Walmart, Inc | Report on packaging at Walmart, Inc

Status
Filed
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
6
Resolution details
Company ticker
WMT
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Waste and pollution
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that Walmart issue a report within one year, at reasonable cost and omitting proprietary information, assessing how the Company can increase the scale, pace, and rigor of its sustainable packaging efforts by reducing plastic packaging and removing misleading recyclability claims.
Whereas clause
Plastic pollution is a global systemic risk. Only 9% of plastic waste globally is recycled[1] and 95% of plastic packaging is disposed of after one use.[2] The limits of plastic recycling coupled with estimates that plastic consumption will double by 2040[3] indicate that to sufficiently mitigate plastics-related risks, plastic reduction is key.

Walmart states that it aims to “break the link between consumption and waste.”[4] The company discloses extensively on its recycling initiatives and acknowledges that in addition to recycling, large scale reuse models and innovations are necessary to address plastic pollution. However, disclosure of Walmart’s plans to integrate reuse systems into its business model is minimal and virgin plastic use in Walmart’s private label packaging increased by 6% in 2022 against its goal of a 15% reduction by 2025.[5]

Insufficient action to address plastic-related risks exposes Walmart to financial risk:

· Legal risk: Plastic packaging distributed by companies including Walmart has low recycling rates,[6] especially flexible plastic packaging.[7] Consequently, Walmart’s use of the Store Drop Off label is misleading under the FTC Green Guides[8] and likely illegal in California once SB 343[9] takes effect, as the label’s use of the chasing arrows symbol misrepresents the recyclability of flexible plastic packaging to consumers. Additionally, the California State Attorney General is investigating the misuse of recyclable labels and recently filed a lawsuit against Exxon for making misleading claims about plastic recyclability.[10]

· Regulatory risk: Regulatory developments such as extended producer responsibility laws[11] could cost companies up to $100 billion annually should governments require them to cover the waste management costs of their packaging.[12] Six states are considering legislation similar to California’s SB 343.[13]

· Reputational risk: Recent research indicates that consumer demand for sustainability and trustworthiness is increasing.[14] Meanwhile, multiple investigations into claims of plastic recyclability reveal that most plastic packaging ends up in landfills.[15],[16] Misleading recyclable labeling and insufficient action to reduce its plastic footprint puts the trust of consumers in Walmart at risk.

To mitigate plastic-related risk, Walmart could prioritize plastic reduction, increase reusable packaging, and redesign remaining product packaging for consistent recycling or composting.
Supporting statement
Proponents suggest that indicators meaningful to shareholders may include:

Disclosure of any enhanced reusable packaging efforts and their results; and
An assessment of the Company’s plastic packaging labeled as recyclable against credible technical standards such as the FTC Green Guides recyclability criteria.

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.