2023 Climate-Related Disclosures

NZX/ASX
24 April 2024



2023 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES


Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited (RBD) has released the attached Climate-Related Disclosures
for the period ended 31 December 2023.

RBD’s 2023 Climate-Related Disclosures are also available on RBD’s website at:
https://www.restaurantbrands.co.nz/community-and-sustainability.



Authorised by:
Callum Webb
Company Secretary
Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited
Phone: 09 525 8700



ENDS.


RESTAURANT BRANDS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED

---

ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT AND
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2023

Restaurant Brands New Zealand Limited (Restaurant Brands or, together with its subsidiaries, the Group) is a
Climate-Reporting Entity (CRE) under the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (the Act).
This is Restaurant Brands’ first Environmental Report and Climate-Related Disclosures (CRD) under the Act and
covers our last 12 months of activity from 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2023.
These climate-related disclosures comply with Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards NZ CS 1-3 (the
Standards) issued by the External Reporting Board.
The following provisions specified in the Standards have been adopted by the Group:
Adoption provision 1: Current financial impacts
Adoption provision 2: Anticipated financial impacts
Adoption provision 3: Transition planning
Adoption provision 4: Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Adoption provision 5: Comparatives for Scope 3 GHG emissions
Adoption provision 6: Comparatives for metrics
Adoption provision 7: Analysis of trends

24 April 2024
José Parés Emilio Fullaondo
Chairman Director
Note: We recognise that climate change projections carry inherent uncertainty. This report reflects our current understanding of
climate-related risks and opportunities as of 31 December 2023. This report includes forward looking statements relating to
climate-related scenarios that are inherently uncertain and subject to change in future reports.
This report includes metrics and targets that are based on estimates and assumptions which are uncertain and subject to
limitations. Challenges relating to data inputs may change over time and impact uncertainty of projections. Restaurant Brands is
committed to progressing towards our targets as outlined in this report, however due to uncertain technological changes,
economic factors and environmental changes, our targets and strategies to achieve these targets are subject to change. Nothing
in this report constitutes the Group’s financial, legal, tax or strategic growth guidance or advice.
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
PURPOSE OF REPORT

Who we are 4-5
Sustainability in 2023 6-7
Governance 8-10
Risk Management 11-12
Strategy 13-17
Metrics and Targets 18-32
Assurance of GHG Emissions 33-35
CONTENT
Page
Appendix 36

New Zealand (NZ)Australia (AU)
Hawaii (HA)
(incl. Guam and Saipan)
California (CA)
Owned Stores
KFC - 110
Pizza Hut - 6
Taco Bell - 14
Carl’s Jr. -17
Franchised Stores*
Pizza Hut - 118
Owned Stores
KFC - 72
Taco Bell - 12
Owned Stores
Pizza Hut - 34
(incl. 5 in Guam & 1 in Saipan)
Taco Bell - 36
(incl. 7 in Guam)
Owned Stores
KFC - 65
KFC / Taco Bell - 10
WHO WE ARE
Restaurant Brands is a corporate franchisee specialising in the operation of quick service and takeaway restaurants of world-class brands across New Zealand,
Australia, California and Hawaii (including Guam and Saipan).
In New Zealand, Restaurant Brands operates four brands - KFC, Pizza Hut, Carl’s Jr. and Taco Bell; two brands in Australia and California - KFC and Taco Bell and two
brands in Hawaii (including Guam and Saipan) - Pizza Hut and Taco Bell.
We invest in worldwide famous brands that are distinguished by their product, look, style, ambience and service and for the total experience they deliver to their
customers around the world. The New Zealand region manages local supply chain and distribution contracts, whereas supply chain is managed by YUM! Brands in
our other three regions.
WHO WE ARE
5
*Restaurant Brands also provides marketing, supply chain and other support to four independent franchisee-owned KFC stores in New Zealand.

PLANET
ENERGY MANAGEMENTCIRCULAR ECONOMYGHG EMISSIONS
Goal StatementOptimising and reducing energy consumptionReducing waste and increasing recoveriesReducing GHG emissions across all regions
KPI
Purchased electricity reduction and replacement with
renewable energy
Waste reduction
Sustainable packaging
Scope 1-2 GHG emissions reduction
Target
10% reduction by 2030 vs 2023 base
To be confirmed in 2024 and included in Scope 3
disclosure
30% reduction by 2030 vs 2023 base
Initiatives &
opportunities
Solar panels and LED lighting
Tracking and monitoring power consumption in stores
Building Management System controls
Increasing share of renewable energy in purchased
electricity
Packaging initiatives targeting reduction of non-
compostable components
Waste audit and separation initiatives
Group fleet renewal and replacement with hybrid or
electric vehicles
Refrigerant gas loss reduction through improved
replacement and maintenance schedules
Solar panels and LED installations
Energy management
SUSTAINABILITY IN 2023
In 2023, the Group implemented a carbon footprint tracking and reporting tool to measure our emissions across all regions.
The Group also engaged external consultants to conduct a materiality assessment on our Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Framework. Through this process - which
included interviews and surveys with our main stakeholders - we were able to identify the key areas of focus for sustainable growth. The four pillars of our ESG Framework are
Product, People, Planet and Governance. We have updated our ESG Framework to align with the key focus areas for the business which are:
Energy management
Circular economy
GHG emissions
Our initiatives are therefore primarily oriented to improve these areas, including Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and targets set through to 2030 to ensure accountability and
to measure progress. The Planet pillar of our ESG Framework is shown below as it is relevant to this report and will drive the Group’s emissions reduction initiatives.
SUSTAINABILITY IN 2023
7

BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
REMUNERATION
& NOMINATIONS
COMMITTEE
Identity of the governance body
The Restaurant Brands’ Board of Directors (the Board) is responsible for the governance of all climate-related
risks and opportunities affecting the Group. The Board is supported in discharging this responsibility by the Audit
and Risk Committee and Health, Safety and Sustainability Committee.
All Board members have experience holding executive positions in both private and publicly listed companies,
with the majority of the Board having international experience in governance roles overseeing business
operations and reporting compliance across Europe, Asia and the Pacific. Collectively the Board has a diverse
mix of skills and experience gained in various industries, markets, and geographies over the last several
decades.
For more information on each Board member see Restaurant Brands 2023 Annual Report.
Audit and Risk Committee and Health, Safety and Sustainability Committee
The Group Risk Management Framework states that the Audit and Risk Committee is responsible for monitoring
and reporting to the Board on all risks, including climate-related risks. The Audit and Risk Committee oversees
the management of physical and transitional climate-related risks with assistance from the Health, Safety and
Sustainability Committee. The Audit and Risk Committee is supported by the Executive Risk Committee when
carrying out its risk functions.
The Health, Safety and Sustainability Committee is responsible for reviewing and recommending to the Board for
approval policies that relate to the Group’s ESG objectives and obligations. The Health, Safety and Sustainability
Committee is also responsible for reporting on and reviewing ESG performance by the Group. The Health, Safety
and Sustainability Committee is supported by the ESG Committee.
All identified climate-related risks are assessed through the Group Risk Management Framework using a
contingency/probability matrix, reviewed by the Executive Risk Committee twice a year. Material climate-related
risks identified are submitted to the Audit and Risk Committee and the Board as part of the annual Group risk
assessment process. To the extent a climate-related risk is identified as a key/material risk to the Group (i.e. a
risk that has sufficient potential to materially impact the delivery of the Group‘s strategy), it is subject to ongoing
monitoring, central testing and oversight by the Audit and Risk Committee and Board under the Risk Management
Framework processes.
GROUP GOVERNANCE
EXECUTIVE RISK
COMMITTEE
GROUP CEO
GROUP CHIEF LEGAL & COMPLIANCE
GROUP CFO, 1x DIVISIONAL CEO, 1x
DIVISIONAL CFO
HEAD OF INTERNAL AUDIT
GROUP ESG MANAGER
AUDIT & RISK
COMMITTEE
EXECUTIVE ESG
COMMITTEE
GROUP CHIEF LEGAL & COMPLIANCE
GROUP CFO
GROUP CHIEF BRAND & MARKETING
GM SUPPLY & QUALITY
GROUP ESG MANAGER
HEALTH, SAFETY &
SUSTAINABILITY
COMMITTEE
GOVERNANCE
9

Executive ESG Committee
The Executive ESG Committee is responsible for:
Addressing climate-related initiatives and opportunities with Management
Overseeing the implementation of the Group’s ESG Framework
Providing recommendations to the Health, Safety and Sustainability Committee on ESG initiatives
Monitoring ESG reporting against targets and metrics
Reporting climate-related risks to the Executive Risk Committee as part of the Group’s Risk
Management Framework’s annual risk assessment process
Developing the Group ESG policies and submitting them to the Health, Safety and Sustainability
Committee for review and further approval by the Board
In addition to the Executive ESG Committee and Group ESG function, each region has dedicated
individuals (including divisional CFOs) responsible for leading environmental initiatives, recording
climate-related events and risks, collecting carbon footprint data, as well as providing support to their
respective regions.
Climate-related events which impact operational activities are reported to the Regional and Group
Management Team and discussed at monthly business reviews. Depending on the severity of the
impact, these events are reported to the Executive ESG Committee and escalated accordingly.
Strategy and Capital Expenditure
Capital expenditure at Restaurant Brands is prioritised according to business needs and expected
returns. To the extent that a climate-related risk or initiative is identified as having a critical need/impact
on the Group’s strategic goals, then capital will be allocated to pursue that initiative. While no significant
capital allocations were made in relation to climate-related risks or initiatives during 2023, we expect
this to change as and when new technologies become available.
The development and implementation of Restaurant Brands’ ESG strategy is primarily carried out during
quarterly meetings of the Executive ESG Committee, with any material climate-related opportunities
discussed and evaluated during these meetings. The recommended business response and potential
capital expenditure required are estimated and reported to the Health, Safety and Sustainability
Committee and the Board.
MANAGEMENT’S ROLE
CALIFORNIA
CFO
FINANCE TEAM
EXECUTIVE ESG
COMMITTEE
BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
GROUP ESG
FUNCTION
AUSTRALIA
CFO
GM PEOPLE &
PERFORMANCE
FACILITIES MANAGER
NEW ZEALAND
BRAND GMS
GM FINANCE
GM PROPERTY
SUPPLY & QUALITY
MANAGER
HAWAII
CFO
FINANCE TEAM
Roles with dedicated climate-related responsibilities are shown in bold on the chart
GOVERNANCE
10
EXECUTIVE RISK
COMMITTEE
AUDIT AND RISK
COMMITTEE
HEALTH, SAFETY AND
SUSTAINABILITY
COMMITTEE

Impact
Likelihood
InsignificantMinorModerateMajorSevere
Almost CertainMODERATEHIGHEXTREMEEXTREMEEXTREME
LikelyMODERATEHIGHHIGHEXTREMEEXTREME
PossibleLOWMODERATEHIGHHIGHEXTREME
UnlikelyLOWMODERATEMODERATEHIGHHIGH
RareLOWLOWLOWMODERATEMODERATE
RISK MANAGEMENT
The Group Risk Management Framework prioritises risks that are rated “high” or “extreme” according to the Risk Management Matrix as these risks present a clear and present
danger to the delivery of our strategy. To the extent that a climate-related risk is assessed to have an “high” or “extreme” rating, it will form part of the list of key/material risks that
are actively monitored by the Executive Risk Committee, Audit and Risk Committee and the Board. Suitable controls/mitigants will be deployed to better manage that risk and the
effectiveness of such controls will be monitored and assessed by the Executive Risk Committee, Audit and Risk Committee and the Board.
The formal risk assessment is carried out on an annual basis. However, if a significant risk is identified outside of the formal Risk Management Framework’s usual processes, the
rating and treatment of the risk can be reviewed and amended during meetings of the Executive Risk Committee, Audit and Risk Committee or the Board.
Each impact category has its definition for each of the following business factors:
Management effort / level of review
Financial / materiality
People
Reputation
Operational
Legal
Stakeholder
This provides a framework for the identified risks to be reviewed, assessed and
addressed at the appropriate management and governance level.
RISK MANAGEMENT
12

CURRENT PHYSICAL AND TRANSITION IMPACTS
Current Physical Impacts
The following climate-related events affected our operations in 2023:
In New Zealand several stores were temporarily closed during the Auckland Flood in January and Cyclone Gabrielle in February.
In Hawaii two stores were lost to wildfires in Lahaina on Maui island in August. Lost revenue and future rebuilding costs related to these
stores are covered by insurance.
Typhoon Mawar in Guam caused store closures for several days.
Flooding in California caused temporary disruptions to store trading hours for several stores.
Current Transition Impacts
Stakeholders’ expectations and compliance requirements targeting net zero GHG emissions by 2050 are current transition impacts that
affected our business, leading the Group to invest additional resources during 2023 to assist with our climate-related reporting obligations and
to transition towards the net zero emissions expectation set out in legislation and increasingly expected by customers and other stakeholders.
STRATEGY
14

Low emissions scenario with net zero emissions by ~2050.
Global warming is limited to 1.5°C by 2100
Policies and consumer sentiment: immediate rapid change
towards more aggressive policies and responsible consumption
Technology change: fast
Physical impacts: low through 2050, then low to moderate
Transition impacts: moderate until 2040, then low
SSP1-1.9 (1.5°C)
SCENARIO ANALYSIS UNDERTAKEN
The Group has undertaken scenario analysis to understand the resilience of our business model and strategy.
The periods were selected to follow the timelines and milestones commonly used by various climate modelling
initiatives and insurers. The 5-, 15- and 25-year horizon was also used with a view towards alignment with typical
franchise and lease tenures, and main Group strategic and operational cycles.
For the climate scenario modelling, the Group has selected three Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) framework. The three selected SSPs are:
SSP1-1.9 scenario assuming the global warming will be capped at 1.5°C*.
SSP2-4.5 scenario assuming the global warming will be limited to 3°C*.
SSP3-7.0 scenario assuming the global warming will be limited to 4°C*.
The three chosen scenarios provide a spectrum of possible outcomes and pathways - from organised rapid transition to
net zero under the SSP1-1.9 scenario, to the “hot house / current policies” scenario SSP3-7.0.
The summary of the differences between the three selected scenarios is shown below, with the main narratives provided
on the next page.**
Intermediate scenario with current emissions levels until ~2050.
Global warming is limited to 3°C by 2100
Policies and consumer sentiment: slow, then accelerating
Technology change: slow through 2040, then moderate
Physical impacts: low through 2050, then moderate
Transition impacts: low through 2040, then moderate
SSP2-4.5 (<3°C)
High emissions scenario with emissions to double by ~2100.
Global warming is exceeding 3°C by 2100
Policies and consumer sentiment: minimal change
Technology change: slow
Physical impacts: low/moderate through 2050, then high
Transition impacts: low
SSP3-7.0 (<4°C)
* By 2100 compared to the pre-industrial levels (1850-1900)
** For more information on the IPCC scenarios refer to the Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report (also known as the Sixth Assessment report or AR6) on
the IPCC website: https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar6/
The Group has used the following timeframe for its
climate scenario modelling:
Short term: 2024-2030 (5-6 years)
Medium term: 2031-2040 (~15 years)
Long term: 2041-2050 (~25 years)
IPCC scenarios from AR6 Working Group (WGIII) report**:
STRATEGY
15

MAIN NARRATIVES UNDER EACH SCENARIO
SSP1-1.9 Scenario
The most optimistic but also one of the most challenging scenarios in the short-to-medium term, characterised by rapid developments in global and national policies supported by
technological innovations. This is also driven by changes in consumer preferences to allow for a timely transition towards a more sustainable and socially responsible economic model,
and with net zero emissions by 2050. However, to be achievable, this scenario requires immediate action and increased cooperation between businesses and governments globally.
This scenario assumes higher transition costs in the next 10-15 years, with increased upfront capital spending and investment in technology and innovation, renewable energy and
reusable materials. This will lead to a rapid decarbonisation of the planet and provide the foundation for long-term sustainable growth and smooth transition to a circular economy and
more transparent socioeconomic model. Investors, consumers and lenders are expected to drive demand for openly-available information and proactive environmental action from
businesses globally, with laggards most likely penalised by increased insurance and borrowing costs, reduced demand for their goods/services from consumers and growing pressure
from regulators and media.
SSP3-7.0 Scenario
A pessimistic scenario assuming the extensive economic growth and overproduction/overconsumption culture will result in the emissions doubling by 2100 from the current levels.
Short-term gains from low production costs and minimal transition impacts for businesses will be outweighed by considerably increased physical impacts from more frequent and
severe weather events, rising sea levels and extended disruptions to business operations. Many currently populated areas will become uninhabitable or submerged. This in turn will
lead to political polarisation, growing fragmentation of the global economy and increasing social inequality worldwide.
SSP2-4.5 Scenario
An intermediate scenario assuming that current socioeconomic model will in general remain intact for some time, with the emissions levels staying more or less unchanged until about
2050. This scenario is characterised by trends similar to the SSP3-7.0 scenario in 2025-2050, when the overproduction and overconsumption culture will prevail short and medium
term, with governments, regulators, lenders, investors and consumer groups proactively trying to lead the change and disrupt the status-quo. However, the effect of those actions
overall will only have impact in the second half of the century, when decarbonisation and transition to more sustainable economic model will become urgent and critical. Unfortunately,
this will mean high transition costs in addition to increased physical climate-related impacts, with a growing pressure on technology to deliver feasible solutions within a constrained
timeframe.
Because the Group time horizon is limited to 2050, the future physical impacts under all three scenarios are currently considered to be similar within the time horizon used, with physical risks under
SSP1-1.9 scenario expected to be ranked as low, under SSP2-4.5 scenario - low or marginally higher, and under the SSP3-7.0 scenario - low to moderate. The difference in the scale and severity of
the impacts between the three scenarios is expected to be significantly higher and accelerating in 2050-2100, which is not covered by this analysis.
Transition risks and respective anticipated impacts for the period 2025-2050 were overall estimated as medium under the SSP1-1.9 scenario, while assumed low under the other two scenarios for
the same periods.
STRATEGY
16

TRANSITION PLAN
While we have elected to use Adoption Provision 3: transition planning (NZ CS 2) for this report, we continue to work
to develop the transition plan aspect of our strategy.
We have established our Scope 1 and 2 emissions reduction targets based on 2023 emissions data. Projects and
initiatives will be starting in 2024, including a review of capital allocation and approval for those initiatives.
Our Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions will be measured and reported annually, and performance monitored against the
approved targets. More information on targets is provided in the Metrics and Targets section of the report.
The largest category of our emissions is indirect Scope 3 emissions, of which the biggest driver is emissions from
purchased and processed food ingredients. This also represents a significant opportunity for us to work with our
suppliers and service providers on packaging and waste reduction, material recoveries, and GHG emissions
reductions in the upstream distribution chain. Scope 3 emissions reduction targets will be modelled and disclosed in
the 2024 report.
While our targets are initially set for 2030, strategically our business will be aligned with the Aotearoa New Zealand
Net Zero 2050 policy, with both short-term and long-term climate-related targets embedded into the Group strategic
planning and capital allocation process.
STRATEGY
17

FuelRefrigerantsNatural Gas & LPGElectricity
Electricity
81.8%
Natural Gas & LPG
10.7%
Refrigerants
6.4%
Fuel
1.1%
NZAUHACA
AU
42.3%
HA
31%
CA
15.7%
NZ
11%
The breakdown of our Scope 1 and 2 emissions for each region by driver and GHG type is in the table below
TONNES CO2e BY CATEGORYNZAUHACAGROUP*
Scope 1 - Mobile Combustion (Fuel)168.3128.844.995.3437.2
Scope 1 - Fugitive Emissions (Refrigerants)598.6562.1835.7659.02,655.4
Scope 1 - Stationary Combustion (Natural Gas & LPG)769.090.91,528.22,050.14,438.3
Total Scope 1*1,536.0781.82,408.82,804.47,530.9**
Scope 2 - Purchased Electricity (location-based)3,017.016,703.310,418.53,690.433,829.2
Total Scope 23,017.016,703.310,418.53,690.433,829.2**
Total Scope 1 and 2*4,553.017,485.112,827.36,494.841,360.1
CURRENT GROUP GHG EMISSIONS PROFILE
TONNES CO2e BY GHG TYPENZAUHACAGROUP*
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)3,860.416,917.611,907.35,820.138,505.4
Methane (CH4)82.61.729.56.3120.2
Nitrous Oxide (N2O)11.43.754.89.479.2
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)598.6562.1835.7658.92,655.4
Perfluorocarbons (PFCS), Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)
& Other
00000
Total Scope 1 and 2*4,553.017,485.112,827.36,494.841,360.1
METRICS AND TARGETS
19
*CO2e tonnes may not aggregate to the totals due to rounding.
**Scope 1 and 2 tCO2e absolute emissions for the year ended 31 December 2023 have been included in the scope of PwC’s limited assurance engagement.
No other amounts or calculations have been included in the assurance engagement and are not covered by the limited assurance report issued.

SCOPE 1SCOPE 2
0
50
100
150
200
250
NZAUHACA
The two intensity metrics chosen by the Group for GHG emissions are:
Tonnes CO2e per $million sales (regional metrics are shown in local currency, Group totals - in NZ$)
Tonnes CO2e per store based on the full year trading days equivalent (363 trading days are used for Hawaii, and 364
for all other regions)
Intensity MetricNZAUHACAGROUP
Scope 1 - tonnes CO2e per $million sales2.72.715.125.35.7
Scope 1 - tonnes CO2e per store 10.89.534.937.720.5
Scope 2 - tonnes CO2e per $million sales5.358.365.333.325.6
Scope 2 - tonnes CO2e per store21.3202.5150.949.692.0
Total Scope 1-2 - tonnes CO2e per $million sales*8.061.080.458.631.3
Total Scope 1-2 - tonnes CO2e per store*32.1212.0185.77.3112.5
GHG PROFILE AND INTENSITY METRICS
* CO2e tonnes may not aggregate to the totals due to rounding
CO2e TONNES PER STORE
METRICS AND TARGETS
20

This report includes Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions.
Scope 3 emissions are not disclosed in the first reporting period under provision 4 of the NZ CS 2.
GHG Protocol was used as a guide when calculating and reporting Group emissions.
The Group adopted an operational control approach for the consolidation of the Group GHG emissions which includes 376 stores, company fleet and four support offices.
Franchised stores will form part of Scope 3 emissions. The Group has excluded warehouses and storage units from Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.
Scope 2 emissions are reported using location-based approach. No contractual instruments or energy attribute certificates from specific suppliers are currently used by the Group.
A market-based approach is not required to be reported under XRB NZ CS1 and therefore has not been presented.
CRITERIA USED TO PREPARE OUR GHG EMISSIONS
Source: XRB - getting started on measuring your emissions
Emission Factor SourceRegionGlobal Warming Potential (GWP)
Ministry for the Environment. 2023. Measuring emissions: A
guide for organisations: 2023. Emission Factor Workbook
(MFE)
New Zealand
Australia
Hawaii
California
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) 2014
is used for the GWP of GHGs
Australian National Greenhouse Accounts Factors
Workbook 2023, Australian Government Department of
Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (ANG)
Australia
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) 2014
is used for the GWP of GHGs
US Environmental Protection Agency - GHG emssions
factors hub, September 2023 (EPA)
Hawaii
California
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4),
2007 is used for the GWP of GHGs
California Air Resources Board, GHG Global Warming
Potentials Website (CARB)
New Zealand
Hawaii
California
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5),
2014 is used for the GWP of GHGs
UK Government GHG Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting, June 2023 (UKG)
New Zealand
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5),
2014 is used for the GWP of GHGs
The following sources were used for respective conversion factors and unit ratios when calculating the Group GHG emissions:
21

Scope
Emission
Source
Data SourceEmission Factor UsedMethodology, Estimates, Exclusions and LimitationsUncertainty
Scope 1
Mobile
Combustion -
Fleet Fuel
(Petrol and
Diesel)
NZ, HA and CA: fuel amount
obtained from fuel card reports.
AU: mileage for vehicles derived
from odometer readings taken
across the year.
NZ, AU: MFE
HA, CA: EPA
NZ, HA and CA: Conversion made from litres (NZ) and gallons (HA and CA) for relevant fuel type to tCO2e.
Assumption that supplier reports are complete and accurate.
AU: Car type, engine size and distance travel recorded. Conversion made to tCO2e. Assumption that
odometer readings are accurate.
NZ, HA, CA: Low
AU: Moderate
due to km-
based
calculation
method
Stationary
Combustion -
Natural Gas,
LPG, Propane,
Generator Fuel
(Diesel)
NZ and AU: Supplier reports and
invoicing.
HA and CA: Supplier invoicing.
NZ: MFE
AU: ANG
HA, CA: EPA
All regions: Monthly invoices and reports from suppliers used for ‘used fuel’ amounts. Assumption that
supplier invoicing is complete and accurate.
AU: Due to data unavailability, November and December consumption was estimated for two stores based
on previous months billing.
HA: Due to data unavailability, estimation of gas usage for six stores (up to 12 months), made based on
consumption for similar-size stores. Separate estimation made for partial missing data using previous
month billing. Assumption made that natural gas usage does not vary significantly across the year.
Synthetic and non-synthetic natural gas treated as same emission factor due to data unavailability; GHG
emissions are therefore likely to be overstated in this category.
NZ, AU, CA: Low
HA: Moderate
due to
estimations
Fugitive
Emissions -
Refrigerant Gas
NZ, AU and CA: Supplier reports
and invoicing.
HA: Supplier invoicing.
NZ: MFE, CARB,
UKG
AU: MFE
HA, CA: MFE, CARB
All regions: Refrigerant type and top-up amount converted to tCO2e.
NZ: Data taken directly from supplier reports. Gas from 15 stores excluded due to unavailability of data
from vendor servicing stores in 2023.
AU and CA: Data from supplier reports and invoicing. Assumption that supplier invoicing is complete and
accurate.
HA: Data from supplier invoicing. Assumption that supplier invoicing is complete and accurate.
AU, HA, CA: Low
NZ: Moderate
due to
incompleteness
Scope
2
Purchased
Electricity
NZ and AU: Supplier reports and
invoicing.
CA and HA: Supplier invoicing.
NZ: MFE
AU: ANG
HA, CA: EPA
All regions: Supplier invoicing and reports used to derive full year consumption and converted to tCO2e.
Estimation for AU, CA and HA support offices consumption made using size comparison of NZ office.
Assumption made that store electricity usage does not vary significantly across the year. Assumption that
supplier invoicing is complete and accurate.
NZ: Estimation made for three stores where data was unavailable for FY23. Estimation based on similar
size stores. Estimation made for partial missing days using previous month billing.
AU: Estimation made based on previous months billing for one store where November and December data
was unavailable.
HA: Due to data unavailability, estimation of electricity usage for nine stores made based on consumption
for similar-size stores. Estimation made for partial missing data using previous months billing.
CA: Estimation made for partial missing data using previous month billing.
NZ, AU, CA: Low
HA: Moderate
due to
estimations
CRITERIA USED TO PREPARE OUR GHG EMISSIONS - CONTINUED
METRICS AND TARGETS
22

Restaurant Brands has set targets to reduce Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 30% by the end of 2030 using 2023 as a base year.
As a separate target, the Group has committed to a 10% reduction in purchased electricity consumption by 2030.
The opportunities to reduce our emissions include:
Replacing own fleet with electric and hybrid vehicles.
Reducing fugitive emissions through improved maintenance and replacing high global warming potential (GWP) refrigerants with low-GWP substitutes.
Using alternative energy sources where practical (e.g. replacing natural gas with renewable electricity).
Reducing electricity consumption through better energy management, solar panel installation and LED lighting, increasing renewable energy in the purchased mix.
Waste and packaging reduction initiatives (to be reviewed and confirmed in 2024).
Climate-related opportunities
Due to the commercial sensitivity, Restaurant Brands is unwilling to disclose specifics of business activities which may benefit from any climate-related opportunity.
Technology change is expected to be a significant contributor to the decarbonisation of our global operations, and for Scope 2 carbon emissions reduction – in particular. This
is expected to be the case under all scenarios, but particularly under the SSP1-1.9 scenario which is aligned with the Net Zero 2050 policy.
Capital deployment
As discussed on page 11, Restaurant Brands’ capital allocation is aligned with its strategic plans and prioritised around the needs of our main business activities.
While we have allocated some capital expenditure on a store-by-store basis, it is expected that emission reduction process will require a more comprehensive and structured
planning process for capital allocation.
Internal emission price
Currently Restaurant Brands doesn’t have methodology to calculate the internal emission price. However with the development of our emissions reduction initiatives and
obtaining data for our intensity metrics, operating expenditure and capital expenditure, an internal emission price may be addressed and developed in the future.
Remuneration linked to climate-related risks and opportunities
Climate-related targets are currently under consideration and development for future inclusion in the Group remuneration structure.
METRICS AND TARGETS
METRICS AND TARGETS
23

METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES USED FOR CLIMATE RISK ASSESSMENT
Restaurant Brands participated in the ‘Retail Sector Shared Scenarios Project’ led by KPMG which included several large NZ retail companies.
The outcome of this collaborative work was the “Integrated Climate Change Scenarios for New Zealand Retail Sector Report” published by KPMG in September 2023*. The
report provided useful guidance and a foundation for our assessment of climate-related transition risks.
Physical Risk Assessment
The Group ESG function and Executive ESG Committee worked with regions on identifying and ranking the main physical and transition risks and the anticipated impacts**. Based
on the feedback collected we have identified the list of stores with potentially high exposure to the physical risk - particularly under the second and third scenarios. The identified
physical risks were cross-checked against a physical risk assessment report obtained by the Group from Marsh (independent third party consultants) which sets out the main
current and future climate hazards for all our stores under the three scenarios.
Physical risk exposure and severity of the physical impacts under the SSP1-1.9 scenario is expected to be noticeably lower than under the other two scenarios used. The general
assumption is that the additional 0.2°C increase in the average global temperature by the middle of the century (SSP1-1.9 scenario) will not lead to drastic changes in the weather
patterns or materially elevated physical risk exposure for the Group between now and 2050. Consequently, we’ve obtained physical hazards data for scenario SSP1-2.6 (1.5-
2.0°C) as an additional layer of stress testing under our most optimistic scenario.
Transition Risk Assessment
Group regions also provided a list of the main climate-related transition risks expected to rise or develop. These were reviewed and discussed with the Executive ESG Committee
during the final ranking review. Additionally, New Zealand Supply and Quality team organised meetings with several major NZ suppliers to discuss the main climate-related risks
and impacts anticipated in our supply chain. It has been agreed to continue this work with annual reviews to be scheduled going forward.
Current physical and transition risk assessment results will be used for evaluation of the anticipated financial impacts in 2024 and added, as deemed appropriate, to the Group
capital allocation and strategic planning.
* The full report can be found on the KPMG website: https://kpmg.com/nz/en/home/services/kpmg-impact/climate-change-and-decarbonisation/the-futures-of-retail.html
** The additional external climate data sources used for the initial risk assessment conducted by the Group are :
NASA sea level projection tool: https://sealevel.nasa.gov/ipcc-ar6-sea-level-projection-tool
Climate Analytics - Climate impact explorer: https://climate-impact-explorer.climateanalytics.org
World Bank - Climate change knowledge portal: https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org
California government location hazard tool: https://myhazards.caloes.ca.gov
STRATEGY
24

GROUP MAIN CLIMATE HAZARDS
SUMMARY**
Current
SSP1-2.6
2030
SSP1-2.6
2040*
SSP1-2.6
2050
SSP1-2.6
change
by 2050
SSP2-4.5
2030
SSP2-4.5
2040*
SSP2-4.5
2050
SSP2-4.5
change
by 2050
SSP3-7.0
2030
SSP3-7.0
2040*
SSP3-7.0
2050
SSP3-7.0
change
by 2050
FLUVIAL (RIVER) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations in 50- & 100-year return zone
12%13-14%13-14%14-15%+3%16%16%17%+5%18%18%18%+6%
PRECIPITATION STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
52%60%60%60%+8%57%59%60%+8%55%58%62%+10%
FIRE WEATHER STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
37%38%38%38%+1%38%39%39%+2%38%38%39%+2%
SEA LEVEL RISE (BY 2100)
% of locations with high or extreme score
---5%---5%---5%-
CLIMATE-RELATED PHYSICAL RISKS
A summary of the Group’s current exposure and risk index changes under the three scenarios by 2030, 2040 and 2050 are shown in the table below.
Overall, the physical risk impacts are not expected to vary materially under the three scenarios selected between now and 2050.
Some risks such as surface flood exposure are relevant across all four regions, and others such as wildfire weather stress or tropical cyclone exposure are more relevant or ranked
higher only in some of our regions.
Although region-specific risk scores are elevated for some regions, the overall change between current levels and the 2050 time horizon is considered low to moderate.
Precipitation stress is currently projected to be the hazard that the Group will experience the most significant change in exposure to under the three scenarios.
Hawaii, including Guam and Saipan, is the only region where some stores are exposed to high or extreme tropical cyclones (Zones 4 and 5). This is not expected to change
between now and 2050 under either scenario. Sea level rise hazard only shows high or extreme score for 5% of the Group assets, with half of those stores located in Hawaii.
The detailed breakdown showing the % of locations exposed to climate hazard by region under each scenario and the description of the main hazards is provided in the next three
pages.
We have elected to use SSP1-2.6 (1.6°C) as a proxy for physical risk modelling under the first scenario on the basis that robust data was unavailable for all our regions under SSP1-
1.9 (1.5°C).
While most of our stores are exposed to climate-related physical risks, the physical risk exposure tables only include information for stores with high or extreme risk score.
* Mean between 2030 and 2050 is used
**Description of each hazard can be found in the Appendix
STRATEGY
25
Colour coding: 0-5% increase, 6-10% increase, 11%+ increase

SSP1-2.6CURRENT20302050
REGION EXPOSURE
NZAUHACAALLNZAUHACAALLNZAUHACAALL
FLUVIAL (RIVER) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations exposed to 50-year & 100-year return
period
6%16%15%17%12%MARGINAL CHANGE IS ASSUMED (compared to the other two scenarios)
PLUVIAL (FLASH/SURFACE) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 5 and 6
0%25%79%2%20%----------
PRECIPITATION STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
74%89%20%0%52%76%94%20%27%60%77%89%20%30%60%
TROPICAL CYCLONE EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 4 and 5 (252km/h and higher)
0%0%17%0%3%NO CHANGE ASSUMED (in line with the other two scenarios)
FIRE WEATHER STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
0%4%79%95%37%0%4%79%99%38%0%5%80%99%38%
WILDFIRE EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 3 and 4
0%6%4%20%6%-----
BY 2100
SEA LEVEL RISE
% of assets with high or extreme exposure by 2100
----------3%7%12%0%5%
ASSETS EXPOSED TO PHYSICAL RISK UNDER SSP1-2.6 SCENARIO
METRICS AND TARGETS
26

SSP2-4.5CURRENT20302050
REGION EXPOSURENZAUHACAALLNZAUHACAALLNZAUHACAALL
FLUVIAL (RIVER) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations exposed to 50-year & 100-year return
period
6%16%15%17%12%9%19%17%26%16%10%19%17%26%17%
PLUVIAL (FLASH/SURFACE) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 5 and 6
0%25%79%2%20%----------
PRECIPITATION STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
74%89%20%0%52%76%92%20%17%57%81%91%20%25%60%
TROPICAL CYCLONE EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 4 and 5 (252km/h and higher)
0%0%17%0%3%0%0%17%0%3%0%0%17%0%3%
FIRE WEATHER STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
0%4%79%95%37%0%4%80%99%38%0%8%80%99%39%
WILDFIRE EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 3 and 4
0%6%4%20%6%-----
BY 2100
SEA LEVEL RISE
% of assets with high or extreme exposure by 2100
----------3%8%13%0%5%
METRICS & TARGETS
ASSETS EXPOSED TO PHYSICAL RISK UNDER SSP2-4.5 SCENARIO
METRICS AND TARGETS
27

SSP3-7.0CURRENT20302050
REGION EXPOSURENZAUHACAALLNZAUHACAALLNZAUHACAALL
FLUVIAL (RIVER) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations exposed to 50-year & 100-year return
period
6%16%15%17%12%10%19%17%30%18%11%19%17%29%18%
PLUVIAL (FLASH/SURFACE) FLOOD EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 5 and 6
0%25%79%2%20%----------
PRECIPITATION STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
74%89%20%0%52%76%91%20%10%55%79%96%20%30%62%
TROPICAL CYCLONE EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 4 and 5 (252km/h and higher)
0%0%17%0%3%0%0%17%0%3%0%0%17%0%3%
FIRE WEATHER STRESS
% of locations with high or extreme score
0%4%79%95%37%0%4%79%99%38%0%5%80%100%39%
WILDFIRE EXPOSURE
% of locations in Zones 3 and 4
0%6%4%20%6%-----
BY 2100
SEA LEVEL RISE
% of assets with high or extreme exposure by 2100
----------3%8%13%0%5%
ASSETS EXPOSED TO PHYSICAL RISK UNDER SSP3-7.0 SCENARIO
METRICS AND TARGETS
28

CLIMATE-RELATED TRANSITION RISKS AND IMPACTS
Restaurant Brands used the three scenarios (covered in the Strategy section) to generate a list of
the main climate-related transition risks faced by the Group within the next 25 years. The Group ESG
Executive team discussed and shared risks with several large vendors and received inputs from
regional leaders. Depending on the severity or scale of the possible impacts, all risks were
categorised using “low”, “medium”, “high” or “extreme” ranking under each of the three selected
scenarios (all transition risks were assumed as low or medium for the Group in 2025-2050). The list
and ranking of transition risks are shown in the next page.
All of our operations are exposed to key transition risks due to the nature of the Quick Service
Restaurants industry. However, the diverse geography of our portfolio means that those risks may
elevate at different times and with a different severity across our four regions.
Based on our analysis, we consider insurance, borrowing costs and consumer preferences as the
transition risks most likely to impact our business.
No high or extreme anticipated impacts have been assumed under the selected scenarios for the
period 2025-2050.
METRICS AND TARGETS
29

SCENARIOSSP1-1.9SSP2-4.5SSP3-7.0
POSSIBLE MITIGATION
TRANSITION RISK TIME HORIZON
2025
2030
2031
2040
2041
2050
2025
2030
2031
2040
2041
2050
2025
2030
2031
2040
2041
2050
Legal & regulatory requirements leading to increased
cost of compliance
med.med.med.lowlowmed.lowlowlow
Ensure adequate resource is available to comply with the new
policies and capital allocated to support environmental initiatives.
Consumer preferences change towards alternative
proteins resulting in sales decline
med.med.med.lowlowmed.lowlowlow
Monitor customer preferences and explore options of enhancing
our offer to the market.
Decreased consumer buying power caused by financial
instability or high inflation/cost of living
med.med.lowlowlowmed.lowlowlow
Explore options to diversify our menu, offer substitutes or enter
other market segments.
Increased costs of upstream distributionmed.med.med.lowlowmed.lowlowmed.
Work together with vendors on alternative options, invest in local
growers or vertical integration.
Disruptions in upstream distribution, shortages, frequent
change of suppliers
lowmed.med.lowlowmed.lowlowmed.
Monitor global food and commodity markets, have action or back-
up plans for all critical categories.
Poor brand reputation impacting ability to attract and
retain talent
med.lowlowlowlowmed.lowlowmed.
Improved brand perception and recognition through good
corporate governance, social initiatives and environmental action.
Scoring poorly in ESG rankings will impact the access to
capital & cost of borrowing
med.med.med.lowlowmed.lowlowlow
Full compliance with policies and regulations, good governance,
achieving group emission reduction targets.
The availability or the cost of insurancemed.med.med.lowlowmed.lowlowmed.
Regular asset portfolio review added to strategic planning.
Insurance cost optimisation, self-insurance.
CLIMATE-RELATED TRANSITION RISKS AND IMPACTS
METRICS AND TARGETS
30

SCENARIOSSP1-1.9SSP2-4.5SSP3-7.0
TIME HORIZON
OPPORTUNITY
2025
2030
2030
2040
2040
2050
2025
2030
2030
2040
2040
2050
2025
2030
2030
2040
2040
2050
Increased local or in-house production helping to reduce/offset upstream distribution cost. Cost pressure and/or
warmer climate conditions will allow to grow and source more ingredients locally or invest in vertical integration
XXX
Increased cooperation between manufacturers, suppliers, and retailers to reach climate targets will drive efficiencies
and cost reduction in the value chain
XXXX
Waste-conscious consumer behaviour will lead to the reduction in waste-handling and packaging costs, increased
recoveries, and decarbonisation
XX
Technology change leading to increased efficiencies/reduced costs, automation, and increased pace of
decarbonisation
XXXX
CLIMATE-RELATED OPPORTUNITIES
Additionally, opportunities arising from the climate-related impacts were discussed with the Group Executive ESG team and divisional leaders. The following opportunities have
been identified and mapped against the respective scenarios.
Further comprehensive analysis is required to scope and evaluate the financial impacts associated with climate-related risks and opportunities under the respective scenarios.
The physical risk exposure report and transition risks and impacts identified and provided in this disclosure will be used when modelling the financial impacts under the three
scenarios.
The outcome then will be shared with the leadership team and relevant inputs will be used for strategic planning and capital allocation from 2024 onwards.
This task will be performed in 2024 with details provided in our next climate disclosures report.
Provision 2 of the NZ CS 2 providing the exemption from disclosing the anticipated financial impacts is adopted in this report.
STRATEGY
31

NZAUHACA
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
FY23
FY24
FY25
FY26
FY27
FY28
FY29
FY30
The Group Scope 1-2 emissions reduction target is set at 30% by 2030 against 2023
base.
This is approximately a quarter less than required by the science-based target aligned
with the 1.5°C global warming scenario.
The 30% reduction target is set for absolute and intensity direct emissions metrics:
reduction of Scope 1-2 total tonnes of CO2e, and tonnes of CO2e per store and per $m
sales.
The target may be re-assessed based on internal or external factors, such as changes in
the emission factors released by the respective authorities, updated climate projections
or changes in technology or legislation.
As a separate target, 10% reduction in purchased electricity by 2030 against 2023
baseline for the Group is set and approved by the Board.
Because those are new targets, the Group performance against the GHG emissions
reduction target will be reviewed and reported annually.
No interim targets are set currently.
No offsets are currently assumed or factored in for achieving the GHG emissions
reduction target. This option may be re-assessed later if required, after actual data is
collected and tracking against the target based on historical performance is reviewed and
evaluated.
41,360t of CO2e
29,000t of CO2e
30% Group Scope 1-2 Emissions Reduction by 2030
GROUP TARGETS
METRICS AND TARGETS
32

INDEPENDENT ASSURANCE
34

INDEPENDENT ASSURANCE
35

CLIMATE
HAZARD
SCORE
REFERENCE
(MARSH)
METRICS AND TARGETS
APPENDIX
36