Monster Beverage Corp | Mitigate Water Scarcity Risks at Monster Beverages Corp

Status
Filed
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
MNSTX
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Water and oceans
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Staples
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED: Shareholders request that Monster issue a report assessing the feasibility and practicality of establishing time-bound, quantitative goals to reduce operational and supply chain water usage to mitigate water risks related to global water scarcity in high-risk areas. The report should be prepared at reasonable expense and omit proprietary information.
Whereas clause
WHEREAS: Consumption of freshwater surpasses the rate at which it can be naturally replenished in many regions, creating water shortage risks for companies, communities, and ecosystems. Compounded by climate change, the World Resources Institute predicts the world will be unable to meet 56 percent of global water demand by 2030.[1]
Companies without a plan to adapt could be exposed to risks including increased input costs, price volatility, shifting production zones, stranded assets, government targets, and loss of social license to operate. Barclays warns that the consumer staple sector, including agriculture, food, and beverage companies, faces a potential $200 billion impact from water scarcity risks. Monster acknowledges the financial materiality of water stress, noting that weather impacts on key commodities and water availability, quality, or pricing could adversely impact its business results.[2]
Monster’s operations and supply chain are reliant on high water risk regions. For example, the company’s operations rely on water from the Colorado River Basin (CRB) which may compromise long-term profitability. The CRB is experiencing chronic and severe water shortages, States are implementing water use reduction regulations, impacting agricultural production, and federal regulators are developing new water use guidelines to take effect in 2026. In the CRB, over 80 percent of water is consumed by agriculture and industry, calling into question Monster’s value chain resilience and increasing the likelihood of brand repercussions.[3]
CDP predicts the financial impacts of water risks are five times greater than the costs of addressing them.[4] Although Monster conducted a water risk assessment of its operations, it has not analyzed its supply chain or disclosed a measurable strategy to mitigate water risks.
Given Monster's dependence on freshwater, water shortages pose a financial risk to the company. For investors to feel confident in the Company’s water risk management, Monster should align with best practices such as those outlined by the Corporate Expectations for Valuing Water and set quantitative, timebound targets to reduce water use across its operations and supply chain, especially in water-stressed areas.[5] Peers including PepsiCo have established such targets.[6]
Supporting statement
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: In the report, proponents recommend Monster consider, at management’s discretion:
Discussing how the targets could be established to help ensure implementation mitigates supply chain water risks, including reputational risks;Disclosing the percentage of key agricultural products sourced from water-stressed regions, including the CRB;Explaining how the company works with suppliers in high-risk watersheds to implement agricultural practices that reduce water risk such as soil health practices;Describing how the company provides technical, educational, or financial support to agricultural suppliers to strengthen water stewardship practices and reduce risk. [1] https://www.ft.com/content/80122ded-4158-45f9-915c-a52b5fb2d088
[2] https://investors.monsterbevcorp.com/static-files/1fd24065-a24a-4d3e-99e2-8a495155d947
[3] https://feedingourselvesthirsty.ceres.org/regional-analysis/colorado-river
[4] https://www.cdp.net/en/articles/media/cost-of-water-risks-to-business-five-times-higher-than-cost-of-taking-action
[5] https://www.ceres.org/sites/default/files/Ceres%20Corporate%20Expectations%20for%20Valuing%20Water%202022.pdf
[6] https://www.pepsico.com/docs/default-source/sustainability-and-esg-topics/2023-cdp-water-submission.pdf?sfvrsn=b43cdc79_6

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.