goals.

The study contains an astonishing number. According to Greenpeace, “around 30 percent of Switzerland’s entire greenhouse gas footprint is paid for by the two companies.” How can that be?

The solution to the puzzle: At Migros and Coop, their own operations – i.e. their own factories, stores and transport – only account for 1 to 2 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions. The vast majority of emissions come from outside the company’s boundaries, namely from suppliers or consumers, but Migros and Coop still attribute this to themselves in their climate reports. In technical jargon, this is referred to as “Scope 3”.

At Coop, for example, almost half of these Scope 3 emissions come from animal products, namely meat, fish and eggs (37 percent) and dairy products (10 percent). These foods have a large carbon footprint because the greenhouse gases methane and nitrous oxide are produced on farms. Coop (like Migros) also sells a lot of petrol, diesel and heating oil. This accounts for another 14 percent of Scope 3 emissions.

In other words, the greenhouse gas emissions that Coop and Migros publish in their sustainability reports reflect to a large extent what the Swiss eat or burn when driving and heating.

Delicate net zero targets

The fact that companies are being held responsible for these emissions is something they themselves are partly to blame for. Both Migros and Coop have committed to the goal of net zero by 2050. The crucial point here is that this applies to the entire value chain, from the farm to the plate. Migros and Coop are thus indirectly taking responsibility for what consumers and suppliers do. This has now become common practice in business: thousands of companies around the world have set themselves such net zero goals.

But this approach has absurd consequences. Greenpeace now believes that Migros and Coop should do much more to achieve their climate goals by getting people to buy less meat and dairy products. If you think about it consistently, retailers should be responsible for a third of Swiss climate protection.

Consumers have a duty

But this means that the responsibilities are distributed incorrectly. The real purpose of economic activity is consumption. Greenhouse gas emissions do not arise because companies enjoy producing per se, but because people want to eat, drive cars or heat their homes.

Consumers therefore have a particular responsibility. They have to ask themselves the crucial questions: How big is my carbon footprint? Am I prepared to change something about it, and at what cost? For example, do I want to eat less meat or drive less?

On the other hand, anyone who places everything on the shoulders of companies is making it too easy for themselves. The responsibility for one’s own consumption cannot be delegated to Migros and Coop.