MATTEL, INC. | Report on food waste management at Mattel, INC.

Status
Filed
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
MAT
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Adopt or amend a policy
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Net Zero / Paris aligned
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that Mattel issue a report (at reasonable cost, omitting proprietary information) describing if, and how, it plans to increase the scale, pace, and rigor of its efforts to reduce its total contribution to climate change and align with the Paris Agreement’s ambition of limiting global temperature rise.
Whereas clause
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has advised that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions must be halved by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 in order to limit global warming to 1.5 °C. Every incremental increase in temperature above 1.5 °C will entail increasingly severe physical, transition, and systemic risks for companies and investors alike. Up to 18% of global economic value could be lost by 2050.[1]

In its 10-K, Mattel (“the Company”) acknowledges that "the effects of global climate change create financial, operational, and reputational risks to Mattel's business,” such as potential supply chain disruptions and increased production costs. Despite acknowledging these risks, the proponent believes the Company’s mitigation strategy falls short of what is needed to shield Mattel and its investors from climate-related risks.

While Mattel has set emissions reduction targets covering its scope 1 and 2 emissions, the Company does not disclose its scope 3 emissions and has not set scope 3 targets. By contrast, competitors like Hasbro and LEGO have set targets validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) that cover both their operational and value chain emissions. LEGO’s scope 3 emissions comprise almost 99% of its total emissions footprint, and, in order to mitigate the associated climate risk, LEGO is requiring its largest suppliers to set GHG reduction targets by 2026.[2] Similar to LEGO, the majority of Mattel’s emissions likely also stem from the Company’s value chain.

Enhanced climate disclosure and risk mitigation measures may help Mattel prepare for upcoming climate disclosure requirements. Regulations such as climate disclosure laws in California and the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive may require the Company to disclose its scope 3 emissions and additional information about how it is mitigating climate risk.

The proponent believes that actions such as disclosing material value chain emissions and adopting science-based emissions reduction targets will help investors better understand the Company’s climate-related risks and opportunities and may help Mattel reap benefits from increased efficiency, lower energy costs, more resilient supply chains, and better preparation for climate-related regulations.
Supporting statement
In the report shareholders seek information, at board and management discretion, on the relative benefits and drawbacks of integrating the following actions:

· Disclosing material scope 3 emissions;

· Adopting science-based GHG emission reduction targets for the Company's full range of operational and value chain emissions, taking into consideration criteria used by advisory groups like the SBTi;

· Adopting supporting targets for supply chain engagement, renewable energy, energy efficiency, or other measures deemed appropriate by management.



?[1] https://www.swissre.com/media/press-release/nr-20210422-economics-of-climate-change-risks.html

[2] https://trellis.net/article/lego-sets-stricter-emissions-reductions-requirements-suppliers/

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.