Bloomin' Brands Inc | Issue near and long-term science base GHG reduction targets at Bloomin' Brands Inc

Status
42.86% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
7
Resolution details
Company ticker
NASDAQ: BLMN
Resolution ask
Set targets or plans
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • GHG targets / emissions
  • Land use inc. deforestation
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders request that Bloomin’ Brands, within a year, issue near- and long-term science-based GHG reduction targets aligned with the Paris Agreement’s ambition of maintaining global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius and summarize plans to achieve them. The targets should cover the company’s full range of operational and supply chain emissions (including Scopes 1, 2 and 3).
Whereas clause
Whereas: As one of the world's largest casual dining companies with more than 1,450 restaurants in 17 countries, Bloomin’ Brands sources significant volumes of commodities that have high carbon footprints, including palm oil, soy, beef, and pulp/paper, which are also leading drivers of global deforestation.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, agriculture, forestry, and other land use change is responsible for 23 percent of total net anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, nearly half of which are attributable to deforestation.
In its 2021 10-K, Bloomin’ acknowledges that climate change may adversely affect commodity costs and operating results. However, unlike many peers, Bloomin’ discloses neither its carbon nor forest footprints, has adopted no emissions reduction targets, and lacks a policy to address its deforestation risk. By contrast, competitors including Chipotle, McDonald’s, and Yum! Brands have made commitments to reduce emissions throughout their full value chains, including from agricultural and land use sources. (Bloomin’ identifies growing competition from quick service and fast casual restaurants as a risk in its 2021 10-K.) As emissions disclosure, robust GHG reduction targets, no-deforestation policies, and action plans become the industry standard, Bloomin’s lack thereof increasingly lags peer companies that are positioning themselves to address these climate and deforestation risks.
Furthermore, at COP26, financial institutions with nearly US $9 trillion in AUM committed to eliminate agricultural-commodity-driven deforestation from their portfolios by 2025. As an increasing number of asset managers incorporate deforestation risk into their investment decision making, Bloomin’ must achieve a deforestation-free supply chain by 2025 or risk becoming uninvestable. Finally, despite a 76% majority vote on a 2021 proposal asking Bloomin’ to issue a report assessing if and how the company could increase the scale, pace and rigor of its efforts to reduce its total contribution to climate change, the company has issued no such report and Bloomin’s updated website provides only a vague and cursory outline of the Company’s aspirations to reduce emissions - an inadequate response to the majority vote. Failure to adopt policies and implement tactics that mitigate climate and deforestation risk may subject Bloomin’ to significant systemic and company-specific risks, including restricted market share, supply chain disruption, and reputational risk.
Supporting statement
Supporting Statement: In assessing targets, proponents recommend:
•Considering approaches used by advisory groups such as the Science Based Targets initiative;
•Developing a transition plan that shows how the company plans to meet its goals;
•Considering emissions reduction targets inclusive of all GHG Protocol-defined sources of Scope 3 emissions—including from agriculture, land use change, and deforestation
•Considering a no-deforestation policy for all forest-risk commodities in the company’s supply chain.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.