Supply chain resilience starts at the farm

The world’s largest food company just called regenerative farming a core resilience strategy, not a charitable project. A balance sheet decision. Nestlé hit 27.6% regenerative sourcing in 2025 against a 20% target and is now aiming for 50% by 2030. 

The business case behind supply chain resilience

In May the SEAOAK team convened in Gloucester NSW with farmers, investors, local and state government, insurers, and farm advisors to discuss the barriers and opportunities for financing adaptation and resilience projects across farms in the NSW Hunter region.

The central challenge was clear, that meeting the adaptation financing gap will require far greater mobilisation of private capital alongside public funding. And it needs to be at a scale the coming decades will demand. 

Carbon Disclosure Project estimates that the cost of unmitigated supply chain climate risk is nearly three times higher than the investment required to manage it. Mitigating supply chain risk by supporting the farms and landscapes within those supply chains isn’t a sustainability argument, it’s good risk management.

Supply chain emissions are 26 times larger than operational emissions, yet most businesses are still working from industry averages rather than supplier-specific data. Progressive businesses are moving toward actual, verified numbers that tell them where the real risk and opportunity sit.

This isn't theoretical. SEAOAK recently completed a 12-month Farm Sustainability and Traceability pilot that was carried out across the supply chain in 7 countries. We tested whether verified, farm-level sustainability data actually changes how the supply chain behaves. Across participants spanning the full beef supply chain from 7 countries, 93.4% said sustainability credentials influence purchasing decisions significantly, somewhat or occasionally (800+ QR code scans, 100+ surveys completed). The shift from averages to verified, supplier-specific data isn't in the near future, it's already here. 

When businesses have that data, they can be proactive. They can identify the most material issues, substantiate claims, and build resilience into the system rather than reacting to disruption after the fact. 

For suppliers, robust data capture opens doors, leading to greater consumer trust, access to premium markets, and competitive edge in procurement processes where sustainability weighting is becoming common practice. 

SEAOAK's traceability pilot saw that 89.7% of supply chain participants reported greater confidence in a product once it carried verified claims and credentials in easy to access formats such as Digital Passports. Suppliers who can prove their story, not just tell it, are the ones moving up the value chain. 

International frameworks such as Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) and Australia's mandatory climate reporting (AASB S2), are raising the bar from industry averages to supplier-specific, verified data. Generic estimates won't cut it. It pays to engage now, rather than be in catch-up mode later.

Who pays for supply chain resilience and verified data?

One of the persistent tensions in supply chain sustainability is who pays for it? Too often, the burden of implementation, measurement, reporting, and verification falls on the farmers and producers; those least equipped to absorb that cost. That is not a workable model.

As the National Operators for Landscape Enterprise Networks (LENs), the SEAOAK team loves that the LENs model takes the burden off the farmer. The model operates on the premise that organisations who benefit from a healthy supply chain should co-invest in its resilience. Here's how it works in practice:

• Farmers don't pay for measurement, reporting, or verification and the time commitment is typically less than one day per year

• Farmers are paid to implement environmental initiatives on farm, things like transitioning from synthetic to natural fertiliser applied through variable rate spreading, planting native riparian strips along erosion-prone riverbanks, or reducing inputs in ways that lower emissions and improve soil health

• Supply chain partners and large businesses fund the environmental restoration because it directly reduces their own supply chain risk

• Farmers own their data. Funding partners receive an aggregated, anonymised impact report, specific to their investment. A public impact report is also produced

How this works in practice

A large food brand joins LENs and funds dairy farms to transition away from synthetic fertiliser. Emissions reductions on those farms are reported annually. The brand reports on verified, actual reductions in their supply chain (not estimates, not averages).

From our perspective, a win-win outcome is where organisations get the data and verified impact they need to act on their sustainability commitments, while farmers get paid to implement practices that benefit soil, water, biodiversity, and long-term productivity, without carrying the cost alone.

The bottom line

Early action on supply chain risk mitigation and resilience costs three times LESS than inaction. Businesses and farms investing now in robust data, verified sustainability practices, and genuine supply chain relationships are building resilience into their operations. The ones waiting are building liability.

If you'd like to discuss Landscape Enterprise Networks in Australia reach out to carli@seaoakconsulting.com.au. We welcome conversations across all sectors.

Want the evidence behind the numbers in this article? Download the full findings from SEAOAK's Farm Sustainability & Traceability pilot

Download case study