Associated British Foods (Mazola corn oil; Twinings Tea) came in at the bottom of Oxfam's rankings, but Kellogg's (Pop Tarts) and General Mills (Cheerios, Yoplait) weren't much better.

These grades, it should be noted, are based on official policies, not actual behavior. Neither Oxfam nor any other independent group has the resources to travel the globe to see firsthand how these policies are implemented on, say, tea plantations in remote corners of Sri Lanka and Mozambique.

Oxfam calls its new campaign "Behind the Brands." This strategy — targeting companies that own popular consumer brands — is increasingly popular among environmentalists and other groups devoted to social change. Jason Clay, a vice president of the World Wildlife Fund, laid out the reasons a couple of years ago in a TED talk.

It comes down to what's practical, Clay said. We could try to convince millions of farmers to work differently. We could try to persuade billions of consumers to buy different products. But it's a lot easier to put pressure on a few dozen companies — huge conglomerates that order commodities from every corner of the globe.

Those companies are extraordinarily sensitive when it comes to the image of their consumer brands. They already have very specific rules for their suppliers when it comes to quality and safety. How about associating those brands with environmental quality and worker well-being?

Oxfam says it will be happy to revise its grades when companies improve their performance.

Copyright 2013 NPR.

The Food and Environment Reporting NetworkThe Food and Environment Reporting Network

Oxfam Gives Big Food Companies Bad Behavior Grades

Why Russia Is Saying 'Nyet' To U.S. Meat Imports