Read the attached article from Financial Times looking at the question of impact reporting for supply chains for ice cream, then address the following questions:

• How far back along the supply chain should firms account for their environmental and social impacts? Theoretically, everything impacts everything else in some way or another.
• Where do (should) companies draw the line, so to speak, between things they are responsible for and things beyond their control?
• What are the benefits and drawbacks of disclosing environmental and social impacts? Think about corporate reputation/image, financing, and legal issues in your response.

\fIce-cream suffered the biggest drop in volumes of any part of Unilever's t'ood division. But Mr Engel says it is \"very important just at this moment in time to reafrm our commitment [to sustainability \". \"Covid has many people wohhling about 'do we have the bande1?',\" he adds. Whose emissions? The challenge for Unilever's ice-cream brands is to cut emissions in the \"cold chain\" from manufacture to the consumer without compromising the taste or quality on which their reputation depends. It is one of many such puzzles facing multinational foodinalters as they seek to reduce their environmental impact. Food accounts for 30 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Food Climate Research Network. Ice-cream freezers are one part of its environmental footprint that Unilever can directly control. The same is not true of most emissions ath'ibutable to food manufacturers, 1which occur further back in the supply chain. \fAmong food companies not including Unilemr, as its household and personal goods divisions are a larger part of its business Danone and Nestle top the table for preparedness for the low- earbon transition, with Mondelez and Kraft Heinz at the bottom. Down on the farm In part, the scores depend on the nature of the products each company makes. Nestle and Kraft Heinz are both weighed down by a focus on meat and dairy products, CDP says. Yet a close engagement with suppliers can help to compensate. Danone, founded as a yoghurt maker and still heavily invested in dairy, \"is really excellent when you look at their scope 3 emissions . . . Danone actually works with all their farmers and milk and dairy groups to track back exactly where their products come from,\" says CDP's Ms Ferguson. Erie Soubeiran, vice-president for nature and water cycle at Danone, says the group wants to boost its WI'I'I'I act'sumer Quads plant-based products. But he rejects the suggestion COI'I'IPBI'IIES, 90 Per cent Of that the group could reduce its climate footprint by their emissions lie outside cutting exposure to dairy. their own processes . . . . \"I think It is very important to choose the model of agriculture we want to be in . .. By saying in Danone that we want to transition to regenerative agriculture, we make a clear choice,\" he says. Regenerative agriculture is an approach to farming that focuses on encouraging a healthy ecosystem. Danone is trying to make greater use of local inputs in many of its lomons by sourcing milk from farms close to its factories, for example. It is also working with farmers to boost biodiversity. As for Unilever, it is following a similar strategy. Like Danone, it does not plan to cut emissions by quitting energy-intensive areas such as ice-cream. Instead, it too has been strengthening conneciions with farms. Some 100 people now work in agronomy departments at Unilever, dealing with farmers who would previously have heard little from the multinationals whose products emerge several steps down the supply chain. These conversations cover land management techniques and teehnologr that can reduce emissions, yet also have the potential to boost yields in the long term a point that Mr Engel stresses. \"Sustainability isn't a cost,\" he says. \"It is an investment.\