Climate Change | Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>Lundin Mining Corporation</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>On Proxy</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p>Lundin describes physical, transition, regulatory, and reputational risks of climate change, yet is unclear how it is addressing these self-identified risks.[1] Scope 3 emissions represent “the greatest proportion” of Lundin’s footprint.[2] Lundin notes stakeholders’ increasing interest in emissions in its last four sustainability reports,[3] highlighting scope 3 interest specifically for two years.[4]</p>
<p>Lundin began disclosing select scope 3 categories in its 2018 Sustainability Report[5] and estimated scope 3 emissions in 2022,[6] however emission figures remain identical for FY22-FY24.[7] Six companies in Lundin’s 2025 TSR Performance Peer Group annually disclose year-on-year scope 3 data with some disclosing since 2014.[8]</p>
<p>Scope 3 emissions account for 68% of Lundin’s total emissions and therefore must be included in a credible decarbonization strategy.[9] For Lundin, four of five material categories are upstream.[10] In its 2023 Sustainability Report, Lundin identified five top suppliers company-wide and at each operation and an intention to engage them in 2024.[11] No such activity was subsequently reported on. In contrast, six of Lundin’s peers disclose a target for material scope 3 emissions and/or a measurable strategy for value chain emissions reductions: Antofagasta, Boliden, Sandfire Resources, Southern Copper, Freeport McMoRan, and Teck Resources.</p>
<p>Investor expectations for mining companies articulate addressing environmental risks and impacts in operations and value chains.[12] Global investor benchmarks including Climate Action 100+ and Climate Engagement Canada’s echo this.[13] These expectations are also included by industry associations. The International Copper Association, founder of The Copper Mark, against which Lundin’s Caserones and Candelaria sites report, calls for active engagement of value chains toward a net zero 2050 future inclusive of scope 3 and mid-term targets.[14]</p>
<p>We support Lundin’s positioning as a base metals company with essential production for a low-carbon future. Lundin outlines an opportunity for “climate change and scope 3 GHG emissions to effect change and endorse resilience in [the] value chain” but doesn’t appear to have a strategy to achieve this.[15] Disclosing an emissions reduction strategy for material value chain emissions would reassure investors that Lundin is managing its emissions profile and associated risks.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1. 2024 Lundin Annual Information Form, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9243/aif-lmc-ye-2024-final.pdf#page=94</p>
<p>2. 2023 Lundin Sustainability Report (SR), https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9273/2023-sustainability-report-lundinmining.pdf#page=44</p>
<p>3. 2021 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9071/lmc_2021_sustainaility_report_accessible_082522.pdf#page=24 ;</p>
<p>2022 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9177/2022_sustainability_report_lundin_mining_aoda.pdf#page=36 ;</p>
<p>2023 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9273/2023-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=44 ;</p>
<p>2024 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9452/2024-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=31</p>
<p>4. 2023 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9273/2023-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=44 ;</p>
<p>2024 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9452/2024-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=31</p>
<p>5. 2018 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9031/lun_2018_sustainability_report_final.pdf#page=54</p>
<p>6. 2023 Lundin CDP Response, C6.5</p>
<p>7. https://lundinmining.com/sustainability/interactive-data-tool/</p>
<p>8. 2025 Lundin Management Information Circular, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9433/lundin_2025_mic_vf.pdf#page=43</p>
<p>9. 2022 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9177/2022_sustainability_report_lundin_mining_aoda.pdf#page=37</p>
<p>10. 2024 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9452/2024-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=31</p>
<p>11. 2023 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9273/2023-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=44</p>
<p>12. The Global Investor Commission on Mining 2030: Investor Expectations – Mining Companies, 2025, https://mining2030.org/wpcontent/uploads/2025/10/Appendix1_Mining2030_Investor-Expectations_Mining_231025.pdf#page=5</p>
<p>13. 2025 CA100+ Net Zero Benchmark, 2025 CEC Net Zero Benchmark</p>
<p>14. 2023. International Copper Association: Copper – The Pathway to Net Zero, https://internationalcopper.org/wpcontent/uploads/2023/02/ICA-GlobalDecarbonization-202301-Final-singlepgs.pdf#page=25</p>
<p>15. 2024 Lundin SR, https://d2hw5o33fpk7z8.cloudfront.net/assets/files/9452/2024-sustainability-report-lundin-mining.pdf#page=75</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Lead Filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Kyela De Weerdt</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Shareholder Association for Research and Education (SHARE)</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>Columbia Sportswear</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>GHG Reduction and Targets </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>WHEREAS</strong>: Climate change poses macroeconomic risks that can depress returns for long-term diversified investors. Studies expect warming of 2°C to cost over $38 trillion annually by 2049.1<br><br>In its 10-K, Columbia Sportswear Company (Columbia) acknowledges that climate change “could disrupt our operations, the operations of our vendors and other suppliers or result in economic instability and changes in consumer preferences and spending that may negatively impact our operating results and financial condition.” Further, climate change may produce more intense and frequent disasters in Columbia’s critical manufacturing countries, including Vietnam, Bangladesh, and China.2<br><br>In 2020, Columbia committed to a 30% reduction in Scope 3 manufacturing emissions by 2030, yet it stopped tracking and reporting on this goal in 2023 and has not adopted any new greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets.3<br><br>Columbia disclosed revised 2022 and 2024 Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions in its most recent sustainability report, but it has not reported Scope 3 emissions since 2021.4 While Columbia has outlined initiatives to reduce energy consumption and enhance sustainable manufacturing, establishing targets would help investors assess whether and how these actions will reduce emissions and address the enterprise and macroeconomic risks of climate change.<br><br>Columbia lags peers in climate risk mitigation efforts. Competitors Nike, Deckers Outdoor Corp., VF Corp., Puma, lululemon and Adidas have disclosed more complete emissions inventories and set Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi) verified emissions reduction targets and supporting goals for materials, employee travel, suppliers, and renewable energy.5 Many peers continue to refine their GHG inventory while disclosing emissions annually and pursuing climate goals.<br><br>Columbia brand’s mission is to “unlock the outdoors for everyone.”6 Columbia recognizes in its 10-K that “our success has been due in large part to our ability to maintain, enhance and protect our brand image and… our consumers’ and customers’ connection to our brands… [and that] customer sentiment could be shaped by our sustainability policies.”7 The Company’s failure to keep pace with competitors and signal ambitions to address climate change misaligns its actions with this brand image and mission.<br>To appropriately respond to climate-related risks and opportunities, protect shareholders from macroeconomic risks, and remain competitive in its market, the proponent believes Columbia should take additional action.</p>
<p>RESOLVED: Shareholders request that Columbia disclose its current GHG emissions as well as short-, medium- and long-term targets for measurably reducing them—and that Columbia report annually on its progress toward those targets.<br><br>SUPPORTING STATEMENT: Proponents recommend, at the board and management’s<br>discretion, that disclosures include:<br>• The full range of Columbia’s operational and supply chain emissions;<br>• Consideration of frameworks, benchmarks and processes developed by credible third parties such as SBTi, Transition Plan Taskforce, and Task Force for Climate Related Financial Disclosures</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07219-0<br>2 https://www.columbiasportswearcompany.com/corporate-responsibility-group/responsible-practices/supply-chain/; https://wmo.int/news/media-centre/climate-change-impacts-increase-asia<br>3https://cscworkday.blob.core.windows.net/hrforms/Recruiting/Career_Site/CR_Reports/2020_Columbia_Corp_Resp_Report.pdf, 25<br>4 https://www.columbiasportswearcompany.com/corporate-responsibility/impact/2024/sustaining-places; https://cscworkday.blob.core.windows.net/hrforms/Recruiting/Career_Site/CR_Reports/2020_Columbia_Corp_Resp_Report.pdf, 24<br>5 https://sciencebasedtargets.org/target-dashboard<br>6 https://investor.columbia.com/sec-filings/annual-reports/content/0001050797-25-000023/0001050797-25-000023.pdf, 1<br>7 https://investor.columbia.com/sec-filings/annual-reports/content/0001050797-25-000023/0001050797-25-000023.pdf, 7</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Lead Filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Giovanna Eichner</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Green Century Capital Management, Inc.</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>Bank of America Corp.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change, Environment </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Financing, Commodities Sourcing/Deforestation, GHG Reduction and Targets </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>WHEREAS</strong>: Deforestation drives climate change and biodiversity loss, undermining ecosystem services upon which businesses depend. Land use change, principally deforestation, contributes 12–20% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,1 and scientists estimate that deforestation is responsible for the loss of 50,000 species every year.2 With the global economy projected to lose USD $23 trillion by 2050 to land degradation, desertification and drought,3 financial institutions jeopardize the stability of their returns by<br>financing activities linked to nature loss and climate change.<br><br>Bank of America (BAC) highlights these risks in its 2024 Sustainability Report, stating, “As forests are<br>depleted, we lose one of the world’s most important carbon sinks, which accelerates climate change and<br>compounds biodiversity loss.” BAC also acknowledges in its 2025 10-K that “climate change and related<br>environmental sustainability matters present short-, medium- and long-term risks.” Consequently, BAC<br>has committed to achieving net zero GHG emissions in its financing activities, operations, and supply<br>chain by 2050 and to deploying USD $1.5 trillion in sustainable finance by 2030.4<br><br>However, the proponent believes that the company cannot adequately address financial risk, nor meet its<br>net zero goal, through “sustainable finance” if it is continuing to finance deforestation that is beyond the<br>reach of its sustainable finance activities. And while BAC recognizes in its 2024 Sustainability Report the<br>importance of preventing deforestation, it discloses no standards, policies, or due diligence measures to<br>address deforestation-risk exposure. It has also removed its Environmental and Social Risk Policy<br>Framework and Forest Practices Policy from the public domain.<br><br>BAC lags competitors including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Rabobank, Deutsche Bank and Standard<br>Chartered, among many others, which have largely adopted generally applicable financing expectations<br>including No Deforestation, No Peat, and No Exploitation (NDPE) commitments for palm oil; Forest<br>Stewardship Council (FSC) or similar certification for forestry clients; and policies addressing the<br>financing of beef and soy sector clients. In part due to such policy gaps, BAC received a 13 percent<br>overall score on Global Canopy’s Forest 500 benchmark of the deforestation policies of financial<br>institutions in 2024.5<br><br>Clear standards and disclosure of progress are key to demonstrating effective risk management. It is<br>firmly within the purview of BAC’s fiduciary responsibility, and in the company’s best interest, to<br>disclose and mitigate deforestation-related risks, especially as more financiers and investors recognize the<br>materiality of such risks and adjust their strategies accordingly.<br><br><strong>RESOLVED</strong>: Shareholders request that Bank of America issue a public report, within a year, outlining if and<br>how it could establish policies or practices to further mitigate deforestation risks from financed activities.</p>
<p><strong>Supporting Statement</strong>: Shareholders recommend the report disclose, at board and management<br>discretion, whether and how Bank of America’s net-zero plan will affect the financing of sectors<br>contributing to deforestation.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1 https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/whats-redd-and-will-it-help-tackle-climate-change/<br>2 https://wjarr.com/sites/default/files/WJARR-2022-0749.pdf<br>3 https://www.unccd.int/news-stories/stories/business4land-mobilizing-private-sector-reverse-land-degradation<br>4 https://about.bankofamerica.com/content/dam/about/reportcenter/<br>esg/2024/Sustainability_at_Bank_of_America_2024_Report.pdf<br>5 https://forest500.org/financial-institutions/bank-of-america/?ayear=2024</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>United Parcel Service, Inc.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change, Sustainability Reporting, GHG Emphasis </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>RESOLVED</strong>: Shareholders request UPS issue a report, at reasonable cost and omitting proprietary information, describing if and how it plans to align its operations and investments with its carbon neutrality goal.</p>
<p><strong>SUPPORTING STATEMENT</strong>:</p>
<p><strong>UPS’ Fossil Fuel Reliance Heightens Climate-Related Financial Risks</strong></p>
<p>United Parcel Service (“UPS”) faces heightened climate-related risks due to dependence on diesel and jet fuel across its global fleet. In its 2025 10-K, the Company acknowledges that climate change poses “financial and operational risks,” including weather-related disruptions.[1] These risks are no longer hypothetical: extreme weather in 2024 caused an estimated $100 billion in global supply chain losses;[2] by 2060, analysts project that climate-driven supply chain disruptions could cost up to $24 trillion.[3] Scientists project global climate damages in the range of $19-59 trillion annually by 2050—five times the cost of limiting warming to 2°C.[4] Continued emissions from UPS’ operations risk locking in further economic losses. </p>
<p>For a logistics company like UPS, whose value proposition rests on operational reliability and resilient supply chains, these operational, financial, and systemic risks could threaten asset performance and increase the cost of capital.[5]</p>
<p><strong>UPS Risks Falling Behind on Climate Targets Amid Misaligned Capital Spending</strong></p>
<p>UPS’ emissions per package have increased since its baseline year, despite targets to cut intensity 50% by 2035 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050.[6] In 2024, only one-third of UPS’ capital expenditures supported environmental sustainability goals, while its continued investment in natural gas vehicles risks locking in higher emissions and lifecycle costs for decades.[7] These trends indicate a misalignment between UPS’ capital allocation and its stated climate commitments. </p>
<p><strong>UPS Lags Competitors</strong></p>
<p>Peers such as DHL and FedEx demonstrate stronger governance and execution of climate strategy.[8] Both have committed to value chain emission reduction targets through the Science Based Targets initiative, conduct scenario analyses, apply a double materiality approach, and link executive pay to sustainability outcomes. They also define clear vehicle electrification milestones that align capital allocation with emissions reductions and long-term competitiveness. UPS lags peers across each of these dimensions. </p>
<p>Investors seek greater visibility into how UPS is integrating climate-related risks and opportunities into its financial and strategic decision-making. A comprehensive climate transition plan aligned with investor expectations and frameworks such as the TCFD and CA100+ would provide that transparency. Developing and disclosing such a plan would strengthen UPS’ credibility with investors while positioning the Company to capture efficiency gains, policy incentives, and market share in a rapidly transforming logistics sector. </p>
<p>[1] https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1090727/000109072725000019/ups-20241231.htm, p.12</p>
<p>[2] https://www.freightwaves.com/news/weathers-wrath-supply-chains-reel-from-2024s-extreme-events </p>
<p>[3] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/03/240313135634.htm </p>
<p>[4] Historical emissions already commit the global economy to approximately 17% Gross Domestic Product (GDP) reduction by 2050. https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/38-trillion-dollars-in-damages-each-year-world-economy-already-committed-to-income-reduction-of-19-due-to-climate-change, as revised by https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/nature-study-on-economic-damages-from-climate-change-revised</p>
<p>[5] https://www.unepfi.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Climate-Risks-in-the-Transportation-Sector-1.pdf </p>
<p>[6] https://about.ups.com/content/dam/upsstories/images/our-impact/reporting/2024-UPS-GRI-Report.pdf, p.27, 29</p>
<p>[7] https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1090727/000109072725000019/ups-20241231.htm, p.49</p>
<p>[8] https://group.dhl.com/content/dam/deutschepostdhl/en/media-center/investors/documents/annual-reports/DHL-Group-2024-Annual-Report.pdf, p.73, 74; https://www.fedex.com/content/dam/fedex/us-united-states/sustainability/gcrs/FedEx_2025_CR_Report.pdf, p.19, 22; </p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Lead Filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Diana Myers</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>As You Sow</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>McDonald's Corp.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change, Environment, Food Justice </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>Agricultural Sourcing / Supply Chain </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>WHEREAS</strong>: McDonald’s restaurants, operating in over 100 countries around the world, rely on a global supply of agricultural products including beef, potatoes, and coffee.<br><br>The reliability of this global agricultural supply chain is increasingly disrupted by changes to weather patterns and other natural systems caused by climate change, deforestation, and other human activity. Severe weather events, drought, and wildfires caused over $21B of crop losses in the US in 2023.1 Transportation networks have been disrupted, with wildfires, hurricanes, and floods shutting down key North American and Asian shipping systems in 2024.2 Coffee production in Brazil is threatened by deforestation-linked changes in rainfall patterns.3<br><br>McDonald’s recognizes nature-related risks and its ability to mitigate them through its sourcing policies. It states,<br><br>We believe regenerative agriculture has the potential to drive action against a series of risks and opportunities to the Company, as well as the potential to deliver benefits for a wide range of stakeholders. That is why we are making the adoption of regenerative agriculture principles within certain categories of the Company’s supply chain a long-term, global priority for McDonald’s and a key step in our responsible sourcing efforts.4<br><br>McDonald’s is supporting this commitment with significant investments. The company has disclosed multiple regenerative agriculture projects over several years.5 Most recently, it announced a $200 million seven-year partnership to support regenerative grazing principles among US-based beef cattle producers.6<br><br>Despite these investments, the Company has not disclosed clear practice guidelines or goals for its regenerative agriculture programs, and it has not indicated it will disclose outcomes of these investments. In these ways it lags other major food companies:</p>
<p>• PepsiCo provides a comprehensive definition of regenerative agriculture and lists 23 practices that can be adopted for inclusion in the program.7<br>• Conagra measures and publicly reports pesticide use reduction in its carrot, pea, sweet corn, and green bean supply chains through regenerative agriculture.8<br>• Lamb Weston measures and publicly reports year-over-year pesticide reduction data, reflecting progress toward its goal.9<br><br>Regenerative agriculture encompasses a wide number of practices that can have an impact on soil health, greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, and other factors. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development, of which McDonald’s is a member, recently published a draft framework for the disclosure of 11 regenerative agriculture outcomes.10 Consumer Reports notes that poorly defined regenerative agriculture programs risk accusations of greenwashing.11<br><br>McDonald’s has not indicated which regenerative agriculture outcomes it is seeking, nor has it committed to disclosing those outcomes. This puts the credibility of the program and the company at risk.<br><br>RESOLVED: Shareholders request that McDonald’s issue a report, at reasonable expense and omitting proprietary information, disclosing if and how the company intends to measure and disclose the practices supported by its regenerative agriculture programs and the outcomes of those programs.<br> </p>
<p>1 https://www.fb.org/market-intel/major-disasters-and-severe-weather-caused-over-21-billion-in-crop-losses-in-2023<br>2 https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-climate-change-is-disrupting-the-global-supply-chain; https://octopart.com/pulse/p/extreme-weather-becomes-new-supply-chain-challenge; https://www.freightwaves.com/news/weathers-wrath-supply-chains-reel-from-2024s-extreme-events<br>3 https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/22/world/americas/brazil-coffee-production-rainfall.html<br>4 https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-purpose-and-impact/food-quality-and-sourcing/responsible-sourcing.html#advancingRegenerativeAgriculturePrinciples<br>5 https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/content/dam/sites/corp/nfl/pdf/McDonalds_PurposeImpact_ProgressReport_2024_2025.pdf<br>6 https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-stories/article/mcd-national-fish-wildlife-foundation-partnership.html<br>7 https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/pepsico-5v9wci20/media/Files/esg-topics/pepsico-regenerative-agriculture-guidelines.pdf<br>8 https://www.conagrabrands.com/citizenship-reports/conagra-brands-citizenship-report-2023<br>9 https://www.lambweston.com/content/dam/lamb-weston/website/en-us/pdf/sustainability/LambWeston_2023_ESG.pdf<br>10 https://www.wbcsd.org/actions/a-global-framework-for-regenerative-agriculture/<br>11 https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/the-regenified-label-risks-credibility-of-regenerative-agriculture/</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>Kroger Co.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>GHG Reduction and Targets </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>Whereas</strong>: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has advised that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions must decrease 43% by 2030 from 2019 levels and reach net zero by 2050 to limit global warming to 1.5°C[1] and avoid the most damaging effects of climate change. Deloitte estimates that “unchecked climate change could cost the global economy $178 trillion over the next 50 years.”[2]</p>
<p>In its 10-K Kroger recognizes business risks from climate change, stating the effects “present both physical risks…and transition risks…which are expected to be widespread and unpredictable.” Extreme weather events may affect Kroger’s ability, “to procure needed commodities at costs and in quantities that are optimal.” Kroger also acknowledges local, state or federal regulatory responses to climate change may affect its financial condition. </p>
<p>Kroger set a goal to reduce its absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions 30% by 2030, applies climate risk modeling to its direct operations, and mentions having business resilience plans. However, the Company has not provided detailed information on its plans to address Scope 3 emissions (representing approximately 93% of Kroger’s carbon emissions), nor has it applied its risk modeling to its full value chains. Without disclosures detailing efforts to mitigate its largest climate impacts, or plans to boost the agricultural supply chain resiliency that is critical to its Our Brands products (26% of FY25 revenue), Kroger may face elevated supply chain, regulatory, operational, and reputational risk. </p>
<p>Kroger disclosed a Scope 3 footprint for the first time in 2025 but has not outlined its intention or strategies to reduce these emissions, a standard practice among peers. Albertsons and Ahold Delhaize have set science-based value chain emissions reduction targets. Costco and Walmart provide greater detail regarding their supplier engagement strategies, emissions reduction progress, and efforts to reduce Scope 3 emissions.[3]</p>
<p>Developing and reporting on plans and intentions to reduce Kroger’s value chain emissions can help Kroger appropriately manage climate risks and opportunities. This would differ from Kroger’s existing sustainability disclosures by providing shareholders with forward-looking and/or quantitative information, at management’s discretion, describing actions the company will take to reduce full value chain emissions.</p>
<p><strong>RESOLVED</strong>: Shareholders request that The Kroger Co. (“Kroger”) issue a report, above and beyond existing disclosures, describing whether and, if so, how it will increase the scale and pace of its GHG emissions reduction efforts. The report should be updated annually, prepared at reasonable expense, and omit proprietary information.</p>
<p><strong>Supporting Statement</strong></p>
<p>At management’s discretion, the report could cover topics including:</p>

Quantitative reduction pathway to meet existing scope 1 and 2 goals;
If Kroger does not plan to increase the scale and pace of its GHG emissions reduction efforts, disclose why;
Kroger’s supplier engagement emissions reduction efforts, suppliers’ decarbonization progress, and related impacts on Kroger’s carbon footprint; and
Details about Kroger’s plan to invest in and scale projects to reduce value chain emissions and increase supply chain resiliency.

<p>[1] https://www.ipcc.ch/2022/04/04/ipcc-ar6-wgiii-pressrelease/</p>
<p>[2] https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/about/press-room/deloitte-research-reveals-inaction-on-climate-change-could-cost-the-world-economy-us-dollar-178-trillion-by-2070.html</p>
<p>[3] https://mobilecontent.costco.com/staging/resource/img/25w03130/5a_ClimateActionPlan_FY24.pdf; Walmart 2025 ESG report</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Lead Filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Amy Carr</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Friends Fiduciary Corporation</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>NVIDIA</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>Data Centers </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>WHEREAS</strong>: Climate change poses macroeconomic risks that can depress returns for long-term diversified investors. Severe weather accounted for a record 21 billion-dollar disasters in 2025.1<br><br>In its 10-K, NVIDIA acknowledges that “climate change, its impact on our supply chain and critical infrastructure worldwide…may disrupt our business and cause us to experience higher attrition, losses and costs.”2 One-third of semiconductor supply could be at risk within a decade unless the industry adapts to manage climate risks.3<br><br>Meanwhile, energy-intensive artificial intelligence (AI) is compounding climate risk. Goldman Sachs research forecasts data centers’ global power demand will increase 50% by 2027, and the rate of U.S. AI growth is expected to emit an additional 24 to 44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2030.4<br><br>NVIDIA plays a key role in the expansion of AI through designing AI chips, systems, and software.<br>While NVIDIA set 2030 targets to reduce absolute greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions from electricity usage and emissions intensity from use of its sold products, in the proponent’s opinion, NVIDIA’s progress toward mitigating climate risk through real world achievement of GHG emissions reductions is difficult to assess.<br><br>For instance, NVIDIA reported zero market-based electricity emissions as a part of its overall operational emissions in FY25, partly due to contracting renewable energy projects across the grid. Meanwhile, it also disclosed a separate increase in location-based electricity emissions from the energy it drew from the local power grid.5 Additionally, the company’s total absolute emissions nearly doubled between fiscal years 2024 and 2025.6<br><br>Furthermore, NVIDIA’s reported GHG inventory does not include use of its sold products. These emissions are likely a significant contributor to the company’s GHG footprint based on peer comparison7 and represent a key metric for tracking emissions reductions.<br><br>Peers AMD, Intel, Onsemi, and NXP have committed to reporting or already published more detailed climate disclosures that include:</p>
<p>• Absolute emissions from use of sold products and initiatives to reduce them;<br>• Third-party validation and increased criteria for renewable energy projects;<br>• Emissions pathways to 2030, including plans to advance climate initiatives across their value chains.<br><br>By enhancing its emissions disclosures, NVIDIA will increase the legitimacy of its climate targets and better demonstrate climate risk mitigation progress to investors as its business grows.</p>
<p><strong>RESOLVED</strong>: Shareholders request that NVIDIA issue a report, at reasonable cost and omitting<br>proprietary information, disclosing the GHG emissions from use of its sold products.<br><br><strong>SUPPORTING STATEMENT:</strong> Proponents recommend, at management’s discretion:<br>• Disclosing emissions that account for major sources of its total GHG footprint;<br>• Considering GHG emissions disclosure guidance;<br>• Reporting based on reasonable emissions estimates, updated annually, and providing timelines for issuing or completing disclosures;<br>• Outlining whether and how the company plans to achieve absolute emissions reductions.</p>
<p>1 https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2025-in-review<br>2 https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001045810/177440d5-3b32-4185-8cc8-95500a9dc783.pdf, 22<br>3 https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/news-room/press-releases/2025/climate-risks-to-semiconductor-supply.html<br>4 https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/articles/ai-to-drive-165-increase-in-data-center-power-demand-by-2030; https://www.npr.org/2025/11/14/nx-s1-5608188/data-center-ai-space-lizards<br>5 https://images.nvidia.com/aem-dam/Solutions/documents/NVIDIA-Sustainability-Report-Fiscal-Year-2025.pdf, 29<br>6 https://images.nvidia.com/aem-dam/Solutions/documents/NVIDIA-Sustainability-Report-Fiscal-Year-2025.pdf, 29<br>7 https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/corporate-responsibility/cr-data-tables.html#environmental; https://csrreportbuilder.intel.com/pdfbuilder/pdfs/CSR-2024-25-Full-Report.pdf, 36</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Co-filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Chris Richardson</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Mercy Investment Services</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>Home Depot, Inc.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change, Environment, Health </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>Biodiversity, Chemicals/Toxins, Deforestation/Commodities Sourcing, GHG Reduction and Targets, Pesticides, PVCs </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p class=”pf0″><strong>RESOLVED</strong>: Shareholders request that Home Depot conduct and publicly disclose a biodiversity impact and dependency assessment, identifying the most significant nature risks and impacts in the value chain and product segments, to inform its strategy to manage nature-related risks, impacts, and dependencies. </p>
<p><strong>WHEREAS</strong>: Nature and biodiversity are systemically important to climate stabilization, public health, human rights, and thriving economies. Regulators, central banks, and investors increasingly recognize the materiality of nature and biodiversity risks,[1] with 730 companies adopting the Taskforce on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) recommendations and the International Sustainability Standards Board beginning the standard-setting process for nature-related disclosures.[2] However, while evidence of the financial effects of nature-related risks for businesses and the economy is extensive,[3] Home Depot has not conducted an assessment of where its business is exposed to nature-related risks, impacts, and dependencies.  </p>
<p>Conducting such an assessment is essential to responsibly managing nature-related issues, preparing for regulation, reducing legal exposure, and managing supply chain risk or disruptions. Retailers that continue to sell products with emerging regulatory risks may face reputational harm and potential liability.</p>
<p>Home Depot is exposed to nature risk in multiple product categories, yet its business is also dependent on natural resources. For example, Home Depot sources timber from the Canadian Boreal forest, but proportionally more wildfires occurred in Canada’s forests where logging took place.[4] Logging also increases vulnerability to pests, flooding, climate disruption, and decreased resilience – all factors that can disrupt availability of raw materials.[5] </p>
<p>Other product categories are also problematic for nature and public health.</p>

Pesticides: Home Depot sells harmful insecticides[6] and glyphosate, a chemical facing restrictions in multiple jurisdictions and linked to extensive litigation. Bayer, the manufacturer of glyphosate-based herbicides has incurred over $17 billion in settlements and judgments.[7]

<p>PFAS (“forever chemicals”): Home Depot sells pots and pans,[8] and other products like sealants, containing PFAS, yet it has no comprehensive disclosure or phase out plans. There is U.S. regulation of PFAS in drinking water,[1] reporting requirements,[2] and many states have passed PFAS bans.[3]</p>

PVC (polyvinyl chloride): used in flooring, piping, and other Home Depot building products, PVC is a known carcinogen posing nature and health risks. PVC production generates dioxins and other persistent organic pollutants; disposal or incineration can release hazardous byproducts and microplastics, contributing to ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss.[4]
Invasive species: several states including Washington and Virginia, have restricted or banned the sale of invasive species commonly found in Home Depot stores, such as English Ivy.[5]

<p>Home Depot has limited biodiversity initiatives and does not evaluate its exposure to nature risks, impacts, and dependencies. This threatens its ability to responsibly manage these issues. Without a public assessment, the efforts appear arbitrary, and investors cannot determine the extent of Home Depot’s exposure to systemic nature-related risks and the adequacy of its programs. </p>
<p> </p>
<p><br> </p>
<p>[1] https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas</p>
<p>[2] https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/tsca-section-8a7-reporting-and-recordkeeping </p>
<p>[3] https://www.saferstates.org/resource/state-action-on-pfas/ </p>
<p>[4] https://toxicfreefuture.org/home-depot-ban-pvc/    </p>
<p>[5] See e.g., https://agr.wa.gov/services/rulemaking/wac-16-752-noxious-weeds-041724</p>
<p><br> </p>
<p>[1] https://www.unepfi.org/industries/banking/navigating-nature-policy/; https://www.ceres.org/download/b3ca7729-ee66-4451-926b-0b6371a49acf; https://www.natureaction100.org/media/2025/10/Nature-Action-100-Status-Report-Oct.-2025.pdf </p>
<p>[2] https://www.ifrs.org/news-and-events/news/2025/11/issb-welcomes-tnfd-support-nature-related-disclosure/ </p>
<p>[3] https://tnfd.global/publication/evidence-financial-effects-of-nature-related-risks/ </p>
<p>[4] https://connectsci.au/wf/article/34/12/WF24175/266074/Exploring-the-determinants-of-the-2023-Quebec</p>
<p>[5] https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/2025-04/Forest_Degradation_in_Canada_R_25-04-A_05.pdf </p>
<p>[6] https://environmentamerica.org/resources/a-snapshot-of-state-actions-to-protect-pollinators/ </p>
<p>[7] https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-pesticides-us-bayer-roundup/ </p>
<p>[8] See e.g., https://www.homedepot.com/p/KitchenAid-Hard-Anodized-Nonstick-10-Piece-Hard-andozed-Aluminum-Nonstick-Cookware-Set-in-Onyx-84800/319757766 </p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Lead Filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Mary Beth Gallagher</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Domini Impact Investments LLC</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>United Parcel Service, Inc.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>GHG Reduction and Targets </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>WHEREAS</strong>: <br><strong>UPS’ Fossil Fuel Reliance Heightens Climate-Related Financial Risks</strong><br><br>UPS faces heightened climate-related risks due to dependence on diesel and jet fuel across its global<br>fleet. In its 2025 10-K, the Company acknowledges that climate change poses “financial and operational<br>risks,” including weather-related disruptions.1 These risks are no longer hypothetical: extreme weather<br>in 2024 caused an estimated $100 billion in global supply chain losses;2 by 2060, analysts project that<br>climate-driven supply chain disruptions could cost up to $24 trillion.3 Scientists project global climate<br>damages in the range of $19-59 trillion annually by 2050—five times the cost of limiting warming to<br>2°C.4 Continued emissions from UPS’ operations risk locking in further economic losses.<br><br>For a logistics company like UPS, whose value proposition rests on operational reliability and resilient<br>supply chains, these operational, financial, and systemic risks could threaten asset performance and<br>increase the cost of capital.5<br><br><strong>UPS Risks Falling Behind on Climate Targets Amid Misaligned Capital Spending</strong><br>UPS’ emissions per package have increased since its baseline year, despite targets to cut intensity 50%<br>by 2035 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050.6 In 2024, only one-third of UPS’ capital expenditures<br>supported environmental sustainability goals, while its continued investment in natural gas vehicles risks<br>locking in higher emissions and lifecycle costs for decades.7 These trends indicate a misalignment<br>between UPS’ capital allocation and its stated climate commitments.<br>UPS Lags Competitors<br><br>Peers such as DHL and FedEx demonstrate stronger governance and execution of climate strategy.8 Both<br>have committed to value chain emission reduction targets through the Science Based Targets initiative,<br>conduct scenario analyses, apply a double materiality approach, and link executive pay to sustainability<br>outcomes. They also define clear vehicle electrification milestones that align capital allocation with<br>emissions reductions and long-term competitiveness. UPS lags peers across each of these dimensions.<br>Investors seek greater visibility into how UPS is integrating climate-related risks and opportunities into<br>its financial and strategic decision-making. A comprehensive climate transition plan aligned with<br>investor expectations and frameworks such as the TCFD and CA100+ would provide that transparency.</p>
<p>Developing and disclosing such a plan would strengthen UPS’ credibility with investors while positioning<br>the Company to capture efficiency gains, policy incentives, and market share in a rapidly transforming<br>logistics sector.<br><br><strong>RESOLVED</strong>: Shareholders request UPS issue a report, at reasonable cost and omitting proprietary<br>information, describing if and how it plans to align its operations and investments with its carbon<br>neutrality goal.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1 https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1090727/000109072725000019/ups-20241231.htm, p.12<br>2 https://www.freightwaves.com/news/weathers-wrath-supply-chains-reel-from-2024s-extreme-events<br>3 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/03/240313135634.htm<br>4 Historical emissions already commit the global economy to approximately 17% Gross Domestic Product (GDP) reduction by<br>2050. https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/38-trillion-dollars-in-damages-each-year-world-economy-alreadycommitted-<br>to-income-reduction-of-19-due-to-climate-change, as revised by https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latestnews/<br>nature-study-on-economic-damages-from-climate-change-revised<br>5 https://www.unepfi.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Climate-Risks-in-the-Transportation-Sector-1.pdf<br>6 https://about.ups.com/content/dam/upsstories/images/our-impact/reporting/2024-UPS-GRI-Report.pdf, p.27, 29<br>7 https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1090727/000109072725000019/ups-20241231.htm, p.49<br>8 https://group.dhl.com/content/dam/deutschepostdhl/en/media-center/investors/documents/annual-reports/DHL-Group-<br>2024-Annual-Report.pdf, p.73, 74; https://www.fedex.com/content/dam/fedex/us-unitedstates/<br>sustainability/gcrs/FedEx_2025_CR_Report.pdf, p.19, 22;</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

<div class=”col-lg-9 content-page left-side”>
<section class=”section-a-single-resolutions resolutions-info top-content”>
<div class=”resolutions-contain”>
<div class=”top-content”>
<h4>Resolution Details</h4>
</div>
<div class=”bottom-content”>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Company:</strong>
<p>BP p.l.c.</p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Year:</strong>
<p>2026 </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Issue Area:</strong>
<p>Climate Change </p>
</div>

<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Focus Area:</strong>
<p>GHG Reduction and Targets </p>
</div>
<div class=”row-info”>
<strong>Status:</strong>
<p>Filed</p>
</div>

</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</section>

<section class=”section-b-single-resolutions content-blocks”>
<div class=”top-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>
<h2>Resolution Text</h2>
<p><strong>Summary</strong></p>
<p>Multiple outlooks project impending decline in oil and gas demand. BP’s strategy assumes rising demand. In the last major demand contraction, the company cut dividends by 50%. This resolution asks BP to clarify how it would create shareholder value under credible scenarios of declining oil and gas demand. With this transparency, investors can better judge how BP’s portfolio might perform under all circumstances.</p>
<p><strong>Declining demand</strong></p>
<p>Many trusted analysts increasingly predict that the world will soon enter a structural decline in oil and gas demand. </p>
<p>STEPS and APS constitute credible scenarios, as they correspond to identifiable policies and market developments. STEPS represents the energy sector’s current direction of travel, based on the latest market data, technology costs, and in-depth analysis of the prevailing policy settings globally. APS anticipates the implementation of additional policies pledged by governments. These scenarios warrant investor concern, as they reflect ongoing and planned implementation of regulation, political support, and technological uptake, as well as market and economic realizes.</p>
<p>Both see an impending peak in demand for oil and gas. In STEPS, oil demand peaks by 2030 and gas by 2035. In APS, both peak before 2030 and fall 17% by 2035 compared to 2023 (99–82 mb/d; 4186–3493 bcm).1</p>
<p>The IEA’s June 2025 oil forecast predicts reduced demand by the end of the decade; this is noteworthy as it seems to align with the oil demand projections indicated in both STEPS and APS.2</p>
<p>Regarding gas, the IEA states: “The period of LNG surplus in the STEPS makes it difficult for some exporters to fully recover their long-run marginal cost of supply, creating risks that project sponsors write off the value of the assets.”3</p>
<p>Other analysts also show outlooks divergent from BP’s. Rystad’s analysis shows oil peaking in the early 2030s, with gas plateauing soon after. The US Energy Information Agency (EIA) expects overproduction to push oil prices down to $51 in 2026, well below the $70 to $74.4 BP expects. 4,5,6</p>
<p>This convergent view on a potential decline by a broad array of market analysts warrants serious concern from investors.</p>
<p><strong>BP’s reset strategy is based on growth in oil and gas demand</strong></p>
<p>At its Capital Markets Update 2025, BP projected a growth for oil and gas production to 2.3–2.5 mmboed by 2030. The Company promises to grow its adjusted cash flows by 20% annually over the next three years, but the plans beyond this short-term horizon are not transparently disclosed.7</p>
<p>Company scenarios assume that oil demand grows to 103.4 mb/d into the early 2030s, with gas demand growing above 4,800 bcm by the 2040s.8 </p>
<p>In their reporting, BP disaggregates its operations into 11 sub-segments, disclosing stress-testing for each sub-segment along a single variable. This approach does not demonstrate how shareholder value would be created under scenarios with declining demand. Further, the stress-testing horizon extends only to 2030. Investors would benefit from disclosure that addresses value generation. beyond this limited time frame, particularly with respect to the Company’s prospective response to a potential global peak in oil and gas demand during the 2030s.9</p>
<p>Historical precedent across multiple industries suggests that prolonged demand contraction puts downward pressure on prices. Further, most oil majors plan to raise production, creating oversupply. Revenue could be affected; only the most cost-competitive producers would deliver value to shareholders in a declining market.</p>
<p>BP does not disclose capital spending, production mix, or dividends in the event that demand falls. Even the Company’s projected growth would require significant gains in market share relative to competitors. Ongoing shareholder trust depends on answers to these questions.</p>
<p>In 2020, with oil demand down 9% and prices at an average of $42 per barrel, BP cut its dividend by 50%; this was a􀅌er the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in 2010. BP has since raised its dividend, but the current $0.0832 quarterly payout remains 21% below pre-2020 levels. This was only a brief drop, yet the Company struggled. A sustained decline portends much higher risks for the Company and its shareholders.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
<p>BP’s current fossil fuel growth assumptions visibly diverge from IEA APS and STEPS scenarios and other analyst projections that foresee sustained demand decline.</p>
<p>Failing to plan for these potentializes risks significant shareholder value loss due to impaired assets, lower margins, and reduced dividends. Transparent disclosure of how BP would adjust capital allocation, energy mix, and cash flow under declining oil and gas demand is essential to assess its business resilience.</p>
<p>This resolution aims to ensure that BP’s strategy accounts for a complex and uncertain energy transition and demonstrates its ability to create shareholder value under a range of plausible scenarios.</p>
<p>You have our support.</p>
<p>1 IEA, World Energy Outlook 2024 and World Energy Outlook 2025, tables A.9 and A.13</p>
<p>2 IEA, Oil 2025</p>
<p>3 IEA, World Energy Outlook 2025</p>
<p>4 Rystad, Global Energy Scenarios 2025</p>
<p>5 EIA, press release, Aug 12, 2025</p>
<p>6 BP, Capital Market Update 2025</p>
<p>7 ibid</p>
<p>8 BP, Energy Outlook: 2025 edition</p>
<p>9 BP, Annual Report 2024</p>

</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class=”middle-content editor-block”>
<div class=”content-block”>
<div class=”main-content”>

</div>
</div>
</div>

</section>
</div>
<aside class=”col-xl-3 right-side”>
<div class=”column-contain”>

<h3>Lead Filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Tarek Bouhouch</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Follow This</span></div>
</div>

<h3>Co-filer</h3>
<div class=”views-row”>
<div class=”views-field views-field-nothing”><span class=”field-content”> Mary Minette</span></div><div class=”views-field views-field-title views-field-field-shareholder”><span class=”field-content”>Mercy Investment Services</span></div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

</div>
</div>
</aside&gt

Disclose emissions reduction strategy for all material value chain emissions