How far does soil health depend on shareholder democracy?

Companies involved: General Mills, Inc. (shareholders vote here); The Campbell's Company (shareholders vote here); Kellanova (shareholders vote here); Target Corporation (shareholders vote here)

The Food and Agriculture Organization ranks erosion among the ten major soil threats and estimates it can cost up to 50 percent of crop yields, and the UNCCD records soils eroding up to 100 times faster than they are replenished.

What a food company will buy decides what a field is asked to grow, and how often it is turned over. The Food and Agriculture Organization reports that 33% of the Earth's soils are already degraded, that over 90% could be by 2050, and that erosion can cost up to half a crop, while the UNCCD records erosion running up to 100 times faster than soil forms. Ninety-five percent of what people eat comes out of that soil. General Mills, Campbell's, Kellanova and Target do not own the fields, and their sourcing standards, contract terms and prices reach them. Farmers make the decision in the end, and public programs pay for much of the transition, so owners remove an obstacle here that nothing else removes while others must also act.

Companies involved: Kellanova (shareholders vote here); The Campbell's Company (shareholders vote here); Target Corporation (shareholders vote here); General Mills, Inc. (shareholders vote here)

Investors filing at General Mills told shareholders that pesticide use reduces soil health and weakens farm resilience to drought and flood, and the European Union will list relevant pesticides among soil contaminants.

A buyer's specification decides what gets sprayed on the crop it buys. Investors filing at General Mills told shareholders that pesticide use reduces soil health and leaves farms less able to withstand drought and flood, and the European Union's new directive will put relevant pesticides on its list of soil contaminants. Four companies have now faced this question on a ballot: As You Sow asked General Mills twice for the pesticide reduction its regenerative program achieves, asked Kellanova for the risks of pesticide use in its supply chain, and asked Campbell's how it will measure its program. Trillium Asset Management and six co-filers asked Target about pesticides in its own label brands. Farmers and regulators also decide this, which is why it is rated Necessary rather than higher.

Companies involved: General Mills, Inc. (shareholders vote here); The Campbell's Company (shareholders vote here)

The European Union built its first soil law around monitoring because comparable soil data did not exist, and the shareholder proposals filed at four food companies all ask for measurement rather than for a change of practice.

Every one of these ballots asks a company to measure something and say what it found, which is what you ask for when nobody knows. The European Union's first soil law, in force since 16 December 2025, is built around monitoring for exactly that reason, and it leaves target values non-binding. A company that buys from a hundred thousand farms can require soil measurements in its contracts tomorrow, and the four that were asked have not published what their regenerative programs do to pesticide use. Public monitoring will take years to arrive and will not cover a supply chain that crosses borders. Owners remove an obstacle here that nothing else removes, which is why this is rated Necessary.

We found no shareholder proposal on farmland conversion in the filings read for this report.

The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification records that 70 percent of all ice-free land has already been altered by human activity, affecting more than 3.2 billion people.

Planning authorities decide what gets built on a field, and no shareholder vote reaches a zoning board. The UNCCD records that 70 percent of all ice-free land has already been altered, that the impact reaches over 3.2 billion people, and that 90 percent will carry that imprint by 2050. Developers, warehouse operators and data center builders are in the chain, and several are listed, so a vote reaches some of what gets built and none of what gets permitted. Soil under a building is lost for generations, which makes this obstacle severe and largely public. Owners help at the margin here, through what the companies they own choose to build and where, which is why this is rated Helpful.

The documents read for this report do not identify which listed manufacturers are responsible for the PFAS now being listed as soil contaminants, and no shareholder proposal on soil contamination appears in the filings read.

The European Commission puts 60 to 70% of EU soils in an unhealthy state at a cost of over 50 billion euros a year, and the new directive requires an indicative list of soil contaminants including relevant PFAS and pesticides.

The chemistry in the ground was put there by somebody, and the documents read for this report do not say by whom. The European Commission records 60 to 70% of EU soils in an unhealthy state, costing the Union over 50 billion euros a year, and the new directive requires the Commission to draw up an indicative list of soil contaminants including relevant PFAS and pesticides within 18 months, with member states recording potentially contaminated sites within ten years. Much of the legacy contamination belongs to companies that no longer exist, and cleanup runs on public money and public authority. A list naming substances is not a list naming firms, so owners help at the margin here, which is why this is rated Helpful.

We found no document in this corpus showing a listed company or a trade association funded by listed companies leading the opposition to the Soil Monitoring Law.

The European Union's first soil law entered into force in December 2025 without binding obligations on farmers, after lawmakers rejected duties on sustainable soil management and a binding timeline for improvement.

Legislators wrote this obstacle and a farmers' organization argued them into it. The European Union's first law on soil monitoring and resilience entered into force on 16 December 2025, and it imposes no new obligations on farmers or foresters while leaving the target values member states set for soil descriptors non-binding. The European Environmental Bureau reports that lawmakers significantly weakened the law before passage, rejecting duties on sustainable soil management and a binding timeline. The lobby the sources name is Copa-Cogeca, the self-described voice of European farmers and agricultural cooperatives, which has no shares and no listed members. A vote reaches companies, and this obstacle belongs to parliaments and to a lobby a vote cannot touch.