Constellation Software, Inc. | Report on packaging at Constellation Software, Inc.

Status
Withdrawn
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
CSU
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
Technology
Company HQ country
Canada
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that the Constellation Brands Board issue a report, at reasonable expense and excluding proprietary information, describing opportunities for the Company to support a circular economy for packaging.
Whereas clause
• The growing plastic pollution and packaging waste crises pose increasing risks to Constellation Brands (“Constellation”). Corporations could face an annual financial risk of approximately $100 billion should governments require them to cover the waste management costs of the packaging they produce.[1] New laws to this effect were recently passed in Maine, Oregon, Colorado, and California,[2] while the European Union has enacted a $1 per kilogram tax on all non-recycled plastic packaging waste.[3]
• A circular economy for packaging, whereby packaging is designed for reuse or recycling and kept in the economy and out of the environment, plays an important role in a net-zero emissions world. Constellation states it is committed to emissions reductions, yet has taken virtually no action to ensure the circularity of its product packaging,[4] despite the fact that its sold products and packaging contribute significantly to Scope 3 emissions at their end-of-life (“EOL”).[5]
• More than 100 leading companies have committed to promoting a circular economy for packaging by taking financial responsibility for the collection, sorting, and recycling of packaging at EOL, a policy known as Extended Producer Responsibility (“EPR”).[6] In areas lacking EPR, companies should make voluntary financial contributions to improve recycling rates.
• The Recycling Partnership (TRP), the leading NGO working to improve recycling, finds that $17 billion is needed to modernize and expand recycling infrastructure, and that doing so will save the equivalent of 710 million metric tons of CO2 over ten years.[7] To improve plastic recycling infrastructure alone, TRP recommends that companies contribute at least $88 for every metric ton of plastic used.[8]
• Competitors Molson Coors, Heineken, Diageo, and at least 26 other major companies make voluntary contributions to expand recycling infrastructure.[9] Constellation is not known to voluntarily contribute financial resources to help ensure its packaging never becomes waste.[10]
• Competitor Diageo is exploring reuse opportunities, has endorsed EPR, and set goals to use 100% recyclable packaging, incorporate recycled materials, and reduce unnecessary packaging. Constellation lacks each of these goals and earned an “F” grade on a recent report evaluating corporate packaging sustainability.[11]
• Our Company could avoid regulatory, environmental, and competitive risks by adopting a circular economy approach to packaging and by contributing to necessary recycling infrastructure.
• .
Supporting statement
The report should assess, at Board discretion:
• The reputational, financial, and operational risks associated with failing to promote a circular economy for packaging;
• Opportunities to develop policies or goals to determine an appropriate level and frequency of voluntary financial contributions to recycling infrastructure, increase use of recycled content, and design for recyclability; and
• The potential to more rapidly reduce dependence on single-use packaging by developing and supporting refillable bottle systems and infrastructure.

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.