Bloomin' Brands Inc | Conduct material biodiversity dependency and impact assessment at Bloomin' Brands Inc

Status
Omitted
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
NASDAQ: BLMN
Resolution ask
Conduct due diligence, audit or risk/impact assessment
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Biodiversity / nature
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that Bloomin’ Brands complete a material biodiversity dependency and impact assessment and issue a corresponding public report to identify the extent to which the company’s supply chains and operations are vulnerable to risks associated with biodiversity loss.
Whereas clause
Biodiversity loss is a global systemic risk. At the United Nations Biodiversity Conference
in 2022, 190 countries agreed to take steps to prevent biodiversity and nature loss. The resulting
Global Biodiversity Framework calls on businesses to assess and disclose biodiversity
dependencies, risks, impacts and opportunities, and to reduce negative impacts.
As a company in the food and beverage sector, Bloomin’ Brands is highly vulnerable to naturerelated risks. It depends on an uninterrupted supply of fresh ingredients to stock its restaurants. It
has significant impacts through sourcing large volumes of commodities that have high carbon
footprints and are leading drivers of global deforestation, including palm oil, soy, and beef.
Failure to comprehensively assess its natural capital dependencies and ultimately mitigate their
impacts on the company exposes Bloomin’ Brands to unnecessary risks:
 Systemic risk: More than half of the world’s GDP is dependent on nature’s services1
. The
World Bank estimates that the collapse of ecosystem services could result in a $2.7 trillion
reduction of GDP as early as 20302
.
 Financial risk: An increasing number of asset managers incorporate nature-related risks
and impacts into investment decision-making. Financial institutions with US $8.7 trillion in
AUM have committed to eliminate agricultural-commodity-driven deforestation from their
portfolios by 20253
.
 Regulatory risk: In October 2024, 27 pension funds with AUM of $2.5 trillion urged
governments to institute mandatory nature disclosures for companies.4
Over 500
companies have already committed to biodiversity assessment and disclosure using the
Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosure (TNFD) framework, released in January.
The International Sustainability Standards Board is reviewing TNFD as it considers
developing natured-based disclosures5
. Meanwhile, in Europe, the CSRD is scheduled to
include mandatory reporting of biodiversity and ecosystem impacts and risks under ESRS
4
6
.
Seventy-six percent of Bloomin’ Brands shareholders urged the company to set comprehensive
emissions reduction targets while adopting a no-deforestation policy in 2021.7
In 2024, Bloomin’
Brands was among the companies targeted by financial institutions with $21 trillion AUM for failure
to disclose climate, forest, and water impacts through CDP.8
While Bloomin’ Brands has recently established goals to disclose and mitigate portions of its
emissions and forest-impact value chains, it lags significantly behind its peers in terms of scope,
ambition, and timeframe.
Without a comprehensive assessment of its biodiversity impacts, dependencies, risks, and
opportunities, Bloomin’ Brands may subject itself to unnecessary systemic, regulatory, and
financial risk.
Supporting statement
In completing this assessment and report, proponents defer to management’s discretion but recommend considering the guidance of standard-setting bodies such as the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures.

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.