Cranswick sustainability score: 37/100
Better than 64% of Food & Beverage (meat/dairy)
Making progress starts at 46. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Cranswick produces fresh pork, poultry, cooked meats, sausages, bacon, pastry and other prepared foods, mostly for UK supermarkets, and also runs pig and poultry farms. UK retail was 79% of its revenue; by category, convenience foods were 35%, fresh pork 23%, gourmet products 20% and poultry 20%.
More about Cranswick
Cranswick plc was incorporated in 1972 as Cranswick Mill Group P.L.C. It had an average of 13,033 employees and £2,982.5 million revenue in the 52 weeks to 28 March 2026.
Founded 1972Head office Hessle, United KingdomStaff ~13,033 average (52 weeks to 28 March 2026)Revenue ~£2.98B revenue (£2,982.5M, 52 weeks to 28 March 2026)Website ↗
Cranswick's footprint is 3,187,889 tCO2e, but this adds Scope 1 and 2 for 2025/26 to Scope 3 for 2023/24, its latest supply-chain year. Its Scope 1 and 2 rose 4.2% to 108,827 t in 2025/26, and supply-chain emissions outside farming and land use rose 24.4% in 2023/24. Its renewable electricity claim rests on certificates; 30% of its energy was renewable. Its SBTi-validated targets are absolute: Scope 1 and 2 down 68.16% by FY2030 from FY2018, and net zero by FY2050. 93% of its poultry feed soy is verified deforestation-free, but its water use rose 11.7%. In 2022 its subsidiary paid £75,000 plus £15,000 costs under an Environment Agency enforcement undertaking after abattoir liquid reached a chalk-stream tributary.
Cranswick scores 37/100 (Below expectations) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it. Last verified November 2026.
That places Cranswick joint 521st of 1,043 companies scored, and 6th of 15 in Food & Beverage (meat/dairy).
What is Cranswick doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Targets & Commitments (8/10, 8/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Water Impact (0/10, 3/10).
Where Cranswick lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
What would raise this score
- Whether its emissions are fallingShow its emissions are falling.
- Its effect on waterMonitor its water use and take measures to reduce it.
- How clean its energy isShow at least half its energy is renewable, with a transition plan.
Every question that lost points
- Emissions from its own operations8/10No verified figures published with their method and a falling trend.
- Emissions from its supply chain7/10Its Scope 3 emissions aren't fully verified or falling year on year.
- Whether its emissions are falling0/10No evidence its emissions are falling.
- How clean its energy is4/10Less than half its energy shown to be renewable, or no transition plan.
- Its effect on nature4/10Its effect on nature isn't measured or independently verified.
- How it uses materials and handles waste4/10No measurable waste or recycling targets reported publicly.
- Its effect on water3/10No monitoring of water use, or no measures to reduce it.
- Its climate targets8/10No validated long-term net zero target.
- How openly it reports8/10No mission-locked structure, such as B Corp certification.
- Its record on controversies5/10Points deducted for controversies or its business model. The finding is under question 10.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Anyone can send us new evidence, free. How to send it.
How is Cranswick's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is Cranswick's score based on?
13 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
31% of them were published by Cranswick itself; the rest come from independent sources.
9 of 13 sources are independent of the company.
“Total Scope 1 emissions tonnes CO e 102,452 98,025 74,848 +4.5% +36.9%”
“Data for 2024/25 has been subject to a limited assurance audit by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP”
“Cranswick plc commits to no deforestation across its primary deforestation-linked commodities, with a target date of December 31, 2027.”
“Nine planning councillors voted unanimously to refuse the two planning applications, one after the other.”
“But Cranswick, which operates the facility, has been unable to provide evidence to support its application to show it will not pollute neighbouring conservation areas.”
“Cranswick conducts a water risk analysis each year for its direct operations. It has mapped its priority areas, but it will not disclose the information.”
“It has now been issued with an enforcement undertaking of 75,000 to be paid to Norfolk Rivers Trust.”
“Cranswick Country Foods based in Watton agreed to pay £75,000 to the Norfolk Rivers Trust as part of a fine from the Environment Agency.”
“Settlement Type : Enforcement Undertaking”
“the Council has now issued enforcement notices against the farm and have indicated they will refuse permission to the retrospective applications.”
“complaints about odours, ammonia emissions, and health issues have been numerous”
“Other concerns include fears about pollution, carbon emissions and animal welfare.”
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Is this your company? Claim this profile (free)
Use this score in tenders
Send the link, or the one-page score sheet. It links back to this page and every source. Free.
Open the score sheet →Send new evidence, free
Scored low because little is published? Publish what you do and send us the link, free. If it holds up, your score changes, and the change is logged on your page.
How to send evidence →Put your score on your website, free
It shows the current band, sector rank and score, and links to this page, so it changes when the score does.
Track this score
Bidding for a public contract? Check if you need a Carbon Reduction Plan, free →
Want your own page like this?
Free, independent, every source shown. Send it to any buyer who asks about your sustainability.
How does Cranswick compare with other food & beverage (meat/dairy) companies?
Where Cranswick sits among food & beverage (meat/dairy) peers.
Among the 15 major food & beverage (meat/dairy) brands we've scored, Cranswick sits 6th of 15.
Who scores higher in Food & Beverage (meat/dairy)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Cranswick.
First Milk's footprint was 1.29 MtCO2e in its year to March 2026, 98% of it from its members' farms, and the figures are independently assured.
See the breakdown →Danone's emissions fell to 18.6 MtCO2e in 2025, 21% below 2020 on its SBTi boundary against a 34.8% cut targeted for 2030. 94% of its electricity is renewable, mostly through certificates, but fossil fuels are still 56% of its energy.
See the breakdown →Butternut Box's footprint was 265,540 tCO2e in 2025, about 80% of it the ingredients it buys, mostly meat.
See the breakdown →Which companies moved this week, and why.
One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
We'll send one email to confirm. No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
Find your page and claim it, free →Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it.