Why Retailers Should Calculate Their Protein Ratio Before Setting a Public Target

Introduction

Retailers are under pressure to reduce Scope 3 emissions, support healthier diets, respond to demand for plant-based options, and show progress on sustainability. In several European markets, this is already turning into concrete targets around the balance between plant-based and animal-based food sales.

Before a retailer announces a target, it needs to answer a simpler question:

Where are we starting from?

This is why calculating a protein ratio should come before any public commitment.

A public target can be useful. It can create momentum, align internal teams, and give external stakeholders a clear signal. But if the target is set before the retailer understands its baseline, it can quickly become a problem. It may be too ambitious, too weak, difficult to track, or disconnected from the commercial reality of the business.

For retailers, the right order is clear: measure first, commit second, act third.

What Is a Protein Ratio?

A protein ratio measures the balance between plant-based and animal-based proteins in a retailer's sales or assortment.

The most useful version is usually based on sales, not only on the number of products listed. In simple terms, the calculation asks: of all the protein sold by the retailer, what share comes from plant-based sources and what share comes from animal-based sources?

A retailer can calculate this in different ways depending on data availability. The strongest approach uses product-level sales volumes, product weight or volume, protein content, and plant, animal, or mixed product categorisation.

This gives a protein-weighted view of what customers are actually buying.

That distinction matters. A retailer may have a large number of plant-based products on shelf, but if they sell in low volumes, the protein ratio may barely move. Another retailer may have fewer plant-based references, but stronger sales in key categories such as legumes, dairy alternatives, meat alternatives, or ready meals.

The protein ratio is therefore not just an assortment metric. It is a way to understand the real balance of sales.

Why Public Targets Should Not Come First

It is tempting to start with a target.

A retailer might announce that it wants to reach 50% plant-based protein sales by 2035, or 60% by 2040. From the outside, this can sound ambitious and credible.

But without a baseline, the target does not mean much.

If a retailer does not know whether it is currently at 15%, 25%, 40%, or 50% plant-based protein sales, it cannot know what level of change the target requires. It also cannot know which categories are driving the current ratio, which levers are available, or how difficult the transition will be.

This creates several risks.

The first risk is over-commitment. A retailer may set a target that looks good publicly but is almost impossible to reach within the proposed timeline.

The second risk is under-commitment. The company may choose a target that sounds ambitious but is actually close to where it already is.

The third risk is internal resistance. Category, buying, and commercial teams are unlikely to support a target if they do not understand what it means for their own categories.

The fourth risk is weak reporting. If the baseline is unclear, future progress will be difficult to prove.

A target without a baseline may create attention. It does not create a strategy.

The Baseline Makes the Target Credible

A protein-ratio baseline gives retailers a starting point. It answers the question: what is our current plant-to-animal protein split?

Once that is known, target-setting becomes more concrete.

A retailer can ask how close its current ratio is to European benchmarks, how far it is from a 50:50 or 60:40 objective, which categories drive the current imbalance, how much annual progress would be required, and which interventions could realistically move the number.

This changes the conversation.

Instead of discussing protein shift as a broad sustainability ambition, teams can discuss it as a measurable business transition.

That matters because supermarkets are complex organisations. ESG teams may own the commitment, but they cannot deliver the shift alone. The ratio will be influenced by assortment, promotions, shelf placement, pricing, supplier negotiations, private-label development, e-commerce journeys, and consumer communication.

A baseline helps connect these teams around the same reality. It also helps leadership understand whether the target is commercially realistic.

What European Retailers Are Already Doing

European retailers are already moving in this direction.

In the Netherlands, the Protein Tracker has become a sector reference. The latest assessment covered 95% of the Dutch retail market, with 13 participating retailers. In 2025, Dutch supermarket protein sales stood at 42.6% plant-based and 57.4% animal-based protein.

That number matters because Dutch supermarkets have committed to reaching 60% plant-based protein sales by 2030. The baseline and annual tracking make it possible to see whether the sector is on track.

The result is useful because it is measurable. It shows progress, and it shows the gap that remains.

In the UK, several retailers report on protein-source food sales through the WWF Basket methodology. This creates another form of structured disclosure, focused on the balance between plant-based and animal-source foods within a broader sustainable diets framework.

These examples show that the protein transition becomes more serious when it is measured. Without measurement, retailers can only communicate intentions. With measurement, they can assess progress.

A Baseline Reduces Reputational Risk

Some retailers may hesitate to calculate their protein ratio because they fear the result will be poor.

This is understandable. Many supermarkets still sell far more animal-based than plant-based protein. A first baseline may reveal a large gap between current sales and future sustainability ambitions.

But this is exactly why the baseline is useful.

A low starting point is not necessarily a reputational problem. It becomes a problem if the retailer has no plan, no transparency, and no evidence of progress.

A credible baseline can be framed clearly: this is where we are today, this is the methodology we used, this is how we will improve, and this is what we will test next.

That is a much stronger position than announcing a target without knowing whether it is achievable.

Retailers also do not need to publish everything immediately. The first calculation can be internal. It can be used to understand the business, test the methodology, identify data gaps, and prepare a more robust strategy.

Public communication can come later, once the retailer is confident in the calculation and the action plan. Measurement does not force immediate publication. It creates the option to communicate credibly when the time is right.

The Protein Ratio Shows Where Action Is Needed

A public target tells a retailer where it wants to go. A baseline shows where action is needed.

This is one of the main advantages of calculating the protein ratio before setting a target. The global ratio is useful, but the category breakdown is often more valuable.

A retailer may discover that most of the imbalance comes from a small number of categories. Fresh meat, dairy, ready meals, frozen products, sandwiches, food-to-go, and prepared dishes may each play a different role.

The right action will depend on the category.

In some cases, the opportunity may be assortment expansion. In others, it may be pricing, promotion, product placement, reformulation, private-label development, or e-commerce recommendations.

For example, a retailer might test whether plant-based products perform better when placed next to animal equivalents. It might review whether promotions are too heavily concentrated on meat. It might analyse whether plant-based options are visible enough online. It might identify categories where hybrid or plant-forward products are more commercially realistic than fully plant-based alternatives.

None of this can be prioritised properly without a baseline.

A protein ratio turns a broad ESG objective into a practical commercial map.

A Baseline Helps Avoid Misleading Progress

Retailers often track plant-based category growth. This is useful, but it is not enough.

A plant-based category can grow while animal-protein sales remain stable or continue growing. In that case, the retailer is selling more plant-based products, but it may not be meaningfully shifting the overall protein balance.

This distinction matters for ESG credibility.

If the objective is to reduce food-related emissions, support healthier diets, and rebalance protein sales, the key question is not only whether plant-based sales are increasing. The key question is whether the overall ratio is changing.

A protein-ratio baseline helps avoid confusing category growth with substitution.

It allows retailers to ask better questions. Are plant-based products replacing animal-based purchases, or are they adding extra volume? Are promotions changing baskets, or only increasing sales for a niche category? Are customers shifting from meat-based ready meals to plant-based ready meals, or are they buying both?

This is where protein-ratio measurement becomes commercially valuable. It does not only track sustainability performance. It helps retailers understand customer behaviour.

The First Calculation Does Not Need to Be Perfect

One common objection is that the data is not ready.

Product information may be incomplete. Nutrition data may be inconsistent. Composite products may be difficult to classify. Fresh products may not have the same data structure as packaged goods. Some products may contain both plant and animal ingredients.

These are real challenges. But they should not prevent retailers from starting.

A first protein-ratio calculation can be built with a clear level of confidence. It can include assumptions, exclusions, and data-quality notes. It can distinguish between products that are easy to classify and products that require further review.

The important thing is not to pretend the first version is perfect. The important thing is to make it transparent and repeatable.

A practical first calculation should show the overall protein ratio, the scope covered, the methodology used, the level of data completeness, the main categories driving the result, and the areas where data quality needs to improve.

This creates a useful baseline. The retailer can then refine the methodology year after year.

This is similar to the way many companies approach Scope 3 emissions. The first inventory is rarely perfect, but it creates a foundation for better reporting and better decisions. Protein-ratio measurement should follow the same logic.

Confidentiality Needs to Be Built In

Retailers may also worry about data sensitivity.

This is legitimate. Product-level sales data is commercially sensitive. No retailer wants to share information that could reveal its category strategy, supplier performance, pricing dynamics, or competitive position.

That is why protein-ratio projects need clear confidentiality rules from the beginning.

Retailers should know who will access the data, what level of detail will be analysed, what will be shared internally, what will be shared externally, whether results will be published individually or collectively, and how competitors' data will be protected.

The first step does not have to be public disclosure. A retailer can start with a confidential internal calculation. It can then decide whether to publish a target, publish the methodology, join a collective initiative, or communicate progress later.

This reduces resistance and makes the process easier to start.

For many retailers, the most realistic path is a confidential baseline first, followed by a public commitment once the business understands the data.

A Target Should Be Built From Business Reality

Once the baseline is calculated, the retailer can set a better target.

A credible target should be ambitious, but it should also be grounded in the business. It should consider the current ratio, category mix, consumer behaviour, data maturity, commercial constraints, and realistic speed of change.

The target should also be clear about scope. This is largely controlled by the methodology adopted by the retailer, although one methodology can still produce several types of target. For example, Lidl Germany follows the WWF methodology but also sets a specific protein-ratio target.

The retailer needs to define exactly what is being measured. Is the target based on protein-source foods only, or the whole food basket? Is it based on sales volume, protein content, revenue, or assortment? Does it include fresh products? Does it include prepared meals? How are mixed products treated? What is the reference year?

These questions may sound technical, but they are essential.

A target without a clear scope can become impossible to interpret. A target with a clear baseline and methodology can become a management tool. It helps teams understand the gap, identify priorities, monitor progress, and adapt over time.

From Baseline to Action Plan

Calculating the protein ratio should lead to a practical action plan.

Once the baseline is known, retailers can move from reporting to experimentation. They can test which levers actually shift the ratio: assortment changes, pricing adjustments, promotional strategy, shelf placement, e-commerce recommendations, private-label innovation, supplier engagement, and consumer communication.

The point is not to change everything at once. The point is to identify the most promising levers, test them, measure the effect, and scale what works.

This is also how retailers can reduce commercial risk.

Instead of committing to a large public target and then trying to work backwards, they can build evidence step by step. They can understand which interventions improve the protein ratio without damaging category performance. They can separate symbolic actions from actions that actually change sales.

That makes the transition more credible for ESG teams and more acceptable for commercial teams.

Recommended Sequence for Retailers

Retailers should avoid starting with a public target. They should start with a baseline.

The most pragmatic sequence is:

1. Define the methodology.

2. Collect the necessary data.

3. Calculate the current protein ratio.

4. Identify the main category drivers.

5. Assess data quality and uncertainty.

6. Define realistic target options.

7. Build an action plan.

8. Decide what to communicate publicly.

This approach is more credible. It is also more useful internally.

It gives ESG teams a defensible number. It gives category teams a practical starting point. It gives leadership a clearer view of the commercial challenge. And it gives the retailer a stronger basis for public communication.

The objective is not to delay ambition. It is to make ambition operational.

Conclusion

Protein-ratio targets can play an important role in the food transition. They can help retailers align with climate and health goals, create accountability, and support a more structured shift toward plant-based and plant-forward food sales.

But targets are only useful if they are grounded in measurement.

A retailer that calculates its protein ratio first will understand where it stands, what drives the current result, which categories matter most, and what level of change is realistic.

A retailer that skips this step risks setting a target that is difficult to explain, difficult to deliver, and difficult to track.

The protein transition does not need more vague commitments. It needs credible baselines, clear methodology, and practical action plans.

For retailers, the message is simple: measure first, commit second, then turn the target into action.

Sources

ProVeg International, Retailers urged to shift to 60% plant / 40% animal protein https://proveg.org/press-release/retailers-urged-to-shift-to-60-plant-40-animal-protein/

ProVeg International, Dutch supermarkets lead Europe, but must collaborate to reach 2030 plant-protein targets https://proveg.org/press-release/dutch-supermarkets-lead-europe-but-must-collaborate-to-reach-2030-plant-protein-targets/

Green Protein Alliance & ProVeg Netherlands, The Protein Tracker methodology update https://theproteintracker.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2025_The-Protein-Tracker-Update-Oct-2025-Green-Protein-Alliance-Proveg.pdf

WWF, WWF launches new methodology to support retailers in achieving 60% of protein food sales from plant-based sources https://www.wwfcee.org/news/wwf-launches-new-methodology-to-support-retailers-in-achieving-60-of-protein-food-sales-from-plant-based-sources

WWF UK, WWF Basket Diets Metric Guide https://www.wwf.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-12/diets-metric-guide.pdf

WRAP, Scope 3 GHG Measurement and Reporting Protocols for Food and Drink https://www.wrap.ngo/resources/guide/scope-3-ghg-measurement-and-reporting-protocols-food-and-drink

Science Based Targets initiative, Forest, Land and Agriculture guidance https://sciencebasedtargets.org/sectors/forest-land-and-agriculture

#