Constellation Brands: Producer Responsibility for Packaging

February 3, 2023 As You Sow

WHEREAS: 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.

RESOLVED: 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.

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