Starbucks operates 37,000+ stores globally, generating $37.2B revenue annually.
Is this your business? Add your evidence →
Starbucks discloses comprehensive emissions data but is failing to reduce them—total emissions up 3% against a 50% reduction target by 2030. Massive supply chain deforestation, 400,000 tonnes of annual packaging waste, and removal of sustainability from executive pay in 2025 expose a widening gap between reporting and action.
Starbucks scores 34/100 (Below expectations) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Fees pay for the review, never the result. Last verified May 2026.
That places Starbucks joint 505th of 847 companies scored, and joint 39th of 46 in Food & Beverage (non-meat).
Where Starbucks sits among food & beverage (non-meat) peers.
Among the 46 major food & beverage (non-meat) brands we've scored, Starbucks is tied =39th of 46, with 1 other.
Its three lowest-scoring questions, and what the evidence didn't show.
At 13.8 million tCO₂e versus 12.88 million tCO₂e baseline, absolute emissions are rising despite 25% intensity improvement.
Nearly 100 million climate-tolerant trees distributed and Conservation International partnerships exist, but efforts are dwarfed by supply chain scale.
Only 2% of beverages sold in reusable cups in FY23.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Evidence that isn't public can count through an evidence review.
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 →Add your evidence, £99
Scored low because little is published? Send us your evidence. A person reviews it and your score reflects what you really do. Done within 5 working days.
Evidence review →Go tender-ready, £495 a year
A yearly rescore, a check of up to 25 key suppliers and a score badge for your website (coming soon).
Get in touch →Strongest on Carbon Footprint — Operations and Carbon Footprint — Supply Chain (7/10, 7/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Nature & Biodiversity Impact (1/10, 3/10).
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Starbucks.
Impossible Foods talks sustainability but delivers minimal proof.
See the breakdown →Natural Balance Foods discloses almost no standalone sustainability data despite managing an international supply chain of agricultural commodities and plastic packaging.
See the breakdown →CanO Water has built its pitch on aluminium's recyclability versus plastic, but lacks any quantified environmental data to back claims.
See the breakdown →The formula and all 14 sources.
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × Scale14 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
12 of 14 sources are independent of the company.
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Starbucks operates 37,000+ stores globally, generating $37.2B revenue annually. The coffee chain sources from 400,000+ farms across 30 countries. While a founding RE100 member with renewable energy procurement, Starbucks faces systemic challenges across absolute emissions, waste generation, and supply chain deforestation inherent to global coffee production at scale.
One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
See what's behind your number →Fees pay for the review, never the result.